Produced by Tor Martin Kristiansen, Joseph Cooper, Stephen
Hutcheson and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
http://www.pgdp.net






A Copy of the Gasparo da Salo Violin used by Ole Bull, the Famous
Scandinavian Violinist, made by Mr. Gillingham, of Chiswick. (_The front
view of this violin will be found on the cover._)




                               THE VIOLIN
                                  AND
                           OLD VIOLIN MAKERS


                                BEING A
                       HISTORICAL & BIOGRAPHICAL
                         ACCOUNT OF THE VIOLIN
                       With Facsimiles of Labels
                           of the Old Makers

                                   BY
                            A. MASON CLARKE
           [Author of “Biographical Dictionary of Fiddlers.”]


                                London:
              WILLIAM REEVES, 83 CHARING CROSS ROAD, W.C.
                     _Publisher of Books on Music._


  _Printed by The New Temple Press, Norbury Crescent, London, S.W.16._

A Copy of the Gasparo da Salo Violin used by Ole Bull, the famous
Scandinavian violinist. Made by Mr. Gillingham, of Chiswick.




                                PREFACE.


This little work is the outcome of some little thought, born of
hesitation. To be clear, I should mention that some years ago I
completed a somewhat exhaustive work on the violin, the first portion of
which reached the stereotype stage, but unfortunately owing to a fire
the plates were destroyed. Other business pressing, the work was laid
aside. In the meantime other books on the violin have been published, a
fact which might be taken as rendering any further work on the subject
superfluous. However, it has been suggested to me by some musical
friends that if I could produce a popular work which could be issued at
a low price it would be well received. Buoyed up with this hope, I set
to work with the object of presenting in a concise form such information
as I have thought necessary or at least of interest to every one who
elects to take up the violin, either as an object of recreation or
serious study. Time alone will prove whether or not the appearance of
this addition to the literature of the violin is justified.

In order to facilitate my labours I have consulted the leading British
and foreign authorities on the violin and kindred instruments. I have
also during many years devoted much time to the inspection and study of
genuine old instruments.

                                                                A. M. C.

Forest Hill, London.




                               CONTENTS.


                                PART I.


                               HISTORICAL.
                                                                   PAGES
  I.—Introductory and Early English                                 1-29
  II.—Italy                                                        30-35
  III.—France                                                      36-40
  IV.—Germany                                                      41-44


                                 PART II.


                              BIOGRAPHICAL.


                    Violin Makers of the Old Schools.
  I.—Italian, with Labels                                          45-71
  II.—German and Tyrolese, with Labels                             72-82
  III.—French, with Labels                                         83-89
  IV.—British, with Label                                         90-103


                                PART III.
  On the Development of Classical Music for the Violin and other
          Stringed Instruments                                   105-117




                                 PART I.
                               HISTORICAL.


                   I.—INTRODUCTORY AND EARLY ENGLISH.

The origin of the violin is always a very interesting subject for study.
It is one upon which many great writers have devoted much time and
thought, but as they arrive at varying conclusions, and in some cases
opposite opinions, the result is to leave the mind of the student in a
state of conjecture and speculation.

In tracing the development of certain species of stringed instruments
the arguments of some authorities often appear pretty conclusive, but
generally we are confronted with such a mass of contradictory
assertions, that we can only treat the theories put forward as
approximate. The professor, teacher and matured student approaching this
subject, of course do so with great profit, as they are better able to
accept or reject whatever may be said concerning the ancestry of the
violin family, than is the young beginner.

For those who desire a more extended knowledge of the rise and progress
of the violin family a large field of literature is open. As a
preparatory the author recommends Otto’s “Treatise on the Structure and
Preservation of the Violin” (W. Reeves, London), which contains much
valuable and interesting information on the subject.

Now, there can be little doubt but that the simplest form of stringed
instrument (played with a bow) was conceived from the idea of a
stretched string fixed at two _points_, vibration being excited by means
of a jagged stick. The earliest known instrument of this species,
according to M. Fétis (a great historical writer on the subject) is the
ravanastron, stated to have been invented by an ancient King of Ceylon,
called Ravana, some five or six thousand years ago. It consisted of a
cylinder of sycamore wood, hollowed out from one end to the other. “This
cylinder is about 4⅜ inches long, and has a diameter of 2 inches. Over
one end is stretched a piece of boa skin, with large scales, which forms
the belly or sound-board. The cylinder is crossed from side to side—at
one-third of its length, next the sound-board—by a rod or shank of deal,
which serves as a neck, of the length of 22 inches, rounded on its under
part, but flat on the top, and slightly inclined backwards. The head of
this neck is pierced with two holes for the pegs, half an inch in
diameter; not in the side, but in the plane of the sound-board. Two
large pegs, 4 inches in length, shaped hexagonally at the top, and
rounded at the ends which go into the holes, serve to tighten two
strings made of the intestines of the gazelle, which are fixed to a
strap of serpent skin attached to the lower extremity of the rod or
shank. A little bridge ¾ of an inch long, cut sloping on the top, but
flat on the part which rests on the sound-board, and worked out
rectangularly in this part, so as to form two separate feet, supports
the strings. As to the bow, it is formed of a small bamboo, of which the
upper portion is slightly curved, and the lower (nearly) straight. A
hole is made in the head of the bow, at the first knot, for fixing a
hank of hair, which is strained and fixed at the other end, by binding a
very flexible rush string twenty times round it.”

Such is this most primitive bow instrument, slight modifications of
which still exist in Eastern countries. The Chinese and Japanese fiddles
one often sees now in music-shops are not at all unlike the ancient
ravanastron. That India appears to have given birth to bow instruments,
and to have made them known to other parts of Asia, Egypt and afterwards
to Europe, no conjecture is needed, for the instruments themselves
exist, and still preserve the characteristics of their native
originality.

We will now pass over a few thousand years during which time stringed
instruments of great variety and of every conceivable shape had been
invented and improved upon in different countries of the world, their
gradual development (brought about, no doubt, more by circumstances
existing at various periods than by any real aim towards artistic
achievement) giving birth to the various families of stringed
instruments in use at the present day, e.g., the violin family, the
harp, guitar, mandoline and pianoforte.

                            * * * * * * * *

In tracing the progress of the violin (which the author will endeavour
to do in connection with its music and performers) it is necessary to
content ourselves with a more definite standpoint, therefore, we will
commence with a period when the viol or fiddle family came upon the
scene, the immediate precursor of the violin; the viol, in fact, is not
inaptly termed the grandfather of the violin.

The great distinctive feature between a viol and the present violin
family, is that instead of F sound-holes, viols had C holes. Some had
sound-holes in the shape of what are known as “flaming sword” holes.
They carried five or six strings, sometimes more, and the finger-board
was mounted with frets, for (as was then thought) the more certain means
of stopping the notes in perfect tune, an idea which, to modern
violinists, involves an absurdity.

Viols are known to have been in use as early as the fifteenth century
(some writers go back to the thirteenth, but these early ones partook
more of the nature and shape of the guitar than of the subsequent viol).
The viol continued in use up to the beginning of the reign of Charles I,
and was one of the most popular instruments in its time. There were
generally four in use, viz., treble, alto, tenor and bass, and occupied
in some respects the position now held by our violin, tenor, ’cello and
double bass. To an ordinary observer there is little difference in
appearance between the shape of a treble viol and the earliest violin,
so that a considerable latitude of doubt may be allowed to exist as to
the finality of the former and the adoption of the latter; but certain
it is that the violin of the time became to be appreciated to such an
extraordinary degree, that the principal viol and lute makers towards
the end of the sixteenth century set about making violins in the place
of viols. Whether the idea of this change was dictated by the caprice of
novelty, or whether any special demand arose for an instrument of more
extended compass by reason of the advancement made in the musical
compositions of the time, it is difficult to determine with certainty.
It is significant, however, that at this period of the advancement of
the violin, the musical influence of Tallis (the founder of English
church music), and of Bird, his illustrious pupil, was manifesting
itself throughout this country, and in Italy the music of Palestrina
exercised a similar influence.

In the year 1662 appeared the first work printed in England containing
any reference to the violin. It was written by one John Playford, and is
entitled “A Brief Introduction to the Skill of Musick,” wherein is the
following relating to the violin:

“The treble violin is a cheerful and sprightly instrument, and much
practised of late, some by book, and some without; which of these two is
the best way, may easily be resolved. First, to learn to play by rote or
ear, without book, is the way never to play more than what he can guess
by seeing and hearing another play, which may soon be forgotten, but, on
the contrary, he which learns and practices by book, according to the
rules of musick, fails not after he comes to be perfect under these
rules, which guide him to play more than ever he was taught or heard,
and also to play his part in concert, the which the other will never be
capable of, unless he hath this usual guide.

“These rules of music are in a plain method, as it shows in the first
six chapters of this book, the which being perfectly understood, viz.,
the notes of the scale or gamut, which directs the places of all notes,
flat and sharp, by which are pricked all lessons and tunes on the five
lines, thus distinguishing of the several parts by their cliffs, as the
treble, tenor, and basse. Lastly, the names of the notes, their
quantities, proportions, and rests, according to the rule of keeping
time, etc. There then remains two things to be instructed in, how the
violin is strung and tuned, and secondly, to give you directions for the
stopping the several notes, both flat and sharp, in their right places.
Then, first observe that this cannot be expressed in words unless on the
neck or finger-board of the violin there be set five or six frets, as is
on the viol. This, though it be not usual, yet it is the best and
easiest way for a beginner, for by it he has a certain rule to direct
him to stop all his notes in exact tune, which those that do learn
without seldom attain so good an ear to stop all notes in perfect tune.
Therefore, for the better understanding of these following examples, I
shall assign to those six frets on the finger-board of your violin six
letters of the alphabet in their order” (here follow examples), after
which he says:

“These few rules (and the help of an able master to instruct thee in the
true fingering, and the several graces and flourishes that are necessary
to be learnt by such as desire to be exquisite hereon), will in a short
time make thee an able proficient.”

These quaint instructions would hardly suffice to meet the requirements
of modern violin playing, but it is interesting to observe the rules and
precepts laid down for the student’s guidance over two hundred years
ago. Observe also the recommendation of frets for accuracy in stopping
the notes.

The viol, however, was not destined to die a sudden death, at any rate,
in this country. The soft wailing tone of the viol still found many
admirers, principally amongst amateurs, who regarded the violin in the
nature of an interloper. Their cause too was vindicated by one Thomas
Mace, who, curious to relate, was born in the same year as John Playford
(1613). This worthy lived in Cambridge, and in 1676 published a work
entitled “Musick’s Monument, or a Remembrancer of the best practical
music both Divine and Civil that has ever been known to be in the
world,” certainly a most ambitious title and one that does not in the
least suffer on its comparison with the precepts contained in the book.
He was one of the clerks of Trinity College, Cambridge, and seemed to
have acquired considerable knowledge of matters musical. Under whom he
was educated, or by what means he became possessed of so much skill as
to be able to furnish matter for the above work, he has nowhere informed
us. We may collect from it that he was enthusiastically fond of music,
and of a devout and serious disposition, though cheerful and good
humoured.

His knowledge of music seems to have been confined to the practice of
the lute (his favourite instrument) and the viol. The third part of this
work is devoted chiefly to the viol, and in this he censures the abuse
of music in the number of bass and treble instruments in the concerts of
his time, in which he says, it was not unusual to have but one small
weak-sounding bass viol to two or three “scoulding violins.” This
disproportion he seeks to remedy by the observance of the following
instructions. He says:

“Your best provision (and most compleat) will be a good chest of viols
six in number, viz., 2 basses, 2 tenors, and 2 trebles. All truly and
proportionably suited. Of such, there are no better in the world than
those of Aldred, Jay, Smith (yet the highest in esteem are), Bolles and
Ross (one bass of Bolles I have known valued at £100).

“These were old, but we have now very excellent good workmen who (no
doubt) can work as well as those if they be so well paid for their work
as they were, yet we chiefly value old instruments before new, for by
experience they are found to be far the best. The reason for which I can
no further dive into than to say, I apprehend that by extream age the
wood (and those other adjuncts) glew, parchment, paper, lynings of
cloath (as some use), but above all the vernish. These are all so very
much (by time) dryed. Linefied, made gentle, rarified, or (to say better
even) agefied, so that that stiffness, stubbornness, or clunginess,
which is natural to such bodies are so debilitated and made plyable,
that the pores of the wood have a more and free liberty to move, stir,
or secretly vibrate, by which means the air (which is the life of all
things both animate and inanimate), has a more free and easy recourse to
pass and repass, and whether I have hit upon the right cause I know not,
but sure I am that age adds goodness to instruments, therefore they have
the advantage of all our late workmen.

“Now suppose you cannot procure an entire chest of viols suitable, etc.
Then thus. Endeavour to pick up (here or there) so many excellent good
odd ones as near suiting as you can (every way), viz., both for shape,
wood, colour, etc., but especially for size. And to be exact in that
take this certain rule, viz., let your bass be larger, then your trebles
must be just as short again in the string, viz., from bridge to nut, as
are your basses, because they should stand 8 notes higher than the
basses. Therefore, as short again (for the middle of every string is an
8th) the tenors (in the string) just so long as from the bridge to F
fret because they stand a 4th higher.

“Let this suffice to put you into a complete order for viols.”

We have given the above quotation _in extenso_ without breaking in with
any comment, in order that the student may better understand the
peculiar phraseology used by this ancient authority. The student will
observe that old instruments were equally valued in those days as in
these, and this too was at a period anterior to the fame of the great
Stradivarius, whose grand period commenced with the opening of the
eighteenth century.[1]

There appears to be a general consensus of opinion favouring the theory
that Gaspar da Salo, the founder of the Brescian school of violin
makers, who probably worked from 1560 to 1610, was the first to make
violins in their present shape. Be this as it may, no mention is made of
any of his instruments having found their way into this country at this
period, nor is he mentioned in any way in connection with the adoption
of the violin in this country, the probability is that our own viol and
lute makers commenced a school of their own, although nothing definite
seems to be known as to who they were. One thing, however, seems
certain, the early English violin makers were far behind the Italians in
point of workmanship. The English model was large and clumsy, while that
of Italy left hardly any room for improvement.

                            * * * * * * * *

The derivation of the word fiddle[2] appears to be wrapt in obscurity,
and must in no way be taken as coeval with the term violin. According to
Strutt, the antiquary (who wrote a very interesting work last century on
the sports and pastimes of the early English), the name of fiddler was
applied to the minstrels or itinerant musicians of the fourteenth
century. Chaucer, in his “Canterbury Tales,” mentions the term in
connection with “The Clerke of Oxenforde.”

  For him was lever han at his beddes head
  A Twenty Bokys clothyd in blacke or rede
      Of Aristotel and hys philosophie
    Than robys riche or fidel or sautrie.

In the “Vision of Pierce the Ploughman,” we read “not to fare as a
Fydeler or a Frier to seke Feastes.”

It would appear that as time went on, these wandering minstrels or
fiddlers sunk very much in popular estimation, and were held in very low
esteem, so much so, that in the reign of Elizabeth was passed an Act
entitled “An Act for the punishment of rogues, vagabonds, and sturdy
beggars,”[3] and amongst the malefactors amenable under this Act were
included “‘Wandering Minstrels’ (other than players of interludes
belonging to any Barron of the realm, or any other honourable personage
of greater degree if authorised to play under the hand and seal of arms
of such Baron, or personage”) the penalty being “such pain and
punishment as by this Act is in that behalf appointed.”

We hear of the itinerant musician again in an ordinance from Oliver
Cromwell dated 1656, during his protectorship, which prohibited “all
persons commonly called fidlers or minstrels” from “playing, fidling and
making music in any inn, alehouse or tavern,” and also from “proffering
themselves, or desiring or intreating any one to hear them play or make
music in the places aforesaid.”

The great moralist, Owen Feltham, in his “Resolves,” 1631, also touches
upon the subject. Under his remarks on music we read: “It is a kind of
disparagement to bee a cunning fiddler. It argues his neglect of better
employment and that he hath spent much time upon a thing unnecessarie.
Hence it hath been counted ill for great ones to sing and play like an
arted musician, Philip asked Alexander if hee was not ashamed that he
‘sang so artfully.’” In the “Westminster Magazine” for February, 1775,
is an article entitled “Fiddling Defended,” as follows:

“Some people are unreasonably severe against Fiddlers, but surely there
is no absurdity in attracting the eyes of the fair in displaying a white
hand, a ring, a ruffle, or sleeve to advantage. Who can blame the
performer who is successful enough to fiddle himself into a good
fortune? Whatever the rigid and austere may think, the approbation of
the ladies is no small spur to a proficiency in music as well as in many
other sciences. It is highly probable that Achilles (though the blind
bard is silent upon this head) would not have strummed his harp with so
much glee if the ears of Deidamia and Brifeis had not been tickled by
it.—A FIDDLER.”

Peacham, in his description of a “Compleat Gentleman,” published 1634,
addresses his readers thus: “I desire no more in you than to sing your
part sure and at first sight, and withall to play the same upon your
violl or the exercise of the lute privately to yourselfe”—and in another
place he observes: “King Henry the eighth could not onely sing his part
sure but of himselfe compose a service of foure five and sixe parts”—and
we are told that Queen Elizabeth was a tolerable performer on the
virginals (the precursor of the pianoforte) and also the violin.

The next source from which any historic information concerning the
fiddle is obtained is from the writings of one Anthony Wood, of Oxford,
who, although not a professional player, was an enthusiastic amateur
whose opinion was not to be despised.

This worthy in his life written by himself in the year 1654 gives an
amusing account of a musical escapade which it may not be out of place
here to repeat, as the work is rather scarce and difficult of access. It
throws an interesting light on the state of music at that period. He
says:

“Having by this time got some musical acquaintance, a frolick by all
meanes must be taken by us; and what should it be, but to disguise
ourselves in poore habits, and like contry fidlers scrape for our
livings? Faringdon Fair this yeare was the place designed to go to: And
all of us (five in number) lodging in a house in the Middle Rew in Magd.
parish,—belonging to one Gregory a Chandler, wee sate out very early the
next morning, and calling first on Mr. Th. Latton’s house at Kingston
Baképuze, wee bid him good morrow by 2 or 3 tunes. He came in the hall
among us, listened to our musick, gave us money, and ordered drink to
(be) carried to us. After wee had done with him, wee retired to the In
standing on the road going to Farringdon, dined there, and after dinner
wee were entertain’d by some of the neighbours, who danc’d (as I
remember) on the Green, gave us some money and victualls, and I think
wee returned very late that evening to Oxon. The names of those in this
exploit were, myself and Will Bull before mentioned, who played on the
Violins, Edm. Gregorie, B.A., and gent. com. of Mert. Coll. who play’d
on the bass viol, John Nap of Trinity on the citerne, and George Mason,
of the said Coll. on another wyer instrument, but could do nothing. Soon
after we took a voyage northward, called at Hampton Poyle, played at Mr.
Wests’ house, had some money, but more drink. Afterwards we went (I
think) to Kidlington, got something there, returned in the evening, and
certain soldiers overtaking us, they by force, made us play in the open
field, and then left us without giving a penny.

“Most of my companions would afterwards glory in this, but I was
ashamed, and could never endure to hear of it.”

He goes on to relate that by 1656 he “had a genuine skill in musick, and
frequented the weekly meetings of musitians in the house of Will Ellis,
late Organist of St. Johns Coll., situated and being in a house,
opposite to that place whereon the Theatre was built.” Here he gives a
list of the company who met and performed their parts on lutes and
viols. The music masters were: “Will Ellis, Batchelor of Musick, and
owner of the house, who always played his part either on the organ or
virginal:—Dr. John Wilson, the public professor, the best at the lute in
all England. He sometimes play’d on the lute, but mostly presided
(directed) the consort.—Curteys, a lutenist, lately ejected from some
choire or cathedral church. Thomas Jackson, a bass violist.... Ed. Low,
Organist lately of Christ Church. He play’d only on the organ; so when
he played on that instrument Mr. Ellis would take up the counter-tenor
viol, if any person were wanting to perform that part. Gervace Littleton
... a violist; he was afterwards a singing man of St. Johns Coll. Will
Glexney, who had belonged to a choire before the warr ... he played well
upon the bass-viol, and sometimes sung his part.... Proctor, a young man
and a new comer. John Parker, one of the university musitians. But Mr.
Low, a proud man, could not endure any common musitians to come to the
meeting, much less to play among them. Of this kind I must rank John
Haselwood, an apothecary, a starch’d formal clister-pipe, who usually
played on the bass-viol, and sometimes on the counter-tenor. He was very
conceited of his skill (though he had but little of it) and therefore
would be ever and anon ready to take up a viol before his betters, which
being observed by all, they usually called him ‘Handlewood.’ The rest
were but beginners.

“Proctor died soon after this time, he had been bred up for Mr. John
Jenkyns, the mirrour and wonder of his age for musick, was excellent for
the lyra-viol, and division-viol, good at the treble-viol, and
treble-violin, and all comprehended in a man of three or four and twenty
years of age. He was much admired at the meetings, and exceedingly
pitied by all the facultie for his loss.”

“A. W. was now advised to entertain one Will James, a dancing master, to
instruct him on the violin, who by some was accounted excellent on that
instrument, and the rather, because it was said that he had obtained his
knowledge in dancing and musick in France. He spent, in all, half a
yeare with him, and gained some improvement from him; yet at length he
found him not a compleat master of his facultie, as Griffith and Parker
were not; and, to say the truth, there was no complete master in Oxon
for that instrument, because it _had not hitherto been used in consort_
among gentlemen, only by common musitians, who played but two parts. The
gentlemen in private meetings, which A. W. frequented, played three,
four, and five parts with viols, as treble-viol, tenor, counter tenor,
and bass, with an Organ, virginal or harpsicon joyn’d with them; and
they esteemed a violin to be an instrument only belonging to a _common
fiddler_, and could not endure that it should come among them, for feare
of making their meetings to be vaine and fiddling. But before the
restoration of King Charles II, and especially after, viols began to be
out of fashion, and only violins used, as treble-violin, tenor, and bass
violin; and the King, according to the French mode, would have 24
violins playing before him while he was at meales, as being more airie
and brisk than viols.”

Under the year 1658 he informs us that: “Tho. Baltzar, a Lubecker borne,
and the most famous artist for the violin that the world had yet
produced, was now in Oxon. And this day (July 24th), A. W. was with him
and Mr. Ed. Low at the Meeting house of Will Ellis. A. W. did then and
there, to his very great astonishment, heare him play on the violin. He
then saw him run up his fingers to the end of the finger-board of the
violin, and run them back insensibly, and all in alacrity and in very
good tune, which he nor any in England saw the like before. A. W.
entertained him and Mr. Low with what the house could then afford, and
afterwards he invited them to the tavern; but they being engag’d to goe
to other company, he could no more heare him play or see him play at
that time. Afterwards he came to one of the weekly meetings, at Mr.
Ellis’s House, and he played to the wonder of all the auditory; and
exercising his fingers and instrument several wayes to the utmost of his
power. Wilson, thereupon, the public professor (the greatest judge of
musick that ever was) did, after his humoursome way stoope downe to
Baltzar’s feet to see whether he had a huff (hoof) on, that is to say,
to see whether he was a devil or not, because he acted beyond the parts
of man.”

“About this time it was, that Dr. John Wilkins, warden of Wadham Coll.,
the greatest curioso of his time, invited him and some of the musitians
to his lodgings in that Coll. purposely to have a consort, and to see
and heare him play. The instruments and books were carried thither, but
none could be persuaded there to play against him in consort on the
violin.

“At length the company perceiving A. W. standing behind in a corner,
neare the dore, they haled him in among them, and play, forsooth he
must, against him. Whereupon he being not able to avoid it, took up a
violin and behaved himself as poor Troylus did against Achilles. He was
abashed at it, yet honour he got by playing with and against such a
grand master as Baltzar was.”

“Mr. Davis Mell was accounted hitherto the best for the violin in
England, as I have before told you, but after Baltzar came into England,
and showed his most wonderful parts on that instrument, Mell was not so
admired, yet he played sweeter, was a well bred gentleman, and not given
to excessive drinking as Baltzar was.”

                            * * * * * * * *

Baltzar occupies a twofold prominence, he was one of the earliest German
performers, and the first to give any real impetus towards the
popularity of the violin in this country. He is also stated to have been
the first to introduce the practice of “shifting.”

                            * * * * * * * *

During the reign of Charles I, and also during the Cromwellian
usurpation, music was practically at a standstill. Instrumental music in
churches was prohibited, and the theatres were soon after shut up.
Indeed, as a previous historian of the art has observed, “nothing but
syllabic and unisonous psalmody was authorised or even permitted in the
Church. Organs were taken down; organists and choirmen reduced to
beggary, and the art of music, and indeed all arts but those of killing,
canting, and hypocracy, discountenanced, if not prescribed. The only
demand made for the fiddle was in the performance of low class music as
an accompaniment to the bacchanalian orgies, in favour during this
profligate period.”

However, with the restoration of Charles II, came the restoration of
music in this country. The musical taste of this monarch having been
formed in France during his sojourn there, he was naturally anxious to
introduce the French style into this country, and as we have seen from
the writings of A. Wood, he emulated the French King, Louis XIV, by
employing a band of twenty-four violins. From this period, and with this
impetus, the epoch of violin playing in England may be said to date.

The leader of this band of twenty-four violins was Baltzar; he was
succeeded by John Banister, who was really the first English violinist
of any note.

Pepys, in his Diary, under date February 20, 1667, says: “They talk how
the King’s violin Banister is made. That a Frenchman (Louis Grabu) is
come to be chief of some part of the King’s music.”

It is worthy of notice that Banister was sent abroad by Charles II in
order to study music and acquire the French taste, and so fit himself
for the leadership of the King’s band, which post, however, he soon lost
for asserting in the King’s hearing that the English violinists were
superior to those of France, which probably accounts for the note made
by Pepys in his Diary.

Banister must have been a very enthusiastic musician, for he was the
first who publicly advertised concerts in this country.

The following advertisement is extracted from the “London Gazette,”
under date Monday, December 30, 1672.

“These are to give notice, that at Mr. John Bannister’s House (now
called the Music School) over against the George Tavern in White Fryers,
this present Monday, will be musick performed by excellent Masters,
beginning precisely at 4 of the Clock in the afternoon, and every
afternoon, for the future precisely at the same hour.”

                            * * * * * * * *

We have now arrived at the close of the seventeenth century, by which
time the supremacy of the violin was established not only in England,
but in all countries where culture and the fine arts march hand in hand.

                            * * * * * * * *

Before bringing this notice to a close, let us glance briefly at the
artistic activity prevailing during the early part of the eighteenth
century.

In his workshop at Cremona would be found the great violin maker,
Antonius Stradivarius, producing those inimitable instruments which have
rendered him so famous. We find Corelli at the head of the first school
of violinists at Rome (of which he was the founder), turning out pupils
destined to shed lustre into whatever country they carried their art,
and writing those immortal sonatas, that will ever retain their high
character as examples of tonal purity, and with Boccherini, laying the
foundation of chamber music.

In 1714 the arrival in England of Geminiani and Veracini, the great
Italian violinists, contributed to make the violin more popular as well
as to advance the practice of execution. They also supplied the
performers on that instrument with compositions far superior to any they
had possessed prior to their arrival.

The establishment of Italian opera in England served to raise up a host
of violinists, who were not slow in availing themselves of the
facilities afforded them for studying under the great Italian masters
continually visiting this country. The result has been, that England at
the present day is able to point with pride to some of the most notable
performers on the violin, as belonging to her ranks.


                               II.—ITALY.

In musical execution, the early schools of Italy showed a marked
superiority over the rest of Europe, particularly with regard to the
violin.

Corelli, who was born in 1653, was the first to establish a new school
in instrumental composition, distinguished from that which preceded it
by a graceful, rhythmical and natural manner of writing. He was the
first composer who brought the violin into repute; and his originality,
facility and delicacy of style, greatly contributed to the popularity of
the violin. He was founder of the Roman, or what may now be called the
ancient school of violinists, and obtained the proud title of “Princeps
Musicorum.” After the publication of Corelli’s works, there was scarcely
a town in Italy where the violin was not cultivated and in which some
distinguished performer on that instrument did not reside. Most of his
contemporaries formed themselves on his model—as Albioni, of Venice,
Torelli, of Verona, Valentini (whose works were published in Holland),
and Marietto, who was a Neapolitan violinist attached to the household
of the Duke of Orleans.

Tartini, born 1692, the most celebrated performer on the violin of his
day, formed all his scholars on the solos of Corelli.[4] He was the
first who observed the phenomenon of the third sound, which he did in
the year 1714, at Venice. This is the resonance of a third note when the
two upper notes of a chord are sounded; and may be distinctly heard if a
series of consecutive thirds are played on the violin, they being
perfectly in tune.

                            * * * * * * * *

Let us now briefly notice the two great Italian schools of violin
makers, which, up to the end of the seventeenth century, had been called
into existence.

The first was the Brescian school, the founder of which was Gasparo da
Salo. This maker, as we have mentioned elsewhere, was the first to
introduce the violin in its present size and shape. The next
representative of this school was John Paul Maggini, who worked from
1600 to 1640. Other makers there were, viz., Mariani, Buddiani, Ambrosi,
Bente, Pietro Sancto Maggini (son of J. P. Maggini), but they call for
no special comment.

The next great school was the Cremonese, founded by Andreas Amati, who
was succeeded by his sons, Antony and Hieronymus Amati, and they worked
together for some time. The most noted of this family was Nicolas Amati
(born 1596, died 1684). The Cremonese renown for violin making, however,
attained its climax in the productions of Antony Stradivarius
(1644-1737) and Joseph Guarnerius (1683-1745). The various lesser lights
who worked in these two schools will be duly noticed in the biographical
portion of this work.

                            * * * * * * * *

The music of this period falls next to be noticed. Mr. Charles Reade, in
his able articles on Cremona fiddles, which appeared in the August
numbers of the “Pall Mall Gazette” for 1872, states, “Man invents only
to supply a want.” This observation is peculiarly applicable to the
violin; for we find that with the advancement of musical composition
came the desire to attain greater perfection in the art of violin
making. This is illustrated by the fact that the performance of modern
music would be next to impossible on one of the old violins, by reason
of the then shortness of the neck; hence arises the necessity for
refitting old violins with longer necks, thus giving the performer
greater command over the high notes, and adding largely to the strength
of the instrument.

The use of the violin in the orchestra began to receive recognition with
the dawn of the seventeenth century. Monteverde, in his opera of
“Orfeo,” printed in 1615, scores for “two little French violins”
(_piccoli violini alla Francese_).

Without referring to the periods anterior to the seventeenth century,
concerning which we have little or no information, we know that during
the first two generations of that century, music in Italy was mostly in
the madrigal style. The capabilities of instrumental music, apart from
the voice, however, were soon discovered, and composers entered gladly
upon a new and wide field of musical effort. The compositions were
usually comprehended under the names of studies, fantasias, capricci,
sonatas, concertos and other pieces in various styles.

Corelli has been accredited with fixing the form of the sonata, and
Torelli, his contemporary, with inventing the concerto.

When dramatic music began to prevail under Corelli, it was scientific
and rather dry, Geminiani first enriched it by expression; but it was
under Tartini that it attained the highest degree of expression, both as
to composition and execution. Soon after this period the concerto was
greatly improved in the hands of Jarnowick and Mestrino, both of whom
were still surpassed by Viotti, who gave to this style the character
which seems so peculiarly its own and brought it to a degree of
perfection which it seems incapable of exceeding.

These remarks apply equally to solo as to concerted music: by which term
we understand music for several voices or instruments, the parts of
which do not stand in the relation of solo and accompaniments, but are
of nearly equal importance; equally _obbligato_, either because each of
them has its appropriate part, or because each takes up the strain
successively, the others alternately becoming accompaniments. This
method is practically alike in the duet, the trio, the quartet, the
quintet, and other pieces where each instrument has its separate part.

Boccherini was the first who, in 1768, gave to these forms a fixed
character. After him came Fiorillo, Giardini, Pugnani, and lastly,
Viotti.

Such was the style of music, so far as the violin is concerned, from the
time of Corelli to the commencement of this century.

Although Italy has since had to yield the palm for instrumental music to
other countries, we must not overlook the fact that for generations she
held undisputed sway in the realm of music; both as regards composers
and performers.


                              III.—FRANCE.

We will now direct our attention to France.

Towards the latter end of the sixteenth century the lute was a very
favourite and general instrument. About the year 1577 the violin was
introduced by Baltazarini, a then celebrated performer, who was sent at
the head of a band of performers by Marshal Brissac to Catherine de
Medicis, and was appointed valet de chambre to the Princess. Beyond this
little appears to be known of him.

We have elsewhere had occasion to refer to the band of twenty-four
violins of Louis XIV. The leader of this band was a Florentine named
Lully, who was instrumental in introducing the Italian music into
France, thus giving to that country a new musical existence. The high
standard then prevailing in Italy, he, however, failed to maintain, but
be this as it may, the French seemed to have acquired a kind of
distinctive reputation as performers, for M. Choron says: “With respect
to the style in which the French have real and undisputed merit, and,
indeed, in many respects have a marked superiority, is the instrumental
in general, and especially that of the violin.... The excellence of the
twenty-four violins of Louis XIV formed by Lully and of other
violinists, was highly spoken of so far back as the seventeenth
century,” and he adds, “I do not, however, know how to reconcile these
facts with the following remark of Corette[5] in the preface to his
“Method of Accompaniment,” published at Paris about the year 1750. ‘At
the commencement of this century’ (says Corette) ‘music was very dull
and slow,’ etc.... When Corelli’s sonatas were first brought from Rome
(about 1715), nobody in Paris could play them. The Duke of Orleans, then
Regent, being a great amateur of music, and wishing to hear them, was
obliged to have them _sung_ by three voices. The violinists then begun
to study them, and, at the expiration of some years, three were found
who could play them. Baptiste, one of these, went to Rome to study them
under Corelli himself,” and M. Choron continuing, says: “Be this as it
may, since that period, instrumental music has been studied with ardour
by the French, and they have made astonishing progress in it. France has
now an excellent school for the violin, founded upon that of Italy.”

It seems rather astonishing to believe that singers could be found to
sing that which took a violinist years of practice to perform,
especially in view of the fact that France at that period almost
neglected the vocal art, and we must regard Corette’s criticism as
somewhat biased, notwithstanding he was “a furious partisan of the
French school of music.”

No doubt the French had to supply their repertoires of chamber music
(when they required it) from the Italian composers, the music of France
in Lully’s time being mostly composed for the lyric drama, which was
then greatly in vogue.

The first to call into existence a French school was Jean Marie Leclair,
who received his instructions from Somis, an Italian. He does not,
however, appear to have formed any great performers, owing, probably, to
the European fame of the great Italian masters. According to one
historian the real founder of the French school was Pierre Gavinies,
born at Bordeaux in 1726. Be this so or not, he certainly produced some
fine masters. Indeed, during the eighteenth century, France was
productive of the finest violinists that had been heard. We have only to
mention such names as Lahousaye, Barthélémon, Rode, Kreutzer, Lafont,
Baillot, Habeneck and De Beriot, in proof of this assertion.

                            * * * * * * * *

The early records of violin making in France, like those of other
countries, seem buried in obscurity. Its literature offers but scant
information of a reliable character, and we are therefore compelled to
make the most of such evidence as is afforded by the slender testimony
of paintings and ecclesiastical monuments.

We are told that Baltazarini was the first to introduce the violin (or
rather the performance of it) into France, in the year 1577, so that it
is safe to assume no maker of any note existed anterior to this period.
One authority tells us that, in the year 1566, the name of Tywersus of
Nancy appears as a lute and violin maker, and is reported to have
assisted Andreas Amati to finish certain instruments made for the chapel
of Charles IX. Soon after this period several names of makers are
recorded, but little seems to be known of them, or of their work.

Excellence in violin making seems to have commenced with the middle of
the eighteenth century, when the name of Nicholas Lupot appears on the
scene as the founder of the French school. Before he died, however, in
1824, France had given birth to John Baptiste Vuillaume, in whose hands
the construction of violins attained the utmost perfection. His
instruments are much admired and often realise large sums of money. Many
makers of great merit have since cropped up, which has had the effect of
establishing France as the greatest producer of the instrument, the
subject of these pages.


                              IV.—GERMANY.

Let us now direct our spirit of inquiry into Germany, that land of music
and musicians. This country, notwithstanding its present musical
position appears to have been somewhat behind the times in regard to the
production of any early violin performers of note, and affords the names
of fewer musicians than almost any other country during the sixteenth
century, if we except Spain. An explanation of this seems to be afforded
by the fact of the wars, which devastated Germany during the latter part
of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth centuries, and
particularly the terrible Thirty Years’ war, during which five great
armies overran that unhappy country, carrying desolation and havoc in
every part of it. These wars destroyed the arts, which can only flourish
in the bosom of peace and happiness. It is certain that at this period
the school of Germany was greatly inferior to that of Italy; it even
appears that the French school began before the German to emerge from
obscurity. Reason is wanting to account for the German lack of early
performers, but we feel constrained to borrow the following words from
Dubourg. He says: “We may observe, that, although derived originally,
like all others, from that of Italy, and contracting no inconsiderable
obligations to it in its progress, it has been, on the whole, much less
indebted to the Italians for resources and support, than the school
either of France or England.”

Although the early German performers were inferior as soloists to those
of Italy or France, they were certainly able to hold their own as
orchestral players. Be this as it may, they have certainly, in modern
times, produced some of the finest violinists the world has seen; the
music too, has long since supplanted that of Italy.

Thomas Baltzar, born at Lubec about 1630, was esteemed the finest violin
performer of his time; but he came to England as we have seen in 1658,
and helped to rescue the violin from the low estimation in which it was
then held, an honour, however, he only lived five years to enjoy.

It was not until the early part of the eighteenth century that any
attempts were made to establish a German violin school. Amongst the
first to diffuse any artistic influence may be mentioned Francis Benda,
1709-86, and John Stamitz, 1719-61, but the honour of founding a
distinct school must be awarded to Leopold Mozart (father of the great
W. A. Mozart) and after him came William Cramer, who ultimately came to
England; these were followed by J. Salomon and Kiesewetter.

Louis Spohr, born 1784, may rightly be termed the founder of the modern
German school, he was both a performer and composer of the highest
order. The names of Guhr, Mayseder and Molique are also well known as
performers of great merit.

                            * * * * * * * *

Violin making in Germany commenced with the name of Jacobus Stainer,
born at Hall, near Absam, in the Tyrol, 1621, died 1683. It has been
said, though without authority, that he was an apprentice of Nicholas
Amati, a statement which would gain little credence on comparing the
instruments of each of these makers.

The next makers in succession are the Klotz family (six in number),
1670-1741. Other makers will be found in the biographical section.




                                PART II.
                             BIOGRAPHICAL.
                   VIOLIN MAKERS OF THE OLD SCHOOLS.


                              I.—ITALIAN.

ALBANI, MATTHIAS, born at Botzen in the Tyrol, 1621, died there 1673. He
adopted the Stainer model, and produced some very fine instruments.

             [Illustration: Mattio Alban fecit Bolzan. 17]

ALBANI, MATTHIAS, son and pupil of the foregoing. He afterwards went to
Cremona to study the art in the Amati school, and afterwards adopted
that model with great success.

   [Illustration: Matthias Albanus mefecit, Bulfani in Tyroli. 1706]

AMATI, ANDREAS, born about 1520, died about 1580. Founder of the
Cremonese school. It is conjectured that he was a pupil of Gasparo da
Salo. He adopted rather a small model, built rather high in the centre.
Backs cut on the layers, deep golden varnish, and perfect finish, are
the chief characteristics of this maker.

The tone is sweet and sympathetic, but lacks brilliancy; they are
therefore valued more on account of their historical associations than
as a musical medium.

AMATI, ANTONIUS and AMATI, HIERONYMUS, flourished 1570-1635. These two
were sons of Andreas. They worked together it is presumed for some time,
and produced many instruments of great beauty. The wood was well chosen
and handsomely figured. The model selected was not quite so high as that
adopted by the father. The _f_ holes are of beautiful shape, and the
backs are cut variously in the whole or slab. The purfling, which is of
exquisite quality, is inserted with the utmost skill. The tone of the
instruments made by this ancient firm is sweet and pure, but is
deficient in power.

[Illustration: Antonius, & Hieronym. Fr. Amati Cremonen. Andrex fil. F.
                                  _16_
        Antonius, & Hieronimus Fr. Amati Cremonen. Andrex F. 16]

AMATI, NICOLAS, born 1596, died 1684. He was the son of Hieronymus, and
the best artist of his family. His first efforts were simply copies of
the firm last mentioned. His most celebrated fiddles are known as “Grand
Amati’s.” He somewhat flattened the model of his father, and continued
the arching nearer the sides, where it forms a sinking in round the
edges. The _f_ holes are exquisitely cut, and the corners are long and
strongly pronounced. The wood chosen for the bellies has a fine even
grain, and the backs are beautifully marked. The varnish used by Nicolas
was deeper and richer than that used by the other members of the family.

The following is a facsimile of an authentic ticket of this great maker.

[Illustration: Nicolaus Amatus Cremonen. Hieronymi Fil. ac Antonij Nepos
                              Fecit. 1677]

BERGONZI, CARLO, Cremona, flourished 1718-47. This maker was the best
pupil of Stradivarius. He at first copied his great master, but
subsequently started a model of his own; rather broad and heavy, and
flat arching. The scroll is strongly pronounced and finely cut. The _f_
holes, which are unusually long, are placed low in the body, and very
near the purfling. The wood is carefully selected and the general
workmanship is of superior finish; only equalled by Nicolas Amati or
Stradivarius. The varnish used by Bergonzi was reddish brown, rather
thickly applied.

        [Illustration: Anno 1733 Carlo Bergonzi fece in Cremona
     Anno 17__ Reuifto e corretto da me Carlo Bergonzi in Cremona]

BERGONZI, MICHAEL ANGELO, Cremona, 1720-60, son of Carlo, made good
instruments, but they certainly suffer on comparison with those of his
father. This maker had two sons called respectively Nicolaus, and
Zosimo, who followed the same calling from 1739-65.

   [Illustration: Nicolaus Bergonzi Cremonensis faciebat Anno 17_60_
           Fatto da me Zosimo Bergonzi F anno 17__  Cremona]

CAPPA, GIOFREDO, an early maker who worked in Cremona about 1590 to
1640. He was a pupil of Hieronymus and Antonius Amati, when those
brothers were in partnership. In 1640 he proceeded to Piedmont and
founded the school of Saluzzio, and formed there many good pupils. Cappa
succeeded best in the manufacture of violoncellos.

         [Illustration: IOFREDVS CAPPA FECIT SALVTVS ANNO 1630]

GAGLIANO, ALLESSANDRO, born about 1640, died at Naples in 1725. He is
said to have commenced operation in Cremona, working under Stradivarius.
His instruments are flat in model, rather large, and generally of fairly
good tone throughout. Varnish light yellow. The badly cut scrolls tend
to mar the otherwise symmetrical proportions of this maker’s
instruments. Label as follows:

 [Illustration: Alessandri Gagliano Alumnus Stradivarius fecit Neapoli
                               anno 1701]

GAGLIANO, GENNARO, son of Allessandro, born about 1695, died 1750. He is
considered the best maker of the family, and his instruments are, as a
consequence, much sought after. He exercised great care in the selection
of his wood, and used a much finer varnish than either his father or
brother Nicolas. Whether or not he was a prolific maker is uncertain,
but instruments of his are rarely to be met with.

 [Illustration: Januarius Gagliano, Filius Alexandri fecit Neap. 1732.]

GAGLIANO, NICOLAS, another son of Allessandro, was born about 1665, died
1740. He was a finer workman than his father, paying more attention to
the outward appearance of the instrument, the tone of which is
pronounced very fine in his best examples. Besides violins he made a
large number of violas and violoncellos. His tickets usually run:
“Nicolaus Gagliano filius Alexandri fecit Neap.”

The remaining members of the family are: Ferdinando, born 1706, died
1781, eldest son of Nicolas; Guiseppe, died 1793; Giovanni, died 1806,
also sons of Nicolas; Raffael and Antonio, sons of Giovanni. Antonio
died in 1860. Label of Ferdinando:

   [Illustration: Ferdinandus Gagliano Filius Nicolai fecit Neap. 17]

GRANCINO, PAOLO, 1665-90, was instructed by and worked under Nicolas
Amati. His instruments are of large model, light yellow varnish, large
sound-holes, negligent purfling, and carelessly finished corners. The
arching is flattish, and the scrolls coarse. The tone of his
instruments, however, possess great power and is of good quality. Other
members of the family worked in Milan.

GRANCINO, GIOVANNI BATTISTA, a good maker of the same school, probably a
son of Paolo. Label as follows:

  [Illustration: Gia. Bapt. Grancino in Contrada Largha di Milano anno
                                 1695]

GUADAGNINI, LORENZO, Placentia, 1695-1760. This maker worked for several
years with Stradivarius, whose instruments he copied with more or less
success. The wood chosen was generally of fine quality, and the
workmanship is evidence that the maker fabricated his instruments with
extreme care. The tone of a genuine Lorenzo is most brilliant in the
upper register, but somewhat weak in the lower. They are much sought
after by performers where the possession of a Cremona of the first order
is unattainable. The varnish used was a rich amber or yellowish red of
fine quality. A ticket of this maker is as follows:

 [Illustration: Lavrentius Guadagnini Pater, & alumnus Antonj Straduarj
                       fecit Placentie Anno 1743]

GUADAGNINI, GIOVANNI BATTISTA, was a brother of Lorenzo. He made some
really good instruments, dividing his attention between the Stradivari
and the Amati models. Giambattista was a son of Lorenzo, and reputed
pupil of Stradivarius. He afterwards went to Piacenza and subsequently
settled in Turin. His instruments are also much prized. Guiseppe, son of
Giovanni, worked successively in Milan, Como and Parma. Other members of
the same family also made violins, but little appears to be known of
them or of their works.

     [Illustration: Joannes Baptista Guadagnini Pla-|centinus fecit
       Mediolani 17_03_ {trademark: seal containing cross GBG P}
    Joannes Baptista Guadagnini {trademark: cross GBG (incomplete)}
    Crenionensis fecit Taurini. {missing}nnus Antoni Stradivari 17]

GUARNERIUS, ANDREAS, born about 1626, died 1698.

The founder of this celebrated family of violin makers was a pupil of
Nicolas Amati. His instruments are estimable for good workmanship
somewhat in the style of the Amati, although marked by certain peculiar
details, by which indeed they are recognised. His varnish is either
golden yellow or brownish red. Andreas left two sons, Peter and Joseph.

Ticket as follows:

   [Illustration: Andreas Guarnerius fecit Cremonæ sub titulo Sanctæ
                              Teresiæ 16]

GUARNERIUS, GIUSEPPE, usually called “Joseph,” son of Andreas, born
1666, died about 1739. Although he may have been a pupil of Andreas, he
has not followed his model. Some say he followed Stradivarius, whose
contemporary he was, and subsequently followed his cousin, also called
Joseph, of whom we shall speak presently. He has consequently varied
both in his patterns and in the details of manufacture; but his
instruments are of good quality and much esteemed, and are more elegant
in form than those of his father. The colour of his varnish is a
brilliant red.

A ticket of his reads:

[Illustration: Ioseph Guarnerius filius Andreæ fecit Cremone sub titulo
                           S. Teresie 17_06_]

GUARNERIUS, JOSEPH ANTHONY, the most renowned of this family, was born
in 1683 and died about 1745; his period of activity dating from 1725.
According to M. Fétis, his father was John Baptist Guarnerius, who was a
brother of Andreas.

He is usually known by the surname of “del Jesù,” because many of his
labels bear this device.

                 [Illustration: {maltese cross} I.H.S.]

Most authorities agree in dividing his working career into four periods.
His first attempts were not marked by any characteristic sign of
originality, except in the indifferent choice of material, form and in
the varnish. In the second period, his instruments are found to be made
with care; the wood used for the sides and back being of excellent
quality, and cut on the quarter (_sur maille_); the deal of the belly
has been well chosen; the varnish of fine complexion and elastic
quality. The pattern is small, but of beautiful outline. The arching is
slightly elevated and falls off towards the purfling in a graceful
curve. M. Fétis in his criticism of these instruments, points out an
obvious defect, namely, the too great thickness of the wood, especially
in the backs, which tends to impede the freedom of vibration, and
consequently the brilliance of sound. In the third or grand period of
his career, Joseph Guarnerius, says the same authority, presents a still
more surprising variety in the forms of his instruments. During this
period he produced instruments of large pattern, made of excellent wood
cut (_sur maille_); and conformably to the best conditions possible, in
respect to arching and degrees of thickness. A beautiful varnish of a
lovely orange shade, remarkable for its fineness and elasticity, protect
these excellent instruments, which are considered equal to the most
beautiful productions of Anthony Stradivarius. We now arrive at the
fourth period, which, it is sad to observe, forms a striking contrast to
the glorious third. Here we have evidence of a lamentable falling off.
The master seems to have worked carelessly, the wood is poor, as is the
varnish.

Reports have been handed down to account for this apparent degeneration
of talent, but as it is impossible to verify the same, it can serve no
good purpose to here relate them. It only remains to be said, concerning
this great master, that he has built up a reputation that is not likely
to suffer by mere rumour.

Paganini possessed one of the finest examples of a del Jesù, which was
presented to him by a M. Livron, a French merchant of Leghorn. At his
death, 27th May, 1840, Paganini bequeathed it to his native town, Genoa,
where it is preserved in a glass case in the museum.

 [Illustration: Joseph Guarnerius fecit {trademark: cross IHS} Cremonæ
                               anno 17__]

GUARNERIUS, PIETRO, Cremona, eldest son of Andreas, born 1655, and lived
to an advanced age. His first productions, which are of flat model, are
dated from Cremona, but later on he established himself at Mantua, where
he manufactured a great quantity of instruments of undoubted merit, but
have the fault of too high an arching, and some there are wanting in
brilliancy of tone. His tickets usually run:

  [Illustration: Petrus Guarnerius Cremonensis fecit Mantuæ sub. tit.
                          Sanctæ Teresiæ 1693]

This maker had a nephew also called Pietro, who worked at Mantua from
about 1725 to 1740, and subsequently in Venice till about 1755. He was a
pupil of his uncle, but his work is less esteemed.

LANDOLPHUS, CARLO, Milan, 1750-1775, reputed pupil of Guarnerius. This
maker was decidedly original in his pattern. Although his instruments
are not characteristic of great beauty as regards outline, they possess
a very pleasing tone. He is one of the last of the old Italian school,
consequently his instruments are rapidly increasing in value. The most
striking point observable in his work is the extremely weak and small
scroll. He left a number of instruments unpurfled and otherwise in an
unfinished state. Those with the light red varnish are considered the
best. He also made some violoncellos of small size. Ticket:

[Illustration: Carolus Ferdinandus Landulphus Fecit Mediolani in Via St.
                         Margaritae Anno 1755.]

MAGGINI, GIOVANNI PAOLO, born 1580, died about 1640. This distinguished
maker is the second representative of the Brescian school, and reputed
pupil of Gasparo da Salo. According to recent researches, Maggini was
born in Botticino Sera, a small village not far from Brescia.

Maggini’s instruments are in general of large pattern; their proportions
are similar to those of Gasparo da Salo, and the style of workmanship
almost identical. The swell or arching is decided, and reaches almost to
the edges. The sides or ribs are narrow; the bellies very strong and of
good quality, the backs generally thin, with the wood cut on the layers.
The varnish, which is remarkable for its delicacy, is of a yellowish
light brown colour; sometimes, however, he used a brownish red varnish.
In either case it is of excellent quality. The extended dimensions, and
the proportion of the arching relative to the various thicknesses of the
wood, impart to most of these instruments a superb, grave and melancholy
tone.

Another characteristic of this master’s productions is found in his
ornamentation. He generally affected a double row of purfling and
various other decorations, and although Maggini was not alone in this
respect, he appears to be the last maker who relinquished the practice
of introducing any ornate addition, which, anterior to his period, was
considered so essential to the finish of an instrument.

Maggini is credited with being the first maker who paid any real
attention to the inside of the instrument, having, it is said,
introduced the side linings and corner blocks, which have ever since
been a _sine qua non_ of construction.

De Beriot, the great violinist, was an admirer of Maggini’s violins.

Tickets of this celebrated maker are not dated. The following is a copy
of one:

                [Illustration: Paolo Maggini in Brescia]

MONTAGNANA, DOMINIC, Cremona and Venice, 1700-1740. He was probably a
pupil of Nicolas Amati, whose model he at first copied, but subsequently
modified this for one of his own, of a somewhat large pattern. The
scroll is larger and more powerful than that of his reputed master and
in the sound holes he also differs. As regards the arching and outline,
the Amati type is at once apparent. The varnish is superb, and of golden
brown transparency. The wood chosen is always the very finest, and the
workmanship is all that can be desired. He also made some very fine
violoncellos. His best instruments, which are of great rarity, are dated
from Venice.

[Illustration: Dominicus Montagnana Sub Si-|gnum Cremonæ Venetiis 1729.]

RUGERI, FRANCESCO (Ruger or Ruggeri), Cremona, 1670-1720. This excellent
maker was a pupil and follower of Nicolas Amati (some writers say
Hieronymus). His instruments are much sought after, and, as a
consequence, are extensively copied and passed off as genuine. His
varnish is generally dark golden brown.

      [Illustration: Francesco Ruger detto il Per Cremona 16_97_]

RUGERI, GIAM-BATTISTA, supposed to be a brother of the foregoing, pupil
of Amati, born at Cremona, 1660. He subsequently went to Brescia, where
he worked from about 1670 to the end of the century. Ticket:

[Illustration: Io. Bap. Rogerius Bon: Nicolai Amatide Cremo-|na alumnus
                    Brixiæ fecit Anno Domini 16_71_]

SALO, GASPARO DA (or Gasparo di Bertolotti), born 1542, died 1612. This
is the earliest maker of whom any reliable record is extant. He is said
to have been born at Salo in Lombardy, and afterwards to have settled in
Brescia. Gasparo is generally credited with the honour of inventing or
producing violins in their present shape. He seems to have devoted his
early period to the manufacture of lutes and viols, and subsequently to
have turned his attention to the violin, which he greatly improved,
thereby founding the Brescian school of violin makers; the earliest
known. The violins of Gasparo which have now become very scarce, do not,
it is true, exhibit that indication of finish so observable in the
instruments produced by his reputed pupil, Maggini, but his model is
excellent and the tone good, being somewhat analogous to that of the
tenor. The fact that Gasparo never dated his labels, makes it difficult
to determine with certainty the exact period of his activity.

Facsimile label as follows:

              [Illustration: Gasparo da Salo, In Brescia.]

SERAPHIN, SANCTUS (Santo Seraphino), 1710-1748, worked in Venice, and is
considered one of the most careful and painstaking makers of the Italian
school. His wood is beautifully figured and well selected. His purfling
is excellent, and he used a fine brilliant varnish. He usually branded
his instruments near the button. Ticket as follows:

   [Illustration: Sanctus Seraphin Utinensis Fecit Venetiis Ann. 17__
                 {surrounded by decorative scrollwork}]

STORIONI, LORENZO, Cremona, 1780-1798. The last of the old Cremonese
school. He sometimes copied Joseph “del Jesù,” at others, he followed
his own originality. His instruments exhibit great variation; notably in
the position of the sound holes, which he never placed twice alike. He
used a poor varnish which clearly indicates the change of process which
was then taking place. Although these instruments are far from being
graceful in outline or beautiful in appearance, they are capable of
producing a good tone; in fact, in Italy a good Storioni is highly
spoken of. This maker does not appear to have made many violas or
violoncellos. Ticket:

       [Illustration: Laurentius Storioni fecit Cremonæ 17_23_.]

STRADIVARIUS, ANTONIO, the king of fiddle makers, born at Cremona, 1644,
died 1737. This great master was an apprentice in the workshop of
Nicolas Amati. At the age of twenty-three years he produced some
violins, the exact reproductions of his master, and into which it is
said he placed the labels of Nicolas. In the year 1670 he signed his
instruments with his own name. From that date, until about 1690, he
produced but few instruments, and it is conjectured, that during this
period of twenty years, his labours and researches were more in the
nature of experiments than of commercial enterprise.

From the year 1690 the individuality of Stradivarius began to assert
itself. It was then that he began to give greater amplitude to his
model. He reduced the high arching hitherto prevailing, and determined
with much nicety the various thicknesses of wood, but he still retained
many of the chief characteristics of his master. The productions of this
period are called “Long Strads.” From 1700 to 1725 Stradivarius was in
the full lustre of his fame. During this period he made those
masterpieces known as the “Grand Pattern.” “He no longer felt his way,
but being certain of all that he did, he carried his manufacture, even
to the minutest details, to the highest possible finish, especially with
regard to the varnish, the quality of which is fine and extremely
supple.”

“The workmanship of the interior of the instrument displays no less
perfection; all is there finished with the greatest care. The degrees of
thickness are adjusted in a rational manner, and are remarkable for a
precision which could not have been attained except by long study and
experiment. The back, the belly, and all the parts of which the
instrument is composed, are in a perfectly harmonious relation. It was,
doubtless, repeated trials and diligent observations, which also led
Stradivarius, throughout this period of his productive career, to make
the blocks and sides of his violins of willow, the specific lightness of
which surpasses that of every other wood. In short, everything had been
foreseen, calculated, and determined with certainty, in these admirable
instruments. The bar alone is too weak, in consequence of the gradual
rise in the pitch, from the beginning of the eighteenth century; the
inevitable result of which has been a considerable increase of tension,
and a much greater pressure exercised on the belly. Hence the necessity
has arisen for re-barring all the old violins and violoncellos.” Such is
Fétis’s description of this grand period.

From 1725 to 1730, Stradivarius produced fewer instruments than he had
previously done in the same period of time. Although they are very good,
the workmanship no longer displays the same perfection. The arching
becomes more rounded, which tends to impair the clearness of the sound,
and the varnish is brown.

After the year 1730, the master exhibits a decided falling off.
Stradivarius, in his eighty-sixth year, still, however, continued at his
bench, assisted by his two sons, Omobono and Francisco, and his pupil,
Carlo Bergonzi, who partially, if not wholly, kept the business going.
Stradivarius signed many of his instruments as having been made simply
under his direction. After the death of this great maker, many
instruments which remained unfinished in his workshop were completed by
his sons. Most of these instruments bear the father’s name.

Stradivarius died at the great age of ninety-three years, and he was
buried in the Cathedral of Cremona.

Facsimile of a written ticket:

                     [Illustration: {handwriting}]

Facsimile of a printed ticket:

  [Illustration: Antonius Stradiuarius Cremonensis Faciebat Anno 1719
                      {trademark cross above A S}]

STRADIVARIUS, FRANCISCO, Cremona, born 1671, died 1743. STRADIVARIUS,
OMOBONO, born 1679, died 1742. These two were sons and pupils of the
great Stradivarius, and the only members who followed their father’s
calling, with whom they worked until his death; the father during the
latter period of his life, signing the instruments “sub disciplinâ
Antonii Stradivarius.” After the death of their illustrious father, they
each worked on their own account. Francisco is reputed to have
manufactured some good violins from 1725 to 1740; his brother chiefly
occupying himself in repairing. The productions, however, of these two
brothers sink into insignificance when compared with those of their
renowned father.

   [Illustration: Franciscus Stradivarius Cremonensis Filius Antonii
                           faciebat Anno 1742
     Omobonus Stradiuarius figlij Antonij Cremone Fecit Anno _1740_
                           {trademark a T s}]

TECHLER, DAVID, Rome, 1680-1740. He is said by some to be a pupil of
Stainer, from the fact that he produced instruments of that type. He
first worked at Salzburg, then at Venice, and finally at Rome, where he
gained much experience. Instruments of this latter city are of the
Italian model. His work proves him to have been a careful and studious
maker. The varnish is usually deep yellow. Label:

      [Illustration: David Tecchler Liutaro Fecit Romæ Anno 1703.]

TESTORE, CARLO GUISEPPE, Cremona. Flourished 1690-1720. He produced
instruments of good quality both as regards finish and tone; his model
being Guarnerius. His instruments are eagerly sought after by those who
desire to become possessed of a good old Italian instrument, but are
unwilling or unable to give a fancy price. These instruments are,
however, gradually rising in value.

TESTORE, CARLO ANTONIO, Milan, 1730, and TESTORE, PAOLO ANTONIO, Milan,
1740, sons of Carlo Guiseppe. They made excellent instruments after the
model of their father, and the tone is good. Paolo frequently left his
instruments unpurfled.

   [Illustration: Carlo Antonio Testore figlio maggiore del fu Carlo
    Giuseppe in Contrada lar-|ga al segno dell’ Aquila Milano 1741.]


                        II.—GERMAN AND TYROLESE.

BACHMANN, CARL LUDWIG, of Berlin (1716-1800). This maker was one of the
most celebrated of the German school. He made his instruments rather
strong in the wood, but now that age has been at work on them, they
possess the advantage of being formed into first-class instruments by
skilful repairers.

BENTE, MATTEO. A maker of the Brescian school, flourished about 1580. He
made some good violins, which are chiefly to be found in collections.

BUCHSTETTER, GABRIEL DAVID, a native of Ratisbon, flourished in the
latter part of the eighteenth century. He copied the Cremonese makers
and used a brown varnish. His wood is rather coarse-grained,
consequently his instruments are not very highly esteemed.

BUCHSTETTER, JOSEPHUS, son of Gabriel David. Made some instruments of
good quality and tone, and adopted a flat model.

EBERLE, ULRIC, of Prague, about 1750, an eminent German maker, whose
instruments at one time were considered nearly equal to the best Italian
makers.

HELMER, CHARLES (CAROLUS), of Prague, a pupil of Eberle. He made some
very fine instruments. Otto says: “They have, however, the fault that
the three upper strings improve greatly by being played on, but the G
string, in most of them, remains so far inferior, that while the tone of
the former is such as may be expected from a full sized violin, that of
the latter only resembles a child’s toy-instrument. Yet an experienced
maker would find no difficulty in correcting this fault.”

HOFFMANN, MARTIN, one of the earliest representatives of the German
school, flourished in Leipzig in the latter part of the seventeenth
century. He was better known as a lute-maker. He made violins possessing
excellent tone, but they do not find much favour by reason of their
ungainly appearance.

JAUCH (or JAUG), of Dresden, early part of eighteenth century. The best
description of this maker’s instruments is that contained in Otto’s
treatise. “Jauch,” he says, “has manufactured very good violins on the
model of the Cremonese, and displayed, in his beautiful and excellent
workmanship, a thorough knowledge of the wood, and of the due
proportions of strength required in the respective parts of the
instrument. But his violins produce a very weak squally tone, when they
have been carelessly repaired; though even in this case they may be
often restored and brought nearly to equal the Italian, by placing them
in the hands of an experienced maker, possessing a knowledge of
mathematics and acoustics, without which they will be completely
spoiled.”

KLOTZ FAMILY. This group represent well-nigh a century of activity,
i.e., from about 1670 to about 1760.

KLOTZ, EGIDIUS. Born in Mittenwald. When young he quitted his native
village and placed himself under Stainer at Absam. Having learnt the art
under this celebrated maker, he returned to his native place and set up
in business on his own account, and soon gained considerable renown as a
maker of superior instruments, so much so that his productions for some
time almost eclipsed those of his master. Even now a sound
specimen—which is rarely seen, is not lightly passed over. His
instruments possess a fine and powerful tone.

KLOTZ, MATHIAS, 1653-1745. Worked for about twenty years in Mittenwald,
during which period he produced instruments of an unsatisfactory nature.
He appears to have been aware of this, and with the object of increasing
his knowledge, he undertook a journey to Florence and Cremona and other
centres of violin industry. With his newly-acquired experience he
returned to his native place and established himself in rather a large
way.

KLOTZ, SEBASTIAN, son of Mathias (1700-1760). The instruments of this
maker are a decided improvement, both as regards pattern and tone. He
adopted a somewhat flat model and coated his instruments with a superior
varnish to that previously used by the family. His instruments are
highly valued.

             [Illustration: Sebastian Kloz, in Mittenwald.]

With regard to the other members of the family, great confusion exists
in the minds of writers as to how they stood in point of relationship
one with the other. In name they are: George (1723-1797), Joseph
(1730-1760), Joan Carol (about 1780), Michael (about the same period).

Spurious instruments bearing the name of Klotz or Clotz flood the
market, and the uninitiated should regard them with grave suspicion,
unless or until the advice of a competent expert has been obtained as to
their genuineness or otherwise.

RAUCH, THOMAS, of Breslau. Made some very good violins in the early part
of the eighteenth century. He worked on an original model, and made
instruments noted for their powerful tone.

RUPPERT, of Erfurt, a maker who worked on an extremely original model.
He made all his instruments very flat in model, and dispensed with the
side linings and corner blocks, and omitted the purfling. The front and
back tables were, however, made with due regard to thicknesses, which
redeemed them somewhat from the defects above mentioned. The instruments
possess a good tone and fine examples are highly priced.

SCHEINLEIN, MATTHIAS FREDERICK, of Langenfeld (1730-1771). Made fine
instruments which, in his time, were in great demand. He made them too
weak, consequently many of them are now practically spoiled by
subsequent repairing.

STAINER, JACOBUS, born at Hall, near Absam—a short distance from
Innsbruck—July 14, 1621, died at Absam, 1683. This maker is the most
renowned of the German school, concerning whose early career the
following account has been handed down. A priest residing in the
district of Absam took a fancy to young Jacob, and had him sent to
Innsbruck to learn the art of organ building under one Daniel Herz. This
calling not suiting the youth’s inclinations, his master advised him to
learn the art of violin making. Stainer then went to Cremona, and placed
himself under Nicolas Amati, who soon recognised the talent of his young
pupil, and took great pains in instructing him in the secrets of the
art. He then quitted Cremona, and for a short time worked in Venice
under Vermercati, who at that time was a maker of some merit. With an
accumulation of experience gained in the best schools of the time,
Stainer finally returned to Absam and settled there as a maker of
violins on his own account. In the year 1645 he married a Margaretha
Holzhammer, by whom he had several children. His renown as a violin
maker rapidly increased, but for some reason or other he found it
difficult to provide for the wants of himself and family, and he was
compelled to travel about the country in order to dispose of his
instruments. However, in 1658, he was appointed court violin maker to
the Archduke Leopold, and in 1669 received the distinction of “Maker to
the Emperor”; but all these advantages and honours contributed but
little to raise him from his chronic state of poverty. He now began to
experience some bitter reverses. A certain creditor of his, named
Solomon Heubnar, with whom he at one time lived (Stainer left him
without paying for his board) lodged an information against him charging
him with the crime of heresy. He was seized and thrown into prison, and
remained there six months, at the expiration of which he found himself
utterly ruined and poverty stared him in the face. He was then
persecuted by Count Albert Fugger for certain dues which it was
customary to levy on court tradesmen. Stainer petitioned the Emperor to
waive this claim, but to no purpose, his supplication being ignored, it
is thought, in consequence of his previous conviction for the alleged
heresy. Stainer then fell into a state of abject misery, neglected his
work, and finally died out of mind. It will therefore be seen that this
renowned maker worked under most distressing conditions, and it is a
marvel that he was able to produce anything worthy of subsequent
copying. Stainer’s house is still pointed out, and, it is said, the
bench to which he was bound when mad.

Another story which has gained currency in some quarters, but in others
said to be mythical, recounts that at the latter period of his life he
abandoned his calling and became an inmate of a Benedictine monastery.
Here, with the assistance of a brother monk, he contrived to get
together sufficient materials for the manufacture of sixteen violins of
great beauty. These apparently fabulous fiddles are known as the
“Elector” Stainers from the circumstance that each Elector was supposed
to be the recipient of one of these instruments, the remaining going to
the Emperor of Germany. For information concerning the instruments made
by this unfortunate fiddle maker, the best is that contained in the
treatise of Jacob Augustus Otto, maker to the Court of the Archduke of
Weimar, translated from the German by Thomas Fardely, of Leeds (1833),
and since then by the late Mr. Bishop, of Cheltenham (William Reeves,
London).

Otto says: “The instruments made by Jacob Stainer differ from the
Cremonese both in outward shape and in tone. They are higher modelled,
and their proportions of strength are calculated quite differently. The
nearest comparison which can be drawn between a Cremonese and a Stainer
is this: a Cremonese has a strong reedy, sonorous tone something similar
to that of a clarionet, while a Stainer approaches to that of a flute.
The belly is modelled higher than the back. The highest part of the
model under the bridge extends exactly one half of the instrument
towards the lower broad part and then diminishes towards the end edge.
It decreases in a like manner at the upper broad part towards the neck.
The breadth of this model is uniformly the same as that of the bridge,
from which it diminishes towards the side edge. The edges are very
strong and round. The purfling lies somewhat nearer to the edges than in
the Cremonese, and is likewise narrower than in the latter (the
Cremonese) in which it is very broad. The _f_ holes in Stainer
instruments are very beautifully cut, and the upper and under turns are
perfectly circular. In length they are somewhat shorter than the
Cremonese. The neck is particularly handsome, and the scroll is as round
and smooth as if it had been turned. Some few have lions’ heads, which
are extremely well carved. The sides and the back are made of the finest
figured maple and covered with a deep yellow amber varnish. In some the
screw (peg) box is varnished dark brown and the belly deep yellow. The
above are the most accurate marks by which the genuine Stainer
instruments may be distinguished. They are rarely to be found with any
labels inside, but in the few which are to be met with of the genuine
instruments bearing any inscription, they are simply written, not
printed. In the Tyrolese imitations of Stainers they are all printed. In
the genuine Cremonese instruments they are likewise invariably printed.”

Genuine Stainers with labels have this written inscription: “Jacobus
Stainer in Absam prope Œnipontum h-fis 165-.” The following is a
facsimile:

   [Illustration: Jacobus Stainer in Absam prope Œnipontum h-fis ’65]


                              III.—FRENCH.

BOQUAY, JACQUES. Paris, about 1700-1735. One of the earliest of the old
French school. Under whom he learnt the art of violin making is not
known, but his instruments, as also those of his contemporaries, clearly
indicate that the Italian influence was suffusing itself in no uncertain
manner. It appears that about the middle of the sixteenth century, one
Nicolas Rénault, a French viol and lute maker, travelled into Italy and
became associated with Andreas Amati, and even assisted that maker in
the manufacture of certain instruments for the chapel of Charles IX, in
1566, and, after a somewhat lengthened stay in Italy, he returned to
France the gainer of considerable experience. Here, perhaps, may be the
explanation why Boquay and the rest of the early French school
principally adhered to the Amati model. Later on Boquay sought to become
original, notably with regard to the sound holes and the scroll. The
tone is sweet, but lacks power.

      [Illustration: JACQUES BOQUAY RUE D ARGENTEUIL A PARIS, 17]

COMBLE, AMBROISE DE, Tourney, Belgium (1730-1760). The best maker of the
old French school, and reputed pupil of Stradivarius. Although the
instruments of de Comble cannot be said to be on the model adopted by
the great Cremonese maker during his best period, there is nevertheless
some indication to lead to the belief that he endeavoured to follow the
renowned artist in the matter of varnish. In this respect he was fairly
successful. His instruments are rather flat and of large pattern,
somewhat on the lines of Stradivarius’s later productions, and although
they are not characteristic of refined workmanship, the material chosen
was of the best quality. He made his instruments strong in the wood,
consequently they possess a very full and rich tone. De Comble also made
some excellent violoncellos.

LUPOT, NICOLAS, born at Stuttgart, 1758, died in Paris, 1824, founder of
the modern school of violin making. His father, also a maker of some
merit, removed to Orléans in the year 1770, and in this town instructed
his son in the art which was destined to make his name famous. During
his pupilage Nicolas set himself to study the instruments of the great
Italian makers, especially those of Stradivarius, and in the result he
elected to adopt the model of this master, from which he seldom, if
ever, departed. With such diligence and enthusiasm did he labour to
produce something akin to his ideal that he soon was able to turn out an
instrument that suffered but little on comparison with the Italians of
the first water. Thus a most beneficial influence in the art of violin
making became propagated. In 1798 Nicolas quitted Orléans for Paris and
established himself in business, and there for twenty-six years he
carried on a labour of love which, as well, produced considerable
pecuniary benefits. Lupot had not been long in Paris before his work
claimed the attention of the Conservatoire, then but recently formed,
and he was accordingly appointed violin maker to that excellent
institution: he was similarly appointed to the Chapel Royal. It is not
difficult to imagine that Lupot endeavoured to revive the lost art of
making the old Italian varnish, judging from the various qualities with
which he was wont to cover his instruments. In this respect, however, he
cannot be said to have been successful, but what he did use ranks high
as a modern varnish. The instruments of this maker are highly prized,
especially those made between 1805 and 1824. An impetus was probably
given to the value of Lupot’s violins from the circumstance that the
celebrated Spohr played for a long time on a Lupot, the tone of which he
declared was “full and powerful”; in fact, the great virtuoso only
parted with this instrument on becoming possessed of a Strad. Lupot
appears to have been almost as uncertain about his labels as he was
concerning his varnish. At Orléans he adopted a Latinised inscription,
and in Paris, three labels have been noticed variously worded. The
following are copies of some labels:

N. Lupot fils, Luthier, rue d’Illiers, à Orléans, l’an 17—.

Nicholas Lupot, Luthier, rue de Grammont, à Paris, l’an 17—.

Nicholas Lupot, rue Croix des petits champs, à Paris, l’an 1817.

Nicholas had a brother named François, who became celebrated as a maker
of bows.

VUILLAUME, JOHN BAPTISTE, born at Mirecourt, October 7, 1798, died
February 19, 1875; the greatest violin maker and copier of modern times.
It is not precisely known under whom he received his first instruction
in the art of violin making. Some say his father, one Claude Vuillaume,
born at Mirecourt in 1771, died 1834, whilst others maintain that the
father was not a fiddle maker, but a carrier between Mirecourt and
Nancy. At all events, at the age of nineteen, he was engaged by François
Chanot, a violin maker of repute, who had just about that period
established a workshop for the manufacture of a new-shaped violin, which
had been patented, so it is not unlikely that François Chanot was his
first real master. He next engaged himself with one Lété, an organ
builder, who dealt in violins, and ultimately became a partner in the
concern. In 1828 he parted from Lété and continued in business alone.
During this period he found great difficulty in disposing of his
instruments; the rage being for those of Italian manufacture. He
thereupon took to fabricating copies of the old masters, and his
operations in this line appear to have been attended with great success.
As a large number of old instruments, Italian and others, passed through
his hands for repair, Vuillaume had ample opportunity afforded him for
studying and ascertaining the inward and outward conditions necessary
for the production of good tone, and this advantage he was not slow to
avail himself of. Fortified with a vast amount of experience, combined
with much knowledge gained by experiment, Vuillaume was in course of
time enabled to produce an instrument in all but one point equal to the
greatest Italian masters, the condition wanting being that of age. In
some cases, possibly through stress of trade, Vuillaume endeavoured to
supply this deficiency by giving to his instruments an appearance of
wear and long usage. In his latter years, however, he relinquished this
pernicious practice. The climax of his skill as a copyist was reached on
the occasion when he reproduced a facsimile of Paganini’s famous
Guarnerius, entrusted for repair. This copy was so marvellous in its
similarity with the original, both as regards appearance and tone, that
the great virtuoso himself failed to recognise his own instrument, and
Vuillaume had to point it out to him. In addition to his high
capabilities as a violin maker, Vuillaume was renowned as a bow maker,
and effected some improvements in that important adjunct, and on the
whole proved himself a genius of uncommon order.

  [Illustration: Jean Baptiste Vuillaume à Paris Rue Croix des Petite
      Champs {trademark: double circle containing cross over BV}]


                              IV.—BRITISH.

WILLIAM ADDISON—THOMAS COLE—EDWARD PAMPHILON—PEMBERTON—THOMAS
URQUHART—CHRISTOPHER WISE.

This group represents the early English school and the principal makers
existing during the seventeenth century. It may reasonably be inferred
that they were more at home with the viol than with the violin as known
to-day. Little can be said concerning their early productions, as they
are now all but extinct; a great portion of them probably perished in
the great fire of London in 1666, in which city some of them were
supposed to have worked.

Christopher Wise is said to have made some fairly good instruments of a
highly decorative nature.

Jacob Rayman was the better artist, and some instruments attributed to
him reflect great credit on this early school.

Thomas Urquhart was a still further advance, his outline and varnish
places him in the front rank of the period.

Edward Pamphilon made instruments of a very tubby appearance, but they
are said to possess a clear and penetrating tone; age, too, has imparted
a very rich colouring to the varnish.

Several other names have been handed down, but as they are minus the
instruments, nothing of importance can be said on the subject.

Aldred and Bolles are mentioned in Mace’s “Musick’s Monument.”

ADDISON, WILLIAM, was a maker of viols and early violins in the middle
of the seventeenth century. He worked in Moorfields, London.

AIRETON, EDMUND. A London maker about the middle of the eighteenth
century. He copied successively the instruments of Stainer, Amati and
Stradivarius, but those on the Amati model are most admired.

BANKS FAMILY. They rank among the best makers of English violins, and
genuine specimens are eagerly sought after and realise good prices.

BANKS, BENJAMIN. Born July 14, 1727, died February 18, 1795. Accounts
differ as to the place of his birth, but as his parents were living in
Salisbury in the year 1725, it is generally supposed he was born in that
town.

Banks has been justly termed “the English Amati,” and this comparison is
well deserved. His fiddles are faithful copies of the great Italian,
both as to model and varnish. These instruments are, however, very rare,
and fiddles of this model offered as genuine Benjamins should only be
purchased with the advice of experts.

Benjamin also made instruments for the then well-known music-firm of
Longman and Broderip in London. These were made on a different model,
somewhat after the Stainer model, and they are greatly inferior to his
favourite Amati fiddles, the finish and varnish indicate hurry and
carelessness. These fiddles are labelled with the name of the firm for
whom he worked. I have seen many fiddles bearing the name of Longman and
Broderip and said to have been made by Benjamin Banks. The majority of
them are, however, spurious. It has been the custom of many dealers to
cut off the name of Longman and Broderip from the bottom of the
published music of that firm and insert these in fiddles, and as
Benjamin Banks was known to have worked for them, some show of
genuineness is thereby implied.

Banks made a number of violas and violoncellos. The latter instruments
stand pre-eminent for workmanship and tone and are particularly well
adapted for the performance of solo and chamber music. This maker
adopted a variety of methods for stamping and otherwise labelling his
instruments. Below the button was the favourite place.

The labels mostly seen are:

Made by Benjamin Banks, Catherine Street, Salisbury.

Benjamin Banks, fecit Salisbury.

Benjamin Banks, Musical Instrument Maker, In Catherine Street,
Salisbury.

B. Banks, Sarum. “B. B.” stamped under the button.

The varnish used by Banks varied from a deep red to a yellow brown.

One word of advice, beware of the unredeemed pledge.

BANKS, BENJAMIN. Son of the preceding; born at Salisbury, 1754, died in
Liverpool, 1820. He worked at first for his renowned father, afterwards
removing to London, where, possibly, he assisted in making the Longman
and Broderip instruments. He then went to Liverpool and worked there
until his death. Very little is known of him or his works, though it is
possible that many of his instruments have been passed off as the work
of his father.

BANKS, JAMES and HENRY, two other sons of the great Benjamin, and
successors to the business at Salisbury, where they were both born,
James about 1756, died 1831; Henry, 1770, died 1830.

James was the violin maker of the concern, while Henry devoted himself
to tuning pianofortes and repairing instruments. Sometimes, however,
they collaborated in the production of violins and violoncellos. They
also extended the sphere of their operations to music selling and dealt
in other musical instruments. The fame of the Banks family as violin
makers declined at this period.

BARRETT, JOHN. A London maker, who worked about 1725. He made some good
instruments which are dated from the Harp and Crown in Piccadilly. He
followed the Stainer model. His varnish is unsatisfactory.

BETTS, JOHN, London, born at Stamford in 1755, died 1823. This excellent
maker was a pupil of Duke, and adopted the Amati model. He was not
himself a prolific maker, his time being principally occupied in the
study of old Italian instruments, the result of which enabled him to
become a very successful dealer and connoisseur. Betts, or “old John,”
as he was most commonly called, carried on an extensive business in the
construction of violins, and employed in his workshop such men as John
Carter, Edward Betts, Panormo, Bernhard Fendt, all of whom subsequently
succeeded in making good instruments on their own account. Betts’s shop
was No. 2 near Northgate of the Royal Exchange, and after his death the
business was continued by his descendants till within a few years ago.

DUKE, RICHARD, London, about 1765-1791. Probably no violin of English
make has attained such popularity as have the instruments of this maker,
hence it is that he is so extensively imitated. Who instructed him in
the art of making violins, etc., is not positively known, but his
instruments are of the highest order in all respects but the varnish, in
which he was not always successful. Duke followed both the Stainer and
Amati models, the latter being his best. His violoncellos are rather
high in model, long in pattern, yellowish varnish and rich in tone. For
his violins he used a dull brown varnish, very elastic and transparent.
During a considerable period Duke worked in the vicinity of Holborn.
Many of his instruments are stamped near the button “Duke, London.”

Labels, mostly written in pen and ink, are as follows:

Richd. Duke, Londini, fecit 1767.

Richard Duke, Maker, Holborn, London, Anno 1777.

The following is a copy of a printed one:

“Richard Duke, Maker, near opposite Great Turn-Stile, Holbourn, London.”

FENDT, BERNHARD, born at Inspruck, in the Tyrol, in 1756, died in London
in 1832. He was at first instructed in the art of violin making by his
uncle in Paris, who spelt his name Fent, a maker there of some
reputation. Bernhard then came to London and entered the service of
Thomas Dodd, the bow maker, and remained with him several years, working
in conjunction with John Frederick Lott. They were never entrusted to
carry their work beyond the white, and the instruments turned out by
this pair were delivered to their master, who applied the varnish with
his own hand, the secret of which he kept carefully to himself.

FORSTER, WILLIAM, known as “Old” Forster, born at Brampton, Cumberland,
May, 1739, died in London, December 14, 1808. The name of Forster in
connection with violin making includes a family whose operation extended
over a very considerable period, but the artist under notice was _the_
fiddle maker of the group, and his instruments to-day reflect great
credit on the British school of a century ago; indeed his instruments,
whether they be violins, violas or violoncellos, are pre-eminent amongst
the productions of this country. His father pursued two occupations,
viz., that of spinning-wheel maker and violin maker and repairer;
instructions in which handicrafts were duly imparted to the son, who
also became tolerably proficient as a violinist. In consequence of some
family differences, the young man quitted his native village and
proceeded to London, arriving there in 1759. His first endeavours in the
metropolis were unsuccessful, and he was forced to accept some
employment offered him by a gun-stock maker. However, he did not forsake
the art he loved, and his spare time was occupied in making violins,
which he disposed of to the music shops. During this time he suffered
great hardship and privation, the effects of which were never afterwards
entirely eradicated. At length he obtained employment as a violin maker
at a music shop on Tower Hill kept by one Beck, and the violins he made
during his two years’ engagement there, gaining much recognition, he not
unnaturally demanded an advance in wages. This was refused, and Forster
consequently left him. In 1762 he commenced business on his own account
at a house in Duke’s Court, and there his artistic abilities procured
for him the attention and patronage of the musical dilettanti. He then
moved into St. Martin’s Lane, and added music publishing and selling to
his business, and at this period he was wont to cut his name from the
title-pages of his soiled or unsold music and use it as a ticket for his
instruments. In 1781 he entered into negotiations with Haydn for the
supply and publication of certain pieces of music for the string family,
which resulted, it would appear, in a great success all round. About
1784, Forster opened in the Strand—No. 348, and here the climax of his
success was attained, even to the extent of receiving Royal patronage.
From the year 1762 to 1770 he adopted the Stainer model, and applied to
his instruments some sort of dark stain, completing the operation with a
coat of varnish. From 1770 or thereabouts he affected the Amati pattern
with greater success, and this refers particularly to his violoncellos,
as they are really grand instruments, better varnish is used and greater
attention is paid to detail. Robert Lindley, the famous violoncellist,
used one of Forster’s instruments at the Italian Opera for nearly forty
years; he named it “The Eclipse.” Crossdill had a famous one, and
Cervette the younger had another. Only four double basses are known to
have been made by William Forster. His commoner instruments are devoid
of purfling. Ticket: “William Forster. Violin Maker in St. Martin’s
Lane, London.”

FORSTER, WILLIAM, son of “Old” Forster. Born 1764, died 1824. He was a
violin maker and repairer of some merit, but never attained the
reputation of his father. He left his instruments unpurfled.

KENNEDY, ALEXANDER, came from Scotland about 1700 and established
himself in London, He was a painstaking workman, and gained a good
reputation. He followed the Stainer model and used a light amber
varnish.

KENNEDY, JOHN, nephew and pupil of the foregoing, followed the same
model, and produced some good violins and tenors.

KENNEDY, THOMAS, the best known of the family. He made a large number of
violins and ’cellos.

NORMAN, BARAK (1688-1740). He was chiefly a maker of viols, but has made
violas and violoncellos, and a few violins on the Stainer model; his
best productions being copies of Maggini. He was probably a pupil of
Urquhart, if one may judge from their respective works. As a maker of
viols he was much esteemed in his day; all his instruments of this class
indicate careful workmanship. As no British violoncello has been
discovered anterior to those manufactured by Norman, it is thought that
he may have been the first maker of that instrument in this country.
They are splendid instruments and much valued. His violas also are fine
specimens, and consequently highly prized by performers on that
instrument. Between the years 1715 and 1720 Barak Norman entered into
partnership with one Nathaniel Cross, at the sign of the “Bass Viol,”
St. Paul’s Churchyard. Barak resorted to various methods in order to
distinguish his instruments, sometimes his monogram is purfled in the
centre of the back, and occasionally, in the case of violoncellos, on
the top table under the wide part of the finger-board. When he became
associated with Cross, the joint monogram was used. The following is a
copy of a printed label used by the firm:

“Barak Norman and Nathaniel Cross, at the Bass Viol in St. Paul’s
Churchyard, London, fecit 172—.”

WAMSLEY, PETER, London (1727-1760). He was at one time considered a
clever maker of violas and violoncellos, but having resorted to the
unfortunate practice of thinning the wood in his endeavour to secure a
freer tone, his instruments at the present day lack power and sonority.
They are, however, capable of great improvement in the hands of a
skilful repairer. He adopted the Stainer model, and at times proved
himself to be a first-class workman. Most of his instruments have only
ink lines instead of purfling. Wamsley made a few double basses, but
they are now very scarce. The best instruments of this maker are those
covered with a dark brown varnish. For a great number of years Wamsley
carried on business in Piccadilly, and used labels, copies of which are
as follows:

Made by Peter Wamsley at the Harp and Hautboy in Pickadilly, 1735.

Peter Wamsley Maker at the Harp and Hautboy in Piccadilly, 17 London 51.

     [Illustration: _Made by_ Peter Wamsley _at ye_ GoldenHarp _in
                          Pickadilly London,_]




                               PART III.
ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF CLASSICAL MUSIC FOR THE VIOLIN AND OTHER STRINGED
                              INSTRUMENTS.


The term “classical” as applied to music is a composition against which
the destroying hand of time has proved powerless (Riemann), in other
words, works which have been handed down to us by the old composers, and
which at the present day are recognised as models of purity in musical
art, are now considered as classical compositions.

Coeval with that remarkable epoch when the violin assumed its present
admirable and unalterable form, which culminated with the closing year
of the sixteenth century, is the dawn of musical composition for the
instrument, and the musicians of the time vied with each other in
producing works calculated to raise the violin from its hitherto
subordinate rank as a mere accompanist to its proper position as a solo
instrument, thereby ensuring prominence and with it rapid popularity.

It is to Italy that we have to turn for any certain knowledge of the
earliest classics, and the first to claim our attention is Arcangelo
Corelli (1655-1713). He was not only the founder of the Roman school,
the earliest known, but probably the first to definitely fix the form of
the sonata. In those times two kinds of sonatas were recognised, called
respectively, _sonate da camera_, i.e., chamber sonata, and _sonata da
chiesa_, or church sonata. The first-named consisted of a series of
dance measures (allemande, courante, saraband, gigues, etc.),
systematically arranged, whilst the latter was a subject treated in
fugal and other learned styles, and otherwise rendered more in keeping
with the dignity of the place in which such compositions were performed.
In the time of Corelli, the sonata usually commenced with an _adagio_,
and after two or three other movements finished with an _allegro_ or
_presto_.

Corelli as a composer showed a great partiality for this class of music,
and his compositions rapidly spread throughout the length and breadth of
Europe. Tartini caused all his pupils to study the works of Corelli.
There is not, it is true, evidence of a great amount of musical
erudition, but what has conferred a remarkable longevity on his works is
his melodic simplicity and pure harmony. His works are forty-eight
sonatas for two violins and bass (Op. 1-4), produced 1683-94; twelve
sonatas for violin and bass (Op. 5), 1700; twelve “concerti-grossi,” for
two violins and ’cello as principal instruments, and two violins, viola
and bass as accompanying instruments.

Such a gifted musician as Corelli was not likely to quit this life
without leaving the impress of his artistic feelings upon those who
sought his instruction, and we have ample proof of the great influence
he exerted in the names of G. B. Somis (1676-1763) F. Geminiani
(1680-1762), and Locatelli (1693-1764). Somis was a close follower of
his master, and it is quite easy to believe this on a comparison of
their respective sonatas. Geminiani asserted more of his individuality,
and this, coupled with the fact of his having received theoretical
instruction from Alessandro Scarlatti, one of the most learned musicians
of the day, no doubt contributed to his making a decided advance on the
violin music of the time. Notwithstanding his increased knowledge as a
theorist, and his greater ability as an executant, Geminiani laboured
long to bring into prominence and popularity the artistic conceptions of
his renowned violin master. His first effort in this direction was made
in 1726 (Geminiani being then in London), when he formed Corelli’s first
six solos into concertos, a style of composition then recently called
into existence, shortly afterwards treating another six in a similar
manner. Others underwent the same process, but to these were added
additional parts. Geminiani was one of the first in the field of musical
expression, even sacrificing strict time to obtain it.

Locatelli furnishes us with another example, not only of the advance of
technique, but of the progress of musical culture. His works called “The
Labyrinth,” “The New Art of Modulation” and “Harmonic Contrasts” are
alone sufficient to establish him as a great reformer in the musical
world of his time. As we have elsewhere observed, Torelli is credited
with having fixed the form of the concerto, and a few lesser lights,
such as the two Veracinis and Alberti, live to this day by their works.
The next master whose influence marked another step in the development
of classical music for the violin was Guiseppe Tartini (1692-1770). Here
we have a man destined for all time to stand out as one of the most
indefatigable pioneers of the violin. In his quadruple capacity as a
performer, composer, theorist and teacher, his influence was
far-reaching, and, what is more, it has been transmitted down to the
present time. As a composer, his style of modulation was a new thing,
and his performance came as a revelation to those who heard him for the
first time. His “Devil’s Sonata” is well-known to all violinists.

We now arrive at a name which brings us in touch with other members of
the fiddle family. Luigi Boccherini (1740-1806), who is justly
considered the father of chamber music for stringed instruments. It was
he who, in 1768, gave definition to the form of the trio, the quartet
and the quintet; forms which have served for the models of all
subsequent composers. In the trio he was followed by Fiorillo, Cramer,
Giardini, Pugnani and Viotti, and in the quartet by Mozart. His other
styles were elaborated by Haydn and Beethoven. Boccherini was a prolific
composer.

Three names should here be mentioned in connection with the concerto, in
whose hands it underwent great improvement. They are Pugnani
(1728-1798), Jarnowick (1745-1804), and Mestrino (1750-1790).

The next and last great representative of the Italian school, and one
who largely influenced the French school, was Giovanni Battista Viotti
(1755-1824), a pupil of Pugnani. The name of Viotti stands out with
peculiar lustre, in that with him the concerto arrived at a degree of
perfection hardly capable of being exceeded. The same may be said of his
trios and duos, both of which should be studied and cultivated by every
young violin aspirant. In Viotti the Italians have certainly produced a
fitting tailpiece to a long line of brilliant composers for the violin,
a line in which no artistic hiatus appears from the time of Corelli.

                            * * * * * * * *

The first to establish a French school was Jean Marie Leclair
(1679-1764). Although he received his instructions from Somis, the
Italian, and became thoroughly imbued with Italian tastes and ideas, he
laboured incessantly, on his return to France, with the object of
establishing a distinct school for his country, and in many respects he
was successful. In 1723 he published a series of solos, and soon
afterwards six sonatas for two violins and bass; also duos, trios and
concertos.

The next to claim attention among the French classical composers is
Pierre Gavinies (1728-1800). He was the first professor at the Paris
Conservatoire, then but recently formed, and the compositions he
contributed testify to considerable musical culture: they are of great
difficulty, and are, for the most parts, sonatas and concertos.

We now introduce three names who greatly elaborated the forms fixed by
the Italians, Rode (1774-1830), Kreutzer (1766-1831) and Baillot
(1771-1842). This almost inseparable trio are so well known to the
student, that a lengthy comment would be superfluous. They were all in
turn professors at the Paris Conservatoire, and the joint production of
their great method for the violin, coupled with their other educational
works, place them as prominent classical writers. Rode is known by his
concertos, caprices and airs with variations. Kreutzer’s forty studies
are a household word with the earnest student, not to mention his
concertos, duets, trios and quartets; and the same may be said with
regard to Baillot’s concertos, variations, and a host of other pieces.

                            * * * * * * * *

We now pass on to consider shortly what the Germans have handed down.
Like other countries, they have been largely indebted to the Italians;
and, in this connection, it is curious to note that with the rise of
music in Germany we find a gradual decadence of the art in Italy.

In Germany we have to look to the great composers rather than the great
violinists for the most important classical works for the violin.

It is unnecessary to notice anything anterior to the time of the great
J. S. Bach (1685-1750); in fact, very little took place in the nature of
published works.

That Bach possessed a sound perception of the capabilities and resources
of the violin is amply demonstrated in all his writings for that
instrument. His acquaintance with the finger-board is only excelled by
his knowledge of the keyboard. Amongst the almost innumerable works of
this greatest musical classic that has ever lived, I would mention his
three partitas and three sonatas for violin (without accompaniment). The
Chaconne in the D minor Partita is a remarkable instance of Bach’s
immense powers of perception.

The first real founder of a German school was Leopold Mozart
(1719-1787), father of the great W. A. Mozart. He is not known by his
instrumental compositions, but his claim to notice exists in the
production of his “Method” for the violin, a work which not only
survived several editions, but assumed the garb of several languages.

The next to call for notice is Joseph Haydn (1732-1809), a most prolific
composer, especially for the string family. Attached to the service of
Prince Esterhazy, a patron immensely rich and passionately fond of
music, Haydn enjoyed a combination of circumstances all concurring to
give opportunity for the display of his genius. It has been vouchsafed
to few musicians to pursue their art under such favourable conditions as
Haydn. He did not compose to please either publisher or the public. So
long as his patron was satisfied with his productions, things went on
merrily with him.

Let us see what Haydn did for the instrument he loved so much. Here they
are—eighty-three quartets, three concertos, twenty-one trios for two
violins and bass, six violin solos.

No review, however short, could lay claim to completeness without
mention of the following—viz., Mozart, Weber and Beethoven. To this
noble trio violinists owe much. It is, of course, quite beyond the
province of this work to even enumerate the many compositions from the
pens of these immortal musicians in which the violin took part, but I
would call attention to Beethoven’s glorious Concerto in D, Op. 61, and
his two lovely Romances in G and F respectively.

Another great German musician who exercised considerable influence on
compositions of classic mould was Louis Spohr (1784-1859). His great
fame as a composer, combined with his reputation as a violin virtuoso of
the highest order, places him in a conspicuous position in the history
of music. The works of Spohr are probably so well known that no useful
purpose can be served in recounting their great merits. Suffice it to
say they are of the highest possible pitch of excellence, and require
more than ordinary technical ability to do them justice. Considered only
as a composer, he has been indefatigable in the production of every
style of music, and he was especially happy in that for the strings. His
beautiful D minor Concerto is one of the finest examples of this class
of music to be met with, and its first introduction by the great master
himself made a great sensation. As one of Spohr’s commentators truly
said, “Mozart had written solid and simple concertos, in which the
performer was expected to embroider and finish the composer’s sketch,
and Beethoven’s concertos were so written as to make the solo player
merely one of the orchestra. But, as Mozart raised opera to a higher
standard, so Beethoven uplifted the ideal of the orchestra, so Spohr’s
creative force as a violinist and writer for the violin has established
the grandest school for this instrument, to which all the foremost
contemporary artists acknowledge their obligations.”

Before taking leave of the German school I would mention two other
names—Joseph Mayseder and Kalliwoda, both of whom contributed much that
is good, and their works consequently attained wide popularity.

Let us now turn to our own country. We have not, it must be admitted,
occupied a front rank as composers of violin music, hence the scarcity
of classical works handed down to us; but let us hasten to add, we have
produced the finest critics in the world, and, what is more, we are
thoroughly well posted up in all the best pieces that have emanated from
the thoughts of the greatest composers.

One of the earliest who wrote for the violin was one Rogers, who, in the
year 1653, wrote airs in four parts for violins. He was followed by John
Jenkins, who wrote twelve sonatas for two violins and a bass, printed in
1664, which were the first sonatas written by an Englishman.

James Sherard also composed several sonatas in the beginning of the last
century, and they are said to bear such a resemblance to Corelli’s that
they might have been taken for that composer’s.

The compositions of Handel materially advanced the violin in this
country, and the establishment by him of Italian opera was the means of
bringing us in touch with the great Italian performers and writers.




                               FOOTNOTES


[1]That Cremona instruments were held in high estimation during the
   reign of Charles II, is proved by the following entry in the
   Enrolments of the Audit Office, 1662, vol. vi: “These are to require
   you to pay, or cause to be paid to John Bannister, one of his
   Majesties musicians in ordinary, the some of fourty poundes for two
   cremona violins, by him bought and delivered for his Majesties
   service as may appear by the bill annexed, and also tenn pounds for
   strings for two years, ending 24th June, 1662. And this shall be your
   warrant, etc.”

[2]In early English times the word “crowd” was often used instead of
   fiddle.

[3]This Act was repealed by 12 Ann Stat. 2, C. 23.

[4]James Sherard, an Englishman, also composed several sonatas, so
   nearly equal to Corelli’s, and resembling them so perfectly in style,
   that they might have been taken for that composer’s.

[5]Michael Corette was an organist in Paris in 1738. He wrote several
   treatises on music.




                                 INDEX.


  Addison, William, 90.
  Aireton, Edmund, 91.
  Albani, Matthias, 45.
  ——, Matthias (son), 45.
  Albioni, 31.
  Aldred, 11.
  Amati, Andreas, 32, 46.
  ——, Anthony, 32, 46.
  ——, Hieronymus, 32, 46.
  ——, Nicolas, 32, 47.

  Bach, 113.
  Bachmann, Carl Ludwig, 72.
  Baillot, 39, 112.
  Baltazarini, 36, 39.
  Baltzar, Tho., 23, 42.
  Banks, Benjamin, 92.
  ——, Benjamin (son), 94.
  ——, James and Henry, 94.
  Bannister, John, 13.
  Barrett, John, 95.
  Beethoven, 110, 115.
  Benda, Francis, 43.
  Bente, 32, 72.
  Bergonzi, Carlo, 48.
  ——, Michael Angelo, 49.
  Betts, John, 95.
  Boccherini, Luigi, 109.
  Bolles, 11.
  Boquay, Jacques, 83.
  Buchstetter, Gabriel David, 72.
  ——, Josephus, 73.
  Buddiani, 32.

  Cappa, Giofredo, 49.
  Cervette, 100.
  Chanot, François, 87.
  Chaucer, 15.
  Choron, 37.
  Cole, Thomas, 90.
  Corelli, A., 28, 31, 106.
  Corette, Michael, 37.
  Cramer, William, 43, 110.
  Cross, Nathaniel, 101.
  Crossdill, 100.

  De Beriot, 39.
  Dodd, Thomas, 97.
  Dubourg, 42.
  Duke, Richard, 97.

  Eberle, Ulric, 73.

  Feltham, Owen, 16.
  Fendt, Bernhard, 97.
  Fétis, 2.
  Forster, William, 97.
  ——, William (son), 100.

  Gagliano, Allessandro, 50.
  ——, Antonio, 51.
  ——, Ferdinando, 51.
  ——, Genaro, 50.
  ——, Giovanni, 51.
  ——, Guiseppe, 51.
  ——, Nicolas, 51.
  ——, Raffael, 51.
  Gavinies, Pierre, 39, 111.
  Geminiani, F., 28, 34, 107-8.
  Giardini, 35, 110.
  Grancino, Giovanni Battista, 52.
  ——, Paolo, 52.
  Guadagnini, Giovanni Battista, 53.
  ——, Guiseppe, 53.
  ——, Lorenzo, 52.
  Guarnerius, Andreas, 54.
  ——, Guiseppe, 53.
  ——, Joseph, 32, 55.
  ——, Pietro, 58.
  Guhr, 43.

  Habeneck, 39.
  Handel, 117.
  Haydn, 110, 114.
  Helmer, Charles, 73.
  Hoffmann, Martin, 73.

  Jarnowick, 34, 110.
  Jauch (Jaug), 74.
  Jay, 10.
  Jenkins, John, 117.

  Kennedy, Alexander, 100.
  ——, John, 100.
  ——, Thomas, 101.
  Kiesewetter, 43.
  Klotz, Egidius, 74.
  —— family, 44, 74.
  ——, Mathias, 75.
  ——, Sebastian, 75.
  Kreutzer, 39, 112.

  Lafont, 39.
  Lahousaye, 39.
  Landolphus, Carlo, 59.
  Leclair, Jean Marie, 39, 111.
  Lindley, Robert, 100.
  Locatelli, 107-8.
  Lott, John Frederick, 97.
  Lully, J. B., 36.
  Lupot, François, 87.
  ——, Nicholas, 40, 85.

  Mace, Thomas, 10.
  Maggini, Giovanni Paolo, 32, 59.
  ——, Pietro Sancto, 32.
  Marietto, 31.
  Mariani, 32.
  Mayseder, 43.
  Mell, Davis, 25.
  Mestrino, 34, 110.
  Molique, 43.
  Montagnani, Dominic, 61.
  Mozart, Leopold, 43.
  ——, W. A., 110.

  Norman, Barak, 101.

  Otto, 80.

  Paganini, 58.
  Pamphilon, Edward, 90.
  Peacham, 17.
  Pemberton, 90.
  Pepys, 26.
  Playford, John, 7.
  Pugnani, 35, 110.

  Rauch, Thomas, 76.
  Rayman, Jacob, 91.
  Reade, Charles, 33.
  Rode, 39, 112.
  Rogers, 117.
  Ross, 11.
  Rugeri, Francesco, 62.
  ——, Giambatista, 62.
  Ruppert, 76.

  Salo, Gasparo da, 13, 32, 63.
  Scheinlein, Matthias Frederick, 77.
  Seraphin, Sanctus, 64.
  Sherard, James, 31.
  Smith, 11.
  Solomon, J., 43.
  Somis, G. B., 107.
  Spohr, Louis, 43, 115.
  Stainer, Jacobus, 43, 77.
  Stamitz, John, 43.
  Storioni, Lorenzo, 65.
  Stradivarius, Antonius, 28, 32, 65.
  ——, Francesco, 69.
  ——, Omobono, 69.
  Strutt, 14.

  Tartini, Guiseppe, 31, 34, 109.
  Techler, David, 70.
  Testore, Carlo Antonio, 71.
  ——, Carlo Guiseppe, 71.
  ——, Paolo Antonio, 71.
  Torelli, 31.
  Tywersus, 40.

  Urquhart, 90.

  Valentini, 31.
  Veracini, 28.
  Viotti, 34, 110.
  Vuillaume, John Baptiste, 40, 87.

  Wamsley, Peter, 102.
  Weber, 115.
  Wise, Christopher, 90.
  Wood, Anthony, 18.


   _Printed by The New Temple Press, Norbury Crescent, London, S.W.16._




                           Transcriber’s Notes


--Copyright notice provided as in the original—this e-text is public
  domain in the country of publication.

--Provided an original cover image, for free and unrestricted use with
  this Distributed Proofreaders eBook.

--Silently corrected palpable typos; left non-standard spellings and
  dialect unchanged.