greatest curioso of his time, invited him and some of the musicians to hislodgings in that Coll. purposely to have a consort and to see and heare himplay. The instruments and books were carried thither, but none could beperswaded to play against him in consort on the violin. At length the companyperceiving A. W. standing behind, in a corner neare the door, they haled him inamong them, and play forsooth he must against him. Whereupon he being notable to avoid it, he took up a violin and behaved himself as poor Troylus di<strong>da</strong>gainst Achilles. He was abash’d at it, yet honour he got by playing with, an<strong>da</strong>gainst such a grand master as Baltzar was. 24If the music and instruments used on this occasion were taken from the MusicSchool collection, as Bruce Bellingham has pointed out, it would have beenagainst the terms of the Heather Bequest, which stipulated that ‘neither ofthese be lent abroad upon any pretence whatsoever, nor removed out of theSchoole and place appointed.’ 25A theme that recurs several times in Wood’s writings is a comparisonbetween Thomas Baltzar and the English violinist Davis Mell. The passageabout the Wadham College meeting in his Life and Times concludes as follows:Mr Davis Mell was accounted hitherto the best for the violin in England as Ihave before told you; but after Baltzar came into England and shew’d his mostwonderful parts on that instrument, Mell was not so admired; yet he playedsweeter, and was a well bred gentleman and not given to excessive drinking asBaltzar was.Earlier in the same work Wood describes a visit made by Davis Mell toOxford in March 1658, concluding it with a rather similar comparison betweenthe two violinists:The company did look upon Mr Mell to have a prodigious hand on the violin,and they thought that no person, as all London did, could goe beyond him. Butwhen Thomas Baltser, an outlander, came to Oxon in the next yeare, they hadother thoughts of Mr Mell, who tho he play’d farr sweeter than Baltsar, yetBaltsar’s hand was more quick and could run it insensibly to the end of thefinger-board. 26In a manuscript version of this passage Wood added ‘some of Mr. Mell’scompositions I have. Mell, who had been one of the Musick to King Charles I(and afterwards to King Charles II) had a sweet stroke; Baltzar’s was rough’. 27Roger North, who was born only in 1651 and was thus probably too young to[10] have heard Baltzar play’ makes very much the same point about him in hisessays on musical history. In the first version of The Musicall Gramarian hewrote that ‘Baltazar had a hand as swift as any, and used the double notes verymuch but alltogether his playing, compared with our latter violins, was like hisCountry rough and harsh’; most likely this judgement was based on acommonly-held opinion at the time. 2824 Shute: op. cit., ii, pp. 100-125 Bellingham: op. cit., p. 5626 Shute: op. cit., ii, pp. 100-127 Ibid., p. 10028 British Library, Add. MS 32533, f. 173, quoted in Wilson op. cit., p. 301; a similar passage inAdd. MS 32536, f. 73v records that Baltzar ‘shewed us wonders upon ye violin ye like ofwch were not knowne here before: his Hand was rough alla Tedesca, but prodigious swift,
There is some reason for thinking that Wood’s comparison between Melland Baltzar was based on the experience of hearing them play in competitionwith each other, probably at an Oxford music meeting. It is known that Mellwas in Oxford less than a month after Baltzar’s performance at William Ellis’son July 24 1658, for on August 17 Wood’s personal accounts show that hespent no less than 3s. 6d. on ‘Mr. Me11’. 29 If there was such a competition,then it probably included a performance of rival sets of divisions on theEnglish popular song John come kiss me now’, a descant to the passamezzomoderno chord sequence; settings by both composers exist side-by-side in JohnPlayford’s printed collection The Division-Violin, first printed in 1684. 30 If thesetwo sets of divisions accurately record the way the two violinists played, thenthe outcome of the competition can have been in very little doubt. Baltzar, aswe might expect from Wood’s comments, requires much more virtuosity fromhis player than Mell. He takes him regularly into third position - thoughnowhere does he require him to ‘run his finger to the end of the finger board’ -and he gives him several passages that cross the boun<strong>da</strong>ry between meredouble-stopping and genuinely polyphonic writing for the violin. Mell’sdouble-stops are tame by comparison, partly because most of them come twicein the work with very few changes:Example 1. Extracts from Davis Mell and Thomas Baltzar, Divisions on ‘Johncome kiss me now’and clattering’.29 Bellingham: op. cit., p. 4930 Nos. 11 and 12; a facsimile edition of the collection is forthcoming from Oxford UniversityPress, edited by Margaret Gilmore.
- Page 1 and 2: The Journal of the Viola da Gamba S
- Page 3 and 4: [3]THOMAS BALTZAR (?1631-1663),THE
- Page 5 and 6: the following spring he was in Engl
- Page 7 and 8: After The Siege of Rhodes nothing m
- Page 9: and ‘that great Virtuoso’. They
- Page 13 and 14: [12] The difference between the two
- Page 15 and 16: ass viol simply by the process of t
- Page 17 and 18: of seventeen sets of consort music
- Page 19 and 20: - as ‘Mr. Baltzars Sute in G: mad
- Page 21 and 22: Private Music in the court musical
- Page 23 and 24: most strongly with Oxford is the us
- Page 25 and 26: [25] Once again, the link between E
- Page 27 and 28: manuscript in the Oxford Music Scho
- Page 29 and 30: playing colleagues in the Private M
- Page 31 and 32: Appendix II:A Possible Portrait of
- Page 33 and 34: [35]
- Page 35 and 36: [37][38] Postscript:After this arti
- Page 37 and 38: [39]IMPROVE YOUR CONSORT PLAYINGA p
- Page 39 and 40: [41] The first note should always b
- Page 41 and 42: of the bar should not be taken into
- Page 43 and 44: [46] A slight ritardando can be int
- Page 45 and 46: secular work by Charpentier to use
- Page 47 and 48: [49] Before returning to the Charpe
- Page 49 and 50: heard together, the treble viol her
- Page 51 and 52: The delicate chromaticisms and subt
- Page 53 and 54: where the final chord invariably co
- Page 55 and 56: important one and, like ornamentati
- Page 57 and 58: information ought to exist in print
- Page 59 and 60: [66] dicular to the-neck needs cons
- Page 61 and 62:
call c-fret-position. Michel Corret
- Page 63 and 64:
[this image, p. 68]
- Page 65 and 66:
[70]
- Page 67 and 68:
[72]
- Page 69 and 70:
follows: Sheila Marshall examples 1
- Page 71 and 72:
[[76]
- Page 73 and 74:
Ithumpe' he doesn't make it clear t
- Page 75 and 76:
music which is now available, in ed
- Page 77 and 78:
serve as an example for the eager p
- Page 79 and 80:
a revision in which a number of han
- Page 81 and 82:
the Church. Nevertheless it is the
- Page 83 and 84:
Seaven Teares of 1604 in particular
- Page 85 and 86:
For Meyer the other side of the coi
- Page 87 and 88:
There are a few unfortunate errors.
- Page 89 and 90:
East, Ravenscroft, Kirbye, Peerson,
- Page 91 and 92:
accumulated wisdom of specialist de
- Page 93 and 94:
engraving of a seventeenth-century
- Page 95 and 96:
Lists and indexes of musical source
- Page 97:
The search for the key to the secre