Fortified with the experience which the variously constructed instruments referred to had enabled him to gather, he would seem to have marshalled all his forces in order to enter on an entirely new campaign, one that should be alike glorious to himself and his art. That he succeeded in achieving all that he could have desired, my readers will have an opportunity of judging by the evidence I propose to offer. It was about the year 1700 when Stradivari entered upon a new era in his art. All his past labours appear to have been only measures preliminary to that which he proposed afterwards to accomplish, and were made for the purpose of testing, to the minutest degree, the effect of particular modifications in the form and thickness of his works.

If we stay to consider for a moment the field of research traversed by Stradivari before entering upon what may be not inaptly named the golden period of his life, artistically considered, we shall be better enabled to appreciate his labours.

Starting from the days when he left the workshop of Niccolò Amati, we find him following implicitly in the footsteps of his master. About 1686 he makes use of the more commendable points belonging to the works of former years, adding others of great beauty and utility. At this period he begins to make his originality felt, continuing in this vein, with but little intermission, down to about the year 1690, when he again gives forth fresh evidence of his power to create, as shown in the "long Strad." In expending his powers on those instruments of varied proportions, it might occur to the mind of the observer that he was undoing much that he had accomplished; but I do not consider that such was the case. His project in making these instruments together with those of larger dimensions, evidences, in my opinion, a desire that he had of fairly testing the result of changed methods of construction. The marked variety of his work about this period of his life, I cannot but regard as sufficient proof of the tentative character of the steps he was taking in his art.

From this brief summary of the varied styles given to the works of this true artist, the reader may gather some idea of the solidity of the foundation which he laid, before trusting himself to raise those works which have become monuments to his memory.

That which I have termed the golden period of Stradivari, commenced about 1700, at which time he reached his 56th year: a time of life when it is a rare occurrence to find genius asserting itself with any degree of power—a time, if not of waning, at least of resting, when the mind usually stays from giving forth originality bearing the freshness of earlier years; but Stradivari, with a few other notable instances in the field of art, forms an exception to this rule, and he proves to us that his talent was then in its full vigour, and ripe for new achievements. George Eliot's fancy well contrasts the painter Naldo—

"Knowing all tricks of style at thirty-one,
 And weary of them; while Antonio
 At sixty-nine wrought placidly his best."

From about 1700 his instruments show to us much of that which follows later. The outline is changed, but the curves, blending one with another, are beautiful in the extreme. The corners are treated differently. The wood used for the backs and sides is most handsome, having a broad curl. The scrolls are of bold conception, and finely executed. The varnish also is very rich, and leaves nothing to be desired.

It is not possible to convey to the reader, by means of mere description, anything approaching an adequate notion of the surpassing gracefulness of the entire work of this epoch. The eye must be made the channel to the mind. If the work is present, then, with the aid which these remarks will afford, the reader may gain, by careful study, much valuable insight into the beauties and genius of this famous artist, together with much useful information.

But during this period of his maturity, even, we find that Stradivari did not absolutely confine himself to making instruments as near as possible alike; on the contrary, it is easy to point out certain variations, the meaning of which he doubtless well understood. We find him guided throughout this period by his usual ideas as regards grandeur of outline and degrees of thickness; but the rotundity of the model, the shape that he gave to the sound-hole, the method of setting the sound-hole in the instrument, although, as before remarked, all executed with a breadth of purpose which his earlier efforts fail to show, may be cited as points in which he varied. I have no hesitation in hazarding an explanation of the reasons that prompted him to these differences of construction. It is my firm conviction that these great makers had certain guiding principles as regards the nature and qualities of the wood they used, and that Stradivari, in particular, made the subject a special study. If this be granted, I do not think there is any great difficulty in understanding the meaning of the differences pointed out. If Stradivari constructed his instruments upon philosophical principles, the chief element of variation in the treatment of any particular instrument must have been the difference of quality in the material; it is evident that a method eminently successful when applied to wood of a certain texture and character, would ensure as eminent a failure if applied indiscriminately in all cases. To obtain wood sufficient for two bellies that should be alike in every particular is impossible, though cuttings should be made from the same piece; and we find that the more the material varies in its nature, so much the greater the variations—a fact which helps the view advanced considerably. In another place I have stated that scarcity of sycamore in the days of these old makers is impossible to understand, but scarcity of a particular kind of sycamore is easy to comprehend. He might have had a cartload of wood handsome in appearance; but handsome wood combined with acoustical properties he deemed needful, was another matter. With what extraordinary care he permitted himself to use the lovely wood he did possess! There are several instances where he has used, during one year, four or five distinct cuttings of wood, more particularly as regards the sycamore. These several cuttings include often the handsomest and the plainest. A year or so later we find him again making use of wood from the same cuttings, which proves satisfactorily that he did not work up one piece before commencing with another. He would seem to have kept back the handsomest wood for certain important commissions. I have seen three Stradivari Violins of 1714, with backs having but little figure, yet this was the year in which he made the "Dolphin," which is regarded by the chief connoisseurs in Europe as a chef-d'oeuvre of Stradivari. From the days when it was in the possession of the Marquis de la Rosa to the present time, its beauty has excited the admiration of the Fiddle world. The splendour of the wood is unsurpassed in any Violin, ancient or modern, and it was named the "Dolphin" from the richness and variety of the tints it gives to the varnish. The model is perfection; its solidity of construction and glorious varnish all tend to make it unique. Its beauty is of a kind that does not require the eye of the skilled connoisseur to recognise it; it causes those to exclaim whose knowledge is limited to being aware that it is a Fiddle. His making this superb work of art in the same year in which he made instruments having wood quite opposite in figure, bears out, I consider, what I have before stated, viz., that Stradivari jealously guarded the material he possessed having both handsome figure and valuable acoustical properties. Mr. Charles Reade says of these "Strads": "When a red Stradivari Violin is made of soft, velvety wood, and the varnish is just half worn off the back in a rough triangular form, that produces a certain beauty of light and shade which is, in my opinion, the ne plus ultra. These Violins are rare; I never had but two in my life."

Guarneri violin
GIUSEPPE GUARNERI DEL GESÙ.
1738.
(B. SINSHEIMER, ESQ.)
The Dolphin
THE "DOLPHIN" STRAD.
Date 1714.
Stradavari Violin
ANTONIO STRADIVARI.
1718.
(W. S. McMILLAN, ESQ.)

Plate XII.

It is conceivable that a manufacture so successful as Violin-making proves itself to have been in Italy during the seventeenth and part of the eighteenth centuries, should give rise to scientific inquiry, in order to discover the reason of the excellence of the best Italian instruments, and, if possible, the principles or laws which guided the makers in the exercise of their genius. That investigations of this character should be attended with important results in connection with the science of acoustics, is to be expected. As to laws or principles of a scientific character, I doubt whether such were recognised or understood when the excellence of the manufacture was greatest, believing that Violin makers of the order of Stradivari must be like poets, "born artificers, not made." The chief merits of Stradivari and his contemporary makers were intuitive. Their rules, having their origin in experience, were applied as dictated by their marvellous sense of touch and cunning, with results infinitely superior to any obtained with the aid of the most approved mechanical contrivances. When to these considerations we add that devotedness of purpose, without which nothing really great in art has been accomplished, we have a catalogue of excellences sufficient to account for the greatness of their achievements.

Turning again to the manuscript of Arisi, we find that "On the 12th of May, 1701, Don Antonio Cavezudo, leader of the private orchestra of King Charles II. of Spain, wrote a highly complimentary letter to Stradivari from Madrid, assuring him that though he had received bow instruments from several makers, for different courts, yet he had never been able to obtain them of such a refined and beautiful tone as those made by him." Arisi adds that Don Antonio Cavezudo was also in the service of the Duke of Anjou.

M. Fétis, in his notice of Stradivari,26 remarks: "The life of Antonio Stradivari was as tranquil as his calling was peaceful. The year 1702, alone, must have caused him much disquiet, when, during the war concerning the succession, the city of Cremona was taken by Marshal Villeroy, retaken by Prince Eugene, and finally taken a third time by the French; but after that period Italy enjoyed a long tranquillity, in which the old age of the artist glided peacefully away."

26 "Notice of Anthony Stradivari," by F. J. Fétis, translated by John Bishop. 1864.

A campaign had taken place in Italy in 1701, when Prince Eugene, with thirty thousand troops, out-generalled Catinat, the able French commander, giving Louis XIV. the opportunity of placing the empty and presumptuous Villeroy in command. Prince Eugene had greatly harassed the French in Italy, when, in the night of February 1, 1702, he surprised the French garrison of Cremona, and, though momentarily successful, "missed the town," as Eugene said, "by a quarter of an hour," but carried off the Commander-in-Chief, Villeroy, which the popular song-writers of the day construed into "a double gain to France"—Cremona saved, and Villeroy lost.

It is conceivable that Stradivari, together with his fellow-citizens, witnessed during the year 1702 more of the pomp of war than was agreeable. The blowing of trumpets, the beating of drums, and other martial sounds, would be music not likely to touch pleasantly the ears of Stradivari, apart from the discomfort attendant on military occupation. He, however, appears to have practised his art with undiminished zeal, judging from the following interesting information given by Arisi. He says: "Stradivari made a complete set of bow instruments, which he intended to present to Philip V. of Spain, on the occasion of the passage of the King through Cremona; and he had prepared a memorial to that effect; but he was dissuaded, and the instruments are still in his possession."

No date is supplied with regard to the events above named; we are therefore left to assign the period when the presentation was to have taken place by reference to other sources of information. In an official diary of the journey of Philip V. to Italy27 it appears that the King arrived in Lombardy on the 10th of June, 1702, and that from Milan he went to Lodi on the 1st of July, and made his entry into Cremona two days later, July the 3rd, at one o'clock in the afternoon. Philip remained several days in the town, receiving visits from the Dukes of Parma and of Mantua, and held there several councils of war with the generals of the allied armies (Spanish and French), and appears to have left Cremona on the 20th of July for the seat of war near Mantua. After the victories of Luzzara and Guastalla, the King passed again through Cremona, arriving there on the 3rd of October, staying one night, and leaving the following day for Milan. On this occasion there was much festivity on account of the victories, and the King distributed sums of money and presents for the wounded, the officers, and the generals. It would therefore appear that Stradivari purposed presenting the instruments to Philip either in July or October, 1702. The condition of affairs at Cremona at this period apparently serves to explain the cause of Stradivari having been dissuaded from presenting the instruments.

27 Contained in the work of Don A. de Ubilla y Medina, Marquis de Ribas, entitled, "Succession de el Rèy D. Philipe V.'; Diario de sus Viages, &c." Madrid, 1704, fol.

"On the 10th of November, 1702, the Marquis Giovanni Battista Toralba, General of Cavalry and Governor of Cremona, sent for Stradivari, and, after complimenting him on his peculiar genius, ordered two Violins and a Violoncello, which were afterwards sent as a present to the Duke of Alba.

"In the year 1707, the Marquis Desiderio Cleri wrote to Stradivari, by order of King Charles III. of Spain, from Barcelona, ordering for the royal orchestra six Violins, two Tenors, and one Violoncello."

This extract refers to the Archduke Charles of Austria, afterwards Emperor Charles VI. Charles III., aided by the British fleet, occupied Barcelona in 1706. We have, therefore, the interesting facts that Stradivari made a complete set of instruments which he intended to present to Philip V., and that he was afterwards commissioned to make another set for Philip's opponent, the Archduke.

Lorenzo Giustiniani, a Venetian nobleman, wrote to Stradivari the following letter, which he received July 7, 1716:—


             "Venice, Giustiniani Palace,
                         "Campiello dei Squellini.

"It is generally known that there is not at the present time in the world a more skilled maker of musical instruments than yourself; and as I wish to preserve a record of such an illustrious man and famous artist, I trouble you with this letter, to ask whether you feel disposed to make me a Violin, of the highest quality and finish that you can bestow upon it."


The following extract from Arisi's manuscript brings us to the end of the interesting information therein contained in reference to the subject of this notice, and amply justifies the closing words of the author, who says: "From what I have written it may be seen how great is the excellence of Stradivari's art."

"In 1715, on the 10th of June, Giovanni Battista Volème, director of the private orchestra of the King of Poland, arrived in Cremona, by special order of the King, to await the completion of twelve Violins, which had been ordered of Stradivari, and he remained here three months; and when all the instruments were ready, he took them with him to Poland."

Arisi doubtless refers to the Belgian musician Jean Baptiste Volumier, who was musical director to Augustus, Elector of Saxony and King of Poland, famous as a patron of music and the arts. It was Augustus who appointed Francesco Maria Veracini as his solo Violinist in 1720, and on the title-page of the charming Sonatas of Veracini we read—

"Dedicata
a sua Altezza Reale,
il Serenissimo Principe Reale di Pollonia
et Elettorale di Sassonia.
Francesco Maria Veracini Fiorentino
Compositore di Camera di sua Maestà."

The blending of the names of Stradivari, Augustus, and Veracini, serves to carry our thoughts into channels overflowing with interesting musical records. Volème (Volumier) is said to have taken the instruments from Cremona to Poland. It would therefore appear that the Royal Orchestra was then stationed at Warsaw, the Court Musicians having to divide their time between that city and Dresden. In these capitals Jean Baptiste Volumier directed the music of the Elector Augustus from the year 1706 to 1728. Veracini was appointed solo Violinist in 1720 to Augustus, and the instruments which Stradivari made for the King were, therefore, only five years old. Though new, their tones were doubtless rich and beautiful. Veracini, it may be assumed, saw, heard, and played upon these comparatively new Stradivari Violins. He, however, whilst fully alive to their sterling merits, played, in all probability, upon his Stainers, which he named "St. Peter" and "St. Paul," with more pleasure, from their being thoroughly matured. The order given by Augustus to Stradivari, and the King's determination to have it executed, throws a strong side-light on the lofty position held by Stradivari as a maker of Violins. It also appears to furnish, in some measure, an explanation of the length of time he took to execute the order given by the Marquis Ariberti. We have here an artist of European celebrity, who was incapable of executing indifferent work. Commissions flowed from the chief courts faster than they could be executed. The genius of Stradivari could not but be true to itself. He scorned to sacrifice quality at the shrine of quantity. His patrons had, therefore, to wait patiently for their instruments, though it might be for years. The Elector of Saxony was evidently resolved upon securing his Violins, and it cannot be denied that the measures he adopted to accomplish his purpose did credit to his perseverance, and reflected honour on the Raphael of Violin-making.

Passing to the last period of this great maker, we enter upon the consideration of a set of instruments very distinct from those of an earlier date, and which have given rise to a great divergence of opinion. Some have gone to the extent of denying the authenticity of these works, as far as they relate to Stradivari; others, again, admit that portions of these instruments are from his hand, and finished by his sons or Carlo Bergonzi. There are, doubtless, many exceedingly crude-looking instruments passing under his name, bearing dates ranging from 1730 to 1737, in the making of which he has taken no part; but, on the other hand, to deny that there are any works of Stradivari having these dates is to deny established facts. He must be an ill-informed judge of Violins who fails to recognise the hand of the master in several splendid specimens of this period. The rich oil varnish with which they are covered is precisely the same in quality as that found upon the instruments belonging to other periods, and which he used without exception throughout his career. It is, perhaps, laid on less carefully, and its colour is more varied. In some instances it is brown, and in others light red, the tone of colour varying according to the number of coats. He seems to have used, generally, more varnish upon these instruments than on his earlier ones. The thickness of the coats is seen in those parts (on the back in particular) where the varnish is worn and broken, caused, in all cases, by the shoulder of the player and the lining of the case upon which the back rests. It must be borne in mind that Stradivari had reached a great age when he made these instruments, and he evidently felt proud of his ability to continue his artistic labours after passing his ninetieth year, from the number of Violins wherein, in his own handwriting, he proclaimed himself a nonagenarian. It would not be reasonable to expect to find so high a finish as in the instruments made from 1700 to 1725, but even in these there is a finish distinct from that of either his sons or Bergonzi. But, beyond this, there is recognisable the splendid form, the masterly scroll, and the perfect sound-hole. To say that Omobono Stradivari, Francesco Stradivari, or Carlo Bergonzi had any share in these notable works, evidences hasty judgment, if not ignorance of the style of those makers to whom these instruments are attributed. The work of Carlo Bergonzi is now pretty well understood; in England, particularly, we have some glorious specimens. I need only ask the unbiassed connoisseur if he can reconcile one of these instruments with those of Stradivari of the period named. I have no hesitation in saying that there is not a single feature in common. The work of the sons of Stradivari is less known, but it is as characteristic as that of Bergonzi, and quite as distinct from that of their father, if not more so. The outline is rugged, the modelling distinct, the scroll a ponderous piece of carving, quite foreign to Stradivari the elder, and the varnish, though good, is totally different from the superb coats found on the father's works of late date.

The division of the work of Stradivari into periods makes the reader more acquainted with the maker's style. It must be remembered, however, that he did not strictly confine himself to making instruments wholly of one pattern at any time, although he certainly did so with but few exceptions until the last period, when, as Lancetti rightly observes, he used more frequently his earlier patterns.

The exact spot where Stradivari was buried was made known by the researches of Signor Sacchi, a Cremonese conversant with the annals of his native city.28 This was an interesting addition to the meagre information previously handed down to us touching Stradivari. It had long been known that a family grave was purchased by Stradivari in the church of San Domenico, in the year 1729: but in the certificates from the Cathedral of Cremona it is stated that he was buried in the tomb of Francesco Villani, no mention being made of San Domenico. The exact words are, "Buried in the Chapel of the Rosary, in the parish of St. Matthew." The omission of the name of the church wherein this chapel stood has led to the belief that the precise spot where the mortal remains of Stradivari rest was unknown. Signor Sacchi finds that the historians of Cremona (but especially Panni, in his "Report on the Churches of Cremona, 1762") mention that the Church of San Domenico was in the parish of St. Matthew, and that the only chapel known by the name of "The Rosary" was the third on the right, entering the Church of San Domenico.

28 "The Orchestra" of July 15, 1870, contains a notice relative to the circumstance, entitled "The Tomb of Stradivari."

An important point is mentioned by the historian above quoted, viz., that about the year 1720 the Parish Church of St. Matthew being judged too full to allow of further burials in its interior, the Church of San Domenico (its subsidiary church) was chosen as a place of burial for the parishioners, for which purpose it was used down to about 1780, and that Stradivari purchased there the grave mentioned. This statement is confirmed by the autograph letter of Count Cozio di Salabue, of Casale Monferato, Piedmont.

Church of San Domenico
1. Church of S. Domenico. 2. Chapel of the Rosary. 3. Tomb of Stradivari. 4. Church of St. Matthew (since 1820 the Post Office, the church having been profaned in 1808 by the French). 5. Convent of the Dominican Friars. 6. House of Stradivari. 7. House of Bergonzi. 8. House of Guarneri. 9. Tower of the Church of S. Domenico. 10. The Sacristy. 11. Shop of Ruggeri (Via dei Coltellai). 12-13. Shop of Amati. 14. Shop of Storioni, and afterwards that of Ceruti.

The Church of San Domenico was, in consequence of its decayed condition, demolished about the year 1870. Becoming aware of what was taking place, I gave instructions that a photograph should be taken of the chapel in which the body of Stradivari was interred. This was accomplished whilst the workmen were in the act of levelling the structure, and it has been engraved on wood for the purpose of insertion in this volume. The stone with the inscription "Sepolcro di Antonio Stradivari E Svoi Eredi Anno 1729," which served to denote the spot where the body was buried, is now preserved in the Town Hall of Cremona. Signor Sacchi remembered it having been placed in the corner, close to the steps and iron railing inside the third chapel on the right, in the Church of San Domenico.

M. Fétis says of Stradivari, "We know but little respecting that uneventful existence. Polledro, late first Violin at the Chapel Royal of Turin, who died a few years ago, at a very advanced age, declared that his master had known Stradivari, and that he was fond of talking about him. He was, he said, tall and thin, habitually wore, in winter, a cap of white wool, and one of cotton in summer. He wore over his clothes an apron of white leather when he worked, and as he was always working, his costume scarcely ever varied. He had acquired more than competency by labour and economy, for the inhabitants of Cremona were accustomed to say, 'As rich as Stradivari!'"29 The house he occupied stands in the Piazza Roma, formerly called the Square of San Domenico, in the centre of which was the church of the same name. The house is still in good condition, and is the principal place of interest in the old city of Cremona to the many admirers of Stradivari who visit the seat of Violin-making in olden times. After the death of Stradivari it was occupied by his sons Omobono and Francesco; and afterwards by the maker's youngest son, Paolo, who carried on there the business of a cloth merchant. Stradivari worked on the ground floor, and used the upper storey for varnishing.

29 "Notice of Anthony Stradivari."

It is somewhat singular that the Cremonese take but little apparent interest in the matter, and have expressed themselves as being astonished at the demonstrations of respect which their French and English visitors pay to the hallowed spot. The better-informed Cremonese have some acquaintance with the name of Stradivari; but to create any enthusiasm among them from the fact of his having been a Cremonese, or from the historical associations which connect him with that city, would be difficult. After the exercise of considerable patience and determination, Signor Sacchi, in conjunction with a few Cremonese, managed to raise sufficient enthusiasm among the inhabitants to permit the authorities to name a street after Stradivari, and another after Amati. This worthy act was performed by the late librarian, Professor Pietro Fecit, who aided Signor Sacchi in his researches in connection with the past of Cremona's Violin-makers.

This street-naming was much opposed at the time. The citizens of Cremona are, however, not quite singular in this respect. It has been remarked that our American friends show far greater interest in Stratford-upon-Avon and its memories than we ourselves do. I must confess that I have great respect for the genuine enthusiast.

The Cremonese have scarcely an idea of the extent of veneration with which we admirers of the art regard their illustrious citizen. They will be astonished to hear that "Stradivari" forms the Christian name of some Englishmen. A well-known dealer, some years since, determined to commemorate his admiration for the great maker, and, accordingly, named his descendant "Stradivari Turner." We have stepped out of the ordinary path of house nomenclature, and have adopted the cherished name of "Stradivari" to the bewilderment of the passer-by, whose unmusical soul fails to be impressed by it. To crown our seeming eccentricities (in the eyes of our Italian friends), I may mention that the magic name has found its way into circles where little interest is taken in the subject of this notice, judging from the following announcement, which appeared in the profane pages of a newspaper: "Waterloo Purse.—E. Mr. Goodlake's Gilderoy beat Earl of Stair's Stradivarius, and won the Purse;" the result showing that Stradivari was evidently out of place in such company.

Franciscus Stradivarius Cremonensis
Filius Antonii faciebat Anno 1742

STRADIVARI, Francesco, Cremona, 1720-43. Son of Antonio Stradivari. Worked with his brother Omobono for several years. Many of the later works of Antonio Stradivari have been attributed to his sons. The character of the work is wholly distinct. I can well understand the error of attributing the instruments of Francesco Stradivari to Carlo Bergonzi, there being many points in common, but that so many marked specimens of the works of Antonio should be deemed apocryphal is beyond my comprehension. The work of Francesco is altogether less finished, but at the same time it shows the hand of the master. The design is bold and original. The tone of Francesco's instruments is invariably rich and telling.

Lancetti states—speaking of Francesco Stradivari—"After the death of his father, he made several Violins and Tenors, to which he put his own name. Although he did not succeed in perfectly imitating the works of his father, the instruments which he made in the years 1740 and 1742, and which remained after his death in the possession of his brother Paolo, were sold at the same price as those of his father, as mentioned in the correspondence between Count Cozio and Paolo. Francesco died at the end of 1742, the year Omobono died, and in which he made the Violins bought by Count Cozio." The date of death (as given by Lancetti), though incorrect by some months—he having died May 11, 1743, aged 72 years—shows the care and trouble taken to render the information as complete as possible, these dates having been given without reference to registers, but simply as stated by Paolo.

Omobonus Stradivarius filius Antonii
Cremone fecit, Anno 1740.

STRADIVARI, Omobono, Cremona, 1742. Brother of Francesco. Lancetti remarks, "Omobono chiefly restored instruments and arranged and regulated them." Francesco, it will be seen, survived his brother about thirteen months, and with him, as with Girolamo Amati, the son of Niccolò, we reach the end of the family's long and historical career of Violin-making. Upon the death of Francesco, the shop in the Piazza San Domenico (now named Piazza Roma) was closed, after having been occupied by the family of Stradivari as Violin-makers for upwards of sixty-three years. From here were sent into cathedral, church, and royal orchestras the largest number of Violins and kindred instruments ever made by one maker—instruments which bore the indelible stamp of genius and have gladdened the sight and hearing of untold thousands. The famous shop, as previously noticed, was next opened by Paolo Stradivari, who was a cloth merchant or warehouseman. Paolo died in 1776, a year after the date of the correspondence which passed between him and Count Cozio di Salabue. Antonio, son of Paolo, born in 1738 and married in 1762, had a son Giacomo, born in 1769 and married in 1797. Cesare, the son of Giacomo, became a physician in Cremona, married in 1838, and left, as the representative of the Cremonese branch of the family, Dr. Libero Stradivari, a barrister-at-law and an excellent performer on the flute.

SURSANO, Spirito, Coni, 1714-35.

TANEGIA, Carlo Antonio, Milan, early in the 18th century.

TANINGARD, Giorgio, Rome, 17—.

David Tecchler Liutaro
fecit Romæ 17—

TECCHLER, David, Rome, 1680-1743. A highly esteemed maker. He worked in Venice, Salzburg, and Rome, chiefly in the latter city. His instruments vary in form, some having a marked German style: they are high-modelled, and the sound-hole partakes of the Stainer character. These were probably made in Salzburg, to the order of his patrons. Those instruments which date from Rome are chiefly of the Italian type, and are so much superior to the others that it seems difficult to reconcile varieties so distinct as the work of the same man. They are finely formed, have splendid wood, and rich varnish of a yellow tint; the bellies are of a mottled character, similar to those so much used by Niccolò Amati. His Violoncellos are among the finest of his instruments. They are mostly of a large size.

TEDESCO, Leopoldo, pupil of Niccolò Amati. He went to Rome. I have seen a Violin of his make dated from there 1658. Workmanship a little rough, good varnish, Amati outline.

TESTORE, Carlo Giuseppe, Milan, about 1690 to 1720. The form resembles that of Guarneri. The wood is often plain in figure.

TESTORE, Carlo Antonio, Milan, about 1730 to 1764. Son of Giuseppe. Copied Guarneri and Amati. These instruments are bold and well made; their tone is excellent; wood often plain in figure.

TESTORE, Giovanni, son of Carlo Antonio.

TESTORE, Paolo Antonio, Milan, about 1740. Brother of Carlo Antonio. Copied Guarneri. The varnish is mostly yellow; frequently unpurfled.

TIEFFENBRUCKER, Leonardo, Padua, 1587. Lute-maker.

TODINI, Michele, seventeenth century, a native of Saluzzo, lived for many years at Rome. Todini was the inventor and maker of a great number of musical contrivances, in which clockwork played an important part. He occupied himself with this manufacture for several years, and turned his house into a kind of musical museum. He published in 1676 a pamphlet describing its contents. His name is associated with our subject in having adopted a new mode of stringing the Violono, or Double-Bass, by using four strings, and playing himself upon the instrument at oratorio performances in Rome. I have mentioned in Section I. that the Violono was originally used with several strings—five, six, or seven—and with frets. Todini is therefore credited with having introduced the method of stringing the Double Bass which led to the conversion of the old Violonos into Double-Basses fitted for modern requirements.

TONONI, Carlo, Bologna. At the exhibition at Milan in 1881, an inlaid Kit, of beautiful workmanship, was exhibited of this maker.

Carolo Tunonus fecit Bononiae
in Platea Castælionis Anno Domini 1698.

Carolus Tononi Bonon fecit Venetiis
sub Titulo S. Cecilæ Anno 1739.

TONONI, Carlo Antonio, Venice, born at Bologna, probably a son of the above. The model varies very much; those of the flat pattern are excellent instruments. They are large, and beautifully made. The varnish, though inferior to that of Santo Serafino, is similar. These Violins are branded above the tail-pin. His instruments date from about 1716.

TONONI, Giovanni, about 1700. Similar characteristics.

TONONI, Felice, Bologna.

TONONI, Guido, Bologna.

TOPPANI, Angelo de, Rome, about 1740. Scarce; workmanship resembles that of Tecchler.

TORTOBELLO, Francesco, Rome, 16—. Maggini characteristics.

TRAPANI, Raffaele, Naples, about 1800. Large pattern; flat model; purfling deeply laid; edges sharp; scroll heavy.

VALENZANO, Gio. Maria, Rome, 1771 to about 1830. Neapolitan character; neat work; varnish excellent in some specimens, being soft and transparent.

VETRINI, Battista, Brescia, about 1629. Yellow varnish of good quality; handsome wood; rather small.

VIMERCATI, Paolo, Venice, about 1700. Similar to Tononi. Jacob Stainer is said to have worked in the shop of Vimercati.

WENGER, Padua, Lute-maker, 1622.

ZANNETTO, Pellegrino, Brescia, 1547. M. Chouquet in his "Catalogue Raisonné" of the instruments at the Conservatoire in Paris, describes a six-string Viol da Gamba of this make.

ZANOLA, Giovanni Battista. Flat model; rough workmanship; German character.

Joannes Baptista Zanola, Verona, 17—

ZANOLI, Giacomo, 1740-80. Verona. Worked in Venice, Padua, and Verona. Venetian character.

ZANOTTI, Antonio, Mantua, about 1734.

Antonius Zanotus, fecit Mantuæ, anno 1734.

ZANTI, Alessandro, Mantua, 1765. He copied Pietro Guarneri, but had little knowledge of varnishing, if we are to judge from the few instruments of this maker extant.

ZANURE, Pietro, Brescia, 1509. A maker of Viols.

ZENATTO, Pietro, Treviso, about 1634.

Pietro Zenatto fece in
Treviso Anno 1634.




SECTION VII

The French School


The French have long occupied a foremost place in the production of articles needing delicate workmanship, and it is therefore not surprising that they should at an early period have turned their attention to the art of Violin-making, which requires in a high degree both skilful workmanship and artistic treatment. The French manufacture of Violins appears to have commenced about the same period as the English, viz., in the early part of the 17th century, François Médard and Tywersus being among the French makers, and Rayman and Wise their fellows in England. The primitive French makers, like their English brethren, copied the instruments made at Brescia and Cremona, to which course they adhered down to the days of Barak Norman, when the two nations parted company, as regards having a common type, the French continuing the path they had hitherto taken, and copying the Italians, with scarcely any deviation, to the present time. The English left the Italian form for the German one of Jacob Stainer, which they adopted, with but few exceptions, for nearly a century, recovering the Italian about the middle of the 18th century. It is remarkable that French makers should have restrained themselves from following the pattern of the famous German maker when his name was at its height and his instruments were in such demand. That in not adopting the then popular form they were rightly guided, experience has clearly demonstrated. When we scan the older works the French have left us, and consider the advantage they had in keeping to the Italian form, we cannot but feel disappointed in finding so few meritorious instruments among them. There appear to have been many makers who were quite unconcerned whether their instruments possessed merit becoming the productions of a true artist; their chief aim would seem to have been to make in dozens—in other words, quantity in place of quality. If the early French makers are carefully studied, it will be seen that Boquay, Pierray, and one or two of their pupils are the only makers deserving of praise. It must be admitted that the shortcomings of the makers of the first period were adequately supplied by those of the second period, which includes the king of French artists, Nicolas Lupot. The old French school, originating with Tywersus and Médard, includes the following makers: Nicolas Renault, of Nancy, Médard, also of Nancy, Dumesnil, Bertrand, Pierray, Boquay, Gaviniés, Chappuy, Ouvrard, Paul Grosset, Despont, Saint-Paul, Salomon, Véron, with others of less importance. Many of these makers had a fair amount of ideas, which, had they been well directed, might have led to fame. Others contented themselves with copying, without giving any place to their fancy. It will be found that many of the instruments by Boquay, Pierray, and a few others, have varnish upon them closely resembling that of the Venetian school; it is full-bodied, very transparent, and rich in colour. Many of their works are covered with a very inferior quality of varnish, which has caused some confusion respecting the merit due to them as varnishers, they being frequently judged by their inferior instruments, without reference to their good ones. It is evident that they made two qualities of varnish, in accordance with the price they were to obtain, as was commonly done in England by the Forsters, Banks, and Wamsley, where similar confusion exists. The Italians happily avoided this objectionable practice. Their works are of one uniform quality in point of varnish. This divergence may possibly be accounted for by the difference of climate. In Italy, oil varnish, judiciously used, would dry rapidly, whereas in France or England the reverse would be the case; hence its more sparing use.

We will now glance at the second French School of makers, commencing with De Comble. Learning his art in Italy, and, it is said, under Stradivari, he brought to bear a knowledge superior to that possessed by the makers mentioned above. The form he introduced was seen to be in advance of that hitherto met with among the French and Belgian makers, and led to its being chiefly followed. The next maker was Pique, who made Violins and Violas that were excellent in point of workmanship, and had he been equally successful in varnishing he would probably have been held in the same estimation as Nicolas Lupot. From these makers sprang quite a little school of its own, comprising François Gand, in Paris, who succeeded to the business of Lupot, and Bernardel, with several others less known. Mention must not be omitted of another excellent copyist—Silvestre, of Lyons. He has left some charming specimens of his art. They are lighter in character than the works of Nicolas Lupot, and resemble the work of Stradivari from 1680 to 1710. Every portion of the work evidences the skill and judgment of the maker. The wood, with scarcely an exception, has not been manipulated in order to darken it, consequently the instruments become of increasing merit as age acts upon them.

The practice of preparing the wood for Violin-making, either by baking it or by the application of acids, may be traced, in the first instance, to a desire to obtain artificially those results which are brought about by the hand of time. In obtaining lightness and dryness in new wood, it was imagined that the object in view would be reached without the aid of Dame Nature. Experience, however, has shown that Fiddles, like all things intended to pass into green old age, mature gradually, and are not to be benefited by any kind of forcing process. The earliest account I have met with of Fiddle-baking occurred in England about 150 years since. One Jeacocke, a baker by trade, and a lover of music by nature, used to bake his Fiddles in sawdust for a week whenever their tones showed symptoms of not being up to his standard of quality. In France the practice may be said to have been introduced about eighty years ago, with a view of facilitating the creation of such mysteries as Duiffoprugcar and Morella Violins, baked and browned until they had something of a fifteenth-century hue. The same means were adopted in the production of instruments intended as copies of the works of Stradivari and Guarneri. The brown hue of the originals, and the worn and broken condition of the varnish which comes of age alone, were imitated with more or less ingenuity. Happily the error is recognised, as far as the best workmanship is concerned, in France. The legitimate imitator's art no longer includes that of depicting wear and brownness, rendering abortive so much excellent work.

It only remains now to mention Salle, Vuillaume, Chanot, Gand, Germain, Mennégand, Gaillard, and Miremont, all copyists of more or less note, who may be said to complete the modern French school. These makers are or were the chief manufacturers of Violins in France of a better class. Those made by thousands yearly at Mirecourt are not Violins in the eyes of the connoisseur. They are made, as common cabinet work is produced in England, by several workmen, each taking a portion, one making the backs, another the sides, another the bellies, and so on with the other parts of the instrument, the whole being finally arranged by a finisher. Such work must necessarily be void of any artistic nature; they are like instruments made in a mould, not on a mould, so painfully are they alike. This Manchester of Fiddle-making has doubtless been called into being by the great demand for cheap instruments, and has answered thus far its purpose, but it has certainly helped to destroy the gallant little bands of makers who were once common in France, Germany, and England, among whom were men who were guided by reverential feelings for the art, irrespective of the gains they reaped by their labours. The number of instruments yearly made in Mirecourt and Saxony1 amounts to many thousands, and is yearly increasing. They send forth repeated copies of Amati, Maggini, Guarneri, and Stradivari, all duly labelled and dated, to all parts of the world, frequently disappointing their simple-minded purchasers, who fondly fancy they have thus become possessed of the real article at the trifling cost of a few pounds. They produce various kinds of modern antiques in Violins, some of which display an amount of ingenuity worthy of being exercised in a better cause; but usually the whole thing is overdone, and the results, in point of tone, are far more disastrous than in the common French copies. The following list of French, Belgian, and Dutch makers contains many names not included in the first edition of this book. The works wherein several of these names occur are M. J. Gallay's, "Les Luthiers Italiens aux 17ième et 18ième Siècles," 1869; M. Fétis, "Biographie Universelle des Musiciens;" M. Vidal, "Les Instruments à Archet," 1876; the "Catalogue Raisonné," of the instruments at the Conservatoire, by Gustave Chouquet, Paris, 1875; "Recherches sur les facteurs de Clavecins," by M. le Chevalier de Burbure, Antwerp, 1863; Pougin's "Supplement to the Dictionary of Fétis;" and Mendel's "Musikalisches Conversations-Lexikon," 1880.

1 Germany's yearly output of such instruments is enormous, the principal seats of manufacture being Mark-Neukirchen (Saxony) and Mittenwald (Bavaria).