:: Historical Notes ::

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 Violin -Its Famous Makers and Their Imitators
by George Hart
Published in 1909

From Brescia came the masters who established the School of Cremona. The Amatis took the lead, their founder being Andrea Amati, after whom each one of the clan appears to have gained a march on his predecessor, until the grand masters of their art, Antonio Stradivari and Giuseppe Guarneri del Gesù, advanced far beyond the reach of their fellow-makers or followers. The pupils of the Amati, Stradivari, and Guarneri settled in Milan, Florence, and other cities previously mentioned as centres of Violin-making, and thus formed the distinct character or School belonging to each city. A close study of the various Schools shows that there is much in common among them. A visible individuality is found throughout the works of the Italian makers, which is not to be met with in anything approaching the same degree in the similar productions of other nations. Among the Italians, each artist appears to have at first implicitly obeyed the teaching of his master, afterwards, as his knowledge increased, striking out a path for himself. To such important acts of self-reliance may be traced the absolute perfection to which the Italians at last attained. Not content with the production of instruments capable of producing the best tone, they strove to give them the highest finish, and were rewarded, possibly beyond their expectation. The individuality noticed as belonging in a high degree to Italian work is in many instances very remarkable. How characteristic the scroll and the sound-hole of each several maker! The work of master and pupil differs here in about the same degree as the handwriting of father and son, and often more. Although Stradivari was a pupil of Niccolò Amati, yet how marked is the difference between the scrolls and sound-holes of these two makers; Carlo Bergonzi worked with Stradivari, yet the productions of these two are more easily known apart. A similarly well-defined originality is found, in a more or less degree, to pervade the entire series of Italian Violins, and forms a feature of much interest to the connoisseur.

In closing my remarks upon the Italian School of Violin-making, I cannot withhold from the reader the concluding sentences of the Cremonese biographer, Vincenzo Lancetti, as contained in his manuscript relative to the makers of Cremona. He says: “I cannot help but deeply deplore the loss to my native city (where for two centuries the manufacture of stringed instruments formed an active and profitable trade) of the masterpieces of its renowned Violin-makers, together with the drawings, moulds, and patterns, the value of which would be inestimable to those practising the art. Is it not possible to find a citizen to do honour to himself and his city by securing the collection of instruments, models, and forms brought together by Count Cozio di Salabue, before the treasure be lost to Italy? I have the authority of Count Cozio to grant to such a patron every facility for the purchase and transfer of the collection, conditionally that the object be to resuscitate the art of Violin-making in Cremona, which desire alone prompted the Count in forming the collection.” These interesting remarks were written in the year 1823, with a view to their publication at the end of the account of Italian Violin-makers which Lancetti purposed publishing. As the work did not see the light, the appeal of the first writer on the subject of Italian Violins was never heard. Had it been, in all probability Cremona would at this moment have been in possession of the most remarkable collection of instruments and models ever brought together, and be maintaining in at least some measure the prestige belonging to its past in Violin-making.

The Violin -Its Famous Makers and Their Imitators
by George Hart
Published in 1909

Select Violins Home

To enable the reader to understand more readily the various types of Italian Violins, they may be classed as the outcome of five different schools. The first is that of Brescia, dating from about 1520 to 1620, which includes Gasparo da Salò, Maggini, and a few others of less note. The next, and most important school, was that of Cremona, dating from 1550 to 1760, or even later, and including the following makers: Andrea Amati, Girolamo Amati, Antonio Amati, Niccolò Amati, Girolamo Amati, son of Niccolò; Andrea Guarneri, Pietro Guarneri, Giuseppe Guarneri, the son of Andrea; Giuseppe Guarneri (”del Gesù”), the nephew of Andrea; Antonio Stradivari, and Carlo Bergonzi. Several well-known makers have been omitted in the foregoing list simply because they were followers of those mentioned, and therefore cannot be credited with originality of design. The makers of Milan and Naples may be braced together as one school, under the name of Neapolitan, dating from 1680 to 1800. This school contains makers of good repute, viz., the members of the Grancino family, Carlo Testore, Paolo Testore, the Gagliano family, and Ferdinando Landolfi. The makers of Florence, Bologna, and Rome may likewise be classed together in a school that dates from 1680 to 1760, and includes the following names: Gabrielli, Anselmo, Tecchler, and Tononi. The Venetian school, dating from 1690 to 1764, has two very prominent members in Domenico Montagnana and Santo Seraphino; but the former maker may, not inappropriately, be numbered with those of Cremona, for he passed his early years in that city, and imbibed all the characteristics belonging to its chief makers.

Upon glancing at this imposing list of makers, it is easy to understand that it must have been a lucrative trade which in those days gave support to so many; and, further, that Italy, as compared with Germany, France, or England at that period, must have possessed, at least, more makers by two-thirds than either of those three countries. And this goes far to prove, moreover, that the Italian makers received extensive foreign patronage, their number being far in excess of that required to supply their own country’s wants in the manufacture of Violins. Roger North, in his “Memoirs of Musick,” evidences the demand for Italian Violins in the days of James II. He remarks: “Most of the young nobility and gentry that have travelled into Italy affected to learn of Corelli, and brought home with them such favour for the Italian music, as hath given it possession of our Parnassus. And the best utensil of Apollo, the Violin, is so universally courted and sought after, to be had of the best sort, that some say England hath dispeopled Italy of Violins.” We also read of William Corbett, a member of the King’s band, having formed about the year 1710 a “gallery of Cremonys and Stainers” during his residence in Rome.

Brescia was the cradle of Italian Violin-making, for the few makers of bowed instruments (among whom were Gaspard Duiffoprugcar, who established himself at Bologna; Dardelli, of Mantua; Linarolli and Maller, of Venice) cannot be counted among Violin-makers. The only maker, therefore, of the Violin of the earliest date, it remains to be said, was Gasparo da Salò, to whom belongs the credit of raising the manufacture of bowed instruments from a rude state to an art. There may be something in common between the early works of Gasparo da Salò and Gaspard Duiffoprugcar, but the link that connects these two makers is very slight, and in the absence of further information respecting the latter as an actual maker of Violins, the credit of authorship must certainly belong to Gasparo da Salò.

We are indebted to Brescia for the many grand Double-basses and Tenors that were made there by Gasparo da Salò and Maggini. These instruments formed the stepping-stones to Italian Violin-making, for it is evident that they were in use long before the first era of the Violin. The Brescian Violins have not the appearance of antiquity that is noticeable in the Double-basses or Tenors, and for one Brescian Violin there are ten Double-basses, a fact which goes far to prove that the latter was the principal instrument at that time.

The Violin -Its Famous Makers and Their Imitators
by George Hart
Published in 1909

That Italy’s greatest Violin-makers lived in times favourable to the production of works possessing a high degree of merit, cannot be doubted. They were surrounded by composers of rare powers, and also by numerous orchestras. These orchestras, composed mainly of stringed instruments, were scattered all over Italy, Germany, and France, in churches, convents, and palaces, and must have created a great demand for bow instruments of a high class.

The bare mention of a few of the names of composers then existing will be sufficient to bring to the mind of the reader well versed in musical matters the compositions to which they owe their fame. In the sixteenth century, Orlando di Lasso, Isaac, and Palestrina were engaged in writing Church music, in which stringed instruments were heard; in the seventeenth, lived Stradella, Lotti, Bononcini, Lully, and Corelli. In the eighteenth century, the period when the art of Violin-making was at its zenith, the list is indeed a glorious one. At this point is the constellation of Veracini, Geminiani, Vivaldi, Locatelli, Boccherini, Tartini, Viotti, Nardini, among the Italians; while in France it is the epoch of Leclair and Gaviniès, composers of Violin music of the highest excellence. Surrounded by these men of rare genius, who lived but to disseminate a taste for the king of instruments, the makers of Violins must certainly have enjoyed considerable patronage, and doubtless those of tried ability readily obtained highly remunerative prices for their instruments, and were encouraged in their march towards perfection both in design and workmanship. Besides the many writers for the Violin, and executants, there were numbers of ardent patrons of the Cremonese and Brescian makers. Among these may be mentioned the Duke of Ferrara, Charles IX., Cardinal Ottoboni (with whom Corelli was in high favour), Cardinal Orsini (afterwards Pope Benedict XIII.), Victor Amadeus Duke of Savoy, the Duke of Modena, the Marquis Ariberti, Charles III. (afterwards Charles VI., Emperor of Germany), and the Elector of Bavaria, all of whom gave encouragement to the art by ordering complete sets of stringed instruments for their chapels and for other purposes. By the aid of such valuable patronage the makers were enabled to centre their attention on their work, and received reward commensurate with the amount of skill displayed. This had the effect of raising them above the status of the ordinary workman, and permitted them as a body to pass their lives amid comparative plenty. There are, without doubt, instances of great results obtained under trying circumstances, but the genius required to combine a successful battle with adversity with high proficiency in art is indeed a rare phenomenon. Carlyle says of such minds: “In a word, they willed one thing, to which all other things were subordinate, and made subservient, and therefore they accomplished it. The wedge will rend rocks, but its edge must be sharp and single; if it be double, the wedge is bruised in pieces, and will rend nothing.” It may, therefore, be affirmed that the greatest luminaries of the art world have shone most brightly under circumstances in keeping with their peaceful labours, it not being essential to success that men highly gifted for a particular art should have this strength of will unless there were immediate call for its exercise.

Judging from the large number of bow-instrument makers in Italy, more particularly during the seventeenth century, we should conclude that the Italians must have been considered as far in advance of the makers of other nations, and that they monopolised, in consequence, the chief part of the manufacture. The city of Cremona became the seat of the trade, and the centre whence, as the manufacture developed itself, other less famous places maintained their industry. In this way there arose several distinct schools of a character marked and thoroughly Italian, but not attaining the high standard reached by the parent city. Notwithstanding the inferiority of the makers of Naples, Florence, and other homes of the art as compared with the Cremonese, they seem to have received a fair amount of patronage, the number of instruments manufactured in these places of lesser fame being considerable.

The Violin -Its Famous Makers and Their Imitators
by George Hart
Published in 1909

Select Violins Home