4
FoMRHI Comm. 1808
Lewis Jones
Playing Orfeo I: Monteverdi’s violini and viole da braccio
Part One: The evidence of the 1609 score of Monteverdi’s Orfeo
Introduction
This is the first in a series of papers which will assess Monteverdi’s use of instruments in Orfeo (first
performed in Mantua in 1607; published in Venice in 1609)1 in relation to local Mantuan instrumental
practice in particular, and to North Italian practice more generally, in the first decade of the
seventeenth century. Succeeding papers will consider Monteverdi’s use in Orfeo of (II) the bassi da
[viola da] gamba and contrabassi de viola da gamba, (III) the wind instruments, and (IV) the harp and
continuo instruments. For reasons of length, this first paper, on the violini and viole da braccio, is
divided into three separate parts (Comms.): Part One examines the internal evidence of the string
music in Orfeo; Part Two extends this survey to the other music for strings that Monteverdi published
between 1605 and 1610, all of which was apparently written for the Mantuan court, and to that
published later which can be dated to the same period; and Part Three compares Monteverdi’s practice
with that of his Italian contemporaries (principally the Mantuan Salamone Rossi but also the Venetian
Giovanni Gabrielli and others elsewhere), and relates it to documentary evidence concerning the
identities and careers of the string players who worked at the Mantuan court.
Previous studies of Monteverdi’s use of bowed instruments in Orfeo have noted that much has been
written on the subject,2 but little account has been taken so far of the documentary record that allows
us partly to reconstruct the circumstances of performance and to identify the players involved. Even
studies published since the appearance of Susan Parisi’s important archival survey of ducal patronage
of music in Mantua have largely ignored the implications of her findings.3 In reassessing the
evidence, reference is made here chiefly to two recent contributions: Tim Carter’s detailed study of the
1
Unless otherwise stated, all references are to Monteverdi, Claudio: L’Orfeo, favola in musica (Venice:
Amadino, 1609), facsimile ed. Elisabeth Schmierer, ‘Meisterwerke der Musik im Faksimile’, 1 (Laaber: LaaberVerlag, 1998).
2
See for example Licia, Sirch, ‘“Violini piccoli alla francese” e “canto alla francese” nell’Orfeo (1607) e
“Scherzi musicali” (1607) di Monteverdi’, Nuova rivista musicale italiana, vol. 15, 1981, pp. 50-65 (p. 50); and
Peter Holman, ‘“Col nobilissimo esercitio della vivuola”: Monteverdi’s String Writing’, Early Music, vol. 21,
1993, pp. 576-90 (p. 580).
3
Susan Parisi, Ducal Patronage of Music in Mantua, 1587-1627: an archival study, PhD dissertation, University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1989; see also Susan Parisi, ‘Musicians at the Court of Mantua during
Monteverdi’s Time: Evidence from the Payrolls’ in S. Gmeinweiser, D. Riley and J. Riedlbauer (eds.):
Musicologica Humana: Studies in Honor of Warren and Ursula Kirkendale (Florence: Olschki, 1994), pp. 183208; Susan Parisi, ‘Acquiring Musicians and Instruments in the Early Baroque: Observations from Mantua’,
Journal of Musicology, vol. 14, 1996, pp. 117-50; and Susan Parisi, ‘New Documents concerning Monteverdi’s
relations with the Gonzagas’ in Paola Besutti, Teresa M. Gialdroni and Rodolfo Baroncini (eds.), Claudio
Monteverdi: studi e prospettive; atti del convengo, Mantova, 21-24 ottobre 1993, ‘Academia Nazionale
Virgiliana di Scienze, Lettere e Arti: Miscellanea’, 5 (Florence: Olschki, 1996), pp. 477-511. Important studies
since 1989 include Philip Pickett, Behind the Mask: Monteverdi’s L’Orfeo (London: author, 1992); Holman,
‘“Col nobilissimo esercitio…”’; and Ephraim Segerman, ‘Review: Monteverdi’s Violini Piccoli alla Francese
and Viole da Brazzo, by David D. Boyden, Annales Musicologiques VI (Paris 1958-63), pp. 387-401’, FoMRHI
Quarterly 101, 2001, Comm. 1738, pp. 28-32.
.
5
allocation of voices in the first performance of Orfeo,4 and Ephraim Segerman’s FoMRHI Comm.
1738.5 My debt to Parisi is evident throughout Part Three.
An attempt is made here to distinguish between several attributes of the instruments: their name
(confusion abounds in the literature between historical and modern practice), form (most importantly,
here, the number and lengths of their strings), sound (chiefly their relative and absolute pitches), use
(the ways they were grouped; and the nominal and absolute pitches they played), and associations.
The terms ‘violin’ and ‘viola’, where not italicised, refer here to instruments having the normal
modern nominal tunings associated with them: g, d’, a’, e’’ and c, g, d’, a’ respectively. The terms
violino and viola and their plurals, and other instrument names in italics, are used here as they are in
the sixteenth and seventeenth-century sources referred to: they may be either generic or specific to a
particular size or pitch register, according to context.6
In reviewing David Boyden’s ‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli alla francese and viole da brazzo’,7
Ephraim Segerman proposes for the string ensemble music of Monteverdi’s Orfeo a hypothetical set of
three sizes of viole da braccio, tuned to the nominal pitches G, d, a, e’ (bass); c, g, d’, a’ (tenor); and
f, c’, g’, d’’ (alto). The last of these tunings is in contradistinction to an instrument sounding a tone
higher (g, d’, a’, e’’, the familiar tuning of the violin) which latter, he implies, would have played only
the music explicitly designated for violino in the score. Segerman views the violino not as a species of
viola da braccio but as a distinct instrument, dissimilar in pitch (i.e. tuned a tone higher than the
hypothetical ‘alto’ viola da braccio), in playing technique and, if we take account also of his previous
publications on the relationship of the two instruments one to the other, also in form and setup.8
Segerman’s proposed ensemble of viole da braccio is striking in two principal respects: its different
sizes are separated not by fifths (as was usual in the sixteenth century for woodwinds and also
common for those string instruments which were tuned in fifths),9 nor alternately by fifths and fourths
(as was increasingly the case in the seventeenth century), but successively by fourths alone, a scheme
without precedent; and in comparison with the string music in the printed score of Orfeo, the ensemble
lacks in range a necessary fourth in the bass (which descends to D) and, assuming that the instruments
were played only in the first position, a tone in the treble (which ascends to b’’).10
It was a common though not universal practice in the sixteenth century to set the successive sizes of
viole tuned in fifths a fifth apart, as was normal for woodwind instruments also. This had the
advantage of allowing the whole ensemble to be tuned in a single grand chain of unisons, initially
extending from F to a’ (encompassing four fifths: F, c, g, d’, a’),11 but which already by 1555,
4
Tim Carter, ‘Singing Orfeo: on the Performers of Monteverdi’s first Opera’, Recercare, vol. 11, 1999, pp. 75118.
5
Segerman, ‘Review: Monteverdi’s Violini Piccoli’.
6
For example, violino may refer to the ordinary g, d’, a’, e’’ violin or it may apply, with or without adjectives
indicating lesser or greater size, to another member of the set of violini, which consisted of viole which were, as
a whole, smaller than the set of violoni; and violini may refer to multiple examples (all of one size) of the
ordinary g, d’, a’, e’’ violin, or to the several sizes of the smaller of two broad families of bowed viole, in
contradistinction to the violoni.
7
David Boyden, ‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli alla francese and viole da brazzo’, Annales musicologiques, vol.
6, 1959-63, pp. 387-401.
8
Notably in Ephraim Segerman, ‘The Transformations from Renaissance to Baroque Fiddles’, at
http://www.nrinstruments.demon.co.uk/fiddlesize.html on 5 June 2000.
9
Tunings for three or more sizes of bowed instruments spanning four or more successive fifths are given by:
Agricola 1528 (but not 1545); Ganassi, 1542; Jambe de Fer, 1556; Zacconi, 1592; Cerone, 1613; and Mersenne,
1636. Tunings for sets of instruments which adopt the principle of separating sizes by an octave, rather than a
ninth, are given by: Agricola, 1545; Banchieri, 1609 and 1611; and Praetorius, 1619.
10
Some of the substantial evidence for viole da braccio normally having been confined to first-position playing
in the early years of the seventeenth century will be examined in Parts Two and Three.
11
This scheme is presented in its simplest form by Ganassi, 1542, who gives three sizes of three-stringed
instruments, tuned in fifths and separated by fifths.
6
according to Jambe de Fer, had expanded to BBb to e’’ (six fifths).12 The widening of this compass to
six or even seven fifths led to uncomfortable disparities of fingering and (especially between
woodwind instruments) of timbre between the remote sizes of instrument,13 and also gave rise to
problems of temperament.14 Such problems were largely ameliorated by separating the different sizes
of instruments not by fifths alone but by alternating fifths and fourths, at least between the outermost
sizes of sets to be played together, giving octaves between sizes that would otherwise have been a
ninth apart. This alternative scheme is seen in an embryonic form in the 1545 edition of Agricola, and
had apparently gained wider acceptance in Italy and Italian-influenced centres by the start of the
seventeenth century, when it was documented by Banchieri and Praetorius. To separate fifth-tuned
instruments successively by fourths represents a further departure from the ideal of unison consonance
that inheres in the prevailing sixteenth-century tunings: unlike the cautious replication of one size of
instrument at the octave which we observe in the early seventeenth century, Segerman’s set of
instruments abandons the unison ideal altogether, replacing it with a more complex pattern of octaves:
G and D appear in three octave registers (G, g, g’ and d, d’, d’’), C and A in two (c, c’ and a, a’) and F
and E, at the extremes of the chain of fifths, in one (f and e’). Such a departure, which would have
made tuning more difficult, would have needed a justification, so it is appropriate that the fitness of
the hypothetical ensemble for its purpose should be tested.
Segerman arrives at his proposal as a result of a review of most – but, significantly, not of all – of the
known sixteenth and early seventeenth-century nominal tunings for viole tuned in fifths. From the
available evidence, he is correct in concluding that the case for relatively straightforward continuity of
tuning practice between the mid-sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is clearer for France than it is for
Italy;15 but it is necessary to re-examine the conclusions he reaches regarding the development of the
use of viole da braccio in Italy. Underlying the conclusions of Segerman’s review are: an artificial
distinction between the highest normal viola da braccio and the violino, stemming from a particular
interpretation of Zacconi, which is irreconcilable with the unambiguous evidence of Banchieri;16
conclusions regarding the use of violini and viole by Giovanni Gabrieli and Salamone Rossi, and in the
Florentine intermedi of 1589, which do not bear scrutiny; an assumption about the relationship of
sixteenth-century nominal pitches to seventeenth-century absolute pitch standards which appears to be
unsustainable; and an exaggerated claim for the prevalence of very small members of the violin family
in sixteenth-century Italian iconography. These problems are reconsidered in Part Three, following a
detailed examination of Monteverdi’s practice as it is recorded in his surviving music.
12
The tunings for four-stringed instruments given by Jambe de Fer, 1556, though tuned in a continuous chain of
fifths, already omit one possible size of instrument: there is a gap of a ninth between the taille-haute contre and
the basse.
13
Praetorius, 1619, vol. 2, p. 26, includes one small bowed instrument, called Exilent: garklein Geig/mit drey
Saitten, the higher of whose two alternative tunings is a’, e’’, b’’; and Mersenne, 1636, vol. 2, p. 185, gives an
‘accord du violon’ spanning the six fifths from BBb to e’’. The higher notes in his two diagrams, he explains,
are produced on the fingerboard of the treble violin.
14
Assuming that string players were to sound open strings, and that woodwind players were to use simple
fingerings where possible, it was necessary for the fifths between sizes of instruments to be tempered if the
preferred scheme of intonation was to use consonant thirds and was not to be quasi-Pythagorean.
15
Segerman, ‘Review: Monteverdi’s Violini Piccoli’, p. 28. The French evidence is not abundant but Jambe de
Fer (1555) and Mersenne (1636) agree as to the main nominal tunings. Segerman characterises Boyden’s
attempt to extend this pattern so as to accommodate the tunings known from Italy as the ‘Renaissance-baroquecontinuity theory’.
16
Zacconi, 1592, ff. 215v-218v. The importance of Adriano Banchieri’s Conclusioni nel suono dell’organo
(Bologna, 1609) and L’organo suonarino (Venice, 1611) to our understanding of the relationship of the violino
to the viola da braccio is discussed in detail in Part Three.
7
Bowed instruments in Orfeo: their names and ranges
The bowed instruments in the general list of ‘stromenti’ which precedes the printed score (p. [iii]) are
as follows:
Duoi contrabassi de Viola
Dieci Viole da brazzo
Duoi Violini piccoli alla Francese
Tre bassi da gamba
These names appear in abbreviation and with minor but insignificant variants of spelling in the course
of the score itself (the violini piccoli are later piccioli; and brazzo and braccio are interchangeable),
where they are also occasionally expanded and qualified. We learn, notably, that at least one of the
two contrabassi de viola was ‘da gamba’ (p. 67), and as no distinction is made between them when
they are listed together (p. [iii]), it is likely that both of the contrabassi were of that kind.17
Where specific numbers of bowed instruments are reported in the score as having played at one time,
they are often fewer than the totals in the list of stromenti. That no more than five of the ten viole da
brazzo are reported by number as having been used at once (pp. 10 and 32) has led to the suggestion
that that the ten were divided into two quintets which played alternately;18 but the designation ‘tutti
(g)li stromenti' for the Toccata (p. [iv]) and the first chorus, ‘Vieni Imeneo, deh vieni’ (pp. 8-9),
suggests that, on at least those two occasions, the two groups, if so constituted, played together. Only
one of two contrabassi de viola is reported as having played at once, suggesting that when combined
with the viole da braccio, one may have been associated with each of two quintets; and only two of
three bassi da gamba are ever explicitly called for.19 The basso da brazzo called for by name at
several points in the score is not separately named in the list,20 and must be assumed to have been
among the Dieci Viole da brazzo; and neither, significantly, are the instruments variously called violini
and violini ordinarii in the score named separately in the list.21
Table 1 presents the clefs and ranges of all the parts reported as having been played by the viole da
braccio or likely, by analogy and according to context, to have been played by them. Instrumentation
reported in the score is reproduced in full. Also included are the ranges of other parts referred to
below in contradistinction to those played by viole da bracio.
A note concerning relative pitch
It is assumed here that all the music in Orfeo is intended to be heard at a single pitch standard, except
where explicitly stated in the score (of the instrumental music this applies only to the Toccata, to be
17
Monteverdi’s use of the da gamba instruments will be considered in ‘Playing Orfeo II’.
Evidence for there having been two established string bands in Mantua at this time is assessed in Part three.
19
Other numerical inconsistencies between the list of stromenti (p. [iii]) and the score are as follows: two
‘Chitaroni’ are listed, but three are reported in the score (pp. 10 and 32); two 'Flautini' appear at p. 30, but only
one ‘Flautino alla Vigesima seconda’ is in the list; four ‘Tromboni’ are listed, but five are reported at p. 70; one
‘Arpa doppia’ is listed, but in the generic change of instrumentation at p. 89, ‘arpe’ are mentioned among other
plurals; and ‘Ceteroni’, absent from the list, are mentioned among the instruments of the terrestrial world which
replace those of the underworld. Though one ‘Clarino’ and three ‘trombe sordine’ are listed (four trumpets in
all), the toccata (p. [iv]) for trumpets is in five parts.
20
The (basso da) (viola da) brazzo (not all components of the full name appear), is named at pp. 28, 36, 63, 80
and 81.
21
When the simple terms violino or violini are used in Orfeo, the instruments are always in pairs. Two staves
individually labelled violino occur at pp. 52, 63 and 78, but when the rubrics at pp. 27 and 28 contrast piccolo
and ordinary instruments, the plural, violini is used.
18
8
played a tone higher than written22), where required by octave-transposing instruments,23 or where
indicated, according to convention, by high clef groupings. High clefs occur only in the sinfonia
between Acts I and II (p. 47, repeated pp. 68-69 and p. 73) and the chorus of spirits, ‘Nulla impresa
per huom’ (pp. 70-73), both in chiavi acuti,24 which would probably have sounded a fourth lower than
written; 25 and the chorus of spirits, ‘E vitute un raggio’ (pp. 84-86) and the preceding and following
sinfonia (pp. 82-83 and p. 87, whose bass is in C4) which, if we take account of the D minor ritornello
that follows, probably sounded a fifth lower than written.26
22
p. [iv]; ‘e si fa un Tuono piu alto…’; an instance of specified vocal transposition occurs in Act IV, where Un
spirto del coro sings the passage ‘O degli habitator’ ‘un tuono più alto’ [p. 76].
23
The violini piccoli alla Francese are considered below, and the use of the flautini and contrabassi will be
considered in later Comms.
24
The chiavi acuti, with the F3 clef for the basses and correspondingly high clefs for the upper parts, were later
called chiavette. Patrizio Barbieri, ‘Chiavette’ in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2001, vol.
5, pp. 595-98, provides a helpful summary of this practice.
25
According to Banchieri (Cartella, overo Regole, 1601) pieces in these clefs were to be transposed down a
fourth when there is a Bb in the signature (which is not the case in the sinfonia and ‘Nulla impresa per huom’),
and by a fifth when there is not (see Barbieri, 2001). In his edition of Orfeo (Huntingdon: King’s Music, 1986)
Clifford Bartlett follows Banchieri in favouring transposition by a fifth (pp. 66 and 90). I will present fully my
argument in favour of transposition by a fourth in this instance in a future Comm. For the transposition of
analogous sections of Monteverdi’s Vespers (1610), see Andrew Parrott, ‘Transposition in Monteverdi’s Vespers
of 1610: an “Aberration” Defended’, Early Music, vol. 12, 1984, pp. 490-516; Jeffrey Kurtzman, ‘An Aberration
Amplified’, Early Music, vol. 13, 1985, pp. 73-6; and Jeffrey Kurtzman, The Monteverdi Vespers of 1619:
Music, Context, Performance (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), pp. 404-22.
26
Carter’s dismissal of transposition of the choruses because ‘it would introduce still more anomalies than there
are otherwise present’ (Carter, ‘Singing Orfeo’, p. 95, and pp. 98-99, where he struggles to match the vocal
ranges to the singers cast elsewhere) is less than fully argued. His objection is seemingly on grounds of vocal
range rather than of tonal organisation and coherence, but the unprecedented occurrence of two parts in the alto
clef, the sudden leap upwards of the ranges of the bass parts, and the use of TTTBB clefs for ‘Pietade oggi et
Amore’ (doubtless to be sung untransposed) are telling: this is music for a deep ensemble of tenors and basses
(appropriate to Hades), singing, I suggest, in the range D (a tone lower than is used elsewhere) to e’ (the
predominant upper note of the solo tenor voices).
9
Table 1: clefs and ranges
p. [iv]: Toccata (nominal sounding pitches
given here, a tone higher than printed in the
score, in accordance with the rubric).27
'Toccata che si suona avanti il levar de la tela
tre volte con tutti li stromenti, & si fa un Tuono
piu alto volendo sonar le trombe con le
sordine.'
G2; d''-b''
C1; d'-d''
C2; a-f#'
C3; a
C4; d
pp. 10-12: Balletto ‘Lasciate i monti’
(repeated, with abbreviated ritornello, pp. 1517).
'Questo balletto fu cantato al suono di cinque
Viole da braccio, tre Chittaroni, duoi
Clavicembani, un' Arpa doppia, un
contrabasso de Viola, & un Flautino alla
vigesima seconda.'
Choro
Ritornello
C1; g'-f''
a'-a''
C1; e'-e''
g'-e''
C3; g-bb'
c'-a'
C4; d-e'
g-e'
F4; G-c'
G-d'
[basso continuo] F4; G-d'
G-d'
Prologue
p. 1: Ritornello (repeated at pp. 6, 46 and 88
and, in an abbreviated version, pp. 2, 3, 4 and
5).
Without local instrumental designation;
implicitly (according to the rubric on p. 47,
and by analogy with that on p. 88) for viole da
braccio.
G2; g'-bb''
G2; a'-a''
C3; c'-c''
C4; d-e'
F4; D-a 28
Act I
p. 8: Choro ‘Vieni Imeneo, deh vieni’
(repeated pp. 17-18)
'Questo Canto fu concertato al suono de tutti
gli stromenti.'
C1; e'-e''
C1; e'-e''
C3; g-a'
C4; d-e'
F4; G-c'
p. 19: Ritornello (repeated pp. 21and 23)
Without local instrumental designation;
implicitly for viole da braccio.
C1; e'-a''
C1; [c]'-e'' 29
C3; a-a'
C4; c-d'
F4; G-a
p. 25: [Choro] ‘Ecco Orfeo’30
It is suggested that, however much the SSATB
choruses may have been doubled by
instruments (as specified at pp. 8 and 10),
those with this SATTB scoring are for voices
only.
C1; e'-f''
C3; a-a'
C4; d-e'
C4; e-e'
F4; F#-d'
27
The notation of the Toccata, which is conceived
for trumpets according to the harmonic series of C,
is conventional. The intended sounding pitch is
confirmed in the Vespers (1610), where the reused
Toccata, no longer played on trumpets but on
cornetti and bowed instruments, is printed a tone
higher.
28
It is noteworthy that the range here extends lower
than the F4 parts later explicitly labelled basso da
brazzo.
29
The range is d'-e'' on p. 19, but c'-e'' on pp. 21
and 23 (the seventh note of the second bar is c’ not
e’’). This is the only one of the relatively small
number of evident printer’s error that affects the
instrumental ranges discussed here.
30
It appears that however much the other choruses
may have been doubled by instruments, those with
this SATTB scoring are intended for voices only.
10
Act II
p. 26: Sinfonia
Without local instrumental designation;
implicitly for viole da braccio.
C1; g'-a''
C1; f'-f''
C3; b- a'
C4; d-g'
F4; G-bb
Ritornelli to ‘Ecco pur ch'a voi ritorno’ and
succeeding stanzas:
p. 27: 'Questo Ritornello fu suonato di dentro
da un Clavicembano, duoi Chitaroni, & duoi
Violini piccioli alla Francese.' (abbreviated
repeat without instrumental designation p. 28).
C1; d'-eb''
C1; c'-d''31
F4; F-c'
pp. 28-29: 'Questo Ritornello fu sonato da duoi
Violini ordinarii da Braccio, un Basso de
Viola da braccio, un Clavicembano, & duoi
Chittaroni.' (repeated without instrumental
designation p. 29).
C1; g'-a''
C1; f#'-f''
F4; G-d'
p. 30: Ritornello. 'Fu sonato di dentro da duoi
Chitaroni un Clavicembano, & duoi Flautini.'
(repeated without instrumental designation p.
31).
C1; f'-e''
C1; d'-d''
F4; G-c'
p. 31: Choro ‘Dunque fa degno Orfeo’
It is suggested that, however much the SSATB
choruses may have been doubled by
instruments (as specified at pp. 8 and 10),
those with this SATTB scoring are for voices
only.
C1; a'-e''
C3; e'-a'
C4; g-e'
31
It is noteworthy that the ninth note of the second
part is printed d’, not b, a departure from the
prevailing melodic figure and parallel movement in
thirds. As this bar is omitted when the ritornello is
repeated, it is difficult to be certain whether
avoidance of the low b is intentional.
C4; d-d'
F4; G-g
[basso continuo] F4; G-a
p. 32: Ritornello to ‘Vi ricorda o bosch'
ombrosi’ (repeated without instrumental
designation pp. 33, 34 and 35).
'Fu sonato questo Ritornello di dentro da
cinque Viole da braccio, un contrabasso, duoi
Clavicembani & tre chitarroni.'
C1; b'-b''
C1; g'-e''
C3; c'-a'
C4; g-f'
F4; G-a
p. 36: Specified changes of continuo
instrumentation of the dialogue between a
[Pastore] and the Messaggiera.
At ‘Qual suon dolente’, where the Pastore is
accompanied by 'Un Clavic. Chitar. & Viola
da bracio', the short labelled passage is: F4; fc'. Previously, at ‘Mira deh mira’, immediately
before the arrival of the Messaggiera (p. 35),
where the Pastore is likely to have had the
same accompaniment: F4; G-c'. Then,
subsequently, at ‘Questa è Silvia gentile’ (p.
36): F4; B-a. Note the avoidance of F (which
recurs in the accompaniment to the
Messaggiera) and D (used in the organ and
Chitarone accompaniment to Orfeo on pp. 3940).
p. 37: Orfeo's basso continuo range F-g
p. 38: Pastore's basso continuo range G-f
pp. 40-41: Choro ‘Ahi caso acerbo’
(abbreviated repeat, p. 44). It is suggested that,
however much the SSATB choruses may have
been doubled by instruments (as specified at
pp. 8 and 10), those with this SATTB scoring
are for voices only.
C1; c'-e''
C3; c'-bb'
C4; e-f'
C4; d-f'
F4; E-bb
p. 42: Sinfonia
Without local instrumental designation;
implicitly for viole da braccio.
C1; g'-g''
C1; f'-d''
C3; g-a'
C4; d-d'
F4; G-g
11
p. 47: At the end of the second act, at the foot
of the page bearing the seven-part sinfonia, to
which it evidently relates: 'Qui entrano li
Tromb. Corn. & Regali, & taciono le Viole da
bracio, & Organi di legno Clavicem. & si
muta la sena.'
Act III
p. 51: Sinfonia (repeated pp. 67 and 93).
C3; d'-a'
C4; g-d'
C4; e-d'
C4; c-c'
F4; F-eb
If the rubric at the previous change of scene (p.
47) is adhered to literally, this might have been
played by trombones (within whose range all
five parts lie), or conceivably by trombones
and a cornetto; but the same sinfonia is later
(p. 67) played pian piano by Viole da braccio
[presumably but not explicitly five32], un Org.
di leg. & un contrabasso de Viola da gamba.
Embellishments, ritornelli and
accompaniments to Orfeo’s aria ‘Possente
spirto’.
pp. 52-55: Embellishments and Ritornello to
stanza 1: ‘Possente spirto’.
Two staves individually labelled 'Violino.';
C1; d’-a’’
C1; d’-a’’
pp. 63-64: Embellishments to stanza 4: ‘Orfeo
son io’.
Three staves, the upper two individually
labelled ‘Violino.’ and the lower ‘Basso da
brazzo.’
C1; g’-bb’’
C1; f’-d’’
F4; G-d’
p. 65: Accompaniment to stanza 6: ‘Sol tu
nobile Dio’. Rubric at the foot of p. 64:
‘Furno sonate le tre altre parti da tre Viole da
braccio, & un contrabasso de Viola tocchi
pian piano.’
C1; g’-d’’
32
Whenever the score states that a particular
number of viole da braccio are joined by a
contrabasso in five-part music (pp. 10, 32), five are
specified.
C1; d’-d’’
C3; c’-a’
F4; G-g
p. 67: Sinfonia (repeated from p. 51; and
played again p. 93).
‘Questa Sinfo. si sonò pian piano, con Viole da
braccio [presumably, but not explicitly, five,
as at pp. 10 and 32], un Org. di leg. & un
contrabasso de Viola da gamba.33
Clefs and ranges as p. 51.
Act VI
p. 78: Ritornello to Orfeo’s aria ‘Qual honor di
te degno’ (repeated pp. 78 and 79).
Three staves, the upper two individually
labelled ‘Violino.’ and the bass without
instrumental designation.
C1; a’-g’’
C1; e’-d’’
F4; G-g (descending to D in the verses
between the ritornelli). By analogy with pp. 28
and 63, this part may perhaps have been played
on the basso da viola da braccio, but no
instrument is named.
p. 80: Changes of continuo instrumentation as
Orfeo doubts that Euridice is following him:
‘Segue Orfeo cantando nel Clavicembano
[Basso da] Viola da braccio, & Chittarone.’
F4; c-a
‘Qui si volta Orfeo, & canta al suono del
Organo di legno.’
F4; G-d
p. 81. ‘Qui canta Orfeo al suono del Clavic
Viola da braccio basso, & un chitar.’
F4; A-e (note that accompaniment to the
following entry, un Spirto, opens with
continuo F).
33
That the contrabasso here follows the foundation
instrument, as at p. 10, suggests that on both
occasions it was conceived of as part of a continuo
group. As five viole da braccio are specified at p.
10, it is likely that the sinfonia at p. 67 was played
by the same number, and that the contrabasso was
not solely responsible for the bass, as it was in the
accompaniment to stanza 6 of ‘Possente spirto’
(‘Sol tu nobile Dio’: p. 65) where, exceptionally,
there is no foundation instrument.
12
Act V
p. 88: Ritornello (repeated from p. 1, where the
instrumentation is unspecified).
‘Tacciono li cornetti, Tromboni & Regali, &
entrano a sonare il presente Ritornello, le
viole da braccio, Organi, Clavicembani,
contrabasso, & Arpe, & Chitaroni, &
Ceteroni, & si muta la Sena.’
Ranges and clefs as p. 1.
p. 93: Sinfonia (repeated from p. 51 where, as
here, the instrumentation is unspecified, and
from p. 67, where played on ‘Viole da braccio
[presumably, but not explicitly, five, as at pp.
10 and 32], un Org. di leg. & un contrabasso
de Viola da gamba.
Clefs and ranges as p. 51.
pp. 97-98: Ritornello to the chorus ‘Vanne
Orfeo felice a pieno’. Without local
instrumental designation; implicitly (following
the general change of instrumentation on p. 88)
for viole da braccio.
G2; g’-b’’
C1; g’-e’’
C3; g-a’
C4; e-e’
F4; D-a
pp. 98-99: Chorus ‘Vanne Orfeo felice a
pieno’ (the clefs of the preceding ritornello are
restated).
G2; f#’-g’’
C1; f#’-e’’
C3; g-a’
C4; e-f’
F4; G-c’
p. 100: Moresca (continuing the clef
combination of the previous chorus and
ritornello). Without local instrumental
designation; implicitly for viole da braccio,
perhaps with other instruments.
G2; f#’-a’’
C1; d’-f’’
C3; g-a’
C4; d-f’
F4; D-a
Identifying the music played by the viole da braccio
The viole da braccio as the normal five-part instrumental ensemble in the terrestrial acts
Most of the instrumental ensemble music in Orfeo consists of sinfonie and ritornelli in five parts.
Although only the balletto ‘Lasciate i monti’ (pp. 10-12) and the ritornello to ‘Vi ricorda o bosch’
ombrosi’ (p. 32) have a rubric specifying that they were played by five viole da braccio and a
contrabasso da viola (with appropriate foundation instruments), the rubric at the end of Act II (p. 47)
shows clearly that this was the normal five-part instrumental ensemble throughout the first two acts: it
indicates that the viole da braccio, organi di legno and clavicembali are there silenced and replaced by
the tromboni, cornetti and regali, the instruments which characterise the underworld. At the end of
Act IV, as Orfeo returns from Hades, this change of prevailing instrumentation is reversed: the rubric
(p. 88) indicates that the cornetti, tromboni and regali are silenced and the viole da braccio (their
number unspecified), contrabasso (singular, as when previously specified), organi, and all the kinds of
plucked continuo instruments enter to play the following five-part ritornello. As this ritornello (p. 88)
is a repetition of that in the Prologue (p. 1), we may deduce that it was played there by the same
bowed instruments, and also when it recurs at the end of Act II (p. 46). The low-pitched five-part
sinfonia in Act III (p. 51) was played, at least at its second occurrence (p. 67) by an unspecified
number of viole da braccio (presumably five), an organ and a contrabasso de viola da gamba.34 In
fact, as the cornetts and trombones are clearly confined to Acts III and IV, there is simply no
alternative group of melodic instruments available to play the five-part pieces, and we must conclude
that all those of unspecified instrumentation in Acts I (p. 19), II (pp. 26 and 42) and V (pp. 97-98)
were similarly played by the viole da braccio.
34
The exceptional register and instrumentation of this sinfonia, which reappears in Act V (p. 93), are considered
below.
13
The clefs and ranges of the sinfonie and ritornelli
Monteverdi is not entirely consistent in his use of clefs in relation to the ranges of instrumental parts,
and in the treble parts, especially, does not always adopt the clef resulting in the fewest ledger lines.
The highest part of the ritornello to ‘Vi ricorda o bosch' ombrosi’ (p. 32), for example, is in the
predominant C1, despite its high range (b'-b''). The G2 clef is used only for the highest (clarino) part
of the Toccata (p. [iv]), the two upper parts of the ritornello to the Prologue (p. 1), and the highest part,
only, of the Act V ritornello (p. 97), its associated chorus ‘Vanne Orfeo’ (p. 98), and the following
Moresca (p. 100). Except for these instances and the low-pitched Act III sinfonia (pp. 51), uniquely
scored C3, C4, C4, C4, F4, Monteverdi uses a uniform combination of clefs, C1, C1, C3, C4, F4, with
remarkably similar part ranges.
Apart from the ritornello to the Prologue (p. 1 etc.), with its two equal upper parts, and the low-pitched
sinfonia in Act III (p. 51), the five-part instrumental movements are confined to the following ranges:
1st soprano
2nd soprano
Alto
Tenor
Bass
g’-b’’
d’-f’’ (f’’ occurs only in the Act II sinfonia (p. 26) and the Moresca (p. 100))
g-a’
c-g’
D-d’
If the instruments are confined to playing in first position, these ranges suit two in violin tuning, two in
viola tuning (or, if one desires to avoid the lowest string, one tuned F, c, g, d’ or G, d, a, e’ for the
tenor parts) and a bass tuned C, G, d, a. The lower limit of the second and third parts may be seen as
making full use of the third string, but without using the fourth. If a semitone extension is allowed for
the two brief instances of f’’, the second soprano parts could alternatively have been played in viola
rather than violin tuning.
Instrumental doubling of the choruses
The extent to which the five-part choruses were doubled by instruments is not known with complete
certainty: only two of the six terrestrial choruses (sung by nymphs and shepherds) and one of the three
underworld choruses (sung by spirits) are reported as having been sung to the sound of sustaining
melodic instruments. That both the viole da braccio that played ‘Lasciate i monti’ (pp. 10-12) and the
tromboni in ‘Nulla impresa per huom’ (pp. 70-73) were five in number indicates beyond reasonable
doubt that all five of their vocal parts were doubled. The recurring clef combinations of the ensemble
pieces exhibit a marked distinction between the voices and instruments of the terrestrial world (Acts I,
II and V) and those of the underworld (Acts III and IV), with more subtle distinctions within each of
those two domains. Those terrestrial choruses explicitly doubled by viole da braccio (‘Lasciate i
monti’)35 or sung ‘to the sound of all the instruments’ (‘Vieni Imeneo’, doubtless including the viole
da braccio),36 have two soprano parts and one each of alto, tenor and bass range (SSATB), and their
ranges match closely:
35
pp. 10-12: ‘Questo balletto fu cantato al suono di cinque Viole da braccio, tre Chittaroni, duoi Clavicembani,
un' Arpa doppia, un contrabasso de Viola, & un Flautino alla vigesima seconda.’
36
p. 8: ‘Questo Canto fu concertato al suono de tutti gli stromenti’; that is, presumably, all the instruments
associated with the terrestrial world only.
14
‘Vieni Imeneo’
‘Lasciate i monti’
Choro
(doubled)
C1; e’-e’’
C1; e’-e’’
C3; g-a’
C4; d-e’
F4; G-c’
Choro
(doubled)
C1; g’-f’’
C1; e’-e’’
C3; g-bb’
C4; d-e’
F4; G-c’
F4; G-d’
Ritornello
a’-a’’
g’-e’’
c’-a’
g-e’
G-d’
G-d’ [basso continuo]
It is likely that the same bowed instruments played both pieces. If the rubric ‘to the sound of all the
instruments’ is interpreted literally, ‘Vieni Imeneo’, unlike ‘Lasciate i monti’, may apparently have
had two viole da braccio to each part.
Three other choruses sung by the nymphs and shepherds in Acts I and II, ‘Ecco Orfeo’ (p. 25),
‘Dunque fa degno Orfeo’ (p. 31) and ‘Ahi caso acerbo’ (pp. 40-41),37 have a lower vocal scoring
(SATTB as opposed to SSATB), and doubling instruments are not mentioned for them. The second
and third parts are a fourth or more lower in range than those of ‘Vieni Imeneo’ and ‘Lasciate i monti’.
In an edition prepared for performances in 1977,38 I concluded, in recognition of these distinguishing
characteristics, that the three SATTB choruses were not intended to be doubled by melody
instruments, but should be accompanied by foundation instruments only. All three choruses comment
on the action, and Whenham, Pickett and Carter have subsequently correlated the two choral scorings
with the presence or absence of particular singers on stage.39 In the improbable event that these
choruses were doubled, either the instruments assigned the second and third parts would have had to
have played in an appreciably lower register than elsewhere (the second in the range a-bb’, as opposed
to e’-e’’; and the third d-f’, as opposed to g-bb’) or an instrument of deeper pitch would have been
necessary for at least the second part.
Like ‘Lasciate i monti’, the final chorus, ‘Vanne Orfeo felic’a pieno’ (pp. 98-99), is strophic, with a
five-part instrumental ritornello sharing the same clefs as the voices. It reverts to the SSATB scoring
of the first two choruses of Act I, but the first soprano ascends, uniquely in the opera, to g’’. Like the
highest part in the preceding ritornello, this is printed in the treble (G2) clef.40 Apart from this
difference, the vocal ranges of ‘Vanne Orfeo felic’a pieno’ match those of ‘Vieni Imeneo, deh vieni’
and ‘Lasciate i monti’ so closely that we may deduce that the performers were the same, and that the
final chorus was doubled by the same group of viole da braccio as played the ritornello that alternates
with it.
37
Perhaps surprisingly, ‘Dunque fa degno Orfeo’, unlike ‘Ecco Orfeo’ and ‘Ahi caso acerbo’, has a basso
segente part on a sixth stave. If all three choruses had been indented also to be instrumentally doubled, it is
‘Ecco Orfeo’, whose lower parts cross, unlike those of the others, that might be thought to need such a part the
most.
38
Lyons Concert Hall, University of York, November 1977. Modern performances are listed in John Whenham
(ed.), Claudio Monteverdi: Orfeo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).
39
John Whenham, ‘Five acts; one action’ in John Whenham (ed.), Claudio Monteverdi: Orfeo (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 42–77 (pp. 52-4); Pickett, Behind the Mask, p. 38; Carter, ‘Singing
Orfeo’.
40
The clefs of the ritornello are restated at the start of the chorus with which it alternates. As the ritornello
ascends to b’’ and the chorus only to g’’, it is likely that the choice of the G2 clef was determined more by the
initial instrumental range than by the subsequent vocal one, and that the change in vocal clef in relation to Act I
does not signal a change of personnel.
15
‘Vieni Imeneo’
‘Lasciate i monti’
Choro
(doubled)
C1; e’-e’’
C1; e’-e’’
C3; g-a’
C4; d-e’
F4; G-c’
Choro
(doubled)
C1; g’-f’’
C1; e’-e’’
C3; g-bb’
C4; d-e’
F4; G-c’
F4; G-d’
Ritornello
‘Vanne Orfeo felic’a pieno’
Choro
(doubled)
a’-a’’
G2; f#’-g’’
g’-e’’
C1; f#’-e’’
c’-a’
C3; g-a’
g-e’
C4; e-f’
G-d’
F4; G-c’
G-d’ [basso continuo]
Ritornello
g’-b’’
g’-e’’
g-a’
e-e’
D-a
Though the ritornelli to ‘Lasciate i monti’ and ‘Vanne Orfeo felic’a pieno’ are confined to the ranges
identified above for the five-part instrumental music in Orfeo, some of the doubled choral parts exceed
these ranges slightly: in ‘Vanne Orfeo’ the first soprano is extended downwards from the prevailing g’
to f#’, and in ‘Vieni Imeneo’ to e’; and in ‘Lasciate i monti’ the alto is extended upwards from a’ to
bb’.
To summarise, apart from the two instrumental pieces of exceptional scoring (the Prologue ritornello
and the low-pitched Act III sinfonia), the music in five parts apparently played by the viole da braccio
has the following overall ranges:
1st soprano
2nd soprano
Alto
Tenor
Bass
e’-b’’
d’-f’’ (f’’ occurs only in the Act II sinfonia (p. 26) and the Moresca (p. 100))
g-bb’
c-g’
D-d’
These slight enlargements of the upper three instrumental ranges to include the doubled choruses do
not alter the provisional conclusions arrived at above as to the most suitable tunings for the five
instruments.
In contrast to the chorus of nymphs and shepherds, that of spirits of the underworld was apparently
composed of tenors and basses only. When their music is in the chiavi naturali (the brief ‘Pietade
oggi et Amore’, p. 77), they have TTTBB clefs, the total range being F-e’. All their other music is in
the chiavette: ‘Nulla impresa per huom’ (pp. 70-73) has AATBarBar and a written range of G-a’
(probably intended to sound a fourth lower: D-e’); and ‘E la virtute un raggio’ (pp. 84-86) has AATTT
and a written range of Bb-a’ (probably to sound a fifth lower: Eb-d’). All three choruses have a basso
seguente line doubling the lowest sounding part, presumably because ‘Nulla impresa per huom’ and ‘E
la virtute un raggio’ have two equal bass parts which cross frequently. Only ‘Nulla impresa per huom’
has explicit instrumentation: five tromboni (which presumably doubled the five vocal parts), a regal,
and nominally two [sic] bassi da gamba and one contrabasso de viola [da gamba].41 Given the
similarity of ranges of the three choruses, it is possible that ‘Pietade oggi et Amore’ and perhaps
especially the substantial ‘E la virtute un raggio’ were also doubled by the same instruments. Their
deep pitch and restricted range (I suggest a sixteenth overall, with the proposed transpositions: D-e’)
contrasts sharply with the music of the viole da braccio, which shares the same putative lowest but has
an overall range of a twenty-seventh (D-b’’).
41
In ‘Playing Orfeo II’ (forthcoming) I shall explore the possibility that, contrary to the printed rubric to ‘Nulla
impresa per huom’, the listing of tre bassi da gamba and duoi contrabassi da viola at the head of the score may
reflect an intention to double all five vocal parts of the Coro de spirti, along with the cinque tromboni.
16
Instances of the use of fewer than five viole da braccio
The basso da viola da braccio (or abbreviated variants thereof) is named as a member of the continuo
group at two dramatically crucial points in the score, where the accompanying instruments evidently
contribute to the characterisation. In Act II, when the Messaggiera enters to announce Euridice’s
death (p. 36), the Pastore who questions her (at ‘Qual suon dolente’) has an accompaniment of
harpsichord, chitarrone and viola da brac[c]io, in contrast to the Messaggiera’s organ and chitarrone.
The continuo part accompanying the solo voices is in the bass clef throughout, and though the short
passage for which the viola da braccio is specified is confined to the fifth f-c’, the lines sung by the
Pastore immediately before the Messaggiera’s arrival (‘Mira, deh mira…’, p. 35), which are likely by
analogy to have shared the same accompanying instruments, has the much wider range G-c’; and
subsequently, at ‘Questa è Silvia gentile’ (p. 36), the range is B-a. Assuming the tuning proposed
above (C, G, d, a) to be correct, this exposed use of the basso da viola da braccio as an accompanying
instrument would have avoided the greater inharmonicity of the lowest string altogether. The absence
of notes below G from the Pastore’s accompaniment is noteworthy, suggesting that the avoidance of
the lowest notes of the bowed bass was deliberate. In contrast, the low F recurs in the Messaggiera’s
organ and chitarrone accompaniment in the dialogue, and D is used by the same instruments in the
accompaniment to Orfeo’s following monologue (pp. 39-40).
In Act IV, when Orfeo doubts that Euridice is following him from the underworld, there are similar
sudden changes of continuo instrumentation. At ‘Ma che odo?’ (p. 80), following a noise ‘from
behind the curtain’, he sings, like the Pastore in Act II, to the sound of a harpsichord, viola da braccio
and chitarrone (F4; c-a). Then, on having looked back and seen Euridice’s eyes, at ‘O dolcissimi lumi
io pur vi veggio’, he is accompanied by a wooden organ alone (F4; G-d). As Euridice’s light is
eclipsed, at ‘Ma qual eclissi ohimè v’oscura?’ (p. 81), the former instrumentation is restored, the viola
da braccio there being explicitly termed ‘basso’ for the first time (F4; A-e). As in Act II, the range
below G is completely avoided by the viola da braccio, again in contrast to the accompaniment of the
following entry, of a Spirit, which opens on low F.
On two occasions a single Basso da viola da braccio plays a trio with two violini. In the second
ritornello of Act II (pp. 28-29) it plays the basso continuo with a harpsichord and two chitarroni; and
in the embellishments to the fourth stanza of Orfeo’s Act III aria ‘Possente spirto’, it plays an
independent part labelled Basso da brazzo (pp. 63-64). The identical range of these two parts (F4; Gd’) is strikingly similar to that of the continuo passages known to have been played by the same
instrument (F4; G-c’); and the recurrence of d’ as the highest bass note in the two trios is strongly
suggestive of an instrument whose top string is a.
At only one other point in the score are fewer than five viole da braccio called for by name. The
accompaniment to the sixth stanza of Orfeo’s ‘Possente spirto’, ‘Sol tu nobile Dio’ (p. 65) has
sustained chords in four parts, the upper three of which were played by three viole da braccio, with a
contrabasso da viola played very quietly.42 The ranges and clefs of the upper parts (C1, g’-d’’; C1, d’d’’ and C3, c’-a’) are consistent with those of the upper three viole da braccio elsewhere. Though the
third part is narrow enough in range to have been played on an instrument with violin tuning, the
recurrence of these clefs suggests that the normal alto instrument (apparently tuned c, g, d’, a’) was
expected. In this register, the largely homorhythmic writing is strongly reminiscent of the sound of the
lira da braccio, which it is presumably intended to imitate.43 Exceptionally, the contrabasso da viola
was used here in preference to the bass viola da braccio (used elsewhere to accompany solo voices),
perhaps because it was better suited to the very quiet playing required. If it was tuned DD, GG, C, E,
42
The question as to whether the prescription ‘pian piano’ applies to all the instruments or to the contrabasso
only will be considered in ‘Playing Orfeo II’.
43
The three-part chords for concealed viole in Apollo’s song ‘Non curi la mia pianta’ in Gagliano’s La Dafne
(1608), pp. 49-52, is closely analogous. Like that of Orfeo, the role of Apollo was sung by Francesco Rasi.
17
A, d, as Banchieri indicates,44 it would have been able to play its part (F4, G-g) either at written pitch
or at the lower octave.45
Monteverdi’s groupings of viole da braccio
The composition of Monteverdi’s groupings of viole da braccio in Orfeo will be reassessed in Part
Three in the light of his other string writing of the time, and of documentary evidence concerning
identity and roles of the players involved. Confining our attention for the present to the internal
evidence of the score, we may draw provisional conclusions. The following summary of the ranges of
the viole da braccio in Orfeo excludes, initially, the low-pitched sinfonia in Act III, but takes account
of all the other music identified here as having been played by them.
The first parts (variously G2 and C1) of the instrumental pieces whose rubrics directly specify viole da
braccio have the overall range g’-b’, which is not exceeded when the remaining five-part sinfonie and
ritornelli, of unspecified instrumentation, are added to them. If the instrumentally doubled choruses
(as identified above) are included too, the range the total range demanded of the first viola da braccio
is extended downward to e’-b’’.
The Prologue ritornello, alone, has two treble parts of almost equal range, sharing the same clef (G2).
Its second part has the range a’-a’’, lacking only the high bb’’ of the first part. The total range of the
second parts of the other five-part pieces (all C1), including the instrumentally doubled choruses
(which do not exceed the purely instrumental pieces in range) is d’-f’’, giving an overall total for the
second parts of d’-a’’. That the second part of the Prologue ritornello lies so much higher than those
of the other pieces invites inquiry as to whether it was played on the same kind of instrument as the
rest.
The third parts (all C3) have the total range g-c’’, of which c’’ occurs only in the Prologue sinfonia
(matching the pair of correspondingly high upper parts), and bb’ only in the choral section of ‘Lasciate
i monti’. The fourth parts (all C4) have the total range c-g’; and the fifth parts (all F4) D-d’, though
they never descend below G when accompanying a solo voice or playing in trio with a pair of violini.
We may identify the tunings of these instruments from among those known at the time with reasonable
certainty. The range of the first viola da braccio parts, ascending to b’’, favours the g, d’, a’, e’’ violin
tuning, and not Segerman’s putative ‘alto’ viola da braccio tuning (f, c’, g’, d’), whose first-position
range is exceeded. All the second parts, also, could have been played on an instrument in violin
tuning, without using the fourth string. The difference in range between the Prologue ritornello (a’a’’) and the other pieces (ascending no higher than f’’ in the opening sinfonia of Act II and the
Moresca, and e’’ elsewhere) is striking: the former needs an instrument tuned like that for the first
viola da braccio part, but the latter could have been played on an instrument in either violin or viola
tuning. The viola tuning would have necessitated two differently constituted ensembles, one for the
Prologue and one for the rest, or the player(s) of the second parts would have had to change instrument
before and after each recurrence of the same ritornello in Acts II and V. (The possibility that two
quintets of dissimilar constitution in this one respect is considered in Part Three.) The consistency
with which d’ occurs as the lower limit of the second part (suggesting a terminus consciously adhered
to, avoiding the string below), and the similarity of the overall ranges of the first and second parts (e’b’’ and d’-a’’ respectively, only a tone apart), suggest g, d’, a’, e’’ as the preferable tuning for both of
the upper parts. For neither upper part is Segerman’s conjectural ‘alto’ viola da braccio tuning
preferable to that of the violin, and for the first part it is simply unsuitable. As this most consistently
44
45
Banchieri, Conclusioni nel suono dell’organo (Bologna, 1609) and L’organo suonarino (Venice, 1611).
The use of the contrabasso da viola as a continuo instrument in Orfeo will be considered in ‘Playing Orfeo II’.
18
documented of contemporary tunings suits the music perfectly, there is no need for us to invent an
inferior alternative.
The third parts (g-c’’) suit the viola tuning, without using the fourth string. That Monteverdi appears
again to have taken the open third string (here g) as a lower limit, further reinforces the case for the
second parts having been conceived for violin rather than viola tuning. The fourth parts (c-g’) may
also be played on an instrument in viola tuning, but their extensive use of the fourth string suggests
that the instrument might have been larger than that used for the third part. This use of different
registers of similarly tuned instruments for the alto and tenor is consistent with the sixteenth-century
tradition of having two equal middle instruments for four-part music,46 and with Mersenne’s evidence
concerning the composition of five-part ensembles in France;47 but it is also possible that a lowerpitched instrument (tuned F, c, g, d’ or G, d, a, e’) was used as an alternative to the tenor viola (c, g,
d’, a’) for the fourth part.48 Of the known four-string tunings of bass viole da braccio, the range of the
bass parts (D-d’) suits only C, G, d, a. Segerman’s proposed bass tuning (G, d, a, e’) lacks the
Monteverdi’s lowest written notes (D and F) just as his alto lacks the highest (b’’). His separation of
the members of the set of viole da braccio by fourths, rather than fifths, may be refuted on the grounds
not only that it would be more difficult to tune and lacks a logical place in the chronology of the
instruments’ development, but also that it renders the outer members of the ensemble unfit for their
intended purpose.
The violino parts
Parts labelled violino or violini occur at five points in Orfeo, always in pairs. In Act II, the first of the
ritornelli to the stanzas following ‘Ecco pur ch’a voi ritorno’ (p. 27) was played ‘from within’ by two
violini piccioli alla Francese (C1, d’-eb’’ and C1, c’-d’’) accompanied by a harpsichord and two
chitarroni (F4, F-c’).49 The violino piccolo alla Francese is considered below. In contrast, the
following ritornello (pp. 28-29) was played by two Violini ordinarii da Braccio (C1, g’-a’’ and C1,
f#’-f’’), a harpsichord and two chitarroni.50 Monteverdi evidently matched the continuo group to the
register and volume of the instruments accompanied, so the presence of the bowed bass in the second
ritornello (absent from the surrounding ones for violini piccoli and flautini) suggests that the ordinary
violini had a stronger sound than the violini piccioli alla Francese.
Violini are called for twice in Orfeo’s Act III aria ‘Possente spirto’. The first stanza has instrumental
embellishments on two staves (C1), each individually labelled ‘Violino’, which continue for the
following ritornello (pp. 52-55). Both parts have the range d’-a’’, so the instruments were apparently
similar. After stanzas adorned successively by a pair of cornetti (associated with Orfeo’s
contemplation of death) and the double harp (when Orfeo likens Euridice’s beauty to paradise), the
embellishments to the fourth stanza, ‘Orfeo son io’ (pp. 63-64), are on three staves, the upper two
46
The sixteenth-century evidence is reviewed in Part Three. It is significant that Monteverdi’s contemporary
Banchieri continues to specify two equal instruments for the middle parts of a four-part ensemble of violini or
violette da braccio in the Conclusioni nel suono dell’organo, Op. 20 (Bologna, 1609) and the second edition of
L’organo suonarino, Op. 25 (Venice, 1611).
47
Mersenne, 1636, vol. 3, pp. 184-90. Regarding the allocation of instruments to the middle parts of a five-part
ensemble, he writes (p. 189): ‘The fifth part (cinquiesme partie) of the foregoing notes [i.e. the second part down
in order of pitch (C1, c’-e’’) in the printed example given of music by Henry le Jeune], is the nearest to the treble
(dessus) in pitch: that is why it ought to be between the treble and the contratenor (haute-contre), and
consequently it should be played by the smallest violon of the three [sizes of instrument] which are in unison.’
48
Pictorial evidence for such groupings is reviewed in Part Three.
49
'Questo Ritornello fu suonato di dentro da un Clavicembano, duoi Chitaroni, & duoi Violini piccioli alla
Francese.' The meaning of ‘di dentro’ has been much discussed. I aim to consider the spatial disposition of the
instruments in a future Comm.
50
'Questo Ritornello fu sonato da duoi Violini ordinarii da Braccio, un Basso de Viola da braccio, un
clavicembano, & duoi Chittaroni.'
19
individually labelled ‘Violino’ (C1, g’-bb’’ and C1, f’-d’’) and the lower ‘Basso da brazzo’ (F4 G-d’).
The highest extends the previous range of the violino upward by a semitone (to bb’); the second,
ascending only to d’’, shows that it was quite acceptable for an instrument of the same size (it is most
unlikely that Monteverdi expected the substitution of a larger instrument than that which played the
second violino part in the first stanza) to play a part of this relatively low range, even though it could
have been played on a viola tuned c, g, d’, a’. The lowest of the three parts reinforces the conclusion,
arrived at above with respect to its use in accompanying the solo voice, that Monteverdi avoided notes
below the third string of the bass viola da braccio when writing in only two or three parts.
In Act IV, the ritornello to Orfeo’s aria ‘Qual honor di te degno’ (p. 78) has three staves, the upper two
(C1) individually labelled ‘Violino’ and the lower (F4) without instrumental designation. The ranges
of the violino parts (a’-g’’ and e’-d’’) lie safely within that already established for the instrument and
the second ascends only to d’’, as in the trio texture of the fourth stanza of ‘Possente spirto’. The bass
of the ritornello has the range G-g, in contrast to that of the intervening verses which descends to D.
By analogy with pages 28 and 63, where two violini are accompanied by bass parts of a similar
melodic character, it seems likely that this passage was intended for the bass viola da braccio, but the
instrument is not specified.
Comparison of the ranges of the violino and treble viola da braccio parts
Excluding the low-pitched sinfonia in Acts III (pp. 51 and 67) and Act V (p. 93), which is considered
below, the first parts of the pieces for which viole da braccio are directly specified have the overall
range g’-b’’, increasing to e’-b’’ when the doubled choruses are accounted for. The second part of the
Prologue ritornello (p. 1, etc.) has the range a’-a’’ (within the overall range of the first parts) and those
of the remaining pieces have the overall range d’-f’’ (about a fourth lower than the first parts). It
seems likely that both of these upper parts were played on similar instruments throughout, although it
is possible that those of the second parts which do not ascend above e’’ or f’’ were played on an
instrument tuned a fifth lower. The combined range of the two parts, d’-b’’, suits the g, d’, a’, e’’
tuning better than any other, this being the full first position range of the upper three strings. Of the
parts labelled violino, the first have the total range d’-bb’’ (a chromatic semitone lower than the viola
da braccio) and the second d’-a’’. The most restricted of the second violino parts ascend only to d’’,
the same upper limit as the lowest in range of the second viola da braccio parts. That the part ranges
of the violino and treble viola da braccio coincide so precisely suggests strongly that the two
instruments were identical and not, as Segerman proposes, a tone apart.51
The relationship of the violino and treble viola da braccio is revealingly exemplified in their three
occurrences in ‘Possente spirto’. In the first stanza, both violini share a wide range (d’-a’’); but in the
fourth they have distinct, smaller ranges (g’-bb’’ and f’-d’’). When, in the chordal accompaniment to
stanza six (played by three viole da braccio and a contrabasso de viola), the two upper parts are
confined to the range d’-d’’ (sharing the lower limit of the violini of stanza one and the upper limit of
the second violino of stanza four), they continue in the C1 clefs of the violini. It is thus likely that the
two treble instruments were the same throughout the aria, the alto viola da braccio and contrabasso de
viola of stanza six succeeding the basso da brazzo of stanza four. When the treble instruments play
alone, the diminutive term violino is used; but when they play with their alto counterpart, they are
accommodated within the collective term viole da braccio. At the return of the three-part string
texture, in the ritornello to Orfeo’s aria ‘Qual honor di te degno’ (p. 78), the upper two of the three
staves (C1) are once again individually labelled ‘violino’. Their ranges (a’-g’’ and e’-d’’) lie
comfortably within those already established for the instruments of the same name in ‘Possente
spirto’. That the second violino part is again within the range of the viola reinforces the conclusion
that string parts were not always played on the largest possible instrument at the time, and in particular
that it was an accepted practice for the violin to play parts which did not use its highest string at all.
51
Segerman, ‘Review: Monteverdi’s Violini Piccoli’, p. 31.
20
The low-pitched sinfonia
The scoring of the sinfonia in Acts III (p. 51 and p. 67) and V (p. 93) is exceptional in its small overall
compass (a seventeenth) and low pitch. All the parts are of small range: the highest is in the alto
register (C3, d’-a’), the bass unusually low and confined (F4, F-eb), and the three middle parts (all C4)
together encompass only a ninth (c-d’). Though no instruments are specified at the sinfonia’s first
appearance (p. 51), the rubric at the previous change of scene (p. 47) invites consideration of the
possibility that it might have been played on trombones, within whose range the parts lie; but when it
is played later in the act (p. 67), the sinfonia, which may represent the sound of Orfeo’s lyre, is played
‘pian piano’ by viole da braccio (presumably five, but their number is not given),52 an organo di legno
and a cotrabasso de viola da gamba.
If this exceptional piece had been played by the same grouping of relatively small viola da braccio
that we have proposed could have played the other five-part pieces (two violins, two violas and a bass,
as proposed above), the second part, exceptionally, would have lain largely on the violin’s g string,
and the third, descending to e, would also have made unprecedented use of the fourth string. This
might conceivably have been an intentional special effect, exploiting the little-used lowest register of
the instrument for reasons of sonority. Alternatively, if one of two stable quintets of viole da braccio
had three violas and only one violin, the second part might have been played on a viola; or, as the C3
clef of the highest part was apparently normally associated with the viola tuning, as many as four
violas might have been used. Depending on the groupings and spatial distribution of the bowed
instruments, this sinfonia might have involved one or more of the players changing instrument, or their
regrouping themselves behind the scene, but it need not necessarily have done so.
The possible groupings of the ten viole da braccio in Orfeo and the extent to which string parts may
have been doubled in 1607 will be reconsidered in Part Three, in the light of Monteverdi’s other works
of the same decade and of documentary evidence concerning the performers.
The violini piccoli alla Francese
The violini piccoli alla Francese are named only in the first ritornello of Act II, and were apparently
not heard elsewhere in Orfeo. The opening scene of the act is rich in contrasts of metre, scoring and
character, and also of register and sonority, to the latter two of which the swift changes of
instrumentation contribute. Each of three brief, three-part ritornelli is paired with a metrically related
song of two stanzas, and has its own instrumentation, as follows:
C
C
[3/2]
Sinfonia [a 5; implicitly for five viole da braccio 53]
Orfeo: ‘Eco pur ch’a voi ritorno’
[2/2]
Ritornello [a 3] violini piccoli alla Francese54
Pastore: ‘Mira ch’a se n’alletta’
Ritornello (repeat of previous one [violini piccoli alla Francese])
Pastore: ‘Su quel’ herbosa sponda’
[6/2]
Ritornello [a 3] violini ordinarii da braccio...basso de viola da braccio
Due Pastori: ‘In questo prato adorno’
Ritornello (repeat of previous one [violini ordinarii da braccio, etc.])
C
C
C3/2
C
C
52
When, elsewhere (pp. 10 and 32), the score records explicitly that the viole da braccio were joined by a
contrabasso in five-part music, they were five in number.
53
The five-part ritornello which precedes Orfeo’s next stanza, ‘Vi ricorda o bosch' ombrosi’, is explicitly for
cinque viole da braccio, un contrabasso… (p. 32).
54
The plucked continuo instrumentation in the score is omitted here.
21
C
Due Pastori: ‘Qui Pan Dio de’ Pastori’
C
C
C
C
[2/2]
Ritornello [a 3] flautini…
Due Pastori: ‘Qui le nappe vezzose’
Ritornello (repeat of previous one [flautini…])
Choro: ‘Dunque fa degno Orfeo’
C
[3/4 6/8]
Ritornello55 [a 5] cinque viole da braccio, un contrabasso…
Orfeo: ‘Vi ricorda o boschi ombrosi’
Boyden’s identification of the violini piccoli alla Francese as pochettes, in which he follows
Rühlmann,56 depends on the instruments so named and the music they played having been perceived
in Mantua as characteristically French.57 The Frenchness of Orfeo’s aria ‘Eco pur ch’a voi ritorno’ was
first commented upon by Prunières,58 but even Boyden, whose case depended on it, had to concede
that the aria is but ‘faintly’ reminiscent of French airs mesurés or airs de cour.59 The strong structural
and metrical affinity of this ritornello is not with ‘Eco pur’, the opening stanza of the act, but with the
following two stanzas, sung by a single shepherd, where any French reminiscence is fainter still. The
resemblance of ‘Eco pur’ to Monteverdi’s own recreation of ‘canto alla Francese’ (as it is termed by
his brother, Giulio Cesare) in his Scherzi musicali (1607) is much stronger.60 That the instruments
called for there are simply violini da braccio, with no nominal suggestion that their choice reinforced
or complemented the French characteristics of the song, weakens the case for the composer’s violini
piccoli alla Francese of the same year having been pochettes.
The printed ranges of the violini piccoli alla Francese (c’-eb’’ overall) correspond closely to those of
the flautini (d’-e’’ overall) which play the third ritornello of Act II. That both pairs of diminutive
instruments must have sounded an octave higher than written is evident from their printed ranges,
55
This is the movement the intricacies of whose rhythmic interpretation are discussed in Willi Apel, ‘Anent a
Ritornello in Monteverdi’s Orfeo’, Musica Disciplina vol. 5, 1951, pp. 213-22.
56
Julius Rühlmann, Geschichte der Bogeninstrumente (Braunschweig: Vieweg, 1882), p. 65: ‘Mersenne sagt
von der Klangfarbe dieses Instrumentes, dass sie (“quant à l’aigu”) im Grade der Schärfe dem Dessus zunächst
gestanden habe, weshalb es zwischen diesem und der Haut-Contre zu stehen habe und folglich die betreffende
Cinquiesme-Stimme von dem kleinsten der drei unisono gestimmten Geigeninstrumente – der Poche – gespielt
werden müsse. Er erklärt aus diesem Umstande, dass die Geiger dieses, zwischen Dessus und Taille seiner
Klangfarbe nach stehende, Instrument Hautecontre nämlich haute contre taille gennant hätten, dass auch die
Poche trotz ihrer Kleinheit und der Dürftigkeit ihres Tonumfanges in der alten Orchestermusik Verwendung
fand, ersehen wir aus dem Verzeichniss der dazu verwendeten Instrumente, welches Claudio Monteverde seiner
Oper “Orpheus” vorausschickt. Dieser Oper, welche 1607 in Florenz zur Aufführung kam, hatte danach auch
“duoi violini piccoli alla Francese” zur Anwendung gebracht, welche nach meinem persönlichen Dafürhalten
nichts anderes sein können, als Pochen, die man etwas spätter in Italien Poccetta nannte.’ Among later authors
who identify the violini piccoli alla Francese as pochettes are Boyden, ‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli’; and
Segerman, ‘Review: Monteverdi’s Violini Piccoli’; and those who favour their having been small violins are
Andreas Moser, ‘Der Violino Piccolo’, Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft vol. 1, 1919, pp. 377-80;
Jack Westrup, ‘Monteverdi and the Orchestra’, Music and Letters vol. 21, 1940, pp. 230-45; Nicholas
Bessaraboff, Ancient European Musical Instruments (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1941);
Margaret Downie Banks, ‘The Violino Piccolo and other Small Violins’, Early Music, vol. 18, 1990, pp. 588-96.
57
Boyden, ‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli’.
58
Prunières, Henry, Monteverdi (Paris: Alcan, 1924); English trans. (London, 1926), p. 65, likens it to
[Monteverdi’s] Scherzi musicali and the French airs mesurés. According to the French edition., p. 49-50: ‘A
côté de ces airs en style récitatif, nous trouvons des airs coulés dans un moule rythmique à la manure des scherzi
musicali et les airs mesurés Francis.’
59
Boyden, ‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli’, p. 389.
60
The ‘canto alla Francese’ is discussed in connection with Monteverdi’s violini piccoli alla Francese by Sirch,
1981, who associates the style with a French manner of violin playing which was later described in Muffat’s
Florilegium secundum, 1698.
22
which are about a fourth lower than those of the violini ordinarii da braccio:61 since the parts for the
violini ordinarii extend to within a tone of the upper limit of the violin’s first position (a’’), and the
octave-transposed violino piccolo parts ascend a diminished fifth higher (eb’’’), the top string of the
violino piccolo must have been a fourth or, less probably, a fifth higher than that of the violino
ordinario: c’ (unused, if present), g’, d’’, a’’, like the Klein Discant-Geig in Praetorius’s table of
tunings62 (corresponding to the depicted Discant-Geig ein Quart höher; 63 the tuning of whose upper
three strings is the same as the lower of the alternatives for the Exilent: garklein Geig/mit drey
Saitten64); or a tone higher: d’ (unused, if present), a’, e’’, b’’, like the higher tuning for Praetorius’s
Exilent: garklein Geig/mit drey Saitten.65
The violin-shaped Discant-Geig ein Quart höher illustrated by Praetorius has a body about 268mm
long,66 which suits the tuning a fourth above the normal violin. Banks notes its similarity of length to
the 266mm of the instrument by Antonio and Girolamo Amati (Cremona, 1613) now in the National
Music Museum, University of South Dakota, Vermillion.67 As it is unlikely that parts as intricate as
Monteverdi’s would have been played on needlessly small instruments, and since c’, g’, d’’, a’’ was
evidently a well established tuning, suitable for a known north Italian size of violin, it is likely that the
three strings needed would have been tuned g’, d’’, a’’, irrespective of the instruments’ form. The
players would thus have been able to finger them an octave above the corresponding strings of the
viola.
We have no clear indication as to which aspects of Monteverdi’s violino piccolo – its form, sound, use
or associations – were regarded as peculiarly French in Mantua and, consequently, no secure basis on
which to speculate as to whether the instruments played were violin-shaped or rebec-like. Like the
flautini, they evidently contributed to the musical characterisation of the opening scene of Act II as
one of pastoral rejoicing, but we don’t know whether they communicated this to the audience purely
through their sound (most of the instruments seem to have been hidden from view) or, as might have
been a possibility for portable instruments with symbolic value, through their appearance on stage
alongside the shepherds and nymphs.68 In the latter case their shape might have been significant, but
we know too little about the experience and expectations of the Mantuan audience to understand how
this might have been received. There is no clear evidence in support of Boyden’s overconfident claim
that pochettes rather than small violins were intended.
61
Boyden’s claim for the originality of his observation that the violino piccolo alla Francese must have sounded
at the upper octave (‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli’, p. 390) seems exaggerated: he cites (p. 389) Moser (1919),
Westrup (1940), and Bessaraboff (1941) as having identified it as ‘a small violin tuned a fourth above the normal
violin,’ and his consideration (p. 392) of Moser’s own discussion of octave transposition. He accuses Moser of
remaining ‘silent on the fact that the violino piccolo (N. B. non-francese! [sic]) is not a transposing instrument,’
but fails to present any evidence of the normal mode of use of the instrument in Monteverdi’s time, or any other.
62
Praetorius, 1619, vol. 2, p. 26.
63
Praetorius, 1620, plate XXI, no. 3.
64
Praetorius, 1619, vol. 2, p. 26.
65
Praetorius, 1619, vol. 2, p. 26. The correspondence between the three-string tunings and the pair of
instruments depicted in Praetorius’s plate XXI (1620) is less precise than that between the Klein Discant-Geig in
the table and the Discant-Geig ein Quart höher in plate XXI: the Kleine Poschen / Geigen ein Octav höher, plate
XXI, nos. 1 (three-stringed; gittern-shaped) and 2 (four-stringed; parallel-sided). Praetorius’s ‘ein octav höher’
should not be understood literally in relation to his Rechte Discant-Geig (plate XXI, no. 4) as his table of tunings
makes clear. The strings of the three-stringed instrument (plate XXI, no. 1) are slightly shorter than those of the
Discant-Geig ein Quart höher (plate XXI, no. 3), and might possibly have had the higher of the alternative
tunings (a’, e’’, b’’).
66
Praetorius, 1620, plate XXI, no. 3; length measurement according to Nicholas Bessaraboff, Ancient European
Musical Instruments (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1941).
67
Banks, ‘The Violino Piccolo and other Small Violins’, pp. 589-93 . The 1613 Amati violino piccolo is shown
in illus. 1, 2, 5 and 6.
68
We know from the score that the violini piccoli and flautini played ‘di dentro’ (from within), perhaps in
contradistinction to the intervening violini ordinarii da braccio, whose location is not specified in the same way.
I intend to consider the spatial disposition of the instruments in a future Comm.
23
The attributes and identity of the violini ordinarii da braccio
The term violini ordinarii da braccio, used by Monteverdi only to distinguish the instruments of the
second ritornello from the immediately preceding violini piccoli alla Francese of the first (p. 28), is
the fullest form of the instruments’ name found in the score. There is no evidence that in being
‘ordinary’ or ‘of the arm’ this pair of instruments differed from the violini called for elsewhere in
Orfeo. Their ranges (g’-a’’ and f#’-f’’) lie comfortably within those already identified here for the
violino and, indeed, for the treble viola da braccio. In the face of mid-twentieth-century suggestions
that either violas or even instruments an octave higher were the normal treble instruments in Orfeo,69 it
is reassuring to have confirmation that the violino of this range was the ‘ordinary’ one. That the
ordinary violino is in this one instance also explicitly qualified as ‘da braccio’ is the most telling piece
of internal terminological evidence identifying the violino in Orfeo as the normal treble member of the
family of viole da braccio, in corroboration of the evidence of the instruments’ ranges. Monteverdi’s
use of the term violini da braccio in his Scherzi musicali (1607) and elsewhere, confirms that he and
his publishers understood this to be so.70 Monteverdi’s use of various names for the instrument is
always explicable according to the context, and there is no evidence that the violino ordinario differed
from the simple violino called for in the score, nor that it differed materially or musically from the
treble viola da braccio.
Provisional conclusions regarding the numbers of string players in Orfeo
There is no positive evidence that more than ten players of bowed instruments were involved in Orfeo.
Though is likely that there may have been eleven or twelve, it is unlikely that all seventeen of the
instruments in the list of stromenti at the head of the score were exclusively assigned to an individual
player. The ten viole da braccio may have been arranged in two groups of five, but when half of them
played in music five parts, only one of the two contrabassi at a time is explicitly associated with them.
When the bassi da viola da gamba and contrabassi played together (their numbers in the list of
stromenti suggest that they too were intended to play in five parts) the viole da braccio were silent, so
the same players could have played both sets of instruments. Although we will never be able to reveal
precisely who played what, and how players doubled on more than one instrument, I aim in Parts Two
and Three to demonstrate that Monteverdi was largely composing for established ensembles in Orfeo,
in a manner that was already customary, and that he was not using viole da braccio for the first time in
‘serious’ music, as Segerman suggests.71 Boyden interprets the rubric on p. 28 as instructing the same
two players to ‘lay aside’ the violini piccoli in order to take up the violini ordinarii,72 and he is
followed in this by Segerman;73 but these rubrics are a record (in the passato remoto) of what
happened in performance, not directions to the players, and the four breves length of the Pastore’s ‘Su
quel’ herbosa sponda’ are a meagre allowance of time in which to accomplish the change. Had there
been only two competent players, they would have had to change instruments, but as there are likely to
have been enough among the ‘ten’, they need not necessarily have done so.
69
Boyden, ‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli’, p. 387, claimed that ‘at the present time, it is generally believed that
the discant viola da braccio was an instrument comparable in size to the modern viola, and that the Violini
piccoli alla Francese in Monteverdi’s opera were “Quart-Geigen” – that is, small violins tuned a fourth above
the usual violin,’ but he did not identify a single author who shared both these identifications; the only author he
cites as holding this view of the discant viola da braccio is Sachs (1940), so it would seem to have been less
widely held than he claimed.
70
The names of the bowed instruments in Monteverdi’s other works of the early seventeenth century are
examined in detail in Part Two.
71
Segerman, ‘Review: Monteverdi’s Violini Piccoli’, p. 31.
72
Boyden, ‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli’, p. 390.
73
Segerman, ‘Review: Monteverdi’s Violini Piccoli’, p. 31: ‘After the piccoli was used, the change in instrument
for each player was signalled by the specification violini ordinarij da braccio, after which only violini were
specified.’
24
In forcing the distinction he seeks to make between the violini and viole da braccio, Segerman protests
that ‘what Boyden misses…is the strong probability that violini were played by violino players and
viole da braccio were played by viole da braccio players.’ Though the intrinsic logic of this is
irreproachable, his argument is predicated on the unsustainable view that the players of violini and
viole da braccio in Orfeo were mutually exclusive classes. He continues: ‘thus if one acquired two
players of the violino piccolo alla Francese…you automatically acquired two violino players.’ In
Parts Two and Three I seek to demonstrate that Monteverdi routinely used the term violino (with or
without da braccio/brazzo) for the normal treble member of the family of viole da braccio, in both
solo and ensemble capacities, and that his north Italian contemporaries used it both for the whole
ensemble, and for single instruments ranging from the baritone to sopranino registers.
25
Appendix: English translation of the list of instruments and rubrics specifying
instrumentation in the 1609 score of Monteverdi’s Orfeo
p. [iii] Stromenti [List of Instruments]
Duoi Gravicembani
Duoi contrabasso de Viola
Dieci Viole da brazzo
Un arpa doppia
Duoi Violini piccoli alla Francese
Duoi Chitaroni
Duoi Organi di legno
Tre bassi da gamba
Quattro Tromboni
Un Regale
Duoi cornetti
Un Flautino alla Vigesima seconda
Un Clarino con tre trombe sordine
Two harpsichords
Two contrabass viole74
Ten viole da braccio75
A double harp
Two piccolo violins in the French style
Two chitarroni
Two wooden organs
Three bass [viole] da gamba
Four trombones
A regal
Two cornetti (cornetts)
A little recorder at the twenty-second
A clarino with three muted trumpets
Toccata
p. [iv] (the verso facing the numbered p. 1): Toccata che si suona avanti il levar de la tela tre volte con
tutti il stromenti, & si fa un Tuono piu alto volendo sonar le trombe con le sordine
[Toccata that was played three times before the raising of the curtain, with all the instruments, and it is
made a tone higher by playing the trumpets with mutes]76
Act I
p. 8: Questo Canto fu concertato [past perfect] al suono de tutti gli stromenti.
[This song was performed to the sound of all the instruments.]
pp. 10-11: Questo Balletto fu concertato 77 al suono di cinque Viole da braccio, tre Chittaroni, duoi
Clavicembani, un Arpa doppia, un contrabasso de Viola, & un Flautino alla vigessima seconda.
[This song was sung to the sound of five viole da braccio, three chitarroni, two harpsichords, a double
harp, a contrabasso de viola, and a little recorder at the twenty-second.]
Act II
p. 27: Questo Ritornello fu suonato di dentro da un Clavicembano, duoi Chitaroni, & duoi Violini
piccioli alla Francese
[This Ritornello was played from within by a harpsichord, two chitarroni, and two piccolo violins of
the French style]
74
The more specific term contrabasso de Viola da Gamba is used later in the score; there can be little doubt that
the two viole listed here are viole da gamba, not viole da braccio.
75
This spelling is used later in the score, the two being synonymous.
76
Volendo = wanting, so perhaps: ‘and it can be made a tone higher if desired by playing the trumpets with
mutes.’
77
Past perfect tense.
26
p. 28: Questo Ritornello fu sonato da duoi Violini ordinarii da braccio, un Basso de viola da braccio,
un Clavicembano, & duoi Chittaroni
[This Ritornello was played by two ordinary violini da braccio, a bass viola da braccio, a harpsichord,
and two chitarroni]
pp. 29: Un Clavicembano & un Chittarrone [A harpsichord and a chitarrone]
p. 30: Fu sonato di dentro da duoi Chitaroni un Clavicembano, & duoi Flautini.
[Was played from within by two chitarroni, a harpsichord, and two little recorders.]
p. 32: Fu sonato questo Ritornello di dentro da cinque Viole da braccio, un contrabasso, duoi
Clavicembani & tre chitarroni
[This ritornello was played from within by five viole da braccio, a contrabasso, two harpsichords and
three chitarroni]
p. 36: Un organo di legno & un Chit[arrone]
[A wooden organ and a chitarrone]
p. 36: Un Clavic[embano] Chitar[rone] & Viola da bracio
[A harpsichord, chitarrone and viola da braccio]
p. 39: Un organo di legno & un Chitarone
[A wooden organ and a chitarrone]
p. 42: Duoi Pastori cantano al suono del Organo di Legno, & un Chittarone
[Two Shepherds sing to the sound of the wooden organ and a chitarrone]
Between Acts II and III
p. 47: Qui entano li tromb.[oni] corn.[etti] & Regali, & taciono le Viole da bracio, & Organi di legno
Clavicem[bani], & si muta la Scena.
[Here the trombones, cornetti and regals enter, and the viole da braccio, wooden organs and
harpsichords are silent, and the scene changes]
Act III
p. 50: Caronte canta al suono del regale
[Charon sings to the sound of the regal]
p. 50: Orfeo al suono del Organo di legno, & un Chitarrone, canta una sola de le due parti
[Orfeo, to the sound of the wooden organ and a chitarrone, sings one alone of the two parts]
p. 52: Violino / Violino
[violin / violin]
p.56: Duoi Cornetti
[Two cornetti]
p. 58: Arpa dopia
[double harp]
p. 63: Violino / Violino / Basso da brazzo
[violin / violin / bass [viola] da braccio]
27
p. 64: Furono sonate le tre parti da tre viole da braccio, & un contrabasso de Viola tocchi pian piano 78
[The three parts were played by three viole da braccio, and a contrabasso de viola played very quietly]
p. 67: Questo Sinfo[nia] si sonò pian piano, con Viole da braccio, un Org.[ano] di leg.[no] & un
contrabasso de Viola da gamba.
[This Sinfo.[nia] was played very quietly, with viole da braccio, a wooden organ and a contrabasso de
Viola da gamba.]
p. 67: Orfeo canta al suono del Organo di legno solamente.
[Orfeo sings to the wooden organ alone.]79
p. 68: Qui entra nella barca e passa cantando al suono del Organo di legno.
[Here he enters into the boat and passes singing to the sound of the wooden organ.]
p. 70: Coro di spirti, al suono di un Reg.[ale] Org.[ano] di legno, cinque Tromb.[oni] duoi Bassi da
gamba, & un contrabasso de viola.
[Chorus of Spirits, to the sound of a regal, wooden organ, five trombones, two bassi da gamba, and a
contrabasso de viola.]
Act IV
p. 78: Violino / Violino
[violin / violin]
p. 80: Qui si fa strepito dietro la tela. Segue Orfeo cantando nel Clavicembano Viola da braccio, &
Chittarone.
[Here a din is made behind the curtain. Followed by Orfeo singing to the harpsichord, viola da
braccio, and chitarrone]
p. 80: Qui si volta Orfeo, & canta al suono del Organo di legno.
[Here Orfeo turns himself, and sings to the sound of the wooden organ]
p. 81: Qui canta Orfeo al suono del Clavic[cembano] Viola da braccio basso, & un chitar[rone].
[Here Orfeo sings to the harpsichord, bass viola da braccio, and chitarrone]
Between Acts IV and V
p. 88: Tacciono li Cornetti, Tromboni & Regali, & entrano a sonare il presente Ritornello, le viole da
braccio, Organi, Clavicembani, contrabasso, & Arpe, & Chitaroni, & Ceteroni, & si muta la Scena.
[The cornetti, trombones and regals become silent, and the viole da braccio, organs, harpsichords,
contrabass, and harp, and chitarroni, & ceteroni enter playing this Ritornello, and the scene changes]
p. 89: Duoi Organi di legno, & duoi Chitaroni concertorno [sic] questo Canto sonando l'uno nel angolo
sinistro de la Scena, l’altro nel destro.
[Two wooden organs and two chitarroni accompany this song, the one in the corner left of the scene,
the other in the right.]
78
79
The rubric relates to the music on p. 65.
NB present tense
28
Bibliography
This bibliography applies to the three parts of ‘Playing Orfeo I: Monteverdi’s violini and viole da
braccio’. It will not be repeated in succeeding comms. in this series but may be added to.
Adler, Israel, ‘The Rise of Art Music in the Italian Ghetto: The Influence of Segregation on Jewish
Musical Praxis’ in Alexander Altmann (ed.): Jewish Medieval and Renaissance Studies (Cambridge,
Mass: Harvard University Press, 1976).
Ademollo, Alessandro, La bell’Adriana ed altre virtuose del suo tempo alla corte di Mantova (Città di
Castello: Lapi, 1888).
Agricola, Martin, Musica instrumentalis deudsch (Wittenberg; 2nd edn., 1529; repr. 1969; 6th edn.,
1545); quasi-facsimile in Robert Eitner (ed.), Publikationen alterer praktischer und theoretischer
Musikwereke, 20 (Leipzig, 1896).
Allsop, Peter, ‘The Role of the Stringed Bass as a Continuo Instrument in Italian Seventeenth Century
Instrumental Music’, Chelys, vol. 8, 1978-9, pp. 31-7.
Altenberg, Detlef, ‘Die Toccata zu Monteverdis “Orfeo”’ in Hellmut Kühn and Peter Nitsche (eds.),
Bericht über den internationalen musikwissenschaftlichen Kongres, Berlin, 1974 (Bärenreiter: Kassel,
1980), pp. 271-74.
Apel, Willi, ‘Anent a Ritornello in Monteverdi’s Orfeo’, Musica Disciplina, vol. 5, 1951, pp. 213-22.
Arnold, Dennis, ‘Performing Practice’ in Denis Arnold and Nigel Fortune (eds.), The New Monteverdi
Companion (Faber: London, 1985), pp. 319-33.
Arnold, Dennis, ‘“L’incoronazione di Poppea” and Its Orchestral Requirements’, Musical Times, vol.
104, 1963, pp. 176-78.
Arnold, Dennis, ‘Monteverdi the Instrumentalist’, Recorder and Music Magazine, vol. 2, 1967, pp.
130-32.
Banchieri, Adriano, Conclusioni nel suono dell’organo (Bologna: heirs of G. Rossi, 1609). Translated
by Lee R. Garrett, Adriano Banchieri, Conclusions for Playing the Organ (1609), Colorado Music
Press Translations, no. 13 (Colorado Springs: Colorado Music Press, 1982).
Banchieri, Adriano, L’organo suonarino, opus 25 (Venice: Amadino, 1611), translated in Marcase,
Donald Earl, Adriano Banchieri, L’organo suonarino: Translation, Transcription and Commentary
(PhD dissertation, Indiana University, 1970).
Bartlett, Clifford and Peter Holman, ‘Giovanni Gabrieli: A Guide to the Performance of his
Instrumental Music’, Early Music, vol. 3, 1975, pp. 25-32.
Banks, Margaret Downie, ‘The Violino Piccolo and other Small Violins’, Early Music, vol. 18, 1990,
pp. 588-96.
Barbieri, Patrizio, ‘Chiavette’ in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2001, vol. 5, pp.
595-98.
29
Barblan, Guglielmo, Conservatorio di musica Giuseppe Verdi, Milano, Catalogo della biblioteca,
fondi speciali 1: Musiche della cappella di S. Barbara in Mantova. Biblioteca di bibliografia italiana,
vol. 68 (Florence: Olschki, 1972).
Beat, Janet, ‘Monteverdi and the Opera Orchestra of His Time’ in Denis Arnold and Nigel Fortune
(eds.), The Monteverdi Companion (London: Faber, 1968), pp. 277-301.
Bertolotti, Antonio, Musici alla corte dei Gonzaga in Mantova dal XV al XVIII: notizie e documenti
raccolti negli archivi mantovani (Milan: Ricordi, [1890]; repr. Bologna: Forni, 1969).
Bessaraboff, Nicholas, Ancient European Musical Instruments (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University
Press, 1941).
Besutti, Paola, ‘'The “Sala degli Specchi” Uncovered: Monteverdi, the Gonzagas and the Palazzo
Ducale, Mantua’, Early Music, vol. 27, 1999, pp. 451-65.
Birnbaum, Eduard, Jüdischer Musiker am Hof von Mantua von 1542-1628 (Vienna, 1893); trans. and
ed. Judith Cohen, Jewish Musicians at the Court of the Mantuan Dukes (1542-1628), Documentation
and Studies, 1 (Tel-Aviv: Tel-Aviv University, 1978).
Blazey, David, ‘A liturgical role for Monteverdi’s Sonata sopra Sancta Maria’, Early Music, vol. 18,
1989, pp. 175-82.
Bonta, Stephen, ‘Terminology for the Bass Violin in the 17th Century’, Journal of the American
Musical Instrument Society, vol. 4, 1978, pp. 5-42.
Bonta, Stephen, ‘The Use of Instruments in Sacred Music in Italy, 1560-1700’, Early Music, vol. 18,
pp. 519-35, 1990.
Bonta, Stephen, ‘The Use of Instruments in the Ensemble Canzona and Sonata in Italy, 1580-1650’,
Recercare, vol. 4, 1992, pp. 23-43.
Bonta, Stephen, ‘Buonamente, Giovanni Battista’ in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and
Musicians, 2001, vol. 4, pp. 606-07.
Boyden, David, ‘Monteverdi’s violini piccoli alla francese and viole da brazzo’, Annales
musicologiques, vol. 6, 1959-63, pp. 387-401.
Boyden, David, The History of Violin Playing from its Origins to 1761 (London: Faber, 1965).
Buratelli, Claudia, Spettacoli di corte a Mantova tra Cinque e Seicento. ‘Storia dello spettacolo:
Saggi’, 3 (Florence: Le Lettere, 1999).
Cammarota, Lionello, ‘L’orchestrazione dell’ “Orfeo” di Monteverdi’ in Venezia e il melodrama nel
Seicento. Maria Teresa Muraro (ed.), Studi di musica veneta, 5 (Florence: Olschki, 1976).
Canal, Pietro, Della musica in Mantova; notizie tratte principalmente dall’archivio Gonzaga, 2nd edn.
(Venice: Antonelli, 1881; repr. Bologna: Forni, 1977).
Carter, Tim, ‘Possente spirto: On taming the power of music’, Early Music, vol. 21, 1993, pp. 517524.
Carter, Tim, ‘Singing Orfeo: on the Performers of Monteverdi’s first Opera’, Recercare, vol. 11, 1999,
pp. 75-118.
30
Carter, Tim, ‘New Light on Monteverdi’s Ballo delle ingrate (Mantua, 1608), Il saggiatore musicale,
vol. 6, 1999, pp. 63-90.
Collaer, Paul, ‘L’orchestra di Claudio Monteverdi’, Musica, vol. 2, 1943, pp. 86-104.
Collaer, Paul, ‘Notes concernant l’instrumentation de L’Orfeo de Claudio Monteverdi’ in Raffaello
Monterosso (ed.), Congresso internationale sul tema Claudio Monteverdi e il suo tempo (Verona:
Stamperia Valdoneza, 1969), pp. 69-73.
Data, Isabella, ‘Il “Rapimento di Proserpina” di Giulio Cesare Monteverdi e le feste a Casale nel
1661’ in Paola Besutti, Teresa M. Gialdroni and Rodolfo Baroncini (eds.), Claudio Monteverdi: studi
e prospettive; atti del convengo, Mantova, 21-24 ottobre 1993. Academia Nazionale Virgiliana di
Scienze, Lettere e Arti: Miscellanea, 5 (Florence: Olschki, 1998).
Dixon, Graham, ‘Continuo Scoring in the Early Baroque: The Role of Bowed-Bass Instruments’,
Chelys, vol. 15, 1986, pp. 38-53.
Fabri, Paolo, Monteverdi, trans. Tim Carter (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994);
reference is made to the English edition, a substantially revised translation of the 1985 Italian edition
(Turin: E. D. T.).
Fabris, Dinko, Mecenati e musici: documenti sul patronato artistico dei Bentivoglio di Ferrara
nell’epoca di Monteverdi (1585-1645), Connotazioni, 4 (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, 1999).
Fenlon, Iain, ‘The Monteverdi Vespers: suggested answers to some fundamental questions, Early
Music, vol. 5, 1977, pp. 380-87.
Fenlon, Iain, Music and Patronage in Sixteenth-Century Mantua (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1980).
Fenlon, Iain, ‘Monteverdi’s Mantuan Orfeo: Some New Documentation’, Early Music, vol. 12, 1984,
pp. 163-72; revised as Fenlon, Iain, 1986: ‘The Mantuan Orfeo’ in John Whenham (ed.), Claudio
Monteverdi: Orfeo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 1-19.
Fenlon, Iain, ‘Rossi, Salamone’ in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2001, vol. 21,
pp. 731-34.
Fortune, Nigel and John Whenham, ‘Modern editions and performances’ in John Whenham (ed.),
1986: Claudio Monteverdi: Orfeo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986).
Gallico, Claudio, ‘Newly Discovered Documents Concerning Monteverdi’, The Musical Quarterly,
vol. 48, 1962, pp. 68-72.
Glover, Jane, ‘Solving the Musical Problems’ in John Whenham (ed.), Claudio Monteverdi: Orfeo
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 138-155.
Harrán, Don, ‘Salamone Rossi, Jewish Musician in Renaissance Italy’, Acta Musicologica, vol. 49,
1987, pp. 46-64.
Harrán, Don, ‘Jewish Dramatists and Musicians in the Renaissance: Separate Activities, Common
Aspirations’ in Siegfried Gmeinwieser, David Hiley and Jörg Riedlbauer (eds.), Musicologia Humana:
Studies in Honor of Warren and Ursula Kirkendale (Florence: Olschki, 1994).
Harrán, Don, Salamone Rossi: Jewish Musician in Late Renaissance Mantua (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1999).
31
Hawkins, Sir John, A General History of the Science and Practice of Music (London, 1776); and
Novello, 1853; repr. with introduction by Charles Cudworth (New York: Dover, 1963).
Hayes, Gerald, Musical Instruments and their Music 1500-1750; vol. 2: The Viols and other Bowed
Instruments (London: Humphrey Milford, 1930). [Vol. 1, The Treatment of Instrumental Music, is
dated 1928].
Heuss, Alfred, ‘Die Instrumental Stücke des ‘Orfeo’’, Sammelbände der Internationalen
Musikgeselschaft, vol. 4, 1902-1903, pp. 175-224.
Heyde, Herbert and Liersch, Peter, ‘Studien zu sächischen Musikinstrumentenbau des 16/17.
Jahrhunderts’, Jahrbuch Peters 1979 (Peters: Leipzig, 1980), pp. 230-59.
Holman, Peter, Four and Twenty Fiddlers: The Violin at the English Court 1540-1690 (Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1993).
Holman, Peter, ‘“Col nobilissimo esercitio della vivuola”: Monteverdi’s String Writing’, Early Music,
vol. 21, 1993, pp. 576-90.
Kelly, Thomas Forrest, ‘“Orfeo da Camera”: Estimating Performing Forces in Early Opera’,
Historical Performance, vol. 1, 1988, pp. 3-9.
Kirkendale, Warren, The Court Musicians in Florence during the Principate of the Medici, ‘Hisoriae
musicae cultores biblioteca’, 61 (Florence: Olschki, 1993).
Kurtzman, Jeffrey, ‘An Aberration Amplified’, Early Music, vol. 13, 1985, pp. 73-6.
Kurtzman, Jeffrey, The Monteverdi Vespers of 1619: Music, Context, Performance (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1999).
Kurtzman, Jeffrey, ‘Write to reply: Jeffrey Kurtzman responds to issues raised by Peter Holman’s
review of his book on the Monteverdi Vespers’, Musical Times, vol. 142, no. 1877, 2001, pp. 52-60.
Lanfranco da Terenzio, Giovanni Maria, Scintille di Musica (Brescia: Britannico, 1533).
Lax, Éva (ed.), 1994: Claudio Monteverdi: Lettere, ‘Studi e testi per la storia della musica’, 10
(Florence: Olschki).
Leopold, Silke, ‘Lyra Orphei’ in Ludwig Finscher (ed.), Claudio Monteverdi: Festschrift Reinhold
Hammerstein zum 70 Geburtstag (Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 1986), pp. 337-45.
Leopold, Silke, Monteverdi, Music in Transition, trans. Anne Smith (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991).
Mersenne, Marin, Harmonie Universelle (Paris: Cramoisy, 1636).
Monterosso, Raffaello (ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Performing Practice in
Monteverdi’s Music: the Historic-Philosophical Background, Goldsmiths’ College, University of
London, 13-14 December 1993, ‘Istituta et Monumenta’, 13 (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio
Monteverdi, 1995:).
Morelli, Arnaldo, ‘Monteverdi and Organ Practice’ in Raffaello Monterosso (ed.), Proceedings of the
International Conference on Performing Practice in Monteverdi’s Music: the Historic-Philosophical
Background, Goldsmiths’ College, University of London, 13-14 December 1993, ‘Istituta et
Monumenta’, 13 (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio Monteverdi, 1995), pp. 125-141.
32
Moser, Andreas, ‘Der Violino Piccolo’, Zeitschrift für Musikwissenschaft, vol. 1, 1919, pp. 377-80.
Myers, Herbert W., ‘Zacconi’s Viola da Braccio Tunings’, Galpin Society Journal, vol. 51, 1998, pp.
244-7.
Myers, Herbert W., ‘When is a violino not a viola da braccio?’, Galpin Society Journal, vol. 53, 2000,
pp. 335-9.
Pannain, Guido, ‘Studi Monteverdiani VII’, Rassegna Musicale, vol. 29, 1959, pp. 234-6.
Parisi, Susan, Ducal Patronage of Music in Mantua, 1587-1627: an archival study, PhD dissertation,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1989.
Parisi, Susan, ‘Musicians at the Court of Mantua during Monteverdi’s Time: Evidence from the
Payrolls’ in S. Gmeinweiser, D. Riley and J. Riedlbauer (eds.): Musicologica Humana: Studies in
Honor of Warren and Ursula Kirkendale (Florence: Olschki, 1994), pp. 183-208.
Parisi, Susan, ‘Acquiring Musicians and Instruments in the Early Baroque: Observations from
Mantua’, Journal of Musicology, vol. 14, 1996, pp. 117-50.
Parisi, Susan, ‘New Documents concerning Monteverdi’s relations with the Gonzagas’ in Paola
Besutti, Teresa M. Gialdroni and Rodolfo Baroncini (eds.), Claudio Monteverdi: studi e prospettive;
atti del convengo, Mantova, 21-24 ottobre 1993, ‘Academia Nazionale Virgiliana di Scienze, Lettere e
Arti: Miscellanea’, 5 (Florence: Olschki, 1996), pp. 477-511.
Parrott, Andrew, ‘Transposition in Monteverdi’s Vespers of 1610: an “Aberration” Defended’, Early
Music, vol. 12, 1984, pp. 490-516.
Parrott, Andrew, ‘Monteverdi’s Vespers of 1610 Revisited”’ in Raffaello Monterosso (ed.),
Proceedings of the International Conference on Performing Practice in Monteverdi’s Music: the
Historic-Philosophical Background, Goldsmiths’ College, University of London, 13-14 December
1993, ‘Istituta et Monumenta’, 13 (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio Monteverdi, 1995), pp. 163-181.
Pickett, Philip, Behind the Mask: Monteverdi’s L’Orfeo (London: author, 1992).
Pickett, Philip, ‘Armonia Celeste: Orchestral Colour and Symbolism in Monteverdi’s L’Orfeo’ in
Raffaello Monterosso (ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Performing Practice in
Monteverdi’s Music: the Historic-Philosophical Background, Goldsmiths’ College, University of
London, 13-14 December 1993, ‘Istituta et Monumenta’, 13 (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio
Monteverdi, 1995), pp. 143-162.
Praetorius, Michael, Syntagma Musicum, vol. 2: De Organografia and 1620: Theatrum
instrumentorum (Wolfenbüttel: Holwein, 1619).
Prunières, Henry, Monteverdi (Paris: Alcan, 1924); English trans. (London, 1926).
Quittard, Henri, ‘L’orchestre de “l’Orfeo”’, Revue d’histoire et de critique musicales, vol. 7, 1907, pp.
380-89.
Rühlmann, Julius, Geschichte der Bogeninstrumente (Braunschweig: Vieweg, 1882).80
80
In view of the rarity of this work, it may be helpful to note that the British Library copy is numbered 7894.c.1.,
not 7894.e.1, as it appears in the catalogue.
33
Sachs, Curt, The History of Musical Instruments (New York: Norton, 1940).
Schlosser, Julius, Die Sammlung alter Musikinstrumente (Vienna: Schroll, 1920).
Segerman, Ephraim, ‘The Tunings and Sizes of the Viole da Braccio’, Galpin Society Journal, vol. 52,
1999, pp. 391-393.
Segerman, Ephraim, ‘Review: Monteverdi’s Violini Piccoli alla Francese and Viole da Brazzo, by
David D. Boyden, Annales Musicologiques VI (Paris 1958-63), pp. 387-401’, FoMRHI Quarterly 101,
2001, Comm. 1738, pp. 28-32.
Sirch, Licia, ‘“Violini piccoli alla francese” e “canto alla francese” nell’Orfeo (1607) e “Scherzi
musicali” (1607) di Monteverdi’, Nuova rivista musicale italiana, vol. 15, 1981, pp. 50-65.
Stevens, Dennis (trans. and ed.), The letters of Claudio Monteverdi, revised ed. (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1995); reference is to this revision, not to the first edition (London: Faber, 1980).
Tomlinson, Gary, Monteverdi and the End of the Renaissance (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1987).
Vaccelli, Anna Maria, ‘Monteverdi as a Primary Source for the Performance of his Own Music’ in
Raffaello Monterosso (ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Performing Practice in
Monteverdi’s Music: the Historic-Philosophical Background, Goldsmiths’ College, University of
London, 13-14 December 1993, ‘Istituta et Monumenta’, 13 (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio
Monteverdi, 1995), pp. 23-52.
Westrup, Jack, ‘Monteverdi and the Orchestra’, Music and Letters, vol. 21, 1940, pp. 230-45.
Whenham, John, ‘Five acts; one action’ in John Whenham (ed.), 1986: Claudio Monteverdi: Orfeo
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986), pp. 42–77.
Whenham, John, Monteverdi: Vespers (1610) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
Zacconi, Ludovico, Prattica di musica (Venice: Polo, 1592).

L`armonia sonora: Continuo Orchestration in Monteverdi`s orfeo

Lighting Models in Computer Games

Writing Instruments Market Expected To Value US$ 24 Billion By 2025

和合と協議 （あるコンサートをプロデユースするに当たって） 杉本康希 今

Sample Preparation Market

Asia-pacific Powered Surgical Instruments Market

Liquid Analytical Instrument Market Global Trends, Market Share, Industry Size, Growth, Opportunities, and Market Forecast 2019 to 2029

Posterior Microsurgical Instruments Market - Size, Share, Outlook, and Analysis 2018–2026

slides

revised program in pdf format