SECTION X
German Makers
ALBANI, Mathias, Botzen. M. Fétis, quoting the Biographical Dictionary of Moritz Berman, with regard to Albani, states that he was born in 1621, and died in 1673. The form is somewhat like Stainer's, but higher and heavier in construction. The varnish is very rich. Wood of good quality.
| Mathias Albani Fecit Bulsani Tyrol 1651. Matthias Albanus Fecit Bulsani in Tyroli 1680. |
ALBANI, Mathias, Botzen, about 1650-1712. Son of the above. This maker should, perhaps, have been classed with those of Italy, his style being Italian; but as he was the son of the well-known German maker, it was thought best that his name should follow that of his father under the head of German makers. The son has shown but faint marks of having been tutored by his parent in the art of Violin-making. He is said to have visited Cremona, in order to receive instruction there under Amati, and this circumstance may have given to his work that Italian air which is so pleasing to the connoisseur.1 This maker is often credited with the work of the elder Albani, it having been supposed that there was but one of that name. The model is good, and the workmanship throughout demands high praise. Gerber states that the famous Violinist, Tomaso Albinoni, possessed two Violins of this maker, dated 1702 and 1709.
1 He appears to have worked for a time in Rome, from which city some instruments are dated.
ALBANI, Paolo, Palermo, about 1633. Probably related to the Albanis of Botzen. See Italian makers.
ALETZIE, Paolo, Munich. See Italian makers.
Lauten und Geigenmacher
in München 1710.
ARTMANN, ——, Weimar, near Gotha, 18th century. Was originally a joiner. Copied Amati very cleverly. The varnish is frequently of amber colour.
BACHMANN, Carl Ludwig, born at Berlin, 1716. Court musician and Violin-maker. The work is clean, and not without style. Bachmann was a performer on the Viol. In 1765 he was appointed instrument maker to the court of Frederick the Great. Bachmann, in conjunction with Ernest Benda, founded in 1770 the concerts for amateurs at Berlin. He died in 1800.
BACHMANN, O., Halberstadt, Violin-maker, and author of a handbook on the construction of bow instruments, published in 1835 at Leipsic.
BAUSCH, Ludwig C. A., Leipsic, born at Nuremberg in 1815. Pupil of B. Fritsche in Dresden.
BAUSCH, Ludwig B. Son of the above.
BAUSCH, Otto B., Leipsic, born 1841, brother of the above.
BECKMANN, Sweno, Stockholm, about 1700. The work is rough.
BEDLER, ——, about 1750.
BÈLA, Szepessy, born at Budapest in 1856. Now living in London.
BINDERNAGEL, ——, Gotha, 18th century. Copied Amati chiefly. There are a few of his instruments which are on the model of Stradivari, and are highly valued in Germany.
BUCHSTADTER, Gabriel David, Ratisbon, 18th century. His Violins are not equal in merit. Some have excellent wood, others very indifferent. When one of his best instruments can be procured, it is a good substitute for a second-class Italian.
CHRISTA, Joseph Paul, Munich, 1730.
und Geigenmacher in München. 17—
DIEL, Martin (spelt Diehl by later members of the family), Mayence, worked with Nicolaus Döpfer, and later with Carl Helmer of Prague. He was a son-in-law of Döpfer.
DIEL, Nicolaus, born 1779, son of Martin, worked with his uncle Jacob Steininger of Frankfort. He succeeded to the business of his father. Died 1851.
DIEL, Johann, brother of Nicolaus.
DIEL, Jacob, son of Nicolaus, settled in Bremen 1834, later in Hamburg. Died 1873.
DIEHL, Nicolaus Louis, Hamburg, son of Jacob Diehl, died 1876.
DIEHL, Friedrich, Darmstadt, born 1814, son of Nicolaus, received a bronze medal, Paris Exhibition, 1867.
DIEHL, Johann, Mayence.
DIEHL, Heinrich, son of Johann.
DÖPFER, Nicolaus, 1768. The instruments of this maker are well made; the model is less raised than that of many German makers. He made a few large Tenors. Döpfer was the master of Martin Diehl.
DURFEL, J. G., Altenburg, 18th century. A well-known maker of Double-Basses.
EBERLE, J. Ulric, Prague, about 1730-50. Was a good copyist of the Italian masters. Eberle also made Viols d'Amour.
Lautenmacher in Prag, 1730.
EDLINGER, T., Prague, about 1712.
EDLINGER, Joseph Joachim, Prague. Son of the above. Worked for some time in Italy. Died 1748.
ELSLER, Johann Joseph, Mayence, 1720-50. Made many good Viols da Gamba.
ERNST, Franz Anton, born in 1745 in Bohemia, died in 1805. He was an eminent Violinist, and received lessons from Antonio Lolli. In 1778 he was engaged as Court musician at Gotha. He took great interest in Violin-making, and made several excellent instruments.
FELDEN, M., Vienna, about 1550. Maker of Viols.
FICHTOLD, Hans, about 1612. Lute-maker.
FICHTL, Martin, Vienna, 1757. Large pattern, good varnish, wood of excellent quality.
FICKER, Johann Christian, Cremona, 1720. Said to have lived in the midst of the greatest makers the world has had; if so, he certainly did not make himself acquainted with the art of Violin-making as understood in Cremona. His instruments may have been made at Mittenwald, and dated from Cremona.
FICKER, Johann Gotlieb, Cremona, 1789.
FISCHER, Zacharie, Würtzburg, 1730. This maker adopted the practice of baking the wood for the manufacture of Violins.
FISCHER, Anton, Vienna, died 1879.
FREY, Hans, Nuremberg and Bologna, born about 1440. A celebrated maker of Lutes. He was the father-in-law of Albert Dürer. John Evelyn, in his Diary, 1645, after speaking in praise of the cheese and sausages of Bologna, refers to the great celebrity of the Lutes by the old makers of that city, and mentions Hans Frey. He says they "were of extraordinary price, and the workmen were chiefly Germans."
FRITZCHE, ——, Leipsic, about 1780-1810.
GEDLER, Johann A., Fussen, about 1750.
GEDLER, Johann B., Fussen, about 1780.
GEISSENHOF, Franz, Vienna, died 1821. The initials F. G. sometimes branded on the button. Stradivari model. Good work.
GERLE, Johann, Nuremberg, 1533 to about 1550. Maker of Lutes and Viols. He also published a book on the Lute, 1533.
GRIESSER, Matthias, Innspruck, 1727.
GRIMM, Carl, Berlin, born about 1794. He died at Berlin, 1855, and was succeeded by a son, Ludwig Grimm.
GROBITZ, A., Warsaw, about 1750.
GUGEMMOS, Fussen, Bavaria, 17—. Indifferent work.
HAENSEL, Johann A., Berlin. Contributed an article to the "Leipsic Musical Gazette" in 1811, entitled "Ueber den Bau der Violin."
HAMBERGER, Joseph, Presburg, 1845.
HAMM, Johann Gottfried, Rome, 18th century. Made instruments of a wide pattern, often with ivory edges, and branded inside with his initials.
HAMMIG, W. H., Leipsic. Now living.
HASSERT, ——, Eisenach, 18th century.
HASSERT, ——, Rudolstadt, 18th century.
HELMER, Carl, Prague, born 1740. Pupil of Eberle of Prague.
HILDEBRANDT, Michael C., Hamburg, 1770.
HILTZ, Paul, Nuremberg, 1656. Maker of Viols.
HOFFMANN, Martin, Leipsic, about 1680 to 1725. Maker of Lutes and Viols.
HOFFMANN, Johann Christian, Leipsic, about 1720. Son of Martin Hoffmann. Lute and Viol maker.
HORNSTAINER, Joseph, Mittenwald, about 1730. Made a few Double-Basses of good quality.
HORNSTAINER, Matthias, Mittenwald, about 1800.
HORIL, Jacob, Rome, about 1742.
HULLER, August, Shoeneck, about 1775.
HUMEL, Christian, Nuremberg, about 1709.
HUNGER, Christoph Friedrich, Leipsic, born at Dresden, 1718, died 1787. One of the best German makers.
JAIS, Johann, Botzen, about 1776. There were other makers of this name.
JAUCH, Johann, Gratz, Styria, Austria. Worked in Dresden about 1774.
KARB, ——, Königsberg, Maker of Viols.
KAMBL, Johann A., Munich, 1640.
Hof Lauten und Geigenmacher
in München.
KEMBTER, ——, Dibingen, about 1730. Stainer model. Good wood, and work well purfled.
KIAPOSSE, Sawes, St. Petersburg, 1750.
KIRCHSCHLAG, ——, Tyrol, 1780.
KLOZ, Matthias, Mittenwald, 1656-1743. Is reported to have been a pupil of Stainer. The work is good and the varnish in some cases of a mellow quality, in others somewhat thin. Some of the wood that he used was cut at the wrong season, and is consequently worm-eaten.
| Sebastian Kloz, in Mittenwald, An 17— |
KLOZ, Sebastian, Mittenwald, 1696-1750, son of Matthias Kloz. The instruments of this maker are much esteemed. The model is flat as compared with most Violins of the German school. The varnish varies.
KLOZ, George, Tyrol, 1687-1737, brother of Sebastian Kloz. Instruments well made, chiefly yellow in colour; wood often worm-eaten.
KLOZ, Egidius, Mittenwald, 1675-1711.
KLOZ, Ægidius, Mittenwald, 1733-1805. Son of Sebastian. One of the best of this very large family of makers.
KLOZ, Joseph, Mittenwald, son of Egidius.
KLOZ, J. Karl, about 1741. Good work, dark varnish, ornamental border round label.
KNITTLE, Joseph, Mittenwald.
KNITTING, Philip, Mittenwald, 1760.
KOHL, Johann, Munich, 1580. Lute-maker to the Bavarian Court.
KOLDITZ, J., Rumburg, died 1796.
|
CHAPEL OF THE ROSARY. CHURCH OF ST. DOMENICO, CREMONA. Plate XV.
|
KOLDITZ, Mathias Johann, Munich, 1720.
Lauten und Geigenmacher in
München 17—
KRAMER, H., 1717, Viol-maker.
KRINER, Joseph, Mittenwald, 1786.
LASKA, Joseph, Prague, born at Rumburg, 1738, died 1805. Worked with J. Kolditz.
LEMBÖCK, Gabriel, Budapest, 19th century. Maker; also known as a repairer of old instruments.
MANN, Hans, Naples.
MAUSSIELL, Leonard, Nuremberg, 1745. Stainer pattern, excellent workmanship. Thin yellow varnish, raised edges. The style and work is not unlike that of Tecchler.
MAHER (MAIER), Andreas Ferdinand. Good varnish, sometimes with lion scrolls.
Hof Laut und Geigenmacher
in Salzburg. Anno 17—
MEUSIDLER, Johann, Nuremberg, about 1550. Maker of Viols.
MOHR, Philip, Hamburg, 17th century. Viol-maker.
MOLDONNER, Fussen, Bavaria, 18th century.
NIGGEL, Simpertus, Fussen, 17—. Flat model, good workmanship. Branded inside with initials S. N.
OHBERG, Johann, Stockholm, 1773. Workmanship of average merit. Varnish mostly of yellow colour.
OTT, Johann, Nuremberg, about 1463. Lute-maker.
OTTO, Jacob August, born at Gotha, 1762, died 1830. Violin-maker to the Court of Weimar. Received instructions from Franz Anton Ernest. He published a work in 1817 entitled, "Ueber den Bau und die Erhaltung der Geige und aller Bogeninstrumente," and another work with more information in 1828, the first English edition of which was published in 1848.
OTTO, Georg August, son of Jacob August, born 1807, died 1859. Succeeded to the business of his father at Jena.
OTTO, Christian, Halle, second son of Jacob August. Born 1813, died 1876.
OTTO, Heinrich, Berlin, third son of Jacob August. Born 1815, died 1858.
OTTO, Carl, Ludwigslust, fourth son of Jacob August. Born 1825. Violin-maker to the Court of Mecklenburg. Died in 1883.
OTTO, C. U. F., Stockholm, fifth son of Jacob August. Died 1884.
OTTO, Ludwig, St. Petersburg, son of Georg August. Born at Cologne; died 1887.
OTTO, Louis, Dusseldorf, son of Carl, now living.
OTTO, Hermann, St. Petersburg, son of Ludwig. Died 1884.
PARTH, Andreas Nicholas, Vienna, 18th century.
PFRETZSCHNER, Johann Gottlob, Cremona, 1750. Very commonplace.
PFRETZSCHNER, Carl Friedrich, Cremona, son of the preceding; no merit.
PLACK, F., Schoenbock, 1730-45.
POSSEN, L., Schoengau, Bavaria, about 1553. Maker of Viols and Lutes.
RAUCH, ——, Wurtzburg.
RAUCH, Jacob, Manheim, 1720-50. Brother of the above. Court Violin-maker.
RAUCH, Sebastian, Hamburg, 1725. High model, rough workmanship. A maker of this name is said to have worked at Leitmeritz, Bohemia, about 1750. Possibly the same.
RAUCH, ——, Breslau, about 1750.
REICHEL, Johann Gottfried, Absam, 18th century.
REICHEL, Johann Conrad, Neukirchen, 18th century.
REICHERS, August, Berlin, 19th century. Pupil of Bausch of Leipsic.
RIESS, ——, Bamberg, about 1750.
RÖSCHER, C. H. W., Bremen, about 1871.
ROTH, Christian, Augsburg, 17th century.
RUPPERT, Franz, Erfurt, 18th century.
RUPPERT, J. N., Erfurt, 1719-28.
SAINPRAE, Jacques, Berlin, 17th century. A Baryton Viol of this maker is among the musical instruments at the Kensington Museum. It is said to have belonged to Johann Quantz, the famous flute-player.2 The Baryton was a favourite instrument with Haydn. He composed several pieces for the instrument, and was fond of playing it. The Baryton, or Viol di Bordone, is of the character of the Viole d'Amour, being strung with sympathetic metal strings. It is, however, a large and more complicated instrument.
2 The flute-playing of Johann Joachim Quantz in 1728 gave so much pleasure to the Crown Prince of Prussia, afterwards Frederick the Great, that he decided to take lessons from Quantz, who was then in the service of Augustus, Elector of Saxony and King of Poland. Quantz was stationed alternately in Dresden and Warsaw. He became a member of the orchestra of Augustus in 1718, when Jean Baptiste Volumier was its director, of whom mention has been made (page 208) relative to his having been sent to Cremona in 1715 to await the completion of twelve Violins ordered of Stradivari.
SAWICKI, C. N., Vienna, 1792-1850.
SCHEINLEIN, Mathias F., 1710-71. High built; dark varnish.
SCHEINLEIN, Johann Michael, Langenfeld, son of the above. Similar characteristics.
SCHELL, Sebastian, Nuremberg, 1727. Lute-maker.
SCHLICK, ——, Leipsic.
SCHMIDT, ——, Cassel, 1800-25. Copied Stradivari indifferently; wood of an inferior kind.
SCHONFELDER, Johann A., Neukirchen, about 1743.
SCHONGER, Franz, Erfurt, 18th century.
SCHONGER, Georg, Erfurt, son of the above.
SCHORN, Johann, Innspruck, about 1680. An excellent maker; the varnish is similar to that of Albani; high modelled. He appears to have removed to Salzburg. There are Viols of his make dated from there in 1696 and 1699.
SCHORN, Johann Paul, Salzburg, about 1700-16. Court instrument-maker.
SCHOTT, Martin, Prague. Chiefly known as a maker of Lutes.
SCHWARTZ, Strasbourg, about 1845. Several of this name worked in Strasbourg.
SCHWEITZER, J. B., Budapest, died 1875. Flat model, neat workmanship. Made a few Tenors.
STADELMANN, Daniel, Vienna, 1680-1744. Good work, model of Jacob Stainer. Thin varnish, sometimes yellow colour.
STADELMANN, Johann Joseph, Vienna, 18th century. Copied Stainer; average merit.
| Jacobus Stainer in Absam prope Oenipontum. 16— |
STAINER, Jacob, Absam, born July 14, 1621, at Hall. The celebrity of this maker is second only to that of the great Cremonese artists. His admirers in Germany and England were, at one time, more numerous than those of the principal Italian makers. In a manuscript note which Sir John Hawkins added to his own copy of his History of Music (1776), he says, "The Violins of Cremona are exceeded only by those of Stainer, a German, whose instruments are remarkable for a full and piercing tone." To the connoisseur of to-day such commendation may seem inexplicable, and cause him to believe that Fiddle admirers of past times were incapable of appreciating true beauty of form, and its bearing upon sound, or else that fashion made its influence felt on the Fiddle world as elsewhere. It would be absurd to deny that the greatest German maker of Violins that ever lived was a man of rare abilities, because it is indelibly written on his chief works that he was a thorough artist. Therefore an expression of surprise that Jacob Stainer has been estimated higher than even Stradivari by the Germans and English, must not be understood as a reflection on his abilities, since it refers to the form that he chose to give to his works. To account for the apparent inconsistency in the works of Stainer, and to strike the balance between his exceptional abilities on the one side and his model on the other, is not easy. His form was not a borrowed one; it is as original as that of Stradivari—a fact which makes it more than ever unintelligible that he should have been content with it. To arrive at anything approaching to a satisfactory solution, we must endeavour to trace the history of this model. Jacob Stainer was born in the Tyrol, and passed there his early years, and probably received his first instructions from one of the old Tyrolean Lute and Viol makers, at a period when they raised their model, and introduced into the German School the scooping round the sides of the backs and bellies, the inelegant sound-hole, the harsh outline, and uncouth scroll. As experience ripened his understanding, he may have felt that these characteristics of the German School were not such as could be moulded with advantage by an artist, whatever his talent might be, and resolved to do his best to unlearn much that he had acquired. In order to do so with any chance of success, but one course was open to him—that of studying the works of the Italian masters. It has been stated that he went to Italy when very young. With this view I do not concur. In all cases where there is an absence of direct evidence, opinions can only be formed from particular analogies bearing on the case under consideration. Now in the case of Stainer we have nothing to guide us but his variations of style, and dates of time and place. What is the result of a careful investigation of every particle of evidence that we can glean? The style is ever German, although the great maker is head and shoulders above all his countrymen who followed his art. I am thus forced to believe that had so excellent an artist visited Italy in his youth, as reported, there would have remained but the faintest trace of its origin. That men of less ability should be unable to entirely sever themselves from their national style of work, even under circumstances most favourable for such a release, I can readily understand; it is an incapacity which has been exemplified over and over again; but Jacob Stainer was not one of these ordinary men; he had not his superior in the school of Cremona as a finished workman, with the single exception of Antonio Stradivari. I believe, therefore, that the German style was deeply rooted within him when he ceased to be young, and that if he went to Cremona or Venice, it was not until he recognised the inferiority of the school in which he had been bred, as compared with that of Cremona or Venice. That he did not go far enough in his "second thought" is pretty well acknowledged on all sides. His originality was conceived in the German School, amid the worst examples, and it was too late to undo what had gone before. Here, then, lies, I consider, the key to the seeming anomaly that so great a maker as Stainer should have adopted and clung to so clumsy a model. That he became acquainted with much of the best work of the Italians is evidenced by his improved style. The varnish he used furnishes even stronger evidence of his having possessed a knowledge of the subject equal to that of the Cremonese makers. Whether he acquired this knowledge in Cremona or Venice cannot be stated with certainty, but I am inclined to believe that he gained it in the first-named city. Who but an artist acquainted with the best work of Italy in Violin-making could have made those exquisite Violins known as "Elector Stainers"? The wood, selected for its rare loveliness, the finished workmanship, and charming rose-coloured varnish, render these works of art of which one glimpse is a never-fading memory. These works show the diligent zeal with which Stainer laboured in his studies of the Italian masters. He contrived to give these instruments an air of grace quite foreign to the best efforts of his brother German makers. In the sound-hole and scroll is observable his seeming desire to leave behind the German preferences; and although it must be admitted that he was but partially successful in his endeavours to stamp out early tendencies, the connoisseur cannot but be impressed with the results of the artist's manipulations. Had such skill been exercised on a form nearer akin to the Italian, the result would have been perfect.
Prior to the publication of the interesting facts obtained by Herr S. Ruf, relative to the personal history of Jacob Stainer, we had no really reliable account of this famous maker.3 The industry and research of Herr Ruf has not only supplied all the ascertainable facts with regard to Stainer, but also served to trace the history of Stainer fiction. The last-mentioned portion of Herr Ruf's labours is singularly instructive as to the manner in which romance is spliced on to what is intended to be sober history, and which results oftentimes in the graft being rendered invisible, or even unsuspected. He tells us that the first mention of Jacob Stainer is that made by Johann Primisser, about a century after the death of the Violin-maker, and that he merely states that there lived in Absam in 1673 a celebrated maker named Stainer.
3 The notice of Jacob Stainer in the "Biographie Universelle des Musiciens" contains information supplied by J. B. Cartier, the well-known Violinist, which formed a portion of the history of the Violin which Cartier proposed publishing, also from notes made by Paul L. de Boisgelou, who brought together much curious information relative to music and musicians.
Early in the present century Counsellor Von Sardagna collected certain particulars concerning Stainer, which were published in 1822. He states that Stainer lived at Absam, that it is traditionally reported that he went to Venice or Cremona, and died a madman. It appears that this slight material was at once utilised for the manufacture of nearly all the romantic accounts of Stainer with which we are familiar. Herr Ruf says that in the year 1825 there appeared in a German literary publication a poetical effusion entitled "Jacob Stainer," and that in 1829 Dr. Johann Schuler published a novel of great merit on the same subject.
Herr Ruf states that August Lewald in 1835 made the novel of Dr. Schuler the basis of the romantic account of Stainer, published in his "Guide Book to Tyrol," under the title of "An Evening in Absam," but without any acknowledgment whatever. Notwithstanding the growth of Stainer literature down to 1835, not a single historical fact concerning the maker had been brought to light. In the year 1839 Herr Ruf began his labours of research. He discovered at Hall a register of the parish of Absam, wherein he found all the information we possess as regards the birth and death of Stainer and his family. About this period the poem of Dr. Johann Schuler, "Jacob Stainer," was dramatised by Theodore Rabenalt. Other poems based on the same material appeared in 1843, but still the facts of Stainer's life were all but unknown. At length Herr Ruf was prevailed upon by Dr. Schafhaült (an ardent admirer and collector of Stainer's Violins) to prosecute his inquiries concerning the great maker.
In the archives of the town and salt mines at Hall, Herr Ruf found much information, which he published in the local newspapers, the ephemeral nature of which naturally placed his valuable contributions beyond the reach of those likely to value them. In the meantime Nicolaus Diehl, of Hamburg, published a little book on Violins, into which was imported a portion of the romance traceable to the novels or poems on Stainer. Herr Ruf, feeling disappointed that his labours in discovering the facts relative to Stainer had failed to clear away the cloud of Stainer fiction, published in 1872 his book, "Der Geigenmacher Jacob Stainer von Absam in Tirol," which gives us a full account of his researches, and should have secured to him the full credit due to his industry. His facts, however, like the good fiction found in Dr. Schuler's novel, "Jacob Stainer," have been used by German writers on the subject of the Violin without any acknowledgment. Herr Ruf died at Hall in the year 1877.
It is said that Stainer was apprenticed to an organ-builder at Innsbrück, but owing to his weak constitution he was unable to continue in the business, and chose instead the trade of Violin-making. Amongst the rumours concerning this maker may be mentioned that of his having been a pupil of Niccolò Amati. It is certain there is no direct evidence in support of it, neither is it shown that his work is founded on that of Amati. I am satisfied that Stainer was assisted neither by the Brothers Amati nor Niccolò Amati, and I am strengthened in this opinion by the steadfastly German character of a model which no pupil of Amati could have persisted in using, even though based on his earliest traditions.
The marriage of Stainer took place October 7, 1645. On the 9th of October, 1658, he was appointed by the Archduke Leopold (of Austria, Governor of Tyrol) one of the "archducal servants," and on the 9th of January, 1669, he obtained from the Emperor the title of "Violin-maker to the Court." About this period he is said to have incurred the displeasure of the Jesuits, which led to his being accused of the crime of heresy. The accusation seems to have been based on the fact of books of a controversial kind—chiefly Lutheran—having been found in his possession. The penalty he suffered for daring to indulge in polemical literature was six months' imprisonment, and his future prospects were completely shattered. Prior to this misfortune he appears to have been in pecuniary difficulties, and frequently at law with one Salomon Hübmer, of Kirzchdorf, from whom he had obtained money loans. In the year 1677 he petitioned the Emperor Leopold—who was a great patron and lover of music—to render him pecuniary assistance, but failed to procure it. Over-burdened with troubles, he was bereft of his reason, and died insane and insolvent in the year 1683.
|
"Alas! misfortunes travel in a train, And oft in life form one perpetual chain." |
His widow was left with a family of eight daughters, she dying in poverty in 1689, which chronological fact disposes of the fiction, so widely circulated, that in consequence of the great grief he experienced upon the death of his wife he withdrew from the world, and became an inmate of a Benedictine monastery, and that he made within its walls the famous instruments known as "Elector Stainers," which he presented to the twelve Electors. Whether he made them to order, in the usual manner, whether he presented them, or where he made them, matters little; they are works of great merit, and need no mysterious surroundings to call attention to them. The followers of Stainer have been numerous, and are mentioned in the lists of German and English makers. Probably no maker is more mistaken than Stainer: the array of German instruments called by his name is at least ten times greater than the number he actually made. Nearly every high-built tub of a Violin sails under his colours. Instruments without any resemblance whatever to those of Stainer are accepted by the multitude as original Jacob Stainers. Much of this has arisen from the variety of style and work said to have been shown in the instruments of this maker. That this marked variety exists I do not believe. The pattern varies, but the same hand is traceable throughout.
STAINER, Markus, Kufstein, Tyrol, about 1659, described as a brother of Jacob. He styled himself on his label "Citizen and Violin-maker." Citizenship carried with it special privileges, and this maker apparently recognised the honour by having "Burger" after his name.
STAINER, Andreas, Absam, about 1660. Mention is made of a maker of Baryton Viols of this name.
STAUGTINGER, Mathias W., Würzburg, about 1671. Maker of Viols and Lutes.
STEININGER, Jacob, Frankfort, about 1775. Son-in-law of the Violin-maker Döpfer, and uncle of Nicolas Diehl, to whom he gave instructions in Violin-making.
STEININGER, Franz, St. Petersburg, son of Jacob Steininger.
STOSS, ——. Makers of this name worked at Prague, Vienna, and Fussen, about the end of the 18th century.
STOSS, Martin, Vienna, about 1824. Flat model, good workmanship. Stradivari pattern, indifferent varnish.
STRAUBE, ——, Berlin, about 1775.
STRAUSS, Joseph, Neustadt, about 1750.
TIEFFENBRUCKER. There appear to have been several Lute-makers of this name working in the 16th century in Germany and elsewhere. No genuine Violins are known. See DUIFFOPRUGCAR.
TIELKE, Joachim, Hamburg, about 1539-92. The name of Tielke is associated with the most remarkable instruments of the Lute and Guitar kind ever produced in relation to rich and chaste ornamentation. It is said there are glowing accounts in old German books of the magnificent instruments by Tielke, with elaborate designs in silver, gold, and jewels.4 The ornamentation and workmanship seen in the best instruments of this maker bear the impress of Italian art of a high order, and evidence the employment of Italian draughtsmen by the house of Tielke. In the collection of instruments at Kensington is a Chiterna (an instrument of the Lute kind) of this make. The body is ornamented with tortoiseshell, with mythological figures in ivory and precious stones. It is signed, and dated 1539. In the possession of Mr. George Donaldson is a Guitar of this maker, signed, and dated 1592, which is considered to be the most artistic and highly ornamented work known by Joachim Tielke. It is wonderfully preserved, and admirably shows the style and character of the art-work of the period.
4 Engel's "Descriptive Catalogue of the Musical Instruments in Kensington Museum," 1874.
TIELKE, Joachim, Hamburg, about 1660-86. Viol and Violin maker. The dates met with on the instruments signed "Tielke" cover a period of upwards of a century and a half, and thus evidence the existence of the house, in connection with the manufacture of musical instruments, through two or more generations. There is, of this maker, a Viola di Bordone in the collection at Kensington, dated 1686. Mention is made by Fétis of a Violin dated 1670, which was in the possession of André of Offenbach; and a Chiterna dated 1676, similar to that in the Kensington collection, is owned by Mr. George Donaldson. M. Chouquet, in his catalogue of the collection of instruments at the Conservatoire, Paris, refers to a Lute (No. 136) by Tielke.
VOEL, E., Mayence, about 1840. Excellent workmanship, scroll well cut. Stradivari model. The character of work is not unlike that of Bernard Fendt.
VOGEL, Wolfgang, Nuremberg, 1650.
|
ANTONIO STRADIVARI. Date 1708. (HECTOR HAVEMEYER, ESQ.) |
|
ANTONIO STRADIVARI. 1736. |
|
GIUSEPPE GUARNERI DEL GESÙ. Date 1735. (G. HART.) Plate XVI.
|
VOGLER, Johann Georg, Würzburg, about 1750.
und Geigenmacher in Würzburg. 17—
VOIGT, Martin, Hamburg, about 1726.5
5 About thirty makers named Voigt or Voight hail from Germany, some contemporary and others dating from the 18th and 19th centuries. Their work is not of sufficient importance to require special notice.—EDITORS.
WAGNER, Joseph, 1730, Constance.
WEICKERT, Halle, 1800.
WEIGERT, ——, Lintz, about 1721. Maker of Viols.
WEISS, Jacob, Salzburg, 18th century.
Geigenmacher in Salzburg.
WENGER, G. F., Salzburg, 18th century.
| Leopold Widhalm Lauten und Geigenmacher, Nürnberg Fecit, A. |
WIDHALM, Leopold, Nuremburg, 18th century. One of the best imitators of Stainer. The wood is frequently handsome, the work finished with care. Varnish, although wanting the delicacy of that of Stainer, is generally of good quality; its colour is mostly pale red. Nearly all his instruments are branded with the initials inside. His name has frequently been spelt Withalm.
WITTING, J. G., Mittenwald, about 1775.
WYEMANN, Cornelius, Amsterdam, 18th century.
ZWERGER, Antoni, Mittenwald, about 1750. Neat work, good wood, varnish of the character of that seen on the instruments of Kloz.
SECTION XI
The English School
It is somewhat remarkable that the Continental writers on the Violin should have omitted to mention any English maker, either ancient or modern. Such an omission must have occurred either from want of information concerning our best makers, or, if known, they must have been deemed unworthy of the notice of our foreign friends. There is no mention of an English maker in the work of Fétis, "Antoine Stradivari," 1856, although numerous very inferior German and Italian makers are quoted. The same omission is also conspicuous in "Luthomonographie Historique et Raisonné," 1856, and Otto's "Ueber den Bau der Bogeninstrumente," &c., 1828. It may be that Continental connoisseurs have credited themselves with the works of our best makers, and expatriated them, while they have inexorably allowed bad English Fiddles to retain their nationality. However, it is my desire that my foreign brothers should be enlightened on this point, and in all candour informed of the array of makers that England has at different times produced, and is yet capable of producing, did but the new Violin command the price that would be a fair return for the time and skill required in the production of an instrument at once useful and artistic. It will be my endeavour to show forth the qualities of those of our makers whose names, as yet, seem never to have crossed the Channel, so that when these pages on the English School are read by distant connoisseurs, and the merits and shortcomings of the makers therein are fairly weighed by them, the good shall be found so to outweigh the indifferent as to entirely change the opinions formed of us as makers of the leading instrument.
Until the early nineteenth century makers of Violins in England would appear to have been comparatively numerous, if we take into consideration the undeveloped state of stringed instrument music at that period in this country. Among those makers were men of no ordinary genius—men who worked lovingly, guided by motives distinct from commercial gain, so long as they were allowed to live by their work. When, however, the duties on foreign musical instruments were removed, the effect was to partially swamp the gallant little band of Fiddle-makers, who were quite unable to compete with the French and German makers in price (not excellence, be it distinctly understood, for we were undoubtedly ahead of our foreign competitors, both in style and finish, at this period). The prices commanded by many English makers previous to the repeal of the duty were thoroughly remunerative. Five to twenty pounds were given for English Violins, while Violoncellos and Tenors commanded prices proportionately high. The English Violin-makers were thus enabled to bestow artistic care in the making of their instruments. When, however, they were suddenly called upon to compete on equal terms with a legion of foreign manufacturers, the result was not so much that their ardour was damped, as that they themselves were extinguished, and served as another instance of the truth of the adage that "the good of the many is the bane of the few."
In matters of magnitude, whether artistic or otherwise, competition is undoubtedly healthy, there being always a small body of patrons who are willing to check the tendency to deteriorate, common to all productions, by encouraging the worker with extra remuneration, in order that a high degree of excellence may be maintained; but in matters confined to a small circle, as in the case of Violin-making, the number of those willing to encourage artistic workmanship is so minute as to fail even to support one maker of excellence, and thus, when deprived suddenly of its legitimate protection, the art, with other similar handicrafts, must drift into decadence. If we look around the Violin world, it is everywhere much the same. In Italy there is no Stradivari in embryo, in France no coming Lupot, in Germany no Jacob Stainer, and in England no future Banks or Forster. Why so? The answer is twofold. Partly there is fault in the demand, arising from the marked preference of this age for cheapness at the expense of goodness; partly, too, there is a fault in the supply, a foolish desire on the part of the makers to give maturity to their instruments, wherein they always completely fail, yet they will not give up their conceit. Here, again, were we dealing with matters of greater magnitude, the evil influence would be lessened, the artistic impulses would still be felt, though in a less degree; whereas so contracted is the circle of the Violin world, that under any stress the support given to makers willing to bestow an artist's care on their work is totally inadequate.
The case of modern Violin-makers is unfortunate. Old Violins being immeasurably superior to modern productions, the demand must necessarily set steadily for the former, and the modern maker has only the few patrons of new work to support him. It cannot be expected that the players of to-day should patronise the modern Violin in order that the next generation should reap the benefit. Years since it was quite a different matter. The makers were well paid for their work, and new instruments were then made to supply wants similar to those which the horrid Mirecourt or Saxon copy fulfils at present. As with other things, so is it also with Violins; if they are to be produced with the stamp of artistic merit, they must be paid for accordingly; without patronage the worker necessarily becomes careless. Finding that his skill fails to attract attention, he gradually sinks down into the mere routine of the ordinary workman. When Italy shone brightest in art, the patronage and remuneration which the workers received was considerable. Had it been otherwise, the powers of its Raffaele, its Cellini, and last (though not least to the admirers of the Violin), its Stradivari, would have remained simply dormant. Art, like commerce, is regulated in a great measure by supply and demand. In Raffaele's day, sacred subjects were in demand; the Church was his great patron, and aided him in bringing forth the gift which nature had implanted within him. In modern times, landscape-painting became the favoured subject, particularly in England; the result of which preference has been to place us in the foremost rank in that branch of art. The stage furnishes another instance of the effect that patronage has in bringing forth latent talent. If the history of dramatic art be traced, it will be found that its chief works were written when the taste of an appreciative public could be securely counted upon. As it waned, so the writers of merit became rarer; or perhaps it would be more correct to say, the plays produced became less meritorious, the authors being constrained to pander to the prevailing tastes.
As further evidence of the effect of patronage on art, a case in point is found in the manufacture of Venetian glass. The Venetians, centuries ago, became famous for their works in glass, and the patronage they enjoyed was world-wide; but their country being thrown into an unsettled condition, capital drifted from it, until the blowing of glass, together with other industries, was comparatively extinguished. Within recent years the art of making glass has shown signs, even in Venice itself, of reviving with all its former vigour in the workshops of Salviati, the success of which is due in great measure to English capital.
With regard to English Violin manufacture, there would be no reason why Violins should not, at the present moment, be produced in England which should fully reach the standard of merit maintained in our forefathers' days, if only the patronage of the art occupied a larger area. The present dearth of English makers does not arise from any national want of talent for this particular handicraft; in fact, we have plenty of men quite as enthusiastic as our foreign friends for a vocation which, in England also, must be pronounced to be alike venerable in its antiquity and famed for the dexterity of its genius.
The earliest makers of Viols in England seem to have been Jay, Smith, Bolles, Ross, Addison, and Shaw, names thoroughly British. We may take this as good evidence that the making of Viols in England originated with the English, and was not commenced by settlers from the Continent. Doubtless the form of the English Viol and its brethren was taken from the Brescian makers, there being much affinity between these classes of instruments. In the few Violins extant by Christopher Wise the Italian character is very striking. In them we see a flat model, excellent outline, and varnish of good quality. The Viols of Jay have the same Italian character. Later on we have names of some reputation—Rayman, Urquhart, and Barak Norman. In the absence of any direct evidence as regards the nationality of these makers it is requisite to endeavour to trace the style belonging to their works. It will be observed that there was a great improvement in the style of work and varnish of instruments made in England, commencing with the time of Rayman, and it is probable that this step in advance was obtained from intercourse with Italy or the German Tyrol. Starting with Rayman, there is a German ring in the name which makes me think that he came from Germany, and, if so, brought with him the semi-Italian character of work common to the makers who lived so near Brescia. If the work and style of Rayman be carefully examined, it will be seen that there is much in common with the inferior Brescian makers. The outline is rugged, the sound-hole is of that Gothic form peculiar to Brescia; the head is distinct from that of the early English type. At the same period Urquhart made instruments of great merit, the varnish of which is superior to that of Rayman, but is evidently composed of similar ingredients. Its superiority may have arisen from a different mode of mixing only. The name of Urquhart has a North British sound, and it is probable that he was born in Scotland, and settled in London as an assistant to Rayman, who would impart to him the style of foreign work.
The semi-Italian character pervading the instruments made in England at this period seems to have culminated in the productions of Barak Norman, whose best works bear even a more marked Brescian character than those of Rayman. The model varies very much, sometimes being high, at other times very flat; in the latter case the results are instruments of the Maggini type. Barak Norman frequently double-purfled his instruments, and inserted a device in the purfling, evidently following Maggini in these particulars. With Barak Norman ends the list of English copyists of the Brescian makers.
We now arrive at the copyists of Jacob Stainer and the Amati, a class of makers who possessed great abilities, and knew how to use them. The first name to be mentioned is Benjamin Banks, of Salisbury, who may with propriety be termed the English Amati. He was the first English maker who recognised the superior form of Amati's model over that of Stainer, and devoted all his energies to successful imitation. Too much praise cannot be lavished on Banks for the example which he selected for himself and his fellow-makers.
Next follow the names of Forster, Duke, Hill, Wamsley, Betts, Gilkes, Hart, and Kennedy, together with those of Panormo, Fendt, and Lott, who, although not born in England, passed the greater part of their lives here, and therefore require to be classed with the English School. The mention of these makers will bring the reader to the present time.
Upon scanning this goodly list, there will be found ample evidence that we in England have had makers of sufficient merit to entitle us to rank as a distinct school—a school of no mean order. We may therefore assume that the Continental writers who from time to time have published lists of makers of the Violin, and have invariably ignored England, have erred through want of information regarding the capabilities of our makers, both ancient and modern.
The following list will be found to enumerate nearly the whole of the English makers, and indicate the distinctive character of their respective works.