Vihuela (New Grove

[toc title=«Contenidos» title_tag=«strong»]

[de New Gro­ve Dic­tio­nary of Music and Musi­cians. 2002]

DIANA POULTON/ANTONIO CORONA ALCALDE

Cor­dó­fono pun­tea­do de la fami­lia de la vio­la en que las cuer­das, hechas de tri­pa, se orde­na­ban gene­ral­men­te en seis o sie­te órde­nes, cada uno pro­ba­ble­men­te uní­sono. Parien­te cer­ca­na del laúd, flo­re­ción prin­ci­pal­men­te en Espa­ña y en áreas bajo influen­cia espa­ño­la en los siglos XV y XVI. Tam­bién fue cono­ci­da en Ita­lia y Por­tu­gal bajo el nom­bre de vio­la. Ori­gi­nal­men­te la pala­bra fue apli­ca­da a varios ins­tru­men­tos que se dis­tin­guían de acuer­do al méto­do de eje­cu­ción: fuen­tes medie­va­les men­cio­nan la vihue­la de pen­do­la (o peño­la: toca­da con una plu­ma) y vihue­la de arco (toca­da con un arco); vihue­la de pen­do­la tam­bién apa­re­ce en fuen­tes rena­cen­tis­ta, que tam­bién uti­li­zan el tér­mino vihue­la de mano (toca­da con los dedos). Para el siglo XVI, sin embar­go, se lla­ma­ba sim­ple­men­te vihue­la al ins­tru­men­to pun­tea­do con los dedos.

1. Structure and history.

The struc­tu­re and early his­tory of the vihue­la are very clo­sely lin­ked with tho­se of the gui­tar and viol. Wood­field (1984) has shown that the vihue­la was pro­bably deve­lo­ped in the 15th cen­tury as a pluc­ked alter­na­ti­ve to the vio­la de arco. Outsi­de the Spa­nish sphe­re of influen­ce, vihue­las were desig­na­ted with gui­tar-rela­ted terms during the 16th cen­tury (see Coro­na-Alcal­de, 1990). Only two vihue­las are known to have sur­vi­ved: one in the Musée Jac­que­mart-André of the Ins­ti­tut de Fran­ce, Paris, and the other in the church of the Com­pa­ñía de Jésus in Qui­to, Ecua­dor. The for­mer (fig.1) is a lar­ge ins­tru­ment with a body length of 58·4 cm. The­re is com­pa­ra­ti­vely little inward cur­ve at the waist and the body is sha­llow in rela­tion to the sur­fa­ce area. The neck is long and narrow and the head is flat and set back at a slight angle. Mul­ti­ple roses set into the sound­board and the uni­que cons­truc­tion of the body and neck, which is made up of a lar­ge num­ber of small pie­ces of con­tras­ting woods (more than 200 for the back alo­ne), add to the dis­tin­cti­ve appea­ran­ce of the ins­tru­ment. Its size and long string-length (about 80 cm) sug­gest that it was tuned at a fairly low pitch (see Pryn­ne, 1963), alt­hough it is also pos­si­ble that it may have been made as an apprentice’s exa­mi­na­tion pie­ce, an hypot­he­sis that is con­sis­tent with its ela­bo­ra­te cons­truc­tion. The Qui­to vihue­la, pro­bably dating from the early 17th cen­tury, is slightly sma­ller, with a body length of about 55 cm, a dee­per body and more pro­noun­ced cur­ves at the waist. This ins­tru­ment was the pro­perty of San­ta Maria­na de Jesús who, accor­ding to con­tem­po­rary wit­nes­ses, used to accom­pany her­self sin­ging the prai­ses of the Christ the Bri­de­groom (d 1645; see Ber­mu­dez, 1991 and 1993). Nas­sa­rre (1723–4) gave a set of pro­por­tions to which a vihue­la should be cons­truc­ted, though his inter­est may have been mainly anti­qua­rian. His pro­por­tions would give a body of grea­ter depth than the Jac­que­mart-André or the Qui­to exam­ples (see Ward, 1953, and Coro­na-Alcal­de, ‘The Vio­la da Mano’, 1984). The many pic­to­rial repre­sen­ta­tions of vihue­las show three basic outli­nes: in the late 15th and early 16th cen­tu­ries vihue­las are depic­ted with C-sha­ped bouts simi­lar to tho­se of a modern vio­lin; later in the 16th cen­tury two basic sha­pes are com­mon, one narrow in rela­tion to its length, the other broa­der and roun­der (fig.2). The­re is usually a sin­gle ela­bo­ra­tely car­ved rose, and in some ins­tan­ces sur­fa­ce deco­ra­tions are set into the sound­board.

Ber­mu­do gave dia­grams of vihue­las nomi­nally tuned at Gam­ma ut, C fa ut, D sol re, A re, D sol re, B mi and E la mi; but the­se, he made clear, were only to faci­li­ta­te the trans­po­si­tion of com­po­si­tions in staff nota­tion into tabla­tu­re for the vihue­la (see Ward, 1982, and Coro­na-Alcal­de, ‘Fray Juan Ber­mu­do’, 1984). Nevert­he­less he men­tio­ned ins­tru­ments of dif­fe­rent sizes, and it is clear that they were tuned at seve­ral dif­fe­rent pit­ches, sin­ce a num­ber of 16th-cen­tury duos demand tunings a minor 3rd, a 4th and a 5th apart. Milán, by the pla­cing of modal finals on cer­tain frets, implied a variety of nomi­nal tunings for his ins­tru­ment, inclu­ding E, G, F and A (see Coro­na Alcal­de, 1991), but in prac­ti­ce he sug­ges­ted that the pitch should be taken from the first (hig­hest) cour­se, which should be tuned as high as it would go wit­hout brea­king. Among other wri­ters, opi­nion was divi­ded as to whet­her the first or fourth cour­se was the bet­ter one from which to begin.

The inter­vals of tuning for which almost all sur­vi­ving music was writ­ten are iden­ti­cal with tho­se of the lute, that is (from the sixth – i.e. lowest – cour­se upwards): 4th–4th–major 3rd–4th–4th. Ber­mu­do, howe­ver, pro­po­sed seve­ral other sche­mes. For a cer­tain ‘small new vihue­la’ he named the notes as G–B–d–g–b–d’. Music given by Fuen­lla­na for a vihue­la of five cour­ses requi­res the same inter­vals of tuning as the six-cour­se ins­tru­ment but with the top cour­se remo­ved. For vihue­las of seven cour­ses Ber­mu­do gave three tunings. The first of the­se, 5th–4th–5th–4th–5th–4th, pro­vi­des a ran­ge of 22 notes on the open strings. The second, G’–C–F–G–c–f–g, he des­cri­bed as new and per­fect (he also gave an accom­pa­ni­ment in this tuning for the roman­ce Mira Nero de Tar­pe­ya). His third tuning, 5th–4th–major 3rd–5th–4th–minor 3rd, could, he sta­ted, be dis­tri­bu­ted ‘by a cle­ver musi­cian’ bet­ween a gui­tar and a ban­du­rria by tuning the four cour­ses of the gui­tar the same as the four lower cour­ses of the vihue­la, and the three of the ban­du­rria the same as the three hig­hest.

The usual num­ber of gut frets on the neck of the vihue­la was ten, and con­si­de­ra­ble atten­tion was given by Ber­mu­do to devi­sing met­hods of pla­cing the­se to obtain an exact into­na­tion. He expres­sed great con­cern about the dif­fe­ren­ce in pitch of cer­tain notes accor­ding to whet­her they have to ser­ve as mi or fa (i.e. sharp or flat) in the mode of a par­ti­cu­lar com­po­si­tion. Sug­ges­tions for over­co­ming this dif­fi­culty inclu­de the use of a dou­ble fret com­po­sed of two thick­nes­ses, eit­her of which could be selec­ted at will; the con­trol of pitch by the amount of pres­su­re exer­ted by the fin­ger in stop­ping the note; and the actual moving of the fret to suit the mode. The last met­hod was advo­ca­ted by Milán, who pre­fa­ced a fan­ta­sia and a roman­ce with this ins­truc­tion: ‘rai­se the fourth fret a little [towards the fret nut] so that the note of the said fret will be strong [mi] and not fee­ble [fa]’; and by Val­de­rrá­bano, who said: ‘lower the fourth fret a little towards the rose’, which meant tuning it to a fa fret. See­king the requi­red note on anot­her cour­se and fret was also men­tio­ned by Ber­mu­do.

Lite­rary refe­ren­ces indi­ca­te that the word ‘vihue­la’ was used in Spain from the 13th cen­tury onwards. It appears in the Libro de Apo­lo­nio (c1250), the Poe­ma de Once­ro (14th-cen­tury), and the famous Libro de buen amor of the Arci­pres­te de Hita (c1283–c1350), who dis­tin­guis­hed bet­ween the vihue­la de arco and the vihue­la de peño­la. Tin­cto­ris des­cri­bed the vihue­la as an ins­tru­ment inven­ted by the Spa­niards and called by them and the Ita­lians vio­la (or vio­la sine arcu­lo). It was, he said, sma­ller than the lute and flat-bac­ked, and in most cases had incur­ved sides. During the 15th cen­tury the gui­tar – which during that period was some­ti­mes lute-sha­ped (see Wright, 1977, and Coro­na-Alcal­de, 1990; see also Git­tern) – and the vihue­la appear to have evol­ved side by side; in the follo­wing cen­tury the gui­tar with its four cour­ses was gene­rally known as a popu­lar ins­tru­ment, lar­gely used for accom­pan­ying songs, whi­le the vihue­la was favou­red by vir­tuo­so pla­yers. Some vir­tuo­sos were emplo­yed in hou­seholds of the nobi­lity, but the finest achie­ved great fame as royal musi­cians at the Spa­nish court, whe­re music was highly estee­med. The chil­dren of Fer­di­nand and Isa­be­lla were trai­ned in music, espe­cially the young prin­ce Juan who pos­ses­sed, among other cham­ber ins­tru­ments, vihue­las and viols which it is said he could play. Alt­hough the­re is abun­dant evi­den­ce for the use of the vihue­la in royal and noble esta­blish­ments at this period, the first prin­ted music appea­red in Milán’s book (1536; seeTabla­tu­re, fig.6).

During the reign of Empe­ror Char­les V the vihue­la reached the height of its deve­lop­ment as the ins­tru­ment of the musi­cal éli­te. The empe­ror boas­ted of two cha­pels, one Fle­mish and one Spa­nish. Alt­hough he emplo­yed mostly Fle­mish musi­cians and sin­gers for the per­for­man­ce of sacred polyp­hony, he entrus­ted the secu­lar musi­cal acti­vi­ties to nati­ve pla­yers, and in pri­va­te music-making the vihue­la had a pro­mi­nent role. It con­ti­nued to be held in high regard at the court of Phi­lip II, whe­re in 1566 the cele­bra­ted blind com­po­ser and pla­yer Miguel de Fuen­lla­na was lis­ted as musi­co de came­ra to Isa­bel de Valois, the king’s third wife. Towards the end of the cen­tury its posi­tion seems to have been under­mi­ned by the increa­sing popu­la­rity of the gui­tar, and a few years later Sebas­tián de Cova­rru­bias Horoz­co wro­te (in his Teso­ro de la len­gua cas­te­lla­na o espa­ño­la, Madrid, 1611) that

This ins­tru­ment [the vihue­la] has been held in great esteem until our own times, and the­re have been exce­llent pla­yers; but sin­ce the inven­tion of the gui­tars the­re are very few who apply them­sel­ves to the study of the vihue­la. This is a great loss, becau­se every kind of nota­ted music can be put on to it, and now the gui­tar is not­hing but a cow-bell, so easy to play, espe­cially when strum­med, that the­re is not a sta­ble-boy who is not a musi­cian of the gui­tar.

Apart from the com­po­ser-pla­yers who­se names have sur­vi­ved through their books, a few other famous pla­yers are men­tio­ned in publi­ca­tions of the time. Ber­mu­do named not only Nar­váez but also Luis de Guz­mán, Mar­tin de Jaén and Her­nan­do de Jaén (‘citi­zens of Gra­na­da’), and López (‘musi­cian to the Duke of Arcos’). Fran­cis­co Pache­co in his Libro de des­crip­ción de ver­dar­de­ros retra­tos (1599) inclu­ded a por­trait of the blind pla­yer Pedro de Madrid with a seven-cour­se vihue­la and com­men­ted, ‘Sevi­lle is honou­red by such a son’, and also one of Manuel Rodrí­guez, ‘pla­yer of the harp and vigue­la’. Vicen­te Espi­nel, in his Rela­cio­nes de la vida del escu­de­ro Mar­cos de Obre­gón (Madrid, 1618), des­cri­bed how he heard Lucas de Matos play on a seven-cour­se ins­tru­ment toget­her with Ber­nar­do Cla­vi­jo on the key­board and the latter’s daugh­ter on the harp, adding that their music ‘is the best I have heard in my life’.

The pre­fe­ren­ce for the vihue­la over the lute in Spain has been explai­ned (Cha­se) by a theory that the lute was repu­dia­ted becau­se of its Moo­rish ori­gin. This theory, howe­ver, over­looks the fact that many aspects of Isla­mic cul­tu­re remai­ned firmly esta­blis­hed in the Spa­nish way of life long after the final expul­sion in 1492, and still remain so. Among musi­cal ins­tru­ments, the rebec con­ti­nued in use into the 16th cen­tury; and many Moo­rish the­mes fre­quently appear in the words of 16th-cen­tury songs. Moreo­ver, a gro­wing body of evi­den­ce sug­gests that the lute was more com­monly used than has been gene­rally sup­po­sed (Poul­ton, 1977).

Tin­cto­ris sta­ted that an ins­tru­ment iden­ti­cal with the vihue­la was pla­yed in Italy, and indeed pic­tu­res and a few musi­cal sour­ces and lite­rary refe­ren­ces con­firm its pre­sen­ce the­re in the 16th cen­tury. Fran­ces­co da Milano is known to have per­for­med on the vihue­la as well as on the lute, and the title of his two-volu­me book of 1536, Inta­vo­la­tu­ra di vio­la o vero lau­to, indi­ca­tes that the pie­ces the­re con­tai­ned are inten­ded for eit­her of the two ins­tru­ments with the words. Other known Ita­lian pla­yers of the vihue­la, inclu­ding the com­po­ser Giu­lio Seve­rino, are men­tio­ned by Sci­pio­ne Cerre­to in his Della prat­ti­ca musi­ca voca­le et stru­men­ta­le (Naples, 1601). Some docu­men­tary and pic­to­rial evi­den­ce of the use of the vio­la in Por­tu­gal can be tra­ced, and the names of a few famous pla­yers, such as Pei­xo­to da Peña, Domin­gos Madei­ra and Ale­xan­dre de Aguiar are known.

Alt­hough the evi­den­ce is at pre­sent scanty, the­re can be little doubt that the vihue­la, toget­her with other Euro­pean ins­tru­ments, was taken to Latin Ame­ri­ca during its colo­ni­za­tion. For exam­ple, in his His­to­ria ver­da­de­ra de la con­quis­ta de la Nue­va-Espa­ña (writ­ten c1568) the chro­ni­cler Ber­nal Díaz de Cas­ti­llo des­cri­bed a cer­tain Ortiz, a sol­dier in the com­pany of Her­nán Cor­tés during the con­quest of Mexi­co, as a ‘great pla­yer of the vihue­la’. Rena­to Almei­da, in his His­tó­ria da músi­ca bra­si­lei­ra (1926), quo­ted from a let­ter of about 1583 from the Jesuit priest Fer­não Car­dim in which he said that schools of sin­ging and pla­ying were early esta­blis­hed in the Chris­tia­ni­zed villa­ges and the nati­ves taught to play the vio­la, among other ins­tru­ments.

Four ins­tru­ments in the Museo Nacio­nal de Antro­po­lo­gía and the Museo Nacio­nal de His­to­ria (Cas­ti­llo de Cha­pul­te­pec), Mexi­co, are clai­med by Cook (1976) to be des­cen­dants of the vihue­la, cons­truc­ted by nati­ve crafts­men. The­se are less well aut­hen­ti­ca­ted than the Qui­to ins­tru­ment, but, toget­her with other mem­bers of the pluc­ked-string family, such as the cua­tro in Vene­zue­la, they strongly sug­gest a com­mon ancestry in the 16th-cen­tury vihue­la and gui­tar.

2. Technique and performing practice.

Though the­re is little writ­ten evi­den­ce about the tech­ni­que of the left hand in vihue­la pla­ying, this can hardly have dif­fe­red in any sig­ni­fi­cant way from that used on the lute. The­re is a brief men­tion by Vene­gas de Henes­tro­sa, and Fuen­lla­na explai­ned how a fin­ger of the left hand may divi­de a cour­se in two by stop­ping only one string, thus obtai­ning an addi­tio­nal voi­ce in the coun­ter­point.

Right-hand tech­ni­que was dealt with in some detail, espe­cially for the pla­ying of rapid pas­sa­ges known as redo­bles. Three met­hods are given. Dedi­llo (mar­ked dedi in some sour­ces) con­sists of a rapid move­ment inwards and out­wards with the index fin­ger; it was con­si­de­red unsa­tis­fac­tory by Fuen­lla­na sin­ce the string is tou­ched by the flesh of the fin­ger on the inward stro­ke but by the nail on the out­ward. Dos dedos (mar­ked dos­de in some sour­ces) con­sists of the alter­na­ting move­ment of the thumb and the first fin­ger, as used in the rest of Euro­pe at this time. Accor­ding to Vene­gas de Henes­tro­sa, dos dedos had two variants: figue­ta cas­te­lla­na (‘Cas­ti­lian’), with the thumb held outsi­de the fin­gers, and figue­ta estran­je­ra (‘foreign’), with the thumb held insi­de the fin­gers, as in 16th-cen­tury lute tech­ni­que. The third met­hod invol­ves alter­na­ting the index and second fin­gers; Fuen­lla­na and Vene­gas de Henes­tro­sa prai­sed this as being the most per­fect way of pla­ying, and Fuen­lla­na added, ‘as I have said to you, to stri­ke with a stro­ke wit­hout the intru­sion of the nail or any other kind of con­tri­van­ce has great exce­llen­ce, becau­se only in the fin­ger, as a living thing, the spi­rit lies’.

Seve­ral vihue­lists’ books con­tain valua­ble direc­tions con­cer­ning tem­po. It is clear that the tac­tus, or com­pás, had no abso­lu­te speed, but in seve­ral cases, both ver­bally and by the use of signs, rela­ti­ve speeds are indi­ca­ted. Both Milán and Val­de­rrá­bano stres­sed that the inten­tion of the com­po­ser should be follo­wed in this res­pect or the com­po­si­tion would not sound well. At the begin­ning of almost every fan­ta­sia Milán gave direc­tions for pla­ying it: very fast, rat­her fast, slowly, or with a well-mar­ked beat. In cer­tain other cases he said that the chor­dal pas­sa­ges must be pla­yed slowly and the redo­bles fast, with a pau­se on the caden­ce points (coro­na­da). ‘This music’, he said, ‘in order to give it its natu­ral beauty … must not have much res­pect for the com­pás’. For the accom­pa­ni­ment of roman­ces he repea­ted his ins­truc­tion to play chor­dal pas­sa­ges slowly and redo­bles fast. Cer­tain other com­po­sers spe­ci­fied that in their music par­ti­cu­lar men­su­ral signs implied par­ti­cu­lar tem­pos, as shown in Table 1.

San­ta María gave valua­ble infor­ma­tion about good sty­le in per­for­man­ce, inclu­ding three sug­ges­tions for the rhyth­mic alte­ra­tion of pas­sa­ges nota­ted in equal qua­vers: to pau­se on the first of each pair and hurry the second; to hurry the first and pau­se on the second; or to hurry the first three notes and pau­se on the fourth. The first met­hod was also appro­pria­te, he said, for pla­ying crot­chets. Among the gra­ces des­cri­bed by San­ta María, some are more appro­pria­te to the key­board, but the trill, mor­dent and appog­gia­tu­ra suit the vihue­la. Vene­gas de Henes­tro­sa also des­cri­bed a mor­dent and upper appog­gia­tu­ra.

3. Repertory.

The music of the vihue­lists, both sacred and secu­lar, has sur­vi­ved mainly in prin­ted sour­ces, except for two impor­tant manus­cripts (E-Mn 6001, dated 1593, and PL-Kj Mus.ms.40032, for­merly held in D-Bsb; see Rey, 1975, and Grif­fiths, 1985), as well as some frag­men­tary sour­ces (see Coro­na-Alcal­de, ‘A Vihue­la Manus­cript in the Archi­vo de Siman­cas’, 1986, and 1992). Four types of tabla­tu­re were used: Ita­lian (used by most of the vihue­lists); a six-line tabla­tu­re with figu­res in which the hig­hest line repre­sents the string hig­hest in pitch (used by Milán, see Tabla­tu­re, fig.6); anot­her six-line tabla­tu­re with figu­res (used in the second volu­me of the 1536 publi­ca­tion of Fran­ces­co da Milano), simi­lar in dis­po­si­tion to that of Milán, but repre­sen­ting the open cour­se with the num­ber 1, the first fret with the num­ber 2, and so on; and Spa­nish key­board tabla­tu­re, the cifra nue­va (used by Vene­gas de Henes­tro­sa and Cabe­zón, see Tabla­tu­re, fig.3). In some books the vocal line is shown in red num­bers in the tabla­tu­re, in others the num­bers indi­ca­ting the vocal line are follo­wed by a small tick or com­ma, or else staff nota­tion is used.

Char­les V’s pre­di­lec­tion for music by Fle­mish com­po­sers in his pri­va­te cha­pel is reflec­ted in some of the books whe­re inta­bu­la­tions of Mass parts by Jos­quin and other Fle­mish com­po­sers, as well as of motets by Jos­quin and Gom­bert form a lar­ge por­tion of the con­tents; nati­ve com­po­sers (Cris­tó­bal de Mora­les and Fran­cis­co Gue­rre­ro) are also repre­sen­ted by inta­bu­la­tions of their sacred works. In secu­lar vihue­la music the fan­ta­sia, ran­ging from sim­ple pie­ces for begin­ners to ela­bo­ra­te con­tra­pun­tal struc­tu­res, out­num­ber all other forms. Little dan­ce music appears in the works of the vihue­lists, except for the pava­na, which Milán, howe­ver, likens to the fan­ta­sia. Dif­fe­ren­cias (varia­tions) were most com­monly based on roman­ce tunes or, more fre­quently, on their asso­cia­ted repea­ting har­mo­nic pat­terns, which were rarely more than a few bars long. In some the melody appears in the can­tus line, in others in the tenor. Some­ti­mes its treat­ment is very free, with inge­nious and ela­bo­ra­te brea­king of the chords or rapid redo­bles over the bass. The sty­le sug­gests that the form may have ori­gi­na­ted in impro­vi­sed accom­pa­ni­ments to the sin­ging of roman­ces, long narra­ti­ve poems some of which have as many as 160 ver­ses. Tien­tos, sone­tos, fabor­do­nesand inta­bu­la­tions of a few chan­sons form most of the rest of the solo reper­tory.

The main forms in secu­lar vocal music with vihue­la accom­pa­ni­ment were the roman­ce and the villan­ci­co. The roman­ces, in which the first stan­za only is gene­rally given, were in many cases of ancient ori­gin, often based on inci­dents in the war against the Moors or the exploits of the knights of the court of Char­le­mag­ne. (Sub­se­quent stan­zas of the­se roman­ces vie­jos are to be found in the great 16th- and 17th-cen­tury collec­tions known as roman­ce­ros, and in 19th-cen­tury collec­tions edi­ted by Agus­tín Durán and others.) Sin­ce no more than the melody line and the asso­cia­ted har­mo­nic pat­tern exis­ted, the accom­pa­ni­ments were com­po­sed by the vihue­lists them­sel­ves.

The villan­ci­co, often a love poem of great inten­sity, was deri­ved from a pre­ci­se poe­tic form con­sis­ting of a sin­gle stan­za; its two sec­tions were known as the estri­bi­llo and the vuel­ta, per­for­med in the order ABBA. Milán appears to have com­po­sed the melody as well as the accom­pa­ni­ment (and pro­bably some of the stan­zas) in his villan­ci­cos. Many other villan­ci­cos exis­ted in a polyp­ho­nic form by well-known com­po­sers such as Gue­rre­ro or Juan Vas­quez; the vihue­lists’ arran­ge­ments for solo voi­ce and vihue­la con­sis­ted of inta­bu­la­tions for vihue­la of one of the vocal lines.

Among the many other forms that make up the rich and varied reper­tory of solo song with vihue­la accom­pa­ni­ment are arran­ge­ments of madri­ga­les, Ita­lian sone­tos, chan­sons (by Ver­de­lot and others), set­tings of coplas by Bos­cán and Gar­ci­la­so and of poems by Petrarch, and ensa­la­das (long com­po­si­tions made up of small musi­cal sec­tions taken from popu­lar songs).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

early theorists

for modern edns. see arti­cles on indi­vi­dual theo­rists

  1. Tin­cto­ris: De inven­tio­ne et usu musi­cae (Naples, c1487)
  2. Cano­va da Milano: Inta­vo­la­tu­ra de vio­la o vero lau­to (Naples, 1536/R) [2 vols.]
  3. de Milán: Libro de músi­ca de vihue­la de mano … inti­tu­la­do El maes­tro (Valen­cia, 1536/R); ed. C. Jacobs (Uni­ver­sity Park, PA, 1971)
  4. de Nar­váez: Los seys libros del delp­hín (Valla­do­lid, 1538/R; ed. in MME, iii, 1945/R)
  5. Muda­rra: Tres libros de músi­ca en cifras para vihue­la (Sevi­lle, 1546/R; ed. in MME, vii, 1949)
  6. de Val­de­rrá­bano: Libro de músi­ca de vihue­la, inti­tu­la­do Sil­va de sire­nas (Valla­do­lid, 1547/R; ed. in MME, xxii, 1965)
  7. Pisa­dor: Libro de músi­ca de vihue­la (Sala­man­ca, 1552/R)
  8. de Fuen­lla­na: Libro de músi­ca para vihue­la, inti­tu­la­do Orp­hé­ni­ca lyra (Sevi­lle, 1554/R); ed. C. Jacobs (Oxford, 1978)
  9. Ber­mu­do: Decla­ra­ción de ins­tru­men­tos musi­ca­les (Osu­na, 1555/R)
  10. Vene­gas de Henes­tro­sa: Libro de cifra nue­va para tecla, har­pa, y vihue­la (Alca­lá, 1557); ed. in MME, ii (1944, 2/1965)
  11. Lie­to: Dia­lo­go quar­to de musi­ca … con vio­la a mano o ver liu­to (Naples, 1559/R)
  12. de Milán: Libro inti­tu­la­do El cor­te­sano (Valen­cia, 1561/R)
  13. de San­ta María: Libro lla­ma­do Arte de tañer fan­ta­sia, assi para tecla como para vihue­la (Valla­do­lid, 1565/R)
  14. Daza: Libro de músi­ca en cifras para vihue­la inti­tu­la­do: El Par­nas­so (Valla­do­lid, 1576/R)
  15. de Cabe­zón: Obras de músi­ca para tecla, arpa y vihue­la (Madrid, 1578; ed. in MME, xxvii–xxix 1966, 2/1982)
  16. Cerre­to: Della prat­ti­ca musi­ca voca­le et stru­men­ta­le (Naples, 1601, 2/1611)
  17. de San­ta Cruz: Músi­ca de vihue­la: libro don­de se veran paza­ca­lles de los ocho tonos y de los tras­por­ta­dos (MS, c1700, E-Mn M.2209)
  18. Nas­sa­rre: Esque­la músi­ca (Zara­go­za, 1724/R)

other studies

  1. Morphy: Les lut­his­tes espag­nols du XVIe siè­cle (Leip­zig, 1902/R)
  2. J.B. Trend: Luis Milán and the Vihue­lis­tas (Oxford, 1925)
  3. Pujol: ‘La gui­ta­re’, EMDC, II/iii (1927), 1997–2035
  4. Apel: ‘Early Spa­nish Music for Lute and Key­board’, MQ, xx (1934), 289–301
  5. Anglès: La músi­ca en la cor­te de los reyes cató­li­cos: poli­fo­nía reli­gio­sa, MME, i (1941)
  6. Cha­se: The Music of Spain (New York, 1941, 2/1959)
  7. Ward: The Vihue­la de mano and its Music (1536–1576) (diss., New York U., 1953)
  8. Ward: ‘Le pro­blè­me des hau­teurs dans la musi­que pour luth et vihue­la au XVIe siè­cle’, Le luth et sa musi­que: Neuilly-sur-Sei­ne 1957, 171–8
  9. Poul­ton: ‘Notes on some Dif­fe­ren­ces bet­ween the Lute and the Vihue­la and their Music’, The Con­sort, no.16 (1959), 22–6
  10. Pope: ‘La vihue­la y su músi­ca en el ambien­te huma­nís­ti­co’, Nue­va Revis­ta de Filo­lo­gía His­pá­ni­ca, xv (1961), 365–76
  11. Pryn­ne: ‘A Sur­vi­ving Vihue­la de mano’, GSJ, xvi (1963), 22–7
  12. Roberts: ‘Some Notes on the Music of the Vihue­lis­tas’, LSJ, vii (1965), 24–31
  13. Myers: ‘Vihue­la Tech­ni­que’, JLSA, i (1968), 15–18
  14. Poul­ton: ‘How to Play with Good Sty­le by Tho­mas de Sanc­ta María’, LSJ, xii (1970), 23–30
  15. Roberts: ‘Remarks on the Vihue­la’, Gui­tar, i (1973), no.7, p.29; no.8, p.33; no.9, p.33
  16. J.J. Rey, ed.: El manus­cri­to “Remi­let­te de Flo­res” 1593 (Madrid, 1975)
  17. Cook: ‘The Vihue­la in South Ame­ri­ca’, Gui­tar, iv/9 (1976), 9–11
  18. Poul­ton: ‘Notes on the Gui­ta­rra, Laud and Vihue­la’, LSJ, xviii (1976), 46–8
  19. Poul­ton: ‘The Lute in Chris­tian Spain’, LSJ, xix (1977), 34–49
  20. Wright: ‘The Medie­val Git­tern and Cito­le: a Case of Mis­ta­ken Iden­tity’, GSJ, xxx (1977), 8–42
  21. Gill: ‘A Vihue­la in Ecua­dor’, LSJ, xx (1978), 53–5
  22. Abon­dan­ce: ‘La vihue­la du Musée Jac­que­mart-André: res­tau­ra­tion d’un docu­ment uni­que’, RdM, lxvi (1980), 57–69
  23. Beier: ‘The Qui­to Vihue­la Revi­si­ted’, News­let­ter of the Lute Society of Ame­ri­ca, xvi/1 (1981), 12
  24. Gill: ‘Vihue­las, Vio­las and the Spa­nish Gui­tar’, EMc, ix (1981), 455–62
  25. Ohl­sen: ‘The Vihue­la in Latin Ame­ri­ca’, News­let­ter of the Lute Society of Ame­ri­ca, xvi/1 (1981), 12–13
  26. Moser: ‘Vihue­la, Gita­rre und Lau­te in Spa­nien wäh­rend des 16. Jahr­hun­derts, 1: die Que­llen – die Vihue­la’, Gita­rre und Lau­te, iii/2 (1981), 18–27
  27. Ward: ‘Chan­ging the Ins­tru­ment for the Music’, JLSA, xv (1982), 27–39
  28. Weis­man: ‘The Paris Vihue­la Recons­truc­ted’, GSJ, xxxv (1982), 68–77
  29. Grif­fiths: The Vihue­la Fan­ta­sia: a Com­pa­ra­ti­ve Study of Forms and Sty­les (diss., Monash U., 1983)
  30. Mon­ta­na­ro: Gui­ta­res his­pano-amé­ri­cai­nes (Aix-en-Pro­ven­ce, 1983)
  31. Coro­na-Alcal­de: ‘The Vio­la da Mano and the Vihue­la: Evi­den­ce and Sug­ges­tions about their Cons­truc­tion’, The Lute, xxiv (1984), 3–32
  32. Coro­na-Alcal­de: ‘Fray Juan Ber­mu­do and his Seven Vihue­las’, The Lute, xxiv (1984), 77–86
  33. Wood­field: The Early His­tory of the Viol (Cam­brid­ge, 1984)
  34. Coro­na-Alcal­de: ‘La vihue­la et la gui­ta­re’, Ins­tru­ments de musi­que espag­nols du XVIe au XIXe siè­cle (Brus­sels, 1985), 73–91
  35. Grif­fiths: ‘Ber­lin Mus.ms.40032 y otros nue­vos hallaz­gos en el reper­to­rio para vihue­la’, Espa­ña en la músi­ca de occi­den­te: Sala­man­ca 1985, 323–4
  36. Coro­na-Alcal­de: ‘A Vihue­la Manus­cript in the Archi­vo de Siman­cas’, The Lute, xxvi (1986), 3–20
  37. Grif­fiths: ‘La músi­ca rena­cen­tis­ta para ins­tru­men­tos solis­tas y el gus­to musi­cal espa­ñol’, Nas­sa­rre, iv (1988), 59–78
  38. Grif­fiths: ‘At Court and at Home with the Vihue­la de Mano: Current Pers­pec­ti­ves on the Ins­tru­ment, its Music and its World’, JLSA, xxii (1989), 1–27
  39. Coro­na-Alcal­de: ‘The Vihue­la and the Gui­tar in Six­teenth-Cen­tury Spain: a Cri­ti­cal Apprai­sal of some of the Exis­ting Evi­den­ce’, The Lute, xxx (1990), 3–24
  40. Ber­mu­dez: ‘The Vihue­la: the Paris and Qui­to Ins­tru­ments’, The Spa­nish Guitar/La gui­ta­rra espa­ño­la, Metro­po­li­tan Museum of Art, 1 Oct 1991 – 5 Jan 1992 and Museo Muni­ci­pal, 20 Feb – 12 April 1992 (New York and Madrid, 1991), 24–47 [exhi­bi­tion cata­lo­gue]
  41. Coro­na-Alcal­de: ‘“You Will Rai­se a Little your 4th Fret”: an Equi­vo­cal Ins­truc­tion by Luis Milán?’, GSJ, xliv (1991), 2–45
  42. Coro­na-Alcal­de: ‘The Ear­liest Vihue­la Tabla­tu­re: a Recent Dis­co­very’, EMc, xx (1992), 594–600
  43. Ber­mu­dez: ‘La vihue­la de la igle­sia de la Com­pa­ñía de Jesús en Qui­to’, RMC, no.179 (1993), 69–77
  44. Coro­na-Alcal­de: ‘La vihue­la, el laúd y la gui­ta­rra en el Neu­vo Mun­do’, RdMc, xvi (1993), 1360–72