A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF ACTIONS TAKEN UPON HISTORIC MUSICAL

INSTRUMENTS THROUGH THE PERIOD OF THE EARLY MUSIC REVIVAL

FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE 20th CENTURY TO THE 1990s

Submitted by Robert Leslie Barclay, BA

in candidature for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Faculty of Arts
The Open University

15 April 1999
 LIBRARY AUTHORISATION FORM 1 ?
I
1
Please return this form to the The Research Degrees Centre with the two b o b d copies of your
\
thesis to be deposited with the University Library.
All students should complete Part 1. Part 2 only applies to PhD students. \
---. - -%----

Degree: PA D

Part 1 Open University Library Authorisation [to be completed by all students]

I confirm that I am willing for my thesis to be made avaiIabIe to readers by the Open University
Library, and that it may be photocopied, subject to the discretion of the Librarian.

Part 2 British Library Authorisation [to be completed by PhD students only]

If you want a copy of your PhD thesis to be available on loan to the British Library Thesis Service
as and when it is requested, you must sign a British Library Doctoral Thesis Agreement Form.
Please return it to the Research Degrees Centre with this form. The British Library will publicise
the details of your thesis and may request a copy on loan from the University Library. Information
on the presentation of the thesis is given in the Agreement Form.

Please note the British Library have requested that theses should be printed on one side only to
enable them to produce a clear microfilm. The Open University Library sends the fully bound copy
of theses to the British Library.

The University has agreed that your participation in the British Library Thesis Service should be
voluntary. Please tick either (a) or (b) to indicate your intentions.

[a] / I am willing for the Open University to loan the British Library a copy of my thesis.
A signed Agreement Form is attached.

[b] 0 I do not wish the Open University to loan the British Library a copy of my thesis
 ..
11

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Prefaratory Material ..................................................... vii

List of illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Illustration credits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
...
Nomenclature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
...
Limitations of Thesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . viii
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

Introduction .............................................................. 1

i The polemic: To play or to preserve . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

..
11 The early music revival . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
...
111 The impact on historic musical instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
iv The sources of tension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
V A new context for craft activity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Chapter One .The Historic Instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

1.1 Defining the historic instrument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

1.1.1 Singularization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.1.2 Function ............................................... 16
1.1.3 The transition to historic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1.2 Categorizing the instrument’s use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1.3 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Chapter Two .Calendar of Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Chapter Three .Analysis of Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

3.1 Documentation of the craft tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

3.2 Sources on general care of instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
3.3 The rise of technical documentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.4 The silent artisan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
3.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

ChapterFour-Currency .................................................. 63

4.1 Musical function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

4.2 Nature of sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
4.3 Continuity through maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
4.4 The values of Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
4.4.1 The pathetic fallacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
4.4.2 Legendary attributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
 ...
111

4.4.3 Arcane practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

4.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Chapter Five .Restitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

5.1 Musical function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

5.2 The nature of sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
5.3 The definition of restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
5.4 The values of Restitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.4.1 Authentic experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
5.4.2 Positivistic thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
5.4.3 The didactic element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
5.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

Chapter Six .Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

6.1 Suspension of musical fbnction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

6.2 The nature of sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
6.3 Preservation and conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
6.3.1 Conservation in popular understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
6.3.2 Development of the conservation discipline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .101
6.4 The values of Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
6.4.1 Integrity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
6.4.2 The pragmatic approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
6.5 Benignneglect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
6.6 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114

Chapter Seven .Methodology of the Critical Analysis ......................... 118

7.1 The superimposition of regimens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118

7.2 Thematrix .................................................. 119
7.2.1 Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
7.2.2 Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
7.2.3 Restitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
7.2.4 Demonstrating the matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
7.3 The stages of criticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
7.3.1 Location in the matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
7.3.2 Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
7.3.3 Rationale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
7.3.4 Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
7.3.5 Dissonances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

Chapter Eight .Critical Analysis: Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

8.1 Coates barrel organ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

8.1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
 iv

8.1.2 Use by the Chilidren of Peace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

8.1.3 Interim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
8.1.4 Renovation1975-79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
8.1.5 Renovation ending in 1984 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
8.1.6 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155
8.2 Steinway piano (Rideau Hall) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
8.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
8.2.2 Acquisition and use by Glenn Gould . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
8.2.3 Purchase for Rideau Hall in 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
8.2.4 Restoration and continuing use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
8.2.5 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
8.3 AmatiQuartet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
8.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
8.3.2 The quartet-in-residence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
8.3.3 Fallow period fiom 1973 until 1992 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
8.3.4 The quartet on loan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
8.3.5 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187

Chapter Nine .Critical Analysis: Restitution ................................. 199

9.1 Steinway piano (National Library) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

9.1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
9.1.2 Use by Glenn Gould . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
9.1.3 Accidental damage and repair ............................. 206
9.1.4 Purchase by the National Library of Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .209
9.1.5 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218
9.2 The Hart House viols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
9.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
9.2.2 Assembly of the chest of viols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222
9.2.3 Usebetween1929and1977 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
9.2.4 Periodofindecision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230
9.2.5 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
9.3 Zumpefortepiano . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
9.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
9.3.2 Possession by the Bean and Naylor families . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
9.3.3 Acquisition by Emmanuel and Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .243
9.3.4 Supplementary Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
9.3.5 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259

Chapter Ten .Critical Analysis: Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272

10.1 Bohak clavichord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ;. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .272

10.1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
10.1.2 Treatment in the 1830s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
10.1.3 Treatment by Broadwood between 191 1 and 1912 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
10.1.4 Discussions on restoring or copying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
 V

10.1.5 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290

10.2 Jadra virginals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
10.2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
10.2.2 Treatments by Hodson and Goble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294
10.2.3 Critique by Denzil Wraight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
10.2.3 Conservation at the Pitt Rivers Museum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300
10.2.4 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
10.3 Kirckman harpsichord . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
10.3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303
10.3.2 Ownership of Benton Fletcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 306
10.3.3 Treatment and maintenance by Dolmetsch, 1951 to 1965 . . . . . . . -308
10.3.4 Treatment and maintenance by Adlam Burnett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .311
10.3.5 Maintenance by Mackinnon and Waitzman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .316
10.3.6 Synopsis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322

Chapter Eleven .Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332

11.1 The confidence of Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332

11.1.1 The polysemic nature of the instrument ...................... 332
11.1.2 Continuity through transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
11.1.3 The objective/subjective balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 336
11.1.4 The equivocal nature of the subjective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339
11.1.5 The viability of Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 342
11.2 The assurance of Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343
11.2.1 The decision to retire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344
11.2.2 Resource of information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
11.2.3 The objective/subjective balance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348
11.2.4 The viability of Preservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351
11.3 The uncertainty of Restitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
11.3.1 The fundamental flaws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
11.3.2 The objective/subjective conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 354
11.3.3 Genuineness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360
11.3.4 The lapse into Currency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
11.3.5 The viability of Restitution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366

Chapter Twelve .The Structured Reappraisal ................................ 377

12.1 A new contextualism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377

12.2 Uncertainty and confidence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 378
12.2.1 Co-opting the craft tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380
12.2.2 To restore or to preserve: change in cognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
12.2.3 To maintain: change in behaviour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386
12.3 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
12.3.1 Opposition to restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
12.3.2 Support of maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
12.4 Future research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 398
 vi
Appendix I .Instrument information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401

1.1 Field structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401

1.2 The instruments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 403

Appendix I1 .Irish harp restoration reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427

2.1 The Harp of Brian Boroimhe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427

2.2 The Dalway Harp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 428

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429
 vii

ILLUSTRATIONS

1. Matrix of three regimens 120

2. Matrix demonstration with pardessus de viole 125
3. Photograph of Coates barrel organ 134
4. Diagram of Coates barrel organ windchest 150
5. Diagram of pin action of Coates barrel organ 151
6. Photograph of Steinway piano in Rideau Hall 157
7. Diagram of Steinway piano action 160
8. Photograph of Amati violins 172
9. Photograph of Amati cello and viola 173
10. Photograph of interior of Amati violin 182
11. Photograph of Steinway piano, National Library 200
12. Photograph of the Hart House viols 219
13. Photograph of the Zumpe fortepiano 236
14. Diagram of fortepiano action 245
15. Photograph of the Bohak clavichord 273
16. Diagram of clavichord action 275
17. Photograph of Jadra virginals 292
18. Photograph of Kirckman harpsichord 304
19. Diagram of bentside distortion 312
20. Categories for assessment 389
21. Decision-making protocol table 1 392
22. Decision-making protocol table 2 393

ILLUSTRATION CREDITS
Figure 3 courtesy of the Sharon Temple Museum; Figures 8 and 9 courtesy of the
Diefenbaker Centre, University of Saskatchewan; Figure 10 courtesy of R. Kim Tipper;
Figure 13 courtesy of Ernmanuel College, Cambridge University; Figure 15 courtesy of the
Royal College of Music; Figure 17 courtesy of the Pitt fivers Museum, Oxford University;
and Figure 18 courtesy of The National Trust. The diagram of the Steinway piano action in
Figure 7 was kindly provided by Steinway and Sons, New York.
 ...
Vlll

ABBREVIATIONS

CAPC Canadian Association of Professional Conservators

CCFCS Canadian Centre for Folk Culture Studies
CCI Canadian Conservation Institute
CIMCIM Comitk international des muskes et collections d'instruments de musique
FoMRHI Fellowship of Makers and Researchers of Historic Instruments
GCI Getty Conservation Institute
HMSOHer (or His) Majesty's Stationery Office
ICOM International Council of Museums
ICOMOS International Council on Monuments and Sites
IIC International Institute for Conservation
IIC-AG International Institute for Conservation -- American Group
IIC-CG International Institute for Conservation -- Canadian Group
MGC Museums & Galleries Commission
OED Oxford English Dictionary
UKIC United Kingdom Institute for Conservation

NOMENCLATURE

The American National Standard system of pitch notation is used. Middle C is C, and A, is
440Hz.

LIMITATIONS OF THESIS

The critical analysis presented in this thesis is restricted to the case studies of nine historic

musical instruments (comprising three sets of three). During the research for this work a great

quantity of data on social and technical transactions with historic instruments, documentary

sources directly relevant to those case studies, and other more broadly based primary and

secondary sources of a contextual nature, were accumulated, but it was not possible within

the limited scope of this work to include it all. The nine case studies presented here were

selected for the abundance of their documentation, resulting in their ability to demonstrate the

analytical technique employed, and to prove its effectiveness. Nevertheless, the conclusions

drawn from analysis of this limited set of data hold true for the remaining material.
 ix

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to extend my thanks to my supervisor, Prof. Trevor Herbert, of The Open

University in Wales, without whose enthusiasm this project could never have started, and

without whose guidance and wisdom it could never have reached its conclusion; to Dr. Leslie

Carlyle, my external supervisor, who provided essential expertise in the philosophy and

practice of conservation, and who guided the whole project with strength, kindness, subtlety

and honesty; to my family, and in particular my wife Janet, whose patience and support

through this long period have been constant and reliant; to the CCI, and in particular Cliff

McCawley, Director of Conservation Services, whose support of their employee in both time

and equipment exceeded all expectations; and to Dr. Timothy McGee of the Faculty of Music

of the University of Toronto, who gave wise guidance at various stages. I am particularly

indebted to all the individuals, collectors, craftspeople and museum personnel who permitted

me access to their records, including Ann Bianconi, Maureen Gammell, Don Hill, Elaine

Keillor, HClkne La Rue, Ken Lauzon, Ruth Mahoney, Timothy Maloney, Richard Maunder,

RenC Morel, Janet Morris, Sharon Stanis, Mimi Waitzman, Elizabeth Wells, Denzil Wraight,

and the Hart House Music Committee. Their openness in providing access to collection

records and personal correspondence for the purposes of critical analysis, and their

encouragement of the process, is evidence of the sincere concern they have for the fbture of

the collections they hold in trust.

 1

INTRODUCTION

i The Polemic: To Play or to Preserve

What cannot be illustrated is [the clavichord's] greatest beauty ... its sound. Indeed, in
many museums this would remain unknown, for it is a common policy among
museums today that instruments should never be heard, never be used.'

This quotation illustrates a tension between the philosophies of restoration and preservation

of historic musical instruments. Extreme views on the necessity to restore and refurbish

culturally significant instruments for didactic, experimental and aesthetic purposes are

matched by equally strong views on the need to preserve them from craft intervention

through the application of conservation policies.*

This tension has been the source of much discussion in the literature over the last three

decades, but no systematic study of the underlying causes of the tension between playing and

preservation has previously been attempted. This is largely due to specialization among

practitioners and a compartmentalization of efforts, which have caused a distancing of views

proceeding to the point that hardened positions often preclude constructive dialectic. In an

attempt to address this, a framework has been devised to allow systematic critical analysis of

the actions and their rationales, and to provide a context for them. It is intended that critical

analyses of the context of treating historic instruments, and of the results of preserving them

in a non-functional state, will help address the dilemma currently facing their users and those

entrusted with their care.

 2

The research concentrates on actions taken on musical instruments between the beginning of

the 20th century and the 1990s, a period that encompasses the rise and increasing popularity

of the early music revival. This period is chosen because it is then that the tension between

the desire to play historic instruments for exploratory purposes, and the need to preserve

them unused as a source of technical information, becomes a focus of contention. Increasing

craft activity on early musical instruments during this period is matched by a rising sense of

their cultural worth as a diminishing information resource. Although attention is generally

concentrated on activities in this period, the earlier histories of the musical instruments under

study are also examined where this information bears upon analysis of their treatment.

The study is limited to instruments of the Western musical tradition made between the

renaissance and the 20th century, and which became the focus of attention during the early

music revival. Instruments from collections in Canada and England provide the source

material. In all, 19 potential case studies were examined for their utility in this work, and nine

which provided the most documentary detail were finally selected. It will be noticed that the

majority of instruments in the resultant set of case studies are keyboards. Three factors

account for this: they are polyphonic instruments for which a wide and representative

repertory of music was written, they are readily adaptable to changes in musical fashion by

the removal or addition of components, and their mechanical complexity and comparative

sensitivity ensure that continual craft input will be necessary to keep them in working

condition. All these factors combine to ensure that action on such instruments will become

documented and thus be amenable to future analysis.

 3

ii The Early Music Revival

The contextual reassessment of early music gained momentum in the last decades of the 19th

century, particularly in England under the efforts of such pioneers as Arnold Dolmetsch,

Francis Galpin, Edmund Fellowes, and others. Galpin’s book Old English Instruments of

Music (1910) was particularly influential, while Arnold Dolmetsch is credited with a seminal

role through his research, teaching and instrument-making. Robert Donington and Marco

Pallis, both second generation students of Dolmetsch, provide personal surveys of

developments in early music scholarship and practice, and biographies of the personalities

who drove them, and both place Dolmetsch in a category apart, and assign to him the genesis

of the redis~overy.~

Many others, like Benton Fletcher who made his house ‘the real London centre of all this

kind of music [...I open to professionals as well as amateurs, for practice and performance’,

were active before the Second World War.4Ralph Kirkpatrick was another, who began his

lifelong association with the harpsichord at this p e r i ~ dMeanwhile

.~ on the Continent a fresh

approach to early music was seen in Nadia Boulanger’s treatments of the works of

Renaissance and Baroque composers, and in the keyboard performances of Wanda

Landowska.6In Brussels Safford Cape had organized the Pro Musica Antiqua in the 1930s.’

Nevertheless, in spite of the activities of these individuals, and many others, scholarly studies

and practical experiments in early music and musical instruments remained ‘the domain of
 4

eccentrics and cranks’ until almost the 1960s.’ In introducing the first volume of Early Music

in 1973, editor J.M. Thomson observed that:

Ten years ago a journal such as this would have been impossible: there were then no
early music consorts such as those whose reputation now begins to reverberate
beyond these shores. [...I Now all is mysteriously changed.’

The change occurred, as Thomson wrote ten years after the passage quoted above, ‘when a

number of tributaries were joining together to form that full flood of activity in every field

that characterised the 197Os’.’O Thomson was not strictly correct in stating that ‘there were

then no early music consorts’ in 1963 (i.e. ten years before his editorial). The formation in

1958 of Musica Reservata by Michael Morrow, John Beckett, and John Sothcott formalized

an association that was already some years old, and the resultant ensemble was largely

responsible for the upswing in popularity of early music at that time.” The group’s

redefinition of the contemporary perception of mediaeval and renaissance music resulted in

an immediate appeal to wider audiences. A later commentator on the career of Musica

Reservata wrote that ‘in the 1950’s even the keenest music lover thought of [mediaeval and

renaissance] sounds in terms of genteel balladry and the simplistic harmonies of monastery

chants’.’*Reviews of Musica Reservata’s concerts indicate the extent of change in

perception, which is evident in a distinct break with the hegemony of mainstream music

practice. For example, under the title ‘Renaissance top of the pops’ a reviewer stated that ‘it

is with the world of the top 20 rather than with that of operas and symphonies that this music

must be ~ompared’.’~
Along with the increasing popularity of Musica Reservata’s brand of

music are implications of a wide, but very diverse appeal: ‘The size and enthusiasm of the

audience, as pop and jazz fans, orientalists and avante gardistes rubbed shoulders with
 5

antiquarians, students, teachers and even businessmen with their clients, showed just how far

the medieval and renaissance revival has progressed. ’ I 4

According to one critic, mediaeval music came to have a ‘novelty value [...I and it provides a

sharp antidote to the too ready acceptance, and the too extensive application, of values which

This was a break with a hitherto almost universal canon of

arise from a romantic ae~thetic’.’~

classical music practice, and the early music revival gradually supplanted this canon with one

of its own. This trend becomes known as the ‘early music movement’ and is generally

classed with the many radical movements whose role was to challenge establishment values

in the 1960s’ and which came to characterize the social changes of that period. While

commenting upon the early music scene of the 1960s and 1970s’ Robert Morgan summarizes

the social context:

The authenticity movement, as well as other manifestations of the contemporary

music and art scene [...I are reflections of what might be described as a cultural
identity crisis. Indeed, viewed in the broadest context, the movement can be
understood as part of a more general crisis of identity characterizing modernity as a
whole. It betrays both the self-consciousness and the sense of personal inadequacy
endemic in an ever more complex and puzzling world.16

Further popularization of early music was brought about by the energetic work of a group of

performer/scholars, among whom were David Munrow, Thomas Binkley and Noah

Greenberg.” It was artists like these, and many others whom it is impossible to name in this

short survey, who brought mediaeval and renaissance music to mass audiences through both

concerts and recordings.

 6

iii The Impact on Historic Musical Instruments

The sudden upswing in the popularity of mediaeval and early renaissance music had no initial

impact on the demand for historic musical instruments upon which to perform, because to a

large extent there were few, if any, extant examples from these early periods. Its main

stimulation was to the musical instrument-making industry. However, an inevitable outcome

of the revival was the exploration and popularization of the music of the high renaissance and

baroque, and later even the classical and romantic eras, causing demands upon extant historic

musical instruments. Authenticity in musical practice, in the form in which it was then

articulated, required the use of either instruments contemporary with the music to be played,

or copies of them.’*

Demands upon historic instrument resources resulted in ‘more and more instruments [...I
being taken out of their cases and played’, while ‘decaying relics’ were brought back into

It is estimated, for example, that of the 4,000 historic keyboard

playing c~ndition.’~

instruments in collections in the United Kingdom, only 40 now remain in ‘original’

condition.20The demand for playable historic instruments was met by musical instrument

makers and restorers who were largely working within a craft-based tradition with long

antecedents. As keyboard instrument conservator John Watson has stated:

The damage caused by playing antique instruments is often preceded by much greater
damage wrought by restorers. Restoration has often been carried out by traditional
repair, maintenance, and even modernization procedures involving replacement of
any worn or damaged material [...I that might stand in the way of musical
objectives. 2 1
 7

Watson is making an extremely important distinction in alluding to two very distinct kinds of

action. Playing of those antique instruments still in working condition involves continued

maintenance, with the potential loss of parts by wear. This is very different in essence from

the other kind of action, which involves the return of degraded and obsolete instruments to

working condition.

An insight into the way in which late 18th-century square pianos were regarded in the 1970s

is provided by restorer and instrument-maker Derek Adlam. In his opinion they are:

A very good class of instrument on which to cut one’s teeth, because the best of them
are marvellous pieces of craftsmanship, beautifully put together. They can be
excellent musical instruments, eminently restorable, but are not usually irreplaceable
antiques. So, if one does need to use such instruments for experiment, one does not
run the risk of wrecking a very precious work of art.**

Thus, once the revival of early music came to the forefront, the craft techniques traditionally

employed in the on-going maintenance, repair and improvement of working musical

instruments, were co-opted to support the aspirations of historical research, musicology and

performance practice. The quotation above indicates the adaptation necessary to make the

traditional craft practice serviceable in its new role. The craft tradition therefore became

driven by values very different from those of its practitioners. The profound physical changes

to historic musical instruments at the hands of craftspeople as a result of these new values,

were in turn not always fully appreciated by those driving these changes. A phenomenon that

will be explored later is the ‘silent artisan’, where the values, goals and achievements of

practice are articulated not by the providers of the service, the agents of change, but by the

recipients, the users of the musical instruments. Arguments against use of an historic

instrument, which can result in potential loss or compromise of the technical and historical
 8

information embodied in its constructi,on,are countered by demands for fimction as a

generator of musical experience. Thus, by causing a craft tradition associated with

maintenance and repair of current instruments to be co-opted into the restoration of historic

objects, the early music revival forced to the forefront the essential dichotomy between

playing and preserving.

iv The Sources of Tension

The sound they can produce is the primary aesthetic component of most musical
instruments, and the reason why they were made. Thus there is always pressure fiom
collectors and musical instrument-makers, the general public, and from many
museum staff to restore them to playing condition so that their musical qualities can
be appre~iated.~~

The pressure to establish and maintain working condition in order to exploit the instrument’s

musical potential, against the counsel of those who argue for non-working state, results in

tension. The sources of this tension reside in three features that historic musical instruments

as functional24objects exhibit to a marked degree: the intensity of interaction between them

and their users, the strong aesthetic, philosophical, and historical basis to their study and use,

and the fragile and transient nature of their materials of fabrication.

Firstly, instruments are components in a highly interactive relationship. In her studies on the

acoustics of bowed string instruments, Carleen Maley Hutchins describes the highly complex

‘human communication chain of composer-player-instrument-listener’.25

(She omits the

instrument makerh-estorerbecause her studies concentrate upon the acoustics of given

instruments, and not upon design and alteration.) The system therefore becomes yet more

complex when the makerhestorer and changes to the instrument are added to the dynamic of
 9

this communication chain. The return of historic instruments to playing condition, and their

maintenance in that state, require continuing input from a system that has strong aesthetic,

subjective components. Perhaps of all artifacts, historic instruments exhibit the most subtle,

changeable and complex dynamic which, in consequence, is not easily susceptible of analysis

by the scientific method.26The measures taken to ensure working state cannot therefore be

understood in purely metric terms, thus causing contention between those with an objective

bias, who would preserve the existing state, and those more inclined to exploit subjective

aspects, who would demand changes to elicit the best musical performance from the

instrument .

Secondly, historic instruments provide signifiers to aesthetic and historical experiences

connected with makers, previous owners and users, and earlier periods of music practice. The

evocative quality of a genuine historic musical instrument in providing an emotional bridge

to earlier music practice is a key ingredient in the desire to reinstate playing condition. The

following quotation epitomises the attitude towards silent instruments in museum collections:

South Kensington looks upon virginals, harpsichord, clavichord, lute as articles of

vertu [sic]or curiosity; Mr. Arnold Dolmetsch looks upon them as musical
instruments which have been ignorantly deposed from their sovereignty over the
emotions.27

Exclusion, on the grounds of preservation, of the possibilities for exploiting the aesthetic,

subjective component embodied in the sound and action of instruments causes contention,

difference of opinion, and dispute.

Thirdly, because musical instruments are functioning artifacts, their materials of fabrication

are susceptible to wear and damage with use. Also, for purposes of resonance and portability,
 10

instruments are often made of light and fragile materials prone to degradation. Those

instruments not in working condition must be brought back by craft intervention, and those

still in working condition must be maintained in that state. Bringing a derelict instrument

back into working condition, or maintaining a functioning one, requires removal and

substitution of parts, and alteration of others. These processes are a source of tension

between the philosophies of musical use and static preservation.

The tension caused by these factors has resulted, in recent decades, in the development of

distinct factions, each with its own adherents and sets of values. In discussing the

methodology of assessing valuations and beliefs, social theorist Gunnar Myrdal indicates that

this development is relatively recent:

The feeling of a need for logical consistency within the hierarchy of moral valuations
[...I is, in its modern intensity, a rather new phenomenon. With less mobility, less
intellectual communication, and less public discussion, there was in previous
generations less exposure to one another’s valuation conflicts.28

This suggestion is in line with the evidence of growing factions with differing value systems

since the 1950s. The formation of such factions is discussed by social psychologist Leon

Festinger. He describes three basic strategies that people employ for reducing cognitive

dissonance, or the discomfort occasioned by differences of valuation: ‘behaviour changes,

changes of cognition, and circumspect exposure to new information or new opinion^'.^'

Festinger argues that the third strategy, ‘circumspect exposure to new information or new

opinions’, is largely responsible for the gravitation of like-minded individuals into groups.3o

He discusses the role of the social group as a major vehicle for the reduction or elimination of

cognitive dissonance, and argues that ‘the larger the number of people that one knows already

agree with a given opinion [...I the less will be the magnitude of the dissonance introduced by
 11

some other person’s expression of di~agreement’.~’

The results of such a social process can

be seen in the hardened positions evident at the present time within the historic musical

instrument field.

v A New Context for Craft Activity

The tension between use and preservation implies the existence of two opposing

philosophies, and this is the way it is most often expressed in the literature. Three authors

pose the question: ‘to play or to preserve?y32,another provides two courses of action with ‘a

claim to use, an obligation to preserve’33,and a fourth, in the field of non-musical museum

objects, sees conservation or restoration as the only choices offered.34Museum curator

Jeremy Montagu amplifies upon this view by stating, in the case of a square piano by Adam

Beyer dating from 1779, that ‘neither restoration nor conservation has ever been necessary’,

thus alluding to the existence of two separate, distinguishable categories of treatment.35

However, it will be shown that such a bi-polar tension between playing and preservation is a

societal construct, based only upon a reading of actions taken upon musical instruments,

rather than an understanding of underlying rationales. Action superimposed upon the

archetypal musical instrument craft activity can, in fact, be divided into three distinct

regimens, depending upon the philosophical underpinning of the activity. These regimens are

termed Currency, Restitution, and Preservation in this study, and each is characterized by

specific sets of unique values.

 12

By presenting this model of craft activity, and by analysing critically not just the actions, but

specifically the rationales, within each regimen, a new elucidation of motives between the

desire for musical function and the preservation of documentary value is derived. This results

in a reasoned and fully conscious decision-making process, in which arguments for

preservation or musical function are not obscured or deflected by false assumptions or flawed

rationales.

NOTES

1. Montagu, ‘Clavichord’, p. 34.

2. The term ‘conservation’ is defined in Chapter 6.

3. Pallis, pp. 41-45; and Donington, ‘Why’, pp. 42-45.

4. Waitzman, ‘Ancient Musicland’, p. 18.

5. Kirkpatrick, pp. 31-41.

6. Cohen, pp. 24-27.

7. Cohen, p. 27.

8. Waitzman, ‘Ancient Musicland’, p. 17.

9. Thomson, ‘Editorial 1973’, p. 1.

10. Thomson, ‘Editorial 1983’, p. 2.

11. Musica Reservata scrapbook, p. 1. This is a compilation of press cuttings and other
material from c.1960 to c.1975 assembled by The British Council. It was kindly lent to the
author by Dr. Trevor Herbert of the Open University.

12. Sommerich, P., Express and News,London, 6 December 1974, p. 17.

13. ‘R.M.’, ‘Renaissance top of the pops’, The Times, London, 4 July 1967.

14. Dobbins, F., ‘Medieval Music’, The Financial Times, London, 19 May 1971.
 13

15. Sadie, S., ‘Medieval vigour and intricacy’, The Times, London, 16 September 1968.

16. Morgan, p. 78.

17. Cohen, pp. 30-45.

18. Donington, for example, provides extensive information on the instrumental requirements
of early music (Donington, Interpretation, p. 50 1).

19. Haskell, p. 24.

20. Arnold-Forster and La Rue, p. 25.

21. Watson, p. 73.

22. Schott, p. 371.

23. Ode11 and Karp, p. 1.

24. The term ‘hnctional’ is defined in Chapter 1.

25. Hutchins, p. 4.

26. The scientific method is defined here as a process of experimentation carried out by a
neutral methodical observer upon an external object of study.

27. Campbell, p. 126.

28. Myrdal, p. 1030.

29. Festinger, p. 3 1.

30. ibid.

3 1. Festinger, p. 179.

32. O’Brien, ‘Conservation’, pp. 291-297; Montagu, ‘Clavichord’, pp. 34-36; and Pollens, p.
40 et seq.

33. Watson, pp. 69-82.

34. Monger, pp. 375-380.

35. Montagu, ‘Clavichord’, p. 36.

 14

CHAPTER ONE - THE HISTORIC INSTRUMENT

Old musical instruments in both museum collections and private ownership are referred to as

‘historic’ in order to emphasise their cultural value, and to differentiate them from newly-

made instruments. This chapter explores the social transactions through which instruments

become historic. A framework is then outlined in which treatment actions upon historic

instruments can be critically analysed. The chapter closes with an introduction to the genesis

and development of three distinct regimens into which actions upon musical instruments are

placed.

1.1 DEFINING THE HISTORIC INSTRUMENT

Musical instruments pass through certain well defined states of existence, and within these

states certain categories of action, directed by cultural attitudes and social circumstances, can

be identified. It will be shown that the historic musical instrument is a functioning object that

exists in a specific social category, which will be identified as ‘singularized’.

1.1.1 Singularization

Like all other artefacts, musical instruments are commodities; the process of

commodification is conferred upon them as a result of their manufacture to suit a specific

need. From the economic point of view a commodity is an item that has a value related to its
 15

use, but also has value as an item of exchange. In his examination of the cultural biographies

of objects, Igor Kopytoff states that:

From a cultural perspective, the production of commodities is also a cultural and

cognitive process: commodities must be not only be produced materially as things,
but also culturally marked as being a certain kind of thing.’

Kopytoff discusses the social transaction of singularization which is a cultural response to

excessive commodification. He enlists Durkheim’s view that society needs to set apart some

portion of objects, or commodities, as ‘sacred’ and that ‘culture ensures that some things

remain unambiguously singular’.* In a state society such objects may belong to the ‘symbolic

inventory of a society: public lands, monuments, state art collections’ and so

Initially, therefore, there are two well-established categories in which man-made objects

reside -- commodity and singularity -- and these are defined by the social transactions that

take place between them. An object is never perceived or valued in its pure form but is

always embedded in its culture, and culturally marked by cognition. As will be shown, all the

musical instruments under study here are categorized as singularized.

Thompson’s work, Rubbish Theory: the creation and destruction of value, has provided new

insights into social transactions from the point of view of the collector and connoisseur. He

argues that artifactual commodities are generally assigned to the categories of transient or

durable, both of which exist in a region of fixed assumptions where world view precedes

societal action. The object’s value -- monetary, aesthetic and cultural -- in both these

categories is clearly circumscribed, and society’s action towards it is therefore

re determined.^ A transient object is one whose value is falling. It is a utensil which is in the
 16

process of being used up, and at some stage its value, both monetarily and culturally, will

become zero. A durable object, on the other hand, is one that has been assigned aesthetic,

monetary or other values by society, and these values are either stable or increasing. It is an

object that has been singularized.

1.1.2 Function

Musical instruments are defined here as functioning objects, a class of artifacts upon which

work must be performed before h l l interpretation can be a ~ h i e v e dThe

. ~ status conferred

upon the functioning object contrasts with that of the class of static historic objects in which

full interpretation may be achieved contemplatively by a process that has been described

elsewhere as ‘impact, scrutiny, recollection and renewal’.6

Both Kopytoff and Thompson use motor cars to illustrate the social transactions that may

take place around a complicated functioning artifact subjected to intricate and varied

interventions, but while Thompson uses the example of the car to illustrate only variations in

market value, Kopytoff demonstrates the diversity of potential biographies such an artifact

may encourage.’ In both cases the significance of the choice of the car lies with the

combination of its intricacy of operation and its social symbolism. Because it is both a

hnctioning machine kept in working condition by technical intervention, and a focus for

social transactions, it carries information of both technical and social value. Their examples,

using a car for demonstration, could have been centred equally well upon musical

instruments because, like motor cars, they are supplied from the manufacturer in new
 17

condition, must be brought into a working state by their owners, and are then serviced,

adapted, repaired and altered to suit the exigencies of continuing use.

Two initial categories in the life of a musical instrument can be defined:

- the primary category when it was in new, unused condition

- the functioning category, when it began to be used in the performance of music

The primary category is the first stage of a musical instrument’s existence, and it occupies the

time between the completion of manufacture and the instrument’s first use. The transition

between this category and the next is marked by the ‘playing-in’ of the instrument, and can

be likened to the ‘running in’ period of a new car. This is the period in the object’s existence

when all adjustments and changes are made, either by the first user or by a technician under

his instruction, and when irreversible changes contingent upon use occur. The primary

category can therefore be defined as the condition in which a musical instrument left its

maker, and before it was put into a working state by technical intervention.

Implicit in the term ‘functioning’ is the assumption that the newly made object must be

brought into a working state and maintained there, All hctioning instruments must have

passed through the primary category, but those resting in it are rare; it is far more likely that

an instrument will have been used and thus be in what has been defined elsewhere as the

‘original state’.8In describing certain artifacts in transport and technical museums that were

acquired new from their manufacturers, industrial artifact historian George Monger, says that:
 18

The only truly original mechanical objects to be found in museums are those either
direct from the makers or which were used, found to be inefficient and not worth
adapting, and discarded.’

However, Monger does not distinguish between the state before use and the state after use;

‘direct from the makers’ indicates an object in the primary category, while ‘used and

discarded’ indicates an object in the functioning category. The clear distinction that must be

made between the two lies in the potential for the user to form a judgement of the object’s

function. In the case of a musical instrument, its musical quality cannot be judged in its

primary state; it can only be assessed at this stage in terms of craftsmanship, visual aesthetics,

and other non-auditory or tactile values. Any assessment of an instrument’s musical quality

pre-supposes its having passed out of the primary and into the functioning category.

The transition from primary to functioning marks the beginning of a musical instrument’s

working life. If the instrument commences its life anonymous and unremarked it will

continue this existence as a transient utensil of falling value. However, should its value

become reassessed by society, its social category will change. It will become singularized. As

Thompson’s entire thesis demonstrates, category transfers from transient to durable take

place under a complex and interacting socially-driven control mechanism.”

Within the functioning category there may be numerous states as the instrument is adapted,

refined, converted, and restored. The category in which an instrument is placed is decided by

its condition and through analysis of its documentation, but a fuller picture emerges during

transitions from one category and the next. It is at such turning points that actions, based

upon rationales, become clear.

 19

1.1.3 The Transition to Historic

Musical instruments can become valued or singularized by social transaction, and will then

belong to the category of durable artifacts with stable or rising value. The term ‘historic’ has

been applied traditionally to instruments that satisfy this criterion. While defining a standard

usage of the words ‘historic’ and ‘historical’, Myers observes that:

Instruments are not historic solely by connection with the famous or infamous, but by
their own contribution to the history of music. Indeed, a museum instrument has only
to be mentioned in a published catalogue written with historical purpose to be a
historic musical instrument.“

Thus, the act of documenting an otherwise unremarkable instrument will, of itself,

singularize the instrument, initiating the social transfer from transient to durable.

Furthermore, musical museum curator Cary Karp has argued for a broadening of the

traditional museum attitudes to what is considered an hstoric musical instrument:

Period material now includes virtually all instruments not in current production. A
vintage instrument from the 1930s is as likely to be entrusted to a museum
conservator as to a commercial repairperson. Similar conditions apply, for example,
to synthesizers that are only a few years old, no longer in production, and clearly
significant to the history of electronic instruments. It is no longer possible to define
the importance of an instrument simply in terms of its age.’*

According to Myers and Karp an instrument may be designated as historic by the application

of any one of an open-ended list of cultural markers relating to such features as age,

ownership, antiquity, beauty, uniqueness, and historical and monetary value. In the case

studies that form the central part of this work, this broad definition of what constitutes an

historic instrument has been adopted: Steinway pianos from the 1930s and 40s, are included

with musical instruments from the 17th to 19th centuries. The key operation that causes an

instrument to become singularized @e. historic) is the process of documentation.

 20

To achieve the status of historic an instrument need not pass from the primary state to the

functioning state, although if it were preserved in the primary state nothing could be deduced

of its musical aspects. It would be valued for attributes other than those associated with its

musical function.

1.2 CATEGORIZING THE INSTRUMENT’S USE

As noted in the Introduction to this work, the tension between playing and preservation is

traditionally represented as bi-polar; restoration and conservation are the two poles about

which activity is focussed. It will be argued later that this traditional model is based upon a

polarization of class, which can be perceived historically in a tension between the person who

perfoms work upon a musical instrument and the person who commissions the work. It will

be shown that this tension is now continued unconsciously in treatment actions, and that the

premises upon which it is based are phlosophically unsound.

In order to analyse critically actions taken upon historic musical instruments a new model of

behaviour is required, so that the rationales behind the actions can be explored

dispassionately, and so that distinctions between types of craft activity can be clarified. To

this end, a framework containing all possible actions has been developed in which the

functioning category is subdivided into three regimens of activity, which are defined here as

Currency, Restitution, and Preservation. These terms, as used in this context of this work, are

defined in detail in Chapters 4,5 and 6. They are briefly introduced here as follows:
 21
- Currency: the instrument continues in use, being maintained in working condition,

and adapted to suit changes in musical fashion. Instruments in this regimen are

already in working condition, and craft action upon them is maintenance.

Restitution: the instrument is 'returned to' and maintained in a state that is assumed to

represent some previous period of its e~istence.'~

Instruments in this regimen are

obsolete and in degraded condition, and craft action upon them is restoration followed

by maintenance.

- Preservation: the current state of the instrument is respected, and it is preserved fi-om

further intervention. Instruments in this regimen are kept in a non-playing state, and

action upon them is described as consewation treatment.

The distinction between maintaining an already working instrument, and returning a

degraded one to working condition is critical in determining to which of the first two

regimens the action is assigned. Action within each of these regimens is circumscribed by

certain associated values and attitudes. When historic instruments are treated, the underlying

craft tradition is informed by the sets of values associated with the backgrounds of its

practitioners in their time, place and circumstances. For example, if an historic instrument is

to be kept in a working state, the values appropriate to that action will predominate. If it is to

be restored to some postulated previous state, a second set of values will apply. A third set of

values comes into play if the instrument is to be preserved in a non-playing state. Thus, the

social framework within which the person who decides upon the manner and level of

treatment lives and works will circumscribe the limits and types of action taken upon the

instrument.
 . 22

It is important to a make a very clear distinction between craft practice as applied to transient,

non-singularized musical instruments, and the same applied to those that have been

singularized and are considered hstoric. Work done upon transient instruments that are used

as utensils and have falling, and eventually zero, value will be a matter of routine, will

require little contemplation, and will go unremarked. However, when the same practice is

applied to those instruments categorized here as historic, action is underscored and directed

by rationales connected with unique sets of values. These values arise from the social

contexts of those who perform or direct the work. It is only when the treatment of the

instrument is done with a clear knowledge of its historical context, cultural worth, and

aesthetic value, that action can be said to take place within the regimens of Currency,

Restitution or Preservation. All three regimens encompass only deliberate treatment of

historic objects, and must be clearly distinguished from the underlying, straightforward craft

tradition which is encountered in the routine bench treatment of unremarkable musical

instruments. Action, in the latter case, is driven by none of the rationales encountered in the

treatment of historic instruments.

1.3 SUMMARY

Historic musical instruments are those that have been singularized by social transaction. They

are categorized as functioning objects because work must be performed upon them in order to

achieve their full interpretation. Action upon historic instruments falls into one of three

regimens -- Currency, Restitution or Preservation -- depending upon the values and attitudes

of those interacting with the instruments. The regimen in which an instrument is assigned is
 23

not a function of its condition or state, but is dictated by the social transactions surrounding

it. These regimens each exhibit characteristic values related to the beliefs and aspirations of

those who adhere to them. The historical development of these regimens, and the basic

features that characterize them, are examined in detail in Chapters 4, 5 and 6.

Although the function of the framework defined in this work is primarily heuristic -- as a tool

to be used in the critical analysis of actions taken on a specific set of historic musical

instruments -- it can have a larger application in the study of social interactions with other

functional objects.

NOTES

1. Kopytoff, p. 64.

2. Kopytoff, p. 73.

3. ibid.

4. Thompson, Rubbish Theoiy, p. 8.

5. The adjectival form ‘functioning’ is used here to indicate activity.

6. Clark, p. 57

7. Kopytoff. p. 68; Thompson, pp. 19-20.

8. Kiihn, p. 393. It is necessary to make a distinction between original condition and original
state. As materials are continually degrading over time through a variety of natural physical
phenomena it is imprecise to refer to original condition, which is irretrievable. Original state,
on the other hand, relates to the physical arrangement of the components of an object, and is
not subject to change over time by natural causes.

9. Monger, p. 376.

10. Thompson, Rubbish Theory, p. 11.

 24

11. Myers, ‘Historic’, p. 22.

12. Waitzman, et. al., pp. 84-85.

13. The contradiction implied by the statement ‘returned to’ is explored in Chapter 5.
 25

CHAPTER TWO - CALENDAR OF SOURCES

This chapter contains a calendar of sources so that actions taken upon the historic musical

instruments presented in the case studies can be placed in context during critical analysis. For

such analysis to be useful and accurate, the actions people have taken upon the historic

musical instruments described in the case studies must be situated in both the period in which

the activity took place, and its social context. Not only is it necessary to ascertain what was

done to an instrument and under what circumstances, but it is also necessary to examine the

prevailing culture of opinion. The intention of this calendar is to provide a chronology

against which actions upon specific musical instruments can be placed. The emphasis is not

upon the influence these sources may have had on practices current at the time of their

formulation, but on the capacity of the sources to reflect the orthodoxies and conflicts of their

period.

For each entry the full bibliographic citation or an appropriate descriptor is provided,

followed by a brief descriptive paragraph. In these descriptions an attempt is made to address

the issues of production, consumption and status -- who produced the source and why, at

whom was it directed, and what its status was. Sources relating specifically to the treatment

of historic musical instruments are augmented here by sources that relate to the cultural

heritage at large. Although this work concentrates primarily upon the period of the early

music revival from the beginning of the 20th century to the 199Os, the calendar begins with

certain earlier sources that had a formative influence upon thinking in the field of the
 26

preservation of material objects. This is a compendium of sources, presenting a holistic view,

and there is no intention to be comprehensive.

1833 Publication of the English translation of Jacob Augustus Otto’s A Treatise on the

Structure and Preservation of the Violin (London: W. Reeves)

This was the work of a practising maker and repairer of bowed string instruments. It

was addressed to the community of violin connoisseurs, but its English translation by

Thomas Fardley appeared at a time when the promotion of literacy among the

‘mechanic’ class was becoming a social concern. The English translation of this work

is one of the first publications of a practitioner addressing the craft issues of musical

instrument repair and restoration. Otto states that his practical experience is superior

to that gained by ‘one who merely understands the subject theoretically, or who only

imitates the work of another without thinking for himself .’ The book was re-issued,
and appeared in several editions, throughout the 19th century and became the model

for other works of the same genre.

1854 Publication of the ‘First Report on the Department of Practical Art by Henry Cole’, in

Addresses of the Superintendents of the Department of Practical Art (London: National Art

Library, Victoria and Albert Museum, 1854), pp. 23-37.

Henry Cole was an enormously influential champion of the utilitarian value of

museums through the latter half of the 19th century. His South Kensington Museum

became a model for others in both Europe and North America. This report was

produced for the information of the governing and funding bodies of public
 27

collections. It promoted the view that the collections of the South Kensington

Museum in London were to be ‘used physically, taken about and lectured on’.’ This

policy established the role of collections of technical artifacts, that they be kept

functional and used didactically for the purpose of mass education.

1855 A meeting of the London Society of Antiquaries on Thursday 3 May in London.

The Society of Antiquaries was a body of enthusiasts, some professional but most

amateur, who were concerned with the study and preservation of antiquities and

works of art. The minutes of the Society’s meetings were available to a wide

readership of members. The meeting referred to in this citation concerned ratification

of a memorandum urging preservation of architecture ‘fi-om further injuries by time or

negligen~e’.~
The Society established a ‘Conservation Fund’ to assist its advocacy in

preserving ancient monuments from intervention.

1857 Publication of John Ruskin’s, The Seven Lamps ofArchitecture (New York: Wiley and

Halstead, 1857)

Ruskin was a writer on the relationship of art to society, and he espoused the view

that the working classes were spiritually impoverished. His books were very

influential, and widely read throughout the latter half of the 19th century. His

readership was generally the better educated middle and upper classes. In the work

cited here, Ruskin articulated the view that restoration of architecture was

detrimental; it meant ‘the most total destruction which a building can suffer: a
 28

destruction out of which no remnants can be gathered; a destruction accompanied

with false description of the thmg de~troyed’.~

1885 Publication of Edward Heron-Allen’s Violin-making as It Was and Is... (London: Ward,

Lock & Co., 1884; 2”ded. London 1885R1984)

The extended title of this book describes it as an ‘historical, theoretical, and practical

treatise on the science and art of violin-making for the use of violin-makers and

players, amateur and professional’. It is widely regarded today as the most important

work of its period upon the subject.

1887 Publication of William Morris’s, ‘The Principles of the Society [for the Protection of

Ancient Buildings] as Set Forth upon Its Foundation’, Builder, 35,25 August 1887.

William Morris was an artist, poet, socialist thinker and designer. This publication

was read by the circle of those concerned with all aspects of architectural work. In it

he collaborated with John Ruskin on the production of a manifesto condemning the

destructive restoration of buildings. This became the founding document for the

Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings.

1898 Publication of John Ruskin’s The Stones of Venice, I (Orpington, Kent: George Allen,

1886)

In this work, Ruskin made use of the pathetic fallacy, which he had formulated in his

1879 publication of Modern Painters, to describe the contradictory effects of

restoration on the fabric and spirit of old buildings. Originally conceived as a critical
 29

tool in the analysis of poetic works, he deployed it here as an expression of the spirit

resident in works of art.

1899 Publication of William Hepworth’s, Information on Bow Instruments (London: William

Reeves, 1899)

This is the work of a practising artisan. It was intended for the general reading public,

including craftsmen and amateurs. In addition to practical information on the care of

bowed string instruments, this work is important in highlighting the responsibility

incumbent upon owners of historic instruments. Hepworth states that ‘it is

undoubtedly the moral duty of each generation to transmit to its successor all valuable

instruments in as perfect a condition as possible’.’ He considers that such instruments

are ‘placed in [the owner’s] trust for the benefit of those who succeed him’.6

1902 Publication of the Hill Brothers’ book Antonio Stradivari: His Life and Work (London:

William E. Hill and Sons, 1902)

The Hills came of several generations of violin makers, dealers and restorers, and had

accumulated a great deal of historical information through practical commercial

transactions. Their book on Antonio Stradivari was intended to disseminate this

information to the community of violin connoisseurs. This is a work of practical,

historical knowledge which gives short shrift to the romantic associations with which

classic violins, particularly those of the Cremona school, had become enmeshed. The

book is pragmatic and matter-of-fact.

 30

1905 Publication of Friedrich Rathgen’s The Preservation ofhtiquities, trans. G. Auden and

H. Auden (London: Cambridge University Press, 1905)

Friedrich Rathgen was a chemist employed by the Museum of Archaeology in Berlin.

His book was addressed to workers in the very narrow field of the preservation of

antiquities. Although focused upon unstable arch.aeologica1objects requiring

emergency treatment, Rathgen’s work in Berlin set the stage for much later

experimental work in the preservation and restoration of all antiquities and works of

art.

1908 Publication of a museum catalogue by Carl Engel Musical Instruments (London:

HMSO,1908)
Carl Engel was the curator of a collection of musical instruments in London. This

publication was a descriptive catalogue of an exhibition, and was widely read by a

museum-going public. This work is of particular interest for the historical material

included with the descriptions of instruments. It symbolizes the awakening interest in

the study of early instruments.

1910 Publication of Canon Francis Galpin’s Old English Instruments of Music (London:

Methuen, 1910)

Canon Galpin was the quintessential amateur. Hit; collection of early musical

instruments was extensive, and his research into their history and function was unique

for its time. His book was intended for the general reader, and signals the beginning

of an academic legitimacy in the collection and study of early musical instruments.

 31

1921 Publication of a report by Alexander Scott, The Ckaning and Restoration of Museum

Exhibits (London: HMSO, 1921)

Alexander Scott was a chemist with the British Government Department of

Scientific and Industrial Research. This is the first of three reports on

scientific treatment of museum objects commissioned by the British Museum.

Subsequent reports appeared in 1923 and 1926. These reports were directed at

both technical and lay readers. Significant to this report is the encouragement

of scientific treatment not just as a means of preservation, but also as a means

of eliciting information from the object.

1924 Inauguration of the first Haslemere Festival at the Ilolmetsch workshop, Haslemere,

Surrey.

Arnold Dolmetsch had been active in the revival #ofearly music since the last decade

of the 19th century. Once he had established his workshop at Haslemere in Surrey,

west of London, it became a centre for early music performance, and the manufacture

and restoration of musical instruments. The Haslemere Festivals began the process of

popularization of early music by exposing it to a *wideningcircle of enthusiasts.

1929 Establishment of the Dolmetsch Foundation in Haslemere, Surrey.

The Dolmetsch Foundation came into being under the initiative of W.J.H. Whittall,

who initiated the raising of fimds for equipping a workshop adjacent to the Dolmetsch

property in Haslemere, and to provide training facilities and scholarships in the study

of early music.
 32

1930 An international conference of museum personnel entitled Conzirence internationale

pour 1'e'tude des me'thodes scientfzques appliquies a 1'examen et la conservation des

oeuvres d'art.

This meeting was held in Rome under the auspices of the League of Nations, and was

specifically targeted to museum personnel concerned with the care of artifacts. This

was the first international conference on the application of scientific and engineering

expertise to the preservation of museum objects.

1934 Publication of Harold Plenderleith's The Preservation ofAntiquities (London: Oxford

University Press, 1934)

Harold Plenderleith had been appointed as consewation scientist to the British

Museum in 1926, an initiative resulting from the work of Alexander Scott, the

museum's consultant. This book was directed at personnel concerned with the

preservation of museum objects. It outlines procedures for the treatment of objects

gained fiom experiences in the scientific laboratory of the British Museum.

1946 The inauguration of The Galpin Society in London..

The Galpin Society was formed after the death of' Canon Galpin. Founding members

were A. Baines, P.A.T. Bate, H. Gough, E. Halfpenny, E. Hunt, G. Rendall and M.

Vincent. The Galpin Society Journal provided one of the first forums for the scholarly

study of early musical instruments. Of particular note to the context of this work are

the papers on restoration of instruments which are characterised by an investigative

and historical approach.

 33

1952 The inauguration of the journal Studies in Conservcition.

This was a journal produced by practitioners responsible for the care and treatment of

works of art and artifacts. It was intended specifically for a technical readership and

promoted the application of scientific principles to the treatment and examination of

art and artifacts. Its appearance and international circulation lent legitimacy to the

profession of conservation.

1956 Publication of the book by Harold Plenderleith and Anthony Werner, The Conservation

of Antiquities and Works ofArt (London: Oxford University Press, 1956)

This was a much expanded and updated handboolk, based upon the work by

Plenderleith that had appeared in 1934. It was intended for a technical readership. The

book is organized on a case study basis and details experiences encountered in the

British Museum laboratories.

1957 Publication of the Weilheimer Regulativ: Richtlinien zum Schiitze alter wertvoller

Orgeln: Weilheimer Regulativ: zugleich kurzgefaflter Beivicht iiber die Tagung der

Orgeldenkmalpfleger in Weilheim/Teck vom 23. bis 27. April 1957 (Berlin: Verlag

Merseburger, 1958)

This publication resulted from a meeting of organ restorers, primarily from German-

speaking countries, who had met to formalize guidelines for the more conservative

and less invasive treatment of historic organs. It was directed towards organ builders

and restorers, and initially had a small and very select readership. Publication of these

regulations represents an early instance of the growing consciousness of the need for
 34

preservation and documentation of treatment. These regulations were updated in

1970.7

1960 The publication of John Shortridge’s monograph, Ifalian Harpsichord Building in the

16th and 17th centuries (Washington, D.C., US National Museum Bulletin, 225, 1960), pp.

93-107.

John Shortridge was associate curator at the United States National Museum,

Smithsonian Institution, where he oversaw the musical instruments of the Hugo

Worch Collection. Distribution of his publication by the Smithsonian Institution Press

assured a readership beyond the narrow field of historic musical instruments. This

paper, the results of examination of 33 instruments in the United States, is a

pioneering example of research on the history of musical instrument technology

resulting from systematic, scientific documentation.

1964 A conference in Venice resulting in formulation of The Venice Charter.

Architects and building restorers met to formalize a document which laid down

guidelines for ethical restoration of buildings. Article 11 of the resultant Charter,

adopted by ICOMOS in 1965, states the following:

The valid contributions of all periods to the building of a monument must be

respected, since unity of style is not the aim of restoration. When a building
includes the superimposed work of different periods, the revealing of the
underlying state can only be justified in exceptional circumstances and when
what is removed is of little interest and th,ematerial which is brought to light
is of great historical, archaeological or aesthetic value, and its state of
preservation good enough to justify the action. Evaluation of the importance
of the elements involved and the decision as to what may be destroyed cannot
rest solely on the individual in charge of the work.8
 35
Article 11 is significant for its forward-looking tenor; it underlines the leading place

that architectural restoration held in the development and formalization of a

conservation consciousness at this period.

1965 Publication of Frank Hubbard’s Three Centuries oj”HarpsichordMaking (Cambridge,

Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1965)

Frank Hubbard had worked in partnership with William Dowd in harpsichord-making

and restoration. This work is an example of research on the history of musical

instrument technology resulting from the disasseinbly and measurement of ‘some

hundred harpsichords’.’ It was directed specifically at instrument-makers. It had a

landmark status as an unrivalled compendium of information on historical instrument-

making practice.

1967 Publication of a book by Alfred Berner, John Henry van der Meer and Genevieve

Thibault, Preservation and Restoration of Musical Instrziments (Paris: ICOM, 1967)

This book was produced under the aegis of the International Council of Museums,

and was intended for museum staff with the responsibility for the care of musical

instruments. It lays out fundamental principles for restoration, and in providing

guidelines, seeks to regulate restoration practices in collections. The introduction

expresses the assumption that restoration to playing condition is the goal of treatment,

and that ‘where possible the restoration of a deteriorated instrument is

commendable’.’’
 36

1968 Publication of The Murray Pease Report: Code of .Ethics for Conservators (New York:

New York University, 1968)

This work was produced by the International Institute for Conservation of Historic

and Artistic Works -- American Group. It was intended specifically for the

organization's members, who were personnel working in conservation, both in

museums and in the private sector. It was adopted as a working document by the

Institute in 1963. The Code of Ethics lays down guidelines for practice, both

commercial and technical. The concept of reversibility is encoded here.

1968 The inauguration of the journal Early Music.

This journal was produced to meet the increasing demands for an international forum

for musicological studies. Its readership included performers, scholars, instrument

makers and restorers. Of particular interest to this study are the occasional restoration

reports, such as that by Adlam on the restoration of a harpsichord by Vaudry, which

focus upon knowledge gained upon early workshop techniques and history of

construction, as opposed to treatment procedures.."

1971 A conference on restoration of keyboard instruments entitled Restauratieproblemen van

Antwerpse Klavecimbels in Antwerp, Belgium.

A group of restorers, musicologists and curators met to discuss the problems of

restoration of Ruckers keyboard instruments. The proceedings were published by

Museum Vleeshuis in 1971. A paper by Skowroneck is of interest in outlining the

concept of 'authentic ruins' (i.e. unrestored instruments), and their potential as

 37

sources of information.” A case study by Lambrechts-Douillez raised the topic of

copying as a substitute to restoration.

1974 A conference entitled ‘Restoration of Musical Instruments’ in Nuremberg, Germany.

This conference was hosted by the musical instrument restoration laboratory of the

Germanisches Nationalmuseum. It attracted conservators and restorers of musical

instruments, specifically those working with museum material, and was one of the

earliest meetings of its kind. The proceedings were reported in by Montagu in Early

Music,’3and papers from the conference were pu.blished in 1977 (see below).

1975 A meeting entitled ‘Day of Studies on the Restoration of String Instruments’ in

Cremona, Italy.

This meeting was hosted by the Committee for the Preservation of the National

Stringed-Instrument Heritage. The proceedings were published in 1976. The tenor of

the conference is caught by Leonard0 Pinzauti, who speaks of intervention ‘without

presumptuousness, without damaging “personal” discovery, with the prospect of

keeping the antique instruments alive, saving, above all, together with their external

appearance their more specific playing individuality, their relationship with the

present, in short, with the history of music’.l4 In the realm of bowed string

instruments, the argument is that preservation and restoration are synonymous, and

that instruments are to be preserved from neglect by use. Their playing characteristics

are integral.
 38

1975 The inauguration in London of the Fellowship of Makers and Restorers of Historic

Instruments (FoMRHI).

FoMRHI was founded by D. Abbot, J. Cousen, J. Montagu and E. Segennan, as ‘a

Fellowship to encourage authenticity and the rapid exchange of ideas’ in the field of

historic musical instrument studies. l5 Membership was typically practitioners either

working upon historic instruments, or modem copies. For efficiency in disseminating

information, the FoMRHI QuarterZy was published four times per year, and

reproduced members’ submissions in the form in which they had been sent to the

compilers. There was no editorial policy. Objection among the membership in 1979

to publication of questionable restoration practices caused the name of the

organization to be changed to Fellowship of Makers and Researchers of Historic

Instruments, thus bringing the organization into line with then-current museum

thinking, while still preserving the acronym.

1977 The inauguration of the journal Musical Instrumen,!Conservation and Technology.

This journal was produced by a loosely formed group of museum musical instrument

conservators, and was specifically targeted to custodians of museum collections. The

first volume was the publication of papers presented at a colloquium on musical

instrument conservation held at the Germanisches Nationalmuseum, Nuremberg in

1974. It represents an attempt to bring colleagues in the discipline into a closer

relationship, but did not disseminate the museum conservation agenda any wider. It

failed to survive beyond its first issue.

 39

1977 Publication of a booklet by Robert Barclay, The Care of Musical Instruments in

Canadian Collections (Ottawa: CCI, 1977)

This work was one of a series addressing the care and preservation of Canadian

museum collections. It was intended for general museum personnel, and was the first

handbook for the non-specialist. It promotes the conservation agenda in counselling

against invasive treatment, while emphasising preventive measures to assure stability.

1979 A publication by Cary Karp, ‘Restoration, Conservation, Repair and Maintenance’,

Early Music, 7, 1 (1979), pp. 79-84.

Cary Karp was musical instrument conservator at: the Musikmuseet in Stockholm,

Sweden. This paper appeared in Early Music, a journal of wide readership in early

music studies. The article outlines the debate on restoration and conservation, and is a

landmark in the dissemination of this infomation in an international forum. It

articulates the pragmatic point of view, advocating that instruments be made ‘as

copyable as possible’,’6and outlines the loss of historical integrity inherent in

restorative treatment.

1980 A publication by John Barnes, ‘Does restoration destroy evidence?’, Early Music, 8,2

(1980), pp. 213-218.

John Barnes was a restorer associated with the Riipond Russell Collection of

Keyboard Instruments at Edinburgh University. This paper appeared in Early Music,

a joumal of wide readership in early music studies. Barnes describes the potential loss
 40

of information about construction techniques and workshop practices as a result of

restoration treatment, and argues for a conservative approach to intervention.

1982 Publication of a draft document, ‘Recommendations for Regulating the Access to

Musical Instruments in Public Collections...’, CIMCIMNewsletter, 10 (1982), pp. 26-45.

This document was produced by the Comite‘ international des muse‘es et collections

d’instruments de musique after a meeting in Antwerp in 1980. Its consumption was

limited to staff of international musical instrument museums who were members of

the organization. Its impact in this draft form was small, but it represents a change in

the thinking concerning access to collections.

1982 A publication by Cary Karp,‘Storage Climates for Musical Instruments’, Early Music,

10,4 (1982), pp. 469-476.

Cary Karp was musical instrument conservator at the Musikmuseet in Stockholm,

Sweden. This paper appeared in Early Music, a journal of wide readership in early

music studies. The paper describes the effects of poor environmental control, and

recommends monitoring methods and instrumentation. It promotes the pragmatic

conservation of collections through instrumental techniques. As with his earlier

publication in the same journal, this paper represents a landmark in the discussion of

such approaches in an international forum.

 41

1984 Publication of Recommendationsfor Regulating the Access to Musical Instruments in

Public Collections (Paris: ICOM, 1984)

This was the publication by the Comite' international des muse'es et collections

d 'instruments de musique of the report resulting lkom the Antwerp meeting of 1980.

Dissemination of this work was broadened considerably through its publication under

the aegis of ICOM, although readership was still predominantly museum personnel.

The publication provides guidelines for access for the purposes of measuring, testing,

playing and use in concert and recording of collected musical instruments. While

advocating care and handling, the section on playing recognizes that collected musical

instruments are still maintained in working condition.

1984 A publication by Hans-Christoph von Imhoff, The IConsewator/Restorer: a Definition

of the Profession (Paris: ICOM, 1984)

This document was produced by the Conservation Committee of the International

Council of Museums. An earlier version was presented for adoption by the

membership in 1981, which was, in turn, the result of discussions initiated in 1978.

The work was addressed all personnel engaged in the treatment of historic properties,

but readership is limited to those subscribing to ICOM publications. The report makes

the first complete definition of the profession, and is also the first document to

attempt reconciliation of the hitherto separate disciplines of conservation and

restoration.
 42

1985 A conference in Venice entitled Per una carta Europea del restauro.

This conference was one of the functions of the Ehropean Year of Music, and it was

held with the intention of producing a charter, or code, of practice in the restoration of

historic musical instruments. Publication of the proceedings of the conference

appeared in 1987 and was widely available to museum staff, private collectors, and

restorers. The papers demonstrate a wide range o i? approaches, from pure conservation

and technological research to protocols for restoration. A paper by Arnold Myers,

‘The Conservation of Wind Instruments’, is impclrtant in providing the groundwork

for a decision-making protocol in the use of historic instrument^.'^ The discussions

towards a European charter for restoration practice are included, although the charter

itself did not materialize.

1986 Publication of a booklet, Code of Ethics and Guidancefor Practice (Ottawa: IIC-CG

and CAPC, 1986)

This document was produced by the two Canadian conservation professional bodies,

and was targeted to museum personnel working in conservation. It represents a

definitive code of ethics and guidance for the conservation profession, laying down

the framework of approach to the treatment of historic material.

1987 Publication of a booklet, Restoration ofEarly MusicaZ Instruments, Occasional Papers

No. 6 (London: UKIC, 1987)

This publication resulted from a conference hosted by the Victoria and Albert

Museum in London. It was produced as one in the series of Occasional Papers of the
 43

United Kingdom Institute for Conservation, with the intention of addressing the ‘rifts

between the institutional conservator and the private restorer’.’’ Readership was

limited to members of UKIC and subscribers to their publications. Contributions

generally address interventive restoration of musical instruments.

1987 A publication entitled ICOM Statutes and Code uJ’PrufessionalEthics (Paris: ICOM,

1987)

This document was produced by ICOM, and was targeted to museum personnel. It

represents a definitive code of ethics and guidance for the museum profession, and

lays down a framework of behaviour when dealing with all aspects of museum

material.

1991 A publication by John Watson, ‘Historical Musica-lInstruments: A Claim to Use, An

Obligation to Preserve’, Journal ufthe American Musicd Instrument Society, XVII (199 I),

pp. 69-82.

This article was written by a museum conservator, and was published in a journal

distributed widely among curators and custodians of historic musical instruments. Its

aim is to suggest a responsible synthesis of playing and preserving of historic

instruments. The article proposes:

A rationale by which a minority of representative musical instruments may

receive minimally intrusive restoration and judicious musical use in order to
preserve and exhibit the aesthetic integrity unique to this class of historic
artifacts, and that such restoration and use must be undertaken without
significant compromise to the instrument’s physical or historical integrity as
mandated in accepted codes of museum and conservation ethcs.Ig
 44

1993 Publication of a book by Kate Arnold-Forster and Helene La Rue, Museums of Music

(London: HMSO, 1993)

The research for this book was done at the initiative of the United Kingdom Museums

& Galleries Commission. The work is directed at museum personnel. It is significant

in providing a wide-ranging survey of the state of musical collections in the United

Kingdom, and in providing specific recommendations for a commitment to

conservation and long-term care.

1993 A workshop entitled 'The Conservation of Musical Instruments' at the Horniman

Museum in London.

This one-week workshop was initiated by the Canadian Conservation Institute. It was

organized by the Museums & Galleries Commission of the United Kingdom, and

hosted by the Homiman Museum of London. The workshop was open to personnel

concerned with the care and treatment of musical instruments, and included

conservators, restorers and curators among the delegates. Conservation philosophy

was discussed, and procedures of a minimally initerventive nature were described.

Emphasis was placed upon maintenance of the found state, and upon derivation of

information by scientific examination.

1993 A publication, Recommendationsfor the Conservation of Musical Instruments: An

Annotated Bibliography (Paris: ICOM, 1993)

This document was produced by the Comite' international des rnuse'es et coZZections

d 'instruments de musique under the aegis of ICOM. It was intended for museum
 45

personnel not specialized in the care and preservation of musical instruments. It

comprises an annotated list of20 key publications on the conservation of musical

instruments. The publications isolated for inclusion in this work are all from the

museum conservation perspective, and instruments in playing condition are not

discussed.

1995 Publication of an information folder, Standards in the Museum Care of Musical

Instruments (London: MGC, 1995)

This is one in a series of folders commissioned from committees of practitioners in

the museum field, and produced by the Museums & Galleries Commission of the

United Kingdom. Items in the series are intended for use by general museum

personnel. This work is a step-by-step guide to the accessioning, documentation, and

care of historic musical instruments. It outlines the museum conservation viewpoint,

yet still provides guidelines for the care of musical instruments that are maintained in

working condition.

1998 Publication of a book edited by Robert Barclay, The Care of Historic Musical

Instruments (Ottawa: CCI/CIMCIM/MGC, 1998)

This work was produced by the Canadian Conservation Institute, the Museums &

Galleries Commission of the United Kingdom, and the Comitk international des

muse'es et collections d 'instruments de musique (CIMCIM). It was intended for wide

dissemination, addressing the concerns anyone working with historic instruments. It

is the work of seven contributors fiom a wide range of specializations in the care and
 46

preservation of historic musical instruments has been incorporated in this book.

Thorough and in-depth guidance is provided on the many aspects and demands of

managing the retirement from active service of heritage musical instruments, whether

they are in the possession of individuals, private collectors, or museums. Details on

the resources, advice, and support available to the custodians of collections are also

included. The authors counsel against restoration of historic instruments, but

recognize that guidelines for the care of working instruments are still necessary

NOTES

1. Otto, p. iv.

2. Quoted in Alexander, p. 159.

3. Proceedings of the Society ofdntiquaries, 111, 1853-1856, pp. 185-186.

4.Ruskin, Seven Lamps, p. 161

5. Hepworth, p. 2.
6 . ibid.
7. Anon., Ars Organi.

8. ICOMOS, p. 15.

9. Hubbard, preface, p. x.

10. Berner, et. al., p. 8.

11. Adlam, pp. 255-265.

12. Eine ehnviirdige Ruine ist besser ais ein falsch restauriertes Instrument (Skowroneck, p.
29).

13. Montagu, ‘Restoration’, pp. 265-267.

14. Pinzauti, p. 133.

 47

15. Montagu, Jeremy, letter to author, 14 July 1998.

16. Karp, ‘Instruments’,p. 180.

17. Myers, pp. 22 1-231.

18. Ashley-Smith, Jonathon, p. 2.

19. Watson, p. 78.

 48

CHAPTER THREE - ANALYSIS OF SOURCES

This chapter examines sources in the craft tradition of instrument repair and maintenance,

and relates them to their social context. It shows that documentation of work done upon

instruments is initially driven by commercial necessities, but increasingly becomes related to

the yield of technical information that treatment affords, and the necessity for recording

details of intervention. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the relationship between

the work of the artisan and its appreciation by the user of the musical instrument.

3.1 DOCUMENTATION OF THE CRAFT TRADITION

Before the middle of the present century, the craft practices of repair and refurbishment at the

level of the individual instrument were characteristically non-textual. Craft practices were

part of an oral tradition, and information was passed on by example through a system of

apprenticeship. A very clear distinction was made between those who maintained and

repaired instruments, and those who used them. For example, in his 19th century book on the

care of bowed instruments, William Hepworth asks:

How many pianists are there, for instance, who have scarcely ever seen the inside of a
piano, and how many violinists, who are with regard to the formation and treatment
of the instrument in a remarkable state of ignorance?'

It was not considered necessary for the musician to know how the tool was made or how it

worked, when there existed a class of craftsmen capable of doing whatever needed to be

done. This distinction between the user and the individual charged with maintenance was one

of class, and is reflected in the comparative scarcity of written records of transactions upon
 49

specific musical instruments undertaken by the practitioners. Documentary sources originate

in a dominant, literate culture, with the distorting effect that the written work of such

intermediaries implies. This line of reasoning is pursued in more detail later.

Regarding the scarcity of documentation of treatment of’works of art in the past, one recent

commentator pointed out that ‘it was not considered necessary to write a detailed report on

treatments carried out [..I and restorers were little inclined to allow their interventions to be

officially recorded’.* Another remarks that ‘the history of early restoration has yet to be

written, but virtually nothing was recorded at the time by the craftsmen involved’ .3

Some textual evidence on procedures performed on individual instruments emerges, but not,

in general, as a result of any articulated directive to pass information on current practice to

contemporaneous practitioners, or to the future. Typically, it emerges in peripheral

documents such as contracts for work to be performed or bills for service. An example of the

scarcity of technical documentation occurs in a communication of the 1930s from Irvin

Hinchliffe, a keyboard instrument restorer, to Benton Fletcher, owner of a collection of

keyboard instruments now housed by the National Trust at Fenton House, Hampstead. On the

back of a brochure for his Uckfield, Sussex, establishment, Hinchliffe writes ‘here is the

Cash Spinet in perfect order. I am proud of being able to repair such a derelict as it was’.4No

other information is provided. It is only through the need to communicate completion of the

work to its owner that even this much information has been recorded. In the absence of a

fuller record, details of the repair can only be deduced by inference from this scant reference,

or by direct examination of the instrument.

 50

Occasionally, more specific information on work done is recorded, but it can still fall far

short of a succinct document. For example, there is the account book of Dom Vincenzo

Ascensio, who worked for the Spanish Court in the late 18th century. Regarding a Stradivari

viola he treated, the entry of 17 July 1783 reads in part:

I pieced the centre and replaced the bar by one adjusted to mathematical proportions
based on that of Stradivari. I corrected the thicknesses, pieced the four comer-blocks,
took the back off and inserted a piece in the centre, as it was too thin. 1had to replace
the neck, which I did in the most careful manner. I then adjusted the instrument, the
tone of which was rendered excellent by all these changes. It took me three months to
do, and I consider the repair worth a 1,000 reals ... I restored the red velvet lining and
repaired the case, which contained the five inlaid instruments; I arranged the niches
and places for the bows, also the hinges, and put a blue ribbon to support the lid when
open: 380 real^.^

Many of the assumptions made by the writer are not transparent to the later reader. In what

way were the thicknesses corrected? By what definition was the back too thin? And how did

the replacement bass bar differ from that already fitted? ‘Theanswers to such questions are

not revealed in what is, after all, simply the recording of a commercial transaction.

In some instances, textual evidence emerges in the recording of treatment by individuals,

other than craftsmen who actually performed the work. € o r example, information on the

restorations of the Harp of Brian Boroimhe and the Dalway Harp, both residing in the Dublin

University Museum, was published in two leaflets by R. Ball in 1853.6The condition of the

Harp of Brian Boroimhe is the least documented of the two; the only detail of the work clone

records that ‘the present Director of the Museum, having observed the mutilation, restored

the parts of the Harp to their proper position, and supplied the lost portions from a n a l ~ g y ’ . ~

The lost parts are then briefly described.

 51

The account of the Dalway Harp includes details of its construction, decoration, and

dimensions, but records only that accurate restoration of the bow and harmonic curve were

undertaken through the copying of original parts, and that the soundboard was restored from

analogy.8 Both texts imply that the Director of the Museum, himself, was responsible for the

work but, given the social climate of the time, this is unlikely. It is more probable that the

actual bench work with tools was done by another, whose input is unrecorded and

unremarked. The accounts of these restorations are considered rare enough that copies of

them are reproduced in Appendix 11.

Because craft transactions upon musical instruments were, in general, not recorded by those

who did the work, extant sources tend to have an intrinsic distortion because they are the

records of observers who have no insight, or interest, in the actual mechanical operations. A

typical case of the distortion introduced by such recording from a dominant culture is

provided in the following anecdotal fiagment. The following paragraph appears in an article

of 1912 when a set of recorders discovered in Chester were played before the Society of

Antiquaries:

When the Chester Archaeological Society moved from its old rooms into the present
Grosvenor Museum in 1886, an old worm-eaten box of peculiar shape was
discovered, which was held together only by the green baize with which it was lined,
and contained what were apparently the remains of some musical instrument. The
remains proved to be a set of recorders or lip flutes in an excellent state of
preservation.’

In this reference there is an unresolved contradiction between ‘the remains of some musical

instrument’ and the ‘excellent state of preservation’. The: above description makes no

reference to the means necessary to transform the first state into the second; to bring the

instruments back into playing condition required intervention, which must have taken place,
 52

but at this juncture is entirely unrecorded." Such intervention is not considered worthy of

recording, because it is the outcome of a manual craft applied to a functional object.

Even though the importance of technical documentation rose in the latter part of the 20th

century (see Section 3.3, following), an example of the low value still placed upon it in the

craft tradition is seen in the sole reference in Orde-Hume's definitive study of the barrel

organ, published in 1978: 'One can waste many hours on re-assembly trying to remember

how the bits went together when a couple of minutes and, perhaps, a rough pencil sketch on

the back of an old envelope could have saved the day."' That a rough sketch on a scrap of

paper would be considered sufficient for assembly instructions indicates the persistence into

the modern era of a non-textual craft culture.

The generally non-textual nature of the craft tradition, and its impact upon attitudes towards

the treatment of historic musical instruments, is developed further in the following sections.

In discussing the general absence of records of work made by craftsmen there remains the

possibility that sources are scanty because they may have been kept originally, but have

failed to survive. However, this is an hypothesis based upon an absence of information and

cannot be pursued further in a scholarly context. On balance, the argument that the craft

tradition was, and continues to be, non-textual must carry more weight.
 53
3.2 SOURCES ON GENERAL CARE OF INSTRUMENTS

In contrast to the lack of information on the treatment ofparticular instruments, guidelines on

the general care, repair and refurbishment of generic musical instruments are a feature of

manuals on performance practice. In a 17th century example, Thomas Mace makes a case for

providing directions in the care of the lute as a preface to Musick’s Monument:

As to the Mechanical Part Thereof, (about which I have taken up the Room of 2
Chapters, viz. the 4th. and 5th.) I apprehend, that some will think It Superfluous, and
others, a Thing too far below Them to undertake; which I grant may be for very
many; yet Below None to be able to know how It should be done, or when Well or I11
done; so that Thereby They may not be Gull’d, or Their Instrument Injur’d by some
Ignorant, Careless or Knavish Work-man who too often Abuse both It, and the
Owners; which He durst not venture to do, but that he presumes They are wholly
Ignorant of His Art.
Besides, I have known many, Living in the Countrey, (Remote from Good
Work-men) upon some very Slight Mischance happening to their Instrument, (for
want of That Knowledge, which Here they may find) quite Lay It by: and the
Instrument, for want of Timely Assistance, has grown Worse and Worse, (sometimes)
to Its Utter Ruine.’’

Mace deals in great detail with the maintenance of all parts of the instrument, including

taking the belly of the lute off, and describes the tools, materials and techniques req~ired.’~

He then outlines the environmental considerations in caring for instruments of thin and

fragile wood, and lists seven reasons for storing the lute in a frequently used bed.14 These

guidelines are generally intended to inform readers not so much of what to do themselves

(because he agrees that manual exercise is generally beneath them), as what to watch for

when the work-man is called in.

An emphasis on the education of the lower classes encompassed early in the 19th century

through the utilitarian goal of the ‘diffusion of useful knowledge’, led to an increase in the
 54

publication of texts on technical, engineering, manufactilring, and kindred topics. l5 The

emancipation of the expert artisan would be achieved ‘not by following his own inclinations

but by systematically reading what he had to learn in order to become a better

This trend stimulated the appearance of treatises on the construction and repair of instruments

-- independent of instructions on their playing -- written by the practitioners of the craft, and
derived from their personal experience. The translation li-om the German, at the beginning of

the 19th century, of the work of Jacob Augustus Otto, Szructure and Preservation ofthe

Violin is an early e ~ a m p l e . Otto

’ ~ states the craftsman’s I(as opposed to the theoretician’s)

point of view:

Having been engaged for the last thirty years in the restoration of [...I damaged
instruments, and in the construction of new ones.;and having, from my youth, studied
music, mathematics, physics and acoustics, I consider myself better qualified to
reason on this Art, with the practical experience gained during the above period, than
one who merely understands the subject theoretically, or who only imitates the work
of another without thinking for himself.18

Later in the 19th century, and into the 20th century, handbooks on restoration and repair of a

wide variety of domestic objects, written by craft practitioners and aimed at a general middle

class readership, became popular. Typical of books specific to musical instruments are those

of William Hepworth, Information on String Instruments, mentioned above, and Alfred F.

Common, How to Repair Violins and other musical instruments. After a detailed description

of the structure and function of the instruments of the bowed string family, Hepworth

provides notes on general maintenance. He recommends ‘application [...I to a well-qualified,

experienced and conscientious violin-maker’ for any repair work. Common’s approach is

more general, and somewhat more invasive. He provides simple maintenance and repair

guidelines for violins and bows, banjos, mandolins and guitars, brass and woodwind
 55

instruments, and musical boxes. The readership is the general public, and the techniques

described are basic.

Encyclopaedias of recipes and techniques became popular in the 19th century, and again the

emphasis is practical and the level of readership general. Typical of this genre is Hasluck’s

Handyman ’s Enquire Within which deals, under the heading of ‘Making, Mending,

Renovating’, with cleaning, varnishing and remedying woodworm in violins2’, and removal

of dents on brass instruments with ball and burnisher.21

Increasingly through the 19th century manufacturers of inusical instruments provided printed

directions on the care and preservation of their products. The intention of such material was

not so much instruction in repair and maintenance, as promotion of the commercial interests

of the manufacturer in securing contracts for continuing maintenance.

,
,-

3.3 THE RISE OF TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION

The early music movement of the 1960s is distinguished from the amateur and somewhat

eccentric trend that preceded it by its increased emphasis on scholarly study. The appearance

of specialized journals, such as Early Music and The Galpin Society JournuZ,argues the

growing need to disseminate information, together with a legitimization and popularity of the

pursuit. Dismantlement of instruments during treatment had always provided restorers with

unique opportunities for exploration, providing insights into historical construction methods,

restoration protocols, and causes of deterioration and failure. This insight, combined with the
 56

analytical and scholarly approach that characterises the c:arly music movement, resulted in a

dramatic increase in the quantity and quality of documentation as an aid in the understanding

of early workshop technique. The publication of such works as Shortridge’s Italian

Harpsichord Building in the 16th and 17th Centuries in 1960, and Hubbard’s Three

Centuries of Harpsichord Making in 1965 signal the enfianchisement of documentation by

the musical instrument restoration establishment.

The growing discipline of museum conservation (detailed in Chapter 6) made documentation

one of the central tenets of its practice. The codes of ethcs for conservation place the

documentation of treatment on an equal plane to the object itselfi

The conservator has an obligation to document hisher work by recording all details
of the conservation of a cultural property. Examination records and treatment records
are an intrinsic part of the property; they should be kept in as permanent a manner as
is practical and be available for appropriate access.22

By making documentation an intrinsic part of the historic object, its absence in the treatment

of the object becomes a source of censure on ethical grounds. So, while restorers placed a

premium upon deriving, during treatment, information that elucidated early technique, the

museum discipline focussed more on recording what treatment had been actually done, thus

creating a cumulative technical hist01-y.~~

3.4 THE SILENT ARTISAN

A recurring theme in the examination of documentary sources concerning the treatment of

musical instruments is the phenomenon of the silent artisan. As noted in Section 3.2, at the

level of treatment of the individual instrument, little is initially consigned to writing. It was
 57

not until well into the latter half of the 20th century that the treatment of those musical

instruments defined in Chapter 1 as ‘hstoric’ came to be documented systematically by those

who did the work. It is shown in Chapters 5 and 6 that such documentation is a symptom of

the elevation of this activity into the realm of the dominant culture.

A corollary to the silence of the artisan in documenting work, is seen in the silence of the

artisan in the decision-making process. When musicologist Richard Taruskin states that

‘artifacts of past culture [...I are still intact and available in a way that musical artifacts

obviously can never be [because] music has to be imaginatively recreated in order to be

retrieved’, he is repeating the dominant assumption that the musical instrument -- the tool --

is not subject to change as a result of natural deterioration, wear and craftsmanly

Missing from this assertion is the realization that the restoration of

inter~ention.~~

deteriorated early instruments to projected previous states does, indeed, involve imaginative
I.

recreation.

As discussed in Section 3.2, a clear distinction can be seen between the user of the instrument

who dictates the treatment and the artisan who performs it. And it is clear that, as the user is

distanced from the operations of the bench, so the musical quality of the finished product is

valued above the means taken to achieve it. A pointed example of this is seen in the views of

violinist Anne-Sophie Mutter on her 1710 Stradivari instrument:

What’s miraculous is that an instrument like this has always, throughout its nearly
300-year existence, adapted itself over and over again to whoever plays it, like a
sponge that has soaked up all that music.25
 58

Comments such as this, which are encountered frequently among players of historic

instruments, point to an attitude that, by its indifference (perhaps born of ignorance),

unwittingly debases the craft tradition. It is assumed that the instrument has adapted itself

repeatedly to the changes demanded of it, rather than the more mundane circumstance of craft

intervention being necessary over its entire life.

This indifference to, and dismissal of, the craft tradition harks back to a time when the user of

the object and its service provider were socially distanced. Musicians working on their own

instruments was ‘a Thing too far below Them to undertake’, in Thomas Mace’s words.26

Reactions against this disparagement of the mechanic arts are found in sources contemporary

with Mace. In commenting upon the perceived lowly status of the artisan, Joseph Moxon

writes: ‘I see no more Reason, why the Sordidness of some Workmen, should be the cause of

contempt upon Manual Operations, than that the excellent Invention of a Mill should be

despis’d, because a blind Horse draws in it. y27 In a slighlly later example, Marshall Smith, in

his handbook on the art of painting, echoes the same sentiment when he says: ‘He that

despiseth the noblest Products of the Soul, because it requires the Assistance of the Hands for

Demonstration, I think deserves not those useful Membrm which he so foolishly

Condemns.’*’

This desire to distinguish socially those who operated with the hands from those who used

the mind appears fully expressed in the 19th century theory of ‘graphopneumata’.29 In his

book on painting technique, George Harris proposes that the act of putting paint onto canvas

be undertaken by a craftsman under instructions from a inan of intellect, thus making the
 59
execution of a painting the epitome of social division. As materials historian Leslie Carlyle

has remarked, ‘with Harris’s system, the “artist” would be forever spared from the coarseness

of exec~tion’.~’
Although such sentiments, and the social stratification based in class which

underlies them, had largely disappeared by the time of the onset of the early music movement

of the 1960s, they nevertheless persist even to this day in the attitudes and assumptions

regarding manual operations that are summarized by the ‘silent artisan’.

The hndamental area in which these attitudes and assumptions bear upon the treatment of

historic musical instruments is in an indeterminacy of evaluation that they introduce. If the

extent of the measures taken to make the instrument playable is ignored by the player, then

the result of those measures upon the finished product will be impossible to assess. Thus, a

massive intervention that has not been documented, and the technical details of which are not

of interest to the player, will not be accounted for in the assessment of the musical

instrument’s performance after treatment.

This aspect of the level and extent of the user’s understanding and appreciation of craft

intervention is fundamental to the critical analysis of actions and rationales which forms the

body of this work. The regimen to which an historic instrument is assigned can be perceived

in the degree of understanding of treatment processes and their implications, and the level of

agreement between the user of the instrument and the person who performs the work.
 60

3.5 SUMMARY

Underlying all craft activity on musical instruments is a generally non-textual craft tradition.

Documentary sources initially tend to be tangential, relating to commercial transactions,

rather than the recording of actions. As consciousness of the place of historic artifacts in

society develops, documentation of treatment becomes a discipline underwritten by both the

collective desire for the dissemination of information, arid by the strictures of codes of ethics.

The nature of the sources provides insight into the social circumstances of the musician and

craftsman, and the developing consciousness of the place of the historic object in society. The

concept of the ‘silent artisan’ is pivotal to the understanding of treatment actions and

rationales.

NOTES

1. Hepworth, pp. 3-4.

2. Marijnissen, p. 275.

3. Oddy, p. 10.
4.Hinchliffe Restorations brochure, undated, files of the Benton Fletcher Collection, Fenton
House, National Trust. Although this brochure is undated, Hinchliffe worked on the
collection of Major Benton Fletcher when it was located at Devonshire House, London, in the
1930s.

5. Quoted in Hill, et. al., pp. 77-78.

6. Ball, Boroimhe; and Ball, Dalway.

7. Ball, Bovoimhe, p. 1.

8. Ball, Dalway, p. 1
 61

9. Bridge, p. 117.

10. Although there are no extant sources on the treatment of these recorders, it is to be noted
that woodwind instruments that have been left unused require significant intervention without
exception . (See, for example, Zadro, ‘Guide’, where cleaning, lapping of head joints, and
oiling are described.)

11. Ord-Hume, p. 349.

12. Mace, ‘The Preface’, verso a.

13. Mace, pp. 54-61.

14. Mace, p. 64.

15. Altick, pp. 130-131.

16. Altick, p. 132.

17.0tto’s work was first published as Uber den bau und die Erhaltung der Geige und aller
Bogeninstrumente... (Halle and Leipzig, 1817). It appeared in several English editions
throughout the lgthcentury.

18. Otto, p. iv.

19. Hepworth, p. 84.

20. Hasluck, p. 538, col. 2; and p. 540, col 1.

21. Hasluck, p. 375, cols. 1-2.

22. IIC-CG and CAPC, p. 9.

23. In his overview of the profession of conservation in The Art ofthe Conservator, British
Museum conservator Andrew Oddy provides a useful synopsis of the methods of
examination and documentation upon which the profession is based (Oddy, pp. 16-21).

24. Taruskin, Text and Act, p. 56.

25. Beuth, p. 73.

26. Mace, The Preface, verso a.

27. Moxon, p. 1.

28. Smith, p. 16.

29. Hams, vol. 2, p. 259.

 62
30. Carlyle, p. 20.
 63

CHAPTER FOUR - CURRENCY

The regimen of Currency was defined briefly in Section 1.2: the instrument continues in use,

being maintained in working condition, and adapted to suit changes in musical fashion.

Instruments in this regimen are already in working condition, and craft action upon them is

defined as maintenance. This chapter completes the definition of Currency, outlines its scope,

and identifies key unique values through which it is characterized. It demonstrates that

Currency is the base regimen of the craft tradition of musical instrument repair and

maintenance. As will be shown in subsequent chapters, lhe regimens of Restitution and

Preservation appear during the 19th and 20th centuries, and become superimposed upon, or

exist alongside, Currency.

4.1 MUSICAL FUNCTION

It is an assumption of the Currency regimen that musical function is the goal of treatment.

The ‘current’ musical instrument is one that is supported by a craft tradition that embraces

the adaptability of the musical instrument to changes in musical fashion. Treatment of the

instrument includes repairs and adjustments, upgrading, improvement, and the addition of

new parts. It may result eventually in transformation of the instrument’s fbndamental

character. All actions upon instruments in this regimen are described under the general term

of maintenance, and may include servicing, repair, adjustments, alterations and

improvements.
 64

4.2 THE NATURE OF SOURCES

As discussed in Sections 3.2 and 3.3, in the largely non-textual regimen of Currency the lack

of documentation of work is a necessity driven by commercial restraints on time, coupled

with an earlier lack of writing skills. Even with an increase in the general level of education

of craftsmen throughout the 19th century, documentation of work continued to be a luxury

not normally afforded the working man. Where a piece of work is priced by the time taken to

accomplish it, the result of the work stands as its own documentation.

In the bowed string industry a complicating factor arises; that of the effect of explicit

documentation upon monetary value. It is argued that documentation of all the work

necessary to keep a valued violin in excellent working condition would result in a fall in its

resale value.' For all the above reasons, sources that deal specifically with the nature of work

done upon individual musical instruments, the materials used, and the techniques employed,

are rarely encountered in the regimen of Currency, and when they are it is the result of the

commercial necessity of rendering an estimate, a bill of sale, or an invoice. An absence of

treatment documentation in a case study provides a clue to the presence of the regimen of

Currency.

4.3 CONTINUITY THROUGH MAINTENANCE

In his examination of the impact of the past on modem society, David Lowenthal identifies

four valued attributes of the past; those features that distinguish the past from the present, and
 65

from the future. These are antiquity, continuity, termination, and sequence. Although he

describes these as ‘a heterogeneous m a y labelled here solely for heuristic and exploratory

purposes’, he nevertheless provides a more enduring stnicture in analysing approaches to the

use of the past.2 Termination and sequence are simply descriptive of the way in which the

passing of time is apprehended, but the first two, antiquity and continuity, are usefd here in

categorizing the activities of using, preserving and safeguarding objects of cultural value.

Continuity ‘implies a living past bound up with the present, not one exotically different or

obsolete’, and this is exactly the sense in which maintenance is viewed in this work.3

The key feature of maintenance is diachronic continuity, a capacity for values of the past to

be incorporated into the present, and to exist alongside it. In the context of the continued

currency of music performance, musicologist Robert Morgan observes that ‘the past, to the

extent that it prevails at all, is not isolated from the present but forms part of He uses the

example of J.S. Bach’s keyboard music which was played in the later 19th century on the

piano, an instrument virtually unknown to Bach, with a full and continuous dynamic

spectrum, and the facility for legato articulation and sustaining pedal. Octave doublings were

common and free arrangements, transcriptions, and ‘corrections’ were a matter of course.

Bach’s keyboard works were transformed into essentially new pieces, but were

comprehended in the 19th century as part of a vibrant anti on-going musical tradition.’

Morgan states that:

From our own vantage point, such liberties may strike us as unforgivable perversions;
yet we should recall that they were deemed acceptable precisely because Bach’s
music persisted as part of a flourishing tradition, unbroken and in constant
transformation - renewing itself through new ideas and developments. Bach was
altered in order to protect the currency of his music and to preserve his place within
the tradition.6
 66

Maintaining the currency of musical instruments by continuous, interventive technical

processes is the craftsmanly equivalent of transforming the music to suit contemporary taste.

In maintaining singularized instruments in functioning condition, there is an act of reverence

to their makers, and by maintaining their currency in the musical tradition, obsolescence is

deferred and the continued cultural presence of both the instruments and their makers is

ensured. As Lowenthal states:

Celebrating continuity, as distinct from antiquity, is profoundly anti-escapist. The

accretive past is appreciated less for its own sake than because it has led to the
present.’

Improvement is a craftsmanly expression of diachronic c,ontinuity,and changes made to

instruments in the regimen of Currency will always be considered by those who subscribe to

the regimen as improvements. Improvements are defined here as irreversible operations that

change the nature of the instrument (such as the permanent introduction of substantially

different components), and are thus distinguished from the application of such removable

additions as strings, mouthpieces, reeds, and tuning devices.

Maintenance, in the broad sense in which it is used here, can be demonstrated

comprehensively in dealings with the instruments of the bowed string family, and especially

those of the Cremona school which responded well to the dramatic changes in musical

fashion at the turn of the 18th century. In describing the alterations made to the neck angle

and finger-board dimensions of Cremonese violins, the Hill Brothers, the pre-eminent 19th-

century London violin dealers, remark that ‘our modem adjustment of the neck and finger-

board certainly constitutes an improvement’.*This change allowed greater facility in playing

below the fourth position, and permitted a higher bridge and string tension to be employed,
 67

thus increasing the dynamics and compass of the in~trurnent.~

Boyden provides a

comprehensive overview of the changes that have taken place to the structure and acoustics

of the violin, and the historical circumstances surrounding them."

References to other instruments with a potential for technical reassessment and upgrading are

also encountered in the literature, and the extant instruments bear witness to the extent of

treatment. In the 17th and 18th centuries valued plucked string keyboard instruments

underwent phases of change, particularly in their compass, due to greater demands by

composers. The changes made to Ruckers harpsichords included the removal of the 4'register

and its substitution with one of 8' pitch, while petit ravulement increased the compass of the

instrument by inserting more but narrower keys." Further changes made in the 18th century,

termed the grand ravulement, included extending the casework to increase the compass

further, and the removal and substitution of bridges, wrestplank, nuts, and tuning pins. These

changes allowed the instruments to be used for playing contemporary keyboard compositions

that required the greater compass.'2 Edinburgh keyboard instrument scholar Grant O'Brien

details the transformations undertaken on harpsichords from the workshop of the Flemish

makers, Ioannes and Andreas R u ~ k e r s . ' ~

Other examples of changes made to musical instruments during their working lives include

the stocking often applied to the inner legs of trombone slides, which became a permanent

design feature in the 19th century.14This improvement pe:rmitted smoother, faster, and more

reliable playing by reducing the surface area of metal in contact and making it uniform over

the full slide range.15Sometimes alterations were extreme, as in the case of lutes of the 16th
 68

century from Bologna, particularly those of Laux Maler. These lutes were much sought after

in the following century, and updated to the point that only the body remained from the

original instrument. The correspondence between the French lute-player, Jaques Gaultier, and

Constantin Huygens of The Netherlands, describes removal of the table, re-barring, and

complete replacement of the neck, as means of putting an instrument into playing order.16

Organs lend themselves to extensive change because individual pipes can be retuned and

voiced as pitches and temperaments change, whole rank:; of pipes may be discarded due to

decay or obsolescence and replaced with new ones, and all other units of the mechanism may

be detached and substituted. In addition, the installation of a large organ is a costly

investment, not to be repeated if other, more economical, measures can be taken. As an

example, in an article in the Organ Yearbook, Dale Can: describes the multi-layered

restorations undergone by the 1702 Schnitger organ in the Der Aa-Kerk in Groningen,

providing a case study that illustrates the potential extent of tran~formation.'~

Woodwind instruments are less likely to be kept current -becausetheir fixed tuning makes

adaptation to changes in pitch standard and temperament technically challenging. However,

occasionally such interventions are successfully carried out. Complimentary and conflicting

views are presented in a debate over the modernization of flutes by the 19th-century French

maker Louis Lot.18

From the foregoing, it can be seen that the definition of maintenance in this work is very

broad. It encompasses all work carried out upon a musical instrument to ensure its longevity
 69

and continuity, including routine servicing, repairs, alter ations and improvements. It

specifically excludes restoration, which is dealt with in the next chapter. A clear distinction

between maintenance and restoration is of key important to the critical analyses of historic

musical instruments that follow these introductory chapters.

4.4 THE VALUES OF CURRENCY

The critical analyses of case studies are structured around two questions: what action has

been taken on the instrument, and upon what rationale is the action based? It is helpful to

derive unique key values so that action and rationale can be examined in context. In the

following sections it will be shown that Currency is characterized by unique values relating

to subjective responses elicited from the instrument, and that such values comprise exclusive

markers that can be used to demonstrate that the regimen of Currency is subscribed to during
.
the treatment and use of a musical instrument.

The key factor in maintaining the currency of an instrument is its potential for continuing use

after both technical improvements and alterations brought about by changes in musical

fashion. All actions, in the form of craft interventions, are focussed on this goal. The

rationales underlying such actions upon culturally valued historic instruments contain many

of the subjective elements encountered in romantic ideology. l9 As described by cultural

theorist Raymond Williams, the Romantic literary, artistic, and philosophical movement

arising at the end of the 18th century embraced subjectivity in ‘new valuations of the

“irrational”, the “unconscious” and the “legendary” or mythical’.20In addition, the increasing
 70

dominance of romanticism in the intellectual milieu of the late 18th century created the

concept of the genius; the individual who must work outside the classical rational

framework.21

Romanticism reached maturity as a literary, artistic and philosophical movement in the 19th

century, but the beliefs and aspirations of its chief commentators comprised what would only

later be classified by observers as a homogenous movement. It has been pointed out that ‘if

[such terms] are used without a sense of the historical complexities which lie behind them,

they can distort the literature to which they refer, rather than illuminating it’.22Nevertheless,

the values of the Romantic movement outlined in the following sections can be equated with

phenomena still well in place during the latter part of the period under study. These values

are discussed in detail below.

.
4.4.1 The Pathetic Fallacy

Because of the intensely interactive nature of musical instruments, they tend to become

imbued with personality, and come to have human qualities ascribed to them. They are

assigned memory, an independence ofjudgement, and a power of almost conscious

interaction with their players. In discussing the treatment of ancient Venetian buildings, John

Ruskin addresses such a personification of objects:

In many instances, the restorations or additions have gradually replaced the entire
structure of the ancient fabric, of which nothing but the name remains, together with a
kind of identity, exhibited in the anomalous association of the modernized portions:
the Will of the old building asserted through them all, stubbornly, though vainly,
expres~ive.~~
 71

Ruskin is subscribing to the prevalent belief from the late 18th century onwards, that works

of art and craft accrue an essence independent of their materials of fabrication. This thinking

had become imbued into the collective consciousness by the influence of the writings of

Wordsworth and Collins, among others.24Buildings, to Ruskin, had a will of their own, and it

is clear that wholesale replacement of the fabric does not necessarily dilute or mask this

intangible phenomenon. Neither does it detract from buildings as objects to be revered and

cherished; quite the reverse, it adds layers of experience to them. Ruskin himself coined the

term pathetic fallacy to describe the tendency, among poets in particular, to ascribe human

emotions or actions to inanimate objects. He describes the pathetic fallacy as:

The difference between the ordinary, proper, and true appearance of things to us; and
the extraordinary, or false appearances, when we are under the influence of emotion
or contemplative fancy; false appearances, I say, as being entirely unconnected with
any real power of character in the object, and only imputed to it by us.25

Used in this context, the pathetic fallacy contains elements of the ‘irrational’ and the
. A fine example of subjective sentiments applied to musical instruments
‘uncons~ious’.~~

appears in the prelude to the Rev. H.R. Haweis’s exposition, Old Violins, published at the

end of the 19th century.27He opens by remarking that ‘the fascination of the violin is the

fascination of the soul unveiled’.28Haweis continues by paraphrasing a collector’s sentiments

upon his instrument:

The grace of the curves [...I full of a variety of levels like the satiny surface of a fine
human body. You might almost believe that a whole system of muscle - a very living
organism - lay beneath the ‘back’ and belly, which to his eyes are alive with swelling
and undulating grace.29

And in parallel with Ruskin’s sentiments upon the continued assertion of the will of an old

building, even through restoration, addition and transforniation, Haweis says of the violin

that:
 72

It is never fit for death; it survives a thousand calamities; nay, even when cut up and
dismembered, its several parts, scattered through a dozen workshops and three
hundred years, live on with a kind of metempsychosis in new forms, and still cling
strangely to their indi~iduality.~’

These sentiments are balanced by the more pragmatic Hills, who mention only briefly in

Antonio Stradivari: His Life and Work, published in 1902, that ‘instruments by continual use

are apt to become weary. They may even be virtually killed’.31

Weariness, sleep, and death are attributes ascribed to musical instruments in the Currency

regimen. Those that are not played upon regularly, or are confined to museum display cases,

are said to fall asleep or die. Under the heading ‘Gifted young violinists win loans to awaken

sleeping Stradivariuses’, the following statement is reported:

In a letter to the winners, the donor said the violins had been sleeping in a vault and
underplayed for years. The donor has been convinced by a friend that ‘my investment
would reap wonderhl dividends by “awakening” these instruments’ .32

In discussing protocols of treatment, string instrument specialist Leonard0 Pinzauti argues

that museums should be endowed with ‘consulting room:;’ where ‘instruments can continue

to live in the most authentic way, which is through playing, to prevent their a t r ~ p h y i n g ’ . ~ ~

Playing is regarded as a way of staving off deterioration, and it is used as a foil against

s ~ ~‘ignorantly deposed’ instrument^.^^

‘decaying relics’ in r n u ~ e u m and

Musical instruments also become imbued with idiosyncrasies which reflect traits of

personality. London Symphony Orchestra flautist Michael Cox writes the following of his

Louis Lot flute:

How can I tell how much my old French flute dictates itself to me or how much I
dictate of my own to it? Certainly [...I I draw the conclusion that I consider my flute
to be a complementary, if not equal, musical personality. It has its own rich persona
 73

and ample voice. On reflection I realise, furthermore, that I have never found another
instrument with such an extensive combination of personality and vocabu1a1-y.~~

Violinist Anne-Sophie Mutter, who reported that her 1710 Stradivarius has absorbed the

music and idiosyncrasies of past players (quoted in Section 3.4) notes that ‘an instrument is

stamped with the character of the musicians who play on And elsewhere she says ‘I

know straight away when someone’s been playing my violin. One can tell the change

immediatel~’.~~
In a similar vein, a freezing and mechanical oscillation process applied to

brass instruments is reported to result in a ‘collecting of experience by the in~trument’.~~

The

result is likened to ‘a group dynamic process within a team’ where ‘as soon as a harmonic

togetherness is achieved a memory effect will occur’.4o

These examples show that musical instruments become imbued with the subjective elements

associated with personality, and have ascribed to them the human qualities of memory,

independence of judgement, and conscious interaction. The presence of these assigned

subjective traits in sources on the care or preservation of instruments indicates that the values

of Currency are held.

4.4.2 Legendary Attributions

The legendary contains elements of the mythical, as cited in William’s definition of the

Romantic.41Individual achievement is magnified, and the arcane is invoked by references to

lost secrets and covert practices. A quality that is at times precognizant, eccentric, or

superhuman is bestowed upon the composers, and upon the players, makers, and restorers of
 74

musical instruments. As Jacques Maquet observed in his anthropological perspective on the

visual arts, regarding the 19th century genesis of the concept of genius:

A genius was not learning and slowly progressing; he was inspired, even compelled
to create out of an inner necessity stemming from his own singularity. The social
milieu, recognized as the main determinant in the ordinary lives of ordinary people,
was a hindrance against which artists should rebel if they wanted to be great. Their
genuineness and spontaneity should not be inhibited by social constraint^.^^

As an example of such a bestowed precognizance, the pre-eminent 19th-century musicologist

Philipp Spitta discussed the ideal instrument for J.S. Bach’s keyboard music in the following

way:

No instrument but one which should combine tht: volume of tone of the organ with
the expressive quality of the clavichord, in due proportion, could be capable of
reproducing the image which dwelt in the master’s imagination when he composed
for the clavier. Every one sees at once that the modern pianoforte is just such an
instrument.43

As Morgan has pointed out, so strong was the need to maintain the currency of Bach’s music

that the composer was assumed capable of influencing future musical developments and of

exploiting the properties of instruments not yet invented.44Although such sentiment may now

be considered suspect in musicology, it persists in performance practice. Mutter, cited earlier

regarding the violin, suggests that ‘musicians like Mozart and Beethoven were [...I

enormously ahead of their time. Beethoven certainly didn’t compose for the fortepiano: he

imagined the sound of the modem grand piano’.45Concert pianist Alicia de Rocha amplifies

this view when asked if she has performed Beethoven on a contemporary instrument, such as

a Broadwood: ‘I have tried, but it is not right. This is the reason why he composed his best

music after he had gone deaf ,46 Of a Stradivari violin re-necked under the auspices of the

Metropolitan Museum in New York, it was reported that ‘the violin seems to sound better,
 75

perhaps, in music of the 1sthcentury than in the 17thcentury repertoire; Stradivari shows

himself here as a forward-looking ge~pius’.~’

Eccentricity, as seen in a lack of inhibition to social constraints, is another element of the

legendary. The Reverend Haweis, introducing the owner of a 17th-century Cremonese violin

to Mr. William Ebsworth Hill, the 19th-century London restorer, describes the scene as

follows:

[Hill] took no notice whatever; he remained absorbed in his delicate adjustments; and
no Prince of the blood would have fared any better than we did until he had finished
what he was about. [Then the instrument was ready for] the magician’s inspection.
At last Hill laid down his tool, and taking the instrument in his hands, gave it
one quick glance and a couple of taps; he then deliberately looked in its astonished
owner’s face, tore off the fingerboard, loosened the neck, and drove a knife under the
belly. The fiddle was soon in pieces, and he threw the loose fragments aside in a heap,
took up his repairs again, and said he would attend to the matter by-and-by, and the
gentleman need not stop; and we got no more out of old Hill that day, who
immediately became reabsorbed in his work.48

Haweis is painting with words a paradoxical portrait that encompasses contemptuousness of

and indifference to both social position and the material upon which Hill works, together

with exemplary craftsmanship and dedication. The result is eccentric, and the portrait is of

genius. By referring to Hill as ‘the magician’, Haweis is invoking a legendary image.

4.4.3 Arcane Practice

References to arcane practice are a further element of subjective attribution. Documentary

sources are dominated by discussion, analysis, and experimentation on the purported lost

secrets of violin making of the 17th and 18th centuries in Cremona, although sources on the

materials and techniques of other instruments also occur to a lesser extent.

 76

In discussing violin restoration, physicist Tibor Csokonan makes the statement that ‘the

expert knowledge of the greatest masters like Amati, Stradivari and Guarneri has been

handed down from father to son, from master to apprentice as a profound ~ecret’.~’

Researchers exploring the use of pozzuolana volcanic ash, or Roman hydraulic cement, as a

treatment for the wood of Cremonese violins, state that ‘there has long been speculation

about the methods and materials used by the seventeenth and eighteenth century schools of

Italian violin In emulation of Proust, a French publication is entitled ‘A la

Recherche du Vernis Perdu’ .51

The varnish used by the bowed string instrument-makers of Cremona in the 17th and 18th

centuries has been the subject of research and speculation since the 19th century. The Hill

brothers effectively dispelled ‘the mystery in which the subject has been involved by the

ever-ready pens and fluent tongues of the many self-constituted authorities’ in 1902 by

stating that ‘the recipe of the varnish employed by Stradivari is still in exi~tence’.~~
They

further criticise the ‘erroneous views disseminated concerning [the varnish’s] magical

proper tie^'.^^ Even the highly romantic Haweis, writing during the same period, states simply
that ‘the trick of mixing it got lost along with the stuff to be mixed, and the Cremonese

So, while
secret, once an open secret, lapsed and lapsed, as it seems, irre~overably’.~~

allowing the romance of the lost secret, he hardly subscribes to the prevalent view that the

recipe of the varnish had never been widely known. More recently, a compendium of musical

instrument varnish recipes, accumulated from widely separated geographical sources,

demonstrates the openness of information on the subject.55

 77

In spite of such attempts to deconstruct the mythology of’violin varnish, the mystery

exercises a continuing fascination among scientists. For example, a Texas researcher is

reported to have ‘uncovered secrets that have mystified violin makers for 200 years and

prevented them fiom precisely duplicating the master’s irnstrument~’.~~

The discovery

involves boiling the exoskeletons of shrimps into a varnish. Under the heading ‘Old tunes on

a new fiddle’, it is reported of the same research that ‘so important is the [...I varnish that

modem instruments of indifferent quality are transformed by treatment with The same

researcher hrther found traces of ‘gold, silver, and vanadium which he attributed to

alchemists of the time who were consulted on preserving the woods’.58In another recent

study, slivers of varnish ‘shed during restoration’ were examined by optical microscopy and

five analytical instrumental methods in the hope of assisling ‘modem-day violin makers in

duplicating Stradivarius’ technique^'.^^ In a similar vein, the performance characteristics of

early brass instruments have been attributed to lost arts of production, and to a secret

ingredient added to the alloy by foundries working before the Industrial Revolution.60

4.5 SUMMARY

The base assumption in the Currency regimen is that the historic musical instrument must be

maintained in a functioning state. The emergence of the regimen from a lower class craft

tradition of musical instrument repair and maintenance it; characterized by a lack of specific

documentation. Maintenance is defined very widely to include all craA activity aimed at

keeping instruments current. It is distinguished very clearly fi-om restoration, which is

detailed in the next chapter. As the craft tradition of maintaining instruments in working
 78

condition passed through the 19th century, subjective attributes appeared, focussing the

rationales for action upon instruments in this regimen.

NOTES

1. Morel, RenC, transcript of interview, 12 September 19!36.

2. Lowenthal, p. 52.

3. ibid.

4. Morgan, p. 58.

5. Morgan, pp. 67-68.

6. Morgan, p. 68.

7. Lowenthal, p. 6 1.

8. Hill, et al., pp. 203-204.

9. Boyden, p. 125.

10. Boyden, pp. 124-125.

11. O’Brien, ‘Ruckers’, p. 463.

12. O’Brien, ‘Ruckers’, pp. 463-464.

13. ibid.

14. Fischer, p. 70.

15. Barclay, ‘Manufacture’, p. 25.

16. Roberts, pp. 17-25.

17. Carr, pp. 1-40. Controversy over the projected restoration of the Schnitger organ in the
Der Aa-Kerk resulted in the formation, in 1998, of The Foundation for the Protection of the
Main Organ of the Der Aa-Kerk (Stichting tot Beschermiizg van het Hoofdorgel van de Der
Aa-Kerk).

18. Frank, et. al., pp. 32-37.

 79

19. The term ‘subjective’ is used here in the sense of phenomena which ‘exist only in the
mind of him who judges’. (Williams, Keywords, p. 3 11.)

20. Williams, Keywords, p. 275.

21. Maquet, Aesthetic, p. 172.

22. Wynne-Davies, p. 859.

23. Ruskin, Stones, vol. 1, p. vii.

24. Wynne-Davis, p. 52 1.

25. Ruskin, Painters, p. 154.

26. Ruskin, Painters, p. 275.

27. In his book Music and Morals, Haweis champions an unquestioned canon of musical
behaviour. It is to be noted that the views of Haweis are generally considered radical, if not
irrational. However, the point to be made here is that such views reflect the background of
opinion and, after appearing in print, achieve currency and become entertained, if not wholly
accepted.

28. Haweis, Violins, p. 7.

29. Haweis, Violins, pp. 12-13.

30. Haweis, Violins, pp. 13-14.

31. Hill, et. al., p. 239.

32. The Canadian Press, ‘Gifted young violinists win loans to awaken sleeping
Stradivariuses’, The Ottawa Citizen, 12 September 1997, p. E4.

33. Pinzauti, p. 132.

34. Haskell, p. 24.

35. Campbell, p. 126.

36, Frank, et. al., p. 34.

37. Beuth, p. 73.

38. Beuth, p. 74. Later in the interview Ms. Mutter rather contradicts this comment by stating
that ‘I wouldn’t have let my fiddle out of my hands for anything’ @. 75).

39. Ritz, p. 15.

 80

40. ibid.

41. Williams, Keywords, p. 275.

42. Maquet, Aesthetic, p. 172.

43. Spitta, p. 44. (Quoted in Morgan, p. 68.)

44. Morgan, p. 68.

45. Beuth, p. 74.

46. Tilson Thomas, Michael, transcript of interview on Concerto, BBC Television, 22

August 1993.

47.Libin, p. 37.

48. Haweis, Violins, pp. 136-137.

49. Csokonai, p. 114.

50. Barlow, p. 313.

5 1 . Colombo, pp. 46-55.

52. Hill, et. al., pp. 166-167.

53. Hill, et. al., pp. 159-160.

54. Haweis, Violins, p. 152.

55. Fontana, et. al.

56. Alper, p. 38.

57. Lipsius, F., ‘Old tunes on a new fiddle’, The Sunday Times, 11 March 1984.

58. ibid. Vanadium was first isolated in 1801, when AndrCs del RIOextracted it from its ore.

59. Anon, ‘The Music of a Stradivarius’, Microscopy, Spring 1995, p. 11.

60. Thein, pp. 377-404.

 81

CHAPTER FIVE - RESTITUTION

The regimen of Restitution was defined briefly in Section 1.2: the instrument is ‘returned to’

and maintained in a state that is assumed to represent some previous period of its existence.

Instruments in this regimen are obsolete and in degraded condition, and craft action upon

them is defined as restorationfollowed by maintenance.This chapter completes the

definition of Restitution, showing how actions taken on historic musical instruments to

satisfy the goal of finding these ‘earlier states’, and the rationales underscoring these actions,

fall into this regimen. Restitution is characterized by a growing interest, commencing in the

19th century, for the performance of early music on period instruments. Consciousness of the

place of the material object in history, and of its fragility and evanescence, became prominent

in the 19th century, and is particularly well demonstrated in sources relating to architectural

elements. Restitution is contrasted here with Currency, in which objects may be equally

treasured, but are adapted to the taste and fimctions of the time through maintenance.

5.1 MUSICAL FUNCTION

As with Currency, it is assumed that the instrument must fbnction musically, although within

this regimen the aims and values espoused are very different. Because of the need to perform

music on ‘original’ instruments, physical refurbishment to a determined previous state is a

critical necessity. Like Currency (and in opposition to Preservation, which follows) this

regimen is based upon the craft activity of musical instrurnent making, repair, and restoration.
 82

5.2 THE NATURE OF SOURCES

As discussed in Sections 3.2 and 3.3, because of the origins of the craft tradition, Restitution,

like Currency, is initially non-textual. As the practice of restoration of early instruments

developed from the craft tradition of general repair and maintenance, it carried with it the low

emphasis on the written record. The emphasis of the early music revival, especially in the

latter half of the 20th century, upon scholarly study and elucidation of workshop technique,

resulted in an increase in both quality and quantity of publications. These writings were

generally focussed on historical research, and did not usually constitute a record of current

treatment.

5.3 DEFINITION OF RESTORATION

In current usage, the action of attempting to return an object to a previous state is referred to

as restoration. However, restoration can have other contradictory meanings, and the term

underwent changes of meaning throughout the 19th and into the 20th centuries. It is useful to

examine the term restoration in its historical context because this reveals the divergence of

critical opinion and practice in the 19th century that led to the foundation of the parallel, but

interrelated, discipline of conservation.

Thinking on the subject became polarized in the middle f the 19th entury when destruction

of architectural elements was reported to have taken place in the name of restoration. This

state of affairs was brought to the attention of the London Society of Antiquaries in 1855 in a
 83

memorandum strongly urging that no restoration be undertaken unless ‘the word

“restoration” may be understood in the sense of preservation from further injuries by time or

negligence’.’ The Society established a ‘Conservation Fund’ to assist its advocacy in

preserving ancient monuments from intervention.2 In a contemporary commentary, John

Ruskin defines restoration as follows:

Neither by the public, nor by those who have the care of public monuments, is the
true meaning of the word restoration understood. It means the most total destruction
which a building can suffer: a destruction out of which no remnants can be gathered;
a destruction accompanied with false description of the thing de~troyed.~

The polemical tenor of this view is a reflection of the violent antagonism between the Anti-

Restoration movement, of which Ruskin and William Morris were key members, and the

restorers of the school of Eugkne-Emmanuel Vi~llet-le-Duc.~

In the introduction to an article

in the Dictionnaire raisonnke de I ’architecturefranqaise du X e au XVIe siscle, Viollet-Le-

Duc wrote of restoration that:

Both the word and the thing are modem. To restore an edifice means neither to
maintain it, nor to repair it, nor to rebuild it; it means to reestablish it in a finished
state, which may in fact never have actually existed at any given time.’

The polarity of views evident in such conflicting statements suggests a maturing of

awareness, and signals the beginning of the rift between restoration as a creative and

interpretive action, and what would become conservation as historical criticism.

Since the adoption of the memorandum on restoration by the Society of Antiquaries in 1855,

further references are made to the damage inflicted by restoration. Presentations to the

Society on the effects of restoration include: the removal of a chancel screen at Wakefield,6

the restoration of the roof of St. Alban’s Abbey,’ the presentation of a Bill for the

Presemation of Ancient Monuments to the House of Commons,’ Church restoration in

 84

Wales,9the destructive restoration of stained glass in Westminster Abbey," the restoration of

Lichfield Cathedral," and the preservation of stone crosses.'' Musical instruments were

presented to the meetings of the Society of Antiquaries from time to time -- the work of

keyboard instrument maker Burkat S c h ~ d i ' the

~ , portable organ at Canterbury Cathedral,14

and the Chester recorder^,'^ -- but no mention is made in any of these presentations of either
condition or treatment.

While consciousness is raised from the middle of the 19th century upon the vulnerability of

the architectural heritage, the changes resulting fi-om the treatment on the class of functional

objects, in which musical instruments are included, tend not to be emphasised. This is

exemplified by the comments of the Rev. J.T. Fowler regarding on-going restorations in

Durham Cathedral in 1874:

As the organ, which was built by Father Smith in 1684, is, after having suffered many
things at various times, now undergoing a complete reconstruction, it may be well to
place on record the following notes of the decoration of the pipes which I fortunately
took before their removal.I6

There follows a brief description. Significant in this quotation is the apparent disposal of the

pipes, and the fact that their decoration is recorded in some detail, but no reference is made to

their musical qualities, methods of construction, or tuning. Interest lies in the decorative

aspect of the pipes in their architectural setting. There is a clear demarcation evident, through

the 19th century and into the 20th, between what is done in the name of restoration to

architectural .elements, and what is done to functioning objects such as musical instruments.

Thus, deployment and definition of the term restoration becomes increasingly contextual.

Treatment not considered ethical in one field (e.g. architecture) may be condoned in another

(musical instruments).
 85

The current dictionary definition of restore is ‘to bring back to the original state; to improve,

repair, or retouch (a thing) so as to bring it back to its original c~ndition’.’~

However,

keyboard instrument specialist Mimi Waitzman argues that restoration actually carries a

musical instrument further from its origin, not nearer: ‘The fact remains that every

restoration, no matter how well-documented or sympathetic, wipes away evidence and makes

the original condition, one condition more remote.’” Restoration is defined in the

conservation code of ethics, in part, as ‘all actions taken it0 modi@ the existing materials and

structure of a cultural property to represent a known earlier state’.’’ The word ‘represent’ is

used to clarify intent; while the dictionary states that the object undergoing restoration is

returned to an ‘original’ state, the conskrvation code of ethics makes it clear that the resulting

condition is a representation of the original state.

Concerning the restoration and interpretation of works of art in general, art historian Paul

Philippot has stated that ‘by treating a monument as a simple historical document, the

integration of the object into our era takes place at the cost of a reduction of ow relationship

to the object to the level of mere knowledge’.20He argues that the action of not intervening in

the presentation of a cultural object results in a ‘refusal to recognize its very specificity’.21To

this end, policies of presentation have been developed in the restoration of works of art that,

‘while keeping to the requirements of historical criticism, comply also with those of the work

of art as actual aesthetic p r e ~ e n c e ’Thus,

. ~ ~ a degree of physical reintegration is justified in

expressing the humanistic values of the artifact while still maintaining its presence as an

historical document. Playing policies for musical instruments in the Restitution regimen carry

Philippot’s interpretation into the realm of functioning objects. Reintegration of the

 86

functioning aspects of musical instruments is seen as a way of maintaining their aesthetic

presence.

As examples, at the Bate Collection of the Faculty of Music of Oxford University, an Adam

Beyer square piano dating from 1779 is ‘untouched since that date [and] still in perfect

working order [...I we tune it regularly and keep it working as the maker intended’.23

Finchcocks, a keyboard instrument collection in an 18th century manor house in Kent, is

‘musical, not visual. It is, above all, a playing collection and its over-riding aim is to bring

the music of different periods to life’.24According to these views, the antithesis of such

policies would be to consign an instrument to the kind ofmuseum that is ‘a temple of silence

where it may be conserved as a piece of furniture, its musical function f ~ r g o t t e n ’ . ~ ~

As the above discussion shows, depending upon both date and context, the word restoration

can have diverse meanings. In 19th century usage it can be taken to mean ‘preservation from

M e r injuries by time or negligence’,26‘destruction accompanied with false description of

the thing destroyed’,27or ‘to reestablish [...I in a finished state which may in fact never have

actually existed at any given time’.28These markedly different interpretations reflect the

emotional content of debate on the subject. Twentieth-century usage is much less polarized,

favouring ‘to bring back to the original state’,29or ‘to represent a known earlier state’:’

depending upon whether the word appears in common usiige, or is applied specifically to the

treatment of artefacts. In this work, the definition put forward by the conservation profession

-- ‘to represent a known earlier state’ -- is used when discussing craft actions on historic
instruments.
 87

5.4 THE VALUES OF RESTITUTION

Two questions will be asked during the critical analysis of the case studies that follow: what

action has been taken on the instrument, and upon what rationale is the action based? As with

the discussion of Currency in the previous chapter, it is helpful to derive unique key values so

that action and rationale can be examined in context. Restoration involves the intent ‘to

represent a known earlier ~tate’.~’

The return of an instrument to a projected previous state,

and its subsequent use in that state, imply a clearly articulated concept of a definitive earlier

state, and the necessary facilities to cany it through. It is epitomised by the statement that

‘car restaurer un instrument, c ’estprisewer ou retrouver sa structure ancienne et son timbre

Restitution is based in craft activity, and it presupposes action upon the

~uthentique’.~~

materials of fabrication of the instrument.

In Section 4.3.1 it was shown that of Lowenthal’s four valued attributes of the past --

antiquity, continuity, termination, and sequence33-- continuity provided a key value to

Currency. Continuity ‘implies a living past bound up with the present, not one exotically

different or ~bsolete’.~“
Antiquity provides the antithesis 1.0 this sentiment; while the

modernizing thrust of Currency is ‘profoundly anti-escapjst’, Restitution is the opposite in

pursuing a release from current values.35By returning the musical instrument to a hnctioning

representation of a previous state, and by its on-going maintenance for the purposes of

exploring music contemporary with the earlier state, the ‘chief use [of antiquity is] to root

credentials in the past’.36This process is, in essence, the driving force behind ‘authentic’

music performance, and thus from Lowenthal’s definition of antiquity, the first value of
 88

Restitution, ‘authentic experience’, is defined. The second value of Restitution is defined as

‘positivistic thinking’ because the pursuit of authentic experience relies for its fulfilment

upon empirical data. The certainty with which attempts are made to recover a previous state

through craft action indicates a belief in a single historical truth. These two values are

explored in detail below.

5.4.1 Authentic Experience

Lowenthal’s term ‘antiquity’ is replaced by ‘authentic experience’ in this work, because the

set of ideas and aspirations that the latter encompasses is more specific to early music.

However, authenticity is a perilous word to use nowadays without very close definition. The

term has been widely used in the early music revival to signify the search for and the

realization of earlier musical values. But authenticity as a concept has undergone an

expansion and a consequent dilution of meaning since it iirst came to be used to signi& the

values of the early music movement. Richard Taruskin points out that ‘nowadays, in the area

of musical performance, it sometimes seems as if authenticity, as a word and as a concept,

has been stood on its head’.37As one example of many, performances of baroque music

advertised as ‘authentic’ and performed on ‘period instruments’ regularly employ recently-

invented brass instruments that have no historical antecedents. The natural trumpet, the

historically appropriate instrument of the 17th and 18th centuries, is almost never heard in

concert or recording.38Taruskin further argues that the word authenticity ‘needs either to be

rescued from its current purveyors or to be dropped by those who would aspire to the values

it properly signifies’.39
 89

The term authentic experience as it is used in this work refers to more than just objective,

knowledge-based information derived from the study of historic musical instruments, and

from the realisation of their function in an historical context. It is also important to capture

with the term the subjective component arising from the experience of trying to recreate past

experiences. Such attempted recapture of past experience is discussed by philosopher

It is his
Chstopher Cherry in his analysis of the way in which the past is a~prehended.~’

opinion that the familiar sense of being profoundly distanced from the past is misrepresented

as being epistemic in origin, as a cognitive deficit due to a lack of information. He argues,

however, that ‘any possible epistemic relationship, no matter how intimate, fails to ~atisfy’.~’

The sense of estrangement from the past persists, even in the presence of historical

knowledge. Through this he identifies a difference between knowing the past, and wishing to

retrieve it.42He defines a sense of the ‘gulf separating the here-and-now and the over-and-

done-with’, and he labels the sensation resulting from its contemplation the ‘ae~thetic’.~~

An example of this essentially subjective component of authentic experience is provided by

John Watson, keyboard conservation specialist at Colonial Williamsburg in Virginia. In a key

quotation, which will be reintroduced later in this work, he describes the artistic impact of

playing upon an historic instrument:

Playing Beethoven on an early nineteenth centuqr piano, one cannot help imagining
the day when the same instrument took part in the creative process of Beethoven’s
contemporaries if not the composer himself. This represents a profound opportunity
to step into a dimension of the cultural landscape from which the music originated.44

This process of entering a ‘cultural landscape’ is bound up with the concept of authentic

experience as it is seen here. In attempting to elicit this experience of past phases in the use

of a musical instrument by auditory and tactile means, the experience of authenticity is

 90

clearly very personal and highly subjective. It is also essential that the instrument being used

as the intermediary -- the medium through which the experience is channelled and moderated

-- be regarded by the player as genuine, or original. As C)ary Karp, then curator at the

Musikmuseet in Stockholm, stated regarding practices with museum instruments during the

opening decades of the early music movement: ‘no performance or recording of the music of

an earlier period was accepted as being authentic unless it was made on original period

instruments. 745

Use of period instruments, not replicas, is the collection policy of Finchcocks, the keyboard

instrument centre referred to earlier. An unequivocal statement upon the aesthetic impact of

the original instrument is made:

The policy has always been that the instruments were intended to be played and
heard, and the only true way to understand the mixsic of the classical masters is to
experience directly the instruments for which it w’as

Direct experience appears to preclude the use of copies. Thus, the ‘aesthetic’ sensation

defined by Cherry, which results from the attempt to step into the ‘cultural landscape’

described by Watson, coupled with the necessity of direct experience of the instruments for

which the music was written, all contribute the subjective elements of authentic experience. It

is not, therefore, simply an adherence to musical and historical data, but is intimately bound

up with sensory experiences elicited from the instrument in its historic persona. Thus, when

dealing with historic musical instruments, ‘rooting credentials in the past’:’ which

Lowenthal labels ‘antiquity’, encompasses a subjective and personal attempt to bridge the

gulf between the past and the present.

 91

5.4.2 Positivistic Thinking

Adherence to musical and historical data, and the focus upon the definitive previous state of

the musical instrument, incorporate elements of positivistic thinking. Taruskin defines

positivistic musicology as that which is ‘interested in letter, not spirit. It sets up research

experiments [...I to be solved by applying rules of logic and It is argued here that

the return of an early instrument to a previous historical state is analogous, and contains

elements of this rationale; it is based in definitive knowledge of the earlier state through

technical study and analysis, followed by craft intervention with the tools necessary to

recreate the lost state.

The positivistic thinking alluded to here does not refer directly to the science of human

society propounded by Auguste Comte and refined by John Stuart Mill, but to the cultural

effects of its later popularization by such writers as Henry Thomas Buckle. Buckle stated in

his History of Civilization in England that:

Whoever wishes to raise history to a level with other branches of knowledge, is met
by a preliminary obstacle; since he is told that in the affairs of men there is something
mysterious and providential, which makes them impervious to our investigations, and
which will always hide from us our future C O U I - S ~ : ~ ~

Buckle argues that a scientific approach to historical study will overcome this obstacle. His

contribution ‘was not to achieve new results in the sciences of history, but to popularize the

belief in the possibility of applying scientific treatment to historical problem^'.^' Raymond

Williams provides a good modem working definition of positivistic thinking as ‘the

representation of facts without any admixture of theory or m y t h ~ l o g y ’ . ~ ~

 92

Positivism in the performance of early music is encountered in attempts to strip away from

the music later editorial accretions, and to arrive at a defined first state wherein the

composer’s intentions are understood and complied with. It is epitomised by Leopold von

Ranke’s dictum that ‘the way it really was’ is ultimately a~hievable.’~

In the treatment of

historic musical instruments, the craft equivalent of positivistic musicology is the process of

stripping away the physical accretions of time, use and changing fashion in an attempt to

recapture an earlier disposition. Thus, restoration of an historic musical instrument is an

attempt to discern the first hnctioning state (as defined in Section 1.1.2), or any pre-defined

functioning state thereafter, by the application of craft techniques informed and guided by

technical information. The chief assumption of such treatment is that previous states are

capable of physical retrieval. As an example of the structure of thought surrounding decisions

to seek the earlier states, keyboard scholar Denzil Wraight writes the following:

A little while ago it was considered appropriate to restore altered harpsichords back to
their original condition, even if this meant, for example, dismantling much of an 18th-
century French ‘ravalement’ of a Ruckers harpsichord. Since then we have come to
feel that perhaps each historical stage is of value, and that we should only take an
instrument back to its last historical state.53

Although withdrawing from the earlier assumption that the goal of restoration resides only in

the first hnctioning state, Wraight still holds to the view that each historical stage is

potentially recoverable.

5.4.3 The Didactic Element

In addition to authentic experience and positivistic thought, there is a strong didactic element

in the regimen of Restitution. Maintaining historic instruments in working condition is often

 93

dictated by policies identifying the roles played by the instruments in teaching and training.

As examples, the Finchcocks collection, referred to above, has an active tutorial policy,

encouraging visits by school groups and individuals. It bas been stated that ‘people are often

astonished that small children are allowed to play on these museum pieces’.54Similarly,

Fenton House, the repository of the Benton Fletcher collection, is open ‘to students of music

who wish to obtain practice on the harpsichord, spinet, and clavichord’.” The plans of the

Royal Academy of Music for a new exhibition building encompass a ‘living museum’

bringing together several existing working collections:

This will be no conventional museum: most of the instruments in the various

collections are maintained in playing condition [imd] will be available to Academy
students and other qualified musicians as a hands-on resource for learning
performance practice, instrument design and construction. Open to the public, each
collection will also have a linked workshop where the historic instruments can be
maintained and used as reference for new work. These units will in turn be supported
by relevant Academy departments, with teaching and practice rooms, a recording
studio, and a central salon for concerts, demonstrations and the display of prime
objects from the various collection^.^^

Such policies upon the use of museum objects have 19th-century precedents. The collection

in the Science Museum in London, described by Carl Engel in Musical Instruments of 1869,

was kept in an environment where use of such items was an assumption. A report of 1854 by

Henry Cole on the South Kensington Museum states that:

The museum is intended to be used, and to the utmost extent consistent with the
preservation of the articles; and not only used physically, but to be taken about and
lectured upon. For my own part, I venture to think that unless museums and galleries
are made subservient to purposes of education, they dwindle into very sleepy and
useless institution^.^^

In all the above examples of policies that focus on function a strong element of instruction is

evident. The collections are to be used as educational resources, and the element of

didacticism within Restitution is clearly evident.

 94

5.5 SUMMARY

Values associated with Restitution arose in the 19th century during an increasing interest in

the exploration of past values in music. In this regimen musical function is an essential

requirement of an instrument. Because Restitution developed from the underlying craft

tradition, documentation of individual treatments is rare during the earlier period, but

becomes more common later as exploration of instrument-making techniques becomes

emphasised. The term restoration is most commonly used to describe the activities within

Restitution, but its meaning varies with both period and context. It is defined here only as

actions taken to reestablish a lost previous state. Two unique values have been identified

which provide rationales for restorative action, and through which the Restitution regimen is

characterized: the pursuit of authentic experience, and positivistic thinking in the technical

search for earlier functioning states. In Restitution, musical instruments are regarded

primarily as generators of musical sound because, without this, the essential aesthetic

engagement of the player is absent.

NOTES

1. Proceedings ofthe Society ofdntiquaries, 111, 1853-1856, pp. 185-186.

2. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, 111, 1853-1856, p. 185.

3. Ruskin, Seven Lamps, p. 161.

4. Vaccaro, p. 309.

5. Quoted in Price, et. al., p. 3 14.

6. Proceedings of the Society ofdntiquaries, V, 1871-1873, p. 149.

 95

7. Proceedings of the Society ofAntiquaries, VI1 1876-78, pp. 455-472.

8. Proceedings of the Society ofAntiquaries, X, 1883-1885, pp. 285-286.

9. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, XI, 1887-’1889,pp. 37-38.

10. Proceedings of the Society ofdntiquaries, XI11 1889-1891, pp. 158-159.

11. Proceedings ofthe Society ofdntiquaries, XIV, 1891-1893, pp. 255-157.

12. Proceedings ofthe Society ofdntiquaries, XII, 1889-1891, pp. 174-181 and pp. 241-245.

13. Proceedings of the Society ofdntiquaries, XXIII, 909-191 1, pp. 201-210.

14. Proceedings of the Society ofAntiquaries, XXIII, 91 1-1913, pp. 7-10.

15. Proceedings of the Society ofAntiquaries, XXIII, 91 1-1913, pp. 117-124.

16. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries, VI, 1873-76, p. 177.

17. OED, XIII, p. 755.

18. Waitzman, p. 22. In both the OED definition and Waitzman’s usage the term ‘condition’
is used, although what is actually meant is ‘state’.

19. IIC-CG and CAPC, Code of Ethics and Guidancefor Practice, p. 17.

20. Philippot, p. 225.

21. ibid.

22. ibid.

23. Montagu, p. 36.

24. Burnett, pp. 35-36.

25. Montagu, p. 36.

26. Proceedings of the Society ofdntiquaries, 111, 1853-1856, pp. 185-186.

27. Ruskin, Seven Lamps, p. 161.

28. Quoted in Price, et al., p. 314.

29. OED. XIII, p. 755.

30. IIC-CG and CAPC, Code of Ethics and Guidancefor Practice, p. 17.
 96

3 1. IIC -- CG and CAPC, Code of Ethics and GuidancedforPractice, p. 17.

32. ‘To restore an instrument is to preserve or recapture its earlier structure and its authentic
sound’ (Abondance, p. 10, col. 2).

33. Lowenthal, p. 52.

34. ibid.

35. Lowenthal, p. 6 1.

36. ibid.

37. Taruskin, ‘Authenticity’, p. 3.

38. Collins, pp. 11-15.

39. Taruskin, p. 3.

40. Cherry, pp. 67-78.

41. Cherry, p. 68.

42. ibid.

43. ibid.

44. Watson, pp. 74-75.

45. Karp, ‘Museums’, p. 179.

46. Burnett, pp. 35-36.

47. Lowenthal, p. 52.

48. Taruskin, Text and Act, p. 146.

49. Cited in Stern, p. 126.

50. ibid.
5 1. Williams, Keywords, pp. 238-239.

5 2 . ‘ A h es wirklich gewesen’, quoted in Taruskin, Text cind Act, p. 146.

53. Wraight, ‘Conservation’, p. 299.

54. Burnett, p. 36.

 97

55. Russell, p. 3.

56. Price, ‘Early Music’, p. 559.

57. Quoted in Alexander, p. 159.

 98

CHAPTER SIX - PRESERVATION

The regimen of Preservation was defined briefly in Section 1.2 as: the current state of the

instrument is respected, and it is preserved from further intervention. Instruments in this

regimen are kept in a non-playing state, and action upon them is described as conservation

treatment. This chapter describes the new valuation of historic objects and structures which

arose in the 19th century, which resulted in a re-assessment of procedures and ethical

approaches. It further describes the way in which the meaning of restoration underwent

change, and how a new term, conservation, came into use. The term conservation, when used

to describe the new discipline and to distinguish it from restoration, is shown to have been

adopted only in the 20th century.

6.1 SUSPENSION OF MUSICAL FUNCTION

In the Currency and Restitution regimens, the continuing musical function of historic

instruments is assumed. Preservation differs profoundly from these earlier regimens in its

stance that musical function is detrimental. Playing of historic musical instruments implies

initial treatment to bring them into working condition (restoration), followed by further

treatment (maintenance) to address wear, damage and replacement of parts as they are

played. A sense of guardianship implicit in Preservation reserves historic artefacts in a non-

functioning state as sources of information.

 99

6.2 THE NATURE OF SOURCES

A chief characteristic differentiating the regimen of Preservation from both Currency and

Restitution is its prime focus upon documentation. In the profession of conservation (which

is discussed in detail in Section 6.3, below), descriptions of work performed on objects are

essential to the conduct of social and technical transactions, and become permanently

associated with the objects being treated. As outlined in Section 3.2.3, Preservation is heavily

textual; it manifests its attitudes through codes of ethics and guidance for practice; through

written, photographic and other forms of documentation; and through published papers on

treatment procedures, analyses, and philosophical approaches. Within the area of historic

musical instruments it boasts a plethora of articles, papers, books, colloquia, and conferences

centred upon the dilemma of playing versus preservation, and of conservation versus

restoration.

6.3 PRESERVATION AND CONSERVATION

Preservation is synonymous with conservation, as the word has come to be understood in its

relationship to the protection of material culture since the 19th century. However,

preservation is the term chosen to describe this regimen for two reasons: firstly, it is a neutral

terms and carries few of the connotations that have arisen in the dialectic between

conservation and restoration and, secondly, it avoids the popular confusion with conservation

in its wider, environmental context, as detailed below.

 100

6.3.1 Conservation in Popular Understanding

Conservation, in the context of the active preservation of objects of cultural value, has not

achieved currency in common usage due to the larger publicity and popular awareness that

surrounds the environmental issues that share the term. For example, the 15th edition of the

Encyclopedia Britannica devotes 23 pages to the natural environment under the entry for

conservation, and makes no mention of the museum discipline.’ Similarly, World Books

Encyclopedia expends 17 pages in dealing only with conservation of the natural world.* The

aims and practices of conservation as a museum discipline are also misunderstood within the

museum profession itself. In commenting upon the role of the artefact in the museum,

Charles Saumerez-Smith observes that:

Much conservation, although certainly not all, is based upon the premise that the
artist’s original vision of an artefact represents the most true and authentic appearance
of that artefact [...I It is a species of contemporary arrogance which regards it as
possible to reverse the process of history and return the artefact’s appearance to
exactly how it was when it popped out of its maker’s hands.3

In assuming that the aim of conservation is the attempted return of objects to supposed earlier

states, Saumerez-Smith is confusing the museum role of’conservation with that of the

restorer, from which it developed. If such a confusion is embraced by a commentator within

the museum community, this indicates the extent to which the policies of the conservation

profession are misunderstood.

The terms conservation and restoration, describing distinct disciplines, are unique to English.

The museum discipline of conservation in most European languages is what in English is

referred to as ‘~uration’.~
On the other hand, the term restoration is used universally in
 101

Europe to denote the process of treating objects, whether the aim be to stabilize or to return to

a previous state.5 Thus, in English there has existed a divergence where the fields of

conservation and restoration continue as distinct entitiesS6ICOM has attempted to redress this

problem with the creation of the hybrid term ‘conservator/restorer’ in its English language

document^.^

It is because of the confusion and misunderstanding introduced by these varied definitions,

that the more neutral term preservation has been chosen for the title of this regimen. Also, a

central argument of this work is that there exist three regimens of activity, rather than the

commonly understood simple polarity between conservation and restoration. Using the term

‘conservation’ as a descriptor of this regimen would introduce further confusion, rather than

clarifying the situation.

6.3.2 The Development of the Conservation Discipline

When the term conservation is used in the current museum context it is defined as:

All actions aimed at the safeguarding of cultural property for the future. The purpose
of conservation is to study, record, retain and restore the culturally significant
qualities of the object with the least possible intervention.8

The emphasis on limiting intervention is the key point. The concept of conservation in

referring specifically to the preservation of material culture first occurs in the 19th century.

The memorandum presented to the meeting of the London Society of Antiquaries in 1855,

referred to in Section 5.3.1, outlines the destructive and misleading character of architectural

In
restoration, stating that ‘a monument restored is frequently a monument de~troyed’.~
 102

defining the word restoration 'in the sense of preservation from further injuries by time or

negligence' the authors of the memorandum have produced a nascent definition of

conservation." The memorandum also mentions the institution of a 'Conservation Fund', an

early occurrence of the word conservation in this context."

The practical discipline which came to be called conservation developed in the 19th century

with the aim of preserving significant objects from the effects of time and negligence. This

represented a new direction in the care of collections; a thrust towards understanding and

combatting deterioration through technical investigations into its cause, and later into the

processes of treatment and their impact upon objects. The research of Michael Faraday, On

the Ventilation of Gas Burners, in determining that the 'red-rot' deterioration observed on

book leathers in the Library of the Athenaeum Club resulted from attack by atmospheric

sulphur dioxide, is a pioneering example of science applied to the study of deterioration.

Friedrich Rathgen's experimental work on artefacts in the last decade of the 19th century at

the Chemical Laboratory of the Royal Museums of Berlin stimulated the investigation and

elucidation of deterioration processes.'2 This work was translated into English in 1905, and

had a significant influence on scientific work at the British Museum.I3The identification and

characterization of deterioration on museum objects stored underground during the First

World War provided the museum preservation discipline with a further underpinning of

scientific investigation. l 4

In particular, the work conducted at the British Museum in the 1920s by Alexander Scott of

the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, leads into the modern era. Although the
 103

word conservation is not yet used to describe his activities, the introduction to Scott’s Third

Report of 1926 shows a forward-looking intention. He encourages collectors:

To feel that many valuable objects that seem irreparable on account of the condition
into which they have fallen, are still worth endeavouring to preserve. Even if these
endeavours should only be partially successful from the point of view of restoration,
in almost every case details of manufacture will be revealed and light thrown upon the
causes and mechanisms of decay, and these facts alone may prove worthy of being
recorded, if for no other reason than to warn others in charge of similar specimens and
faced with like pr0b1erns.l~

A conference in Rome, organized by the League of Nations in 1930, was the first venue for

the discussion of the need for control of the museum environment, and other preventive

measures aimed at ensuring the longevity of collections. This conference is generally

regarded as the first international effort to place scientific research at the centre of the

preservation of art works and antiquities.16

The discipline of preservation of museum objects grew rapidly in England in the period after

the Second World War as a result of experimental studies, and through the scientific

reassessment of the effects of deterioration and subsequent restorative treatment. The

inauguration of the journal Studies in Conservation in October of 1952, and the appearance

of Harold Plenderleith’s The Conservation of Antiquities and Works ofArt in 1956 signalled

published legitimization of the term conservation as applied to the study and arrest of

deterioration in works of art and artifact^.'^ Systematic abstraction of technical papers had

commenced with Technical Studies in the Field of Fine Arts, produced by the Fogg Art

Museum of Harvard University from 1932-42, and continued with Abstracts of Technical

Studies in Art and Archaeology, produced by Freer Gallery of Art between 1943 and 1952.‘*

It continues with Art and Archaeology Technical Abstracts, produced by the International
 104

Institute for Conservation in association with the Getty Conservation Institute. All this

evidence of dissemination of information shows that conservation had become an academic

discipline. By the creation and encoding of its own terminology, ethics, standards and

literature it had distanced itself from the lower class, largely oral tradition of restoration from

which it had developed. As art historian Paul Philippot has remarked, ‘the expanding role of

technological studies of works of art brought the practice of restoration and conservation

from the level of traditional working-class artisanship to that of an exact science’.’’

6.4 THE VALUES OF PRESERVATION

Two questions will be asked during the critical analysis of the case studies that follow: what

action has been taken on the instrument, and upon what rationale is the action based? As with

the discussions of Currency and Restitution in the previous two chapters, it is helpful to

derive unique key values so that action and rationale can be examined in context.

In her examination of the societal values of the emerging conservation field, Miriam Clavir

identifies the two key values of integrity and the scientiiic approach:

The first belief is that there is a fundamental importance accorded to preserving the
integrity of objects and especially their physical integrity [...I The second belief is that
a systematic scientific approach is the best way to preserve objects.20

Clavir assigns integrity to all actions that centre upon care, preservation and treatment of

material objects in their physical, historical, and conceptual roles.’’ Elsewhere, she argues

that the application of scientific principles to conservation deflects the focus away from the

aesthetic being of the object, which remains the primary province of restoration.22This
 105

paraphrases Philippot’s view that the action of not intervening in treatment of the aesthetic

attributes of an object results in a ‘refusal to recognize its very ~pecificity’.~~

The scientific approach as a value is assigned by Clavir to the application of the scientific

method in the treatment of culturally significant objects: ‘It was based upon the belief that the

nature of the universe constitutes an objective reality which can be understood by the

application of scientific knowledge and methods.’24Since the use of the term ‘scientific

approach’ tends to imply the application of instrumental techniques for the capture of data,

and thus appears narrow when dealing with the wider social implications of treatment and

continuing care of historic musical instruments, the temi is replaced with ‘pragmatic

approach’ in this work. This term implies the wider social context, and invokes the system of

thought that underlies ‘scientific’ action. Thus, preservation is not exclusively practised by

scientists, but it is conducted in a scientific manner. The sense in which‘pragmatic is used

here is that of ‘pertaining to the study of events with emphasis on cause and effect’25,or ‘the

matter of fact treatment of things,y26and not specifically to the philosophical systems of

Pierce and James.27

Thus, two values -- integrity and the pragmatic approach -- comprise the exclusive cultural

markers used to indicate whether the conservation treatment and use of a musical instrument

comes under the regimen of Preservation. These two values are examined in detail below.
 106

6.4.1 Integrity

In the regimen of Preservation respect is found for the physical, historical, aesthetic, and

conceptual integrity of the historic object when decisions on its material condition or state

must be taken.28In Preservation there is a framework of encoded ethical practices, of which

the intrinsic physical nature of the object is the centre; in short, the integrity of the artefact is

respected by strictures and controls placed on craft praclice, and it is not compromised by

actions taken upon it. Integrity is therefore the antithesis of the values of both continuity and

authentic experience discussed in Sections 4.3 and 5.3, where focus is upon the expression of

the subjective qualities of the historic object through craft intervention. In the case of musical

instruments, integrity is seen in the actions of conservation treatment, and preservation in a

non-working state as an information resource, as opposed to actions taken to ensure musical

function.

Scientific investigation of the effects of deterioration and craft intervention, coupled with a

critical reappraisal of past treatments and their impact on works of art and artefacts, led to a

conservative, non-interventive approach to heritage material. Such a contextual approach,

promulgating a policy of maintaining status quo, is antithetical to the craft-driven regimens,

where traditional craft practices are seen in the continuing reworking of early material. Thus,

the critical appraisal of both restoration and maintenancr: actions that had taken place in the

past, resulted in a collective desire not to be subject to similar critical appraisal in the future.
 107

The scientific reappraisal of the treatment of artefacts, and its effect on criticism, shows a

congruence with the positivistic reappraisal of early music. Concern for authenticity in the

early music movement, in Robert Morgan’s view, is a ‘situation characterized by an

extraordinary degree of insecurity, uncertainty and self-doubt -- in a word, by anxiety’.29He

goes on to say that the movement ‘can be understood as part of a more general crisis of

identity characterizing modernity as a whole. It betrays both the self-consciousness and the

sense of personal inadequacy endemic in an ever more complex and puzzling world’.30

Raymond Leppard, too, identifies this loss of certainty; regarding the search for and the

reinstatement of past values in music, he states that ‘to seek confirmation that what has

endured for years, maybe for centuries, and can still be counted valuable, would seem to

suggest a sort of permanence when all else around shows very little indication of

Haskell sees a ‘hands off attitude to the interpretation of early music which, again, is driven

by a sensitivity to criticism.32

In parallel to these trends in early music is the ‘hands off‘ attitude to museum objects, again

driven by an anxiety to avoid negative criticism. This is attested to by the rising influence of

the discipline of preventive conservation, the aim of which is to reduce the incidence and

severity of agents which adversely affect artefacts. The term ‘preventive conservation’ could

be considered tautological -- what is conservation if it is not preventive? However, the term

has been coined to differentiate those actions taken, remote from the artefact, to arrest

deterioration, from actions taken upon the artefact itself.33For example, control of the

environment around a sensitive object in order to protect it from damage would be considered

a preventive action, whereas treatment of the object to reduce its sensitivity to the
 108

environment would be regarded as an interventive action. In short, one can either prevent a

soundboard cracking by controlling relative humidity, o:r one can varnish it to achieve the

same result. It is because of this need to distinguish remote action from local action that the

element of tautology in the term ‘preventive conservation’ has arisen. A recent critique of the

term indicates the extent to which the conservation agenda is driven by n~n-intervention.~~

Reversibility

Actions in the regimen of Currency pass usable objects on to the future by confident craft

treatment, and the actions in Restitution are expressed in the search for an earlier state

through craft intervention. In marked contrast to these two, integrity requires that technical

action of any kind has no lasting consequences. Such a policy is effected by application of

the principle of reversibility. Reversibility requires that ;m avenue of retreat be maintained for

all actions taken upon objects. In examining reversibility as a legitimate goal of conservation

treatment, Barbara Appelbaum states that it ‘sets conservators apart from skilled restorers or

repairers’ and is ‘one of the factors which establish our unique intent to project our work into

the distant future’.35Integrity supports the aspiration that work done upon an object may be

obliterated without trace in the future, should changes in epistemological reading of the

object so dictate. Thus, if ‘our work’ is being projected into the future, it is done so with the

present knowledge that, through the potential for reversibility, the physical signs of the work

done upon the object will have no intrinsic value, and may be discarded.
 109

The use of the term ‘reversibility’ in connection with the concept of permitting subsequent

return to a previous state, appeared in the Murray Pease Report, which was adopted in 1963

by the IIC-AG, and became its published Code of Ethics in 1968.36Article 11.5 states that:

The conservator is guided by and endeavours to apply the ‘principle of reversibility’

in his treatments. He avoids the use of materials which may become so intractable
that their future removal could endanger the physical safety of the object.37

However, the concept that any treatment applied to an o’bjectcould be reversed has changed

in meaning and understanding since Murray Pease’s application of it to conservation

treatment processes. The dictionary definition of reversible is a) capable of being reversed or

of reversing, or b) capable of going through a series of actions either backwards or

It is clear that by this definition no degree in reversibility is allowable; a process

or a mechanical device is either capable of reversing, or it is not. Furthermore, the second law

of thermodynamics implies that a quantity called entr0p.y ensures irreversibility in all but

purely mechanical actions.39And as Arthur Eddington stated so eloquently, ‘if your theory is

shown to be against the Second Law of Thermodynamics, I can give you no hope; there is

nothing for it but to collapse in deepest humiliation’.4o

It is clear that when used in the context of treatment actions on objects, the meaning of

reversible carries no mechanical connotations, and is closer to that of removable. For

example, when John Barnes discusses treatments of keyboard instruments with a view to

allowing subsequent recovery of evidence of manufacturing techniques, he states that

reversibility has gradations:

The survival of evidence is closely linked to the degree to which the treatment is
reversible. This axiom should increase our interest in reversible processes and lead us
 110

to realize that most so-called reversible processes are, in fact, only partially
rever~ible.~’

Appelbaum also states that ‘reversibility is not a simple “yes” or “no” proposition’, but that

the concept supports degrees of re~ersibility.~’

Reversibility, as understood within the

conservation field, therefore differs fundamentally from its common mechanical definition.

And, because it appears in its conservation guise to run contrary to the second law of

thermodynamics, it is, as Hellwig has argued, an ideal to which conservators may aspire, but

never achieve.43

6.4.2 The Pragmatic Approach

The application of scientific methods to the analysis and documentation of historic objects

results in a systematic approach based in objectivity. It is the policy of the discipline of

conservation that instruments be maintained in a non-functional state, or at least that function

be strictly controlled; function is regarded as detrimental to historical integrity.# Specific

evidence of the pragmatic approach in the preservation of musical instruments is seen in the

comparatively low value placed upon the tactile and auditory information derived through

playing. A pragmatic approach argues that such information is a product of the present, and

contains no information of value to the study of the past physical states of the instrument. In

arguing for a change in the traditional role of the museum musical instrument, Cary Karp

expresses the dichotomy between the aesthetic and the epistemic:

[The instrument’s] mode of communicating with us must be changed from that of the
ephemeral object, which provides fleeting musical delight, to that of the immortal
witness to the practices of the musical instrument makers of past generation^.^^
 111

Here the results of playing the instrument are regarded simply as fleeting musical delight, and

not as information in an historical context. Thus, in its emphasis on hard data, the pragmatic

.approach is antithetical to the subjective values implicit in authentic experience encountered

in the regimen of Restitution. Playing the musical instrument for aesthetic experience is

sharply distinguished from sounding it for the purposes of taking auditory and acoustical

measurements. Ode11 and Karp make an argument for the potential of techniques for the

acquisition of data from musical instruments without the need for playing. They provide brief

descriptions of techniques for eliciting sounds from non-fbnctioning woodwind and keyboard

in~truments.~~

When Montagu likens the fate of an instrument in a pragmatic setting to installation in ‘a

temple of silence where it may be conserved as a piece of furniture, its musical hnction

forgotten’, he misunderstands the basic premise of the pragmatic approach, which is the

derivation of musical information without the need for musical f~nction.~’

The musical

function is not forgotten, but simply transferred. Conservator John Watson argues for a

search for the ‘historical voice’ of the musical instrument, resident in the information it

holds, as opposed to its musical voice.48Although in aesthetic terms the musical function is

implicit in the instrument’s playing status, in pragmatic terms it is embodied in the

information that the instrument possesses. It is through application of the analytical and

documentation methods of science that this information is extracted. Robert Portillo, curator

of the Erich Lachmann Collection, provides a synopsis of techniques for the capture of such

inf~rmation.~’
 112

In discussing the documentary value of early keyboard instruments, Martin Scowronek states

Karp summarises
that ‘we learn more from an authentic ruin than from a restored ~riginal’.~’

such a pragmatic point of view on the playing of historic instruments:

It is becoming obvious that restored older instruments do not necessarily behave or

sound as they did when they were new. Since composers can reasonably have
expected to hear their works performed on relatively new instruments -- certainly not
on centuries old restored museum pieces -- the chronologically original instrument is
not necessarily the musically authentic one.”

The pragmatic approach to the goal of recapturing tactile and auditory qualities from earlier

functioning states of historic instruments is through the production of copies. Thus, ‘rather

than rendering these collections as playable as possible, thereby compromising both their

material and documentary integrity, would it not be wiser to make them as copyable as

possible’.52The copy may have embodied in it all the projected features of the original, when

new, and thus will provide a much closer simulacrum than the restored original. A copy may

also be used as a ‘test bed’ for further musical experimentation, in a way that would be

inimical to a restored historic instrument. The current interest in the copying of historic

instruments as an aspect of the pragmatic approach is such that an international conference

was held on the subject.s3

6.5 BENIGN NEGLECT

Clearly, an historic instrument can only fit into the scheina of Currency, Restitution or

Preservation if action is actually taken upon it, because the regimen into which it fits is

dictated by attitudes and approaches at the time of transactions. Action is taken upon the

instrument because it is valued, whether for its utility in playing current music, its potential
 113

for exploration of past music, or for its information value as an historic resource. To which

regimen is the instrument assigned if no action is taken? In such a case, the transaction

defaults to a form of passive preservation. However, this takes place in the absence of action,

and can be likened to benign neglect. Such a form of passive preservation should not be

confused with active conservation treatment, where actions based upon conscious rationales

are taken to intervene on the instrument’s behalf to ensure stable conditions, and long-term

security. The maintenance of stable relative humidity for fragile wood mentioned above is an

example of active conservation.

As an example of passive preservation, a letter written in 1868 by Mssrs. Broadwood makes

the following observation on the condition of a harpsichord once owned by Georg Friedrich

Handel:

As a musical instrument, this harpsichord has lived its life. It is not now capable of
being tuned, and any attempt to improve the accord of it might prove disastrous by
the sounding-board giving way altogether. It is, Iherefore, of consequence to the
preservation of the woodwork that the tuning should not be attem~ted.’~

Here preservation is recommended through force of necessity. The decision not to act is made

through the potential for failure, due to complete collapse, should attempts be made to render

the harpsichord playable, rather than through respect for the technical information the

instrument may contain. The ideal is to restore to working condition; the practical position is

to take no action. Passive preservation results.

Passive preservation is characteristically undocumented. It can be likened to the ‘timeless and

valueless limbo’ that Thompson assigns to objects that are as yet undiscovered by society.”

But, in the present case, the objects have already been valued by society, although while in
 114

this state they are fiee of the social transactions that provide their context. Like Thompson’s

‘limbo’, the boundary between passive preservation and the states that precede or follow it, is

decided by social pressures.56

6.6 SUMMARY

The seeds of Preservation were sown in the 19th century in reaction to over-restoration, but it

was not until the period between the two World Wars that science became an integral feature

of the conservation ethos. Re-examination of damage associated with earlier treatments

engendered a culture of anxiety and guardianship. Preservation is synonymous with the

museum discipline of conservation, although the tern conservation is not distinguished in

popular understanding from the much more popular terni restoration.

Within the regimen of Preservation historic musical instruments are considered in their

historical, technical, and social contexts. Preservation represents conservation treatment in all

efforts to stabilize and maintain instruments with the minimum of physical intervention. A

framework of exploration, documentation, and interpretation is informed by respect for the

fabric of the instrument and the transformations it has undergone over time. The values of

integrity and the pragmatic approach are central to Preservation.

NOTES

1. Encyclopedia Britannica, pp. 663-686.

 115

2. World Books Encyclopedia, pp. 778-793.

3. Saumerez-Smith, p. 20.

4. French conservation, German konseweirung, Italian conservuzione.

5. French restauration, German restaurierung, Italian rt:stauro.

6. Barclay, ‘The conservator’, pp. 35-40.

7. von Imhoff, pp. 33-37.

8. IIC-CG and CAPC, Code, p. 16.

9. Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries of London, Thursday, 3 May 1855, I11 1853-
1856, pp. 185-186.

10. Proceedings of the Society ofAntiquaries ofLondon, Thursday, 3 May 1855, I11 1853-
1856, p. 186.

11. Proceedings of the Society ofAntiquaries ofLondon, Thursday, 3 May 1855, I11 1853-
1 8 5 6 , ~185.
.

12. Gilberg, pp. 105-120.

13. Gilberg, p. 106.

14. Oddy, pp. 13-14.

15. Scott, first report, p. 2.

16. Office International des MusCes, pp. 126-130.

17. Plenderleith had already published The Preservation of Antiquities in 1934.

18. Cited in Murray Pease, p. 5.

19. Philippot, p. 217.

20. Clavir, ‘Social and Historic’, p. 1.

21. Clavir, ‘Social and Historic’, pp. 1-2.

22. Clavir, ‘Factors’, p. 9.

23. Philippot, p. 225.

24. Clavir, ‘Social and Historic’, p. 3.

 116

25. OED, XII, p. 277.

26. ibid.

27. Williams, Keywords, p. 241

28. IIC-CG and CAPC, Code, p. 5.

29. Morgan, p. 57.

30. Morgan, p. 78.

3 1. Leppard, p. 22.

32. Haskell, p. 185.

33. See, for example, Michalski, ‘History’ and ‘Definition’, p. 3. These articles introduce the
terms of reference for a newly-formed Working Group of the Conservation Committee of the
International Council of Museums.

34. Barclay, ‘Guldbeck’, pp. 3-8.

35. Appelbaum, p. 65.

36. Murray Pease Report, p. 63.

37. ibid.

38. OED, XIII, p. 825.

39. Coveney and Highfield, p. 33.

40. Eddington, p. 74.

41. Barnes, ‘Restoration’, p. 217.

42. Appelbaum, p. 71.

43. Hellwig, ‘Reversibilitat’, p. 27.

44. The MGC publication, Standards in the Museum Cave ofMusicaZ Instruments, outlines
the extensive safeguards that surround musical instruments in the museum.

45. Karp, ‘Museums’, p. 18 1

46. ibid.

47. Montagu, ‘Clavichord’, p. 36.

 117

48. Watson, ‘Voice’,p. 35.

49. Portillo, pp. 20-21.

50. Scowronek, p. 29.

5 1. Karp, ‘Museums’, p. 179.

52. Karp, ‘Museums’, p. 180.

53. CIMCIM, Copies, 1996.

54. Quoted in Engel, p. 137.

55. Thompson, p. 10.

56. Thompson, p. 11.

 118

CHAPTER SEVEN - METHODOLOGY OF THE CRITICAL

ANALYSIS

This chapter provides a summary of the schema of the three regimens described in Chapters

4,5 and 6 . The relationship between the three regimens is illustrated with a matrix, within

which all actions upon historic musical instruments ma)' be categorized. A sample case study

is provided to show how the regimen in which a musical instrument is situated depends upon

actions and their accompanying rationales. The five stages of critical analysis are then

described, as a preparation for examination of the case studies.

7.1 THE SUPERIMPOSITION OF REGIMENS

Over time, a superimposition of regimens takes place. It was shown in Chapter 4 that the

basic craft activity of musical instrument repair and maintenance is overlaid with Currency,

where the musical function of culturally valued historic instruments is ensured through

continuing intervention with tools and materials. Towards the end of the 19th century,

interest in the revival and reinterpretation of early music resulted in the introduction of the

regimen of Restitution, described in Chapter 5 , where conscious effort was made through

craft intervention to return historic musical instruments to projected earlier states. Chapter 6

then describes the genesis of a consciousness of the physical integrity and information value

of material objects which arose in the early decades of the 20th century, and resulted in the

regimen of Preservation. Thus, the current situation arises, where there exist at the present
 119

time three distinct and parallel regimens, each with its own adherents and characteristic

modus operandi.

It is evident that the introduction of a new regimen does not displace or exclude the earlier

one. The process is additive; the first regimen existed without competition until the second

arose. This first regimen was not supplanted, but tended to exist alongside the second in

parallel, each having its own practices, and its own adherents maintaining its viability. When

the third regimen arose it, too, competed in parallel with those already existing. Thus, there is

a tendency towards pluralism as more choice in the philosophical approach and actual

treatment of historic instruments is offered.

7.2 THE MATRIX

Figure 1 (following page) illustrates the relationship of the six categories that constitute this

schema in the form of a matrix, and briefly outlines their contents. The three regimens

occupy the vertical axes, and their actions and rationales occupy the horizontal axes.

In order to demonstrate how actions taken upon an historic musical instrument at a turning

point in its history are represented within the matrix, a sample case study is presented; a

pardessus de viole (the smallest member of the viol family) from the HBpital GCnkral de

QuCbec. The instrument upon which this sample case study is based actually exists, but only

one of the potential regimens of treatment was ultimate1;y followed. The instrument is
 120

identified at a cusp of its life when decisions which fall into one of the three regimens of

treatment must be taken.

Currency Restitution Preservation

The actions The instrument's The historical The integrity of the
adopted by continuity is context of the instrument is
those who maintained through instrument is re- preserved by
subscribe to the physical intervention. created by returning maintaining its
values of a Alterations and it to a projected present state
regimen. improvements are previous state. Craft without indelible
made so the instrument intervention results intervention.
can continue in use. in alteration and Scientific methods
The instrument can be substitution of the are employed to
transformed as the original materials. safeguard and
needs of the player Action is termed document the
dictate. All action is restoration and instrument. Action
termed maintenance. maintenance. is termed
conservation
treatment.
The rationale Subjective There is positivistic Application of the
adopted by attributes are assigned belief in the scientific method to
those who to the instrument, and possibility of the study and
perform actions achievements of recapturing a preservation of the
in a regimen. makers and users are definitive previous instrument reflects
imbued with state of the pragmatic thinking.
emotional value. instrument. The Subjective
Physical instrument is used as responses are
transformation of the a medium in relegated to the
instrument is not seen recreating a past status of current
to interfere with its cultural ambience. information.
subjective attributes.

e form o f a matrix.

According to the account of Nazaire LeVasseur (a commentator upon musical practice in

19th century Quebec) masons working upon restorations in the Hapita1 GCnCral de Quebec

noticed that one wall of the room in which they were working sounded hollow.' From
 121

LeVasseur’s account, it is likely that this restoration work was being done around the year

1859.2 The masons sought permission to investigate the hollow sound and, on demolishing

the wall, found a caveau constructed for hiding provisions and other valuables during attacks

by ‘savages and, later on, the Anglo-Sa~ons’.~

In this recess were ‘a dozen’ musical

instruments of six strings, which LeVasseur says were identified as viols and bass viols made

by Nicholas Bertrand, the early 18th century luthier of Paris.4 Several of the instruments fell

to pieces once exposed, but four remained in sound c~nclition.~

7.2.1 Preservation

The SupCrieure of the H6pital was apparently not disposed to consider the cultural worth of

the instruments, and so parcelled them out to several dealers, collectors, and musicians in

Qukbec. She is described by LeVasseur as one who was ‘not an antiquarian and had no

interest in the curiosities of the world from the perspective of her LeVasseur bemoans

this lack of foresight from his own perspective of 60 years in the future, and furthermore

blames the absence of a public museum in Qukbec City at that time on a lack of public spirit.

It is for this reason, he says, that the historic relics of Qukbec ‘fly to the four cardinal points

of the ~ontinent’.~
The only organization in QuCbec City that collected historical material

systematically at that time was the English-speaking Literary and Historical Society of

Quebec, which had been founded by Lord Dalhousie in ‘I824.*

This is the first cusp in the history of the viols since their discovery; they wait at a point

where the decision of an individual dictates the regimen into which they will fall. Had the
 122

instruments been either bequeathed to an institution or retained by the HGpital, and been

preserved from further intervention, the regimen of preservation would have been followed.

In that case, the instruments would have been treasured for their intrinsic value as static

signifiers of the early days of New France, and preserved in their found condition.

7.2.2 Currency

One of the instruments, apardessus de viole, was given by the SupCrieure to a blind resident

of the H6pita1, a boy who played the violin exceptionally well. Joseph Lyonnais, a luthier of

QuCbec City, furnished him with strings, resin and other needed items, and LeVasseur reports

that the boy played Scottish reels, hornpipes, waltzes and La Belle Catherine upon the

instrument using the four top strings. The viol did not work very well for him, however, so he

approached Lyonnais again, and asked him to convert the instrument into a vi01in.~This is

this second point of decision in the life of this instrument; the second cusp in the viol’s

fortunes.

Had Joseph Lyonnais taken the instrument into his repair shop and replaced the neck, so it

could be played comfortably as a violin, the instrument would have fallen into the regimen of

Currency. The projected conversion fiom viol to violin follows a long-established craft

practice, common in the 19th century; a similar conversion of an English viol by Bar&

Norman into a violoncello is described by Berlin musical instrument restorer Olga

Adelmann. l o The intention of such conversions is to maintain the instrument’s continuity

 123

through physical intervention. Irreversible alterations would have been made so that the

instrument could continue in use, and it would have been transformed in consequence.

7.2.3 Restitution

Since most of the instruments recovered from the HBpitaI had fallen to pieces once exposed,

those surviving must have required extensive treatment in order to make them playable."

This is borne out in the case of one of the instruments, the 1720 Bertrand bass viol which

now bears, in addition to its maker's label, a manuscript label stating that [Joseph] Lyonnais

had made repairs in 1865 and that his son, Roch, had made hrther repairs in 1916.'*

LeVasseur describes the elder Lyonnais abandoning repair work on the bass viol due to the

extreme porosity of the wood, and his son subsequently repairing the instrument completely

using cotton ribbons and hide glue.I3

Rather than following the blind boy's request by converting the pardessus de viole to a

violin, Joseph Lyonnais offered a new small violin in exchange. In recounting this

transaction, Lyonnais's son, Roch, cites the motivation ior the trade being his father's

opinion that the conversion would be imp~ssible.'~

However, financial gain was probably an

equal motivator. Three of the instruments had been purchased in 1864 by a Montreal

merchant, William Snaith, for 50 dollars, a very large sum at that time.'' He had bought three

'very old Instruments from the Ladies of the Convent ofthe Hospital General [...I who had

imported them for use in the Convent choir, before the conquest of Canada'.16 These three

viols were later exported to the United States.I7

 124

Although no specific documentation of extensive treatment of the pardessus de viole exists,

the provision of new strings, noted by LeVasseur, alone is indication of a desire for

playability. Thus, the third point of decision in thepardessus’ life occurs. The action points

towards maintaining working condition, and the intervention to effect playability is

considered a prerequisite of treatment of the surviving viols. The intention is to return the

instruments to the state in which they were used before their incarceration, and to treat them

as working, musical signifiers of a time before the English conquest of Canada. This action

situates thepardessus and the other viols in the Restitution regimen.

7.2.4 Demonstrating the Matrix

Having charted the progress of thepardessus de viole, the potential stages in its history can

be represented in the matrix already presented above. It ‘hasbeen shown that circumstances

dictated that only one route for the instrument would be followed -- towards Restitution -- so

the other two potential avenues of use therefore remain empty. They might have happened,

but circumstances dictated that they did not. Nevertheless, this graphic presentation

(following page) shows the way in which decisions upon the disposition of the instrument

have an impact upon the regimen into which action upon it falls.
 125

Currency Restitution Preservation

The actions It was requested that The pardessus de Had the SupCrieure
adopted by those the pardessus de viole was exchanged of the Hdpital
who subscribe to viole be converted for a new violin, thus recognised the
the values of a into a violin in order keeping it in its historical attributes
regimen. to make it easier to original state. of the instrument it
play and more easily This was the path would have been
useful for the owner's chosen. preserved as a
repertoire. museum piece.
This plan was not This direction was
carried out. not followed.

The rationale Evidence of A definitive previous

At the period in
adopted by those subjective rationales which the
state of the viol is
who perform is absent from this maintained. transaction to
actions in a record. The plan Although the museum status could
regimen. itself was not carried commercial aspects have taken place, the
out, and its rationales climate of thought
of the transaction are
remain obscure. was predominantly
evident, authenticity
is the rationale. towards use, rather
than preservation.
Figure 2. Real and potential regimens in the story of the pardessus ? viole from the
HBpital GCnCral de QuCbec at one point in its history.

7.3 THE STAGES OF CRITICISM

The example of the viols from the HBpital GCnCral de QuCbec illustrates the decision-making

process at key points, or cusps, in an instrument's history. Changes of status are a result of

action, underscored by the rationale of attitudes and assumptions unique to the regimen in

which the action takes place. Analysis of the reasoning behind the actions leads to clearer

understanding of the thought processes in their context. Thus, the treatment that historic

musical instruments have undergone can be related directly to underlying social values.
 126

Analysis of the case studies presented in this work is conducted in five stages:

- locating an action taken on an instrument in one of the three regimens of the matrix;

- examining the action;

- examining the rationale;

- placing the action in its sociafiistorical context; and

- identifying dissonances between and within regimens.

These five stages are examined in detail in the following sections.

7.3.1 Location in the Matrix

The case studies and their accompanying analyses are presented in the following sections in

three sets, each containing three case studies. It was shown in Chapters 4,5 and 6 that the

three regimens -- Currency, Restitution and Preservation -- are chronologically hierarchical.

The base craft tradition in the treatment of historic musical instruments has Currency

superimposed upon it initially, followed by Restitution, as cultural objects become

consciously situated in history, and overlaid again by Preservation, as feelings for the full

context of the object mature, and emphasis is placed upon the irreversible effects of physical

intervention. One regimen overlies the previous one, but does not necessarily displace it.

It is in order to exploit this hierarchical structure, and to develop an understanding of the

progressive, linear nature of developments through time, that the case studies are arranged in
 127

three sets of three. The first set contains case studies that will be shown to fall primarily into

the regimen of Currency. The second set contains studies in which the values of Restitution

will be seen to overlie Currency. The third set will demonstrate the way in which the values

of Currency, Restitution and Preservation interact with each other, to produce the complex

modem dynamic of the historic instrument situated at a nexus of conflicting demands.

7.3.2 Action

The matrix identifies two categories of values which are displayed in the horizontal axis; the

uppermost of these represents the actions adopted by those who subscribe to the values of a

regimen. Action can be motivated by the desire to maintain currency through continuing use,

the desire to recapture past experience through restorati\,e treatment, or the need to stabilize

the object unchanged.

Craft intervention that transforms musical instruments comes into collision with the values of

the school of thought that promotes preservation. Tension therefore arises through a dialectic

between those who traditionally restore and repair instruments, and those who seek to

preserve them as information resources. It is a tension perceived to be based in craftsmanship

and, simply put, revolves around the question of whether or not to intervene with tools. On

one side are the players and craftspeople, whose aim is musical function, and on the other

side are those who seek to preserve the instruments for study and for posterity. However,

when actions are more closely examined during critical analysis, a less polarized and more

intricate situation becomes evident. Emphasis is placed upon discerning the nature of the
 128

intervention contemplated and carried out. The action is therefore not isolated fi-om the

thought processes that dictate its context.

7.3.3 Rationale

The lower horizontal category of the matrix represents the thought processes that dictate

context; the rationales adopted by those who perform actions in the regimen. When

examining rationales, the traditional tension between action and inaction described above is

matched by a tension based in the fundamental dialectic of objective and subjective

phenomena. The dilemma of whether to play or to preserve an historic instrument is

characterized by the rationalization within the three regimens of the epistemic and the

aesthetic or, in other words, of the objective and the subjective. The relative value of

objective information derived from factual knowledge is contrasted with the relative value of

subjective information arising from feelings and perceptions. Where expression of objective

values dictates the terms, musical instruments are reserved in non-operating condition for

study and analysis. Where subjective values hold sway, the musical attributes of instruments

are exploited. The balance of the two opposing positions centred on these values, and the

dialogue that arises, is as much an indicator of the regimen in which the instrument is situated

as is the action taken upon it.

 129

7.3.4 Context

Context in the critical analysis of case studies is of key importance. The Calendar of Sources

in Chapter 2 is the chief reference for this section. Specific actions upon the historic

instruments under study, and their underlying rationales, are related by means of

documentary sources to prevailing attitudes and assumptions in the wider social sphere. The

emphasis in providing a documentary context is not so much upon the influence these

sources may have had on practices at the time of their formulation, as on their capacity to

reflect the orthodoxies of the period under study. As an illustration, the existence of a

conference where particular actions are either supported or denounced cannot always be said

to have any immediate or lasting impact upon practices at the time it was convened.

However, it can be said that the initiative in hosting the conference represents a swell of

background opinion. The existence of the conference is itself reflective of the structure of

thought at the time.

It must be emphasised that in this work the critique of individual actions is always situated in

as full a context as possible. Because the research relies upon the documented actions of

individuals, the lack of a clearly delineated context for their actions might result in blame

being unfairly or incorrectly assigned. This is not the intention. The critical analysis is

directed at social surroundings, and concentrates on both the larger systems of belief and the

particular exigencies of time, place and circumstances, rather than the unmoderated actions of

individuals. Therefore, when actions are viewed in their social context, individual culpability

becomes relegated."
 130

7.3.5 Dissonances

The final step in the analysis is an examination of dissonances between rationales and actions

within the three regimens. The term dissonance to describe inconsistencies between cognition

and behaviour was formalized by Leon Festinger in his 1957 publication, A Theory of

Cognitive Dissonance, in which the strategies people adopt to reduce the anxiety produced by

such dissonances are analysed.” The dissonances discussed here are of two kinds: the first

are seen in the emergence of opposing viewpoints between and among individuals and

groups. Such opposing viewpoints serve an analytical purpose by providing a counterpoint;

they throw the thinking behind decisions into a sharper relief. Thus, a treatment decision may

be analysed by examining the dissonant rationales and actions expressed by adherents based

in disparate regimens. For example, the violently conflicting values, referred to in Section

5.3.1, between the English Anti-Restoration movement and the restorers of Eugkne-

Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc’s school, provide insights into the nature of the dialectic at that

time.

The second kind of dissonance is seen between the actions and rationales of individuals when

, they adopt conflicting values of opposing regimens. Because the three regimens are mutually

exclusive, the adoption by individuals of views identified with differing regimens results in

dissonance. This then provides a focus for critical analysis of actions. For example, if there is

a thrust towards continuity in the upgrading and improvement of an instrument, while at the

same time the musical results of treatment are discussed in historical terms, an inconsistency

is evident. One can subscribe to either value, but not to both.

 131

NOTES

1. LeVasseur, p. 14.

2. In his account published in 1919, LeVasseur says that these events took place 60 years
ago: ‘il-y-a une soixantaine d’annbs aujourd’hui ’, p. 14.

3.‘Des sauvages, et, plus turd, des Anglo Saxons’, LeVasseur, p. 14.

4. ibid.

5. In a recent critique of LeVasseur’s account, ‘”Musique et Musiciens a Qukbec: Souvenirs

d ’un Amateur de Nazaire Le Vasseur (1848-192 7): Etude Critique’, Vivianne Emond has
”

studied the disposition and current location of these instruments and corrected many errors of
dating.

6. ‘Qui n ’ktaitpas une antiquaire et que les curiositiks de ce monde n ’inthessaientpas au

fond de ca cellule’, Levasseur, p. 15.

7. ‘Opkrent constamment unefugue aux quatrepoints ctzrdinaux du continent’, LeVasseur, p.

16.

8. Anon., Literary and Historical Society of Quebec, infbrmation brochure, undated.

9. LeVasseur, p. 15.

10. Adelmann, p. 115.

11. LeVasseur, p. 14.

12. Emond, p. 39.

13. Levasseur, p. 15.

14. ibid.

15. The account of this purchase is verified by Levassew, p. 15. These instruments are now
in the Crosby Brown Collection at The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, catalogue
numbers 1343, 1344, and 1345. (anon., Catalogue of the Crosby Brown Collection..., pp. 64-
66.)

16. Snaith, William, letters to The Metropolitan Museum, 19 December 1898 and 2 January
1899, archives of The Metropolitan Museum, New York.

17. ibid.
 132

18. A very important component of this research was the feedback provided by those who
offered information for the case studies on the instruments under their care. All respondents
were offered the opportunity to review the completed case studies. This process often
resulted in further information pertaining to context.

19. Festinger, p. 2.
 133

CHAPTER EIGHT - CRITICAL ANALYSIS: CURRENCY

This chapter focuses upon three case studies in which the values of Currency predominate --

a barrel organ made by Richard Coates in the Sharon Temple, Ontario, a Steinway piano

once owned by Glenn Gould, and which is now in Ridem Hall in Ottawa, and the University

of Saskatchewan’s quartet of Amati bowed string instruments. The values of the regimen of

Currency are seen in maintenance actions taken to ensure continuity, and in rationales based

upon subjective criteria.

8.1 COATES BARREL ORGAN

8.1.1 Introduction

This barrel organ is said to have been the first instrument built by Richard Coates around

1819 or 20.’ Coates was a band master in the British Anny who had aligned himself with the

breakaway Quaker sect known as the Children of Peace who had settled in the area of Hope,

Ontario at the beginning of the 19th century.* Hope was soon renamed Sharon as the sect

gained a firm footing in the locale. The organ was commissioned by David Willson, the

leader of the Children of Peace. The barrel organ was originally installed in the Meeting

House, a building designed and constructed by Ebenezer Doan for the Sect’s worship. Once

the sect was well established other buildings were erected, and a new keyboard organ was

commissioned from Coates. This was installed in the Meeting House, while the barrel organ

was moved to a specially designed Study, a small building devoted to David Willson’s
 134

Once moved it became set aside for his exclusive use.4 Two barrels are
intellectual a~tivities.~

known to have been used with the instrument, each having ten tunes5.The majority of these

were melodies popular at the time, some with a religious base, and a few secular.

Figure 3. The Coatesbarrel organ in the Sharon Temple.

The mechanism and pipes have been covered with
detachable Perspex panels.

It is unclear exactly what parts of the instrument were actually made by Coates and how

much of the mechanism was purchased from manufacturers in Europe or the United States.

There are several points around which discussion focusses. Firstly, the casework is of pine,

grained to appear like mahogany, and is of local construction, judging by the similarity in
 135

workmanship to the later keyboard organ built by Coates and still in the Sharon Temple.

Secondly, the framework of the mechanism is entirely scparate from the outer case (as is

White oak (quercus sp) was available

usual) and is made of English oak (quercus SP)~.

locally in very small quantities, but is not likely to have been favoured over maple or birch,

which were in plentihl supply. Of 1,294 recorded pieces of furniture of 19th-century Ontario

provenance, only nine have oak as their primary construction Such features as the

slider mechanism that locks the barrel being played into place, and the winding crank which

rotates it, betray English workmanship.*It is not known if the pipework is Coates's own

work, although if the barrel operating mechanism originated in Europe, the ranks of pipes

may have been supplied with it. It has also been suggested that the instrument was originally

a keyboard organ, later fitted out for barrel operation.'

The barrels are generally assumed to have been made and pinned by Coates. Their techniques

of manufacture and the process of pinning are described by Payzant." Coates's choice of

tunes, and his modus operandi are discussed by Barbara Ann Schau." The barrels are covered

with paper, through which the bridges and pins have been inserted, in the manner of

manufactured European barrels.'* Only one of the tunes on the barrels, 'China', does not

appear in an English s o ~ r c e . ' ~

After the dissolution of the Children of Peace in the 1880s, the organ passed into private

ownership, until it was donated to the York Pioneer and Historical Society in 1953. The

instrument underwent several phases of treatment after this acquisition, including a

 136

renovation between 1975 and 1979, and further treatment ending in 1984. The organ was

used in concerts and re-enactments of the sect’s activities until the late 1980s.

From the above introduction, four distinct periods in the history of the Coates organ are

identified:

- Use by the Children of Peace

- Interim period

- Renovation 1975-79

- Renovation ending in 1984

The history of the instrument is documented in detail below, and activity within these periods

is analysed.

8.1.2 First Period: Use by the Children of Peace

History

Little is known concerning the original state of the instmment when it was installed in the

Meeting House, except what can be gleaned from it in its present condition. It is not known

to what pitch the pipes were tuned, or what temperament was used. The organ was perhaps

tuned to meantone with a pitch considerably lower than the modern A4=440Hz,but this

conjecture is based solely on an anonymous and undated note which states: ‘It was formerly
 137

tuned in mean tune [sic]temperament as was done in J.S. Bach’s day, but was re-tuned in the

present day equal temperament by Keith MacMillan of Toronto several years ago.”4

The bellows were originally operated by a lever running in a slot on the left side of the

casework at the rear. The later keyboard organ by Coates, the casework of which is preserved

in the Sharon Temple, also has this feature. As the crank for rotating the barrel is at the front

of the casework, playing the instrument while operating the bellows fiom the side slot

obviously required the services of two people.

The organ was moved into David Willson’s Study fiom the Meeting House, and during this

move the bellows lever was removed and replaced with ai foot pedal installed through a crude

hole carved into the lower front of the c a s e ~ 0 r k . lThe

~ pedal survives, but none of the

mechanism to which it was attached is in existence, SO the actual layout of the operating

system is unclear. Another of Coates’s organs, which was preserved in private hands in

Rodney, Ontario, and has now been donated to the Sharon Temple Museum, shows this

feature as an original installation. The conversion of the barrel organ to front pedal operation

was done for two reasons: firstly, space constraints in the Study made it almost impossible

for a person to squeeze in beside the casework to operate the bellows and, secondly, Willson

operated the instrument himself in the privacy of his own domain.16An illustration of around

1890 by Owen Staples shows the barrel organ placed against the end wall of the Study with

the foot pedal in place.I7 There is, however, a problem in interpreting this illustration; the

organ is fitted so tightly into the end of the room that it is clearly impossible to slide the

barrel out from the side when changing to a new set of ten tunes. It has been said that the
 138

framework may have been adapted at this point to allow barrels to be removed fiom the front,

although the evidence is not clear."

Analysis

During this first period of its existence, the barrel organ is a functional object kept in service

by the musical instrument craft tradition. The chief alteration in its state occurred when it was

transferred to the Study. The side lever system for actuating the bellows was removed, and

replaced with a foot pedal operated from the front. This involved drilling a hole through the

casework near floor level and installing a crank on two pivots to bear on the underside of the

feeder bellows. The only remains of this work extant are the loose foot pedal and the hole

through which it was inserted. These changes represent a transfer from the first hctioning

state to the second functioning state, as defined in Section 1.1.2.

The status of historic, as defined in this work, has yet to be conferred upon the instrument.

The Coates organ is in Thompson's transient category, as an object of falling value which is

in the process of being used up. Assuming no change in its status, at some stage its value,

both monetarily and culturally, will become zero. l 9 The process of singularization, discussed

in Section 1.2.1, where the object becomes a part of the 'symbolic inventory of a society', has

yet to take place.20Such a transfer occurs, not necessarily at the owner's initiative, but under

societal pressure.*' Thus, while the organ was later regarded by those who preserved it from

loss as an object of intrinsic historic value, its first users regarded it as a functional utensil.
 139

8.1.3 Second Period: Interim

History

In the first decades of the 20th century the organ was acquired by the Reverend Robert

William Byrne Pugh of Keswick, Ontario. No sources survive fiom this period concerning

the history of use of the instrument. In 1953 the estate of the late Rev. Pugh donated the

organ to the York Pioneer Historical Society, which at that time superintended the Sharon

Temple and other historic sites in the region.22

Extensive maintenance was done in the mid-1 950s, but no proper and thorough

documentation of the work survives. Payzant, writing in 1980, makes reference to the work

of Leonard Downey who ‘converted the instrument from foot power to electricity about thirty

years ago’.23This involved removal of the bellows and its actuating mechanism and the

installation of an electric blower and the necessary trunking. The blower produced a higher

flow than the bellows, and thus a higher pressure at the pipe feet, so two dampers were

installed in the trunking to control this. The bellows and other associated parts were

discarded, thus destroying all clues to the original wind pressure, although the foot pedal

survives. During this period all leather and felt in the windchest was replaced, The

anonymous, undated note in the files of the Sharon Temple Museum refers to a re-voicing

necessary as a result of this installation. According to Barbara Ann Schau, little work was

done on the barrels, aside fiom tapping in the occasional loose pin or bridge.24An incomplete

tape recording, not using all stops, was made of some tunes in 1956. In 1963 another
 140

recording was made, this time of all the tunes, but not using the 8' stop.*' Transcriptions of

the barrel tunes into musical notation were carried out by Donald F. Wright in 1967-68.26

When the organ was installed in the Sharon Temple by the York Pioneer Historical Society,

an area 7" x 21" (17.5cm x 52.5cm) of the original wooden bench seating surrounding the

walls was cut away so that the casework could be fitted more neatly in place. The removed

wood was apparently discarded.

Analysis

Actions

The complete removal and discarding of the bellows, the installation of the electric blower,

and the re-tuning and revoicing of the pipes, all argue a desire to bring the organ to reliable

and simple working condition. All these actions are expressions of diachronic continuity;

they are modernizations, constituting improvement over the original state, as defined in

Section 3.3.1. This evidence places work on the mechanical parts of the organ clearly in the

regimen of Currency. There is no evidence in any of these actions of attempts to recover an

earlier state, or of consideration of integrity by preservation of the status quo.

In contrast to the invasive work done on the mechanism, the only work done on the barrels

consisted in making their playing more reliable by resetting loose pins." The early efforts at

tape recording the organ, and the later systematic transcription of the tunes into musical
 141

notation by Wright, argue a focus on the original musical attributes of the instrument as

encoded in the barrels.28

Rationales

Organ barrels are considered an extremely valuable musicological resource because they

encode the music as it might have been played, not as it was written in musical notation. As

Fuller remarks in his introduction to the study of mechanical instruments:

What makes automatic instruments so much more valuable than treatises is that every
ornament is shown in context; every one is, in a sense, a special case and one can
observe how the rules and generalizations of ornament tables are adapted to real
musical situation^.^^

The existence on the Coates organ barrels of a wide range of tunes popular at the beginning

of the 19th century provides insight into musical knowledge and practice in Upper Canada at

that period. Thus, a distinctly exploratory thrust is seen in the attempt at retrieval, intact, of

this music. Nevertheless, the music encoded on the barrels must be distinguished fiom the

attitudes towards the mechanism itself, the treatment of which shows strong evidence of the

values of Currency. Thus, authentic experience in the attempts to retrieve sensations of past

phases in the use of the instrument is moderated by a contradictory updating and

improvement of the mechanism.

Context

A rising focus on the interpretation of early music resulted in increased interest in early

instruments. The prevailing museum orthodoxy on the treatment of historic musical

instruments is epitomised by the opening statement of the 1967 publication Preservation and

Restoration of Musical Instruments: ‘Where possible the restoration of a deteriorated

 142

instrument is ~ommendable.’~~
Thus, access to museum-based literature at the time the above

work was done would have underscored the didactic function of recovering the original

music played upon the organ through a process of technical intervention. Nevertheless, at this

period restoration was regarded among musical instrument specialists as a process of re-

establishment of an earlier state, and the publication cited above makes specific

recommendations upon protocols to be followed in achieving this. Also, at this period codes

of conduct for the treatment of historic properties began to be formulated. The field was led

by the publication of the Weilheimer Regulativ in 1957, which laid down guidelines for the

treatment of historic organs. In the museum field The Murray Pease Report: Code ofEthics

for Conservators had been adopted as a working document by the IIC-AG in 1963. A

colloquium held in Antwerp in 1971 concerning restoration of plucked string instruments,

Restauratieproblemen van Antwerpse Klavecimbels, W h e r indicates the climate of opinion

in Europe, although the proceedings were not widely disseminated.

Dissonances

In spite of the developing context of museum conservation at the time of this treatment, and

the consciousness of the need for preservation evident in the Weilheimer Regulativ, work was

carried out which obliterated original information, such as installing the electrically-operated

bellows and revoicing the pipes. In fact, the modernizing work done on the Coates organ

within a museum setting indicates the isolation of these practitioners from prevailing

opinions.
 143

A clear inconsistency in approach is seen: while there was a desire for authentic experience in

rediscovering the music, this was arrived at through a modernizing effort on the musical

instrument. An electrically-driven wind system, which necessitated revoicing of the pipes, is

used in conjunction with the original barrels. The musical result of this process cannot result

in a performed rendition of the music ‘as it really was’.3’ The intention ‘to represent a known

earlier state’ of the musical instrument is corrupted by ignorance of the impact of modem

components and t ~ n i n g s . This

~ * dissonance shows a combination of values from both

Currency and Restitution.

8.1.4 Third Period: Renovation from 1975 to 1979

History

Around the middle of the 1970s the growing perception of the historical importance of the

Coates barrel organ began to have its consequences. It proved to be the oldest Ontario-made

organ in existence, and was in essentially working condition.33This prompted much study of

the instrument and eventually resulted in the decision to further renovate it.34In 1975 a grand

series of concerts in the Sharon Temple was inaugurated, in which the organ was planned to

feature.35In the Autumn of that year the fi-ame, windchest, all the pipes, the blower and

trunking, and the barrel mechanism were removed, leaving the free-standing casework in the

Temple. The windchest and frame were transferred to a workshop in Erindale College,

Toronto, while the pipes, bellows reservoir and trunking were reassembled in an organ

repairer’s workshop, and work on the pipes began. In order for the organ to be audible, and to
 144

play in concert with a choir and other instruments, it was necessary to re-voice and re-tune all

the pipes again. The ‘cut-up’ of the upper lips of the pipes was altered significantly, and the

instrument tuned to the standard modern concert pitch 0fA,=440Hz.~~

All pipes had

originally had their caps attached with hand-made iron nails, many of which had to be

extracted during tuning and voicing. The caps of all 133 pipes were then ‘fastened with neat

screws in place of Coates’s crude nails’.37It was reported that ‘the resulting joints are

stronger than the originals’ and would allow further adjustment for voicing when required.38

The windchest was opened and all leather and felt inspected. In general, the materials

installed by Downey in the 1950s were still in good repair, although the mechanism needed

much cleaning, adjusting and f r e e i n g - ~ pDuring

. ~ ~ reassembly many modem manufactured

wood screws were used throughout the structure, replacing the original nails, screws or wood

pegs. Extensive cleaning and repositioning of the keyframe, keys and points was also done at

this time. According to Geoffrey Payzant, Stewart Duncan, a Toronto organ specialist, was

responsible for this work, although no documentation survives.40

At the close of this phase, in June of 1979, the organ mechanism was playable in Duncan’s

workshop using the original barrels. However, the barrels were not in good condition; some

pins and bridges showed a tendency to come loose and the wooden gear teeth, which engaged

the worm drive, were chipped and

 145

Analysis

Actions

The planned concert use of the organ provided the stimulus for this further treatment. Gordon

Angus, an Ontario enthusiast of early organs, places the onus for treatment decisions on the

organizers of the concert series.42The re-voicing of the pipes, and their re-tuning to

A4=440Hz, fit solidly into the category of continuity. The motive was one of utility,

maintaining the instrument in a hnctional state at modein pitch. Substitution of ‘neat screws’

for the original ‘crude nails’ in order to make the joints ‘stronger than the originals’ was

clearly made with a view to i m p r ~ v e m e n tThat

. ~ ~ this process ‘would allow further

adjustment for voicing when required’ further amplifies the utilitarian nature of this work.44

The absence of treatment documentation is characteristic of Currency.

Rationales

There is no evidence of subscription to subjective values during this period. The strong thrust

towards continuity shows that the instrument is securely placed in the regimen of Currency,

but there is no evidence that this is underscored by any contemplative aspirations. In the

absence of these rationales, Currency as a regimen becomes indistinguishable from the base

craft tradition of musical instrument maintenance. At this period, the historical status of the

instrument is entirely subsumed by its function as a working musical instrument.

 146

Context

During the 1970s, when the barrel organ was being prepared for concert performance, there is

evidence of a divergence of opinion on the correct disposition of historic musical

instruments. On one hand ‘the ever-increasing necessity of restoring old instruments’ is

advocated by the delegates to the Cremona ‘Day of Studies’: which builds upon the ground

laid by the ICOM publication on re~toration.~~

On the other hand, the new conservation

awareness evident in the publication ‘Restoration, Conservation, Repair and Maintenance’

promotes the opposite.47Restoration as a means of preservation is opposed to conservation as

defined by non-intervention. From discussions earlier in this work, it can be seen how loosely

the term ‘restoration’ is used in the literature at this time. At this period of treatment of the

Coates organ, opposing viewpoints of equal persuasiveness are represented in the literature,

but the tendency towards caution in interventive strategies is gaining ground.

Dissonances

Although this period of treatment coincides with a major turning point in attitudes towards

the treatment of cultural property, no dissonance is in evidence. Prevailing opinion within the

museum field was turning against interventive treatment, and in both Restitution and

Preservation the historical qualities ofthe object are the i’ocus. In opposition to these trends,

the actions upon the Coates barrel organ appear to have been taken with no thought for either

recovery of historic state or preservation. There is no evidence that the prevailing social and

intellectual context in the disposition of historic instruments was considered.

 147

Dissonances in the approach are also absent. The thrust of treatment was totally located in

Currency: contrasting the term ‘neat’ to describe the screws with ‘crude’ for the nails

indicates a value judgement -- that a better or improved version of the original has been

supplied. The idea of restoration, as a return to a previous state, does not feature in the

actions taken on the organ at this time, although it must be understood that the craftsmen who

performed the work may well have perceived their work as ‘restoration’ in the sense that they

were restoring the organ to working condition. In the present context this work is regarded as

maintenance.

8.1.5 Fourth Period: Renovation ending in 1984

History

The condition of the original barrels of the organ was such that it was considered further

damage to them and to the mechanism could result if they were played. The decision was

made to have a new barrel machined and to pin it with a selection of five tunes. Once the

barrel was made and had been tested in the organ, the mechanism was returned to the Sharon

Temple and installed in the casework, with one rank of pipes, so that pinning could proceed

in It was decided to pin only five tunes so that a much wider and more robust wire

could be used for the pins and bridges. Pinning was begun with ‘University’, the simplest of

the tunes on Coates’s barrels. This was regarded as an experiment, as the tune has the fewest

notes and no dense chords or rapid passages. A one-bar interlude on Coates’s version of this

tune was omitted:

 148

For more straightforward operation this gap would be needed, otherwise the operator
would not be able to stop the barrel neatly between verses, and [...I we were striving
for simplicity in operation.49

Apart from this omission the tune almost exactly copied the original, as far as the condition

of the original barrel would allow. However, as pinning of further tunes progressed, ‘Egypt’

on the original barrel was found to have missing sections, so on the new barrel ‘some

conjectural accompaniment [was composed] in order to maintain the style and texture’. This

was done ‘with particular delight and the conviction that if Coates did not do it my way, he

should have’.’’ ‘University’ was first heard on the new barrel in 1979. Further tunes were

pinned until, in 1984, the barrel contained a full five.

The craftsman notes that, because many of the pins on the original barrel were loose or too

low, a note would ‘wheeze and squeak or not sound at all. Some people think this effect is

quaint and attractive, but it is not the effect the builder sought in 1820’.5’ When the new

barrel was installed, he reports that ‘once I heard this beautiful old instrument in full voice,

resonating in the Temple [...I it was a revelation to me. I still marvel at the sound’.52

As part of further renovations to both the Coates organs (keyboard and barrel) there was a

suggestion to strip the caseworks and to refinish them. The original finish consisted of

coloured varnish grained to appear like rnah~gany.’~

The Canadian Conservation Institute

was requested to comment on the proposal to strip and refinish, and advised that such

original finishes were rare, especially on wooden objects of this vintage in Ontario, and that

the casework should be left intact and consolidated wherever po~sible.’~

 149

One outstanding problem with the barrel organ had been noticed: there was a tendency for

. ~ ~symptom of
‘running’ among some of the pipes on the right side of the ~ i n d c h e s tThe

‘running’ appears when pipes adjacent to the one whose windway is opened also speak. For

example, on the Coates organ, when pipes a major third apart were sounded together in a

chord, the pipe between would also speak. The faults that cause this ‘simultaneous sounding

of another pipe with the one which is intended to sound’ are detailed by Seidel in his classic

19th century handbook on organs.56He describes the symptom as indicating leakage between

channels in the windway due to either faulty caulking between them, loose screws holding

the top and bottom of the windchest together, warped components, or excessive wind

pre~sure.~’
Traditionally, this problem is forestalled by the organ-maker by cutting chequered

v-shaped channels in the boards above and below the slider, which have the effect of

channelling away any leakage. Audsley illustrates these in his 19th century English

compendium on the organ.58No such channels had ever been cut into the boards of the

Coates organ.

It was thought that the running on the Coates organ could be cured by providing ‘safety

valves’ at some points in the windchest close to the affected pipes. In the absence of the

traditional channels in the boards, which hlfil this role, this can be accomplished by drilling

holes to the outside air, graduated according to the supplied pressure, the size and resistance

of the pipe, and other features which control pressure at the pipe’s foot. Usually a fairly small

hole is drilled, and opened out as tests reveal the improvements in attack and decay of the

note. This technique is mentioned by Andreas Werckmeister in his Orgel-Probe of 1698,

where he describes it as ‘a deplorable pra~tice’.~’

Seidel, writing upon the organ in the mid-
 150

19th century, refers to such relief holes as ‘a sort of artifice to hide some fault’.60In his

practical guide of the 1920s to organists in isolated parishes, John Matthews says ‘there is a

rough and ready method of curing runnings without taking down the soundboard -- the

objectionable practice known as “bleeding”’.61Clearly, among orthodox organ builders and

servicers, the technique of bleeding was not to be countenanced.

As the windchest of the Coates organ had recently been dismantled and serviced, it was

assumed that the running was due to poor original design, and steps were taken to make

corrections or improvements. Thirteen W (6.25mm) holes were drilled in the front facia

board of the windchest to correspond with the troubled windways on the right side of the

windchest. This cured the problem very effectively and there proved still to be ample

pressure f7om the electric blower so that, even though wastage through bleeding occurred

through these holes, it was not sufficient to compromise operation.

Figure 4. Cross section of the windchest showing the location of the relief
holes (a), the sliders (b), the pallets (c), the actuating wires (d), and the
windway (f).
 151

Apparently in an effort to protect his source of advice on this unorthodox measure, the

craftsman states only that it was done ‘on the basis of the best available advice’.62Remarking

on the subject of the pressure relief holes, he noted that:

I have heard it said that there was dismay over the drilling of those holes because they
are quite visible. From the point of view of the sound of the organ, and of its use, the
holes were long overdue and are perhaps the most effective single improvement in the
current program of renovation of the

Another problem that presented itself was that on occasions, especially during the playing of

clusters of notes, the tracker bar would be forced upwards as the keys impinged upon the

bridges and pins of the new Some keys on the old barrel had even been knocked out

during playing and had been set back in place with epoxy resin. The sharp angle of attack of

the keys onto the barrel was at the root of this problem, but no corrective action was taken

except to hold the tracker bar down by hand when playing.65The editor of the Journal ofthe

Musical Box Society stated that:

We have never seen one with stickers dropping directly onto the pins, and such
bizarre construction makes one wonder if something has been removed or the
mechanism altered over the years.66

I I

Figure 5. The way in

which the keys
impinged upon the
bridges and pins.

The philosophical approach to treatment of the barrel orgim during this phase of its existence

is encapsulated in the following quotation:

 152

On this job maintenance and repair are indistinguishable. And it would be wrong to
refer to the project as a ‘restoration’, if by that word is meant returning to its original
condition. This cannot be done, for two reasons. The first [is the] loss of the original
wind-generating system. The second is the kind of service that is now expected of the
organ. It plays as often in a week during the summer season as it would have in a year
in its heyday in the Meeting House, hence its operation must be made simple and
reliable, as it was not originally.67

And further:

On a device as old and as sensitive as the Coates barrel organ the distinction between
maintenance and repair is not a clear one, so the work will continue as long as the
instrument is in regular service.68

By 1984 five tunes were pinned on the new barrel -- ‘University’, ‘St. Anne’s’, ‘China’,

‘Egypt’ and ‘Wells’ -- and the pipes all spoke accurately. The instrument was demonstrated

several times daily to museum visitors throughout the summers that followed. Although

reservations were expressed at the continuing use of the organ, it was not until the end of

1991 that use was curtailed pending a review of the organ’s condition and treatment.69

Analysis

Actzons

Values of the regimen of Currency predominate in this fourth period of the organ’s treatment.

Action to ensure continuity is seen in the many references to improvements made to the

organ throughout this period, particularly the measures taken to eliminate ‘running’ among

the pipes on the right side of the windchest. This was regarded as ‘perhaps the most effective

single improvement of recent decade^'.^' Use of the word ‘improvement’ indicates the value

of continuity. Also, the proposal to strip the original varnish of the organ casework, and to

refinish it, is indicative of values which are firmly within the Currency regimen.
 153

Throughout the renovation in this fourth phase, simplicity of operation is the chief intention.

The craftsman speaks of ensuring ‘more straightforward operation’71,and making the organ

‘simple and reliable, as it was not rigi in ally'.^^ This is justified by the increased level of duty

the instrument is now called upon to perform. The indistinguishability of maintenance and

repair in the restorer’s view, is further indication of the perceived necessity for gradual

relegation and replacement of parts that have ceased to function efficiently; Le. remaking of

the barrel. Such a transformation of the instrument under. continual maintenance is a key

indicator of continuity.

After removal of the bellows and associated mechanism, and re-voicing and tuning of the

pipes, the barrels remained the sole purveyors of the instrument’s original musical function.

As work began on the pinning of a replacement barrel, iinprovements were incorporated there

too. During pinning of ‘University’ a one-bar phrase was omitted,73and a missing section

from ‘Egypt’ was replaced with ‘some conjectural acc~rnpaniment’.~~

These reworkings are

diametrically opposed to the values held in the regimen of Restitution, where the thrust is

towards recapturing an earlier disposition. To paraphrase Morgan, Coates’s organ ‘was

altered in order to protect the currency of his music and to preserve his place within the

tradition’.75The organ was not easily playable without these changes, which were felt

necessary to continue projection of Coates and his music into the future.

Rationales

Subjective elements are clearly evident in the transformation the instrument has undergone,

coupled with the assertion that it is still ‘the Coates barrel organ’.76The pathetic fallacy
 154

asserts itself in the belief that even through discarding the wind generating system and

replacing it with electricity, through re-voicing and re-tuning the pipes, through reworking

the barrels upon which the music itself is encoded, and tllrough all the other efforts towards

improvement and simplicity, Richard Coates the organ-maker is still in evidence. A further,

more direct, emotional connection with kchard Coates is suggested by the ‘conviction that if

Coates did not [pin the tunes] my way, he should have’, and the delight with which this work

. ~ ~ the report that ‘once I heard this beautiful old instrument in full
was a ~ p r e h e n d e dAlso,

voice, resonating in the Temple [...I it was a revelation to me. I still marvel at the sound’

implies that the sound produced is what the builder might have heard.78

Context

This phase of work on the Coates barrel organ was in progress during the period when the

international journal Early Music had published two seminal articles on the philosophy of

intervention upon historic musical instruments: ‘Restoration, conservation, repair and

maintenance’ in 1979, and ‘Does restoration destroy evidence?’ in 1980.79Both these

publications advance a note of caution in approaches to the restoration of historic

instruments. In the local context, The Care of Musical Instruments in Canadian CoZZections

had been published in 1977, advocating a minimally interventive conservation approach.80

Dissonances

The phrase ‘I have heard it said that there was dismay over the drilling of those holes’ is the

first documented indication of dissonance.” The request to the CCI for advice on the

advisability of stripping and refinishing the casework is further evidence of the incursion of
 155

other regimens.82The modernizing approach to the instrument is consistent with the regimen

of Currency, which is characteristically isolated from the context of museum-based treatment

approaches. However, dissonance arises because the organ is the property of a museum, and

yet is still treated as an object to be maintained through continuity.

Dissonance is clear in the implication that ‘the effect the builder sought in 1820’ has been

achieved through the installation of the new barrel, coupled with an electrically driven wind

system feeding pipes tuned at modern pitch and in a modern t e m ~ e r a m e n t . ~ ~

8.1.6 Synopsis of the Four Periods

In the first identifiable treatment period the barrel organ is not yet an historic instrument by

definition. It is transient object of falling value, and has yet to be singularized, and thus

identified by society as an object of symbolic value.

In the second period, modernization of the organ’s mechanism by substitution of the pedal

operated bellows with an electric blower, tuning and ,voicingthe pipes, and replacement and
A

upgrading of other parts, indicate the values of continuity. However, the desire to record the

music on the barrels by playing the organ indicates a distinct interest in the historic aspects of

the instrument. A higher value is placed upon the authenticity of the musical data encoded on

the barrels, than upon that of the mechanism itself.

 156

The third period, the renovation of 1975-79, again shows the predominant value of continuity

through maintenance. All actions taken upon the organ are aimed towards its function as a

musical instrument. It is improved and made easier to play, and its tuning is modernized for

concert perfonnance. There is no evidence of subjective rationales.

In the fourth period of treatment, improvements on the organ to ensure easier playing

continued into the renovation ending in 1984, indicating continuing adherence to the values

of Currency. Similarly, changes made to the musical data during pinning of the barrels also

indicate an effort at continuity. References to the maker of the instrument evoke a subjective

rationale. In this final phase, conflicts and inconsistencies are encountered.

8.2 STEINWAY PIANO IN RIDEAU HALL, OTTAWA

8.2.1 Introduction

Canadian pianist Glenn Herbert Gould (1932-1982) possessed several pianos which he used

for concerts, recordings and practice. Five pianos he owned during his concert and recording

career are extant: a Yamaha grand in Roy Thompson Hall, Toronto; a Steinway grand in the

National Library of Canada in Ottawa (see Section 9.1); a Steinway grand in Central United

Church, Edmonton, Alberta; a Chickering of 1895 in Toronto; and the instrument under study

here, a Steinway grand in Rideau Hall, the Governor General of Canada’s residence in

Ottawa.84
 157

Figure 6. The Steinway piano in Rideau Hall, Ottawa.

The instrument described here is a Steinway 6’ 11” grand piano completed on 24 October

1934 and given the serial number B274981.85It was initially owned by Steinway and Sons

and leased to various artists as part of the firm’s Concerts and Audit collection. Glenn Gould

purchased the instrument from Steinway on 9 April 1969.86On Gould’s death in 1982 the

executors of his estate offered the instrument for sale, and there was concern in the Canadian

cultural community that it might either pass into private hands or leave the country.87
 158

The Director General of the National A r t s Centre in Ottawa was initially enthusiastic about

purchasing the instrument, but finding the transaction difficult to justify, passed on the

information to the administrators of Rideau Hall (also hiown as Government House), the

residence of the Governor General of Canada." An agreement to purchase was struck in

March 1983 and plans were made to return the piano to performance After

consultation with the Toronto piano tuner who worked closely with Gould, the instrument

was placed in the hands of Lauzon Music, the representative for Steinway in Ottawa.go

The instrument was completely refurbished and returned to Rideau Hall. The inaugural

concert was performed at Rideau Hall on 30 November 1983 by Vancouver pianist Jon

Kimura Parker. Among the guests on this occasion were the parents of Glenn G o ~ l d .The
~'

piano is seen and heard regularly by many Canadian and foreign visitors who pass through

Government House each year.

Three distinct periods in the history of this Steinway piano can be identified fiom the above

introduction:

- Acquisition and use by Glenn Gould

- Purchase by Rideau Hall in 1983

- Restoration and continuing use

The history of the instrument is documented in detail below, and activity within these periods

is analysed.
 159

8.2.2 First Period: Acquisition and Use by Glenn Goiild

History

Little can be said of the original users of the piano fi-om 1934 until Glenn Gould’s

acquisition, as the only documentation pre-dating his ownership is held by Steinway and

Sons and is considered ~onfidential.~~

Although its use as a loan instrument in Steinway’s

Concerts and Audit collection indicates that it had no special identifiable attributes, during

his frequent visits to New York Gould had come to appreciate its qualities, as he had done

with another Steinway piano, number CD 3 18 of Eaton’s Concert and Artist Fleet (see

Section 9. 1).93

Glenn Gould purchased the instrument from Steinway and Sons on 9 April 1969 and had it

delivered to his home address in Toronto.94This instrument is referred to as Glenn Gould’s

‘working piano’; the phrase originates with the executors of the estate, is adopted by the

National Arts Centre in OttawaYg5

and is used by various officials in the cultural sectors of the

Department of Public Works and the National Capital Commission, the body responsible for

maintenance of Rideau Hall.96Yet nowhere in the existing documentation is the term

‘working piano’ defined. Kenneth Lauzon, an Ottawa piano restorer who later worked on the

piano, stated that, because this was the private instrument that Glenn Gould kept in his

apartment, it was his opinion was that the term ‘working piano’ became synonymous with

‘practice
 160

Figure 7. Cross section of Steinway piano action. Gould’s specific

requirements included adjustment of the let-off screw (#42), and
changing the key dip by adding washers under the front rail guide (#5).

Gould had very particular requirements of his instruments, their set-up being very different

from that of standard concert grand pianos. In particular, he required very bright hammers

(i.e. with hard felt), a let-off as close to the strings as possible -- in the order of 1/16”

(1.6mm) -- and a very shallow touch (also known as dip or draft) of approximately 3/16“

(4.75mm).98The value for key draft is half of that normally specified by Steinway and Sons.99

(Figure 7.)

Much of what Glenn Gould had to say about the unique adjustments he required for his

pianos relates to his other Steinway piano, CD 318, which is the subject of Section 9.1. For

example, Gould speaks of ‘the alignment of such essential mechanical matters as the distance

of the hammer from the strings, the ‘‘after touch” mechanism, etc. ’ as being of importance in

freeing the piano from its ‘natural tendency’.’00Because the instrument he is referring to is

the one he used in concerts and recordings, it has become much more of a focus for

discussions of his playing style. The ‘working piano’ under study here has been
 161

comparatively neglected by commentators and analysts. Nevertheless, while in Gould's

possession this piano was maintained by Verne Edquist, a Toronto piano tuner acquainted

with the special disposition Gould required in his instruments, and was kept in that

mechanical state."'

Analysis

At the stage when it was used regularly by Glenn Gould, there are no indications that the

Steinway piano was regarded as an historic instrument. The piano was in continuous daily

use, was regularly maintained, and was therefore likely regarded by Gould and his tuner as a

utensil. As with the previous example, the Coates barrel organ, the piano has yet to become a

part of the 'symbolic inventory of a society'.'02 The association of the instrument with Glenn

Gould, whereby it became culturally marked, is retrospective, in that only after his

relinquishing of it did it become a singularized, durable object of cultural value.

8.2.3 Second Period: Purchase for Rideau Hall in 1983

History

After Glenn Gould's death in 1982 the executors of his estate offered the Steinway for sale. It

was initially offered to the National A r t s Centre in Ottawa, but Rideau Hall, the residence of

the Governor General of Canada was then con~idered.'~~

During negotiations for the purchase

of the instrument from the estate, it was reported that the Governor General's residence
 162

already had two Steinway baby grand pianos ‘personally selected for us by Horowitz’ so that

‘before agreeing to take the Gould piano [...I it should bt: checked for size, suitability, etc.’.’04
According to the executors, the piano had to be maintained in working condition,

consideration being given that it should be:

In the care of an individual or an organization where it would be used by professional

musicians (a piano will deteriorate unless it is used) and, if possible, be available for
viewing [...I by members of the public.1o5

The intention was that it be ‘preserved, protected and used to the greatest advantage’.Io6In

recognizing the cultural and aesthetic aspects of the proposed acquisition, the Deputy

Minister for Public Works stated that Government House (Rideau Hall) would be the best

site:

Such a historic piece would be seen by many visitors each year and [...I it would
receive the regular use necessary to prevent its deterioration [...I large numbers of
visitors, including school children and senior citizens, are shown through the House
each year in organized tours and with an appropriately worded plaque, the piano’s
origins and significance could be explained by th.e tour guides.lo7

Unlike Steinway CD 318, which was Gould’s more publicised instrument, there was no

stipulation from the executors that this piano remain in the state in which Gould had used it.

Acquisition of the piano by Rideau Hall was made contingent upon its being reconditioned,

therefore to the estimated purchase price of between $6,000 and $7,500 was added $2,000 to

$4,500 to cover treatment. Complete rebuilding and refinishing had been recommended by

Verne Edquist of Toronto.”’

 163

AnaIy sis

Actions

Values associated with continuity appear in the suggestion that acquisition of the piano for

Rideau Hall is based upon its utility as a musical instrument. An assumption throughout the

correspondence is that the instrument would be used on a regular basis by professional

musicians, and maintained in working state.’” The extent of thinking along the lines of utility

is seen in the consideration of the instrument’s dimensions as a guide to suitability.”’ Thus,

although the cultural and historic associations of the Steinway piano with Glenn Gould were

known and appreciated, its purchase for Rideau Hall was placed in a context which

emphasises utility.

Rationales

The association of Glenn Gould with the Steinway piano is the factor that initiated its

singularization, and caused it to become a desirable acquisition. Plans to perpetuate this

historical association included a tangible signifier in the form of a plaque to be attached to the

instrument.”’ Subjective elements are suggested in the statement that the other Steinway

pianos at Rideau Hall were ‘personally selected for us by Horowitz’,112as though to imbue

them with unique characteristics of a personal nature. This is, however, the assumption of

one individual, and does not necessarily indicate subscription to this philosophy by others

concerned with the disposition of the Gould piano. The statements that ‘a piano will

deteriorate unless it is used’’ l 3 are more apposite, signifying the subjective values associated

with the maintenance of the health of instruments through function.

 164

Context

Glenn Gould’s influence upon the pianistic interpretation of Bach’s keyboard works is

considered seminal: ‘He redefined what it means to play Bach on the pi an^."'^ It has been

argued that his creative aesthetic ‘implies a rejection of “authenticity” and thus challenges

many of the premises and orthodoxies of the historical-performance movement’.11sIn the

sphere of influence in which he made his music, where the interpretation of earlier music on

modern instruments is considered the norm, the values of Currency find a comfortable fit.

‘His insistence that the performer’s role is properly creative, rather than recreative’,’l6 is

indicative of the process of continuity, where there exists, in Lowenthal’s phrase, a ‘living

past bound up with the pre~ent’.”~

In this context, the attitudes towards the Steinway piano,

representing a constantly renewable and hnctional resource, are unarticulated reflections of

this prevailing orthodoxy.

Dissonances

There is no evidence at this period of the instrument’s existence of influences from the

regimens of Restitution or Preservation which might indicate cause for conflict. The phrase

‘preserved, protected and used to the greatest advantage’, introduces an element of

inconsistency, but only if preservation and protection are taken to refer to the traces of Glenn

Gould’s ownership.’” In this context, however, use of the piano is not inconsistent with its

‘preservation’ in the Residence of the Governor General.

 165

8.2.4 Third Period: Restoration and Continuing Use

History

Prior to purchase the piano was examined in Toronto by the workshop foreman of Lauzon

Music of Ottawa in March 1983 in order to assess the work that needed to be done.'lg On

examining the instrument in his Ottawa workshop, Kenneth Lauzon's findings were reported

as follows:

Was Glenn Gould an aggressive pianist? Afier examining the battered state of the late
musician's Steinway, Ottawa restorer Kenneth Lauzon thinks so. Lauzon was hired
by the federal government last week to restore the 50-year-old grand, which it
purchased fi-om Gould's estate for $12,500. The piano will eventually be installed in
Rideau Hall, the residence of the governors general. 'In 22 years of restoration I have
never seen anything like it', said Lauzon after surveying the damage. Two layers of
veneer are scraped from the name board. The strings are worn out. The harp that holds
them needs rebronzing, and Lauzon plans to strip and repaint the entire piano. 'It
looks as if the beavers got at it', said Lauzon.12'

The Steinway was entirely dismantled, all mechanical parts were serviced or replaced, the

metal fi-ame was rebronzed, and the case was stripped to the bare wood, repaired and

refinished with 'six or seven coats' of black lacquer. The instrument was restrung and tuned,

hammers and dampers were refelted, and the action was adjusted.12'None of this work was

documented either in writing or graphically; the instrument was 'treated like any other piano'

in need of refurbishment.122The only extant documentation of this treatment is a series of 4"

x 5" format colour photographs mounted on a ~ a n e 1 . On

I ~ ~return to Rideau Hall it was

intended that a metal plaque be attached to the instrument above the keyboard. This was not

done; instead, a portrait of Gould at the keyboard was hung near the piano with the following

inscription:
 166

As a mark of respect for the musicianship of the late Glenn Gould, the Government of
Canada, at the request of Their Excellencies Mr. & Mrs. Edward Schreyer, acquired
and has restored Mr. Gould’s working piano for display and use in the ballroom of
Rideau Hall.

In commenting upon the original proposal for a commemorative plaque attached to the

instrument, an official of the Museum of Man in Ottawa was quoted as saying that ‘it’s

ironical to remove all evidence of Glenn Gould and then put a plaque on it saying it is

In answering this criticism, the Public Works Project Manager stated that ‘it’s not being

bought as a museum piece. It was offered to us on the condition it be restored as a musical

instrument’.12’However, in the opinion of the chief executor of the Gould estate, the

treatment was the purchaser’s idea, although he did support it.’26The Governor General’s

Cultural Attach6 remarked that ‘it hasn’t occurred to anyone’ to leave the piano in the state in

which Gould used it.’27Glenn Gould biographer Geoffi-ey Payzant wrote that:

It is being rebuilt at public expense so that all traces of the characteristics for which
he loved it will be carefully removed; it will occupy a place of honour in the official
residence of the Governor General as a memorial to its former owner. A government
official has announced that it will be in such good condition that Gould himself would
not have been ashamed to play it in public. The many levels of irony and absurdity in
these projects would have delighted Glenn Gould.12’

Even though Payzant is confusing this instrument with CD 3 18, which is in the possession of

the National Library of Canada, his sentiments concerning the removal of all traces of

Gould’s use remain valid. Two officials of The Heritage Canada Foundation reacted publicly

to the decision taken to restore the piano, and to the suitability of the personnel employed:

Canada has some of the world’s finest furniture and musical instrument conservators
in its employ [...I It seems only appropriate that the ‘how’ and ‘how much’ of the
restoration be entrusted to their competent judgement; not to a hiture/piano
refinisher -- regardless of how skilled. 12’

In criticizing the removal of all traces of Glenn Gould’s ownership, the Heritage Canada

officials commented:
 167

We, as Canadians, must overcome this outdated notion that our history, our great
achievements and our heroes must be without flaw. For it is the patina that recalls
these events and men. From it we come to understand what greatness is.
This piano’s keyboard reflects the thousands of hours of practice that Mr.
Gould struggled through to reach his perfection. As such these scratches and flaws
reflect perfection much more than seven perfect coats of lacquer ever will.’30

The restored Steinway had its inaugural performance by Jon Kimura Parker on November 30

1983; Glenn Gould’s parents were among the guests.I3’‘The piano continues to be used at

Rideau Hall on a regular basis and is periodically tuned and maintained by Lauzon Music.

Analysis

Actions

Values associated with Currency are signified by both the recognition of the tangible

evidence of Glenn Gould’s ownership, and by its subsequent obliteration. Treating the

instrument ‘like any other in need of refurbishment demonstrates the application of

the craft tradition in assuring continuity through maintenance (keeping in mind the very

broad interpretation of maintenance in this context). The processes of removing the marks of

usage on the keyboard facia, replacing working parts such as hammers and dampers, re-

bronzing the harp, and stripping and refinishing, all indic,atecontinuity.

There is evidence that the previous state and its significance to Glenn Gould are not

considered. Examination of the marks of use on the keyboard fascia, which the critics of the

treatment had referred to as ‘patina’133, is conversely described by the craftsman as

‘surveying the damage’.134The contrast of the words patina and damage evokes the polarity

between historical context and continuity. Had the intention been to preserve these features,
 168

action could then be classified as a search for what Lowmthal refers to as the ‘exotically

different or o b s ~ l e t e ’ . ’ ~ ~

The statement that the instrument was ‘not being bought as a museum piece’ but was offered

‘on the condition it be restored as a musical instrument’, indicates the popularly held polarity

between Currency and Pre~ervation.”~

The word ‘restored’ is used in such a way that the

distinction between maintenance and a return to a previous state are conflated. The

underlying assumption is one of opposition -- that a museum piece cannot operate as a

musical instrument. The prime focus is in ensuring the continued function of the instrument

in a familiar setting.

Rationales

Subjective values are evident in the expendable nature of the characteristics specific to Glenn

Gould’s ownership, as embodied in both the fabric of the instrument, and in the changes

made and caused by him to it. If it is considered possible: to refurbish the instrument entirely,

both visually and mechanically, then the continuing cultural presence of Gould must have an

existence independent of the instrument’s materials of fabrication. Elements of the pathetic

fallacy are therefore seen in the instrument being used as a signifier of Glenn Gould by its

presence alone, and not by any unique physical feature of it. This is in marked contrast to the

pragmatic viewpoint expressed by one of the critics in commenting upon the irony of

removing ‘all evidence of Glenn Gould and then put[ting] a plaque on it saying it is his’.’’’
 169

Context

As mentioned in Section 8.2.4, attitudes towards the Steinway piano in this period represent

the prevailing orthodoxy of continuity. The remark that ‘it hasn’t occurred to anyone’ to

leave the piano in the state in which Gould used it is indicative of the depth of commitment

to continuity, but equally of the absence of exposure to other rati0na1es.l~~

The absence of documentary material, enlisted either in support of the decision-making

process or of the actual treatment, is indicative of the non-textual nature of Currency. The

refurbishment itself was undertaken in the same manner as for the routine treatment of an

non-culturally marked piano, and the only record of treatment was a series of photographs.

This lack of congruence with parallel methods of working in the cultural sector is further

evidence of the insular nature of Currency. The statement that ‘it’s not being bought as a

museum piece’ signifies this attitude. 13’

Dissonances

During and after the restoration process conflicting views on the nature and extent of the

treatment surfaced. The competence of the craftsman’s judgement is questioned in asking

why decisions on the extent of ‘restoration’ should be entrusted to ‘a hiture/piano

refinisher -- regardless of how ~killed’.’~’

And the removal of all traces of Gould’s use is

decried; the patina ‘recalls these events and men. From it we come to understand what

greatness is’.I4’ The critics further equate the physical imperfection evident in the scratches

and flaws indirectly with Gould’s aesthetic musical perfe~ti0n.I~~

(The polysemic nature of

these traces of use is discussed in Chapter 11.)

 170

There is no evidence of dissonance in the approach to the actual treatment. It, and the

rationale behind it, are firmly founded in the regimen of Currency.

8.2.5 Synopsis of the Three Periods

In the first identifiable period, acquisition and use by Glenn Gould, the Steinway piano is not

yet an historic instrument by definition. It is a transient object of falling value, and has yet to

be identified by society as an object of symbolic value.

Purchase by the Canadian government initiates a transitional period, when the instrument

(now singularized) has ceased to be used on a regular basis, but before intervention is made

on it. The piano possesses all the features of its previous owner’s unique adjustments, and the

marks of wear and use on its surface. As no action has been taken upon it, it is in a holding

state of passive preservation -- preservation by default. The aspiration that the piano will be

‘preserved, protected and used to the greatest advantage’ summarizes the equivocal nature of

thinking at this stage.’43

The third period of treatment, the refurbishment of the Steinway piano and its continued use

in concert, places actions upon it securely in the regimen of Currency. Evidence is

predominantly found in the actions taken to ensure continuity, although a rationale based in

the subjective is also encountered. The lack of documentation is a key feature of this

regimen.
 171

8.3 AMATI QUARTET

8.3.1 Introduction

These four bowed string instruments were brought together as a quartet in the 1950s by

Stephen Kolbinson, a wheat farmer of Kindersley, Sa~katchewan.’~~

The 1637 violin was

acquired from David McCallum, a violinist of the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra in 1955.

Kolbinson purchased the 1627 violin from Australian violinist Daisy Kennedy in 1957,

having previously enquired after its availability in 1954. The violoncello was purchased from

Hills of London in 1957, and the private collection of Walter Simmenauer in Paris sold the

viola to Kolbinson in 1958.14’

In order to ensure that the instruments were played upon on a regular basis, it was

Kolbinson’s wish that the University of Saskatchewan purchase the instruments and form a

Murray Adaskin of the University’s Department of Music undertook

quartet-in-re~idence.’~~

to persuade the Senate of the University late in 1958 to pursue the purchase.’47Negotiations

with the newly-formed Orford Quartet to be the quartet-in-residence appeared promising at

first, but eventually came to nothing. No permanent players emerged until 1969, by which

time the Department of Music was employing enough teachers to form a quartet.148On

Adaskin’s retirement for the University in 1973, the four Amati instruments were placed in

storage in the Department of Music. During their period of storage they were examined

periodically.
 172

Figure 8. The 1637 Nicolo Amati violin (left) and the 1627 Antonius and
Hieronymus Amati violin (right).

In 1992 a request was made to the University authorities by the Lafayette Quartet for loan of

the instruments, and an agreement was reached between the University of Saskatchewan and

the University of Victoria, British Columbia, where the Lafayette Quartet was in r e ~ i d e n c e . ' ~ ~

Review of the loan agreement in 1996 occasioned a reassessment of the role of the University

in its custodianship, resulting in consultations with a wide range of specialists in the care and

preservation of historic musical instruments.

 173

Figure 9. The 1607 Antonius and Hieronymus Amati viola (right) and the
1690 Hieronymus Amati violoncello (left). .

From the above material, three distinctly documented periods in the history of the Amati

Quartet can be identified:

- The quartet-in-residence

- Fallow period from 1973 until 1992

- The quartet on loan

These periods are documented in detail in the following sections, and activity within them is

analysed.
 174

8.3.2 First Period: The Quartet-in-Residence

History

During the brief period in 1958 that Stephen Kolbinson owned the four Amati instruments,

he consulted with the New York specialists Emil Hermann, Jacques Franqais, and Rembert

Wurlitzer regarding valuation and authenticity of the two violins and the viola.'50Only one of

the instruments, the viola, was considered in need of treatment on this occasion: 'I left [it]

with Sacconi [Simone Sacconi, employed by the Wurlitzer firm] to have some slight repairs

done so that it will be in the best of ~ondition'.'~'

The firm of Wurlitzer possesses no

documentation of this treatment.'52

In order to ensure the instruments would continue to be played, Kolbinson entered into

negotiations with the University of Saskatchewan, who eventually purchased the quartet.153

Meanwhile, Murray Adaskin of the University's Department of Music undertook to establish

a string While visiting Rembert Wurlitzer in 1958, Kolbinson requested an

appraisal document which could later be presented to the University of Saskatchewan to

represent its purchase price for the quartet:

I asked that the quartet be appraised at $20,000.00. I could have asked a higher price
and they would have appraised it as such, but then this isn't a business as far as I'm
concerned. Rembert Wurlitzer thought this very cheap and insisted on inserting in the
appraisal that this figure was a very minimum.'55

Rembert Wurlitzer personally provided a written valuation for the three instruments after

examination at his premises, and also certified the authenticity of the violoncello on the
 175

strength of a certificate from Hill and Sons in London.”“ His appraisal includes the wording

‘we consider the above appraisal a very minimum valuation of the quartet’.15’

Adaskin’s initial failure to establish a university-based string quartet resulted in less use for

the instruments than first anticipated. According to Gordana Lazerevich, who documented

Adaskin’s acquisition and use of the Amatis in a chapter entitled ‘A Prairie renaissance of the

arts’, the instruments ‘were only taken out of their vault for an occasional performance by a

visiting musician’.’58It was not until 1969 that regular use by a string quartet of faculty

members was assured. Adaskin was joined by Norma Lee Bisha on the violin, Michael

Bowie on the viola, and Edward Bisha on the cello on these occasion^.'^^

Adaskin continued the relationship with Wurlitzer established by Kolbinson, requesting

maintenance for the instruments on at least two occasions. Eight years after acquisition by the

University he wrote that:

The ‘Cello I believe, is slightly open at the top of the instrument where the neck joins
it. The Nicolo Amati Violin has a set of impossible pegs which never function
properly, and I would very much like to have them removed and replaced by a fine set
properly fitted. The other violin and viola may merely require some touching up here
and there. I6O

This treatment is not documented in Wurlitzer’s files.’61In view of a second transaction,

some two years later, it is questionable whether the instruments were ever sent to New York

on this occasion. In a letter of February 1968 to Thomas Bertucca, who was employed as a

restorer by Wurlitzer, Adaskin states that the instruments have been sent, and that:

We would like you to give the instruments whatever attention they may require to
bring them up to their best playing condition. However, we would ask that you attend
to the following:
The Nicolo Amati:
 176

Replace mechanical pegs, with properly fitted ordinary pegs of the finest
quality.
Examine sound-post, bridge; and any possible openings or required
adjustments. 16*

The request to replace the ‘mechanical pegs’ indicates that this work, mentioned in the

correspondence to Sacconi, had not been done previously. However, the presence of what

appear to be geared machine tuning heads on the Daisy Kennedy Amati raises the larger

questions of when and where these devices were installed. Had they existed when Kolbinson

. showed the instruments in New York, such clearly spurious devices would certainly have

been remarked. The instrument would very probably have been left with Sacconi for

treatment, along with the viola. In addition, a photograph of Stephen Kolbinson and Murray

Adaskin with the instruments, taken during the handling-over ceremony at the University in

1958, shows both violins with normal pegs.’63The concl.usion is that these geared tuning

heads were installed locally, at some time in the eight years after acquisition by the

University.

Analysis

Actions

The four instruments were serviced at least twice during this first period, providing them with

‘whatever attention they [might] require to bring them up to their best playing ~ondition’.’~~

The cello required closure of a crack, and one violin and the viola needed ‘some touching up

here and The Daisy Kennedy violin needed more significant treatment; the addition

of mechanical tuning heads to it while in the University’s care is particularly evocative of

Currency, as it indicates that a putative improvement in the original design was valued.’66
 177

Action throughout this period is securely upon use as musical instruments. The emphasis of

treatment is continuity, ensuring that the instruments remain current by craftsmanly

maintenance when necessary.

Rationales

In his desire to continue the playing status of the quartet of Amati instruments he had

assembled, Stephen Kolbinson is demonstrating a set of deeply held and largely unarticulated

assumptions that characterize the genre of historic bowed string instruments. Such aspects as

ensuring the continuing value of the instruments through playing are made plain by the prices

paid for individual items, and the valuation of the assembled quartet.

Context

Such 19th-century developments as the publication of Otto's Treatise, and the pioneering

work of Savart on the acoustics of the violin, lay the foundation for the special place that

early violins now o~cupy.'~'

The treatise of Heron-Allen, and the classic study of Stradivari

by the Hills are evidence of the solidification of this trend at the end of the 19th century.I6*

The ethos surrounding the possession of historic bowed string instruments is summarized late

in the 19th century by Hepworth, who writes:

It is undoubtedly the moral duty of each generation to transmit to its successor all
valuable instruments in as perfect a condition as possible. For this reason it should be
the business of each player to consider any good instrument he may happen to own, as
placed in his trust for the benefit of those who succeed him.'69

A sense of continuity coupled with moral obligation is clearly articulated here. The fact that

Kolbinson and Adaskin were able to consult with no less than three New York violin
 178

specialists in the 1950s -- Emil Hemann, Jacques Franqais, and Rembert Wurlitzer --

indicates the dimensions and profitability of the classic violin field at that time.

Dissonances

No dissonances are discernible at this phase of treatment. The instruments are confidently

ensconced in Currency, and continuity is ensured through use. The gear-dnven tuning heads

show inconsistency in the local context; the craftsman who did this work was motivated

purely by function, and was clearly unaware of how such work would be regarded by the

bowed string establishment at large."'

8.3.3 Second Period: Fallow Period from 1973 until 1992

History

On the retirement of Murray Adaskin from his teaching position at the University of

Saskatchewan in 1973, the four instruments were also retired and placed in storage in the

Department of The instruments had been examined and cared for periodically from

1970 by Professor Robert Klose, head of the Strings Programme. He continued his

supervision until their care came under the aegis of the Head of the Music Department in

1985.172The quartet remained retired until 1992.

 179

Analysis

The transaction between active use of the quartet and retirement into storage begins a period

of passive preservation. The regimen into which instruments fall is dictated by actions,

underscored by rationales. Because the instruments remain unused, they are not subjected to

craft intervention. Therefore, in the absence of action, the schema defaults to non-intentional

passive preservation, which is largely undocumented.

8.3.4 Third Period: the Quartet on Loan

History

In 1992 a request was made to the University authorities by the Lafayette Quartet, the

quartet-in-residence at the University of Victoria, British Columbia, for loan of the

instruments. An agreement was ratified in a letter of understanding between the University of

Saskatchewan and the University of Victoria.'73Section 6 of the letter of understanding

describes the measures to be taken in the care and treatment of the instruments:

The University of Victoria will be responsible for appropriate handling, storage and
upkeep of the instruments, including maintenance and any repairs occasioned by
normal wear and tear as a result of playing, transport, or exposure to changes in
climate. However, where any repairs must be undertaken simply as a result of the age
of the instrument, and would have become necessary whether the instrument had been
played or not, the responsibility will be shared equally by the University of Victoria
and the University of Saskatchewan. In the event that there is any dispute as to how a
specific repair relates to this agreement, the two Universities will accept the opinion
of a qualified repair firm to be chosen j0int1y.l~~
 180

The instruments were passed over to the Lafayette Quartet in the Summer of 1992, and their

first concert was given on September 20 of that year as one of the University of

Saskatchewan’s Celebrity Series.’75On this occasion the Lafayette Quartet played Adaskin’s

String Quartet No. 1, and the Celebrity Series was renamed the Adaskin Concert Series in his

honour. 176

Support for the professional use of the quartet came from music critics. It was felt that ‘the

Amatis [...I had been languishing in their cases for years, and desperately needed to be played

and maintained’, and further that ‘the instruments are best in the hands of professional~’.’~~

This critic, who wrote for the Globe and Mail newspaper, had followed the Lafayette

Quartet’s career since acquisition of the Amati instruments:

The Amati’s sound in that first concert [1993] WiEi anticlimactic, but a year later, after
the instruments had been worked on and played in, it was a revelation [...I Those who
think the instruments are best in the hands of professionals point to the fact that not
only are the instruments shown to the best advantage as a set, they have improved in
the Lafayette’s care. The collection - originally purchased in 1958 for a mere $20,000
- is now valued at more than $1.25-milli0n.’~~
Towards the end of the Lafayette Quartet’s tenure of the instruments, a questionnaire on the

conditions of their use, patterns of service, and general well-being was conducted by the

CCI.17’ The following description of treatment is quoted from this source:

By whom were the instruments serviced?

The names provided were Roland Feller (San Francisco), and Kim Tipper (Victoria),
Horst ijbel (Panna, Ohio), and David van Zandt (Seattle). The choice of instrument
serviceman depended largely upon location of the instrument and player at the time
when servicing was necessary, although because Kim Tipper was resident in Victoria
his services were used more often.

How frequently were the instruments serviced?

On average the instruments were inspected every six months, although servicing was
done more on a the basis of perceived need. If the instrument was working
satisfactorily, no action needed to be taken.
\

181

What work was done during regular service?

Work includes adjustments to set-up (particularly re-setting of the soundpost), minor
retouching of varnish on areas of wear, and re-stringing.

Had any major problems been observed?

The 1627 violin had a fallen arch on the treble side and a crack had recently been
observed in the same area. The pegs of the viola sometimes failed to grip, especially
in dry climates, and it was estimated that they might need rebushing fairly soon. The
edges outside the purfling of the viola were chipped in several places on the treble
side and it was considered that repair and replacement would be needed.

Had any major work been necessary?

The violoncello was accidentally dropped while in its case, causing the scroll to
become detached from the neck. The whole neck was removed and replaced with a
new one, to whlch the original scroll was grafted.’” The crack in the 1627 violin was
repaired by removing the belly and gluing a wood button across the crack from the
inside (See Figure 10). Several other areas of weakness were repaired while the
instrument was apart, and the work was documented with photographs. Treatment on
both instruments was done by Kim Tipper in Victoria.

Were there any playing idiosyncrasies?

The ‘g’ string of the violoncello was reported to be ‘muddy’, but the re-necking
apparently cured this. No other idiosyncrasies were reported, although all players
reported that the instruments had rapidly improved with playing since the Quartet had
started using them, and were now at the peak of their efficiency.

How were the instruments transported and stored?

The instruments were kept in their cases at all times and were rarely, if ever, out of
possession of the Quartet members. The violoncello had an air ticket purchased for it
routinely.

Was the immediate environment of the instruments monitored?

No environmental monitoring was done.

How was the immediate environment of the instruments controlled?

No control of environment was considered practically possible when travelling with
the instruments between venues of widely differing climate. Moisture wicks were
kept in the instruments’ ‘f-holes to provide a certain amount of buffering.

How much playing time did the instruments have per day?
The players generally agreed that each instrument had between four and five hours of
use per day.’81
 182

Figure 10. Underside of the belly of the 1627

Antonius and Hieronymus Amati violin,
showing multiple repairs carried out over the
instrument’s history.

Review of the loan agreement in 1996 occasioned a reassessment of the role of the University

in its custodianship. Concern had been expressed that use by professional musicians during

world-wide concert engagements would result in damage. Regarding travel and use of the

quartet, the Musical Instrument Standing Committee of the University professed itself ready

To this
to be ‘guided by the policies of other institutions which own historic instruments’.*82

end a series of consultations with a wide range of specialists in the care and preservation of
 183

historic musical instruments was undertaken. Richard T. Rephann, Professor of Music at the

Yale University Collection of Musical Instruments, said that ‘just because they would be

used by professional quartets does not mean they are not going to be abused’.183He further

argued, regarding the sound of the instruments:

Modem instruments are designed for modem players--these Amatis are not. Their
creators would not recognize their own instruments [...I the Amatis today don’t sound
anything like their creator intended, especially the second violin and viola (cut
‘
back). 84

‘Cut back’ refers to the practice of making the instrument smaller by cutting down the belly

and back, and re-shaping the ribs. Robert Sheldon, Conservator of Musical Instruments at the

Library of Congress in Washington D.C., was of the opinion that:

The instruments should not be taken on and off aircraft, or in and out of automobile
trunks. [They] are already over-stressed now with all the playing that has been done
on them; given the style of modem playing, when travel is added to this, the life-span
of the instruments is greatly ~hortened.’~’

On the other hand, Ren6 Morel, a New York specialist in rare violins, argued for the

continuation of playing status:

One has to remember that most of the world famous virtuoso [sic] are travelling to
extreme humidity and extreme temperature and yet, while these people know what to
do, they manage to keep their instruments in perfect playing and esthetic condition.Ig6

He provided evidence in the regular playing of the Stradivarius, Guarnerius and Amati

instruments in the Library of Congress in Washington D.C., and of the Amati Quartet in the

Corcoran Gallery, the instruments of which, after being played regularly for twenty years by

the Tokyo Quartet, were ‘in better shape than when first loaned to themy.lg7On the subject of

the condition of the wood, he attributes its longevity to a ground coating that prevents

oxidation, and says that ‘up to these days, these ingredients or that ingredient is called “a

secret”’.18’
 184

Support for Morel’s stance on the efficacy of continued playing status is seen in the

following excerpt from a letter to the Saskatoon Post, the local newspaper:

There has been concern that constant use and the attendant travel of concertizing will
be detrimental to the instruments. To suggest cavalier handling of the instruments by
any musician responsible for their welfare is ludicrous. Consider the many old and
valuable string instruments in regular use by the great players of today. You can be
assured their instruments receive the utmost expert care and attention as they travel
the concert world [...I The Amatis must be used and maintained to their full worth. To
bring them back to Saskatoon to languish in splendid silence would be sinful.189

Analysis

Actions

Continuing hnction is clearly of first importance during this third period. The loan

agreement to the Lafayette Quartet is predicated upon the instruments’ having regular and

intensive use. It is accepted that this process will result in damage, and the consequent need

for maintenance. Two scenarios are described in the loan agreement: ‘repairs occasioned by

normal wear and tear as a result of playing, transport, or exposure to changes in climate’, and

those attributed ‘to the age of the instrument [which] would have become necessary whether

the instrument had been played or not’ .190 No specific allowance is made for damage due to

accident.

The work either done to the instruments, or contemplated, can be divided into that associated

with normal use, that occasioned by the age and condition of the instruments, and that

necessary after accidental damage. The treatment offered the instruments during this period

can be contrasted with the opinions of the correspondent to the Saskatoon Post, who argues
 185

that ‘to suggest cavalier handling by the musicians responsible [...I is ludicrous’ .I9’ Violin

specialist RenC Morel states that professional musicians know how ‘to keep their instruments

in perfect playing and esthetic condition’ This subscription to a schedule of repair-based

maintenance places the action securely in the regimen of Currency.

Rationales

Subjective elements characteristic of Currency are evident in the correspondence over use of

the instruments and the reassessment of their disposition. Elements of personification appear

in the concept of ‘development’ of the instruments through playing. This is cited by music

critic Elissa Poole, who states that the first concert on the instruments was ‘anticlimactic’, but

that in a year the results was ‘a re~elation’.’~~

The members of the quartet themselves concur,

stating that the instruments had improved through being played and were at the peak of their

efficiency.lg4Personification is also evident in the views that the instruments ‘had been

languishing in their cases for years, and desperately needed to be played and maintained’.195

The need is placed upon the instruments, not their users. A further subjective element is

Morel’s evocation of the arcane in his statement that the longevity of the instruments is a

result of a secret ground coating that prevents oxidation. 196

Context

Treatment of the Amati Quartet is in line with the sentiment expressed at the Cremona Day of

Studies in 1975: ‘Keeping the antique instruments alive, saving, above all [...I their more

specific playing individuality, their relationship with the present, in short, with the history of

music.”97 This indicates the continuing strength of the values of Currency. However, the
 186

University’s review of the use of the Amati Quartet brings in widely dissenting views from

the museum community. The context is now widened to include museum views which had

been widely expressed in the contemporary literature. Typical of these sentiments is that

expressed by conservator Cary Karp in assuring ‘the material survival of the musical

instruments in their holdings to the hllest extent permitted by the current state of

conservation science’.’98

It is important to stress that the extent of treatment needed for the instruments while they

were in use by the Lafayette Quartet is not atypical. Figure 10 gives an idea of the major

repair work the Antonius and Hieronymus Amati violin of 1627 had undergone before its

most recent treatment. Within the context of the Currency regimen, and allowing for the wear

and tear with playing specified in the University’s contract, the work done upon the

instruments is well within what would be expected.

Dissonances

Viewpoints opposed to playing status come from musical instrument curator Richard

Rephann who speaks of the possibility of abuse, and conservator Robert Sheldon, who states

that the instruments of the quartet are already over-~tressed.’~~

Thus, once the Currency

regimen in which the instruments are immersed is exposed, dissonance arises. The tension of

the dialectic is evident in the strength of the language used in defence of Currency; such

words as ‘cavalier’, ‘ludicrous’, and ‘sinful’ indicate the height of feelings that potential

retirement of the instruments occasions.

 187

An element of irrelevancy is introduced when an increase in the instruments’ monetary value

from $20,000 to $1.25-million over the period of the Lafayette Quartet’s use is equated with

their musical efficiency.200Firstly, the evaluation of $20,000 for the four instruments

provided by Wurlitzer in 1958 represents a figure artificially lowered by Kolbinson, who had

no wish to profit from his beneficence.201Secondly, when the figures for diminishing dollar

purchasing power through inflation are factored in, the figure of $20,000 in 1958 becomes

$1 19,200 by 1996.202Thirdly, the increasing monetary value of rare violins over four

decades, regardless of their active or passive roles, must be allowed for. Lastly, the monetary

value of the instruments, when the Lafayette Quartet assumed custodianship in 1993, is

substituted for their assigned value in 1958. Thus, the statement that the instruments had

increased in value from $20,000 to $1.25-million within the period of the Lafayette Quartet’s

tenure, is highly inconsistent. This faulty logic appears to be used as a justification for the

continuing playing status of the quartet.

8.3.5 Synopsis of the Three Periods

When the Amati instruments were first assembled as a quartet in 1958 they were acquired in

working condition f’i-ompractising musicians. Their continued working state in the regimen

of Currency was an assumption, a projected career only interrupted by a lack of musicians to

play them. The two resting periods, one at the beginning of the University of Saskatchewan’s

custodianship, and the other after Adaskin’s retirement, were imposed by practical

considerations not related to the state and condition of the instruments, and there was no

conscious desire to preserve them in this non-playing state.

 188

The review of the Lafayette Quartet’s custodianship exposed the decision-making process to

a wider audience, and thus challenged the assumptions of the Currency regimen. This act

initiated the dialectic of ‘play or preserve’, and thus exposed the polarized views.

NOTES

1. McArthur, p. 3.

2. Schau, ‘Musical Past’, p. 17.

3. Schau, ‘Musical Past’. p. 18.

4. There is some evidence that there were actually three organs; two barrel organs and one
keyboard instrument. Afier the Study was built, it is noted that ‘so great was the old man’s
[Willson’s] love of music that he had another crank pipe organ built for it’ (North York
Intelligencer and Advertiser, 28 October 1898).

5 . Schau, ‘Musical Past’, p. 18.

6. Artifact catalogue, Sharon Temple Museum.

7. Pain, pp. 521-538.

8. Carelse, Clement, letter to author, 15 October 1993.

9. ibid.

10. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, pp. 6-1 1; and Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, pp. 7-1 1.

11. Schau, ‘Musical Past’, pp. 18-20.

12. Ord-Hume, p. 409.

13. Schau, ‘Sacred Music’, p. 128.

14. Anon., undated, Sharon Temple Museum records, Sharon, Ontario.

15. As pointed out earlier, there is some evidence that a new organ was built specifically
for the Study.

16. Anon., The North YorkIntelligencer and Advertiser, Newmarket, Ontario, 28 October
1898.
 189

17. John Ross Robertson Collection, Metro Toronto Library, Toronto.

18. Hill, Donald, letter to author, 16 May 1994, p. 2.

19. Thompson, p. 8.

20. Kopytoff, p. 73.

2 1. Thompson, p. 10.

22. Note to file, records of Sharon Temple Museum, Sharon, Ontario.

23. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, p. 7.

24. Schau, ‘Sacred Music’, pp. 92-93.

25. Wright, Donald, letter to Helmut Kallmann, 2 September 1974, correspondence of

Helmut Kallmann.

26. Reproduced in Schau, ‘Sacred Music’, pp. 92-136.

27. Schau, ‘Sacred Music’, pp. 92-93.

28. Reproduced in Schau, ‘Sacred Music’, pp. 92-136.

29. Fuller, p. 165.

30. Berner, et al, p. 8.

31. Taruskin, p. 146.

32. ibid.

33. Kalmann, pp. 115-116.

34. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, p. 8.

35. Draft of concert programme, records of the Sharon Temple Museum.

36. Angus, Gordon, letter to author, 14 April 1994, p. 2.

37. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, p. 8.

38. ibid.

39. Payzant, Geoffrey, letter to author, 16 July 1984.

40. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, p. 7.

 190

41. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, p. 9.

42. Angus, Gordon, letter to author, 14 April 1994, p. 2.

43. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, p. 8.

44. ibid.

45. Moreni, p. 91

46. Berner, et al.

47. Karp, ‘Restoration’.

48. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, p. 7.

49. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, pp. 10-11.

50. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, p. 11.

51. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, p. 9.

52. ibid.

53. Although completed over a decade apart, the caseworks of both instruments appeared to
have been finished by the same hand. The finish on the keyboard organ was noticeably more
deteriorated on account of its exposure to sunlight, especially on one side of the upper
section. (Barclay, R. L., Surface Treatment of Coates Organs, unpublished report (Ottawa:
Canadian Conservation Institute, 1983).)

54. ibid.

55. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, pp. 10-11.

56. Seidel, p. 130.

57. Seidel, pp. 130-131.

58. Audsley, p. 213.

59. Werckmeister, pp. 18-19.

60. Seidel, p. 182.

61. Matthews, p. 9.

62. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, p. 11. The advice actually came from Noel Mander, an
organ-maker in the United Kingdom, although another commentator states that ‘we do
not know if the facts presented to Mr. Mander were accurate’. (Angus, Gordon, letter to
 191

author, 14 April 1994.)

63. Payzant, ‘Barrel No. 3’, p. 11.

64. ibid.

65. ibid.

66. Fitch, Howard, M., letter to York Pioneer Historical Society, undated, records of Sharon
Temple Museum.

67. Payzant, G., ‘The Barrel No. 3 Project - a Review’, transcript of a presentation to York
Pioneer Historical Society, 2 1 March 1985.

68. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, p. 11.

69. Barclay, R.L., Conservation ofthe Richard Coates Barrel Organ, unpublished report
(Ottawa: Canadian Conservation Institute, 1991)

70. Payzant, G., ‘The Barrel No. 3 Project - a Review’, transcript of a presentation to York
Pioneer Historical Society, 21 March 1985.

71. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, pp. 10-11.

72. Payzant, G., ‘The Barrel No. 3 Project - a Review’, transcript of a presentation to York
Pioneer Historical Society, 21 March 1985.

73. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, pp. 10-11.

74. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, p. 11.

75. Morgan, p. 68.

76. Payzant, ‘Rebirth’, p. 11.

77. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, p. 11.

78. ibid.

79. Karp; and Barnes.

80. Barclay, Canadian Collections.

81. Payzant, ‘Barrel No. 3’, p. 11

82. Barclay, R. L., Conservation of the Richard Coates Barrel Organ, unpublished report
(Ottawa: Canadian Conservation Institute, 1991)

83. ibid.
 192

84. Kallmann and Potvin, p. 542.

85. Archives and Database, Steinway and Sons, New York.

86. ibid.

87. Anon., ‘Glenn Gould’s Piano at Rideau Hall’, Realty and Development, Official
Residences Division, records of the National Capital Commission, Ottawa.

88. MacSween, Donald, letter to Rebecca Sisler, 21 January 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

89. Mackay, John A.H., letter to Esmond Butler, 28 February 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

90. ibid.

91. Anonymous note to file, records of the National Capital Commission, Ottawa.

92. Dove, Stephen, K., transcript of personal communication by telephone from Steinway
and Sons, 13 May 1996.

93. Remenyi M., letter to Helmut Kallmann, National Library of Canada, file number 168-3-
G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.

94. Archives and Database, Steinway and Sons, New York.

95. MacSween, Donald, letter to John A.H. Mackay, 2 February 1983, records of Rideau
Hall, Ottawa.

96. Realty and Development, Official Residences Division, records of the National Capital
Commission, Ottawa.

97. Lauzon, Kenneth, transcript of personal communication to author, 14 June 1995.

98. Maintenance record, National Library of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-6 - Collections -
G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.

99. Matthais, p. 88.

100. Liner notes to J S . Bach: Two- and Three-part Inventions, Columbia recording ML
6022, quoted in Payzant, Glenn Guuld, p. 106. In this quotation Gould likens the ‘natural
tendency’ of the Steinway piano to the automatic transmission of a car. The sense of control
and immediacy is lost through the interposition of the mechanism.

101. Mackay, John A.H., letter to Esmond Butler, 28 February 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

102. Kopytoff, p. 73.

 193

103. MacSween, Donald, letter to Esmond Butler, 11 January 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

104. Sisler, Rebecca, memorandum to file, 21 January 1983, records of the National Capital
Commission, Ottawa.

105. MacSween, Donald, letter to Esmond Butler, 11 January 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

106. ibid.

107. Butler, Esmond, letter to John A.H. Mackay, 2 February 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

108. Mackay, John A.H., letter to Esmond Butler, 28 February 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

109. MacSween, Donald, letter to Esmond Butler, 11 January 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

110. Sisler, Rebecca, memorandum to file, 21 January 1983, records of the National Capital
Commission, Ottawa.

111. Butler, Esmond, letter to John A.H. Mackay, 2 February 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

112. Sisler, Rebecca, memorandum to file, 21 January 1983, records of the National Capital
Commission, Ottawa.

113. MacSween, Donald, letter to Esmond Butler, 1I January 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission; and Butler, Esmond, letter to John A.H. Mackay, 2 February 1983,
records of the National Capital Commission, Ottawa.

114. Kallmann and Potvin, p. 542, col. 3.

115. ibid.

116. ibid.

117. Lowenthal, p. 52.

118. MacSween, Donald, letter to Esmond Butler, 11. January 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

119. Lauzon, Kenneth, transcript of personal communication to author, 15 August 1995.

120. Macleans Magazine, 11 April 1983, p. 33.

 194

121. Beltrame, Julian, ‘Discord sounded over restoration of Gould piano’, The Ottawa
Citizen, 23 April 1983, p. 9.

122. Lauzon, Kenneth, transcript of personal communic,ationto author, 14 June 1995.

123. These pictures are on display in Lauzon Music, Wellington Street, Ottawa.

124. Beltrame, Julian, ‘Discord’, The Ottawa Citizen, 23 April 1983, p. 9.

125. ibid.

126. ibid.

127. ibid.

128. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 146.

129. Byme, Richard, 0. and Weaver, Martin, E., ‘Piano scars reflect perfection’, The Ottawa
Citizen, 3 May 1983, p. 8.

130. ibid.

131. Anonymous, Rideau Hall publicity material, 30 November 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

132. Lauzon, Kenneth, transcript of personal communication to author, 14 June 1995.

133. Byme, Richard, 0. and Weaver, Martin, E., ‘Piano scars reflect perfection’, The Ottawa
Citizen, 3 May 1983, p. 8.

134. Macleans Magazine, 11 April 1983, p. 33.

135. Lowenthal, p. 52.

136. ibid.

137. Beltrame, Julian, ‘Discord sounded over restoration of Gould piano’, The Ottawa
Citizen, 23 April 1983, p. 9.

138. ibid.

139. ibid.

140. Byrne, Richard, 0. and Weaver, Martin, E., ‘Piano scars reflect perfection’, The Ottawa
Citizen, 3 May 1983, p. 8.

141. ibid.

142. ibid.
 195

143. MacSween, Donald, letter to Esmond Butler, 1’1January 1983, records of the National
Capital Commission, Ottawa.

144. Lazerevich, p. 205.

145. Adaskin, Murray, ‘The Amati Quartet of Instruments’, unpublished notes, files of the
Department of Music, University of Saskatchewan.

146. Lazerevich, p. 205.

147. Purchase Agreement, records of the Department of‘Music, University of Saskatchewan.

148. Lazerevich, p. 205.

149. ‘Letter of Understanding Between the University of Saskatchewan and the University of
Victoria’, 27 November 1992, records of the Department of Music, University of
Saskatchewan.

150. Kolbinson, Stephen, letter to Murray Adaskin, 25 June 1958, records of the Department
of Music, University of Saskatchewan.

151. ibid.

152. Wurlitzer, Marianne, transcription of personal communication to author by telephone,

February 1998.

153. Lazerevich, p. 205.

154. Purchase Agreement, records of the Department of Music, University of Saskatchewan.

155. Kolbinson, Stephen, letter to Murray Adaskin, 25 June 1958, records of the Department
of Music, University of Saskatchewan, p. 2.

156. Wurlitzer, Rembert, letter to University of Saskatchewan, 17 June 1958, records of the
Department of Music, University of Saskatchewan.

157. ibid.

158. Lazerevich, p. 205.

159. Stanis, Sharon, letter to author, 10 December 1998.

160. Adaskin, Murray, letter to Simone Sacconi, 3 May 1966, records of the Department of
Music, University of Saskatchewan.

161. Wurlitzer, Marianne, transcript of personal communication to author by telephone,

February 1998.
 196

162. Adaskin, Murray, letter to Simcsne Sacconi, 5 February 1968, recordss of the
Department of Music, University of Saskatchewan.

163. Photograph without caption, records of the Department of Music, University of

Saskatchewan.

164. Adaskin, Murray, letter to Simone Sacconi, 5 February 1968, records of the Department
of Music, University of Saskatchewan.

165. ibid.

166. ibid.

167. Savart, Mimoire, 1819.

168. Heron-Allen, The Violin; and Hill, Stradivari.

169. Hepworth, p. 2.

170. In commenting upon treatment procedures of this genre of instruments, violin

connoisseur Charles Beare argues that the central characteristic of the industry was that of the
development of good taste in restoration. Replacement of the traditional pegs with geared
tuning heads would be considered in very poor taste (Beare, p. 9-1 1).

171. Lazerevich, p. 206.

172. Klose, Robert, Proposal for the Quartet of Amati hzstruments at the University of
Saskatchewan as presented by the Department of Music to the University Committee on the
Amati Instruments, internal document, records of the Department of Music, University of
Saskatchewan, p. 3.

173. ‘Letter of Understanding Between the University of Saskatchewan and the University of
Victoria’, 27 November 1992, records of the Department of Music, University of
Saskatchewan.

174. ibid. p. 3.

175. Stanis, Sharon, letter to author, 10 December 1998.

176. ibid.

177. Poole, Elissa, ‘Making Music with Strings Attached’, The Globe and Mail, 30
November 1996.

178. ibid.

179. Barclay, R.L., Recommendation for the University cgSaskatchewan Amati Quartet,
unpublished report (Ottawa: Canadian Conservation Institute, 1996)
 197

180. According to R. Kim Tipper, who did this work, this was at least the fourth neck that the
instrument had received (letter to author, 19 January 1999).

181. Assuming the same figure on average historically, it can be calculated that the 1607
viola had had 640,575 hours of playing.

182. Klose, Robert, Proposal for the Quartet of Amati Instruments at the University of
Saskatchewan as presented by the Department of Music to the University Committee on the
Amati Instruments, internal document, records of the Department of Music, University of
Saskatchewan, p. 7.

183. Rephann, Richard T., in Klose, p. 10.

184. ibid.

185. Sheldon, Robert, in Klose, p. 10.

186. Morel, RenC, letter to The Board of Governors of the University of Saskatchewan, 3 1
December 1996, records of the Department of Music, University of Saskatchewan, p. 2.

187. ibid., p. 1.

188. ibid.

189. Whelan, John M., ‘Crime to let Amatis sit silent and unused’, Saskatoon Post, 20
December 1996, p. A5.

190. ‘Letter of Understanding Between the University of Saskatchewan and the University of
Victoria’, 27 November 1992, records of the Department of Music, University of
Saskatchewan,

191. Whelan, John M., ‘Crime to let Amatis sit silent and unused’, Saskatoon Post, 20
December 1996.

192. Morel, RenC, letter to The Board of Governors of the University of Saskatchewan, 31
December 1996, records of the Department of Music, University of Saskatchewan, p. 2.

193. Poole, Elissa, ‘Making Music with Strings Attached’, The Globe and Mail, 30
November 1996.

194. Barclay, Recommendation, p. 6.

195. Poole, Elissa, ‘Makmg Music with Strings Attached’, The Globe and Mail, 30
November 1996.

196. Morel, RenC, letter to The Board of Governors of the University of Saskatchewan, 3 1
December 1996, records of the Department of Music, University of Saskatchewan, p. 1.
 198

197. Pinzauti, p. 133.

198. Karp, Per una carta, p. 284.

199. Klose, p. 10.

200. Poole, Elissa, ‘Making Music with Strings Attached’, The Globe and Mail, 30
November 1996.

201. Kolbinson, Stephen, letter to Murray Adaskin, 25 .June 1958, records of the Department
of Music, University of Saskatchewan,p. 2.

202. Gamson, Robert, transcript of personal communication to author by telephone, 28 May

1998, Statistics Canada, Government of Canada.
 199

CHAPTER NINE - CRITICAL ANALYSIS: RESTITUTION

This chapter focuses on three case studies in which values in the Restitution regimen come to

overlie and replace those of Currency. The case studies deal with a Steinway piano owned by

Glenn Gould, which is now preserved in the National Library of Canada in Ottawa, the Hart

House viols from the University of Toronto, and a fortepiano made by Johannes Zumpe, now

in Emmanuel College, Cambridge. The values of Restitution are seen in actions of restoration

and maintenance to establish and continue working condition, and in rationales based upon

the search for authentic experience and the belief in a definitive earlier state.

9.1 STEINWAY PIANO IN THE NATIONAL LIBRARY OF CANADA

9.1.1 Introduction

Canadian pianist Glenn Herbert Gould (1932- 1982) possessed several pianos which he used

for concerts, recordings and practice. Five instruments he owned are extant: a Chickering of

1895 in Toronto; a Yamaha grand in Roy Thompson Hall, Toronto; a Steinway grand in

Rideau Hall, the Governor General of Canada's residence in Ottawa; a Steinway grand in

Central United Church, Edmonton, Alberta; and the instrument under study here, a Steinway

8' 11" grand of 1943.' The instrument was completed by Steinway and Sons of New York on

2 March of that year and was given the serial number D317194.2It was purchased by the T.

Eaton Company of Toronto for their Concert and Artist Fleet on 2 March 1951. Eaton's gave

it the serial number CD 3 18, the 'CD' designation being applied to all the instruments of the
 200

Concert and Artist Fleet.3 The designation CD 3 18 will be used throughout this case study as

this is the number by which Glenn Gould knew it, and the way the instrument is now referred

to in the literature. The piano has been described as ‘the one that Gould loved besty4and he

himself says it is the instrument ‘to which I feel a greater devotion than to any other piano

CD 3 18 is the instrument upon which he played many concerts and

that I have enco~mtered’.~

also made most of his recordings.

I-

Figure 11. Steinway piano, CD 3 18, situated in the foyer of the National
Library of Canada.

While in the possession of the T. Eaton Company, from 1951 onwards, the piano was still

under a service contract to Steinway and Sons. It was leased from Eaton’s by many concert

players, and it was during the latter part of this period that Gould became acquainted with it.
 20 1

He began to make adjustments to it in 1960.6His growing attachment to the piano eventually

led to his purchase of it from Eaton’s in 1970.7

Gould was extremely particular about h s instruments and, having become familiar with their

idiosyncrasies, insisted upon using them wherever possible. CD 3 18 was frequently

transported to various recording and concert venues during its major period of use. During

shipment in 1971 it was dropped and severely damaged. Repairs were carried out in

Steinway’s workshops and although he used it for some years afterwards, Gould eventually

replaced the piano with a newly purchased Yamaha upon which he made his last recording,

J.S. Bach’s Goldberg Variations.’

After Glenn Gould’s death in 1982 his estate offered the piano for sale to the National

Library of Canada in Ottawa, with the stipulations that it remain in the condition in which

Gould used it, and that regular concerts be given on its9The National Library agreed to these

conditions and the piano was delivered on 29 November 1983. Its condition was monitored

and repairs made when necessary. Regular tuning was contracted out to an Ottawa tuner,

while Gould’s tuner in Toronto was consulted as the need arose.” The inaugural concert on

the piano was given by Canadian pianist Angela Hewitt in the foyer of the National Library

of Canada in the Autumn of 1986.

Three distinct periods in the history of Steinway piano CI>3 18 can be identified from the

above introductory material:

 202

- Use by Glenn Gould

- Accidental damage, and repair work by Steinway

- Purchase by the National Library of Canada in 1983.

The history of the instrument is documented in detail below, and activity within these periods

is analysed.

9.1.2 First Period: Use by Glenn Gould

History

From the time of its purchase in 1951 until 1970 the piano bearing the designation CD 318

was owned by the T. Eaton Company, and lent to a variety of unknown concert pianists as

part of their Concert and Artists Fleet." Records of these transactions were not retained by

the Eaton Company, so the use of the instrument and its various locations during this period

are unknown.'*

It was during this lease period that the Steinway piano became regarded by Glenn Gould as

something more than a run-of-the-mill instrument. By 1960 he had started to make radical

changes to its action. It is noteworthy that the tuner who worked for Eaton's during this

period thought it 'terribly worn out and Eaton's didn't want to repair it'.13 However, once

Glenn Gould had become familiar with it, he is said to have stated that he 'found it right for
 203

his own tastes [...I and was not much concerned with piano tone quality, more with how it

played’ . I 4 In an interview Gould described the features of CD 3 18 in the following way:

This piano has a very light action, as indeed all pianos that I prefer do. Many people
say it’s tinny and sounds like a harpsichord or a fake harpsichord or God knows what.
Maybe it does. I think it has the most translucent sound of any piano I ever ~1ayed.l~

The piano had been used for his recordings, broadcasts and performances from the early

1960s and was kept in working condition by Verne Edquist, a tuner based in Toronto.16

A diagram of the Steinway piano action, and a discussioii of Gould’s specifications appears

in Section 8.2.2. He had developed this radical adjustment of the action to suit his

unorthodox, straight-fingered playing style, and he was clearly attempting to recapture the

tactility of his first piano, the 1895 Chickering which was the standard for his judgement.”

However, it is also clear that the specifications he was trying to recapture were never well

defined in his own mind. Geoffiey Payzant, the author of a biography of Gould, says of his

search for perfection:

The Chickering may be Gould’s dream of perfection, but it is the nightmare of every
piano technician who has worked on a Steinway for him, trying to adjust the action to
what Gould at that moment remembers as the feel of the Chickering’s.**

Verne Edquist, the tuner whom Gould employed for many years, stated that ‘nothing precise

could really be said about the desired specification^'.'^

During its ownership by Eaton’s Gould had been given exclusive use of CD 3 18, and he was

able to make all the adjustments he required unopposed.:” As it was actually considered to be

‘terribly worn out’, Eaton’s had little reason not to accede to its use by him on a regular basis.

Gould eventually purchased the piano from Eaton’s on 24 October 1970. Edquist, the tuner,
 204

was apparently able to do things to the piano which even Steinway’s considered beyond the

capabilities of their staff. Payzant remarks that ‘one can imagine the tension at Steinway and

Sons, since Gould’s ideas of “immediacy and clarity” are unconventional, to say the least’.21

In a later letter to Steinway and Sons, Gould speaks of being ‘proud indeed to add [the piano]

to my “rare” instrument collection’.22

Analysis

Actions

At this stage of its life the piano is firmly rooted in the Currency regimen. Even though

‘terribly worn out’ it was considered valuable enough by Gould for intervention to be made

to keep it in working condition.23The fact that Gould was unable to articulate clearly what he

wanted of a piano’s action is further evidence that continuous maintenance of the mechanism

was not only necessary, but desirable.

Rationales

Unlike the other Steinway, which was regarded as Gould’s ‘working piano’, the sources

indicate that this instrument can already be regarded as singularized. Although at this stage it

is in continuous daily use, is regularly maintained, and is regarded by Gould and his tuner as

a utensil, this piano begins to accrue some attributes of an object in the ‘symbolic inventory

of a society’.24 Evidence of the cultural marking of the piano through its association with

Glenn Gould is seen in a contemporary interview, where reference is made to his unique
 205

requirements of the in~trument.~~

Thus, the elevation of the instrument due to its association

with hls genius reflects subjective values in the Currency regimen.

Context

Glenn Gould’s influence upon the pianistic interpretation of keyboard music, particularly

Bach’s keyboard works, has been discussed earlier (Section 8.2.3). At this stage, Steinway

piano CD 3 18 is an essential component in the creative and interpretive context of his music,

and its capacity for adaptation to the demands upon it place it securely in the social sphere

where there exists a ‘living past bound up with the The Steinway piano represents

a constantly renewable and functional resource. The work done upon the instrument was not

documented, and the only sources are secondary ones resulting from interviews with Gould.

Adjustments to the piano were made through experience arising from tradition, but much

adapted to suit individual requirements.

Dissonances

There is no evident conflict or dissonance in the approach to the treatment of CD 3 18. As a

worlung utensil, albeit already acquiring symbolic value, its treatment is clear and

unequivocal. Considerations of preservation or protection from intervention simply cannot be

entertained as it is in constant use. The tension at Steinway and Sons over Gould’s

unconventional ideas of ‘immediacy and clarity’ are indicative only of an internal conflict

over the technical approach to maintaining the instrument.27

 206

9.1.3 Second Period: Accidental Damage and Repair

History

After being damaged by dropping during shipment in 1971, CD 3 18 was returned to

Steinway and Sons for repair.28In a letter to the firm in New York, Gould reported the

following damages:

The plate is fractured in four critical places. The lid is split at the base end and there is
also considerable damage to it towards the treble end as well. The sounding board is
split at the treble end. Key slip pins are bent out of line.29

Repair work was carried out by Franz Mahr, the expert repairer at the Steinway workshops,

and on 14 February 1973 Gould was able to report that ‘for all intents and purposes CD 3 18

was saved fi-om the scrap heap’.30Gould spoke of the ‘miraculous rebirth of the in~trument’.~’

In the seven years from 1973, when the repaired piano was returned fiom Steinway’s, it was

still being used by Gould, but finally in 1980 ‘he at last abandoned it because even he had to

admit that it was beyond redempti~n’.~~

Glenn Gould’s change to a Yamaha instrument for his last recording indicates that the

Steinway was not working for him the way it had before, although it is not known whether

the accidental damage had contributed to his eventual disenchantment with it.33However, his

extreme pedantry regarding the set-up of his instruments, together with his notorious inability

or unwillingness exactly to describe what he was seeking, might have militated against

satisfaction with the repair work. As Geoffrey Payzant notes:

 207

Glenn Gould does not tell us what he is seeking from his endless, agitated tinkering
with his piano. Perhaps he does not know or, more likely, he does not want to look
into the matter for fear of centipedal [sic]con~eqiiences.~~

Whether there was a tangible difference in the instrument’s feel after repair and restoration is

not the issue; at issue is the synergistic way in which the player related to the instrument, and

the fkagility of this relationship. However, regardless of his own inability to continue using

CD 318, Glenn Gould did not consign it to ‘the scrap heap’, but retained it unused.

Analysis

Actions

The action of attempting a return to working condition after damages occurred is fdly

consistent with continuity through maintenance. The role of the workshop at the Steinway

premises was the repair of damages, and in view of the difference of opinion between their

technicians and Gould’s tuner, it is unlikely that any adjustment work was done upon the

action there.3’

Rationales

There is no evidence of any subjective component to the rationales for taking action upon the

piano, except that the work was put under the expertise of Franz Mahr, and so accorded with

Gould’s celebrity status. Once the repair was completed Gould, himself, referred to the piano

as one of ‘my “rare” instrument collection’, thus alluding to the subjective component in its

value to him (and, by extension, to society).36His decision not to dispose of CD 3 18 after he

 208

had exhausted its possibilities as a musical instrument also indicates an attachment beyond its

mere utility.

Context

At the commencement of this period the Steinway piano was being repaired after its accident

in order to return it to working condition, and it was therefore firmly ensconced in the

regimen of Currency. No impingement of other regimens is evident. However, Gould’s

affirmation of its ‘rare’ status hints at a growing wider context. In view of the stringent

specifications for the disposition of the instrument after his death (see Section 9.1.4,

following), it can be speculated that after its abandonment, but still during his lifetime, the

piano was already becoming culturally marked as an item of Gould memorabilia. Thus the

context of the musical utensil predisposed to continuity was moderated by a more

‘museological’ one of intrinsic and collectable value.

Dissonances

There is no evidence of dissonance in the treatment of the piano, or of inconsistency in the

approach to treatment. It is treated as a valued instrument in the regimen of Currency, and

later makes the transition unopposed to a state of treasured disuse.

 209

9.1.4 Third Period: Purchase by the National Library of Canada

History

After Glenn Gould’s death in 1982 his estate offered the Steinway instrument for sale only to

a purchaser who could meet certain very stringent conditions. These conditions bear very

strongly upon the way the instrument would be regarded in the future and are therefore

quoted here in full:

The Purchaser shall store and maintain the Piano in such manner as to preserve, in so
far as is reasonably possible, and for as long a time as is reasonably possible, the
unique qualities of the existing action and mechanism of the Piano and, in fbrtherance
of this objective, the Purchaser shall:
i) consult on at least one occasion within one year of the date hereof with a person
designated by the Vendors respecting the maintenance and tuning of the Piano;
ii) use its best efforts to encowage the use of the Piano for recital purposes at least
two (2) times and not more than six (6) times per year;
iii) endeavour to ensure that the Piano is used by a competent pianist for practice
purposes for approximately two (2) hours per week;
iv) except for purposes of facilitating recitals contemplated in subparagraph ii) above,
and for such other purposes as are contemplated in this Agreement, not remove the
Piano from its place from time to time of ordinary storage;
v) mark or accompany the Piano with a plaque or inscription approved in writing by
the Vendor, in the official languages of Canada, reciting that the Piano is one
formerly owned and used by the said Glenn Herbert Gould in his lifetime;
vi) take all reasonable steps to preserve the Piano for historical and research purposes,
which steps may include restricting or discontinuing the use of the Piano as
contemplated under subparagraphs ii) and iii) above, or other uses or public access
now contemplated under this Agreement.37

The National Library of Canada purchased the piano, with other material from Gould’s

estate, in 1983. No treatment work was carried out on CI> 318 at this time. Geoffrey Payzant

is in error when he states that the piano is being rebuilt at government expense so that ‘all

traces of the characteristics for which he loved it will be carefully removed’.38He is referring

to the other Steinway piano, referred to earlier, which is now located in Rideau Hall. In
 210

justifying its acquisition of the instrument, the National Library identified two areas of

critical importance:

Of particular concern was that the piano, because of its specially adapted action and
mechanism, be kept in active and playing order, to be available to researchers and
scholars studying the technique of Glenn Gould [and] the modifications made to the
action and mechanism of the piano make it a unique instrument, and thus of limited
value for widespread use.39

The National Library’s agreement to accede to the desire of the estate to keep the instrument

in the state and condition in which Gould played it, and to use it regularly for practice and

public concert, placed a heavy burden on their curatorship. It was necessary to justify to

players of the instrument, critics and the concert-going public why the piano was maintained

in this way.4oIn 1993, during a concert given by a visiting Hungarian pianist, a key failed to

function and this caused questions to be raised by media critics. Following is a transcript

from a radio interview between Suzanne King of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and

Timothy Maloney of the National Library:

Suzanne King: The Glenn Gould Steinway is loolking a little dowdy; chipped paint
and the like on the outside. And, given the incident last week, it could use a little
work inside.

Timothy Maloney then provided an explanation of why the instrument was kept in exactly

the condition it possessed when Gould was using it, and how this related to the vendors’

stipulations.

Suzanne King: So the Gould piano is really an artifact. But not entirely, because
another part of the agreement stipulates Gould’s piano must be used for
performances. So the National Library does its best, having it tuned and checked
before every performance. But, after all, the poor dear is aging (it’s nearly 50), and
with age comes a few wrinkles.41

Repairs, adjustments and tuning were the necessary support functions carried out on the

piano after its acquisition. In 1983 the CCI was requested to examine the instrument, advise
 21 1

on its condition and the suitability of the proposed disp1a.y environment, and also to

undertake minor repairs. A thennohygrograph record was made of the space in which it was

proposed to display the piano, in order to assess the level of potentially harmful fluctuations

of relative humidity and temperat~~re.~~

Further work was undertaken in 1992 to repair the

cover which had split as a result of poor support.43Tuning was carried out by H. Hoglund, an

Ottawa tuner acquainted with the history of the instrument and with Glenn Gould’s

requirements.44

Controversy over the condition of the piano arose in late 1996 when a visiting scholar found

the instrument’s action changed from the specifications associated with Gould’s use. The key

down-weight (touch weight) appeared to be in excess of 55 g m s , and the hammers had been

replaced with newer ones, heavier than the originals installed when the instrument was new.45

Other work, of a less contentious nature, included rebushing of keys, repair of elongated

balance rail holes, cleaning and lubrication of spring slots, lubrication of knuckles and

support cushions, and repinning of hammer flanges.46A reply to this critique from the

custodians included a response fi-om the technician who did the work. He stated that the

original hammer felts were worn through in places and ‘have been replaced with a new set,

purchased from Steinway & Sons, which do indeed weight [sic]more than their

A down-weight figure of between 58 g m s (in the bass) and 54 gms (in the
co~ktterparts’.~~

treble) was provided, with the assertion that ‘these figures fall within the parameters set by

the manufacturer, and given all the variables of older acfion parts that can affect their values,

they are remarkably accurate’.48A touch weight of 47 g m s is recommended in the Steinway

Service Manual.49The technician concludes by remarking that:

 212

The shallow ‘touch’ characteristics of CD 3 18 have been maintained [...I even though
such specifications are far from amenable to many professional pianists. On the other
hand, we should not lose sight that Glenn Gould .-- as a profound and in some respects
representative thinker of the late twentieth century -- was far more interested in the
creative act and its ability to reflect a dynamic and process-oriented conception of
reality. To that end, any blind adherence to what are in fact flexible technical
parameters is surely contrary to his spirit.50

The above brief record of treatment and rationale was composed as a reply to criticism.

Previous work on the instrument is not documented.

Analysis

Actions

In the stipulations of the vendors of Glenn Gould’s estate, and in the attempts by the National

Library of Canada to adhere to them, there is a structured attempt at recapturing and

maintaining the state in which the piano was used. The attempt to preserve ‘in so far as is

reasonably possible, and for as long a time as is reasonably possible, the unique qualities of

the existing action and mechanism of the Piano’ indicates the values of Restitution.” Craft

intervention is recognized as necessary in restoring the instrument’s playing state, and

maintaining that state.

As the tenure of the National Library continued, a shifting of standards is evident. The

critique of 1996 noted a heavier down-weight than that apparently specified by Gould

(approximately nine grams heavier than Steinway’s specification) and new hammers of a

heavier type.52The shallow key draught typical of Gould’s tenure was maintained, although it

was argued that such a set-up was ‘far fi-om amenable to many professional pianists’.53These
7

213

alterations indicate a drift away from Restitution, and towards Currency. Although other

servicing, such as rebushing, lubrication and cleaning, were also performed, none of these

had an impact upon the specific disposition of the instrument.

Rationales

An element of positivistic thinking (as discussed in Section 5.3.2) is encountered in the belief
that the previous state, i.e. the one in which the instrument was maintained in Gould’s

lifetime, was capable of capture. In amplifying the impoi-tance of the piano’s working state,

the vendors stipulate that the purchaser must ‘consult on at least one occasion within one year

[...I with a person designated by the Vendors respecting the maintenance and tuning of the

Thus, a sense of continuity in the care and upkeep of the instrument would be

maintained.

At the beginning of the National Library’s custodianship the search for authentic experience

is uppermost. The Library’s rationale, adopted from the vendors’ specifications, for

maintaining this specific mechanical state was so that the piano would ‘be available to

researchers and scholars studying the technique of Glenn G o ~ l d ’This

. ~ ~ follows the vendors’

statement that the piano must be preserved ‘for historical and research purposes’.56The initial

motivation was clearly that of playing the instrument so as to ‘step into a dimension of the

cultural landscape fiom which the music originated’, as John Watson described it.57 This is

an evocation of antiquity in Lowenthal’s ‘rooting [of] credentials in the past’.58The research

element also indicates a strong additional didactic purpose.

 214

The vendors’ stipulation that the piano be used for recital purposes reflects simply the desire

to publicise its associations, but the ftrther stipulation that it be ‘used by a competent pianist

for practice purposes for approximately two (2) hours per week’ suggests the subjective

values of Currency.59This is an expression of the concept that the instrument must be used

regularly in order to maintain its playing condition. The stipulation (never carried out) that a

descriptive label be applied to the instrument, recalls the insecurity alluded to in Section

8.2.4, where the label on the other Steinway piano was intended to provide a tangible

signifier in the absence of other, original features.60

Context

Once Steinway piano CD 3 18 was purchased by the Natnonal Library of Canada in 1983, its

context expanded immediately, and increased in complexity. The instrument was now

situated in an institution with policies for the conservation of its holdings, and under the care

of personnel dedicated to preservation61Nevertheless, because it was specified that the

instrument must be used, elements of its earlier context as a musical utensil were carried with

it. Thus, the milieu in which Gould worked -- ‘His insistence that the performer’s role is

properly creative, rather than recreative’ -- existed alongside the museological context

encompassed by preservation of status quo.62In addition, the museological context itself was

divided between the conservative sentiments expressed by Karp and and of

Recommendationsfor Regulating the Access to Musical Instruments in Public Collections,

which recognize that historic musical instruments can be maintained in working ~ o n d i t i o n . ~ ~

Elements of the regimens of Currency, Restitution and Preservation co-exist in the expanded

context of the Steinway piano.

 215

Dissonances

Dissonances arise in the concept of maintaining CD 3 18 in working condition, and especially

in the state in which Glenn Gould used it. The direction specified by the vendors, and

followed by the National Library, is fraught with conceptual difficulties. The first difficulty

arises in attempting to define the specifications that are taken to characterize Gould’s

requirements. As Payzant remarked, perhaps Gould did not know, or was reluctant to

explore, what he hoped to achieve fiom his ‘endless, agitated tinkering with his

From the practical point of view of one who had to carry out Gould’s wishes, Verne Edquist,

the Toronto piano tuner, stated that ‘nothing precise could really be said about the desired

specifications’.66Any attempt to capture the set-up of Gould’s piano could therefore be only

an approximation based upon the experience and memory of the original technician. In

addition, as the specifications were endlessly varied during Gould’s long ownership, the

specific period in the development of his relationship with the instrument which is

represented in the current set-up is impossible to define. Gould was, as the Ottawa tuner

remarked, ‘far more interested in the creative act and its ability to reflect a dynamic and

process-oriented conception of reality’.67

A second conceptual difficulty arises from the history of the instrument itself. After its repair

by Steinway and Sons in 1973, Gould used the instrument for seven years before abandoning

it ‘because even he had to admit that it was beyond For his last recordings he

used a Yamaha instrument. The Steinway was clearly out of favour with Glenn Gould some

time before his death, and was apparently saved by him for sentimental rather than musical
 216

reasons. Thus, if it was, indeed, beyond redemption, its validity as a signifier of its owner’s

pianistic technique is open to question.

A dissonance arises within the vendors’ stipulations when they opt for preserving the unique

qualities of the piano through the continuation of playing status. The impact of continued

playing status upon these ‘unique qualities’, and the effect that the specified service visits

would have, is not taken into account. For example, the work done in 1996 included

rebushing of keys, repair of elongated balance rail holes, cleaning and lubrication of spring

slots, lubrication of knuckles and support cushions, and repinning of hammer flanges, in

addition to the work on the hammers, the felts of which were worn This attitude by

the vendors and new owners is in line with the thinking described in Section 2.3, where the

effects of craft intervention are ignored, and physical ch‘mges are not considered as having an

impact upon musical results. However, the stipulation that ‘for research and preservation

purposes it might become necessary to restrict or disconlinue the instrument’s use’ indicates

a tacit acceptance of the effects of continuing maintenance:’ although the point at which the

instrument’s use is suspended would occur after its value as a research tool had already been

compromised.

The effect of such equivocal thinking is reflected in the perception of an outsider, the CBC

reporter Suzanne Gng: ‘So the Gould piano is really an artifa~t.~’

But not entirely, because

another part of the agreement stipulates Gould’s piano must be used for performance^.'^' The

Steinway piano is neither solely a collected artefact, nor a working utensil, but is expected to

fulfil the roles of both. The delicate conceptual balance between keeping the instrument
 217

working, and in the condition and state in which it was used by Gould, is emphasised by the

negative publicity surrounding a small lapse in performance, and the reaction to the

instrument’s exterior condition.73

The lack of documentation of treatment is inconsistent with the instrument’s status within an

institution that possesses a conservation policy, and where the Preservation regimen should

prevail. However, the piano’s acquisition by the Library, an institution that concentrated on

written and printed material, was anomalous, and at the time of acquisition recommendations

on documentation policies for working historic instruments were only just beginning to be

. ~ ~absence of written descriptions of action at this period is characteristic of

f o r m ~ l a t e dThe

Currency, where sources are limited to peripheral documents such as bills of sale.

In the later phase of treatment in 1996, inconsistency arises in the espousal of the values of

both Restitution and Currency. The intention to preserve the instrument in the state in which

Glenn Gould used it is solidly situated in the regimen of Restitution, but this is countered by

the statement that ‘any blind adherence to what are in fact flexible technical parameters is

surely contrary to his spirit’.75The use of new, heavier hammers, rather than the re-felting of

the lighter originals, speaks of the values of Currency, where the continued maintenance of

the instrument through substitution of components is routine.

 218
9.1.5 Synopsis of the Three Periods

While in use by Glenn Gould, Steinway piano CD 3 18 was treated as a working instrument,

but was valued by Gould for its unique characteristics. The instrument was not an anonymous

utensil, but was the subject of some public interest, and thus had become singularized. It was

kept continuously in working condition and was regularly serviced. The thrust of this work

was exclusively towards continuity.

After the accidental damage, and repair work by Steinway, the piano continued to be played

by Gould, until he ceased to use it in 1980. As before, it continued to be maintained as an

instrument securely in the regimen of Currency, yet it was clearly treasured, and culturally

marked.

Purchase by the National Library of Canada in 1983 changed the piano’s status initially from

Currency to Restitution. The intention to preserve the instrument in the state in which Gould

used it showed a positivistic rationale, and the purpose was clearly to use the instrument for

the exploration of his pianistic style. This regimen later became weakened by incursions from

Currency, as the specific method of continued maintenance and repair eroded the ‘authentic’

aspects of the endeavour.

 219

9.2 THE HART HOUSE VIOLS

9.2.1 Introduction

Figure 12. The Hart House viols displayed in front of the oaken
dowry chest in which they are stored.

This set of six viols in a wooden chest comprises twopardessus’, two trebles, an alto tuned

as a tenor, and a bass. They are presently the property of Hart House, University of Toronto.

Hart House was established early in the present century as a recreational facility for students

of the University of Toronto under a bequest from the Massey Foundation. It was named after
 220

Hart Massey, an alumnus of the University. The instruments are considered here as an
ensemble because they have followed the same path from their earliest records to the present.

A lack of specific documentation means that little can be said of the original use of the viols,

beyond the obvious statement that they performed as hctioning musical instruments while

the music written for them was still in vogue. All must have experienced low points in their

careers during the 19th century when viol music was out of fashion and its revival was still in

the future.

The viols came together as a set in the 192Os, at which time they were placed in a specially

fitted-out wooden chest, made of brown oak (quercus sp.). The chest has the carved

inscription ‘Margret Platts 1673’ and, as it pre-dates all the instruments, its original function

was probably as a dowry chest.76The lid is not original. ‘Theearliest mention of the viols is in

an appraisal done by Auguste Delivet in 1925 or 1926 for Dolmetsch of H a ~ l e m e r eThis

.~~

appraisal misidentifies four of the six and is very sparse on details. Later appraisals by

Monical, Pronger, and Remenyi agree more closely.7*

The viols were inspected by Edmund H. Fellowes of St. George’s Chapel, Windsor Castle,

on 4 March 1929 in the presence of the Warden of Hart House, University of Toronto. The

chest of viols was ‘in Vancouver and was in danger of finding its way to the United States’.79

It was at this point that the Massey Foundation and Vincent Massey together purchased

shares in the instruments and requested that Hart House be their custodian. Once in the

possession of Hart House the viols were used during the summer months by the Conservatory
 221

of Music Quartet. Sir Ernest MacMilIan was then Chairman of the Hart House Music

Committee.” In 1932 the Massey Foundation sold its share of the instruments to the Arts and

Letters Club of the University, while Vincent Massey sold his share to Hart House.

Disagreements between the A r t s and Letters Club and the Hart House Music Committee over

insurance payments for the viols resulted in the purchase in 1935 of the remaining shares by

Hart House through an anonymous donation.81The viols were regularly played since their

acquisition in 1929, and regulations for their use were drawn up by the Music Committee in

1937.82Use of the viols reached a peak in the 1970s when Peggy Samson, a noted Toronto

viol player and ‘Canada’s senior g a m b i ~ t ’organized

,~~ a sextet to give regular concerts. In

view of continuing wear and tear, a maintenance protocol for the viols was for~nulated.~~

The last regular use of the viols in concert was in 1977. Nevertheless, efforts continued after

this to allot money to maintain the instruments in playing conditiong5and to encourage

players to use them.86In 1982 discussions on the disposal of the viols took place, resulting in

an approach to the Ontario Heritage Foundation Instrument Bank.87An offer from a private

source to purchase the viols or to exchange them for a Bosendorfer grand piano was received

An approach was made to the Canada Council Instrument

in 1982,88but this was reje~ted.~’

Bank in 1987, and was initially received with ‘keen interest’.’’ However, after continued

negotiation this initial enthusiasm was reversed in early 1992, and plans for the transfer of the

viols failed to mature.

In September of 1992 members of CIMCIM, a committee of ICOM, examined the

instruments, and this W h e r exposure resulted in a request to the CCI for examination and
 222

In February of 1993 the CCI produced a report outlining three possible

cons~ltation.~'

scenarios: the present storage in the chest in the Warden's Office, use of the viols in concert,

or display in Hart House.92Some efforts were made during 1993 by Hart House to locate a

museum willing to house the viols under suitable conditions but nothing came of these

enquiries.93

From the above introduction, three distinctly documented periods in the history of the Hart

House viols can be identified:

- Assembly of the six instruments in the chest c. 1925

- Use between 1929 and 1977

- Period of indecision

These periods are documented in detail below, and activity within them is analysed.

9.2.2 First Period: Assembly of the Chest of Viols

History

The assembly of this set of six instruments as a chest of viols at some time around 1925 or

1926 represents a marked transformation in their meaning. The act of bringing them together

as an entity makes two very clear statements: firstly, that the instruments are now valued for

their collective identity (as a chest of viols), and secondly that they are now one coherent unit
 223

which is intended to represent a past practice. Because the instruments were acquired from

diverse sources, and have varied provenances both historically and geographically, in order to

create the coherent entity of a chest of viols it was necessary to ‘normalize’ individual

members of the set. Although no written sources exist from this period of their history,

examination reveals that treatment of four of the instruments took place at the time they were

assembled as a set and installed in the chest.94The label of G. Saint-George appears inside

two of the viols, the Bertrandpardessus and the anonymous English alto, indicating that he

was the craftsman responsible for the present state of these two instruments of the set. The

anonymous English alto appears to have been made originally as a five-string instrument, and

then later converted to six strings and tuned down as a tenor, to fill as best as possible the

tenor gap in the set.95The treble attributed to Bergonzzi and the bass attributed to Tielke also

bear signs of extensive repair and alteration. Only the Giiersanpardessus and the anonymous

Flemish treble are in an essentially original state.96Questions have been raised concerning the

authenticity of the Flemish treble; its unusual construction and immaculate condition have

been cited as evidence for a 19th century origin as a conscious imitation of an earlier type.97

All instruments bear the number 1231 stamped beside their tail pegs.

Analysis

Actions

The values of Restitution prevail at this period in the instruments’ history; the treatments

apparently carried out by G. Saint-George in ‘normalizing’ two viols of the set, and the

indications of repairs carried out on the other instruments at the same time, indicate the intent
 224

'to represent a known earlier state'.98The possibility of the Flemish treble being a 19th-

century reproduction adds weight to the concept of recreating an earlier state by craft

intervention, in this case by supplementing a lacking original with a reproduction. The

probable conversion at this time of the five-string alto viol into a six-string tenor, in ord.er to

fill the gap in the 'chest', indicates the extent to which the concept of the set was allowed to

over-ride the integrity of individual instruments. The completeness and detail of the

instruments' restoration as a 'chest of viols' is signified by their enclosure in a genuine 17th

century oak chest, adapted for the purpose. All this evidence of an attempt to capture an

earlier state indicates solid adherence to the values of Restitution.

Rationales

The rationale for assembling these viols as a set, and of using them in performance, is seen in

the attempt to reconstitute a past ambience. This is evidence of the search for authentic

experience, as encountered in Lowenthal's slightly narrower definition of antiquity -- the

intention 'to root credentials in the past'.99The viols are used as the medium in an historical

transaction.

Context

Assembly of the instruments in the chest as a set coincides with the activities of Arnold

Dolmetsch, whom Donington cites as being one of the founders of the early music revival."'

The historical viol literature was given great attention by Dolmetsch and his followers

through the opening years of the 20th century, and eventually became formalized in the

Haslemere Festival, inaugurated in 1 924"', and the Dolmetsch Foundation of 1929'02. An

 225

equally influential publication, Canon Francis Galpin's OZd English Instruments of Music,

had appeared in 1910. The viols themselves had passed through Arnold Dolmetsch's hands

around the year 1925.'03At this period, museum conservation was just emerging in the works

of such museum personnel as and Plenderleith,"' and its influence upon musical

practices was negligible.

Dissonances

There is no evidence of inconsistency in the approach to the treatment of the viols during the

time they were brought together as a set. The work done upon them is consistent with the

approaches to restoration of the period. Historic instruments were used because, as Marco

Pallis remarks, modern reproductions were not available in sufficient quantities to satisfy

demand.lo6

9.2.3 Use Between 1929 and 1977

History

There are few sources from the earlier part of this period concerning either the preservation

or the conditions of use of the viols, except the statement in the Hart House records that the

Conservatory of Music Quartet used the instruments under the Chairmanship of Sir Ernest

There is no extant documentary evidence to suggest that the viols were

Ma~Mi1lan.l'~

regarded in any other way than as fbnctioning musical instruments. Their maintenance can be
 226

assumed to be the same as that afforded newly-made instruments used under similar

circumstances.

A transfer agreement between the Massey Foundation and Hart House, drawn up in 1932,

empowers the latter ‘to permit and so far as they may be able to direct the use of the said

viols [...I to stimulate and encourage the appreciation of music in Hart House or

elsewhere’.’’* The two following sub-clauses in this same agreement deal with the

eventualities surrounding sale or other disposal, while clause 2 places trusteeship with the

Warden of Hart House. Thus, the use of the viols is assured, as is their potential as a

realisable asset, but directions to their care and preservaiion as an entity different in essence

fi-om other usable artifacts are not evident.

After transfer of title to the chest of viols to Hart House in 1932 the instruments entered a

regulated phase, and their combined functionality and museum-piece status begin to be

represented in sources. Regulations controlling use of the viols written by the Music

Committee in 1937, state that:

The instruments are museum pieces and should be treated as such: at the same time
they are not merely objets d’art and they should be available for use under certain
condition^.'^^
The regulations control the use of the instruments, and lay down the conditions under which

they will be made available, but do not go into any detail on care and maintenance. Although

accorded the status of art objects, it is evident that while viol music remained popular enough

to keep this set regularly in use, their status as functioning musical instruments was

uppermost. This essential hctionality is visible in an inventory of a shallow removable tray

 227

within the chest which contained inter alia a bass viol fingerboard, spare bridges, nuts and

tailpieces, miscellaneous pieces of wood, clamps, planes, a chisel, a file, and a hammer."'

In 1974 a maintenance protocol for the viols was written.' " The thrust of t h s document is

towards preventive conservation in the context of use, and guidelines are provided for

maintenance of stable relative humidity (RH) within certain set limits. The author points out

that sudden fluctuations of RH are more damaging than slower seasonal changes, and

provides advice for countering the former. The document describes daily care, including light

cleaning and inspection, and professional care, where at least once a year fuller treatment,

including polishing, retouching, tightening of pegs and soundpost should be undertaken. This

is the first occurrence in the records of a detailed protocol of care and maintenance for the

instruments. In 1975 dimensions were taken by D. Warnock of Princeton, Massachusetts, for

the preparation of a set of drawings of the instruments. No copies of the finished drawings

were ever made available to Hart House.' '*

Analysis

Actions

The need expressed in the transfer document 'to stimulate and encourage the appreciation of

music' underlines the prime function of the instru~nents."~

Presence of tools within the chest

is evidence of an on-going programme of maintenance, while the spare parts in the same

place, particularly the fingerboard, indicate a propensity for substitution of components of the

instruments.
 228

The regulations written after transfer of title to Hart House provide only conditions for loan,

and it is not until 1974 that specific directions on care appear. Even at this time, the emphasis

is still upon maintaining working condition. Polishing, retouching and tightening of pegs are

all maintenance actions taken as a result of routine attrition due to playing.

Rationales

By 1937 a source states explicitly that the instruments are to be regarded as museum pieces

and objets d'art; it is stated that they should be treated as such, but still with the proviso that

they be available for use.114The appreciation of their museum status and their continuing

hnction as representative documents of historical practice are reflections of authenticity, and

place rationales securely in the Restitution regimen. The intent to prepare technical drawings

indicates a didactic interest in the materials of fabrication and instrument-makingtechnology,

but the absence of a finished product leaves t h s impetus stillborn.

Context

During the period of active use between the acquisition of the viols in 1929 and the cessation

of regular playing in 1977, the context of the care and preservation of historic material

changed profoundly, but the application of conservative measures to musical instruments

appears only sparingly at the close of the period. At the beginning of the period, the ethos

was dominated by explicit function. Museum conservation was in its infancy, and was not to

have an influence upon historic musical instruments until the 1970s, as signified by such

publications as those of Karp and Barnes in 1979 and 1980 re~pectively."~

Practice in

historic musical instrument use for the latter part of this period is more accurately expressed
 229

by the statement in 1967 that 'restoration of a deteriorated instrument is

together with the remarks from the Day of Studies at Cremona concerning 'the ever-

increasing necessity of restoring old instrument^'."^ The 1971 colloquium in Antwerp, where

caution in the treatment of historic instruments is discussed, is peripheral and addressed

solely to the museum community.118

It is important to note that because Hart House is not

administered as a museum, access to this material and the regimen that it reflects, is not a

foregone conclusion.

Dissonances

The concept that the viols are considered as both objets cl'art in a museum context and

working musical instruments would suggest an equivocal position in present-day terms.

However, in 1937 such sentiments reflected orthodox opinion, and the expression of the

instruments through playing was perfectly consistent with their museum status. Nevertheless,

continuing craft attention to ensure good playing condition implies the kind of on-going

intervention alluded to in the maintenance document of 1974."' The difference between

actions taken to return instruments to a previous state, and those aimed at maintenance of

them in that state, becomes blurred. Restitution is clearly expressed in 'the ever-increasing

necessity of restoring old instruments','2obut their continued maintenance, with the necessary

removal and replacement of worn parts, has more in common with Currency. Return to a

previous state for the purposes of playing music implies continued maintenance in that state,

and thus counsels upon the desirability of restoration are also counsels on the desirability of

continued use. Playing maintenance becomes a process of minor restoration endlessly

repeated. Restitution blends into Currency.

 230

9.2.4 Third Period: A Period of Indecision

History

After 1977 the viols were not used regularly. This is accounted for by three interconnected

factors: the decreasing popularity of viol music in Toronto at that time, a lack of competent

and willing players, and the deteriorating condition of the instruments.'2' A plea was made by

viola-da-gamba player Peggy Samson, who had been the most recent force behind regular

playing of the viols until her retirement in 1977, that a plan for maintenance be established

and monies set aside for the instruments. She stated that 'the lead-lined [sic]case [...I is ideal

for preserving their wooden health' but that repairs and maintenance would be necessary.'22

In 1979 a maintenance budget of $250.00 per annum was established by the Music

Committee, although it was apparently never drawn upon.'23

The viols remained undisturbed in their chest in the Hart House Warden's office until early

1982 when sale of the instruments to the Government of Ontario was discussed by the

This stimulated fbrther response fiom Peggy Samson: 'I have written this letter
Uni~ersity.'~~

because I am Canada's senior gambist & am seriously concerned to contemplate an act so

likely to look sad in future years."25In response, the Warden wondered 'whether Hart House

is in a position to exercise adequate stewardship [...I Would the viols be more generally

accessible if they, for instance, were part of the provincial instrument bank rather than stored

in my office?'.'26Suggestions for workshops and concerts focusing on the instruments were

proposed,'27and exchange for a Bosendorfer grand piano was suggested. Regarding the latter,
 23 1

the Warden was adamant that Hart House would not engage in what were perceived to be

clandestine activities.128

An approach was made in 1987 to the Canada Council Instrument Bank which showed keen

interest in acquiring the viols. Publicity material states that 'the Instrument Bank intends to

acquire quality instruments and to lend them to outstanding Canadian musician~'.'~~

Negotiations resulted in the production of a set of guidelines for the tran~fer.'~'

Maintenance

of the instruments is detailed specifically:

1. Ownership:
Hart House to retain title, in the first instance (See #6 below).
2. Maintenance:
The Canada Council to assume all costs of maintenance and administration. A
firm of craftsmen acceptable to the Music, Committee will perform
maintenance.
3. Storage:
Instruments are to be stored, whle not on loan to musicians, in an
environmentally suitable location.
4.Policy Governing Loans to Musicians:
Only Canadian Citizens or Landed Immigrants to be eligible. Prime
consideration to be given to musicians whose principal professed activity is,
or is expected to be, public performance. 'The duration of loans are to be no
more than five years, with renewal at the option of the Canada Council.
5. Attribution:
Hart House to be acknowledged on concert programmes.
6.Review:
A review of this arrangement (#1 to #5) to be undertaken after an initial period
of five years, in which consideration would be given to the transferral of
ownership to the Canada Council.

This offer was eventually rejected by the Canada Council, and the Warden of Hart House was

informed that the Council had 'no interest in pursuing the matter'.13' The viols remained in

storage in their chest in the Warden's office.

 232

In September of 1992 a request to examine the viols by members of CIMCIM was made to

the Hart House Music Committee. This visit coincided with the ICOM Triennial Conference

in Qukbec City and was attended by eminent organologists and museum curators from

significant collections ~ o r l d w i d e .This,

' ~ ~ in turn,spurred further interest in the future

disposition of the instruments, and a report on their condition and suggestions for their future

was requested of the CCI.'33The report, submitted in February 1993, outlined three possible

recourses: the present storage in the chest in the Warden's Office, where ideal conservation

conditions obtained at the price of anonymity; use of the viols in concert, which would allow

their public expression at the expense of their safety; or display in Hart House, which would

give them public exposure as visual objects, but not compromise their condition. Further

efforts were made during 1993 by Hart House to locate a museum willing to house the viols

under suitable conditions. Nothing came of these enquiries and the viols remained passively

conserved in ~ t 0 r a g e . l ~ ~

Analysis

Actions

The focus throughout most of this period remains directly upon playability, even though the

viols were not in continuous use. It was apparent in 1977 that the deteriorating condition of

the viols would prevent their further use, even had there been both a demand for concerts,

and players for the instruments. Although their 'wooden health' was assured while in storage,

provisions for their continuing use were considered necessary, and a budget was set aside for

the purpose.
 233

Negotiations with the instrument banks of both the Provincial and Federal governments were

intended to ensure that the instruments would be lent to practising musicians.’35On-going

maintenance would be essential. The guidelines concerning transferral of the viols to the

Canada Council state that ‘a firm of craftsmen acceptable to the Music Committee will

perform maintenance’.’36Thus, there is an emphasis on maintenance for the purposes of

continued playing.

It was only after the visit by the delegates of CIMCIM in 1992 that museum considerations

were entertained. Of the three suggested courses of action provided in the report of 1993, two

argued for preservation, and one supported the continuing state of Restitution, with the

understanding that this would compromise the safety of the instruments.

Rationales

This last period of the case study is significant for its lack of the subjective elements that

characterise the rationales of Restitution. Discussion is dominated by the transactions

considered necessary to ensure continued playing. The suggestions for workshops and

concerts with the instruments, and the offers of them to both the Provincial and Federal

government instrument banks, emphasise unidirectional thinking along the lines of function.

There is no documented evidence that the viols were ever considered a resource in

museological terms, and that their value might reside in non-playing status. Storage in the

Warden’s office was considered simply to be inadequate stewardship, rather than measured

preservation.137
 234

Context

During the period of benign preservation while in storage the context of the viols changed

very little from that which obtained during their active status before 1977. In 1983 museum

guidelines were published internationally recognizing that playing of historic instruments

was a continuing practice.138It was argued that those instruments already restored to playing

condition had already been compromised, and could thus continue to be maintained under

strictly controlled

As stated earlier, the fact that Hart House is not a museum suggests that the values associated

with the regimen of Preservation would not impinge upon the values adhered to, and the

protocols followed. The report of 1993 was arguably the first introduction of alternate

regimens to the custodians of the viols. The possibility of preservation in their present state

was presented, together with display or continued use, should the demand arise. The lack of

action on the recommendations of this report is indicative of the continued equivocal status

of the instruments; further use would require enthusiasm from the music community, display

would require infrastructure, on-going care and financial resources, while storage as an

increasingly valuable asset would require no further action.

Dissonances

The concept voiced in 1937 that the viols were considered both as museum pieces and as

working musical instruments, becomes more dissonant in this last period. A burgeoning

industry in reproduction musical instruments negates the necessity of using originals, while
 235

strictures intending to limit and control the playing of historic instruments in the museum

context continue to be published.

The ‘Guidelines Concerning Transferral to Canada Council’ recognize that continued

maintenance will be necessary if the viols are to be kept in playing condition. Under a

regimen of continued use and craft intervention, Restitution continues to show a tendency to

lapse into Currency.

9.2.5 Synopsis of the Three Periods

In the first period, the assembly of the Hart House viols as a ‘chest’ in the mid-1920s was

clearly an act of restoration; establishing the instruments within a conjectured previous state,

and keeping them in playing condition, was done in order to ‘root credentials in the past’ .I4’

Playing state continued in the following period with consciousness of the museum status of

the viols being raised. Some dissonance is noted in the potential for the values of Restitution

to be confused with those of Currency.

During the period of indecision over the disposition of the viols, their playing status

continued to be emphasised. Planned transfer to the musical instrument banks of the Province

of Ontario or the Canada Council would have projected the viols into an environment where

the values of Currency prevailed. There is no evidence that their passive preservation in

storage was ever regarded as desirable.

 236

9.3 JOHANNES ZUMPE FORTEPIANO

. - _- i
r

Figure 13. The Johannes Zumpe fortepiano after restoration in

1988.

9.3.1 Introduction

This instrument was built in London in 1766 by Johannes Z ~ m p ewho

' ~ ~had emigrated fkom

Hanover and had worked under Burkat Schudi. In 1761 he set up his workshop in Princess

Street, Hanover Square.'42It has been suggested that this instrument is the earliest extant

English square piano.*43A second example of 1766 was sold by Christie's of London on 12

June 1979,'44and is now in the collection of Colonial Willamsburg in Virginia. '45 Other

examples of Zumpe fortepianos from around this period are instruments of 1767 in the

Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York, and in the Victoria and Albert Museum. There

are two instruments from the year 1768, one in the Royal Ontario and the other

in the Russell Collection, Edinburgh. The Russell Collection also has one of 1769.147
 237

E.W. Naylor, the owner of the instrument in 1924, states that it was in the possession of the

Bean family of Scarborough since at least 1790.148As Bean Gardens, the family holding, was

only established around 1790, it has been suggested that the instrument might have been

purchased second hand.149No documentation of the instrument itself is forthcoming until the

appearance in 1919 of a letter in The Times in whch H. Martin describes the instrument.150

In 1949 negotiations were under way for the sale of the ibrtepiano to Rosamund Harding, a

collector, but a price could not be agreed upon and the instrument remained with the Naylor

fa mil^.'^' The fortepiano was transported to Victoria, British Columbia by Bernard Naylor in
the 1960s and remained there until the 1980s. In 1984 Bernard Naylor approached Derek

Brewer, the Master of Emmanuel College, with a view to bequeathing the instrument to the

College. It was initially suggested that the instrument reside in the Music School of the

University, rather than the College Library, in view of the better facilities in the former for

di~play.'~'
Naylor argued that the ambience of the Library was more conducive to the

instrument's historic status. Agreement was reached on this issue and the fortepiano was

received by Emmanuel College in January 1985.

The instrument was examined in February 1985 and a report on its condition prepared.'53The

report strongly recommended restoration of the piano to playing condition. This was agreed

upon by the College authorities, and restoration was undertaken by the author of the

condition report between April 1986 and April 1988.'54In April 1988 a concert was given on

the piano, the instrument being maintained in playing condition for a short period
 238

thereafter.’” The appearance of a crack in the new soundboard installed during the restoration

necessitated more treatment in 1993.lS6 After further repairs the instrument was not returned

to Emmanuel College but placed in storage in a building of the Music Faculty, although some

parts of the instrument, removed during restoration, were retained in the Prints Room of the

former location.

Three periods of treatment of the Zumpe fortepiano can be identified fiom the foregoing:

- Possession by the Bean and Naylor families

- Acquisition by Emmanuel College and Restoration

- Supplementary Restoration

These periods are documented in detail below, and activity within them is analysed.

9.3.2 First Period: Possession by the Bean and Naylor Families

History

In a letter to The Morning Post of 1924, E.W. Naylor idcntified the Zumpe fortepiano as

being a family possession for a considerable time, having been ‘bought when new by my

maternal ancestor, the horticulturalist Bean, who kept a garden with a concert hall at

Scarborough in the mid-Eighteenth Century’.’57From observations made during treatment

between 1985 to 1988 it was conjectured that the instrunlent had undergone restoration early
 239

in the 19th century.158

It was observed that the hammers had had a second layer of leather

glued over the original, and that the instrument had been restrung with open-wound, brass

core strings in the lower register, and plain iron in only one gauge for the upper.’59It was also

considered possible that some of the pilots which activate the hammers were repositioned

during this same ‘modernization’. The following distortions were also ascribed to the 19th

century restoration:

The increased tension of these strings had pulled the wrestplank out from its mortise
in the frame at the bass end and twisted it along its length, which in turn had distorted
the soundboard badly and unseated it from the liner for several centimetres in the
back right-hand comer. Moreover the bridge had parted from the soundboard over
more than half of its length, and the whole case was noticeably twisted, the front
right-hand comer being pulled up in the all-too-familiar way.’6o

Although an earlier treatment is conjectured, it is not possible to determine over what period

of time the distortion described here actually took place. In the first extant reference to the

condition of the piano, a letter by H. Martin to The Times in March 1919, the following is

noted:

The piano is practically as sound and perfect as when made, and is now tuned to high
concert pitch [...I The scale is G to F, five octaves, less top G. Does the reader know a
piano as old and in such perfect condition?’61

The reference to ‘perfect condition’ suggests that the damage described above had not yet

compromised the playing quality of the piano; the instrument was apparently in working

condition even though tuned to a very high pitch. The tern ‘high concert pitch’ is not

defined, but in England the French diapason normal of A4=439had been adopted by the

Philharmonic Society in 1896, under the consultation of Alfied Hipkins.162The above

reference suggests that the piano was tuned even higher than this.
 240

Correspondence regarding the possible purchase of the piano from the Naylor family in 1948

does not provide any information on its condition,163and it is not until negotiations for its

transfer to Emmanuel College in the 1980s were under way that the condition of the

instrument is again mentioned. A letter from Bernard Naylor to Derek Brewer, the Master of

Emmanuel College, written on 9 May 1984, states that ‘our piano is in very bad state of

repair, but I have been assured that it is aZZ there & could be re~tored’.’~~
There is no

reference to who had assessed the instrument’s condition at this time. Brewer replied that, ‘I

was fascinated to hear about it and would certainly like i o see the instrument brought up to

good condition if p~ssible’.’~’

He assumed that ‘restoration will cost a considerable amount,

for example, .€500’.’66In a later letter to Richard Maunder, who subsequently restored the

piano, Naylor again raises the subject of restoration:

We had a bit of a party when the instrument was 200 years old & we poured a little
champagne into it, which no doubt accounts for the fact that there is no sign of recent
woodworm! [...I I have meant to have the piano restored ever since it came to my
brother and me in 1934 but, like all other members of my father’s maternal family,
never did.167

Analysis

Actions

Addition of a second layer of leather glued over the original on the hammers, and a

restringing with wires of different composition and gauge from those originally installed,

indicates updating or improvement characteristic of Cun.ency.I6*Continuity of active service

is ensured by substituting material of original specificationswith new material. It was also

 242

Context

If the modernization was indeed done in the 19th century, this action could have pre-dated

the arising consciousness of the necessity to preserve tangible material attributes, as

articulated by such mid- to late-19th century writers as Ruskin and Morris.’76Currency was

the norm, and Restitution, as a consciously articulated goal of return to a previous state, still

lay in the future. The heightened consciousness of the material value of architectural

elements and works of art only came to be considered for such functional objects as musical

instruments much later.

As outlined in the Introduction to this work, the early part of the 20th century saw a growing

interest in the study and use of early musical instruments. This is evident in such sources as

Canon Galpin’s Old English Instruments of Music, published in 1910, the pioneering work of

Arnold Dolmetsch, and the presence of such collections as those of Cummings, Donaldson,

Taphouse, and Watson.177

In this context, working condition of the Zumpe fortepiano would

have been considered the norm.

Dissonances

The term ‘restoration’ is used on two occasions in this period, but there is no indication that

the distinction between returning the instrument to a previous state, and up-dating or

improving it, is understood or appreciated. Similarly, ‘brought up to good condition’

indicates no specific direction the work might take.’78Nevertheless, this unclear

understanding of the distinction between ‘restoration’ and simple maintenance is not

inconsistent with general knowledge outside the fields of museum collections and historic
 243

musical instrument studies. In fact, it is in keeping with the concept of the 'silent artisan'

(outlined in Section 1.5) where there is a lack of awareness of the technical aspects of a

musical instrument's treatment.

9.3.3 Section Period: Acquisition by Emmanuel College and Restoration

History

As soon as the fortepiano was in the possession of Emmanuel College, action upon its

condition began to be considered. The following problems were identified in a report of

February 1985179:

It is, fortunately, in essentially very sound condition, although the action is badly out
of regulation, there are some broken strings, and the wrest-plank has become detached
from the frame, whch has caused the soundboard to lift and warp, and in turn the
bridge to become detached. There is a very little (old) woodworm in the soundboard
and bridge, but it is not at all serious, and there is no sign of recent infestation. The lid
is slightly warped, and its underside has unfortunately had the original polish stripped
and replaced with modem

In discussing restoration the author of the report raises the option of preservation of the

instrument in its current state, or of a return to playing state:

There are in my view just two possible courses of action for the College. The first is
to preserve the instrument exactly in its present state, with no attempt at repair or
restoration; the second is to restore it to playing condition. Because the piano is of
such unique historical importance, it is absolutely vital that nothmg be done that
might destroy any information it could possibly yield, either now or in the future,
about its construction and musical capabilities. On the face of it, this overriding
consideration suggests that the former might be the correct course of action [...I If
nothing is done, however, the instrument will gradually deteriorate, for regular
maintenance is essential to keep any form of machine in good condition. In any case,
it is above all a musical instrument, and its musical qualities cannot be assessed at all
unless it is restored to playing condition.'"
 244

The report further states that:

It is indefensible not to restore a historic instrument to playing condition unless there

is a grave risk that such restoration might seriously damage the instrument. There is
no such risk with the Zumpe square piano, since it is in fundamentally good
condition.18*

Restoration to playing condition was therefore recommended. The following details

paraphrase the proposed treatdent. The action would be removed for a thorough overhaul,

which would involve replacing the leather hinging of the hammers, although if possible

leather hammer covers would be retained. The instrument would be complete re-strung; even

though most of the original strings appeared to be in place, many were broken and crudely

knotted together.’83Also, the strings were considered too brittle and would probably break

when tuned to 18th century pitch. The soundboard and wrestplank would be removed, and

the wrestplank would either be reattached or removed and replaced. On further examination

the soundboard might be found to be repairable, otherwise it would be removed and

rep1a~ed.l~~
The report also stipulates that whoever undertakes the restoration work must

‘provide the College with the hllest possible report, preferably illustrated by photographs, of

every stage of the work’, and that ‘every alteration of the present state of the instrument must

be potentially reversible, as well as fully documented’.lS5

The instrument was dismantled for restoration and dunring examination the following features

of Zumpe’s construction that indicated his experimentation were noted, as well as changes

that he may not have made.lS6All keys had two scribed lines across them to locate the

position of the pilots, instead of one, as would have been the case if the best position for the

pilots was known beforehand. The damper spring layout showed evidence of a change of

plan; whalebone (baleen) springs may have been used originally, to be replaced by springs of
 245

wire. The soundboard proved to have been made in three plys, the top and bottom ones

running transversely and the middle one at right angles to these, instead of the conventional

single thickness of wood with one grain dire~ti0n.l~~

I f

Figure 14. Diagram ofEnglish pianoforte action showing (a) key, (b) pivot pin, (c)
pilot, (d) hammer, (e) hammer weight, (f) string, and (h) hinge.

Treatment was undertaken between April 1986 and April 1988. The following details of the

dismantlement process are extracted from the restoration report"':

- Hammers were removed and numbered underneath in pencil. This entailed cutting the

parchment hinges that attached them to the hammer frame.

- The fabric-covered batten under the keyfi-onts was removed, and all old cloths

stripped off.

- The outer (later) leather covers of the hammers were taken off. 'Unfortunately the

condition of the inner leather covers was not such as to make it possible to retain

them, for they were rather dry and hard.'lg9New leather hammer covers were applied

and new parchment hinges attached.

 246

- The wood blocks glued under the hinges were replaced, and the old (but not original)

hinges were discarded.

- Repairs to the keys included drilling and plugging of some balance pin holes, and

redrilling.

New leather buttons were attached to the pilots to replace the originals which had

disintegrated. The highest pilot and the lowest two were brought forward.

- The strings were removed and their gauges and materials of fabrication recorded.

- Wrest-pins were removed and cleaned, and drilled with lmm diameter transverse

holes.

- The bridge, the wrest plank, the batten along edge of the soundboard, and the

surrounding mouldings were removed by softening the glue by dampening, and by

removing hardware. The three plys of the soundboard were separated from each other.

- All removed parts were labelled and placed in storage in Emmanuel College.

The following details of the reassembly and adjustment of the instrument are extracted from

the restoration report:

- A new wrest-plank was made and set in place with glue and an additional six 1?4"

(3 8mm) woodscrews.
- A new soundboard was made and fitted and the surrounding mouldings replaced.'No

attempt was made to reproduce the original 3-ply soundboard, for the technical

problems of manufacture would have been formidable, and in any case, to judge from
 247

the distorted state of the original soundboard, Zurnpe’s experiment had not been a

success.”9o

- ‘A few’ hitchpins were replaced.

- The heads of hammers Nos. 2-6, 10-12,15 and 20 were removed and reglued onto the

shanks nearer to their hinges.

- The damper pivot wire was replaced with a larger diameter 1/16” (1.7mm)brass rod,

and the holes through which it passed drilled out to match.

- The damper leathers were replaced.

- New hinges were fitted to the front flap and main lid.

- A new trestle stand was made to replace a missing, but not original, one.

The string gauge was ascertained by stringing the region around middle C and deciding by

ear. A gauge of 0.0173” ( 0 . 4 4 ~ (material

) not specified) ‘sounded about right’.lg1During

the stringing experiments the case began twisting; when half strung with the 0.0173”

(0.44mm) wire the comer-to-comer distortion reached W. A maximum twist of 5/32”,

arrived at by calculation, was considered acceptable at a pitch of A4=415Hz. The new

stringing, the specification for which was derived from this experimentation, was very similar

to that used on the 1768 Zumpe in the Russell Colle~tion.’~~

However, the new stringing was

apparently still placing too much strain on the instrument:

About two months after fitting all the strings, the twist as measured at the front right-
hand comer had increased to about 7/32”, the tuning was still very unstable, the
distortion in the case was forcing the action-frame out of shape so that several
hammers were binding, and a small crack appeared in the new ~oundboard.”~
 248

In order to correct the distortion and stabilize the tuning, an aluminium ‘T’ section 1%x 1?htt

(38 x 38mm) was attached transversely underneath the case with 24 countersunk

woodscrews.194

The tone quality of the restored Zumpe fortepiano was described in terms of the ‘singing

quality of the treble [...I and the resonant bass [...I remarkable in such a small instr~ment’.’~~

The author states of this report, though, that ‘it is difficult to describe the tone of an

The instrument was played once in a public recital, on Monday 25 April 1988,
in~trument’.’~~

featuring Emma Kirkby (soprano) and Jan Smaczny fortep pi an^).'^' The performance was not

recorded.

A report on the treatment of the instrument was published in 1990 in The Galpin Society

This publication drew criticism from keyboard restorer John Barnes, whose

correspondence was published in the next issue of the journal. Barnes quotes The Galpin

Society’s editorial policy, and comments upon it:

‘For anything published in the GSJ both the author and editor must be sure that all
possible steps have been taken to avoid attracting subsequent adverse criticism’ [...I It
therefore seems to me unfortunate that the article [...I describes restorational
procedures which are highly controversial and which many would view as
unde~irab1e.I~~

Barnes is complimentary of the investigative aspects of the treatment, but regarding the

musical results of the treatment, he states that:

Nearly everyone now takes the view that if an old instrument does not have its
original soundboard (unless, of course, it is old enough to have a worthy eighteenth
century replacement) it is not worth listening to and therefore not worth restoring.
Consequently the actual removal of an existing original soundboard for replacement
by a new one is, or ought to be, completely taboo.’’’
 249

In response to this, Maunder asks that, if an instrument is in sound enough condition, is it

‘right to condemn it to eternal silence, so that its musical qualities can never be assessed?’.201

He further argues that the original soundboard ‘was in too poor a condition for reinstatement

to be possible if the instrument was to be made playable’ .’02

Analysis

Actions

The extent of the proposed treatment work clearly indicates intervention to return the

instrument to playable condition. Thorough overhaul of the action, complete re-stringing, and

removal of the soundboard and wrestplank are all restoration procedures intended to promote

function.203The action clearly has an hstorical basis, as shown by the detailed examination

of Zumpe’s workmanship, and the resultant theories concerning the original layout of the

instrument, and its stringing.204

All t h s action places the proposed action in the regimen of

Restitution. There is clearly the intention to ‘root credentials in the past’.205

The recommendation that ‘the fidlest possible report [be kept] preferably illustrated by

photographs, of every stage of the work’ places the action in the more recent phase of

Restitution where record-keeping is emphasised.206Further evidence of this is seen in the

publication of the work in The Galpin Society Journal, although it should be noted that the

published work is much more concerned with the technical and historical discoveries made

during the process, than with documentation of the treatment itself.

 250

The actual treatment of the Zumpe fortepiano shows features of Restitution in replacement of

cloths and leathers matching original specifications, re-stringing with wire of appropriate

type and gauge, use of whalebone (baleen) for springs in place of the later metal wire, and

replacement of the wrestplank with one modelled closely on the original. On the other hand,

features of Currency appear in the changes made to the iiistrument that do not reflect the

practices of the maker. The heads of ten of the hammers were removed and reglued onto the

shanks in a position nearer to their hinges, the damper pivot wire was replaced with a larger

diameter brass rod, and the holes through which it passed were drilled out to match. The

wrest pins were dnlled transversely to accept the strings, instead of relying upon friction as

was the original practice. Correction of the corner-to-corner distortion was effected by

attaching an aluminium ‘T’ section transversely underneath the case with screws.2o7All these

actions represent changes to the known original state of the instrument.

The greatest change to the fortepiano’s state was the provision of a new soundboard. The

speed of propagation of vibration through wood, and thus the acoustic spectrum resulting

from excitation, is moderated by grain direction. In softwoods, vibration travels as much as

five times as quickly along the grain as it does across, whereas composite panels like

plywood have velocities in both directions similar to those measured in solid wood across the

grainzo8Thus, replacement of the isotropic three-ply original soundboard with a

conventional, single thickness anisotropic one, alters the acoustic properties profoundly. This

action is characteristic of Currency, where upgrading and improvement are evident, while

musical characteristics resulting fkom changes in the materials of fabrication and the original

disposition are not considered.

 25 1

Rationales

The belief in the possibility of returning the instrument to a previous state by craft

intervention reflects the elements of positivistic thinking outlined in Section 4.3.2. A

scientific flavour is given to this endeavour by two references to ‘assessment’ of the

instrument’s musical qualities. The rationale for restoration is clearly rooted in the search for

authentic experience as defined in Section 4.3.2; it is seen in the desire to explore the

historical sound of the instrument. The statement that ‘it is indefensible not to restore a

historic instrument to playing condition unless there is a grave risk’ underlines this stance

clearly.209It is fwther argued that the fortepiano ‘is above all a musical instrument, and its

musical qualities cannot be assessed at all unless it is restored to playing condition’.2’o The

antithesis is to ‘condemn it to eternal silence’.2” The word ‘condemn’ carries connotations of

sentence and punishment, and ‘eternal’ is equally evocative.

The statement that ‘the instrument will gradually deteriorate, for regular maintenance is

essential to keep any form of machine in good condition’ is characteristic of Currency, but

appears in this context as a justification to restore.212Only two courses of action are

suggested: ‘to preserve the instrument exactly in its present state, with no attempt at repair or

A treatment protocol between these two

restoration’ or full restoration to playing condition.213

extremes -- a more conservative approach aimed simply at stabilization and conservation -- is

not entertained, although the references to ‘potentially reversible’ processes, to ‘any

information it could possibly yield’, and to documentation of treatment all indicate a

familiarity with the values of the Preservation regimen.214

 252

Context

During the 1980s, when the Zumpe fortepiano was brought into playing state, the radical

change of context in the treatment of hstoric keyboard instruments had already taken place.

The sources referred to in Section 9.2.4 include the colloquium held at the Museum

Vleeshuis, Antwerp, and the wider dissemination of the conservative viewpoint through the

publications of Karp and Barnes, whch had appeared in Early Music in 1979 and 1980

The appearance of the latter two papers in Early Music is significant because
re~pectively.~’~

it indicates a widening of the museum conservation agenda into the area of scholarly

musicological studies. Previously, Ear& Music had published ‘The restoration of the Vaudry’

in 1976, a paper which presented technical knowledge derived from the complete

disassembly and rebuilding of an historic instrument.216

Thus, the papers by Karp and Barnes

represent a departure from the reportage of treatment procedures hitherto considered

orthodox.

An international colloquium in Venice that resulted in the publication of Per una carta

Europea del restaur0 had taken place in 1985. Grant O’Brien, Curator of the Russell

Collection of Historic Keyboard Instruments in Edinburgh, had argued that the aim of

restorers should be to ‘re-think OUT approach to the restoration of musical instruments, and to

provide a heritage of unrestored instruments for study by h t w e generation^'.''^ This

sentiment is, in fact, reflected in the proposal for treatment of the Zumpe fortepiano:

‘Because the piano is of such unique historical importance, it is absolutely vital that nothing

be done that might destroy any information it could possibly yield, either now or in the

future, about its construction and musical capabilities.’218

 253

Publication of the treatment in The Galpin Society Journal resulted in criticism of technical

aspects, but of more significance here, it stimulated criticism of the Society’s editorial policy.

In his correspondence, Barnes quotes editorial policy to the effect that ‘both the author and

editor must be sure that all possible steps have been taken to avoid attracting subsequent

adverse criticism’.219
This correspondence is significant because of its effort to modify the

views of the journal to better reflect the current orthodoxy.220The Galpin Society Journal had

earlier published papers outlining organological discoveries occasioned during the

dismantlement of historic instruments.221

The issue of the replaced soundboard of the Zumpe

is most noteworthy in encapsulating the contemporary restoration orthodoxy that ‘if an old

instrument does not have its original soundboard [...I it is not worth listening to and therefore

not worth restoring’ .222

Dissonances

Conflicts within the historic instrument restoration field are manifest in the correspondence

by Barnes to The Galpin Socieq Journal. The extent of the work done is considered

excessively invasive when placed against the unique quality and historic significance of the

instrument.

The insertion of the new soundboard, together with other improvements to the instrument’s

first functioning state, are dissonant with the intention of assessing its original musical

capabilities. The values of Restitution, in attempting to recapture the historic sound, exist

here in parallel with the values of Currency, where updating and improvement of an earlier

disposition prevail.
 254

The concept of reversibility ‘sets conservators apart from skilled restorers or repairers’ and is

‘one of the factors which establish ow unique intent to project our work into the distant

f t t ~ r e ’The
. ~ ~term
~ reversibility has been shown to be problematic even within the

conservation profession, and an interpretation closer to removability is warranted (see

Section 4.4.1). Although the term ‘reversibility’ is used in the proposal for treatment of the

Zumpe fortepiano, certain actual measures taken do not allow for this, even in its wider

interpretation as ‘rem~vability’.~~~
For example, the delamination of the soundboard into its

three components precluded reassembly. Thus, there is a dissonance between the use of a

term specifically embraced within the regimen of Preservation, and the actual treatment of

the instrument, which embraces values of both Currency and Restitution.

Dissonance is also evident in the aim of restoring the fortepiano to working condition so that

its music qualities could be assessed, and the lack of systematically recorded results. The

instrument’s performance while in playable condition was not recorded acoustically, and the

only assessment of its musical capabilities is in the reported ‘singing quality of the treble [...I

and the resonant

9.3.4 Third Period: Supplementary Treatment

History

The Zumpe fortepiano was played privately for chamber music for a short period of time

after its debut concert, but further problems of stability were experienced:
 255

The sound board cracked again, and more work had to be done to sort this out. It
became plain that the frame would not support the strain of tuning the instrument to a
useful pitch [...I I had the impression there was ii basic design fault.226

The damage manifested itself in the appearance of a large crack and two smaller cracks in the

soundboard, which occasioned fiu-ther work. The following details of condition and treatment

are extracted from the supplementary report of 1993?27The cracking was ascribed to the

excessively low relative humidity in the Library of Emmanuel College where the piano had

been displayed since its return from treatment in 1988.228No hygrothennograph records from

this period are extant for the Library, and it is unknown whether environmental monitoring

was undertaken.

Repair of the cracks necessitated removing the soundboard from the instrument, and to this

end the damper springs, dampers, strings and wrest-pins were removed, and the mouldings

around the edges of the soundboard unglued. The small cracks in the soundboard were then

repaired with glue and small shims of soundboard wood, and small blocks were glued

underneath to strengthen them. The larger crack, which had caused the front 1" (25mm) to

detach completely, was repaired with glue. The soundboard was then conditioned for several

weeks at a relative humidity of approximately 50% until its dimensions had stabilized. It was

then reinstalled and the instrument rough tuned to A4=415Hz. After a few weeks another

crack developed at the front, alongside the previously repaired one:

Since the relative humidity had been kept constant this crack could not have been the
result of fiuther shrinkage, but must have been caused by the string tension's having
twisted the wrest plank [...I At this point the only alternatives were to abandon the
restoration completely, or to repair the new crack but reduce the tension of the
strings.229
 256

The soundboard was repaired in situ by removing the front portion and replacing it with a

new piece, secured in place by a strip of wood underneath. The instrument was tuned to

A4=390Hz.Monitoring over the next few months revealed no major new cracks, so the

instrument was restrung so as to restore the pitch to A4=415Hzat the new maximum tension.

It was emphasised that:

The soundboard is only just strong enough to bear the tension of the strings, and that
it has been kept at a relative humidity of about 50% for the last year. If the relative
humidity were allowed to drop below, say, 45%, or if the pitch were raised above
A=415Hz, the soundboard would almost certainly break again. No further major
repair will be possible: it would have to be completely renewed, as I did in my 1986-
88 rest~ration?~~

In the correspondence which took place before the Zumpe fortepiano was donated to

Emmanuel College, it had been suggested that it be housed in the Faculty of Music where

better facilities existed for its display.231

The donor, Bernard Naylor, had replied at that time

that ‘it is of first importance to us that the piano should repose within the College. Could it

not be counted among those “objects [in the Library] which give the rooms a pleasantly

furnished and variegated a~pearance”?’.~~~

Nevertheless, the stipulation that an inability to maintain a stable relative humidity of 50% in

the Library would cause further cracking of the soundboard, resulted in the move of the

Zumpe fortepiano to storage in the Cudworth Room of the Faculty of Music. The strings

were de-tensioned, and the instrument was covered with plastic dust-sheeting.
 257

Analysis

Actions

Playing state was considered uppermost in this period; the actions during the first part of this

period are primarily those related to Currency. The repairs made to the soundboard, the

lowering of pitch, and the attention to relative humidity are all evidence of efforts to continue

function through maintenance. Further treatment is conducted in the manner of a rescue

attempt; abandoning the restoration completely is mooted as an alternative to further

treatment.233

Deposition of the instrument into a storage area, de-tensioning of the strings, and enclosing it

under a dust cover are all actions of passive preservation. The fortepiano is left to be

preserved by inaction, rather than by an active protocol of conservation treatment and

inspection.

Rationales

Emphasis continues to be upon the playing state, although there are no references to

assessment of musical quality. The conclusion that action had to be taken because ‘there was

a basic design fault’ indicates the rationales of the regimen of Currency because attempts to

correct the fault imply a desire to improve.234

 258

Context

The context remains essentially the same as that described during the previous treatment

period.

Dissonances

The continued problems of cracking of the replacement soundboard, which constitute the

major thrust of the supplementary restoration, are taken to indicate an original design fault. A

new 3-ply soundboard had not been reproduced fiom the original because ‘to judge fiom the

distorted state of the original soundboard, Zumpe’s experiment had not been a S U C C ~ S S ~ . ~ ~ ~

The tight restrictions on pitch and relative humidity recommended after the latest phase of

repair indicate a fragility not present in the instrument before treatment, In 1919 the

fortepiano was judged to be ‘practically as sound and perfect as when made’.236If this report

is correct, the distortion in the original soundboard does not appear to have been a result of

‘Zumpe’s experiment’ but of later improper treatment, perhaps related to a higher string

tension a hundred or more years after the instrument’s manufacture. It is therefore

inconsistent to apply continued restorative measures to the cracked soundboard, which

deviates markedly fiom one of the original specifications, and then to cite the insolubility of

the problem as a fault of the original design. Plywood is a great deal stronger in tension than

single-ply wood, and it is not inconceivable that Johannes Zumpe knew that.237Dissonance

between action and rationale if evident.

 259

9.3.5 Synopsis of the Three Periods

In the first period the fortepiano was regarded as an hlstorical object, and was treasured as a

family heirloom. Changes made to its first functioning state indicate the values of Currency,

which is consistent with thnking in the period in which the work was done.

The second period is characterized by treatment that enc,ompasseselements of both Currency

and Restitution; restoration is conducted, but maintenance is also evident. Attempts are made

to reinstate an earlier disposition for the purposes of assessing historical sound, but this is

compromised by the inclusion of major replacement parts with non-original characteristics.

Systematic assessment of the musical qualities of the instrument is not demonstrated.

In the third period musical function continues to be emphasised, but the instability and

fragility of the instrument prevent its use. It passes from a regimen primarily dominated by

the values of Currency, although with elements of Restitution, to one of passive preservation.

NOTES

1. Kallmann and Potvin, p. 542.

2. Steinway and Sons, archives and database, New York.

3. Remenyi, M., letter to H. Kallmann (undated), National Library of Canada, file number
168-3-G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.
4.Friedrich, p. 10.
 260

5. Liner notes to J.S. Bach: Two- and Three-part Inventions, Columbia recording ML 6022,
quoted in Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 106.

6. Payzant, Glenn Gould, pp. 107-108.

7. Steinway and Sons, archives and database, New York.

8. Friednch, p. 11.

9. National Library of Canada, Ottawa, file number 168-3-G9-4,Collections - Gould, Glenn,

- Piano.
10. Edquist, V., letter to National Library of Canada (undated), National Library of Canada,
file number 168-3-G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.

11. Remenyi, M., letter to H. Kallmann (undated), National Library of Canada, file number
168-3-G9-6- Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.

12. Records Department, T. Eaton Company, transcript of communication to author by

telephone, 15 April 1995.

13. Cook, G., letter to H. Kallmann, 22 August 1983, National Library of Canada, file
number 168-3-G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.

14. Cott, p. 47,

15. ibid.

16. Edquist had been introduced to a u l d by George Cook, the tuner employed by the T.
Eaton Company. Edquist, Verne, letter to National Library of Canada, 15 March 1983,
National Library of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano -
maintenance - Vol. 1.

17. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 105.

18. ibid.

19. Edquist, V., letter to National Library of Canada, 15 March 1983, National Library of
Canada, file number 168-3-G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.

20. Steinway and Sons, archives and database, New York.

21. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 107.

22. Gould, G., letter to David Rubin, Steinway and Sons, 14 February 1973, National Library
of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-4 - Collections - G. Gould - piano.
 26 1

23. Cook, G., letter to H. Kallmann, 22 August 1983, National Library of Canada, file
number 168-3-G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.

24. Kopytoff, p. 73.

25. Cott, p. 47.

26. Lowenthal, p. 52.

27. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 107.

28. Friedrich, p. 11.

29. ibid.

30. Gould, G., letter to David Rubin, Steinway and Sons, 14 February 1973, National Library
of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-4 - Collections - G. Gould - piano.

3 1. ibid.

32. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 146.

33. Friedrich, p. 11.

34. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 109.

35. ibid., p. 107.

36. Gould, G., letter to David Rubin, Steinway and Sons, 14 February 1973, National Library
of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-4 - Collections - G. Gould - piano.

37. Purchase Agreement, National Library of Canada, Ottawa, file number 168-3-G9-4,
Collections - Gould, Glenn, - Piano.

38. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 146.

39. Anon., ‘Background Notes’, National Library of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-4,
Collections - Gould, Glenn - Piano.

40. Maloney, Timothy, transcript of verbal communication to author, 14 April 1995.

41. The Arts Report, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, reference number 18422-1, 3 May
1993.

42. Barclay, R.L., ‘Glenn Gould Piano’, Canadian Conservation Institute, 1983, National
Library of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-6, Collections - G. Gould - Piano - Maintenance -
VOl. 1.
 262

43. Barclay, R.L., memorandum to Joyce Banks, National Library, Canadian Conservation
Institute, 7 April 1992. National Library file number 168-3-G9-6, Collections - G. Gould -
Piano - Maintenance - Vol. 1.

44. Hoglund, H., letter to National Library of Canada (undated), National Library of Canada
file number 168-3-G9-7, Collections - G. Gould - Piano - Current Use.

45. Virdy, Tim, letter to the editor, Glenn Guuld, 3 , 2 (1997), p. 23.

46. ibid. p. 24.

47. ibid.

48. ibid.

49. Matthais, p. 90.

50. Vhdy, Tim, letter to the editor, Glenn Guuld, 3, 2 (1997), p. 24.

51. National Library of Canada, Ottawa, file number 168-3-G9-4, Collections - Gould,
Glenn, - Piano.

52. Virdy, Tim, letter to the editor, Glenn Guuld, 3,2 (1997), p. 23.

53. ibid.

54. National Library of Canada, Ottawa, file number 168-3-G9-4.

55. Anon., ‘Background Notes’, National Library of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-4,
Collections - Gould, Glenn - Piano.

56. National Library of Canada, Ottawa, file number 168-3-G9-4, Collections - Gould,
Glenn, - Piano.

57. Watson, pp. 74-75.

58. Lowenthal, p. 52.

59. ibid.

60. ibid.

6 1. Conservation Policy document, undated, National Library of Canada, Ottawa.

62. Kallmann and Potvin, p. 542, col. 3.

63. Karp, ‘Restoration’; and Barnes, ‘Evidence’.

64. ICOWCIMCIM, 1983.

 263

65. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 109.

66. Edquist, V., letter to National Library of Canada, 15 March 1983, National Library of
Canada, file number 168-3-G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.

67. Virdy, Tim, letter to the editor, Glenn Gould, 3 , 2 (1997), p. 24.

68. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 146.

69. Virdy, Tim, letter to the editor, Glenn Gould, 3,2 (1997), p. 24.

70. Purchase Agreement, National Library of Canada, Ottawa, file number 168-3-G9-4,
Collections - Gould, Glenn, - Piano.

71. The term ‘artifact’ is used in this case to mean specifically ‘museum object’.

72. The Arts Report, Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, reference number 18422-1,3 May
1993.

73. ibid.

74. For example, the CIMCIM ‘Draft Recommendations’ of 1982.

75.Virdy, Tim, letter to the editor, Glenn Gould, 3,2 (1997), p. 24.
76. Such chests are described in MacQuoid, pp. 160-170, and illustrated on pp. 167 and 168.
Harrison illustrates the type on pp. 40 and 41.

77. Anon., Description of the Viols, 23 May 1975, Hart House records, University of
Toronto, p. 1.

78. Monical, William, letter to Hart House Music Committee, 2 February 1974, records of
Hart House, University of Toronto; Pronger, Brian, report to Hart House Music Committee,
27 February 1974, records of Hart House, University of Toronto; and Remenyi House of
Music, ‘InsuranceAppraisal A478’, 9 December 1982, records of Hart House, University of
Toronto.

79. Anon., Description of the Viols, 23 May 1975, Hart House records, University of
Toronto, p. 1.

80. ibid.

8 1. ibid.

82. Hart House Music Committee, Regulationsfor the Use of the Hart House Viols, article 94
(7), 11 February 1937, records of Hart House, University of Toronto.
 264

83. Samson, Peggy, letter to Hart House Music Committee, 7 January 1982, Hart House
records, University of Toronto.

84. Pronger, Brian, On Maintaining the Collection of Viols, 27 February 1974, Hart House
records, University of Toronto.

85. Samson, Peggy, letter to &chard Alway, 23 December 1978, Hart House records,
University of Toronto.

86. Rappen, Ulrich, letter to Richard Alway, 8 April 1982, Hart House records, University of
Toronto.

87. Alway, Richard, letter to Ontario Heritage Foundation Instrument Bank, 26 January 1982,
Hart House records, University of Toronto.

88. Rappen, Ulrich, letter to Richard Alway, 8 April 1982, Hart House records, University of
Toronto.

89. Nashman, A., letter to Ulrich Rappen, 17 March 1983, Hart House records, University of
Toronto.

90. Anon, Guidelines Concerning Transferral to the Canada Council, 2 October 1991, Hart
House records, University of Toronto.

91. McGee, Timothy, letter to Canadian Conservation Institute, 12 October 1992, records of
Canadian Conservation Institute.

92. Barclay, R.L., Recommendationsfor the Hart House Viols, unpublished report (Ottawa:
Canadian Conservation Institute, 10 February 1983)

93. Hart House Music Committee minutes, 21 March 1995, Hart House records, University
of Toronto.

94. Monical, William, letter to Hart Mouse Music Committee, 2 February 1974, records of
Hart House, University of Toronto.

95. ibid.
L

96. Barclay, R.L., Recommendationsfor the Hurt House Viols, unpublished report (Ottawa:
Canadian Conservation Institute, 10 February 1983)

97. Monical, William, letter to Hart House Music Committee, 2 February 1974, records of
Hart House, University of Toronto.

98. IIC-CG, Code ofEthics, p. 17.

99. Lowenthal, p. 52.

 265

100. Donington, ‘Why’, p. 42.

101. Pallis, p. 41.

,.
J

102. Donington, ‘Why’, p. 42.

103. Description of the Viols, 23 May 1975, Hart House records, University of Toronto, p. 1.

104. The Cleaning and Restoration of Museum Exhibits

105. The Preservation of Antiquities

106. Pallis, p. 41.

107. Anon., Description of the Viols, 23 May 1975, Hart House records, University of
Toronto, p. 1.

108. Anon., ‘Agreement between Massey Foundation and Hart House’, clause la, 18 May
1932, Hart House records, University of Toronto.

109. Hart House Music Committee, Regulationsfor the Use of Hart House Viols, Regulation
no. 1., 11 February 1937, Hart House records, University of Toronto.

110. Barclay, R.L., Recommendationsfor the Hart House Viols, unpublished report (Ottawa:
Canadian Conservation Institute, 10 February 1983), p. 4.

111. Hart House Music Committee, On Maintaining the Collection of Viols, 27 February
1974, Hart House records, University of Toronto.

112. Note to file (undated), Hart House records, University of Toronto.

113. Anon., ‘Agreement between Massey Foundation and Hart House’, clause 1 a, 1 8 May
1932, Hart House records, University of Toronto.

114. Hart House Music Committee, Regulationsfor the Use of Hart House Viols, 11
February 1937, Hart House records, University of Toronto.

A 115. Karp, ‘Restoration’; and Barnes, ‘Evidence’.

116. Bemer, et al, p. 8.

117. Moreni, p. 91.

118. Restauratieproblemen...

119. Pronger, Brian, On Maintaining the Collection of Viols, 27 February 1974, Hart House
records, University of Toronto.

120. Moreni, p. 91.

 266

121. McGee, Timothy G., letter to author, 24 March 1994.

122. Samson, Peggy, letter to Hart House Music Committee, 5 January 1979, Hart House
records, University of Toronto.

123. Note to file (undated), Hart House records, University of Toronto.

124. Alway, Richard, letter to Ontario Heritage Foundation Instrument Bank, 2 October
1991,Hart House records, University of Toronto.

125. Samson, Peggy, letter to Richard Alway, 7 January 1982, Hart House records,
University of Toronto.

126. Alway, Richard, letter to Hart House Music Committee, 26 January 1982, Hart House
records, University of Toronto.

127. Rappen, Ulrich, letter to Richard Alway, 8 April 1982, Hart House records, University
of Toronto.

128. Nasham, A., letter to Ulrich Rappen, 17 March 1983, Hart House records, University of
Toronto.

129. CommuniquC (undated) The Canada Council, Ottawa.

130. ‘Guidelines Concerning Transferral to Canada Council’, 2 October 1991, Hart House
records, University of Toronto.

131. Curry, C.A., letter to Warden of Hart House, 3 March 1992, Hart House records,
University of Toronto.

132. CIMCIM Bulletin, 12 (November 1992), p. 1.

133. Barclay, R.L., Recommendations for the Hart House Viols, unpublished report (Ottawa:
Canadian Conservation Institute, 10 February 1993)

134. Hart House Music Committee minutes, 21 March 1995, Hart House records, University
of Toronto.

135. CommuniquC (undated), The Canada Council, Ottawa.

136. ‘Guidelines Concerning Transferral to Canada Coun.cil’, 2 October 1991, Hart House
records, University of Toronto.
137. Alway, Richard, letter to Hart House Music Committee, 26 January 1982, Hart House
records, University of Toronto.

138. Recommendations for Regulating...

 267

139. ibid.

140. Lowenthal, p. 52.

141. All documentation relating to the Emmanuel College piano refers to the maker as
Johannes Zumpe. Elsewhere he is know by the fuller and slightly variant name of Johann
Christoph Zurnpe.

142. More correctly Prince’s Street.

143. Maunder, p. 77.

144. Wells, G., ‘London Salerooms’, Early Music, 7,4 (1979), p. 524.

145. Accession number 1968-294.

146. Catalogue number 920.58 (Cselenyi, p. 64).

147. At the time of writing the two instruments (P2-JZ1768.35 and P1-JZ1767.39) were on
loan to Russell Collection.

148. Naylor, E.W., letter to Morning Post, 1924 (no day or month).

149. Maunder, ‘Square Piano’, p. 78.

150. Martin, H., letter to The Times, No. 498, March 1919.

151. Harding and Naylor correspondence, 9 September, 1.4 September, and 17 September
1949, Emmanuel College Archives, Furniture, Cambridge University.

152. Brewer, Derek, letter to Bernard Naylor, 24 May 1984, Emmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, Cambridge University.

153. Maunder, Richard, Square piano by Johannes Zumpe, 1766, unpublished report, 18
February 1984, Emmanuel College Archives, Furniture, Cambridge University.

154. Maunder, Richard, Square piano by Johannes Zumpe, London 1766: Restoration report,
unpublished report, 6 June 1988, Emmanuel College Archives, Furniture, Cambridge
University.

155. Rankin, Susan, letter to author, 30 August 1996.

156. Maunder, Richard, Square piano by Johannes Zumpe, London 1 766: Supplementary
Report (February 1993), unpublished report, 10 February 1993, Emmanuel College
Archives, Furniture, Cambridge University.

157. Naylor, E.W., letter to The Morning Post, 1924 (no day or month).
 268

158. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, pp. 79-82.

159. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, p. 79.

160. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, p. 82.

161. Martin, H., letter to The Times, No. 498, March 1919.

162. Quoted in Audsley, p. 636.

163. Harding and Naylor correspondence, 9 September, 14 September, and 17 September

1949, Emmanuel College Archives, Furniture, Cambridge University.

164. Naylor, Bernard, letter to Derek Brewer, 9 May 1984, Emmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, University of Cambridge.

165. Brewer, Derek, letter to Bernard Naylor, 24 May 1984, Emmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, University of Cambridge.

166. ibid.

167. Naylor, Bernard, letter to Richard Maunder, 1 April 1985, Ernmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, Cambridge University.

168. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, p. 79.

169. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, p. 80.

170. Martin, H., letter to The Times, No. 498, March 1919.

171. Naylor, Bernard, letter to Derek Brewer, 9 May 1984, Emmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, University of Cambridge.

172. ibid.

173. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, p. 79.

174. Naylor, E.W., letter to The Morning Post, 1924 (no day or month).

175. Naylor, Bernard, letter to Richard Maunder, 1 April 1985, Emmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, Cambridge University.

176. See, for example, Ruskin, Seven Lamps, p. 161; and Morris, ‘Principles’.

177. Cited in Campbell, p. 295.

178. Brewer, Derek, letter to Bernard Naylor, 24 May 1984, Emmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, University of Cambridge.
 269

179. Maunder, Richard, Squarepiano by Johannes Zumpe, 1766, unpublished report, 18

February 1984, Emmanuel College Archives, Furniture, Cambridge University.

180. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 1

181. Maunder, Square piano, pp. 1-2.

182. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 2.

183. It is not clear what the term ‘original’ means in this context. Elsewhere the author argues
that the instrument had been restored at some time in the 19th century, and suggests that the
strings dated from that period. Also, the stringing finally arrived at after restoration differed
markedly in gauge and material from that found on the instrument before restoration.

184. Maunder, Squarepiano, pp. 2-3.

185. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 3.

186. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, pp. 77-78.

187. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 4.

188. Maunder, Richard, Square piano by Johannes Zumpe, London 1766, Restoration report,
unpublished report, 6 June 1988, Emmanuel College Archives, Furniture, Cambridge
University.

189. Maunder, Restoration report, p. 5.

190. Maunder, Restoration report, p. 4.

191. Maunder, Restoration report, p. 7.

192. Johannes Zumpe Square Piano, catalogue number P2-521768.35.

193. Maunder, Restoration report, p. 7.

194. ibid.

195. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, p. 83.

196. ibid.

197. Concert Programme (undated), Emmanuel College Archives, Furniture, Cambridge

University.

198. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, pp. 77-84.

199. Barnes, ‘Galpin Society’, pp. 199-200.

 270

200. ibid.

201. Maunder, ‘To the Editor’, p. 201.

202. ibid.

203. Maunder, Restoration Report, pp. 2-3.

204. Maunder, Restoration report, p. 4.

205. ibid.

206. Maunder, Restoration report, p. 3.

207. Maunder, Restoration report, p. 4.

208. Schniewind, pp. 250-252.

209. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 2.

210. ibid.

211. Maunder, ‘To the Editor’, p. 201.

212. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 2.

213. ibid.

214. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 3.

2 15. Lambrechts-Douillez; Karp, ‘Restoration’; and Barnes, ‘Evidence’.

216. Adlam, pp. 255-265.

217. O’Brien, ‘Conservation’, p. 297.

218. Maunder, Squarepiano, pp. 1-2.

219. Barnes, ‘The Galpin Society’, pp. 199-200.

220. Barnes, ‘The Galpin Society’, p. 200.

22 1. Bate, ‘Serpent’; Farrington, ‘Dissection’; Hadaway, ‘Report’; Hellwig, ‘Lute’; van der
Meer, ‘Example’; and Zadro, ‘Woodwinds’.

222. Barnes, ‘The Galpin Society’, p. 200.

223. Appelbaum, p. 65.

 271

224. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 2.

225. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, p. 83.

226. Rankin, Susan, letter to author, 30 August 1996.

227. Maunder, Squarepiano, p. 1.

228. ibid.

229. ibid.

230. Maunder, Square piano, p. 2.

23 1 . Brewer, Derek, letter to Bernard Naylor, 24 May 1984, Emmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, Cambridge University.

232. Naylor, Bernard, letter to Derek Brewer, 24 July 1984, Emmanuel College Archives,
Furniture, Cambridge University.

233. Maunder, Supplementary report, p. 1.

234. Rankin, Susan, letter to author, 30 August 1996.

235. Maunder, Restoration report, p. 4.

236. Martin, H., letter to The Times, No. 498, March 1919.

237. Schniewind, pp. 164-165.

 272

CHAPTER TEN - CRITICAL ANALYSIS: ]’RESERVATION

This chapter focusses upon three case studies in which the values of the Preservation regimen

come to overlie and replace those of Restitution. The case studies deal with a clavichord

ascribed to Bohak owned by the Royal College of Music in London, a virginals by Jadra in

the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford, and a harpsichord by Kirckman in the Benton Fletcher

collection at Fenton House in London. The values of Preservation are seen in actions taken to

ensure longevity and stability, and in rationales based upon the integrity of the object and the

science of its conservation.

10.1 BOHAK CLAVICHORD

10.1.1 Introduction

This case history deals with a clavichord believed to have been made by Johann Bohak of

Vienna in 1794. The instrument was purchased by Anton Richter in 1831 . The dating and

provenance of the instrument are derived from a label on it, now no longer legible, and a

certification Richter made to the effect that he had bought it in 1831 from Herr Lichtenthal,

an Esterhazy official, who affirmed that it had been Joseph Haydn’s property, and a further

attestation from Fanny Elssler, daughter of Johann Elssler, Haydn’s copyist.’ On this

evidence the instrument has long been associated with Haydn and is often referred to in

correspondence and publicity as ‘Haydn’s clavichord’. In the absence of maker’s

identification marks, the attribution to Bohak is assisted through similarities in workshop

 273

techniques with other instruments of secure provenance, such as the fortepiano by the same

maker in the Museo Teatrale alla Scala, in Milan.2The instrument was sold by Richter's son
J

Hans to Mrs. Chapman in 1911, a sale which was negotiated by Arthur F. Hill, the London

musical instrument dealer.3The instrument had been repaired and altered some time around

1830, before it went to England. In 1911 Arthur Hill negotiated the hrther repair of the

instrument with the London firm of Broadwood, and in 19 12 he delivered the finished work

to the Chapmans. The instrument was donated by the heirs of Mrs. Chapman, in her memory,

to the Museum of Instruments of the Royal College of Music in May 1937.

. I

Figure 15. The Bohak Clavichord in the state in which it is displayed in the
Musical Instrument Museum of the Royal College of Music.
 274

In 1976 discussions were initiated between Elizabeth Wells, curator of the Museum of

Instruments, and John Barnes, a restorer of keyboard instruments in Edinburgh. The options

of restoring or making a playable copy were considered for three reasons: the clavichord

presented a misleading appearance due to later accretions, it had a key importance due to its

association with Joseph Haydn, and, because the collection belonged to the Royal College of

Music, the working properties of the instruments were considered of intere~t.~

The clavichord

was transported to Edinburgh and stored, first at the Russell Collection, and then at the

workshop of the Curator of the collection, John Barnes, while examination and research took

place. Examination showed that previous restorations, especially the less recent one of the

183Os, had obliterated much evidence of original string length and bridge position, so a

search was made for other extant examples of instruments by Bohak, or for others of the

same provenance, which might provide the missing information on construction. Other

restorers, conservators and curators were consulted concerning the desirability of restoration

or copying. The search for comparable instruments proved inconclusive. Discussions

continued until 1987 when the instrument was returned to the Royal College of Music having

been cleaned and prepared for display and examination.

Three distinct periods of activity for analysis can be identified from the above introduction:

- Treatment in the 1830s

- Treatment by Broadwood between 1911 and 1912

- Discussions on restoration or copying from 1976 to 1987
 275

10.1.2 First Period: Treatment in the 1830s

History

An invasive treatment of the clavichord was done in Vienna in the 1830s, probably shortly
after its purchase by Anton Richter in 1831. No direct source for this work is extant, and all

evidence of the date and location of the restoration, and what was done at that time, comes

from an examination report produced in 1976, addenda that followed in 1984 and 1986, and a

further report of 1988, all commissioned from John Barnes by the Royal College of Music.’

Barnes notes that many features of the first restoration are characteristic of Viennese

pianoforte manufacture of the period around 1835.

c.... .

Figure 16. Diagram of clavichord mechanism showing (a) key,

(b) pivot pin, (c) strings, (d) tangents, and (e) guide pin.

Changes to the instrument included the addition of a tangent rail, and raising of the height of

the sides of the case to accommodate a nameboard and a new vertical keyboard cover. The

hitchpin locations were changed, moving them further away from the tangents, and new

hitchpins were supplied. The style of the new hitchpins was consistent with early 19th-

century Viennese practice. An edge strip behind the hitchpin rail was added. New tangents

(d), made from flattened pianoforte capsels, were inserted. The position of the bridge was
 276

changed, and the original bridge replaced with a new one, double-pinned and with a flat top

as in contemporary Viennese practice.6 The soundboard had been removed and a new section,

backed by parchment adhered with glue, attached along its front edge. Evidence for the

existence of a supporting strut on the side of the wrestplank near the top wrestpins was also

found.’ At first it was believed that the soundbars attached below the soundboard had been

removed, pared down to make them lighter, and then replaced, but later examination showed

that these were not original, and were probably included during the 1830s restoration. It was

suggested that, as the instrument was fitted with a laminated soundboard by the maker,

reinforcing bars below it would not have been considered necessary.’

Analysis

Categorization of the actions taken on the instrument depends upon whether the association

with the classical composer Joseph Haydn was recognized. If such an historical association

was made at that time, it can be argued that societal pressure had caused singularization to

take place. The Bohak clavichord would have been regarded as ‘Haydn’s clavichord’, and

would have entered the ‘symbolic inventory of society’ .9 If the association was only a later

accretion, it can be argued that the instrument was still only a transient artifact of falling

value, being modernized for current use. However, documents attesting to the association

with Haydn are extant, leading to the assumption that the clavichord had become an historic

instrument as defined in this work.”

 277

Actions

The argument for assigning this period of activity to the regimen of Currency lies in the

nature of the work carried out, and the period in which it was done. It had been noted in

examination of the instrument that many features of the first treatment were characteristic of

Viennese pianoforte manufacture of the period around 1835." The new hitchpins, the new

bridge, double-pinned and with a flat top, and the re-use of flattened pianoforte action capsels

as tangents, were all consistent with early 19th-century Viennese practice. Also, a tangent rail

had been added, the bridge had been re-positioned according to contemporary pianoforte

practice,I2 and the soundboard had been reinforced from below with wooden bars.I3

All this work is indicative of ensuring continuity, which at this period is to be expected.

There is no evident intention to revert to the musical instrument-making style of the late 18th

century, but rather the intention of the work carried out is to bring the instrument into line

with current practice. In its replacement and alteration of'parts vital to the acoustic and tactile

values of the instrument, including baning the soundboard and changing the bridge position

and dimensions, such work shows no apparent regard for. the integrity of either the original

fabric of the instrument, or its original disposition.

Rationales

Although the clavichord as a musical instrument 'lingered into the early decades of the

nineteenth century in some out-of-the-way places7,l4by the time the restoration of the Bohak

was undertaken around 1835 this type of instrument had effectively become extinct. The

extent of the restoration performed on such an out-of-date instrument indicates that the
 278

association with Haydn was well known, and appreciated. Thus, an intrinsic value over and

above that of an otherwise obsolete musical instrument is evident; it makes more sense to

restore an instrument of known pedigree and historical association, than to restore one that is

merely obsolete. Nevertheless, there is no suggestion of a distinction being made between

upgrading to ensure a continuing working state, and actions taken to ensure recovery and

preservation of the original state. The clavichord is maintained in working condition because

of the signification provided by its earlier ownership.

Context

The work done in the 1830s pre-dates the arising consciousness of preservation, as articulated

by such mid- 19th century writers as Ruskin and Morris.'s The evidence of upgrading and

improvement, which was evidently done in a fortepiano workshop, indicates the values of the

Currency regimen.

Dissonances

There is no inconsistency in the approach to the treatment of the instrument at this period.

The work done to the clavichord is consistent with normal workshop practice of the time and

place of its first documented treatment.

 279

10.1.3 Second Period: Treatment by Broadwood Between 1911 and 1912

History

The sale of the clavichord by Hans Richter in 1911 was negotiated by Arthur F. Hill, a

transaction resulting in documentation that survives. Writing to Mr. Chapman, Hill states

that: ‘As you will see from the enclosed (which kindly return [...I) the Clavichord is a plain

looking affair, but it could be put into proper repair and order, and certainly made playable.’16

‘The enclosed’ was evidently a photograph. A little over a month later Hill wrote to Mr.

Chapman saying that he ‘would really like [...I Mrs. Chapman to let us put it into better

order’.’’ Among the things needing attention was the stand which had been built by Hans

Richter’s father.

The estimate submitted by Broadwood’s, with Hill’s as the intermediary, stated that the

instrument could be ‘put into satisfactory state of repair for between E7 and E8’.18The bill

submitted on completion of the work was for a much greater amount than that estimated:

- Repairing Haydn’s Clavichord, making and fixing Walnut stand of the period as per
Messrs Morant & CO’Saccount E15 10 6
- Repairing the action of the Haydn Clavichord and putting in playable order as per
Messrs Broadwood’s account E7 18 0
- To strings as invoiced $1 1 719
The new stand was made to replace the one whose legs presented ‘the appearance of inverted

skittles’.20The stand of a Hass clavichord of 1767, owned by Sir Gervaise Glynn of Ewell,

was to be used as a model.*l

 280

During examination in 1976, Barnes noted that a gap between the wrest plank and the case

side, caused by string tension, had been filled with wood, and that the wrestplank was

screwed down with a total of eight large woodscrews. In his opinion, based on traces of

manufacturing technique, these screws dated from between 1860 and 1920, and thus could

have been inserted by the Broadwood craftsmen. They could equally represent an interim,

unrecorded, strengthening.22

Analysis

Actions

The functioning musical quality of the Bohak clavichord in its 1911-12 period is emphasised

by such phrases as ‘it could be put into proper repair and order, and certainly made

playable’23,and he ‘would really like [...I to let us put it into better order’.24Working

condition, though, is an assumption of both Currency and Restitution, so it is necessary to

divine motives in order to assign the work done at this period into one or other of these

regimens. The most telling clue lies not with the instrument, but with the stand that was made

by Anton Richter, and which was replaced by Broadwood’s for one modelled after a Hass

instrument of 1767.2’This conscious attempt to re-create an earlier state, even though neither

the date nor the provenance was correct, points to the values of Restitution.

It can be argued that the work done on the instrument itself should be assigned to Currency.

The gap between the wrest plank and the case side, noted in 1976, had been caused by string

tension.26.This damage had been rectified by filling the crack with wood, and inserting eight
 28 1

large woodscrews into the wrestplank. Thus, reinforcement of the structure constitutes an

improvement, placing the work in the regimen of Currency. However, the necessity for such

structural stabilization was more likely to have resulted from an unclear understanding of the

original stringing of the clavichord, both in string material and tension. Fitting strings of the

correct gauge, and tuning the instrument to an appropriate historical pitch, might have

obviated the necessity for reinforcement. The strengthening measures were predicated by the

over-riding goal of playability, and ignorance of its deleterious effects.

Rationales

At this period of the instrument’s treatment, sources identify the Bohak as ‘Haydn’s

C l a ~ i c h o r d ’Having
. ~ ~ the instrument in playing condition signifies the link with Haydn, and

releases the chain of connotations that characterize antiquity -- ‘the attempt to elicit aesthetic

experience of past phases in the use of a musical instrument by auditory and tactile means’

(Section 4.3.2). This is the epitome of ‘root[ing] credentials in the past’.**

Context

The activity around the Bohak clavichord during this second period is indicative of the

growing interest in organology. Canon Francis Galpin’s book, Old English Instruments of

Music, published in 1910, and the holdings of such collectors as Cummings, Donaldson,

Taphouse, and Watson indicate the growing popularity of early instrument~.~~

The pioneering

work of Arnold Dolmetsch in the first decades of the 20th century in popularizing early

music is also of key importance.

 282

Dissonances

Treatment of the clavichord indicates no dissonance between the approach taken and its

rationale. The growing sense of conservation as a discipline distinct fiom restoration was not,

at this early stage, associated with functional museum objects.

10.1.4 Third Period: Discussions on Restoring or Copying from 1976 to 1987

History

In late 1976 an approach was made by the curator of the Instrument Museum of the Royal

College of Music to John Barnes, asking him to undertake a workshop investigation and

An informed decision could then be

produce a detailed report on the Bohak cla~ichord.~’

made as to whether to make it playable, or to remove some of the accretions of past

treatments. The instrument was removed to Edinburgh for examination in his workshop.

First, it was necessary to establish the position and dimensions of all original components.

Barnes states that ‘I have found evidence which confirms the originality of the soundboard

and indicates the position of the original bridge at 5 points. So we have the basis of a

reasonably accurate re~toration’.~’

Such evidence of the earlier state would provide key

information on the string length, and the striking points of the tangents. Nevertheless, the

curator replied that ‘my immediate reaction is that it does not sound as though enough of the

original instrument is leA for restoration to be ~ e n s i b l e ’It. ~was

~ therefore considered

necessary to seek confirmation of the existence of another clavichord by Bohak, or an

instrument of very similar provenance, in order for the restoration to be based upon solid
 283

comparative evidence. To this end, several specialists in the field were consulted, but with

little recorded success.33Christopher Clarke and William Dow, both private sector restorers

and instrument-makers, ‘felt that we [the Museum] would do better, perhaps, to buy another

clavichord rather than restore this! 734 During extensive examination and partial

dismantlement Barnes had begun a drawing of the instrument. Once he had derived enough

information from the clavichord, he proposed to return it, untreated, to the Museum in 1978.35

Meanwhile, while awaiting further information on extant Bohak instruments, or those of

similar provenance that could be used as models, the clavichord was kept in Edinburgh.

Thoughts upon the possibility of restoration are still evident when the curator of the Royal

College of Music collection states, in 1983, that she is ‘extremely anxious to see thls

restoration completed and to have the instrument back in the The justification for

this is framed as follows: ‘I am sure that you will appreciate that it would be a great help to

us to have the instrument, with its Haydn association, here at present, and playable [...I It

would have been good if we managed it for last year’s Haydn Centena~y.’~’

Some doubt was expressed as to how the restored clavichord would sound, so Barnes made a

recording of a copy he had made of the Bohak in its assumed original state, and a copy of an

instrument by Hubert, so that a comparison could be made:

The enclosed cassette will reassure you that the Bohak will sound like a real
clavichord. It is more sustained than my Hubert copy and not quite so loud, partly
from heavier keys and partly from a more massive bridge. Taking out lead weights
from the keys will make it a little more responsive and if you decide to have a new
bridge it will make the sound a little less sustained and a little louder because the
bridge will be more like the Hubert’s. A new bridge will change the string lengths a
little, but none of these changes will much affect the sound, which will be much as
you hear on the recording.38

The response was equivocal:

 284

It was very kind of you to go to the trouble of making the tape, but I am sorry to say
that it doesn’t help me to come to a decision. Perhaps because of the recording level
or the proximity of the microphone, neither instrument sounds quite like a clavichord.
(I played the tape to 3 other people who felt the ~arne).~’

Meanwhile, Friedemann Hellwig, musical instrument restorer at the Germanisches

Nationalmuseum in Nuremburg, had said that ‘while it would be musically reasonable to

restore the Bohak, and it would sound like an 18th century clavichord, it would not have its

own individuality’. He ‘wondered if, with its twist, it would take tension’ and also felt that ‘a

copy would be a safer idea then [sic]a restoration’ .40 The curator expressed some of the gains

to be made in restoration to working condition:

The main argument in favour of a restoration is that we have no early clavichord [in
the collection of the Royal College of Music] and there is a strong temptation to make
the instrument playable so that students can learn from playing it - and give ‘Haydn’s
clavichord’ a voice (good publicity for the Museum on a popular level) [...I The
Bohak has already suffered so much alteration that, provided it can take tension, it
would not lose (in historical terms) from a restor~ition.~~

However, on balance the curator opted for a more conservative approach, so a quotation was

requested for the removal of some of the later accretions, which would then render the

instrument clean and stable, and allow access to makers and students who wished to study the

interior. To this end the hitchrail would be repaired, the non-original hitchpins and tangents

would be removed and substituted with new ones of original pattern, new edge mouldings

would be applied, and the soundboard would be spot glued in place with paper interfaces to

allow easy later removal. Strings would not be fitted. Barnes also provided a detailed account

of his findings to date, including information on the original positioning of the bridge, the

paring down of the soundbars, and the thinning of the s ~ u n d b o a r dHe

. ~ ~changes these

recommendations slightly in a communication some two years later, after discovering that the

soundboard was probably not originally glued in, but attached with nails.43A month later
 285

Barnes records the results of some further examination of the instrument, and reports that,

contrary to his earlier suggestions, the bars below the soundboard are probably not original,

but were added during the 1830s re~toration.~~

At the end of the year he notes that he has

‘returned [his] copy to 415 [A4=415Hz]about a week ago and find that I prefer its sound and

feel at this pitch and find it easier to play’.45Finally, he states that:

I shall be disappointed if you decide against restoration [...I I can understand the
cautious people who council [sic]against restoration. They do so because a new
bridge has to be made which is partly conjectural. The sacrifice of not having
Haydn’s clavichord in playing order is, however, not theirs but yours. And I don’t
think they can say that restoration is positively wrong. To them it doesn’t seem ideal.
I think that criticism would be disarmed by a successful re~toration.~~

Barnes also offered to lend a copy of the Bohak clavichord to the College to offset the

anticlimax of having neither the original restored, nor a copy.47The copy was examined in

Edinburgh by both parties, and comparisons were made with other instruments in playing

condition. The Instrument Museum Advisory Committee members were also canvassed

individually with the following result:

The general feeling is that there are too many unknown factors for us to be sure of a
valid restoration for a museum. The same doubts would apply to a copy - it would be
a hypothetical reconstruction. There is also the question of whether the original could
take the tension in the long-term. There is a great temptation to go ahead nonetheless -
partly because it is our only clavichord, partly because it was (probably) Haydn’s and
partly because the instrument is at present in such a state.48

The Bohak clavichord was ‘tidied up’ and returned to the Royal College of Music in 1987.

Aside from the stated hypothetical qualities of a copy of the instrument, the possibility of

acquiring one for the collection was rejected upon grounds of both financial constraint and

lack of space.49
 286

Analysis

Actions

The initial request made in 1976 to have the clavichord assessed for its potential return to

working condition indicates that Restitution was strongly favoured by the c u ~ t o d i a n s . ~ ~

Maintenance of some of the collection’s keyboard instruments in working condition is

described as a policy of the C ~ l l e g e .Early

~ ’ in discussions the curator states that there might

be insufficient evidence on the instrument for a valid restoration or copy to be made, but this

is a prelude to a search for more, not an advisory to di~continue.~’

Pressure upon the curator

to have the instrument restored is expressed in documents spread over several years.53When

the final decision not to restore the instrument is made in 1987, it is done so with regret, and

with the possibility of re-opening the debate should another clavichord by Bohak be found.54

The restorer’s viewpoint emerges when he states that he would be disappointed if the

restoration did not go ahead, and argues that a successful restoration would ‘disarm the

critics’ .55

Strong elements of didacticism are seen in the desire ‘to make the instrument playable so that

students can learn from playing It is explicit in the policy of the Museum of Instruments

that a few keyboard instruments in the collection be functional, and that the educational

activities of the College be empha~ised.~’

Nevertheless, playing of instruments is strictly

regulated to those already in working condition, and is limited by restricting playing time and

controlled by selection of suitable personnel.58Regular inspections and servicing of all

functioning instruments is carried

 287

Rationales

A rationale based in positivistic thinking is encountered in the statement, made at the

commencement of discussions, that ‘I have found evidence which confirms the originality of

the soundboard and indicates the position of the original bridge at 5 points. So we have the

basis of a reasonably accurate restoration’.60This sentiment places the thinking behind

treatment firmly in the Restitution regmen. It indicates a belief in the achievability through

craft intervention of a definitive previous state. When the curator replied that there was

insufficient original material left ‘for restoration to be sensible’, the response was to seek

further data through confirmation from another clavichord by Bohak, or an instrument of

very similar provenance.61The intention in this search for comparative evidence is to achieve

the first fbnctioning state of this particular instrument; the period during which it was used by

Haydn. This would require removal of evidence of the two intervening states of c. 1835 and

1911-12.

Focus on authentic experience is signified by references to Haydn couched as justification for

restorative treatment. Having ‘the instrument, with its Haydn association, here at present, and

playable’ and lamenting its failure to be present at ‘last year’s Haydn Centenary’, both

indicate the significance attached to the instrument’s pedigree.62However, it is very

important to understand the context of these remarks. The references to giving ‘Haydn’s

clavichord a voice’, and thus providing ‘good publicity for the Museum on a popular level’,

reflect the precarious position that the collection of the Royal College of Music was in at that

time.63What is voiced here is the possibility of making one much-altered instrument

 288

playable, thus enhancing the profile of the museum, and ensuring the preservation of the

other instruments. This pressure was, in fact, resisted.*

The motive that authentic experience provides is seen in the potential for subjective sensation

through musical function, coupled to the signifier of Haydn’s name. This is made evident by

the restorer’s reference to ‘the sacrifice of not having Haydn’s clavichord in playing order’.65

The word ‘sacrifice’ is very powerful in this context because it indicates the undesirability of

a non-playing state.

The values of Preservation, as opposed to Restitution, appear in the discussions upon the

advisability of restoration. Integrity is represented, although it is not unequivocally advocated

by any source in this case study. Hellwig wonders ‘if, with its twist, it would take tension’66,

thus arguing technically against workmg condition, rather than promoting preservation. His

objection, therefore, is not based upon ethics, but practicality. Both private instrument

makerkestorers consulted felt that it would be better ‘to buy another clavichord rather than

restore this’67.The decision by the curator not to restore, and the restorer’s proposals to

render the instrument clean and stable, and to allow access to the interior for makers and

students who wished to study it, are features associated with the value of integrity.68And the

final decision not to proceed without explicit documentation from other instruments of

similar provenance, also denotes integrity.

Pragmatic values are expressed by Hellwig when he argues that ‘while it would be musically

reasonable to restore the Bohak, and it would sound like an 18th century clavichord, it would
 289

not have its own indi~iduality’.~’

His use of the word ‘individuality’ in this context is

important; it places his view in diametric opposition to the value of authentic experience,

which promotes working condition as a signifier of aesthetic experience. Working condition,

in Hellwig’s view, signals a loss of the instrument’s individuality, as opposed to a

reinstatement of Haydn’s aesthetic presence. Further aspects of pragmatic values appear in

the preparation of an extensive documentation report, and the production of a ‘copy’ of the

instrument in its conjectured original state. In order to satisfy the owner’s need for a working

clavichord, Barnes offers to lend his ‘copy’ of the instrument to the College.70

Context

At the beginning of the correspondence, such key documents as Karp’s ‘Restoration,

Conservation, Repair and Maintenance’, and Barnes’s own contribution to the debate, ‘Does

restoration destroy evidence?’, which appeared in Early .Music in 1979 and 1980

re~pectively,~~
still lie in the future. And the highly influential international colloquium that

resulted in the publication of Per una carta Europea del restauro, coincided with the end of

the correspondence and the return of the untreated instrument. Thus, at the commencement of

this debate, the prevailing attitude of the College, but not of the curator, is better reflected by

such publications as Preservation and Restoration of Musical Instruments, which counsels

and advocates the restoration of museum instruments to working condition wherever

possible.’* Later, while the dialogue upon the wisdom of restoration of the Bohak clavichord

was under way, opinion in the musical instrument community itself was undergoing a change

of attitude towards a more conservative approach.

 290

Dissonances

A distinct dissonance is evident in the attempts to capture an idea of the instrument’s original

state, when the weight of the keys, the mass of the bridge, and the unknown disposition of the

original stringband are all variables which conspire against arriving at a decision by direct

comparison. The players’ and auditors’ individual preferences and sensitivities add a hrther

layer of doubt; on later returning a copy of the clavichord to a pitch of A4=415Hz, the restorer

finds that ‘I prefer its sound and feel at this pitch and find it easier to play’.73Aside from

these variables, it proves, in fact, impossible for the auditor(s) of the recording to identify

even the type of instrument: ‘neither instrument sounds quite like a clavichord. (I played the

tape to 3 other people who felt the same).’74

While an audio recording can only carry acoustic data, an attempt is being made to convey

aesthetic values of a non-epistemic nature through this medium. There is clearly dissonance

between the positivistic search for a definitive state, and the attempted arrival at that state

through aesthetic, non-quantifiable values, such as touch, feel and preference. Thus, assuring

that the completed restoration of the Bohak will make it ‘sound like a real clavichord’

provides no concrete data upon which a justification to proceed can be based.

10.1.5 Synopsis of the Three Periods

In the first period of treatment of the Bohak clavichord, in the 1830s, there is a nascent
I
conflict of values, in that modernization of the instrument distances the memory of Haydn

from the physical state of the instrument during the period when he was using it. In other
 29 1

words, the work done on the instrument is solidly assigned to Currency because of its

modernizing emphasis, while the aesthetic associations, with their shades of authenticity,

might be assigned to Restitution.

In the second period of treatment, in 1911-12, there exists a clear indication that the Bohak

clavichord is now regarded as representative of an earlier musical tradition, and that actions

upon it are directed towards respect for, and recovery of, this earlier state through restoration

procedures. At the same time, the technical knowledge necessary to return it to a previous

state, and the articulated need to do so, are not yet hlly present. The association with Haydn

indicates a search for authentic experience.

The third period of activity illustrates the tension between the regimens of Restitution and

Preservation, and the dissonance withn the latter. The views of all parties involved in

discussions upon the advisability and possibility of restoration of the instrument to its

original state, illustrate the divergence of viewpoint and lack of consensus between the two

regimens. Protracted discussions during a search for information show a tendency towards

Restitution, but the instrument is eventually consigned to the regimen of Preservation. The

dialogue between a curator employed to preserve historic instruments, and a restorer keen on

returning the instrument to playing state, indicates the precarious nature of advocacy in the

regimen of Preservation. The dialogue indicates the pressures that are exerted to reinstate

working condition, and the regret expressed when this is disallowed.

 292

10.2 JADRA VIRGINALS

Figure 17. View of the Jadra virginals within a glass-fionted

display case in the Pitt Rivers Museum. The angle fiom
which this photograph is taken demonstrates the lack of direct
accessibility that the display environment sometimes entails.

10.2.1 Introduction

This pentagonal virginals was made in Italy by Marco Jadra in 1552. The instrument has an

effective compass from C/E, to F,, or 4% octaves, including the short octave in the bass. The

short octave was a common device on early keyboards for extending the compass downwkds

without adding a full complement of keys, strings, and other associated parts. The lowest

keys in the bass that would normally be sharps were tuned as naturals.75Two other

instruments by this maker have been identified, one of 1568 in the Victoria and Albert

Museum (V&A) in London, and the other of 1565 in the Glinka Museum of the Moscow
 293

C~nservatory.'~
However, on stylistic grounds Denzil Wraight, a maker and restorer of

keyboard instruments, assigns the V&A instrument to another maker.77

Nothing can be stated specifically concerning the care and maintenance of the instrument

before the 20th century as no documentation is forthcoming prior to this period. The

information that the virginals was owned by Valdrighi, which appears on a paper label in the

instrument, has not been substantiated. At the beginning of the present century the instrument

was owned by Canon Francis Galpimi8 It is illustrated in Galpin's book Old English

Instruments of Music where it is described as a spinet.79

After Canon Galpin's death in 1946 the instrument was purchased from his estate by Alec

Hodson of Lavenham, Suffolk. Hodson put the instrument into playing order just prior to

selling it to the Pitt Rivers Museum in 1948.80The firm of Robert Goble of Headington,

Oxfordshire, put the instrument into playing order again in 1954." The firm continued to

maintain the instrument until 1962.82Through the latter part of the 1960s it was tuned and

maintained by Andrew Douglas.83In August of 1975 Deilzil Wraight approached the Pitt

Rivers Museum with a proposal for a re-working of the instrument which would put it once

again into playing condition, and would better respect its condition and history.84This

proposal was not put into practice and the instrument remained on display, but in a non-

functioning state.

From the foregoing, three distinctly documented periods of treatment of the Jadra virginals

can be identified:
 294

- Treatments by Hodson and Goble, 1948 and 1954

- Critique by Denzil Wraight in 1975

- Conservation within the Pitt Rivers Museum

Activity within these periods is analysed below.

10.2.2 First Period: Treatments by Hodson and Goble

History

In April of 1947 Alec Hodson, a dealer and restorer of musical instruments in Lavenham,

Suffolk, offered the Jadra virginals to the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford. In a letter to the

curator T.K. Penniman his opinion is that:

I think the Pitt Rivers Museum an excellent place for this very early instrument. I
only object to instruments going into museums when they are put in glass cases, in
derelict condition, and never heard.8s

The Museum records indicate that the instrument was put into playing order by Hodson, and

also refer to a tuning key made by him in 1948.86Hodson refers to the working condition of

the instrument, but does not state unequivocally that he has restored it: ‘Should you be

interested, the price of the late Cannon [sic]Galpin’s virginal of 1551 [sic]will be 85

No records are extant of what measures might have been taken to

guineas, in perfect ~rder.’~’

put the instrument into ‘perfect order’.

 295

The firm of Robert Goble subsequently restored the Jadra between 1953 and 1954 and billed

the Pitt Rivers Museum for E24 on 16 February 1954.*8The Museum catalogue of musical

instruments records the following: ‘Put into first class playing order by Robert Goble of

Headington, Feb. 1954. The old jacks, much repaired and not all contemporary (original?) are

kept.’89This entry indicates that Goble had made the new set ofjacks which the instrument

now has. The originals were returned with the instrument and are retained by the Museum.

They are of at least two different styles and bear the marks of repeated req~illing.’~
Record

keeping by Goble at the period of this treatment was ‘minimal’ and no documentation of the

work was retained.g1Further tuning and regulating is recorded in an invoice for &2,dated 7

June 1955.92 Further mention is made of maintenance work on the instrument done by the

firm of Goble in 1962.93

Analysis

Actions

Hodgson’s references to the need to keep the instrument in working condition, while still

reflecting its historical value, place actions on it securely in the regimen of Restitution. The

aim is to maintain musical function while respecting historical attributes. The attentions of

Robert Goble, and later Andrew Douglas, are evidence of a continuing focus on playing

condition, while the manufacture and fitting of a new set of jacks indicates that the wear and

tear on original components was compromising function. The state of the earlier jacks, and

the fact that they appear to be made in two styles, indicates repair and replacement on a

continuing basis at an earlier period.

 296

Rationales

The rationale for keeping the virginals in working Condition is based in authenticity -- the

exploitation of the aesthetic, historical quality of this ‘very early i n s t r ~ m e n t ’It. ~is~ treasured

for its function as a mediator for musical experience. The rationale for function is clearly

expressed by Hodson who disparages the alternative mode of existence, an imagined ‘derelict

condition, and never heard’.9sHearing the instrument constitutes its raison d ’&re.

Context

The absence of any documentation of treatment during this period, aside from invoices for

service, is indicative of the time before the rising popularity of early music, when

intervention was aimed purely at h c t i o n , and did not usually involve any element of

exploration of historical craft technique. During the 1960s such key publications as those of

Hubbard and Shortridge encouraged craft intervention on early keyboard instruments to be

accompanied by the recording of findings during treatment.96At the same time, the growing

discipline of museum conservation began to emphasise the keeping of treatment records as an

adjunct to the information yield of the artefact. Work done on this instrument pre-dates that

period.

Dissonances

There is a clear inference from Hodson that some museums fail, in his estimation, to care

appropriately for their holdings. His adjuration that the Pitt Rivers Museum should maintain

hctioning state, making this almost a condition of sale of the instrument, is an early

instance of the growing philosophical division between Restitution and Preservation.

 297

The fact that the old jacks were retained by Goble after his treatment of 1953/4, and

documented as having been returned to the museum, shows respect for their historic

attributes as bearers of evidence of a previous state.

10.2.3 Second Period: Critique by Denzil Wraight

History

In a 1975 critique of Goble’s restoration, keyboard instrument maker and restorer Denzil

Wraight details the following features: the instrument is strung in iron throughout, instead of

brass, it is tuned to modem pitch (A4=440Hz)which is as much as a fourth too high, and it

has been quilled in leather.97In his own plan for treatment Wraight suggests quilling in

Delrin (a modem synthetic material) as being comparable to natural quill in mechanical

attributes, but much more durable. He states that the compass of the instrument should be

effectively G,-C,, which agrees with Galpin’s estimate. Wraight concludes by stating that

‘enough is now known about 16th century instrument building to remove the matter of

historical restoration from the sphere of opinion’.98

In Wraight’s opinion the quilling material and the metal of the strings were inappropriate for

an instrument of this period. Furthermore, tuning one fourth higher than the pitch for which

the instrument was designed would have placed a great deal of extra tension on the frame.
 298

No action was taken on Wraight’s suggestions for revising the earlier restoration, although

tuning and maintenance was continued by Andrew Douglas.99Correspondence within the Pitt

Rivers Museum directly after Wraight’s assessment indicates some interest in the condition

of the instrument: F.F. Hill notes the ‘interesting suggestion [by Wraight] that the original in

all probability was likely to have been tuned as much as a fourth below modem pitch’.’’’

B.A.L. Cranstone, the Curator of Ethnology at the museum, later wrote to Wraight that ‘your

suggestion that we should put the Jadra into playing condition and arrange a recital is an

interesting one’.’’’ From this, it is apparent that the instrument was no longer in a working

state at this time.

Analysis

Actions

Action in this phase is virtual, as no treatment following the recommendations was actually

carried out. The suggested action, however, continues to be focussed upon the functioning

state. The critique of the instrument’s disposition is centred upon the metal used for the

stringing, the string tension, and the material used for the plectra. These are all features

whose nature relates to musical performance, but string tension also has a bearing upon

physical stability. Wraight’s suggestion that the Jadra should be put into playing condition

indicates that at this time the instrument was no longer functioning.

 299

Rationales

A key feature of the exchange of ideas during this phase of the virginals’ history is the very

positivistic statement that ‘enough is now known about 16th century instrument building to

remove the matter of historical restoration from the sphere of opinion’.Io2The argument that

the instrument should be strung throughout its compass in brass represented the then current

orthodoxy, although more recent research has indicated that polygonal virginals of this period

would be strung with iron wire in the lower register, changing to brass at about tenor C.’03

This illustrates the highly contextual nature of opinions concerning historical dispositions,

and also indicates the drawbacks inherent in craft intervention, beyond restringing, that

proves to be irreversible.

Context

Although the problems of restoration of keyboard instruments had been discussed in 1971 at

the colloquium Restauratieproblemen van Antwerpse Klavecimbels in Antwerp, this

represented only the onset, in one location, of a rising conservation consciousness. The

prevailing viewpoint from 1968 that ‘where possible the restoration of a deteriorated

instrument is commendable’ still held sway.Io4The journal Early Music, inaugurated in 1968,

periodically carried articles encouraging restoration, as did The Galpin Society Journal.”’ In

1975, the year that the critique of the Jadra’s disposition was written, FoMRHI was founded.

Because the original title of this organization includes the word ‘restorers’, this provides a

key indicator of contemporary thinking. The return of historic musical instruments to playing

state was still considered at that time to be a desirable aim in the museum context.
 300

Dissonances

As no action was taken upon the recommendations, no dissonances arise. Nevertheless, it is

possible to see in retrospect that the proposed treatment would have required further

revisiting as more knowledge on the hstorical disposition of the instrument became

available.

10.2.4 Third Period: Conservation at the Pitt Rivers Museum

History

The suggested restoration to playing condition of 1975 is the last recorded thrust in this

direction. In justifying the use of audio-visual equipment in musical instrument displays, the

curator, HClkne La Rue, stated in her review of the Pitt Rivers Museum musical collections in

1984:

In displays of musical instruments there is always the disappointment that those

objects which were designed to make music cannot be played or heard. Obviously we
would not be preserving this unique collection were we to make any playable, but it
does not make it very easy for the uninformed visitor if they cannot appreciate the
instruments in use.'06

Since 1984 the Jadra pentagonal virginals has been on display behind glass in the exhibition

gallery of the Pitt Rivers Museum Annex. The display environment is controlled against

fluctuations in relative humidity and temperature, routine monitoring of the environment is

undertaken, and condition is checked periodically. The instrument is maintained in an

untuned state with the strings straight and aligned, but under very little tension.
 301

A detailed examination of the instrument was conducted in 1991 by Grant O’Brien, early

keyboard specialist of the Russell Collection in Edinburgh. The following technical

information is recorded in his report: signature and other inscriptions; scantlings

(dimensions) and case materials; details of the soundboard rose; keyboard features, including

compass and key dimensions; scalings, including string length and plucking point; string

gauges marked on key levers; all pin and bridge dimensions; general materials of fabrication;

and general decorative details. A section of notes is appended to the report, detailing features

of interest in this particular instrument, and providing comparisons with another ascribed to

the same maker in the V&A, London.’” O’Brien does not discuss the instrument’s condition.

Analysis

Actions

Action at this stage of the Jadra virginals’ existence centres upon conservation. Scientific

methods are employed to safeguard the fabric of the insti-ument, including enclosure to limit

public access and dust, control of lighting, relative humidity and temperature, and

detensioning of the strings. These are all active measures for ensuring stability and long-term

preservation. It is clearly the policy of the Pitt Rivers Museum that instruments in its

collection are not played.’”

Rationales

The Jadra virginals has been transformed from a source of tactile and auditory sensation to a

source of technical and historical information. The instrument has provided source material
 302

for definitive studies on Marco Jadra and the 16th century Venetian school of keyboard

instrument makers.'09Intervention, either through treatment aimed at re-establishing playing

condition, or through use as a musical instrument, has been curtailed in favour of

measurement, documentation, and scholarly study. The instrument is protected by policy,

where preservation and restoration are clearly opposed.

Context

This instrument is placed firmly in the museum context as represented by such publications

as Recommendations for the Conservation of Musical Instruments: An Annotated

Bibliography"', and Standards for the Care of Musical Instruments."' Both of these

publications advocate preservation of status quo through scientifically applied controls, and

counsel playing only under strictly controlled circumstances. The instrument as an

information resource is advocated in two key publications by K a r ~ . " ~

Dissonances

There is no recorded debate over the virginals' location in the Preservation regimen, so no

dissonance between actions and rationales arises. Because of an actively pursued museum

conservation policy, and because the museum's collection of instrument is primarily

ethnographic, pressure to achieve or maintain playing state of instruments is largely absent.

 303

10.2.5 Synopsis of the Three Periods

The first period of recorded treatments, those by Hodson and Goble, is characteristic of

Restitution. The action is to maintain working condition under the rationale of exploring the

instrument’s historical context.

The critique of 1975 by Denzil Wraight proposes a continuation of playing state, and argues

for a revisiting of the current disposition of the instrument. Re-stringing, re-quilling and

lowering of string tension are all suggested as the means of better representing a known

historical state. The instrument continues to exist in the Restitution regimen.

In the final phase, the treatment of the Jadra virginals is situated firmly in the regimen of

Preservation within the collections of the Pitt Rivers Museum. Through a policy of

conservation, emphasis is placed upon stability of the materials of fabrication, and a yield of

information gained through curtailment of craft intervention.

10.3 KIRCKMAN HARPSICHORD

10.3.1 Introduction

This double manual harpsichord was built in 1777 by Jacob Kirckman of London. In the

1930s the instrument was owned by Major Benton Fletcher, an enthusiast in the revival of

early music, who had opened his property, Old Devonshire House, to students of keyboard
 304

and chamber music. In pursuing the goal of recreation of an earlier musical ambience, he had

acquired a number of keyboard instruments. From his allusions to concerts on historic

instruments it is clear that they were kept in working condition throughout his ownership.

Figure 18. The Kirckman harpsichord on display in

Fenton House, Hampstead. The distortion to the
bentside describedbelow, and illustrated in Figure 19,
is evident.

In 1937 Major Fletcher donated Old Devonshire House to the National Trust with all its

holdings including furnishings and musical instruments. It was stipulated that the collections

be maintained in working condition so that students of early music could have access to types
 305

of instruments preceding the pianoforte. Old Devonshire house was destroyed by bombing in

May 1941, but the instruments had been moved out of London during the Blitz for safe

keeping, and only their original stands were 10st.l'~In. 1943 the National Trust purchased No.

3, Cheyne Walk, in Chelsea, moved the instruments into the house, and reopened the

collection after the cessation of hostilities. Major Fletcher died in 1944. Fenton House, with

its collection of fine china and furniture, was bequeathed to the National Trust in 1952, and

the musical instruments were moved there the same year.'14

The firm of Arnold Dolmetsch restored the Kirckman harpsichord in 1952 and was

responsible for its maintenance until 1965. In 1972 the instrument was restored again, by the

firm of Adlam Burnett, and was maintained by them until 1982. In 1984 maintenance of the
Kirckman, and the other instruments of the Benton Fletcher collection, was taken over by the

firm of Mackinnon and Waitzman. Fenton House has remained open to the public since 1952,

and spinets, harpsichords, and clavichords are available in good working condition to

students of music selected by audition.

Four distinctly documented periods for analysis in the history of the Kirckman harpsichord

can be identified fiom the above introduction:

- Ownership of Benton Fletcher in the 1930s

- Restoration and maintenance by Dolmetsch 1951-65

- Restoration and maintenance by Adlam, Burnett 1972-82

- Maintenance by Mackinnon and Waitzman
 306

10.3.2 First Period: Ownership of Benton Fletcher

History

It was Benton Fletcher’s intention to promote early music not through a ‘dead museum of

glass cases, but a living institution with perfonnances of music & lectures upon kindred

subjects’.l15In the opinion of Mimi Waitzman, keeper of the collection of keyboard

instruments at Fenton House, ‘he didn’t see music in isolation: he had a global perspective

that encompassed the costumes, the drama and the spectacle. He was interested in preserving

a past that he saw was disappearingy.’l6And, in contrast to the Dolmetsch family, who were

Fletcher’s contemporaries and active in the early music revival, he ‘wanted the original

artefact, not a reproduction’.117

It was therefore necessary to keep all instruments of his collection in sound working

condition and, in Waitzman’s estimation, ‘few have survived without radical and sometimes

multiple alterations’.Il8Irvin Hinchcliffe was the restorer responsible for the instruments

during Fletcher’s lifetime, but no specific documentary evidence of treatment on the

Kirckman harpsichord is extant. According to Derek Jacltson, whose mother had been Benton

Fletcher’s housekeeper, and who had himself been associated with the National Trust since

1937, record keeping during restoration and maintenance of the instrument collection was

limited to invoices and bills of sale.’lgNo records related to the Kirckman harpsichord appear

to have survived.
 307

Analysis

Actions

Fletcher’s insistence that the collection be active in music performance during this period

places the Kirckman harpsichord in the regimen of Restitution. The instrument is maintained

in working condition through craft intervention. However, the potential for a lapse into

Currency is evident in the reference to ‘radical and sometimes multiple alterations’.’20This

indicates the precarious position that an instrument occupies if it is maintained in working

state for the long term. This critical aspect is discussed in Section 11.3.4.

Rationales

Authenticity is evident in the reference to Fletcher’s desire to recreate a past ambience

through the medium of the musical instruments in a staged context -- the drama, costumes

and spectacle. The opinion that he required original instruments, not reproductions, is also

noteworthy. It indicates, again, the attempt to explore the past through the medium of a

genuine historic object; an experience not to be gained through a non-original substitute.

Context

Records of interventions were not routinely kept during the early decades of this century, and

the absence of any documentation of treatment can be considered the norm. The publication

of technical details of instruments, derived during dismantling for restorative treatment,

begins to be encountered only in the 196Os.l2l Similarly, documentation, according to the

 308

practices of conservation as a distinct discipline, appears around this time, with the growing

emphasis on treatment records and documentation of condition.

Dissonances

The allusion to a ‘dead museum of glass cases’ is an early instance of the growing

philosophical distance between Restitution and The functioning state of the

instruments is central to their existence in Fletcher’s collection, and it is clear that this

attitude is already viewed, in the 1930s, as divergent froin the that of some museums.

10.3.3 Second Period: Restoration and Maintenance 0y Dolmetsch, 1951-1965

History

In 1951 the Kirckman harpsichord was sent to the workshops of the Dolmetsch firm in

Haslemere for restoration. This represented a considerable change from the policy during

Benton Fletcher’s life time, because during his custodianship he ‘wouldn’t let a Dolmetsch

near it’.’23Continued running maintenance was necessary after the restoration, and

Dolmetsch was involved with this for the next 14 years. In 1956 the nag’s head swell, which

had been disconnected during the earlier restoration, was reported missing. The instrument

was again sent to the Dolmetsch workshop for repair, and substitute nag’s head swell parts

were supplied by D. McKenna from another, unidentified in~trurnent.’~~

Three years later

Dolmetsch requilled the lute stop, and made an interior music stand. In 1963 the jacks of the
 309

lute stop were replaced with new ones. The originals have not survived, having been either

discarded or lost. The keyboard was rebushed in 1965.’25

Analysis

Actions

Action during this second period continues to be upon maintenance of playing state. During

this process several features of the instrument became irreversibly changed, amplifying

Waitzman’s view that ‘every restoration, no matter how well-documented or sympathetic,

wipes away evidence and makes the original condition, one condition more remote’.’26In this

case, records of treatment appear not to have been kept, or at least not provided to the owners

of the instrument. The substitution of components during on-going treatment provides further

evidence for the potential lapse into Currency of protocols associated with Restitution.

Rationales

Although not explicit in the sources, the continued use of the Kirckman at Fenton House, in

compliance with Benton Fletcher’s wishes, argues that the search for the experience of

authenticity through use of an original instrument is still the motivator.

Context

The period of the Dolmetsch firm’s association with the instrument coincides with a

profound change in thought regarding the value of the information to be gained in the

treatment of musical instruments. Publications of the results of restorative treatments begin to

 310

appear, together with technical studies of instrument-making practice. However, while the

developing museum-based philosophy of conservation was well articulated in such

publications as The Conservation of Antiquities and Work of Art’27,and would soon be

encoded,12’ it would not have any influence upon collected musical instruments until the

following decade, and then only within the mainstream museum world.

Dissonances

The rising presence of museum-based philosophies of conservation during this period

appears not to have influenced the conceptual approach to the treatment of the Kirckman. The

loss of parts of the instrument, such as the original nag’s head swell lever and the original (or

earlier) jacks from the lute stop, indicates that the documentary and signifjring function of

these components, even when divorced from the instrument, was not appreciated. The idea

that these parts are original to the instrument, and should be retained for that reason alone, is

overtaken by their essentially disposable nature.

The absence of any documentation of work done indicates the commercial exigencies of

treatment, rather than a lack of exploratory nature. The instrument is worked upon so that it

can be played, not so that the process of treatment can become a source of historical technical

information, as is the case when Restitution is fully developed under the enquiring thrust of

the early music movement. Neither is the treatment documented for the purposes of making a

permanent record of intervention, as would be the case in the Preservation regimen.

 311

Both the absence of documentation and the apparent disposal of original parts make the

action at this stage in the instrument’s life appear ‘old-fashioned’. Trends in the treatment of

historic instruments during the 1950s and 60s are out of phase with this attitude. Also, the

replacement of original parts with facsimiles, or parts from another instrument, shows the

potential for on-going treatments in the Restitution regimen to lapse into Currency. This

illustrates the fine line between the rationales of re-establishing an earlier state, and the

rationales of maintaining that state by continuous intervention.

10.3.4 Third Period: Restoration and Maintenance by Adlam Burnett

History

In 1972 the firm of Adlam Burnett made a proposal for restoration work based upon an

examination of the instrument. The proposed work included: refitting the lower 8’ manual

with quill plectra in place of the existing leather; requilling all other registers with Delrin

throughout, and fitting new tongues in the jacks as necessary; reattaching the loose hitch pin

rail at the bass and treble ends; removal of the baseboard in order to correct the lift at the base

end of the bridge; and general repairs to and setting up of the keyboard, restringing,

adjustments to the stop levers, machine, and pedal mechanisms. This was described as ‘a

major restoration’ and the removal of the baseboard was considered ‘regrettable but

necessary’. 12’ This work was commenced in 1974 and by August 1977 Adlam Burnett

reported on the completed work.13o

 312

Aside from the proposed treatment described above, further work of a much more

interventive nature had been found necessary. The bentside of the case close to the right

cheek had become distorted by string tension. The tendency of the cheekpiece to tip

backwards (away from the player) is a very common feature in harpsichords of this period

(Figure 19). This distortion is related to the designer’s progressive increase of string tension

in successive models, while not accurately coupling this with concomitant increases in the

structural strength of the wood components.

te

Figure 19. Distortion of the bentside (b). String tension (c) causes force
(d) which tips the cheekpiece (a) upwards, causing comer (e) to rise. This
distortion is easily visible in the photograph of the Kirckman (Figure 18).

The distortion of the instrument’s bentside necessitated a process of reforming using a

wooden caul fitted to the curve of the side. This entailed complete dismantlement of the

instrument, and removal of the veneer from the underlying carcase of the bentside. A series
 3 13

of saw cuts was then made vertically across the distorted area, and these were filled with

wood wedges, glued in place, thus forcing the wood back into its original shape. The veneer

was then replaced. While the instrument was dismantled all interior bracing was re-glued,

and a prop which had been inserted between the baseboard and 4'bridge was removed. This

had been added during a previous restoration and had resulted in a muffling of resonance.

Wood reinforcing battens that had been glued under the soundboard were removed. Both

these treatments resulted in a clearer and less muffled tone. The tongues of 200 jacks had to

be replaced with new ones because the routine removal and replacement of the quilling as it

wore out, or as fashions changed, had enlarged the holes in which it was secured. Twenty-

two jacks were replaced as they were considered too small to work correctly. These were

assumed to have come originally from another instrument. A new jack rail was built and

installed to replace the worn original.

In 1982 the instrument was returned to Adlam Burnett for regulation, levelling, and cleaning.

The jacks were requilled throughout in 'bird', replacing the synthetic DeIrin that had been

installed earlier. Wear to the balance and front key guide mortices was corrected, and new

dampers were fitted throughout.'3'

Analysis

Actions

It is significant that 'a major restoration' was considered necessary in 1972,13*although major

work had been carried out on the instrument by Dolmetsch in 1951. Furthermore, during the
 314

1972 work, several features of earlier treatments were removed, including the prop between

the baseboard and 4' bridge, and the reinforcing battens glued under the soundboard.

Materials that were considered expedient to insert in a treatment of 1951 were removed two

decades later. Inappropriate jacks were also removed and replaced with new ones, and a new

jack rail was supplied to replace the worn original. These changes all illustrate the continuing

maintenance necessary after restoration, especially at a time when new knowledge is causing

opinions upon approaches, materials and techniques to be updated and modified.

Correction of the distortion to the bentside required highly invasive treatment. In order to

ensure a continued playing state, it was therefore necessary to correct a defect of manufacture

that originated with the maker of the in~trurnent.'~~

Similarly, the use of Delnn, a synthetic

material substituted for quill to enhance reliability, can be seen as an improvement upon the

original disposition. Both these features of the treatment represent improvements, and thus

illustrate the narrow conceptual boundary between the regimens of Restitution and Currency.

The later removal of the Delrin, and return to the use of quill indicates a tendency to

withdraw from this m~dernization.'~~

Documentation of the work included a detailed proposal for treatment and an equally

thorough record of the work actually p e r f ~ r m e d .Copies

' ~ ~ of this material were deposited

with the owners. These documents indicate two trends: the desire to disseminate information

of an historical and technical character, and the perceived necessity for a permanent record of

treatment. The former results from the investigative nature of the early music movement,

while the latter arises from the values of museum-based disciplines.

 315

Rationales

Values associated with authentic experience are clearly evident in the return of the Kirckman

to a reliable playing state. The instrument is in a location where the personal dialogue

between keyboard players and historic musical instruments is of paramount importance.

However, hints of a conservation consciousness are encountered in the statement that such a

major treatment as correcting the bentside distortion is considered 'regrettable but

nece~sary~.~~~

The assertion that removal of the interior prop and the reinforcing battens resulted in a clearer

and less muffled tone may be true, but the perceived outcome is still based on a subjective

' ~ ~the original auditory qualities of the instrument cannot be known with
value j ~ d g e m e n t .As

any certainty, judgements upon its tone colour are necessarily conjectural, and are intimately

and inextricably bound up with current musical taste.

Context

At the time of the major treatment (1972) the sentiment was still current from the 1968

publication, Preservation and Restoration of Musical Instruments, that restoration was

~ommendable.'~~
The year before the treatment was undertaken the conference in Antwerp,

Restauratieproblemen van Antwerpse Klavecimbels, took place, at which restorers and

curators discussed the problems associated with interventive treatment.I3' However, the

results of this conference were not widely disseminated. In 1976 Derek Adlam published the

technical and historical results of major interventive treatment of a harpsichord, which

indicates that there was still a scholarly venue for descriptions of restorative procedure^.'^^
 316

As noted above, the 'regrettable but necessary' aspect of the treatment indicates a feeling for

the integrity of the instr~ment.'~'

Dissonances

In general, both the work done on the Kirckman at this time, and the rationale behind it, are

consonant with the values of Restitution. However, specific actions such as the attempts at

eradicating a maker's defect, and the use of synthetic quilling, are inconsistent with authentic

experience, and suggest improvement. Also, it is recognized that invasive treatment will

detract from the instrument as a medium of exchange with the past -- that its integrity will be

compromised -- but while it is regretted, it is judged that the work must still go ahead. This

indicates an awareness of the developing discipline of conservation, and suggests a

dissonance surrounding this action.

10.3.5 Fourth Period: Maintenance by Mackinnon and Waitzman

History

In October of 1984 the keyboard firm of Mackinnon and Waitzman examined the harpsichord

and produced a report of its ~ 0 n d i t i o n . It

l ~was
~ noted that the cheekpiece on the bentside was

again tipping back even though it had been corrected only seven years previously. In

addition, there were splits in the soundboard, the wrestplank was becoming detached, and

there was a gap between the treble hitchpin rail and the bentside. All these features were

attributed to distortions resulting from continuing string tension, and it was clear that the
 317

previous intervention had had only a temporary corrective effect. The examiners also

identified a marked deterioration in the playing state of the instrument. The playing action

was judged to be 'shocking' and 'utterly inconsistent with normal wear and tear'.'43 All the

quill from the restoration completed in 1977 had since been removed and the instrument

requilled partially with natural quill and partially with Delrin. During this process some of

the jack tongues had been damaged, and some had been split so badly by removal of the old

quilling material, that they could no longer be used. During replacement of the quilling many

of the flyback staples had been distorted, and the tongue springs damaged. All jacks had been

liberally coated with olive oil. The key dip had been altered in the treble by an additional

layer of felt and a folded concert programme. The order of stagger (the plucking order of the

jacks) had been disturbed, while the damping proved ineffective and badly adjusted. The

authors of this report concluded:

We recommend that no structural work be carried out on this instrument [...I The
number of times that this repair can be carried out on a two hundred year old
keyboard being limited, we feel that it should not be undertaken until absolutely
necessary.'44

Work was undertaken to bring the harpsichord back into playing state with the minimum of

intervention. A report of March 1987 details all the work carried out on the instruments of the

Benton Fletcher collection, including the 1777 K i r ~ k m a n . All

' ~ ~244 jacks had the olive oil

removed, and 77 of them also needed individual repairs. In most cases this consisted of either

rebuilding the existing tongues, or complete replacement. The new set-up reconstructed the

Adlam Bumett restoration of 1977.146

 318

The report referred to above also included a review of the playing times of all the instruments

in the collection over two consecutive one-year periods. The Kirckman harpsichord’s figures

were reported as follows:

Number of occasions played 56

Most consecutive hours 5
Total hours 1984-85 25 XI
Total hours 1985-86 68

Limits to both playing and practice time were suggested.

In 1994 a further condition report by MacKinnon and Waitzman on the whole collection

highlighted the deteriorating condition of the Kirckman harpsichord. The machine stop was

not moving smoothly and the ‘general condition of the harpsichord has begun to cause

unea~e’.’~’
The authors noted that ‘signs of deterioration are increasingly apparent’ and

‘reliability is just beginning to be affected’.148A record of hours played from 1988 to 1994

was provided:

Year: 88 89 90 91 92 93 94
Playing time (hours): 16 43% 29Y; 55% 44% 44 36

The publication of Musical Instrument Museums, a review of the state of musical collections

in the United Kingdom undertaken by the MGC, stimulated the production of a revised

policy on the use of the Benton Fletcher Colle~tion.‘~~

The following observation was made:

If we continue, as we have until now, to repair instruments replacing worn out parts
with new, and modifying old parts so that they may hnction, we will be even less
able to present them in good faith, as ‘original’ objects. Rather, in many important
respects, they will have become working replicas of them~e1ves.l~~

In March of 1995 a schedule of time limits to be applied to the keyboard collection was

produced for distribution to all players of the instruments at Fenton House. The committee

responsible for the decision stated that:

 319

For many reasons the Committee are reluctant to withdraw instruments permanently
from playing condition. Playing formed an integral part of Major Fletcher's vision for
his bequest, and music has always added a lively and exciting atmosphere to Fenton
House.'"

Playing time on the 1777 Kirckman harpsichord was limited to four hours per season (March

to October). The Kirckman had always been a favourite instrument of visiting players, as a

comparison of its playing time with other instruments in the collection indicated.152The

revised policy was an attempt to distribute use more evenly:

One intention of this measure is to help spread the hours of use more evenly over the
whole Collection. We very much hope that our frequent and regular players will feel
encouraged to try more of the instruments and use all the time available to them, for
we greatly value their support.'53

The Kirckman harpsichord is kept in limited working condition in Fenton House and

monitored at three-monthly intervals for any signs of deterioration of its playing state. The

environment of the rooms in which all instruments are kept is monitored continually, and

measures are taken to minimise relative humidity fluctuations.

Analysis

Actions

Examination of the harpsichord showed that it had deteriorated markedly since last restored

by Adlam Burnett in 1982. The instrument had been re-quilled with a mixture of materials,

both artificial and natural, jack tongues had been damaged, flyback staples had been

distorted, and the tongue springs damaged. Olive oil had been used excessively as a lubricant.

In addition, the action of the instrument was badly out of a d j ~ s t m e n t .There

' ~ ~ is no

indication of a projected return to a previous state, or indeed a continuation of the current set-
 320

up, and damage has been caused in the process. These actions fall into a category by

themselves; critical analysis of these case studies seeks to place actions on historic

instruments into context, and to assess them in the light of social and technical demands, but

incompetence does not fit comfortably into this schema.

Of more concern to the long-term playing status of the Klirckman was the observed return of

the distortion ‘corrected’ in the treatment of 1974-77. In addition to the tipped cheekpiece,

cracks were seen at other places in the instrument where stress had been relieved.

Nevertheless, in the report the recommendation that ‘no structural work be carried out on this

instrument’ is tempered by the proviso that it ‘should not be undertaken until absolutely

So, while the strictures of Preservation are understood and appreciated, it was
nece~sary’.’~~

felt that the individual circumstances of the instrument still dictated invasive treatment if the

decision to continue playing status was forced.

Because of the stipulations of the playing policy of the collection (‘playing formed an

integral part of Major Fletcher’s vision for his beq~est”~“),

a strategy of limiting use of the

Kirckman harpsichord, and of spreading playing time more evenly over the other instruments

of the collection, was instituted. The programme that resulted from this strategy epitomises

the pragmatic approach. Control of the situation is taken by compiling numbers, data, and

statistics centred upon the recording of playing time. Three-monthly monitoring of the

instrument was instituted as a further check on its well-being.

 32 1

Rationales

The fact that the instrument was maintained in a playing state appropriate to its presumed

historical disposition indicates the continuation of Restitution. The playing policy of the

collection still dictates active use of the harpsichord in the performance of period music, and

also encourages the didactic element. Visiting players are still encouraged to support the

collection through regular use of the instruments.

Elements of Preservation appear in the reluctance to submit the Kirckman harpsichord to

another invasive treatment because ‘we will be even less able to present [the instruments] in

good faith, as “original” The statement that the instruments ‘will have become

working replicas of themselves’ 15* is the antithesis of continuity, where exactly this process

takes place.

Context

By 1984 consciousness of the expressed need for preservation of museum collections of

musical instruments was a solid feature of the conservation literature. A working group of

CIMCIM had produced a draft of guidelines for public access to instrument collections.159

These were published in revised form in a booklet in 1984. In a move to minimise the

perceived division between ‘conservator’ and ‘restorer’, which is specific to English usage

(as discussed in Section 5.3), ICOM published a definition of the professional wherein the

term ‘conservator/restorer’ was 1egitimized.l6’In addition, the papers by Karp and Barnes

that had appeared some years earlier in Early Music, indicate dissemination of the

conservation perspective beyond its own literature.161

 322

Dissonances

Maintaining playing state while still adhering to the values of Preservation is a clearly

dissonant. It represents an attempt to strike a balance between the integrity of the instrument

and explorations of its subjective attributes. The discomfort that this compromise incurs is

clearly expressed in the Committee’s reluctance ‘to withdraw instruments permanently from

playing condition’, even though there is evidence of the detriment to their state that playing

causes.

10.3.6 Synopsis of the Four Periods

During the ownership of Benton Fletcher, the Kirckman harpsichord was firmly ensconced in

the Restitution regimen. It was used for the performance of period music, and was maintained

in a working state that replicated some historical model by craft intervention. This continued

under the restoration and maintenance by Dolmetsch, between 1951 and 1965.

During the restoration and subsequent maintenance by Adlam Burnett, between 1972 and

1982, the values of Restitution are still evident but, in keeping with the academic emphasis

on the study of early instruments, the practices of record keeping and general documentation

ere more advanced. Elements of Currency are seen in the improvements brought about by the

use of Delrin for the plectra, and in the attempts to correct the maker’s error of construction.

In the period of maintenance by Mackinnon and Waitzman there was a marked shift in

thinking. The values of Preservation were introduced in the advice not to submit the
 323

harpsichord to further invasive treatment, in the necessity for monitoring the playing time

and condition of the instrument, and in attention to the environment in which the instrument

resided. There was still a thrust toward continuing the Kirckman’s playing state, but this

appears to be regarded as a compromise position of temporary duration.

NOTES

1. MS 41 17, Parry Room, Royal College of Music Library.

2. Bizzi, p. 74.

3. Instrument information files, Royal College of Music Museum of Musical Instruments.

4. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 4 May 1984, records of Musical Instrument
Museum, Royal College of Music.

5. Barnes, John, Examination Report: Bohak Clavichord, December 1976, records of the
Museum of Instruments, Royal College of Music.

6. Barnes, John, Examination Report, p. 2.

7. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 26 June 1984, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

8. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 21 November 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

9. Kopytoff, p. 73.

10. MS 41 17, Parry Room, Royal College of Music Library.

11. Barnes, John, Examination Report: Bohak Clavichord, December 1976, records of the
Museum of Instruments, Royal College of Music, p. 2.

12. ibid.

13. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 21 November 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

14. Dart, p. 73.

 324

15. See, for example, Ruskin, Seven Lamps, p. 161; and Morris, ‘Principles’.

16. Hill, Arthur F., letter to Mr. Chapman, 3 August 1911, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

17. Hill, Arthur F., letter to Mr. Chapman, 29 September 1911, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

18. Broadwood and Co., ‘Estimate for Repair’, 22 November 1911, records of the Museum
of Instruments, Royal College of Music.

19. Arthur F. Hill, bill of sale to Mrs. Chapman, July 16 1912, Musical Instrument Museum
records, Royal College of Music.

20. Hill, Arthur F., letter to Mr. Chapman, 29 September 1911, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

21. ibid.; see also Boalch, p. 64.

22. Barnes, John, Examination Report: Bohak Clavichord, December 1976, records of the
Museum of Instruments, Royal College of Music, p. 3.

23. Hill, Arthur F., letter to Mr. Chapman, 3 August 1.911, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

24. Hill, Arthur F., letter to Mr. Chapman, 29 September 191I, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

25. ibid.

26. Barnes, John, Examination Report: Bohak Clavichord, December 1976, records of the
Museum of Instruments, Royal College of Music, p. 2.

27. Arthur F. Hill, bill of sale to Mrs. Chapman, July 16 1912, Musical Instrument Museum
records, Royal College of Music.

28. Lowenthal, p. 52.

29. Campbell, p. 295.

30. Details of this report, and the thinking behind the decisions made upon the future of the
instrument, are contained in John Barnes’s publication ‘Haydn’s Clavichord’.

3 1. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 11 January 1977, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music, p. 1.

32. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 3 1 January 1977, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.
 325

33. Among those consulted were Friedemann Hellwig, restorer at the Germanisches
Nationalmuseum; Alfons Huber, restorer at the Museum fur Kunstgeschichte, Vienna; Daniel
Spika, curator of the Narodni Museum, Prague; and Derek Adlam, Christopher Clarke, and
William Dow, restorers in private practice.

34. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 16 July 1977, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

35. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 9 August 1978, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

36. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 6 April 1983, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

37. ibid. The term ‘Haydn Centenary’ is used rather loosely in the correspondence; it refers to
the 250th anniversary of Haydn’s birth in 1732.

38. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 27 March 1984, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

39. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 4 May 1984, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

40. ibid. The ‘twist’ refers to a comer-to-comer distortion due to string tension.

41. ibid.

42. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 26 June 1984, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

43. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 14 October 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

44. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 21 November 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

45. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 3 December 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

46. ibid.

47. ibid.

48. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 19 June 1987, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

49. ibid.
 326

50. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 4 May 1984, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

5 1. Collections Management and Educational Services, unpublished document, Royal

College of Music Museum on Instruments, undated, p. 2.

52. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 31 January 1977, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

53. Wells, letters of 22 September 1978,6 April 1983, and 4 May 1984, p. 2, records of the
Museum of Instruments, Royal College of Music.

54. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 19 June 1987, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

55. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 3 December 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

56. ibid

57. Collections Management and Educational Services, unpublished document, Royal

College of Music Museum on Instruments, undated, p. 2.

58. ibid.

59. ibid.

60. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 11 January 1977, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music, p. 1.

61. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 31 January 1977, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

62. ibid.

63. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 4 May 1984, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

64. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to author, 16 February 1999.

65. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 3 December 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

66. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 16 July 1977, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

67. ibid.
 327

68. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 14 October 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

69. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 16 July 1977, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

70. ibid.

71. Karp, ‘Restoration’, pp. 79-84; and Barnes, ‘Evidence’, pp. 213-218.

72. Berner, et al., p. 8.

73. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 3 December 1986, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

74. Wells, Elizabeth, letter to John Barnes, 4 May 1984, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

75. Russell, ‘The Harpsichord’, p. 78.

76. Boalch, pp. 407-408.

77. Wraight, p. 165. Wraight’s attribution of the instrument to Franciscus Brixiensis is

disputed by O’Brien in ‘Marco Jadra’, p. 4.

78. Catalogue of musical instruments, Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford.

79. Galpin, Plate XXIII, opposite p. 124.

80. Hodson, Alec, letter to T.K. Penniman, 30 April 1947, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

81. Goble, Robert, invoice to W.T. Penniman, 16 February 1954, Pitt Rivers Museum
records, Oxford University.

82. Anon., note to file, Pitt Rivers Museum records, Oxford University.

83. La Rue, HClkne, transcript of personal communication to author, May 1995.

84. Wraight, Denzil, letter to R.R. Inskeep, 28 August 1975, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

85. Hodson, Alec, letter to T.K. Penniman, 30 April 1947, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

86. Catalogue of Musical Instruments, Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford University.

 328

87. Hodson, Alec, letter to T.K. Penniman, 28 August 1947, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

88. Goble, Robert, invoice to W.T. Penniman, Pitt Rivers Museum, 16 February 1954, Pitt
Rivers Museum records, Oxford University.

89. Catalogue of Musical Instruments, Pitt Rivers Museum.

90. Examination by author at Pitt Rivers Museum, May 1995.

91. Goble, Andrea, transcript of telephone conversation, May 1995.

92. Goble, Robert, invoice to W.T. Penniman, Pitt Rivers Museum, 7 June 1955, Pitt Rivers
Museum records, Oxford University.

93. Anon., note to file, Pitt Rivers Museum records, Oxford University.

94. Hodson, Alec, letter to T.K. Pentiman, 30 April 1947, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

95. ibid.

96. Three Centuries of Harpsichord Making (1965); and Italian Harpsichord Building in the
16th and 17th centuries (1960).

97. Wraight, Denzil, letter to R.R. Inskeep, 28 August 1975, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

98. ibid. Wraight was to alter this view considerably, stating 15 years later that ‘I would now
regard it as correct [...I to write that most Italian polygonal virginals (including the Oxford
Jadra) were designed to be strung with iron wire, changing to brass at about tenor c’
(Wraight, Denzil, letter to author, 15 January 1996).

99. La Rue, Hklkne, transcript of personal communication, May 1995.

100. Hill, F.F., letter to R.R. Inskeep, 7 September 1975, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

101. Cranstone, B.A.L., letter to Denzil Wraight, May 7 1980, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.
102. Wraight, Denzil, letter to R.R. Inskeep, 28 August 1975, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

103. Wraight, Denzil, letter to author, 15 January 1996.

104. Berner, et al., p. 8.

 329

105. Examples are: Adlam, ‘Vaudry’; and Farrington, ‘Dissection’,

106. La Rue, pp. 12-13.

107. O’Brien, Grant, Virginal Measurement Short Form: Jadra Virginals, October 1991,
Russell Collection of Early Keyboard Instruments, Edinburgh.

108. La Rue, pp. 12-13.

109. For example: Wraight, ‘Stringing’; and O’Brien, ‘Marco Jadra’

110. ICOM, 1993.

111. MGC, 1995.

112. Karp, ‘Restoration’; and Karp, ‘Musical Instruments’.

113. Russell, Keyboard Instruments, p. 3.

114. ibid.

115. Fletcher, Benton, letter to Madam Benenson, 12 April 1937, Fenton House records, The
National Trust.

116. Ballinger, p. 9.

117. ibid.

118. ibid.

119. Jackson, Derek, transcript of interview with author, 25 April 1996.

120. Ballinger, p. 9.

121. See, for example, Hubbard, Harpsichord Making; and Shortridge, Italian Harpsichord.

122. Fletcher, Benton, letter to Madam Benenson, 12 April 1937, Fenton House records, The
National Trust.

123. Jackson, Derek, transcript of interview with author, 25 April 1996.

124. Note to file, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

125. ibid.

126. Waitzman, ‘Ancient Musicland’, p. 22.

127. Plenderleith (1956)

 330

128. The Murray Pease Report (1968)

129. Adlam Burnett, Proposalfor Restoration, 24 October 1972, Fenton House records, The
National Trust.

130. Debenham, W.M., Report on WorkDone,25 August 1977, Fenton House records, The
National Trust.

131. Anon., Report, 1982, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

132. Adlam Burnett, Proposalfor Restoration, 24 October 1972, Fenton House records, The
National Trust.

133. It is not clear whether this ‘correction’ was thought to have any long-term benefit, as the
string tension (and thus the force on the wood) remained the same after treatment.

134. Anon., Report, 1982, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

137. Adlam Burnett, Proposal for Restoration, 24 October 1972, Fenton House records, The
National Trust; and Debenham, W.M., Report on WorkDone, 25 August 1977, Fenton House
records, The National Trust.

136. Adlam Burnett, Proposalfor Restoration, 24 October 1972, Fenton House records, The
National Trust.

137. Anon., Report, 1982, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

138. Berner, et al., p. 8.

139. Scowronek.

140. Adlam, ‘The Vaudry’.

141. Adlam, Burnett, Proposalfor Restoration, 24 October 1972, Fenton House records, The
National Trust.

142. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Report on Condition of I777 Kirckman Harpsichord,

October 1984, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

143. Makinnon and Waitzman, Report, 1984, p. 2.

144. Makinnon and Waitzman, Report, 1984, p. 3.

145. Mackinnon and Waitzman, A Report on the Condition of the Keyboard Instruments and
Humidification System, and on the Work Carried Out in the Period September 1985, to
February, 1987, March 1987, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

146. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Report, 1987, p. 2.

 33 1

147. ibid.

148. Mackinnon and Waitzman, A Report on the Condition of the Keyboard Instruments and
on Work Carried Out in the Period September, 1993 to September, 1994, November 1994,
Fenton House records, The National Trust, p. 4.

149. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Revision of Playing Policy in the Light of Museums and
Galleries Commission Report, November 1994, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

150. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Revision, p. 2.

151. Marsden, J., Ashby, J. and Waitzman, M., Benton Fletcher Collection of Early
Keyboard Instruments, Fenton House records, The National Trust, p. 1.

152. Mackinnon and Waitzman, A Report on the Condition of the Keyboard Instruments and
on Work Carried Out in the Period September, 1993 to September, 1994, November 1994,
Fenton House records, The National Trust, p. 4.

153. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Report, 1993-1994, pp. 1-2.

154. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Report on Condition of 1777 Kirckman Harpsichord,

October 1984, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

155. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Report, 1984, p. 3

156. Marsden, J., Ashby, J. and Waitzman, M., Benton Fletcher Collection of Early
Keyboard Instruments, Fenton House files, The National Trust, p. 1.

157. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Revision of Playing Policy in the Light of Museums and
Galleries Commission Report, November 1994, Fenton House records, The National Trust, p.
2.

158. ibid.

159. ‘Recommendations for Access’, 1982.

160. von Imhoff, 1984.

161. Karp, ‘Restoration’; and Barnes, ‘Evidence’.

 332

CHAPTER ELEVEN - DISCUSSION

In this chapter the results of critical analysis of the nine case studies are discussed, focusing

upon the soundness of actions taken on the instruments, and the viability of the regimens in

which the actions take place. It is shown that Currency and Preservation are regimens where

stability and confidence in actions and rationales are evident, while Restitution occupies an

equivocal position, as the values of Currency are co-opted to support the aspirations of

historical research, musicology and performance practice.

11.1 THE CONFIDENCE OF CURRENCY

Analysis of the case studies on the Coates barrel organ, the Steinway piano, and the Amati

quartet, showed that the actions taken on these instruments and the rationales for action fell

predominantly in the regimen of Currency. This section places these actions and rationales in

a wider context, and examines the relative values of subjective and objective criteria.

11.1.1 The Polysemic Nature of the Instrument

Instruments were shown to undergo repeated cycles of repair, upgrading, and use, during

which their original fabric gradually diminishes. In the case of a singularized instrument,

what persists is the semiological idea of the object, not the thing itself, and this idea is a

social construct compounded of knowledge about the instrument, and attitudes and

assumptions towards it. People’s reactions to such instruments are necessarily integrated;
 333
’
their perception is selective and conditioned by both immediate surroundings and past and

ongoing experiences. Thus, the instrument is polysemic, in that different people react in

different ways to it.

In psychological terms, a person’s approach and response to any experience is dictated by the

‘set’ which accompanies it. In his pioneering work on thought and judgement, D.M. Johnson

defined the set initially as ‘a concept of intermediate level, functioning between motives and

acts’.’ Wishing to play an organ made by Richard Coates (for example) is the motive, the

experience resulting from hearing music played upon it is the act, and between the two lies

the set. Johnson states that the set is ‘a readiness to make a specified response to a specified

stimulus’, but further amplifies this by stating that ‘a person can be prepared in advance for

any stimulus or any aspect of a complex stimulus situation that he can identify and for any

activity that he can perform’.2

Depending upon the contents of their individual sets, one observer regards the damages to

Glenn Gould’s piano (the one refurbished for use in Rideau Hall) as the ‘work of beaver^',^

while others regard them as patina evocative, not just of Gould’s playing style, but of the

effort that had gone into the perfection of his At the primary level of signification, the

damages are signs, which signify to any observer that the instrument is not in new condition,

and that it has undergone wear and degradation. Because such primary level observations are

shared by all viewers, they carry no emotional implications. However, at the secondary level

of signification, which Roland Barthes names connotation, contemplation of the damages

leads viewers into a cognitive level of subjectivity. It is at this level that ‘myth is created and
 334

To one viewer the damages detract from the perfection of the instrument and the
cons~med’.~

image of Glenn Gould that it evokes, while to another they provide the touchstone to

fantasies upon the nature of his perfection and how it was won. In both ‘readings’ the

subjective extrapolations go far beyond the bounds of the physical object. The social

implications of the polysemic nature of these damages to the surface of the instrument are

evident in the widely divergent readings of the damages, and the equally divergent actions

taken. Actions upon the instrument are thus channelled by the cultural predisposition of the

viewer, and programmed by the social milieu in which the observation takes place. As Storey

notes in his paraphrase of Barthes, ‘which codes are mobilized will depend on the triple

context of the location of the text, the historical moment and the cultural formation of the

reader’.6 The ‘text’ (in this instance, the damage to the piano) is located in a particular

musical and social milieu, the historical moment comes when intervention is required, and

the ‘reader’ (in this instance, the artisan) is motivated by the set of values relating to his craft.

In the case of Gould’s Steinway, the ‘text’ (the damage) was located in a context where the

values of Currency prevailed, the historical moment was the demand by the owners (who

controlled the instrument’s disposition) to bring it into a working state, and the cultural

formation of the reader was in the values of continuity effected by intervention with tools and

materials. The result is an object that has been irreversibly transformed, yet has still been

described as ‘Glenn Gould’s piano’. The same holds true for the Amati quartet and the

Coates barrel organ, all of which have undergone transformation of structure and musical

identity, but are still closely associated with the traditions, the myths, and the legends of their

makers and users.

 335

11.1.2 Continuity Through Transformation

The regimen of Currency is characterized by the desire for continuity which is achieved

through craftsmanly intervention. All the parts of the Coates barrel organ which contributed

to its musical character were either replaced or changed to suit musical taste current at that

time. Even the music encoded on the barrels themselves was altered. In the words of the most

recent intervener: ‘it would be wrong to refer to the project as a “restoration”, if by that word

is meant returning to its original condition [...I its operation must be made simple and

reliable, as it was not originally’.’ The Steinway piano owned by Glenn Gould had all

vestiges of his use stripped from it during the process of refurbishment to an as-new state for

the use of the Governor General. It was ‘rebuilt at public expense so that all traces of the

characteristics for which he loved it [were] carefully r e m ~ v e d ’It. ~was ‘treated like any other

piano’ in need of refurbishment.’ The quartet of Amati bowed-string instruments had

undergone centuries of alteration and repair before being sold to the University of

Saskatchewan, and the process continued after the transfer. In the words of one commentator:

‘Their creators would not recognize their own instruments [...I the Amatis today don’t sound

anything like their creator intended’.’’ All these interventions, which have altered the

fundamental character of the musical instruments, are evocations of a ‘living past bound up

with the present’.” The instruments are transformed in order to protect their place within a

continuing musical tradition.

How is it possible to reconcile such radical transformation of the physical substance of the

instrument with the continuing presence of its original qualities? Having the Coates barrel
 336

organ ‘in full voice, resonating in the Temple’ after its most recent treatment was said to be

‘the effect the builder sought in 1820’.’*Glenn Gould’s Steinway was ‘in such good condition

that Gould himself would not have been ashamed to play it in p ~ b l i c ’ .The
’ ~ aesthetic and

monetary value of the instruments of the Amati quartet increased in spite of their radical

transformation. The answer lies in the dominance of objective values by subjective ones; in

the capability of feelings to displace or relegate knowledge. In all cases, the emphasis is upon

values not associated with the materials and physical disposition of the instrument.

11.1.3 The Objective/Subjective Balance

In order to support the concept of a transformation of the fabric of the instrument running in

parallel with the continued presence of the historical maker or user, a firmly held set of

assumptions is required. As was shown in Section 3.3.2, these assumptions are rooted in the

subjective values of the pathetic fallacy and the legendary, and together constitute the

presence of an organic and psychic quality resident in the instrument. Within this context, the

balance of subjective to objective must be tipped heavily in favour of the subjective, so that

continuing craft activity can be justified and countenanced.

An example of the relative merit afforded to subjective criteria is music critic Elissa Poole’s

analysis of the sound of the University of Saskatchewan’s Amati quartet: ‘The Amati’s sound

in that first concert was anticlimactic, but a year later, after the instruments had been worked

on and played in, it was a re~elation’.’~

In her belief in the development of the instruments

through playing, while at the same time omitting consideration of the potential development
 337

of the players during the same period, she is subscribing to the idea that inorganic objects are

capable of exhibiting organic attributes. The players of the Amati instruments also speak of

the instruments’ development, and are of the opinion that peak efficiency was achieved while

in their hands.I5 In the dynamic between the player and the instrument, the player is regarded

as a constant, and the instrument becomes the variable, capable of non-mechanistic

development and expression. It is noted also that the intervention of the artisan is ‘invisible’

within this structure of thought. This feature will be returned to in the following chapter.

The observations that Glenn Gould’s piano must be used by professional musicians because

‘a piano will deteriorate unless it is used’,’6 and that ‘regular use [is] necessary to prevent its

deterioration’, are expressions of another basic assumption, that use of the object has

preservative q~a1ities.l~
However, when considered closely, this is only so because, in the

regimen of Currency, use implies servicing which, in turn, implies replacement of worn parts.

In this context the focus is deflected away from the materials of fabrication, which are valued

only as long as they perform their function, and are considered entirely replaceable without

penalty.

If such assumptions are examined from an objective point of view, flaws become apparent.

The assumption that preservation is ensured through playing stands in marked contrast to the

observation made by keyboard specialist John Watson, who states that through natural wear

alone, preservation by function is a ‘dangerous mythYw1*

Regarding critical discrimination of

the tone qualities of instruments, in his recently published study of the violin, James Beament

points out the fallacy of attributing tone to an instrument. He argues that ‘when [the violin] is
 338

played, what we perceive and how we characterize the sound are entirely dominated by how

the particular player bows Tone, he further argues, is a product of the brain of the

listener or the player, not of the materials of fabrication of the instrument.20He states that

discrimination by listening to the tone of the instrument is imaginary:

Every listening test confirms the conclusion reached from considering our hearing
system, that we are incapable of remembering this sound [the tone of the instrument]
over quite short periods. It cannot be used to determine the change of an instrument
over time, or to identify an instrument when played.21

Thus, the questions of whether the auditor was able to distinguish between the acoustic

attributes of four separate Amati instruments over the space of a year, and could also

disentangle this information from any individual development of the players of the

instruments over the same period, are not entertained. The subjective impression is given

greater weight than objective observations. The aesthetic discrimination shown in identifying

the unique characteristics of individual violins is explained by Beament in the following way:

'If people believe they can remember this sound, they will persuade themselves that they can,

and that is why the sound is so subjective and susceptible to suggestion, belief, and

The continuing identity of Glenn Gould in the refurbished Steinway piano, and the continuity

of Richard Coates in the remaining vestiges of the organ he is thought to have built, are

beliefs of the same kind, held in the presence of objective, verifiable evidence to the contrary.

The subjective quality of such beliefs as these is independent of objective criteria and, by its

very nature, is resistant to objective analysis.

 339

11.1.4 The Equivocal Nature of the Subjective

The powerful influence of subjective values in the regimen of Currency is observed in the

following examples of the repeated but unsuccessful attacks it has sustained from analytical

science. An ‘experiment’ conducted in the 1960s by Murray Adaskin of the University of

Saskatchewan is of interest because it occurred at the time when the Amati quartet was in use

there. Adaskin had hoped to demonstrate the difference in sound between rare Cremona

violins and home-made amateur ones by playing the same piece of music for a small

audience on four instruments: a violin made by Stephen Kolbinson, another made by Eddie

Mather, a Saskatchewan gunsmith and amateur violin-maker, a Guarneri owned by

Kolbinson, and Adaskin’s own Stradivari. He reported the following unexpected results:

In order to show off the violins I played the Adagio of Bach’s first unaccompanied
sonata on each of them and asked the audience to identify the two old instruments [...I
and it turned out that the two winners were Eddie and Steven. I will say this: I didn’t
cheat, but I tried to play my best on the new violins, because with the rare instruments
you couldn’t help but play well on them [...I When I announced the results that most
of the audience took their home-made violins to be the Strad and the Guarneri, tears
of happiness began to roll down Eddie’s and Steven’s cheeks. This was a great
moment in their lives.23

String instrument researcher Carleen Maley Hutchins reports similar results after she

improved a ‘wretched’ $5.00 violin and had it played behind a screen along with an

‘excellent Cremona’ instrument -- ‘the two were voted equal in tone by a college music

department audience’, although the player knew which was

Systematic study had preceded such simple experiments; commercial pressure on the violin-

making industry in France at the beginning of the present century resulted in the publication

by Chenantais, a violin-maker of Nantes who worked with Le Lyonnais, of Le Violoniste et le

 340

Violon, a review of practical tests in musical perception. He had found that, such was the

hegemony of the antique violin establishment, no serious player in France would purchase a

modem violin. He cites the predisposition for Cremona instruments at the time for this bias:

‘Subjectively, one seeks qualities in an old instrument, and faults in a new one. Nothing is

decided by listening’.25In addressing this problem, he reported wide-ranging tests -- Les

Concours de Sonoritk de Paris of 1909,1910,1912 and 1921 -- which were conducted

stringently and under carefilly varied conditions.26His results are summarized by bowed-

string instrument researcher Emile Leipp who says:

If no hint has been given beforehand it is impossible to distinguish an old instrument

from a new one by ear alone. The superior sonority of a Stradivari and others is a
myth; there are good and bad instruments in every period - that is all. Sonority
depends largely upon the player. The reputation of Stradivari violins is due in great
part to the fact that only the gifted virtuosi could buy them, on account of the
exorbitant prices demanded for them [...I In the hands of an unskilfil violinist even a
Stradivari becomes

Nevertheless, Beament answers the question of whether such considerations might detract

from the value of old instruments by famous makers:

Not at all; as with all such artefacts, the price is determined by supply and demand.
They do not make any different sound, and no audience can tell what instrument is
being played. But if a player thinks he plays better on such an instrument, he

Thus he argues that, although there is no basis to the belief in the superiority of old

instruments, the belief does feed back to the player, enhancing his performance and

cementing his belief. The complex ‘human communication chain of composer-player-

instrument-listener’ described by Hutchins is responsible for this self-fulfilling quality.29

Clearly, the application of subjective phenomena to decision-making processes in the

disposition of historic musical instruments cannot withstand objective analysis. The classical
 34 1

method of negating the influence of subjective data is in the use of blind and double-blind

tests.30In a blind test the audience is not told which instruments are being played, and in a

double-blind test neither the player nor the audience is informed. Thus, bias is removed from

judgements and a measure of objectivity results. On the other hand, advanced preparation is

essential to the generation of the anticipated results when dealing with subjective phenomena.

If the player knows the instrument is superior, the results will bear this out; if the player does

not know the identity of the instrument, the results will be equivocal. Tests applied to violins

and audiences during Les Concours de Sonoritk de Paris bore these conclusions The

documented context of the instrument, and the listener’s knowledge of it, become of supreme

importance. The contents of the ‘set’ with which the listener is prepared for the experience

dictate the results.

An anecdote on the critical importance of advance preparation of the ‘set’, and the effect that

such predisposition can have, is recorded by the Reverend H.R. Haweis on the occasion when

he showed Remenyi a ‘very fine copy of a Strad which had deceived many’.32Remenyi

played the instrument and believed it genuine, although it had actually been made by L ~ p b t . ~ ~

The knowledge that he was playing upon a genuine Stradivari violin biassed Remenyi’s

perceptions before he began playing. The sense experience was moderated by context, and it

is thus apparent that the nature of the aesthetic experience gained through hearing the

instrument is open to deception.

The importance of both primary and secondary sources in providing musical identity is

especially high in the Currency regimen, because the materials of fabrication are considered
 342

mutable. A secure provenance provides the necessary foundation for genuine aesthetic

musical experiences, in the absence of an identity provided by the original components. The

Amati instruments have a secure provenance which includes the primary sources of labels

applied by the makers (assuming no substitution), and secondary sources of pedigrees

containing certificates and attestations of value and authenticity. The Richard Coates barrel

organ contains no physical evidence in the form of maker’s signature, labels, or other primary

sources, but it is unique in construction and contains primary sources in features that are

found in no other instrument. Although its location in the Sharon Temple, and the long

association with it, provide a solid context, the association of the instrument with Richard

Coates is entirely through such secondary sources as written descriptions and oral tradition.

The association of the Steinway piano with Glenn Gould is much less secure. Because it was

treated ‘like any other piano’,34and it had not ‘occurred to any~ne’~’

to leave it in the state in

which Gould used it, all physical association with him was lost. It was therefore necessary to

reinforce the belief that subjective attributes of musical instruments have a continuing

presence by planning to apply a descriptive plaque to the instrument. It is ‘ironical to remove

all evidence of Glenn Gould and then put a plaque on it saying it is his’,36but where no

tangible signifier of Gould’s presence exists, it is considered necessary to apply one.

11.1.5 The Viability of Currency

The above selected examples of objective observation made upon subjective phenomena

illustrate the durability of these subjective values. In spite of the overwhelming evidence of
 343

the equivocal nature of the subjective, and its apparent openness to deception, the regimen of

Currency continues to be viable. The pathetic fallacy and the legendary play an extremely

important role in ensuring this continuing viability. The pathetic fallacy shows itself in a

‘kind of identity... the Will of the old building’, as Ruskin described it,37and the ‘false

appearances [...I entirely unconnected with any real power of character in the object, and only

imputed to it by us’.38The legendary is encountered in the belief in the genius of the

instrument-maker, lost secrets, and arcane knowledge. Without the powerful components that

these subjective phenomena provide, the intervention of the artisan would lack a rationale for

its actions. Continuity of the aesthetic presence of historic musical instruments is contingent

upon the subjective components of musical experience being valued above the materials of

fabrication. In the persistence of the ‘silent artisan’, the regimen of Currency shows extreme

confidence.

11.2 THE ASSURANCE OF PRESERVATION

Analysis of the case studies of the Kirckman harpsichord, the Bohak clavichord, and the

Jadra virginals showed that the actions and their rationales passed from the regimen of

Currency through Restitution, and generally came to rest in Preservation. This section places

the actions and rationaIes of Preservation as represented by these three instruments in a wider

context, and examines the implications of a policy of silence.

 344

11.2.1 The Decision to Retire

In all three case studies, the thrust of action in the most recent stages of the instrument’s

history was towards retirement from playing status. The instruments were shown to have

passed through various stages of use, coming either to a static, silent state or a state of phased

withdrawal from use. This action is in line with the more conservative museum policy, which

encompasses ‘managing the retirement from active service of heritage musical instrument^'.^'

Although, in all three cases, the dialectic of ‘to play or to preserve’ becomes evident during

the final stage, the means whereby retirement was planned or debated, and the rationales

behind the decisions taken, differ markedly. It will be shown in the following section that

preservation of these three keyboard instruments is brought about through three quite distinct

mechanisms:

- For an instrument that is still in working condition, action is taken, contrary to policy,

to minimize but not curtail use.

- For an instrument for which restoration is contemplated, a lack of hard data upon

which to base action dictates preservation.

- For an instrument in a display case, action is prescribed by the overall museum

conservation policy.

The Johannes Kirckman harpsichord provides an example of gradual withdrawal from

service. At the close of this case study plans were in effect to limit, and eventually to curtail,

use of the instrument. It had been actively used until the 199Os, and had already had several
 345
phases of invasive repair and r e f b r b i h e n t in the preceding decades. The need for gradual

withdrawal from active service was brought about by evidence of significant structural

distortion, and the knowledge that this could only be corrected by dismantlement (see Section

10.3.5)40.It was felt that if such treatments continued to be carried out the instrument would

be on its way to becoming a ‘working replica’ of i t ~ e l f . What

~ ’ is significant about this

withdrawal of playing state is that it is conducted within a clearly articulated playing policy,

and in opposition to it. Because ‘playing formed an integral part of Major Fletcher’s vision’,

compromise is evident in a strategy of limiting, but not curtailing, use of the i n ~ t r u m e n t . ~ ~

This case thus epitomises the dilemma of preservation when faced with a contradictory

playing policy.

The case of the Bohak clavichord illustrates the way in which preservation had taken place

through a lack of data. The instrument had been active since at least the 192Os, but its playing

state had been allowed to lapse while in the museum. During its active life, the clavichord

had been dismantled and modified to the extent that information on its original disposition

had been blurred or lost. Re-thinking of the instrument’s state in the discussions that took

place from 1976 to 1987 (see Section 10.1.4) centred upon its association with Haydn, and its

didactic and political uses. However, interest in the instrument as a signifier of Haydn was

not merely visual; it was necessary to have the clavichord in working condition in order to

fblfil this role.

It is clear from the extant sources that if information on the original disposition of the Bohak

had been available -- either through detective work on the instrument itself, or through
 346

association with other instruments of the same provenance -- there would have been more

pressure to restore it to a working state. The restorer would have liked to have had the

instrument playable, and regret was expressed that this was not possible. It was only through

a lack of information that action was restrained. The significant point is that action in the

Restitution regimen depends absolutely upon historical information. Work cannot be done

upon an hstoric instrument without data pertaining to the original disposition, a feature

which distinguishes Restitution very clearly from Cwrency.

Although this case epitomises the dilemma of the desire for musical hnction (the central

tenet of Restitution) when faced with an inoperable state, it highlights very clearly the

enormous yield of information that comes about as a result of systematic and thorough

analysis during treatment examination. The Bohak clavichord qualifies as an ‘authentic

ruin’43,and is rendered in a state where whatever information it still possesses is made

accessible.

The Jadra virginals had been active in the 1950s and 60s, and had undergone several phases

of treatment aimed at maintaining playing state. Playing state had then been allowed to lapse

because the instrument was housed in a museum that had developed a policy of not playing

the instruments in its collections. The curatorial staff considered it obvious that ‘we would

not be preserving this unique collection were we to make any playable’.44In the words of

Denzil Wraight, who had examined the instrument in the mid-l970s, it was ‘a bit out of place

in a museum that had more to do with ethnomusicology than keyboard instrument^'.^^

 347

Nevertheless, the museum policy makes it clear that playing and preservation are considered

antithetical.

These three cases show that, in the absence of secure museum policies on conservation, the

decision-making process on retirement is highly influenced by individual circumstances.

Retirement from playing status is controlled and driven by a complex web of societal

pressures, where the tension between hearing the instrument and preserving it unheard

provides the focus.

11.2.2 Resource of Information

In the Preservation regimen action is limited by a central tenet that distinguishes it clearly

from the other two regimens: maintenance of the instrument in a non-playing state. To

protect the instrument’s integrity, intervention is either proscribed, or at least minimized and

controlled. Furthermore, the policy of reversibility ensures that any evidence of

craftsmanship that may have been necessary during the processes of stabilization and

preservation, may be erased in the future without loss of information. The partial treatment of

the Bohak clavichord is a prime example of this approach: the instrument was rendered clean

and stable, it was left unstrung, and access to the interior was permitted by spot gluing of the

soundboard with paper interface^.^^ The object of the exercise was to make the instrument as

accessible as possible for study by presenting openly the evidence of its technical history,

while ensuring that any alteration to achieve this could be removed later. With the Kirckman

harpsichord, there is a strong advisory against further invasive treatment. This was borne out
 348

in a clear message: when treatment to keep it playable becomes essential, the playing role of

the instrument would have to be reassessed. Again, the tendency is away from craft

intervention. The Jadra virginals is protected from intervention by policy, but in its non-

workable state it still provides a resource of technical information, as witnessed by the study

of its materials and disposition carried out by Grant O’B~ien.~’

Preservation as a regimen of care is antithetical to continuously applied craftsmanship. By its

documentary approach, and its emphasis on non-intervention, it delimits the intervention with

tools that is the mainstay of the craft tradition. Thus, the values of the craft tradition are

displaced by concerns for the material welfare of the object, and the technical information

that may be elicited from it. Preserving the integrity of the object overrules the values of both

Restitution and Currency. As discussed in Section 5.3, this elevation of the discipline away

from its craft roots is signified by the cultural distance implied by the titles of Restorer and

Conservator.

11.2.3 The Objective/Subjective Balance

The rationale of the Preservation regimen is largely pragmatic; evidence for the yield of

objective information is seen in the documentation of both the Jadra virginals and the Bohak

clavichord, where information of historical value is derived, not through restoration, but

through its antithesis, preservation of status quo. The rationale is evident in the application of

scientifically formulated conservation procedures intended to arrest decay, prevent further

intervention, and interpret the current state. The meticulous documentation of playing time of
 349

the Kirckman harpsichord is another facet of the pragmatic gathering of data characteristic of

Preservation.

As discussed in Section 5.4.2, the emphasis on hard data excludes subjective belief. Thus, the

specifically aesthetic attributes of musical instruments, as experienced in the tactile and

auditory responses from playing, are considered ephemeral and personal, and are allowed

only a limited value. Playing an instrument in order to derive aesthetic experience, rather than

hard data, is dismissed. The imbalance between the epistemic and the aesthetic is seen in the

opposed values of what Karp describes as the ‘immortal witness’ to past practices, and

‘fleeting musical delight’ .48 In Preservation the former is powerfully authoritative, while the

latter is seen to be transitory and personal.

It will be noted that only in the case of the Jadra virginals is there an absence of the

aesthetic/pragmatic dialectic; in the cases of the other two instruments, the aesthetic

characteristics of the instrument are a source of much debate, and silence is only subscribed

to reluctantly. These case studies, one of an instrument that could not be restored through

lack of information, and another that was partially retired reluctantly against playing policy,

were chosen specifically for the residual dissatisfaction that they exhibit. Preference in these

two cases, and in others throughout this work, is for functional playing status, where the

aesthetic life of the instrument is maintained and exploited. Preservation curtails the aesthetic

life implicit in function, and this is why there is so much regret.

 350

It will be shown later that in the regimen of Restitution the intent of arriving at a definitive,

knowledge-based earlier state results in the retrieval of non-objective auditory and tactile

responses imputed to represent a phase of past use (see Section 11.3). These responses come

to be regarded as equal in value to hard data, and a distinction between the two is not made.

This same flaw is evident in the Preservation regimen where arguments are made for the

acquisition of data from musical instruments without the need for playing:

This dilemma [restoration versus preservation] could be mitigated if it were realised

that musical instruments can often be coaxed into providing useful audible evidence
without first being subjected to invasive preparation [...I A great deal of progress
could result from making a distinction between ‘soundability’ and playability, where
the former can often be achieved without any prerequisite re~toration.~’

The dilemma could, in fact, only be mitigated if the acquisition of data by scientific methods

was understood to be equivalent to the acquisition of experience through playing. The point

is that data derived through the application of scientific methods cannot be regarded as an

equivalent to authentic experience. The player cannot ‘step into a dimension of the cultural

landscape from which the music originated’ through the medium of science.50

This flaw results from the false equivalence of scientific data and subjective sensation. If the

object of Restitution were only to re-create the physical disposition of the instrument, then

making the originals as ‘copyable’ as possible, instead of restoring, would s~ffice.~’

Producing replicas for the performance of the music of earlier periods would be an adequate

substitute if this were the sole aim. However, a replica ofHaydn’s clavichord (for example) is

in no way equivalent to the instrument itself as an aesthetic presence, and could not therefore

be used as the medium in an authentic transaction with the past.

 35 1

11.2.4 The Viability of Preservation

The viability of Preservation is assured through the protective role that underpins the

profession of conservation. It is significant that in the regimens of Currency and Restitution

there has never been an expressed need for a code of ethics; it is only in Preservation that

policies for ethical behaviour are systematized and encoded.52It is clear from all the

foregoing case studies that playing historic musical instruments is the preferred option, and

that those who press for their non-functioning state are in a minority, and are thus placed in

opposition to societal trends.

As more is learned through scientific methods about the processes of change with time and

use, the perception of the evanescence of material objects results in the emergence of a role

of altruistic guardianship. This is conservation in its widest sense. The legal definition of a

conservator is that of ‘protector, guardian, or keeper’.53This sense is transferred to the

custodianship of culturally valued objects, where the museum has traditionally provided the

venue for guardianship:

It would be entirely in keeping with the very concept of the museum that they [sic]
should serve as oases where musical instruments can survive indefinitely as our
mentors, in a world whose supply of older instruments is otherwise constantly
dimini~hing.~~

The thrust of Preservation is towards safety, security, and long-term stability. The preventive

measures taken to achieve these ends, including strictures on use, stable environmental

conditions, and non-interventive treatments, are all intended to promote continuation of the

instrument’s physical presence by minimising or eliminating interaction. This is antithetical

to the values of both Currency and Restitution, where musical function is a given. It is
 352

especially in opposition to the school of thought mentioned in Section 3.3.2 that advocates

playing as a means of preservation.” In fact, statistics have been provided to show that in a

solo work, a harpsichord key towards the centre of the compass is struck in the region of two

thousand times per hour, demonstrating that, by natural wear alone, preservation through

playing is a ‘dangerous myth’.56

Preserving instruments in a non-functioning state is founded upon their value as a

diminishing resource. In this respect, the regimen of Preservation shows its links with the

larger sphere of cultural activity in which the ideological values of natural conservation

prevail. When Grant O’Brien enquires ‘why are we destroying evidence on these instruments

as though there were an endless supply of them from which to draw informati~n?’’~
he is

alluding to the ever-decreasing number of keyboard instruments in essentially unmodified

c~ndition.’~
Elements of an appropriation of values from the larger sphere of conservation of

the natural world are seen in the following quotation:

Antique musical instruments, especially those retaining substantial historical

integrity, are a non-renewable and diminishing cultural resource -- an endangered
species. If we allow preservation to be secondary to musical performance, the legacy
will be spent, the species e~tinct.’~

Musical instruments are equated here with endangered natural species and non-renewable

resources, both values of the conservation of nature. The use of such terms amplifies the

sense of guardianship resident in non-functional status. The viability of the Preservation

regimen is assured through policies of non-intervention, based upon codes of ethical

behaviour. Confidence is indicated by the lack of dissonances between the actions and

rationales of the Preservation regimen.

 353

11.3 THE UNCERTAINTY OF RESTITUTION

Between the active, craftsmanly confidence of Currency and the encoded ethical, scientific

behaviour of Preservation lies the regimen of Restitution. This section places the actions and

rationales of Restitution represented by the case studies of the second Steinway piano, the

Hart House viols, and the Zumpe fortepiano, into a wider context, and examines certain flaws

contained in their basic assumptions, which lead to paradoxical thinking.

11.3.1 The Fundamental Flaws

It was shown in Section 11.1 that in the regimen of Currency, where continuity of a musical

instrument is ensured through transformation, the original disposition, and the materials of

fabrication through which it is realised, are considered of less importance than the non-

corporeal essence of the instrument. The subjective values associated with the pathetic fallacy

ensure that transformation of the instrument does not detract from its subjective qualities.

Emphasis is upon values not associated with the materials and physical disposition of the

instrument. However, in the regimen of Restitution there is a profound change of emphasis;

the materials of fabrication and their original disposition ideally become essential

components in the process of recreating a past musical ambience. It is the presence of the

materials, or replacements of them, in a state that would be recognized by an earlier maker or

user that provides the raison d‘&e of the regimen. This attitude is epitomized by the

statement that ‘car restaurer un instrument, c ’estprisenjer ou retrouver sa structure

ancienne et son timbre authentique’.60

 354
Because of this profound shift in the emphasis placed upon materials and earlier physical

states, certain flaws only incipient in the regimen of Currency become magnified in

Restitution. Three fundamental philosophical flaws are identified: the conflict between

objective and subjective responses, the ‘genuineness’ of the instrument, and the narrow

conceptual boundary that divides the regimens of Restitution and Currency. These aspects are

discussed in the following three sections.

11.3.2 The Objective/Subjective Conflict

The thrust behind returning an historic musical instrument to a postulated previous playing

state, and of maintaining it in that state, is to explore the music of the period in which it was

made and used. This exploration results in both epistemic and non-epistemic aspects of

musical experience; it yields information concerning such aspects as construction techniques,

materials, tuning, pitch, and playing style, but it also yields sensations arising from human

interaction with a genuine historical object. The factual information is contained in objective

data derived from the measurement and recording of information. Acoustic data are gained

from measurements of pitch and timbre, while physical data are derived from a wide range of

measurable functional phenomena, which depend largely upon the type of instrument. All

these data can be represented objectively, and used as standards of comparison between

instruments.

Subjective sensation, on the other hand, is derived from personal involvement with the

instrument. The tone of the instrument, its ‘feel’, and other subjective values experienced
 355

during playing are apprehended within the ‘human communication chain of composer-player-

instrument-listener’.61In the definition of Restitution out lined in Section 4.4, both the

objective values associated with positivistic thinking, and the subjective values associated

with authentic experience are present in the musical outcome. The aspects of objective data

and subjective feelings arising from treatment and use of‘historic instruments are explored in

the following three sub-sections with the intention of illustrating their fundamental

differences.

Objective Data

Physical intervention with the intention of recapturing an earlier state of an historic

instrument, and the actions of maintaining it in that state, require specific knowledge. The

technical parameters of the chosen historical state must be known with a degree of certainty

in order to justify actions. This search for a definitive state shows positivistic thinking

because it assumes that enough can be known about an earlier disposition that an attempt to

realize it through craft intervention can be contemplated.

The extent and completeness of such knowledge is highly dependent upon the historical

period in which the work was done. For example, the ‘normalizing’ done to the Hart House

viols in the 1920s to bring them together as a ‘chest of viols’ (Section 9.2.1) shows that the

projected attributes of the set of instruments over-rode those of the individual members. The

anonymous English alto had the appearance of a converted five-string instrument;62the treble

attributed to Bergonzi and the bass attributed to Tielke showed extensive repair and

alteration; and the provenance of the Flemish treble was also q ~ e s t i o n e dAll
. ~ ~these efforts at
 356

inventing a ‘chest of viols’ underscore the positivistic belief in a certain achievable previous

state, and result in a defined and irreversible physical alteration. The instruments were

transformed in order that an earlier historical disposition could be represented in them.

More information was available for the projected restoration of the Johannes Zumpe

fortepiano (Section 9.3.3) as definitive works upon the disposition of early instruments of this

kind existed as guides at the time of its treatment.64Nevertheless, conjecture was invoked in

returning some of the pilots to projected previous positions, and in repositioning the heads of

some of the hammers. The restoration itself involved an exploration and elucidation of the

original disposition of the instrument (although, because of the inconsistency of adding an

anachronistic soundboard, the full disposition was not ultimately reflected in the finished

work).

When the trustees of Glenn Gould’s estate stipulated that the mechanical attributes of the

Steinway piano sold to the National Library should be preserved as an exemplar of his

technique (Section 9.1.4), much immediate information to support this intention was at hand.

If the instrument was to be ‘available to researchers and scholars studying the technique of

Glenn Gould’, it could only fulfil these criteria if sufficient evidence was believed to exist.65

The technical specifications of Gould’s particular set-up were, in fact, known with some

certainty (see Figure 7). Such data were available from the tuner who had worked regularly

with Gould, so these specifications were considered ultimately achievable.

 357

In all these cases, a clearly articulated view of a previous state is essential in justifying and

directing craA intervention. The degree to which such. interventions are well-founded, or are

based upon supposition and conjecture, is less important than the presence of a mental picture

of the previous state in the mind of the practitioner before work commences, together with

access to the necessary craft operations to bring it about.

Subjective Impressions

Once an historic instrument has been brought into a working state that is thought to represent

an earlier period of its existence, it becomes an intermediary, or medium, in leading the

player into a conceptual landscape. Restoring to playability centres on this mediating

function. However, while the craft intervention of recapturing the earlier state is moderated

by specific knowledge, entry into a chosen cultural landscape through playing is clearly not.

In her analysis of the interaction of the viewer with the museum object, Ludmilla Jordanova

describes the effect of apprehending cultural objects:

Objects are triggers of chains of ideas and images that go far beyond their initial
starting point. Feelings about the antiquity, the authenticity, the beauty, the
craftsmanship, the poignancy of objects are the stepping stones towards fantasies,
which can have aesthetic, historical, macabre or a thousand other attributes. These
strings of responses should not be accorded the status of ‘knowledge’, however, but
should be understood in terms of their own distinctive logic.66

In semiological terms, the act of playing an instrument of known provenance leads the player

into the secondary level of signification, where ‘myth is created and consumed’.67As

discussed in Section 11.1, the response elicited at the secondary level of signification

depends upon the triple context.68Each player will therefore bring a unique psychological set

to the action, making the responses themselves unique and inherently personal, and therefore

not amenable either to scientific description or to systematic analysis. Thus, any sensory
 358

experiences resulting from the playing quality of restored musical instruments cannot be

‘accorded the status of knowledge’.69

Conflict

When both the objective data and the subjective impressions described above are brought to

bear upon the treatment of an historic instrument, dissonances arise. As an example of the

way in which the objective and the subjective are in conflict, the rationale for restoration of

the Zumpe fortepiano focussed upon its musical value: ‘it is above all a musical instrument,

and its musical qualities cannot be assessed at all unless it is restored to playing ~ondition.’~’

However, once the first phase of treatment was completed, assessment of the piano’s musical

qualities was assessed by playing the instrument in concert and rendering a written

description of the ‘singing quality of the treble [...I and the resonant bas^'.^' In alluding to the

non-epistemic nature of this assessment, the author himself states that ‘it is difficult to

describe the tone of an in~trurnent’.~~

This observation is in line with Beament’s view that

‘every listening test confirms [...I that we are incapable of remembering [the tone of the

instrument] over quite short periods’.73Thus, an objective assessment of the instrument’s

musical qualities through human interaction with it was not, and could not be, ultimately

achieved.

The conceptual difficulty of maintaining Glenn Gould’s piano in the state in which he would

have used it provides another example of the conflict between objective and subjective

responses (Section 9.1.4). As stated earlier, the specifications of the piano’s action were

known with some certainty through direct consultation with Gould’s tuner. However,
 359

Gould’s ‘endless, agitated tinkering”‘, and his tuner’s own opinion that ‘nothing precise

could really be said about the desired specification^'^' add an indefinable subjective

component, making the adjustments a matter of c ~ n j e c t u r eAs

. ~ ~the tuner who later worked

on the instrument at the National Library remarked, Gould was ‘far more interested in the

creative act and its ability to reflect a dynamic and process-oriented conception of reality’.77

Although this appears to be used as a pretext for deviating from the earlier stated aims in

maintaining the action, it nevertheless captures the essentially ineffable quality of what was

being attempted, and the impossibility of definitiveness in any resultant mechanical set-up.

A distinct demarcation between acoustic data derived from a musical instrument and personal

assessments of its musical value must, therefore, be made. Physical acoustic qualities and

perceptual musical qualities represent different kinds of phenomena, and they are not

comparable. The former are objective, measurable and constant, while the latter vary with the

predisposition of the performer and the circumstances surrounding the performance.

Thus, the first philosophical flaw arises from the coexistence of positivistic thinking in the

return of an historic instrument to a conjectured previous state through craft intervention,

with the aesthetic, subjective exploration of past musical values as the goal. The intent of

arriving at a definitive, knowledge-based earlier state results in the retrieval of non-objective

auditory and tactile responses imputed to represent a phase of past use. Yet these responses

are regarded as equal in value to hard data, and a distinction between the two is not made.

The exploration and reassessment of early musical forms by intervention upon historic
 360

musical instruments therefore contains essential subjective components which are antithetical

to the epistemic search for a definitive state.

11.3.3 Genuineness

Keyboard instrument conservator John Koster, of The Shrine to Music Museum in South

Dakota, refers to the ‘htility of restoration’ of historic musical instruments, focussing his

conclusion upon the transformations wrought over time by craft interventi~n.~~

Although

concentrating on the material fabric of the object, his remarks lead into discussion of the

second philosophical flaw. This flaw arises from a difficulty in defining the genuineness of a

restored musical instrument and, by extension the genuineness of the aesthetic response

which is intimately bound up with it. The subjective component, which is defined here as

authentic experience, arises from the aesthetic response resulting from the attempt to

recapture the past, and it can only be present when the player knows that an instrument with a

genuine pedigree is being used. The historic persona of the instrument as a touchstone is

much more important in Restitution than in Currency, where the overwhelming evidence of

subjectivity and the possibility of deception are understood, accepted, and relegated. To cite

the obvious example, players of classic violins are well aware of the transformations that

their instruments have undergone, but this information is not allowed to compete with the

psychic presence of the object, and the experience it provides. But in the regimen of

Restitution the opposite is the case; it is only through the use of a musical instrument with a

secure and known pedigree, and in a state that would be recognised by its historical user, that,

in the words of keyboard conservator John Watson, the ‘opportunity to step into a dimension
 361

of the cultural landscape from which the music originated’ can present itself.79Apparently,

the amount of material left from the instrument’s first-used state is important to these

responses.

In discussing the use of reproductions rather than original historic objects in museums, Peter

Mann, erstwhile curator of the Science Museum in London, states that curators have ‘a

feeling that a reproduction is no substitute for the “real thing .80 Cary Karp amplifies this
93,

when writing of the earlier years of the early music movement by stating that ‘no

performance or recording of the music of an earlier period was accepted as being authentic

unless it was made on original period instruments’.81It is clear that authentic experience

cannot be provided by reproductions of early instruments, but must be satisfied with those

that are believed to be essentially composed of original material.

The definition of ‘original’ in terms of historic musical instruments that have undergone

changes over a long history of use is elusive. For example, in attempting to define the term

‘original’ as applied to historic keyboard instruments, Michael Latcham, curator of the

musical instrument collection of the Haags Gemeentemuseum, arrives at the following

definition:

An instrument or part of it must have been there at the beginning of the life of the
instrument to be called original, but may well have changed during the course of its
life.82

But he goes on to modify, and actually negate, this definition by fiuther stating that:

The unchanging instrument does not exist and the unchanging sound quality of an
instrument is mythical. To call an instrument original is to snatch at a process of
change in the hope of clutching some intangible eternal
 362

Mimi Waitzman amplifies this point regarding earlier restorations of the keyboard

instruments of the Benton Fletcher collection:

Given the scarcity of instruments now found and preserved in an original, or even
nearly original condition, from which the restorer could draw reliable information, the
results of such restoration, however satisfying to modem ears and fingers, can only
ever be judged a qualified success. The fact remains that every restoration, no matter
how well-documented or sympathetic, wipes away evidence and makes the original
condition, one condition more remote.84

From these arguments, the attempt to ‘enter a cultural. landscape’ through the medium of an

‘original’ instrument does not rely for its success upon either a clear appreciation of what

parts of the instrument date to its conception, an understanding of the restoration procedures

it may have undergone, or a realisation of the changes wrought by time. Indeed, ignorance of

these factors will facilitate the authentic experience, while knowledge of them will impede

and deaden the effect. Thus, it can be argued that the use of an historic instrument as a

mediator across what Cherry defines as the ‘gulf separating the here-and-now and the over-

and-done-with’, depends essentially upon either an absence of information on what was done,

or an unconscious dismissal of the extent of the transformati~n.~~

That the experience of authenticity depends upon this absence of information is underlined

by Taruskin’s statement (discussed in Section 3.4) that “artifacts of past culture [...I are still

intact and available in a way that musical artifacts obviously can never be [because] music

has to be imaginatively recreated in order to be retrieved’.86The Hart House viols are a prime

example of imaginative recreation; not only were some instruments altered to better represent

their earlier state, but also the whole set was brought together as a ‘chest of viols’ complete

with an original 17th-century oak container.

 363

The antithesis of Taruskin’s ‘artifact of past culture’ that is ‘still intact and available’ would

be an instrument that had undergone no change since it was first made and used, thus

providing a primary reference to past technology and music practice. Such an instrument is

highly unlikely to actually exist because materials change with time, and instruments often

become transformed with use. The changing function and social context of the musical

instrument ensures transformation. Especially when preserved as a museum object, the

musical instrument does not escape transformation of meaning. Saumerez-Smith speaks to

the divorce of museum objects from their past context of ownership and use:

Museums are presumed to operate outside the zone in which artefacts change in
ownership and epistemological meaning. Anyone who has attended closely to the
movement of artefacts will know that the assumption that, in a museum, artefacts are
somehow static, safe, and out of the territory in which their meaning and use can be
transformed, is demonstrably false.87

The meaning being sought through restorative treatment of a musical instrument resides in its

original disposition, and like the music to be performed on the instrument, it too must be

‘imaginatively recreated in order to be retrieved’.88The genuineness of the instrument is

therefore always open to question, and with it the genuineness of its emotional impact.

11.3.4 The Lapse into Currency

The third fundamental flaw of Restitution lies in the potential for this regimen to lapse into

Currency. Once an instrument has been returned to a projected previous state, it must be

maintained there. Restoration is highly context specific -.- as new information arises on

technical details of earlier instrument-making practice, the ‘idea’ of the earlier state demands

continuing revision. Denzil Wraight’s views regarding the Jadra viriginals are a case in point.
 364

In 1975 he said that ‘enough is now known about 16th-century instrument building to remove

the matter of historical restoration from the sphere of opinion’,89yet he revised this opinion

considerably 20 years later.”

Furthermore, use of the instrument incurs wear and tear so that the materials of fabrication

also need continuing repair or replacement. For example, the Kirckman harpsichord

underwent at least three phases of treatment, each superimposed upon the preceding one, and

each based upon the emergence of further technical information pertaining to its conjectured

original state. Thus, the instrument becomes an accretion of ideas and concepts made

concrete through succeeding waves of craft intervention. As John Koster has remarked:

New materials replacing deteriorated or missing parts are, at best, copies or

reconstructions of the original components. Thus, all restored instruments are, to a
certain extent, copies of t h e m s e l ~ e s . ~ ~

The values of Currency are inherent in this constant process of replacement and renewal,

which takes place under protocols of maintenance, thus making the inherent weakness of

Restitution as a goal apparent.

An overt example of the lapse into Currency is seen in the treatment of Glenn Gould’s

Steinway piano, where a justification for the use of new, heavier hammers, rather than the re-

felting of the lighter originals, is made (see Section 9.1.4). The statement that ‘any blind

adherence to what are in fact flexible technical parameters is surely contrary to his spirit’92

speaks of the values of Currency, where the continued maintenance of the instrument through

substitution of components is routine. This sentiment is in opposition to that of the vendors,

who stipulated that the purchaser ‘shall maintain the Piano in such manner as to preserve, in
 365

so far as is reasonably possible, and for as long a time as is reasonably possible, the unique

qualities of the existing action and mechanism of the Piano’.93These ‘unique qualities’,

through which Gould’s style is characterized, have come to be regarded as ‘flexible technical

parameters’.

In the treatment of the Zumpe fortepiano, sundry improvements made to the instrument

suggest the values of Currency. The insertion of the new soundboard, replacing the original,

was motivated by two factors: ‘the technical problems of‘manufacture would have been

formidable’, while the distortion of the original indicated that ‘Zumpe’s experiment had not

been a Improvement is implicit in both the choice of an easier solution, and in the

removal of an ‘experiment’ that was deemed to have failed. Bracing the underside of the case

with aluminium angle to prevent distortion due to string tension is also an action of updating

and improvement because no such bracing existed before. In these cases Restitution lapsed

into Currency during the actual process of treatment, and changes were not due to a later

rethinking resulting from the acquisition of new data.

The Hart House viols had been maintained in working condition since their initial assembly

as a ‘chest’ around the year 1929. During this period it was evident that continual attention

had been necessary to keep them in playing order. In their last phase of use it was recognised

that, should they be transferred to the custody of the Canada Council, continued maintenance

would be an essential factor. It was stipulated that a firm of craftsmen would be employed to

this end. Under such a regimen of continued use and craft intervention, the initial values of
 366

the Restitution regimen become overshadowed by the values pertaining to the assurance of

continuity.

All three case studies of instruments initially ensconced in the regimen of Restitution show

accretive elements of Currency. It is evident that Restitution rests upon a conceptual knife

edge; if no further action is taken upon the restored instrument it becomes passively

preserved, while if treatment not based upon historical data is done, such as routine

maintenance, it has the tendency to lapse into Currency.

11.3.5 The Viability of Restitution

The three fundamental flaws described above represent dissonances between action and

rationale, because they result from parallel valuations of unlike quantities. The uncomfortable

juxtaposition of objective data, derived through craft intervention, with subjective feelings,

must in some way be reconciled. The questionable genuineness of the instrument, again a

result of craft intervention, must be reconciled. And, finally, the potential for lapse into

Currency, which is also related to work done upon the instrument, must in some way be

resolved. How is it possible for an artisan to operate within the regimen of Restitution

without discomfort?

Potential discomfort with this parallel valuation of unlike quantities results in the deployment

of a psychological strategy that was formalized by Leon Festinger in his 1957 publication, A

Theory of Cognitive Dissonance, in which the strategies people adopt to reduce the anxiety
 367

produced by a dissonance between cognition and behaviour are analysed. Festinger argues

that such strategies are a common phenomenon essential to everyday human social

transactions: ‘where an opinion must be formed or a decision taken, some dissonance is

almost unavoidably created between the cognition of the action taken and those opinions or

knowledges which tend to point in a different direction. ”’According to the theory of

cognitive dissonance, there exist inconsistent or ‘non-fitting’ relations between pairs of

cognitive elements where ‘the obverse of one element would follow from the other’.96For

example, in the return of a valued musical instrument to a playing state, the actions require

the pragmatic, positivistic drive to arrive at the definitive earlier state of the object, while the

rationale for this action is rooted in the apprehension of the aesthetic through authentic

experience once treatment is completed. The paired cognitive elements of rationale and

action are dissonant, and it therefore becomes necessary to devise a mental strategy to

achieve comfort with the decision taken.

Festinger identifies three basic strategies for achieving dissonance reduction: ‘behaviour

changes, changes of cognition, and circumspect exposure to new information or new

opinion^'.^' The first strategy need not be considered here because it is through behaviour
that a regimen is defined; if behaviour were to change in response to cognitive dissonance,

treatment would be withheld, and thus the action would not fall within the regimen of

Restitution.

The third strategy, circumspect exposure to opinions that might prove contradictory, is

broadly seen in the division of the historic musical instrument field into opposing factions,
 368

each of which has, at present, clearly defined sets of knowledge and limited interaction. Thus,

by working within the regimen of Restitution, the restorer’s exposure to contradictory

opinions is controlled and channelled. Any change in this state of affairs would imply

transfer of activities to another regimen.

If behaviour remains constant, cognition must change to accommodate it. Thus, the second

strategy outlined by Festinger is invoked. Evidence for changes in cognition appears in the

inconsistency noted when the vendors of Glenn Gould’s Steinway piano stipulated during the

1980s the preservation of the unique qualities of the piano through the continuation of

playing status. Dismissal of the impact of continual servicing of the mechanism upon its

‘unique qualities’ prevents physical changes from intruding upon musical results. Dissonance

is thus ameliorated by ignoring contradictory knowledge. Later, when far-reaching changes to

the action of the instrument were openly criticised in 1996, dissonance between the intent and

the action was reduced by dismissing the original intent as ‘blind adherence to [...I flexible

technical parameters’.98The cognition of the importance of these technical parameters is

changed to accommodate the action taken.

The same strategy is invoked in assessing the results of replacement of the soundboard of the

Zumpe fortepiano, where the musical result is entirely disconnected from the physical

disposition on the instrument (see Section 9.3.3). Musical assessment of the piano is carried

out in the absence of one of the most critical parts of the instrument that contribute its

original tonal character -- the soundboard. For the restorer still to consider meaningful the

resultant tonal qualities of the instrument, dissonance arising between the effects of the
 369

materials of fabrication on tone formation and the musical result, must be reduced

considerably. When open criticism of replacement of the soundboard appears in writing, this

is countered by asking whether it is ‘right to condemn it to eternal silence, so that its musical

qualities can never be assessed?’99Dissonance is again reduced, this time by evoking the

misleading argument that the instrument’s silence would be a condemnation. Cognition of the

impact on musical quality of the new soundboard is changed by comparing its working state

favourably to a state of silence.

These examples do not indicate ignorance on the part of the artisans; it is clear that the

implications of the work done upon the instruments are well understood, and that the

existence of contrary opinions is known. What is shown here is a state of mind brought about

by mental weighting in favour of the perceived musical qualities, and against the effects of

craft intervention. The phenomenon of the ‘silent artisan’ introduced in Section 3.4 is evident

in this downplaying. (This aspect is discussed further in the next chapter.) In both cases,

criticism of the approach is countered by strategies intended to justify the position taken. The

intent is to achieve psychological comfort with the chosen regimen through a change of

cognition, thus reducing dissonance.

By these means the paradoxes inherent in the regimen are kept in balance, thus maintaining

the viability of the regimen. Restitution occupies a central position in the schema described

here, by virtue of the means taken to maintain this balance. The regimens on either side

exhibit a confidence that has little need of such strategies. The aesthetic presence of historic

musical instruments is celebrated in the Currency regimen by focussing upon the subjective
 370

components of musical experience. An equal confidence is seen in the regimen of

Preservation, where the focus is upon the objective characteristics of the materials of

fabrication, stressing the integrity of the instrument, and disavowing the subjective element.

In Restitution, object and subjective collide.

11.4 SYNOPSIS OF DISCUSSION OF THE THREE REGIMENS

Subjective values are shown to dominate in the regimen of Currency. The pathetic fallacy

provides the rationale for the powerful subjective element in this regimen; evidence for the

equivocal nature of the subjective, and its apparent openness to deception, does not detract

from the viability of the Currency regimen. Craft activity is directed towards maintaining

continuity, and the instrument therefore becomes the epitome of 'a living past bound up with

the present'.''' The confidence exhibited by the activities in this regimen is of key

importance, and it is clear that no dissonance appears in the way Currency embraces craft

intervention.

In the Preservation regimen objective values dominate. The conservation code of ethics

places limits upon intervention, which effectively precludes maintaining playing state, or

returning an instrument to a previous state with the intention of ensuring function. The

objective aspects of information dominate, relegating craft intervention, and its

subjective/aesthetic outcome, to a lower level, in favour of scientific examination and

preservation from deterioration. The confidence in the ac,tivitiesof this regimen is evident in

its encoded standards of behaviour, which account for the lack of internal dissonance.
 371

Between these two regimens lies Restitution. Three fundamental flaws point to an equivocal

relationship between rationales and actions: the uncomfortable juxtaposition of objective data

with subjective feelings; the questionable genuineness of the instrument; and the potential for

lapse into Currency. Each contributes to a lack of confidence -- a ‘philosophical fragility’ --

which is not evident in either of the other two regimens. There is much internal dissonance,

and it is necessary to deploy strategies to reduce cognitive dissonance in order to reconcile

actions of treatment with their rationales. This lack of confidence is a key feature of

Restitution, and marks it as being different in nature from either Currency or Preservation.

NOTES

1. Johnson, Psychology, p. 65.

2. Johnson, Psychology, p. 66.

3. Anon., untitled article, Macleans Magazine, 11 April 1983, p. 33.

4. Byme, Richard, 0. and Weaver, Martin, E., ‘Piano scars reflect perfection’, The Ottawa
Citizen, 3 May 1983, p. 8.

5. Storey, p. 78.

6. ibid.

7. Payzant, G., ‘The Barrel No. 3 Project - a Review’, presentation to York Pioneer Historical
Society, 21 March 1985.

8. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 146.

9. Lauzon, Kenneth, transcript of personal communication to author, 14 June 1995.

10. Klose, p. 10.

11. Lowenthal, p. 52.

12. Payzant, ‘Barrel Number 3’, p. 9.

 372
A
J

13. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 146.

14. Poole, Elissa, ‘Making Music with Strings Attached’, The Globe and Mail,30 November
1996.

15. Barclay, R.L., Recommendation for the University ofSaskatchewan Amati Quartet,
unpublished report, (Ottawa: Canadian Conservation Institute, 1996), p. 6.

16. MacSween, Donald, letter to E.U. Butler, National Arts Centre, Ottawa, 11 January 1983,
records of the National Capital Commission.

17. Butler, E., letter to J.A.H. Mackay, 2 February 1983, records of the National Capital
Commission.

18. Watson, p. 72.

19. Beament, p. 236.

20. ibid.

21. ibid.

22. ibid.

23. Lazerevich, p. 204.

24. Hutchins, ‘Physics’, p. 63.

25. ‘Subjectivement duns un ancien on cherche des qualiths, duns un moderne des dhfauts.
On ne contr6lejamais par l’audition’, Chenantais, p. xiv.

26. Chenantais, pp. 35-54.

27. Leipp, p. 110.

28. Leipp, p. 238.

29. Hutchins, ‘Introduction’, p. 4.

30. Rubin and Babbie, p. 277.

3 1. Chenantais, pp. 46-52.

32. Haweis, Violins, pp. 224-225.

33. ibid.

34. Lauzon, Kenneth, transcript of personal communication to author, 14 June 1995.

 373

35. Beltrame, Julian, ‘Discord sounded over restoration of Gould piano’, The Ottawa Citizen,
23 April 1983, p. 9.

36. ibid.

37. Ruskin, Stones, vol. 1, p. vii.

38. Ruskin, Modern Painters, p. 154.

39. Barclay, Historic, preface.

40. Mackinnon and Waitzman, Report on Condition of I777 Kirckman Harpsichord, October
1984, Fenton House records, The National Trust.

41. ibid.

42. Marsden, J., Ashby, J. and Waitzman, M., Benton Fletcher Collection of Early Keyboard
Instruments?Fenton House records, The National Trust, p. 1.

43. Scowronek, p. 29.

44. LaRue, pp. 12-13.

45. Wraight, Denzil, letter to author, 1 January 1996.

46. Barnes, John, letter to Elizabeth Wells, 26 June 1984, records of the Museum of
Instruments, Royal College of Music.

47. O’Brien, Grant, Virginal Measurement Short Form: Jadra Virginals, Russell Collection
of Early Keyboard Instruments, Edinburgh, October 1991 .

48. Karp, ‘Instruments in Museums’, p. 181.

49. Karp and Odell, pp. 6-7.

50. Watson, pp. 74-75.

5 1. Karp, ‘Instruments in Museums’, p. 180.

52. Guild regulations and apprenticeship rules were focussed upon the commercial aspects of
trade protection and quality control. The key feature of the conservation ethos is the transfer
of moral or ethical obligations from the client to the object.

53. OED, 111, p. 766.

54. Karp, ‘Conservation’, p. 285.

55. See, for example, the instrument playing policies of the City of Crernona, criticized by
Waitzman, et a1 in ‘Basic Maintenance’, p. 98.
 374
i

56. Watson, pp. 70-72.

57. O’Brien, ‘To play’, p. 293.

58. This is not to say that the instruments are assumed to be in their first functioning state,
because the effects of time and use cannot be reversed. Reference to unmodified condition
simply alludes to the absence of the evidence of irreversible craft activity, so the instruments
can therefore be assumed to possess the features they had when new.

59. Watson, p. 82.

60. ‘To restore an instrument is to preserve or recapture its earlier structure and its authentic
sound’, Abondance, p. 10, col. 2.

61. Hutchins, ‘Introduction’, p. 4.

62. Monical, William, letter to Hart House Music Committee, 2 February 1974, records of
Hart House, University of Toronto.

63. ibid.

64. For example, the extant stringing of 1768 Zumpe fortepiano in Russell Collection,
Russell Collection catalogue, number P2-JZ1768.35.

65. Anon., ‘Background Notes’, National Library of Canada, file number 168-3-G9-4,
Collections - Gould, Glenn - Piano.

66. Jordanova, p, 23.

67. Storey, p. 78.

68. ibid.

69. Jordanova, p. 23.

70. Maunder, ‘Square Piano’, p. 2.

71. Maunder, ‘The Earliest’, p. 83.

72. ibid.

73. Beament, p. 236.

74. Payzant, Glenn Gould, p. 109.

75. Edquist, Verne, letter to National Library of Canada, 1983. National Library of Canada,
file number 168-3-G9-6 - Collections - G. Gould - piano - maintenance - Vol. 1.
 375
b

76. A further fimdamental dichotomy lies in the issue of adjusting the action to Gould’s
‘specifications’ after he himself had abandoned the instrument.

77. Vhrdy, Tim, letter to the editor and rejoinder, Glenn Gould, 3 , 2 (1997), p. 24.

78. Koster, ‘Restoration’, p. 36.

79. Watson, pp. 74-75.

80. Main, p. 371.

81. Karp, ‘Musical Instruments’, p. 179.

82. Latcham, p. 50.

83. ibid.

84. Waitzman, ‘Ancient Musicland’, p. 22. The term ‘condition’ is used throughout this
citation, although the term ‘state’ is preferred in this work (see Section 1.1.2).

85. Cherry, p. 68.

86. Taruskin, Text and Act, p. 56.

87. Saumerez-Smith, p. 20.

88. Taruskin, Text and Act, p. 56.

89. Wraight, Denzil, letter to R.R. Inskeep, 28 August 1975, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

90. Wraight, Denzil, letter to author, 15 January 1996.

91. Koster, ‘Exact Copy’, p. 37.

92. VArdy, Tim, letter to the editor and rejoinder, Glenn Gould, 3, 2 (1997), p. 24.

93. National Library of Canada, Ottawa, file number 168-3-G9-4, Collections - Gould,
Glenn, - Piano.

94. Maunder, ‘Square Piano’, p. 4.

95. Festinger, p. 5.

96. Festinger, p. 13.

97. Festinger, p. 3 1.

98. Vitrdy, Tim, letter to the editor, Glenn Gould, 3 , 2 (1997), p. 24.
 376

99. Maunder, ‘To the Editor’, p. 201

100. Lowenthal, p. 52.

 377
n

CHAPTER TWELVE - THE STRUCTURED REAPPRAISAL

This chapter opens with a summary of the contextual approach that a structured reappraisal of

the rationales behind craft actions on historic instruments allows. The way in which the craft

action normally associated with the regimen of Currency was co-opted in the search for the

historical states of musical instruments is described. The distinct actions of maintenance and

restoration are examined, and strategies for allowing continued playing status are introduced.

Conclusions are drawn upon the viability of both maintenance and restoration as craft

actions. The chapter closes with a discussion of future avenues of research.

12.1 A NEW CONTEXTUALISM

This work has sought to reappraise the thinking upon the preservation and use of historic

musical instruments. By submitting case studies of typical instruments to critical analysis

within the framework developed here, the attitudes of people towards these objects, and the

rationales they adopt in their care and treatment, are seen in a fuller social context. As

cultural theorist Raymond Williams has put it:

However difficult it may be in practice, we have 1.0 try to see the process as a whole,
and to relate our particular studies, if not explicitly at least by ultimate reference, to
the actual and complex organization.’

This examination of the entire context of actions is akin to that proposed by Floris Cohen in

his study of the historiography of the scientific revolution. He refers to a ‘new contextualism’

in an attempt to arrive at a terminology that best expresses his relational approach: ‘Here the

idea is to consider the body of a scientist’s work as an indissoluble part of its social,
 378
n

economic, and political context.’* People’s actions upon historic musical instruments can also

be viewed in this way; as an indissoluble part of the culture in which the work was done. The

roles of individuals in both decision-making processes and treatment actions can be seen in a

holistic way, allowing the cycle of unstructured criticism that has fostered the present

divisive attitudes to be broken. Thus, as the patterns of thought that motivated past actions

become reevaluated, a shift in emphasis results, away from the tension between playing and

preservation, and towards mutual understanding of a common role in safeguarding and

interpreting musical heritage.

12.2 UNCERTAINTY AND CONFIDENCE

It has been shown through the critical analysis of the nine case studies, and the discussion

that followed, that actions on historic musical instruments can be categorized into those that

assure continuing musical use, those that reestablish an earlier state, and those that preserve

the objects from intervention. When the rationales of these actions were analysed in all three

regimens, a distinct contrast was revealed between actions which showed consistency, and

actions which indicated dissonance.

It was seen in the Currency regimen that there was no conflict between the treatment of the

instruments and the philosophy that underscored this action. Similarly, in the regimen of

Preservation, a confident philosophy of action was encountered, maintained by published

codes of behaviour. In both cases, no dissonance within the regimen between actions and

rationales was evident. However, once the actions and rationales of these two regimens are
 379
n

exposed to each other, conflict between them becomes very evident. Crafi intervention

associated with Currency, which resulted in transformation of the artefact, collided with the

values of preservation. Thus, it was shown that these two internally consistent regimens --

Currency and Preservation -- were at the opposite sides of a truly bi-polar dialectic. This was

seen most revealingly in the dialogue over the marks of use on the keyboard fascia of Glenn

Gould’s Steinway piano. To those who sought to preserve such marks, they signified patina

To those who sought to keep

which led the viewer into levels of subjective ~ontemplation.~

the piano current, the marks were described simply as da~nage.~

Each ‘reading’ was

consonant with the values of its regimen, and could therefore be justified by those who

proposed it, but there was nevertheless dissonance between these very conflicting readings.

The regimen of Restitution is markedly different in nature fiom either Currency or

Preservation, because no such confidence in action backed by rationale is evident. It was

demonstrated in the case studies that actions and rationales in the treatment of historic

instruments were, in fact, distinctly dissonant. This ‘philosophical fragility’ revealed itself in

strategies that participants in this regimen deployed in order to reduce or reconcile

dissonance. Thus, the rationales for activity in the regimen of Restitution are not as securely

based as in the other two regimens. In the following section the historical development of this

internal dissonance is traced, and conclusions are drawn about the viability of restoration of

historic musical instruments.

 380

12.2.1 Co-opting the Craft Tradition

Throughout this work a clear distinction has been made between the craft actions of

maintenance and those of restoration. Maintenance takes place in the Currency regimen, and

is characterized by craft intervention to keep an already working instrument in a continuing

playing state. It is epitomised by Lowenthal’s valued attribute of continuity which ‘implies a

living past bound up with the present, not one exotically different or obsolete’.’ Thus,

maintenance encompasses all actions aimed at keeping an historic instrument current, so that

it may be used in present-day performance of music.

Craft action in the Restitution regimen is profoundly different, because maintenance of

playing state must be preceded by the restoration treatment necessary to make the instrument

functional. This accords with Lowenthal’s valued attribute of antiquity, the chief use of

which is ‘to root credentials in the past’.6 This craft action is defined as restoration, and it

involves the intent ‘to represent a known earlier ~ t a t e ’Keyboard

.~ specialist John Watson

alludes to this distinction between restoration and maintenance when he writes that ‘the

damage caused by playing antique instruments is often preceded by much greater damage

wrought by restorers’.* Even though the results of two kinds of action he refers to are both

termed damage, they actually arise from fundamentally different rationales, and are of an

entirely different conceptual nature; one arises from cwrent musical function, while the other

comes about as a result of an historical search.

 381

The distinction between these conceptual differences results, in turn, from a specific

historical development of the two regimens; the overlay of Currency with Restitution. The

nature of the demand for working instruments diverged at the beginning of this century, when

the goal of reinstating a lost playing state became added to that of maintaining working

condition. It will be remembered that the early periods of several of the case studies showed

an indeterminacy in assigning action to a specific regimen. For example, the nature of the

work done upon the Bohak clavichord between the years 1911-12 (Section 10.1.3) showed

elements of both maintenance and restoration. The Zumpe fortepiano showed similar traits

from around the same period (Section 9.3.2). In another case, isolated from contemporary

patterns of thought, as late as the 1950s and 60s, modernization of the Coates organ took

place in parallel with explorations of its historical attributes (Section 8.1.3).

These three examples show that, as the early music revival was gathering momentum, the

existing craft skills of the Currency regimen were enlisted in order for actions to be

performed. However, as the rationales of Restitution became more clearly articulated, craft

action took on a new focus; it was no longer simply a means to maintain the instrument’s

currency, but was an action capable of eliciting results of technical, musical and historical

interest. This co-opting of the craft tradition into a new endeavour resulted in some elements

of that tradition being inevitably transferred to the new regimen. One element that was

transferred directly from Currency to Restitution was the craft operations themselves.

Initially, the tools, techniques and materials used to keep historic instruments current were

identical to those used in the recreation of earlier states. Another element that was initially

incorporated comfortably into Restitution was the low emphasis upon documentation of
 382

work. At the beginning of this century, when the early music revival was in its infancy, the

generally non-textual nature of the craft tradition is evident in the paucity of restoration

interventions consigned to paper. Later, as the Restitution regimen became more distinct

from its forebear, there was a tendency to make a record of the process when such

interventions provided opportunities for historical and technical research.

The two distinct, and conceptually quite different branching facets of craft intervention --

maintenance and restoration -- have been customarily conflated, thus producing the present

simplistic bi-polar model, which this work is intended to deconstruct. The polemic ‘to play or

to preserve’, discussed in the introduction to this work, arises from an interpretation only of

actions, and not of the underlying rationales. When rationales are not explored and

differentiated, the actions become regarded together, in opposition to preservation, and

simply as ‘intervention with tools’. However, when the significantly different rationales of

maintenance and restoration are exposed to critical analysis in the three-regimen model

described in this work, a truer situation emerges. Two quite distinct sources of tension

become apparent:

- The tension between restoring an historic instrument to a working state, or preserving

it in a non-working state.
- The tension between continuing to maintain an historic instrument already in a

working state, or preserving it in a non-working state.

 383

Thus, the previously held view that there exists a single source of tension now loses much of

its energy and focus. Through analysis of rationales, it is evident that there is now no longer a

single tension between craft action and preservation. Instead, there are now two very different

cases to be considered, and two very different conclusions to be drawn. The dialectic of ‘to

play or to preserve’ becomes:

- to restore or to preserve

- to maintain or to preserve

These two polarities are examined in the following two sections.

12.2.2 To Restore or to Preserve: Change in Cognition

The question, to restore or to preserve, is a tension existing between the values of the

regimens of Restitution and Preservation. However, within the Restitution regimen itself

there is internal dissonance, which causes the lack of confidence and the ‘philosophical

fragility’ noted above. This dissonance is centred on decisions to be taken concerning those

instruments no longer in working condition; ones that can be considered derelict, and upon

which actions based in positivistic rationales are contemplated. The intent is intervention ‘to

represent a known earlier state’.’ As discussed in the previous section, the tools and

techniques of Restitution had been co-opted from those of Currency. This co-opting of the

craft tradition into a new endeavour resulted in some values of that tradition coming into

conflict. The subjective values associated with Currency did not accord with the parallel
 384

subjective values developing in Restitution. In Currency there was no dissonance resulting

from the pathetic fallacy as a rationale for ensuring contiiiuity through craft action. There was

a comfortable relationship between craft action in maintaining the instrument's working state,

and the appreciation of the musical results. For example, the complete physical

transformation of Richard Coates's barrel organ, and the musical results emanating from it,

provoked no dissonance because it was being maintained through continuous alteration and

improvement.

In Restitution, on the other hand, the subjective values and craft action are not comfortably

related. The craft operations are no longer concerned with ensuring continuity, but are

employed in the exploration of a past music-historical ambience. The rationale for divining

an earlier state through intervention is dissonant with appreciation of the musical results. This

is illustrated by the substitution of the soundboard in the Zumpe fortepiano, and the

subsequent assessment of the musical results in a presumed historical context. One of the

flaws in the Restitution regimen, the objective/subjective conflict discussed in Section 11.3.2,

is the direct outcome of this dissonance. Further dissonance between action and rationale was

described in Section 11.3.3, where questions were raised over the genuineness of the

instrument, and the potential impact of this doubt upon subjective experiences.

It was argued in Section 11.3.5 that the way in which the Restitution regimen continues to be

viable is through changes in cognition, whereby the dissonance between 'the cognition of the

action taken and those opinions or knowledges which tend to point in a different direction' is

reduced." Only by such a strategy, it was argued, could the paired cognitive elements of
 385

actions requiring a pragmatic, positivistic drive to arrive at a definitive earlier state, and the

rationales of apprehending the aesthetic through authentic experience, be reconciled.

If the player’s subjective experience gained through playing an historic instrument is to

remain uncompromised, then the only way in which this can be done is by dismissing the

effects of craft intervention. The less one knows, or chooses to know, of the extent of craft

intervention on the instrument, the more ‘authentic’ will be the experience. The ‘profound

opportunity to step into a dimension of the cuItural landscape fiom which the music

originated”’ relies for its effect on a belief that the instrument is indeed ‘the real thing’.

The phenomenon of the silent artisan was introduced in Section 3.4. It exists within the

regimen of Currency, where the materials of fabrication are considered mutable, and thus the

transformation of the instrument’s substance does not detract from, or interfere with, its

subjective qualities. This dismissal, or ignorance, of the impact of craft upon musical

qualities arose in part from the social stratification of the craft tradition, where the person

who performed the work was distanced socially from the one who made use of the results.

The user of the instrument had no interest or desire in knowing what had been done, and thus

the musical result was untainted by any consideration of the workbench. Although such a

distinction, which had its roots in class structure, had largely disappeared as an overt social

manifestation by the middle of the present century, its impact persists in the comfortable

juxtaposition of craft intervention and musical results that characterises the regimen of

Currency. The silent artisan is epitomised in the belief that a violin ‘has always, throughout
 386

its nearly 300-year existence, adapted itself over and over again to whoever plays it, like a

sponge that has soaked up all that music’.**

Although arising in the regimen of Currency, the phenomenon of the silent artisan has very

clearly been carried through unconsciously into the Restitution regimen, where it now

accounts for the interpretation that craft intervention has a low impact upon the musical

quality of the instrument. Cognitive dissonance between an authentic experience of an earlier

state, and the impact of craft intervention necessary to achieve that state, is reduced by

ignoring the impact the intervention has upon the materials of fabrication and their

disposition. Thus, the phenomenon of the silent artisan continues in a regimen that,

paradoxically, has the very actions of craft as its focus. Dissonance is reduced by ‘changes of

cognition, and circumspect exposure to new information or new opinion^'.'^

12.2.3 To Maintain: Change in Behaviour

The dissonance between maintaining instruments in a working state, or retiring them to a

non-working state is not internal; the regimens of Currency and Preservation are confidently

free of dissonance in the way that work is conducted and justified. The dissonance between

maintenance and retirement occurs between regimens. It includes all instruments that are

being kept current through function, and so also includes those instruments that have been

restored and are presently in working condition. Whether the newly-restored instrument

should continue to play or be retired is equally a source of contention. But, by including all

instruments in playing state, this highlights the first of the three flaws of the Restitution
 387

regimen (described in Section 11-3.4)that, once an instrument has been restored to playing

state, the actions associated with continued maintenance tend to lapse into the Currency

regimen. As an example, in the case of the Jadra virginals it was said in the 1970s that

‘enough is now known about 16th century instrument building to remove the matter of

historical restoration from the sphere of opinion’,I4yet this opinion was later revised as

further information became available. Clearly, the maintenance considered accurate

historically in the prescribed stringing of the 1970s, differed from the same treatment

prescribed twenty years later. Hence, maintenance is based upon current knowledge, and in

its revision over time shows the tendency to lapse from the Restitution regimen into

Currency.

The demand to express the full aesthetic presence of historic instruments through playing

music on them is clearly a deeply-rooted and long-standing drive; the case studies have

shown examples of division and regret resulting from decisions to suspend playing status.

The drive to maintain playing status has long antecedents; some of the instruments in the case

studies have been kept in working condition for centuries, and many have undergone

successive stages of treatment. It is also clear that a conservation consciousness arising

within the 20th century has neither displaced this drive, nor submerged it. The drive to

maintain the musical voice of historic instruments is encountered in Arnold Dolmetsch’s

opinion, that those historic instruments preserved unplayed ‘have been ignorantly deposed

from their sovereignty over the emotions’.’’ Although expressed in the early years of this

century, this sentiment is still apposite.

 388

Recently, keyboard specialist John Watson has made a plea for a reconciliation between the

musical sentiments and the documentary functions of historic organs:

Like all old musical instruments, historic organs have not one but two voices. They
have a musical voice, and they have a historical voice [...I Old music on old
instruments helps us experience the artistic musical landscape in which our ancestors
lived [and] an historic organ is virtually a multi-volume, hand-written, autograph,
unabridged, encyclopedia of organ making, written by a known, practicing [sic],
historical organ builder.16

This author expresses the clear desire to explore ways of both exploiting and respecting these

two voices. This is an argument for a change in behaviour, rather than a change in cognition.

If it is decided that musical function is to continue so that subjective, emotional phenomena

can be experienced, while still allowing the preservation criteria of science and integrity to be

satisfied, the present rigid structures of behaviour, promoting continuity on the one side and

integrity on the other, must be altered. By doing this, the values and attitudes implicit in the

question ‘to maintain or to preserve’, will be replaced by values and attitudes appropriate to

the question ‘under what strictures and in what circumstances may the instrument be played’.

Dissonance must be reduced by the first of Festinger’s strategies, ‘behaviour change^'.'^

This change in behaviour can only occur if a decision-making structure is already in place.

When the potential for use of historic musical instruments is considered on a case-by-case

basis, methods of reconciling the conflicting demands of preservation and playability become

available. Decision-making protocols have been applied in the business and industrial sectors

for some time,’* and have more recently been examined for their application to heritage

collection^.'^ Systematic categorization of heritage objects has been instituted as a way of

conserving valuable material while still maintaining didactic use of collections. As an

example, the Netherlands Ministry of Welfare, Health and Cultural Heritage created the Delta
 389

Plan for the purposes of categorizing values and assigning preservation resources for historic

collections.20In the musical instrument field, Myers proposed in 1987 a systematic

categorization of brasswind instruments as an aid in deciding which could be played, and

under what conditions.*' In this system, five categories of rarity were proposed: unique, rare,

historic, common, and replaceable. This categorization was later promoted by the MGC for

the drawing up of care plans for all working instruments.22However, such a categorization

takes no account of the present physical condition of the instrument, or the state in which it

presently stands. In order to capture data related to the these categories, and to incorporate

these data into a decision-making protocol, the following fuller categories have been

developed here:

Figure 20. Categories for assessment of playing potential.

These categories constitute the basis of a decision-making protocol, described below, that can

be applied to all historic instruments presently in working condition. The contents of these

categories are first described in detail as follows:

 390

Rarity23

unique

The only example of its type, an example from a famed maker, or with a well-

documented association with a particular historic event or personage.

rare

One of a few examples of its type, or associated with a particular historic event or

personage.

historic

Relatively scarce, and having some historical value, but not associated with a

particular event or personage.

common

One of many extant, but no longer in production.

replaceable

One of many extant, and still in production.

Risk of Damage24

highest

Will certainly be damaged by use; e.g. ivory, glass and ebonite wind instruments,

string instruments with deteriorated structures, and season-cracked brass.

 391

high

Most woodwind instruments, especially if not played regularly, fragile finishes such

as lacquers and varnishes, corroded metals, and mechanically unsound structures.

medium

Metal instruments in sound mechanical and chemical condition with moveable park

such as slides and valves, and all wooden instruments in stable condition.

low

Metal instruments in sound mechanical condition with no moveable parts, and

wooden instruments of solid construction.

safest

Recently made instruments of all types in sound condition.

State

perfect

No traces of use, no damages or repairs, all components in place, and all parts

original.

excellent

No damages or repairs, all components in place, all parts original, and obviously used

but well maintained.

 392

good

Obviously used and with traces of repair and maintenance, and some parts not

original, but consistent with earlier state.

mediocre

Essentially fulfilling its function, evidence of heavy use, and significant amount of

replaced parts.

poor

Functioning but in non-original state, with many parts replaced, including those that

contribute to sound p r o d ~ c t i o n . ~ ~

In order to assess the risks attendant on use of an historic instrument, a numerical value is

derived from two overlapping matrices. The first compares risk and rarity:

iigure 21. The risk and rarity matrix.

 393

The numerical value for risk compared with rarity derived from this first matrix is then

compared with condition:

6 6 7 8 9 10
7 7 8 9 10 11
8 8 9 10 11 12
9 9 10 11 12 13

The numerical value derived from this comparison provides a key to the extent of use an

instrument can sustain. Numerical scorings are interpreted as follows:

1. There are no circumstances under which the instrument should be played.

2. The instrument may only be played under exceptional circumstances and for a limited

time to establish such features as tuning, range, temperament, etc. It can only be

played under close supervision, and after expert assessment of its condition and the

potential yield of information gained from its use. The player must be able to
 394

demonstrate a familiarity with the instrument. A high quality recording should be

made of the playing session.

3. The instrument may only be played under exceptional circumstances but for a longer

duration, under supervision, and after independent expert assessment of its condition

and the information gained from its use. The player must demonstrate a familiarity

with the instrument. A high quality recording should be made.

4. The instrument may be played more frequently, under supervision, although duration

should still be limited. Such limitation can only be assessed on an individual basis

and relies upon accurate and complete documentation of condition before and after

use.

5. The instrument may be played more fi-equently, and with sessions of longer duration.

6. The above requirements may be relaxed slightly in view of the fact that future playing

sessions may contribute further information. Expert assessment of the information to

be gained is still desirable but not essential.

7. The instrument can be used frequently, and for fairly extended periods. There is less

need to establish the value of information gained.

8. Regular use of the instrument can be maintained, although it should still be played

under supervision. Players should still be required to demonstrate expertise on the

type of instrument.

9. As for the above, but playing need not be supervised.

10. Unsupervised playing is the norm, although regular monitoring should be done.

11. The player does not need to be an expert on the instrument, but must demonstrate a

familiarity with historic material.

 395

12. The instrument may be played unsupervised by players unfamiliar with its

capabilities.

13. Any instrument with this score should have its presence in a collection of historic

instruments reassessed.

It is emphasised that this is a model protocol, and that its successful deployment will depend

upon the particular demands of any specific historic musical instrument to which it is applied,

and to the particular circumstances under which it is used. A version of this decision-making

protocol was first proposed by this author for the Bate Collection of Musical Instruments at

Oxford University, the instruments of which are required by the terms of their donation to be

played.26

Correct application of this protocol requires deep knowledge of the instrument being

assessed. Its position within the collection in which it resides, and its relationship with

similar instruments elsewhere, must be well understood. The risk of use of the instrument

must be explored in terms of its materials of fabrication and their condition, and the state of

originality and extent of transformation must be assessed. As an adjunct to the interpretations

of the 13 categories derived above, their application can be clarified by the guidelines by

Ode11 and K a r ~ . ~The

’ guidelines they provide include additional factors to be used in

weighing risk, particularly those concerning access to facilities for the technical craft

operations of treatment, and those for the extended care of the instrument once its playing

state has been reestablished.

 396

There are four potential limitations to the application of decision-making protocols of this

kind:

- The status of instruments is arrived at through an assessment of available information.

This depends upon accurate and thorough research, not only of the instrument in

question, but also of other similar ones elsewhere.

- There is a tendency for categorization to become self-fulfilling. An instrument

assigned to a certain category within this system will thereafter be treated in a way

that characterises its status. Because a judgement of value is made, there is therefore a

temptation to give less attention to instruments that score lower.

- Instruments tend to rise through the categories. An instrument considered replaceable

at the present time may not be in the future; due to natural attrition the common

becomes less so.

- The protocol will become refined as personnel become familiar with it, and thus

earlier decisions will not be as well founded as those made later.

In view of these limitations, it is essential that research 011 the individual instrument be as

thorough as possible, and that categorization decisions be reviewed at regular intervals by

specialists with expertise in such areas as organology, musicology, instrument-making,

restoration and conservation.

 397

12.3 CONCLUSIONS

12.3.1 Opposition to Restoration

The resolution of dissonance between craft intervention and musical results within the

regimen of Restitution can only come about by a change in cognition, because change in

behaviour would result in the regimen itself being abandoned. The change in cognition which

allows the evocation of subjective musical experience is based.upon a structured ignorance of

the extent of craft intervention. This is because craft intervention to restore an earlier

functioning state has two inconsistent outcomes: the subjective musical results are the

experiences of the player alone, and are not communicable; and the objective musical results

can only relate to the instruments’ present dispositions, not to their historical states.

Therefore, it is impossible to assess for historical accuracy the value of any musical data

produced, and there is therefore no contribution to the body of music-historical knowledge to

be gained from restoration. It is concluded that historic musical instruments are a diminishing

resource, and that those in degraded condition should remain so as sources of technical and

historical information.

12.3.2 Support of Maintenance

Maintaining playing state is no longer simply a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ proposition. By utilizing a

reasoned and fully conscious decision-making process, and having a wide understanding of

the individual instrument’s context, state, and condition, the decision to maintain playing
 398

state or to preserve may be given a solid, objective basis. Reduction of the dissonance

between the regimens of Currency and Preservation is brought about by change in behaviour,

not a change in cognition. Although historic musical instruments are a diminishing resource,

those already in playing condition, and which meet the kind of organized and systematically

applied criteria outlined in the decision-making protocol, can be provided with the

opportunity to continue in that role.

12.4 FUTURE RESEARCH

The analytical structure developed here has been applied only to historic musical instruments.

However, as musical instruments share many similar characteristics with other hnctioning

objects, it is clear that this schema could have much wider applications. For example, it

might be applied to the problems associated with the maintenance of flying condition in

historic aircraft, or the running of steam locomotives, both of which also add legal and

mechanical obligations. The polarity between those who wish to exploit the finction of these

objects, and those who wish to preserve them, is equally as wide as that among personnel in

the historic musical instrument field. Future research should concentrate on case studies of

objects such as these that have well-documented histories of use and intervention, to ascertain

if the schema applied to this work can have wider applications.

A corollary of reserving valuable historic instruments in a non-fknctioning state as resources

of information, is the production of copies. Although some work has been done on defining

the parameters for historical copies of musical instruments, the rationales behind the choice
 399

of instruments to copy have not yet been analysed. Future research could identify those

historic instruments that have been selected as ‘mentors’, and analyse the reasons for their

choice, the veracity of the resultant copies and, of key importance, the strategies necessary to

make the copies perform well in the modern context.

NOTES

1. Williams, Revolution, p. 60.

2. Floris Cohen, p. 229.

3. Byme, Richard, 0. and Weaver, Martin, E., ‘Piano scars reflect perfection’, The Ottawa
Citizen, 3 May 1983, p. 8.

4.Anon., untitled article, Macleans Magazine, 11 April 1983, p. 33.

5. Lowenthal, p. 52.

6. ibid.

7. IIC-CG and CAPC, Code, p. 17.

8. Watson, p. 73.

r
9. IIC-CG and CAF’C, Code, p. 17.

10. Festinger, p. 5.

11. Watson, pp. 74-75.

12. Beuth, p. 73.

13. Festinger, p. 31.

14. Wraight, Denzil, letter to R.R. Inskeep, 28 August 1975, Pitt Rivers Museum records,
Oxford University.

15. Campbell, p. 126.

16. Watson, ‘Beyond’, p. 35.

 400

17. Festinger, p. 3 1.

18. Kepner and Tregoe are considered pioneers in the application of decision-making
protocols to business practice.

19. Price and Fitzgerald.

20. Netherlands Ministry of Welfare, Health and Cultural Heritage, Deltaplan. Preservation
of Cultural Heritage in the Netherlands, Fact sheet C-11-E-1992.

2 1. Myers, ‘Conservation’, pp. 22 1-231.

22. Standards, p. 65.

23. The rarity category uses Myers’s definitions verbatim.

24. The Risk of Damage and State categories are derived from the report to the Bate
Collection.

25. The terms perfect, excellent, good, mediocre, and poor relate to state, and not condition.
As an illustration, the Amati violin illustrated in Figure 10 would be described as poor when
assessed according to these terms, even though it is imminently playable.

26. Barclay, R.L., ProposaZ for the Bate Collection, unpublished report (Ottawa: CCI, July
1997)

27. Ode11 and Karp, ‘Ethics’

,
I
 40 1

APPENDIX I - INSTRUMENT INFORMATION

1.1 Field Structure

Each case study is preceded by fields containing information about the instrument under

study. The instrument information preceding each case study is structured around the fields in

the left column of the following table. These field names constitute a refined set derived from

those shown in the right column, which were proposed by musical instrument curator Arnold

Myers for the cataloguing of general musical instrument collections.’ Myers originated this

system because ‘no satisfactory cataloguing standards could be found in the literature’ and

because he wished it to form the basis of an accepted international standard.2His work is

used as a source here because it represents a recent and thorough attempt to provide a

versatile cataloguing framework for a mixed collection.

This work Myers’s fields

Ownership -

Classification CL classification

Acquisition number AN acquisition number

Name ON Original name

- EN English name

Nominal pitch NP Nominal pitch

- TS Type of system

Compass -
 402

Maker MK Maker

Place of origin PL Place of origin

- CO Culture of origin

Date of manufacture DM Date of making

Inscriptions IN Inscriptions

Serial number SN Serial number

Dimensions OS Overall size

Further information FM Further information on maker

Notes

- Classification uses the system and terminology originated by Hornbostel and S a c h ~ . ~

- Nominal Pitch and Compass use the American National Standard where C, to B, is

the octave from middle C to B in the centre of the treble clef. The A which stands at

440Hz in the Helmholz nomenclature is A,.,

In adapting the set of fields to better answer the current purpose, the following changes have

been made:

- Ownership is added to accommodate the current custodians of the instruments under

study.

- Original Name and English Name have been conflated to Name.

- Type of System has been removed as it is specific to the keywork of wind

instruments.
 403

- Compass has been added, where necessary, to accommodate keyboard instruments.

- Culture of Origin has been removed because instruments from the Western tradition

are common to the whole set of cases under study.

Overall Dimensions has been expanded to include all relevant dimensions.

- Further Information on Maker has been expanded to include all extra information not

represented within the texts of the case studies.

Myers completes his set with a further 17 fields, all of which provide detailed information

not germane to this s t ~ d yThe

. ~ purpose of the set of fields derived for this study is heuristic

and explanatory -- the fields provide basic information as an adjunct to the cases under

analysis, but are not intended to stand alone as cataloguing information.

1.2 The Instruments

Coates Barrel Organ

4 Ownership

Sharon Temple Museum, Sharon, Ontario

Classification

Organ

Acquisitionlaccession number

956.20.1

Name

Barrel organ
 404

Nominal pitch

A4=440Hz

Compass

From left6:

ACDEFGA Q CDEFG Q A Q CDEF Q G Q AGFD Q C Q BAGFD Q C Q BAGFD Q C Q

BbG

Maker

Richard Coates?

Place of origin

Europe? Canada?

Date of manufacture

1819/20

Inscriptions

Pitch and number in ink on each key, pitch pencilled on ends of keys. Pitch

and number in ink on each pipe, reproduced below in pink wax crayon and

overlaid with pencil. Pitch written lightly in pencil on the pipeboard, overlaid

more heavily in pencil. Traces of paper stop labels. ‘The Old Hundred’

pencilled below stops on horizontal board.

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Height 236.0cm, width 172.Ocm, depth 102.50cm.

 405

Further information

Four ranks of pipes, all in wood. Diapason with 37 pipes, bourdon with 37

pipes, 4' open with 37 pipes, and 4' open with 22 pipes. Total of 133 pipes.

Worm driven 10 tune barrel mechanism with pins and bridges acting on a key

rail. Hand or foot operated bellows.

Steinway Piano in Rideau Hall

Ownership

Rideau Hall, Department of Public Works, Ottawa

Classification

Struck string keyboard

Acquisition number

210425.048

Name

Grand piano

Nominal pitch

A4=440Hz

Compass

A, - C,, seven and one third octaves, 88 keys.

Maker

Steinway and Sons

Place of origin

New York, U.S.A.

 406

Date of manufacture

1934

Inscriptions

Stencilled maker’s decal on key facing. Serial number below music desk on

cast iron plate.

Serial number

B27498 1

Dimensions

Height 96.0cm (from floor), width 142.5cm, length 197.5cm

Further information

none

Amati String Quartet

a) Violin (1627)

Ownership

University of Saskatchewan

Classification

Bowed string

Accession number

None

Name

Violin
 Nominal pitch

A4=440Hz

Maker

Antonius and Hieronymus Amati

Place of origin

Cremona

Date of manufacture

1627

Inscriptions

Printed paper label:

‘Antonius Hieronymus Fr. Amati Cremonen Andreas fil. 1627’

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 405mm, upper bouts 163mm, middle 114mm, lower bouts 202mm

Further information

The back of one piece of maple cut on the quarter with medium flames

running slightly downwards from left to right. The ribs and scroll of similar

wood. The table of two pieces of spruce with even, medium grain. The varnish

is of a golden brown colour.’

b) Violin (1637)

Ownership

University of Saskatchewan
 408

Classification

Bowed string

Accession number

None

Name

Violin (known as the Daisy Kennedy Amati)

Nominal pitch

A4=440Hz

Maker

Nicolo Amati

Place of origin

Cremona

Date of manufacture

1637

Inscriptions

Printed paper label:

‘Nicoleus Amatus Cremonensus Antoni Nepos 1637’

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 403mm, upper bouts 160mm, middle bouts 11lmm, lower bouts 197mm
 409

Technical description

The back of one piece of maple cut on the half slab with medium horizontal

flame. The ribs and scroll of similar wood. The table of two pieces of spruce

with medium narrow grain. The varnish is of a golden brown co10ur.8

c) Viola

Ownership

University of Saskatchewan

Classification

Bowed string

Accession number

None

Name

Viola

Nominal pitch

A4=440Hz

Maker

Antonius and Hieronymus Amati

Place of origin

Cremona

Date of manufacture

1607

Inscriptions

Printed paper label:

 410

‘Antonius & Hieronymus Fr. Amati Cremoneri Andreas fil. F. 1607’

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 423mm, upper bouts 184mm, middle 128mm, lower bouts 233mm

Technical description

The back of one piece of maple cut on the half slab with a painting of the

Borghese family crest depicting two cherubs. The ribs and scroll of similar

wood. The table of two pieces of spruce with narrow grain in the centre seam

area, widening to medium in the flanks. The varnish is of a golden brown

colour.

d) Violoncello

Ownership

University of Saskatchewan

Classification

Bowed string

Accession number

None

Name

Violoncello

Nominal pitch

A,=440Hz
 41 1

Maker

Hieronymus Amati

Place of origin

Cremona

Date of manufacture

1690

Inscriptions

Printed paper label:

'Hieronymus Amatus Cremonen Nicolai Figlius 1690'

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 921mm, upper bouts 408mm, middle 255mm, lower bouts 489mm

Technical description

The back of two pieces of willow cut on the partial slab with mild figure. The

Plymouth family seal on the button. The ribs of matching wood. The table of

two pieces of spruce with narrow grain in the centre seam area, widening

slightly and then narrowing again in the outer flanks. The varnish is of a

golden brown c01our.'~

Steinway Piano in National Library

Ownership

National Library of Canada

 412

Classification

Struck string keyboard

Acquisition number

none

Name

Grand piano

Nominal pitch

A4=440Hz

Compass

A, - C,, seven and one third octaves, 88 keys.

Maker

Steinway and Sons

Place of origin

New York, U.S.A.

Date of manufacture

1943

Inscriptions

Stencilled maker’s decal on key facing. Serial number below music desk on

cast iron plate.

Serial number

D3 17194

Dimensions

Height 960mm @om floor), width 1422mm, length 1975mm

 413

Further information

none

The Hart House Viols

a) Pardessus de viole, Guersan

Ownership

Hart House, University of Toronto

Classification

Bowed string

Acquisitiodaccession number

None

Name

Six-stringpardessus de viole

Nominal pitch

A4=415Hz, tuned one fourth above the treble

Maker

Louis Guersan

Place of origin

Paris

Date of manufacture

1761
 414

Inscriptions

Paper label inside back under bass side 'c' hole. Number 1231 stamped beside

tail peg

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 328mm, upper bouts 161mm, middle 1l o r n , lower bouts 196mm

Further information

Excellent and almost original condition."

b) Pardessus de viole, Betrand

Ownership

Hart House, University of Toronto

Classification

Bowed string

Acquisitiodaccession number

None

Name

Six-stringpardessus de viole

Nominal pitch

A4=415Hz,tuned one fourth above the treble

Maker

Nicolas Betrand
 415

Place of origin

Paris

Date of manufacture

1725

Inscriptions

Label of G. Saint-George appears inside back, below bass side sound hole.

Number 1231 stamped beside tail peg

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 313mm, upper bouts 155mm, middle 116mrn, lower bouts 187mrn

Further information

Worn finish, crudely revarnished.

c) Treble viol, Bergonzi (attrib.)

Ownership

Hart House, University of Toronto

Classification

Bowed string

Acquisitiodaccession number

None

Name

Six-string treble viol

 416

Nominal pitch

A,=4 15Hz

Maker

Carlo Bergonzi (attrib.)

Place of origin

Cremona

Date of manufacture

1734

Inscriptions

Facsimile label inside back, below bass side sound hole, of Carlo Bergonzi.

Number 1231 stamped beside tail peg

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 33 lmm, upper bouts 158mm, middle 1 12mm, lower bouts 187mm

Further information

Double purfling on front, sides and back typically English. Non-original head

grafted on.

d) Treble viol, Anonymous

Ownership

Hart House, University of Toronto

Classification

Bowed string
 417

Acquisitiodaccession number

None

Name

Six-string treble viol

Nominal pitch

A4=415Hz

Maker

Anonymous

Place of origin

Netherlands?

Date of manufacture

c.1700

Inscriptions

Number 1231 stamped beside tail peg

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 345mm,upper bouts 172mm, middle 120mm, lower bouts 204mm

Further information

Excellent condition. Extremely wide neck and fingerboard.

e) Alto viol, Anonymous

Ownership

Hart House, University of Toronto

 418

Classification

Bowed string

Acquisitionlaccession number

None

Name

Six-string alto viol

Nominal pitch

A4=415Hz

Maker

Anonymous

Place of origin

England?

Date of manufacture

18th c.

Inscriptions

Label of G. Saint-George appears inside back, below bass side sound hole.

Number 1231 stamped beside tail peg

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 424mm, upper bouts 205mm, middle 149mm, lower bouts 250mm

Further information

Built as an alto (perhaps with five strings) and tuned as a tenor. Renecked.
 419

f) Bass viol, Tielke (attrib.)

Ownership

Hart House, University of Toronto

Classification

Bowed string

Acquisitiodaccession number

None

Name

Six-string bass viol

Nominal pitch

A,=4 15Hz

Maker

Joachim Tielke (attrib.)

Place of origin

Hamburg

Date of manufacture

e. 18th c.

Inscriptions

Number 1231 stamped beside tail peg

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Body 659mm, upper bouts 307mm, middle 225mm, lower bouts 250mm
 420

Further information

Table and sides extensively repaired

Joannes Zumpe Fortepiano

Ownership

Emmanuel College, Cambridge University

Classification

Struck string keyboard

Acquisition number

none

Name

Fortepiano

Nominal pitch

A,=4 15Hz

Compass

G3to F, (no G#,)

Maker

Johannes Zumpe

Place of origin

London

Date of manufacture

1766
 42 1

Inscriptions

Maker’s name label on keyboard facia: ‘Johannes Zumpe Londini Fecit 1766

Princess Street Hanover Square’

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Height 146mm, width 450mm, length 1228mm

Further information

Four and one half octaves, 58 keys.

Bohak Clavichord

Ownership

Royal College of Music Museum of Instruments, London

Classification

Struck string keyboard

Accession number

RCM 177

Name

Clavichord

Nominal pitch

A4=415Hz

Compass

F, to F,, 61 notes
 422

Maker

Johann Bohak?

Place of origin

Vienna?

Date of manufacture

1794?

Inscriptions

Remains of a paper label (inscription not legible) on the bass end of the

hitchpin rail. Traces of two sets of numbers on the key levers, one set marking

the order of the keys, the other the string gauges.

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Length 1459mm, width 469mm, depth (including later case capping and

baseboard) 167mm, depth (without later case capping and base board)

109mm.
J

Jadra Pentagonal Virginals

Ownership

Pitt Rivers Museum, Oxford

Classification

Plucked string keyboard

 423

Accession number

1948.1.p 1

Name

Virginals

Nominal pitch

A,=4 15Hz

Compass

G/A, to C, (C/E, to F8)

Maker

Marco Jadra

Place of origin

Italy

Date of manufacture

1552

Inscriptions

Name batten: ‘MARC1 IADRA MDLII’

J

Back of name batten: ‘Restored by Robert Goble, Oxford. 1954’

Paper label: ‘Virginal, 1552, made by Marco Jadra in Italy. Formerly owned

by Valdrighi, then by Canon F.W. Galpin. Two others by this maker are

known, one in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, and one in the

Glinka Museum, Moscow.’

Serial number

None
 424

Dimensions

Length 1583mm, width 341mm (inside case dimensions)

Further information

Pentagonal form. Short octave in the bass. Quilled in crow. Brass stringing

throughout. C jacks pluck away from the player, f jacks pluck towards player.

No outer case.

Kirckman Harpsichord

Ownership

Fenton House, The National Trust

Classification

Plucked keyboard

Acquisitiodaccession number

unac

Name

Harpsichord

Nominal pitch

A,=4 15Hz

Compass

F, to F,, two manuals.

Maker

Jacob Kirckman
 42 5

Place of origin

London, England

Date of manufacture

1777

Inscriptions

Nameboard at rear of keys: ‘Jacobus et Abraham Kirckman Londini fecerunt

1777’

Serial number

None

Dimensions

Length 2362mm, width 933mm, height 3 17mm (case).

Further information

Nag’s head swell operated by pedal.

Three registers: upper 8’, 4’, and lute

NOTES

1. Myers, ‘Cataloguing’, pp. 14-28.

2. Myers, ‘Cataloguing’, p. 14.

3. Von Hornbostel, E.M. and Sachs, C., ‘Systematik‘.

4. American Standard Acoustical Terminology, S 1. 1- 1960 of the USA National Standards

Institute (New York: ANSI, 1960)

5. von Hornbostel and Sachs, pp. 22-25.

6. Left and right are proper throughout; i.e. from the perspective of the object, not the viewer.
 426

7. This information is transcribed from the files of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences,
University of Saskatchewan.

8. ibid.

9. ibid.

l0.ibid.

11. Further Information for all instruments is derived from appraisals in the records of Hart
House, University of Toronto.
 427

APPENDIX I1 - IRISH HARP RESTORATION REPORTS

1 THE HARP OF BRIAN BOROIMHE

OF

BRIAN BOROIMHE.
RESTORATION OF THE AKCIENT HARP PRESERVED IK‘ THE DUBLIN UNIVERSITY
JIUSEUJI, AXD COMMONLY CALLED THE HARP OF BRIAN BOROIJIHE.

,*uAd,izs( 9 17: I $-I~.-~C .J/.k, -. ( ~

A/*A c / j 2
THEtradition* attached to the original Harp is, that some time after the death of Brian, mho mas
killed at the Battle of Clontarf by the Danes, in 1014, it was, with other Regalia, presented to the Pope
in Come ; subsequently ,Z successor to his Holiness sent it as a present to Henry VIIL, by whom it was
returned to Ireland, to be figured on his coins, in compliment to the musical taste of the Irish. Mr.
Curry states, however, that there is some evidence to show that this Harp belonged to Donagh Cair-
brcch O’Brien, Chief of his name, who died A.D. 1244. I n the course of the last century it mas
given to the University Museum, in a mutilated state. From this imperfect condition, in which
the brolwi bow was fiastened down on the soundingboard, so as to cover over three of the string-
holes, the form so commonly used in emblematical devices was adopted. The present Director of
the Museum, having observed the mutilation, restored the parts of the Harp to their proper position,
and supplied the lost portions from analogy. They consist of about five inches of the lower end of
the bow and the foot of the Harp ; the National Emblem, the Shamrock, which is seen on the original,
Iiaviiig two leaves of a scroll pattern, has been carried down in the restoration on the part supplied.
The I €IS, in one of its early forms, is engraven on the arm. The Harp, when perfect, had thirty strings ;
and though it is now impossible to prove that it really was the property of Brian Boroimhe, it has not
been questioned that it is the oldest known Irish harp. Doubts thrown on its being of the antiquity
ascribed to it were inainly founded on very imperfect examination of the instrument, and were suggested
by a coat of arms of the ONeills rudely nailed upon it, and assumed to be a part of the original instru-
ment, but which, it would seem probable, was nailed on by way of ornament, in 1760, when it is said
to have been carried in procession in Limerick. On the visit of the Queen to Ireland in 1849, the
Harp was exhibited, when Her Majesty said, This, then, I understand to be the Harp of Ireland.” It
mny be added, that in the Royal Arms carved on the bow of the Dallvay Harp, which mas made in
1611, this Harp appears to be figured in the quartering for Ireland. In the hope that its graceful form
may take the place of the commonly inelegant-often ridiculous-figures introduced into emblematical
devices, this restoration was made.
* See Vollancey’s Collectnnea de Rebus Hibernicis, vol. iv., p. 32.

K. BALL.
J d y . 1853. Dublin University Museuni.

This illustration, and the one on the next page, are reduced to 80% of their full size.
 428

2 THE DALWAY HARP

R E S T O R A T I O N OF T H E H A R P
KXOWX AS TIIE

A xoTicE of this fine Instrumcnt appeared in Bunting's Collection of thc Ancient Music of Ireland, published about
1809 ; it is as follows :
6' The remaining fragments of this Hsrp consist of the most i m p r t n n t p w t i : The harmonic curve, o r pin-hnrd. snd the fore-nm, the sound-
h a r d alone beins io5L It hos long been in the fnndy of SoDh Dalwsy, Ex+, of Bellahill, near Crrrickfergus. and appears by noticn enar&ved on it
to have bcen made far the llause of Fitzgcrnld of Clunin [Cloyne]. whore Arms are handiomcly cliased on the front of the fore.pillar, surmounted by
the Arms of England. Every part of the rcninining fragincnts is covered with inscriptioni io Lutin and in the Irish clurauier. the former containing
mottoes and the name of thc maker (Donntur Filius Thndci): the latter the year it was made in (A. D. I621), and the servant,' names of the household.
According to an old custom. the instrunicnt is supposed tu be onimnted, and. among other matien. informr us of the immcs of two harpers who h d pro.
duccd the finest music on i t : these were. it scciti% Giolla ratrick JI'Cmdun and Uiarmid JI'Crcdan. By the pins, which reinain &ost entire, it is
found IO have contniiicd in the row forty-five strings. bcsidn sewn in tlic centre. probably fur unison, to uthen. muking ill all fifty-two. and exceding
the conmuti harp by twenty-two strings. I n consequence of thesouid-bnrd being lor\ different attemptr l o ascertain it, scale have been unruccessfu[;
it contained twenty-four. s t r i n p niorc thin the riolwl hnrp c u l l d Brim B o r u i d d s . and in point of wurkmnnship ir beyond comparison superior to it,
both for the rl~ganeeof i t 5 crowded ornnnmntr. und fur tlie generul eseeution of I ~ O L Lports . on n-hich the correcmeri of s musical instrument depends.
The oppoiitc ride i5 q u n l l y beautiful with tlnt of w l k h a dclinention i5 given : the fure-pillar appears tu be o f s i l l l ~ w , the harmonic curve of
The instrument, in truth, deserves the epithet ellrimed by thr inscriptiun on itsulf: EGO ICY PFCI?I.\ CITII.%RAPFN.
. JIuammcin :-Bottom of round.board tu cxtremity of linrmonic curve, where i t joiilr fore-pillar.
LengtIi afsound.l,uard. i n the clrnr. .....................
..... 3 feet. 10 inches.
2 IO
..............
Distance ufwuid-bwrd to i'urc-pillnr, at grLmtcst width, I 3
Longcststriiig. ............................ 3 . .I
Sl,"rtcrL .............................. 0 2}1'

The vicw and drawing pitblislicd by Bunting ivcrc made by John JPCrackcn, Erq., of BelCast.
We givc the Irish inscription, as copicd by Eiigcnc Curry, &I.R. I. -4., from the origiiial liarnionic curvc, and also
his translation thereof :
.
lyiaoro uo11 . Fciuiiiuiioi;i. us. ~ e n u n. E, .Cinaiiio . s c a p u l c a ;yctuuin. a n c a n . nolaanat,. niip.i.nobo. ~ n i ~ ~ uufip Bemur
o $1 Scaaiii, 1

llliitpr bpeuiwclt DOIW ~ U B E l Seuaii biiicileip Fionu 1Seuan puburl l~ulctlelpn a bcoliaC 1 pilip I
~ U ~ I ~ I U1I tJiu~~lll~ilu ; ~ o m n a i l tbo c6caipc

ufi riiio 5 1621.

cuOg 0 puulllc bct ~tmiImuoipun .1 ~ c n i i i l I-Z U I I Y L Iw i ~ q w r g uc q~c 1 I l l u i l q - C, ~ u I n m 1
r mulllll~
lit c n u i l i . bu 6icmunuig uhcirgc-
1wDeoi.a ian po uile. , pilip ;ti ~ c t i o giiic q u i t 1181 cuiLluli~un. ~ofic[u]ir L CUIUS iiu r a ~ c l puu pun.
i 1
6rollaFpaDpis niba cpiuuiit i m l t < i pcup e c m ~ u i l w p i ~ ~uaiii p~iuisiiiiii buii, Feap 11- re DO b~ieuij.1 T>iupiiiain iiiz cpiwiin niuillc pcil-
3101s im cid,er, Slafitt ua lii ~,=,uIH~uUOIU uliiiiucii '1 Sgii: caii uial, go I ~ U C U I I I WUia g p r w optu p i n uile.

'~'l'livre ore tlrey who werc servitors tu JVIIIIYitr Xdiuond (Fitr Gerald]. at Clusin [Cloyne]. at tlic time tliut I 1vn9 made. viz. : the Steward
:liere was Jonicr Filr Julin: .id JIiuriee IYulrli WAS uur Suprrintmmlcnt ; atid Derrnod Fitr J o h , IViiic Ilutler ; a i d John 1:usdbnn war Beer Uutler;
ud Philip Fit' Domiel WAS Cook tlterr. Auno Llmiiiii 1621.
'a Teige O'Iiuarc ~3 Chmbwlniii tlicrc. nnd Jniiier Euasel wus IIouse J111r:Iul ; niid Jlniiricc Birr 'Tliumar aiid Nnurice Fit2 Edmond ; tliesu
were all discreet ntteudoiitruponliiiii. Pliilip Yitztrigc Jlugmth was 'l'dur rliere ; Uuancliutili Fitr 'l'eige wils hi3 Cnrpwtrr.-it wnr he that nindc me.
"Giolln~ntrick Alnc Cridan wns niy Nusicirn and Hnrmonist ; nnd if I coulll Inire found a better, hint should I have. and Dermot Jl'Cridan
dong with hini, t w o highly accouiplirlnd men, wlmin 1 had to nurse nie. A i d un every our of tlicse. ninj God Iinvc mercy on them d."
Igcsidc tllc Irish inscriptioil there is, iii Ictiers, iic:ir tiic figure of a quceli,
large 1to111ii11 ttt tlw cnd of the liarrnoiiic
:urve,-
I:E 8. EU JE F I E R I FECEKUXT
EGO SUJI 1:EGlNA CITtIAEARU31.
Upon the 1hw tlic Rural Arms of England arc cnrvcd; a i d it is to be remarked, tlut the quartering for Ireland exhibits
i Ilarp, ivliicli is u good rcprescntatioii of that knowii BY tlic I1:irp of Urian Eoroimhc. Undcr thc Royal h n s are thosc of
Sir Johii FitaErlir~ondFitzgcrald. of Cluync, inipnlcd witli tltoac of his wife, the Hun. Ellen Darry. daughter of Viscount
Buttcvant ; lie was married in 1611. and died ill 1640. Thc niottocs un&r tlic arms nppcar to be,-VInEsClT VCLSERE VIn-
rus, Borrm ES AVAST. Upon the edgc of the Bow wcrc Latin inscriptions (nuw partly lost) ; there remain, PLECTO VISCO
:EGO. . . . . . . . . . h1OSSTItA VlGOS. JIUSICA DEI IIOSUJI. IIISTRACTAS SOLdTUll 8IUSlCA MENTES. UT SOSCS ........
rn,\ssiT SIC GLORIA x u m t . vlscrT VEIIITAS. Upon the illside ol'tlic 130w..in large letters, is i~iscrihd,-oosa~tis FILIUS
rl[ADEI ME FECIT, SPES MEA I X DEO.
Thc figures of animals on tlie I[ormonic C u r w arc tnlmi from sonic of the earlicst printcd books on Xatuml His-
.ory, and are cleverly csecutcd. The ciitirc oruamciitntioii displays much skill. The Harp appears to have h e n pnintcd
,vith brilliant colours, but as they wcrc probably iiot part uf its first acloriimciit, they have u o t bcen copied in the Res-
;oration. Through tlic kindness of JIariott Daliwy, Esq., of Bcll;iliilll tlic present owncr of thc Harmonic Curve, and of
Mrs. Sherrtrd, of Thornhill, who is possescd of thc Bow, thc Dircctor of thc University hluscurn %vag enabled to niakc
iccurate restaration of thwc important parts. The Sound-board is rcstorcd froin uiialogy, and the ornament on it is taken
iom tlic beautiful pattern on the lower siclc of tlic projccting part of the Bow.
Twenty-two oiily. Urinn Boroimhe'r I d thirty atris(3.-lt U.
K. BALL,
July, 1853. Dublin Uniiersity dfir3euni.
 429

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abondance, Florence, Restauration des Instruments de Musique (Fribourg: Office du Livre,

1981)

Adelmann, Olga, ‘Experiencesin restoring at the Musikinstrumenten Museum in Berlin’, in

Day of Studies on the Restoration of Stringed Instruments (Cremona: The Committee for the
Preservation of the National Stringed-InstrumentHeritage, 1976) pp. 111-116.

Adlam, Derek, ‘Restoring the Vaudry’, Early Music, 4, 3 (1976), pp. 255-265.

Alexander, Edward P., Museum Masters: Their Museums and Their Influence (Nashville,
Tern.: American Association for State and Local History, 1983)

Alper, Joseph, ‘The Stradivarius Formula’, Science 84, March 1984, pp. 36-43.

Altick, Richard, The English Common Reader (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957)

Anon., Catalogue of the Crosby Brown Collection of Musical Instruments of All Nations, vol
1. Europe (The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Hand-book no. 13) (New York: The
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1902)

Anon., Dolmetsch and His Instruments (Haselmere: Dolmetsch, 1929)

Anon., Richtlinien zum Schiitze alter wertvoller Orgeln: Weilheimer Regulativ: zugleich
kurzgefapter Bevicht iiber die Tagung der Orgeldenkmalpfleger in WeilheimlTeck vom 23.
bis 27. April 1957 (Berlin: Verlag Merseburger, 1958)

Anon., ‘Richtlinien zum Schiitze Denkmalwertiger Orgeln: Neufassung des Weilheimer

Regulativs’, Ars Organi, Heft 36 (July 1970)

Anon., ‘The Music of a Stradivarius’,Microscopy, Spring (1995), p. 11.

Appadurai, Aqun, ed., The Social Life of Things (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1986)

Appelbaum, Barbara, ‘Criteria for Treatment: Reversibility’, Journal of the American

Institute for Conservation, 26,2 (1987), pp. 65-73.

Arnold-Forster, Kate and La Rue, HClkne, Museums of Music (London: HMSO, 1993)

Ashley-Smith, Jonathan, ‘Introduction’,in Restoration of Early Musical Instruments,

Occasional Papers No. 6 (London: UKIC, 1987), p. 2.

Audsley, George Ashdown, The Art of Organ-building (New York: Dodd, Mead and
Company, 1905)
 430

Ball, R., Restoration of the Harp Known as the Dalway Harp (Dublin: Dublin University
Museum, 1853)

Ball, R., The Harp of Brian Boroimhe (Dublin: Dublin University Museum, 1853)

Ballinger, Christina, ‘Museums: Fenton House’, Early Music Today, (October/November

1996), pp. 8-1 1.

Barassi, E.F. and M. Laini, eds., Per una carta europea del restaur0 (Florence: Societa
Italiana di Musicologia, Leo S. Olschki, 1987)

Barclay, R.J. [sic],‘The conservator: versatility and flexibility ,Museum International, 45,4
(1993), pp. 35-40.

Barclay, Robert, ‘Ethics in the Conservation and Restoration of Early Brass Instruments’,
Historic Brass Society Journal, 1 (1989), pp. 75-81.

Barclay, R.L., ‘Manufacture before 1800’, in The Cambridge Companion to Brass

Instruments, Trevor Herbert and John Wallace, eds., (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1997), pp. 24-37.

Barclay, R.L., ‘Per Guldbeck Memorial Lecture’, Bulletin of the Canadian Association for
Conservation, 22,3 (1997), pp. 3-8.

Barclay, Robert, ed., The Care of Historic Musical Instruments (Ottawa: CCI/MGC, 1998)

Barclay, R.L., The Care of Musical Instruments in Canadian Collections (Ottawa: CCI,
1977)

Barlow, C.Y., ‘Wood treatment used in Cremonese instruments’, New Scientist, 332,24,
(1988), p. 313.

Barnes, John, ‘Does restoration destroy evidence?’, Early Music, 8 , 2 (1980), pp. 213-218.

Barnes, John, ‘Haydn’s Clavichord’, De Clavichordo 1113B. Brauchli, S. Brauchli and A.

Galazzo, eds. (Magnano: Musica Antica a Magnano, 1997), pp. 227-240.

Barnes, John, ‘The Galpin Society and Restoration’, The Galpin Society Journal, 43 (1990),
pp. 199-200.

Bate, Philip, ‘A Serpent d’Eglise: Notes on some Structural Details’, The GaZpin Society
Journal, 29, (1 976), pp. 47-50.

Beament, James, The Violin Explained (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997)

 43 1

Beare, Charles, ‘Restoration of violins, viols and related instruments’, in Restoration ofEarl’
Musical Instruments, Occasional Papers No. 6 (London: UKIC, 1987), pp. 9-1 1.

Berner, Alfred, van der Meer, John Henry and Thibault, Genkvieve, Preservation and
Restoration of Musical Instruments (Paris: ICOM, 1967)

Beuth, Reinhard, ‘Playing on a Stradivarius: an interview with Anne-Sophie Mutter’,

Encounter, (May 1988), pp. 71-75.

Bizzi, Guido, La collezione di strumenti musicali de Museo Teatrale alla Scala (Milan:
Silvana, 1991)

Boalch, Donald, Makers of the Harpsichord and Clavichord, 1440-1840, 3rd. edition,
Charles Mould, ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995)

Boyden, David, ‘The Violin’, in Musical Instruments Through the Ages, Anthony Baines, ed.
(London: Penguin Books, 1961), pp. 103-131.

Bridge, J.C., ‘Exhibition of a set of recorders’, Proceedings of the Society ofAntiquaries, 24

(1912-14), pp. 117-124.

Burnett, R. and Burnett, K., ‘Finchcocks, Living Museum of Music’, MMA Journal, (June
1995), pp. 35-37.

Campbell, Margaret, Dolmetsch: The Man and His Work (London: Hamish Hamilton, 1975)

Carlyle, Leslie, ‘Design, Technique and Execution: the Dichotomy between Theory and Craft
in Nineteenth Century British Instruction Manuals on Oil Painting’, in Looking Through
Paintings, Erma Hermans, ed. (London: Archetype Publications, 1998), pp. 19-28.

Carr, Dale C., ‘With what aim and purpose, and to what end, should historical organs be
restored?’, The Organ Yearbook, 24 (1994), pp. 1-40.

Chenantais, J., Le Violoniste et le Violon (Nantes: L. Durance Librairie Ancienne et Modeme,

1927)

Cheny, Christopher, ‘How can we seize the past?’, Philosophy, 64 (1989), pp. 67-78.

CIMCIM, Copies of Musical Instruments (Paris: ICOM, 1996)

CIMCIM, ‘Recommendationsfor Regulating the Access to Musical Instruments in Public

Collections - Draft Document’, CIMCIMNewsletter, 10 (1982), pp. 26-45.

CIMCIM, Recommendations for Regulating the Access to Musical Instruments in Public

Collections (Paris: ICOM, 1984)
 432

CIMCIM, Recommendations for the Conservation of Musical Instruments: An Annotated

Bibliography (Paris: ICOM, 1993)

CIMCIM, Training in Musical Instrument Conservation (Paris: ICOM, 1994)

Clark, Kenneth, ‘Looking at Pictures’, in Historical and Philosophical Issues in the

Conservation of Cultural Heritage, N. Stanley Price, M. Kirby Talley and A.M. Vaccaro,
eds. (Los Angeles: GCI, 1996), pp. 56-59.

Clavir, Miriam, ‘Factors Influencing the Emergence of Conservation as a Field: Societal

Values’, XXII Annual Conference preprints, IIC - CG, 1996, p. 9.

Clavir, Miriam, ‘The social and historic construction of professional values in conservation’,
Studies in Conservation, 43 (1998), pp. 1-8.

Cohen, Joel and Snitzer, Herb, Reprise: The Extraordinary Revival of Early Music (Toronto:
Little, Brown, 1985)

Cole, Henry, ‘First Report on the Department of Practical Art by Henry Cole’, in Addresses
of the Superintendents of the Department of Practical Art (London: National Art Library,
Victoria and Albert Museum, 1854), pp. 23-37.

Collins, Tim, ‘So How Many Holes Does a Baroque Trumpet Have, Anyway?’, Historic
Brass Society Newsletter, 9 (1996), pp. 11-15.

Colombo, L., ‘A la recherche du vemis perdu’, Science et Technologie de la Conservation et

de la Restauration, 1 (1988), pp. 46-55.

Common, Alfred, E., How to Repair Violins and other musical instruments (London:
William Reeves, 1904)

Cott, Jonathan, Conversations with Glenn Gould (Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown, 1984)

Coveney, Peter and Highfield, Roger, The Arrow of Time (New York: Fawcett Columbine,
1990)

Cselenyi, Ladislav, Musical Instruments in the Royal Ontario Museum (Toronto: Royal
Ontario Museum, 1971)

Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly and Rochberg-Halton, Eugene, eds., The Meaning of Things -

Domestic symbols and the self(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987)

Csokonai, Tibor, ‘The restoration of the violin: the power pulses involved’, in Problems of
completion, ethics and scientzfzcal investigation in the restoration, in Third International
Restorer Seminar, Veszprkm, Hungary, 11-20.7.1981, ed. Jaro, Marta, pp. 114-124.
 433

Dart, Thurston, ‘The clavichord’, in Musical Instruments Through the Ages, ed. Anthony
Baines (London: Penguin Books, 1961), pp. 68-73.

Dee, Reginald, ‘Restoration of musical instruments at the Victoria and Albert Museum,
1964-68’, in Restoration ofEarly Musical Instruments, Occasional Papers No. 6 (London:
UKIC, 1987), pp. 12-15.

Dolmetsch, Mabel, Personal Recollections of Arnold Dolmetsch (London: Routledge and

Keegan Paul, 1957)

Donington, Robert, The Interpretation ofEarly Music (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1974),
pp. 44-51.

Donington, Robert, ‘Why early music?’, Early Music, 11, 1 (1983), pp. 42-45.

Eddington, Arthur, The Nature of the Physical World (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1928)

Eliason, Robert E. and Hellwig, Friedemann, eds., Musical Instrument Exhibitions in

Scandinavia (Paris: ICOM, 1986)

Emond, Vivianne, “’Musique et Musiciens a QuCbec: Souvenirs d’un Amateur” de Nazaire

LeVasseur (1848-1927): Etude Critique’, Memoire prCsent6 pow l’obtention du Maitre en
Musique, UniversitC Laval, 1986.

Encyclopedia Britannica (Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica Inc., 1989)

Engel, Carl, Musical Instruments, rev. ed. (London: HMSO, 1908)

Faraday, Michael, On the Ventilation of Gas Burners, Royal Institution Lecture, 7 April
1843.

Farrington, Frank, ‘The Dissection of a Serpent’, The Galpin Society Journal, 22 (1969), pp.
81-96.

Festinger, Leon, A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press,
1957)

Fischer, Henry G., ‘The tenor sackbut of Anton Schnitzer the Elder at Nice’, Historic Brass
Society Journal, 1 (1989), pp. 65-74.

Floris Cohen, H., The Historiography of the Scientific Revolution (Chicago: University of
Chigaco Press, 1994)

Fontana, Eszter, Hellwig, Friedemann and Martius, Klaus, Historisches Lacke und Beizen,
(Nuremberg: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, 1992.
 434

Fowler, H.W., A Dictionary of Modern English Usage, 2nd ed. revised by Sir Ernest Gowers
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968)

Frank, Jaap, Cox, Michael and La Rue, Hklhe, ‘The Louis Lot Debate’, Flute, (1997), pp.
32-37.

Friedrich, Otto, Glenn Gould: A Life and Variations (Toronto: Lester and Orpen Denny,
1989)

Fuller, David, ‘An Introduction to automatic instruments’, Earfy Music, 11, 2 (1983), pp.
164-166.

Galpin, Francis, Old English Instruments of Music (London: Methuen, 1910)

Gilberg, Mark, ‘Friedrich Rathgen: the Father of Modern Archaeological Conservation’,

Journal of the American Institute for Conservation, 26,2 (1987), pp. 105-120.

Graiia, C., Meaning and Authenticity (New Jersey: Transactions Publishers, 1989)

Hadaway, Robert, ‘An instrument maker’s report on the repair and restoration of an
opharion’, The GaIpin Society Journal, 28 (1975), pp. 35-42.

Harris, George, The Theory of the Arts ..., Vols. I & I1 (London: Trubner and Co., 1869)

Hamson, John, A History of English Furniture (London: Mills and Boon, 1972)

Haskell, H., The Early Music Revival: A History (London: Thames and Hudson, 1988)

Hasluck, Paul E. ed., Handyman ’sEnquire Within (New York: Cassell and Co., 1908)

Haweis, H.R., Old Yiofins(London: George Redway, 1898)

Haweis, H.R., Music and Morals (London: Longman’s, Green and Co., 1906)

Hellwig, Friedemann, ‘An example of lute restoration’, The Galpin Society Journal, 23
(1970) pp. 64-68.

Hellwig, Friedemann, ‘Discussioni’, in Per una carta europea del Restaur0 (Florence:
Societa Italiana di Musicologia, Leo S. Olschki, 1987), p. 443.

Hellwig, Friedemann, ‘Reversibilitat - ein restauratorisches Ideal’, Der Restaurator heute.

Beitrtige ZUY Definition eines Berufes, (Bamberg: Arbeitsgemeinschaft des Technischen
Museumspersonals), pp 25-27.

Hepworth, William, Information on Bow Instruments (London: William Reeves, 1899)

 435

Heron-Allen, Edward, Violin-making as It Was and IS (London: Ward, Lock & Co., 1885)

Hill, W. Henry, Hill, Arthur F. and Hill, Alfred E., Antonio Stradivari: His Life and Work,
facsimile reprint of 1902 edition (New York: Dover, 1963)

Hubbard, Frank, Three Centuries of Harpsichord Making (Cambridge, Mass. : Harvard

University Press, 1965)

Hutchins, Carleen Maley, ‘Introduction’, The Physics ofhlusic, in Readings from Scient@
American (San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Company, 1978), p. 4.

Hutchins, Carleen Maley, ‘The Physics of Violins’, in The Physics of Music (San Francisco:
W.H. Freeman, 1978), pp. 57-68.

ICOMOS, ‘The International Charter for the Conservation and Restoration of Monuments
and Sites’, in Protecting our Heritage (Ottawa: ICOMOS, 1990), pp. 14-16.

ICOM, ICOM Statutes and Code of Professional Ethics (Paris: ICOM, 1987)

IIC and GCI, Art and Archaeology Technical Abstracts (Los Angeles: IIC and GCI, 1956 et
seqJ

IIC-AG, The Murray Pease Report: Code of Ethics for Conservators (New York: New York
University, 1968)

IIC-CG and CAPC, Code of Ethics and Guidancefor Practice (Ottawa: IIC-CG and CAPC,
1986)

IIC-CG and CAPC, Selecting and Employing a Conservator in Canada (Ottawa: IIC-CG and
CAPC, undated)

Johnson, D.M., The Psychology of Thought and Judgement (New York, Harper and Brothers,
1955)

Johnson, E.V. and Horgan, J.C., Museum Collection Storage (Paris: ICOM, 1979)

Jordanova, Ludmilla, ‘Objects of Knowledge: A Historical Perspective on Museums’, in The

New Museology, P. Vergo ed. (London: Reaktion, 1989), pp. 22-40.

Kalmann, Hellmut, A History ofMusic in Canada (Toronto: University of Toronto Press,

1987)

Kallmann, Hellmut, and Potvin, G. eds., Encyclopedia ofMusic in Canada, 2nd. ed.
(Toronto, Buffalo, London: University of Toronto Press, 1992)
 436

Karp, Cary, ‘Musical Instruments in Museums’, The International Journal of Museum

Management and Curatorship, 4 (1985), pp. 179-182.

Karp, Cary, ‘Storage Climates for Musical Instruments’, Early Music, 10,4 (1982), pp. 469-
476.

Karp, Cary, ‘Restoration, conservation, repair and maintenance’, Early Music, 7, 1 (1979),
pp. 79-84.

Karp, Cary, ‘The Conservation of Musical Instruments’, in Per una carta Europea del
restaur0 (Florence: Societh Italiana di Musicologia, Leo S. Olschki, 1987), pp. 283-289.

Kepner, Charles Higgins and Tregoe, Benjamin B., The Rational Manager; a Systematic
Approach to Problem Solving and Decision Making (Princeton, N.J. : Kepner-Tregoe, 1976)

Kirkpatrick, Ralph, ‘Fifty years of harpsichord playing’, Early Music, 11, 1 (1983), pp. 31-
41.

Kopytoff, Igor, ‘The cultural biography of things’, in The Social Life of Things: commodities
in cultural perspective, Aqun Appadurai, ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1986)

Koster, John, ‘Restoration, reconstruction and copying in musical-instrument collections’,

Museum International, 48, 1 (1996), pp. 36-40.

Koster, John, ‘The “Exact Copy” as a Legitimate Goal’, in Copies of Musical Instruments,
CIMCIM Publications, No. 3 (Edinburgh: CIMCIM, 1995), pp. 7-13.

Kiihn, Hermann, ‘The Restoration of Historic Technical Artefacts, Scientific Instruments and
Tools’, The International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, 8 (1989), pp.
389-405.

Lambrechts-Douillez, Jeannine, ‘The Ruckers-Couchet instruments in Museum Vleeshuis:

restoration or copy’, in Colloquium: Restauratieproblemen van Antwerpse Klavecimbels, J.
Lambrechts-Douillez ed. (Antwerp: Museum Vleeshuis, 1971), pp. 44-49.

La Rue, Hklene, ‘The Musical Instrument Collections in the Pitt Rivers Museum’, Museum
Ethnographers Group Newsletter, 16 (1984), pp. 9-14.

Latcham, Michael, ‘Soundboards Old & New’, Galpin Society Journal, 45 (1992), pp. 50-58.

Lazerevich, Gordana, The Musical World of Frances James and Murray Adaskin (Toronto:
University of Toronto Press, 1988)

Leipp, Emile, The Violin (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1969)

 437

Leland, C.G., Mending and Repairing (London: Chatto and Windus, 1896)

Leppard, Raymond, Authenticity in Music (Portland: Amadeus Press, 1988)

LeVasseur, Nazaire, ‘Musique et Musiciens ii QuCbec’, La Musique, 1,2 (19 19), pp. 14-16.

Libin, Laurence, ‘The “Restored” Stradivari and Amati Violins of the Metropolitan Museum
of Art’,Journal of the Violin Society of America, 4, 1. (1977/78), pp. 34-47.

Lipsius, F., ‘Old tunes on a new fiddle’, The Sunday Times, March 11, 1984.

Lowenthal, David, The Past is a Foreign Country (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1985)

Mace, Thomas, Musick’s Monument (London, 1676)

MacQuoid, Percy, History ofEnglish Furniture, Vol. 1, The Age of Oak 1500-1660 (New
York: Dover, 1972) facsimile of 1st edition (London: Lawrence and Bullen, 1904)

Mactaggart, Peter, ‘Examination and restoration of paint on musical instruments’, in

Restoration ofEarly Musical Instruments, Occasional Papers No. 6 (London: UKIC, 1987),
pp. 6-8.

Mann, Peter, ‘Working Exhibits and the Destruction of Evidence in the Science Museum’,
International Journal of Museum Management and Curatorship, 8 (1989), pp. 369-387.

Maquet, Jacques, ‘Objects as Instruments, Objects as Signs’, in History from Things, S .

Lubar and W.D. Kingery, eds. (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1993), pp. 30-40.

Maquet, Jacques, The Aesthetic Experience (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986)

Marijnissen, R.H., ‘Degradation, Conservation, and Restoration of Works of Art: Historical

Overview’, in Historical and Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage,
N.S. Price, M. Kirby-Talley Jr. and A.M. Vaccaro, eds. (Los Angeles: GCI, 1996), pp. 275-
280.

Matthais, Max, Steinway Service Manual, (Frankfurt-am-Main: Verlag Erwin Bochinsky,

1990)

Matthews, John, The Restoration of Organs, (London: Office of ‘Musical Opinion’, 1920)

Maunder, Richard, ‘The Earliest English Square Piano?’, Galpin Society JournuZ, 42 (1989),
pp. 77-84.

Maunder, Richard, ‘To the Editor’, The Galpin Society Journal, 43 (1990), p. 201.
 43 8

McArthur, Emily, A Histoly of the Children ofpeace, (Newmarket, Ontario: Express Herald
Print, 1898), reprint (Toronto: York Pioneer and Historical Society, 1967.)

MGC, Standards in the Care of Musical Instruments (London: MGC, 1995)

Michalski, Stefan, ‘History and Connotations of the Term Preventive Conservation’,

Preventive Conservation, 1 (1995), p. 3.

Michalski, Stefan, ‘Definition of Preventive Conservation for the Working Group ’,

Preventive Conservation, 1 (1995), p. 3.

Monger, George, ‘Conservation or Restoration?’, International Journal ofMuseum

Management and Curatorship, 7 (1988), pp. 375-380.

Montagu, Jeremy, ‘A Clavichord by Hieronymus Hass’, National Art Collections Fund -

Annual Review, (1994), pp. 34-36.

Montagu, Jeremy, ‘Musical Instrument Restoration Conference’, Early Music, 2,4 (1974),
pp. 265-267.

Moreni, Eugenio, ‘Introduction to the proceedings’, in Day ofstudies on the Restoration of

Stringed Instruments (Cremona: The Committee for the Preservation of the National
Stringed-Instrument Heritage, 1976), pp. 91-92.

Morgan, Robert, ‘Tradition, Anxiety and the Current Musical Scene’, in Authenticity and
Early Music, N. Kenyon, ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988), pp. 56-8 1.

Morris, William, ‘The Principles of the Society [for the Protection of Ancient Buildings] as
Set Forth upon Its Foundation’, Builder, 35, (25 August 1887).

Morrow, Michael, ‘Musical Performance and Authenticity’, Early Music,6,2 (1978), pp.
233-246.

Moxon, Joseph, Mechanick Exercises or the Doctrine of Handy- W o r h (London, 1703),

reprint, (Scarsdale, NY: The Early American Industries Association, 1979)

Myers, Arnold, ‘Are Our Instruments “Historic” or “Historical”?’ F o M . 1 Quarterly, 75

(1994), p. 22.

Myers, Arnold, ‘Cataloguing Standards for Instrument Collections’, CIMCIM Newsletter,

XIV (1989), pp. 14-28.

Myers, Arnold ‘The Conservation of Wind Instruments’, in Per una carta Europea del
restauro, (Florence: Societh Italiana di Musicologia, Leo S. Olschki, 1987), pp. 22 1-231,

Myrdal, Gunnar, An American Dilemma (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1944)
 439

Netherlands Ministry of Welfare, Health and Cultural Heritage, Deltaplan. Preservation of

Cultural Heritage in the Netherlands, Fact Sheet C- 11-E- 1992.

O’Brien, Grant, ‘Ioannes and Andreas Ruckers’, Early Music, 7 , 4 (1979), pp. 453-466.

O’Brien, Grant, ‘Marco Jadra -- A Venetian Virginal and Harpsichord Builder?’, unpublished
manuscript, Edinburgh, 1998.

O’Brien, Grant, ‘The conservation of historical keyboard instruments: to play or to

preserve?’, in Per una carta Europea del restaur0 (Florence: SocietA Italiana di Musicologia,
Leo S. Olschki, 1987), pp. 291-297.

Oddy, Andrew, ed., The Art of the Conservator (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press,
1992)

Odell, J. Scott, ‘Musical Instruments’, in Caringfor Your Collections (New York: Harry N.
Abrams, 1992), pp. 128-137.

Odell, J. Scott and Karp, Cary, ‘Ethics and the Use of Instruments’, in The Care of Historic
Musical Instruments, R.L. Barclay, ed. (Ottawa: CCL’MGC, 1998), pp. 1-7.

Office International des Muskes, ‘L’activitC de l’office international des musCes: conclusions
adoptkes par la confkrence internationale pour l’ktude des mkthodes scientifiques appliqukes
A l’examen et A la conservation des oeuvres d’art, Rome, 13-17 octobre, 1930’, Mouseion, 13-
14 (1930), pp. 126-130.

Ord-Hume, Arthur W.J.G., Barrel Organ (New Jersey: A.S. Barnes, 1978)

Otto, Jacob Augustus, Uber den bau und die Erhaltung der Geige und aller
Bogeninstrumente... (Halle and Leipzig, 1817), trans. A Treatise on the Structure and
Preservation of the Violin, 4th edition of translation (London: W. Reeves, undated)

Oxford English Dictionary, The, 2”dEdition, prepared by J.A. Simpson and E.S.C. Weiner
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989)

Pain, H., The Heritage of Upper Canadian Furniture (Toronto: Key Porter, 1984)

Pallis, Marco, ‘The rebirth of early music’, Early Music, 6, 1 (1978), pp. 41-45.

Payzant, Geoffrey, ‘Barrel Number 3 of the Sharon Temple Barrel Organ’, The York Pioneer,
80 (1985), pp. 6-1 1.

Payzant, Geoffrey, Glenn Gould: Music and Mind (Toronto: Key Porter, 1984)

Payzant, Geoffrey, ‘The Barrel No. 3 Project - a Review’, transcript of a presentation to York
Pioneer Historical Society, March 1985.
 440

Payzant, Geoffrey, ‘Rebirth of the Sharon Barrel Organ’, The YorkPioneer, 7 5 , l (1980), pp.
7-11.

Philippot, Paul, ‘Restoration from the Perspective of the Humanities’, in Historical and
Philosophical Issues in the Conservation of Cultural Heritage, N.S. Price, M. Kirby-Talley
Jr. and A.M. Vaccaro, eds. (Los Angeles: GCI, 1996), pp. 216-229.

Pinzauti, Leonardo, ‘Conservation and restoration of antique instruments’, in Day of Studies

on the Restoration of Stringed Instruments (Cremona: The Committee for the Preservation of
the National Stringed-Instrument Heritage, 1976) pp. 128-133.

Plenderleith, Harold, ‘A History of Conservation’, Studies in Consewation, 43, 3 (1998), pp.

129-143.

Plenderleith, Harold, The Preservation ofhtiquities (London: Oxford University Press,

1934)

Plenderleith, Harold and Werner, Anthony, The Consewation ofAntiquities and Works ofArt
(London: Oxford University Press, 1956)

Pollens, Stewart, ‘Restoration of Musical Instruments: to play or to preserve?’, Art and

Antiques, 4 , 2 (1983), pp. 40, 104, 107-108, 110.

Pomian Krystoff, Collectors and Curiosities - Paris and Venice, 1500-1800 (Cambridge:
Polity Press, 1990)

Portillo, Robert, ‘Modern Techniques for the Nondestructive Examination of Musical

Instruments’, WAAC Newsletter, 18, 1 (1996), pp. 20-21.

Price, Curtis, ‘Early music: listening practice and living museums’, Early Music, 25,4
(1997), pp. 559-561.

Price, Judith and Fitzgerald, Gerald, ‘Categories of Specimens: A Collection Management

Tool’, Collection Forum, 12, 1 (1996), pp. 8-13.

Rathgen, Friedrich and Bormann, R., The Preservation qf Antiquities: A Handbook for
Curators, trans. G. Auden and H. Auden (London: Cambridge University Press, 1905)

Ritz, Achim, ‘A Canticle to a De-iced Tuba’, Franyurter Rundschau, 9 Nov 1995, p. 26,
translation J. Bence in FoMRHI Quarterly, 86 (1997), pp. 14-15.

Roberts, J.D., ‘The Lute: Historical Notes’, Lute Society Journal, 2, S, pp. 17-25.

Rubin, Allen and Babbie, Earl, Research Methods for Social Work (Pacific Grove, California:
Brooks/Cole, 1993)
 441

Ruskin, John, Modern Painters, 3, XI1 (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1879)

Ruskin, John, The Seven Lamps ofArchitecture (New York: Wiley and Halstead, 1857)

Ruskin, John, The Stones of Venice, I (Orpington, Kent: George Allen, 1886)

Russell, Raymond, Early Keyboard Instruments (London: The National Trust, 1991)

Russell, Raymond ‘The Harpsichord, Spinet, and Virginal’,in Musical Instruments Through
the Ages, A. Baines, ed. (London: Penguin Books, 19611, pp. 74-87.

Saumerez-Smith, Charles, ‘Museums, Artefacts, and Meanings’, in The New Museology,

(London: Reaktion, 1989), pp. 2-21.

Savart, F., Me‘moire sur la Construction des Instruments de Corde et b Archet (Paris:
DCterville, 1819)

Schau, Barbara Ann, ‘Sacred Music at Sharon: a Nineteenth Century Canadian Communityy,
Master of Arts thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa, 1983.

Schau, Barbara Ann, ‘Sharon’s Music,al Past’, The Ysrk Pioneer, 80 (1989, pp. 17-31.

Schniewind, Amo, Concise Encyclopedia of Wood & Wood-based Materials (Oxford:

Pergamon Press, 1989)

Schott, Howard, ‘A visit to the Adlam Burnett workshop’, Early Music, 5 , 3 (1977), pp. 371-
379.

Scott, Alexander, The Cleaning and Restoration of Museum Exhibits --first report (London:
HMSO, 1921)

Scott, Alexander, The Cleaning and Restoration of Museum Exhibits -- second report
(London: HMSO, 1923)

Scott, Alexander, The Cleaning and Restoration of Museum Exhibits -- third report (London:
HMSO, 1926)

Scott, Alexander, ‘The Restoration and Preservation of Objects at the British Museum’,
Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, 70 (1922), pp. 327-338.

Seidel, J.J., The Organ and its Construction, 2nd. ed. 1855, facsimile reprint (New York: Da
Capo Press, 1982)

Shortridge, John, ‘Italian Harpsichord Building in the 16th and 17th Centuries’, US National
Museum Bulletin, 225 (1960), pp. 93-107.
 442

Skowroneck, Martin, ‘Zu welchem Zweck und Ziel, mit welcher Absicht werden historische
Musikinstrumente restauriert?’ in Colloquium: Restcluratieproblemen van Antwerpse
Klavecim bels, Jeannine Lambrechts-Douillez ed. (Antwerp: Museum Vleeshuis, 197l), pp.
28-34.

Smith, Marshall, The Art of Painting According to the Theory and Practise of the Best
Italian, French and German Masters..., 2nd edition (London: ‘Printed MB for the Author and
are to be sold by R.Bently in Russel-Street, Covent-Garden and F. Hancock in Castle-Ally’,
1693)

Spitta, Phillip, Johann Sebastian Bach, trans. C. Bell and J.A. Fuller-Maitland (New York:
Dover Publications, 1951)

Stern, Fritz, The Variations of History (New York: Vintage Books, 1973)

Storey, John, An Introductory Guide to Cultural Theory and Popular Culture (Athens, GA.:
University of Georgia Press, 1993)

Sturman, Shelley, et al., Guidelinesfor Selecting a Conservator, 2nd. ed. (Washington:

American Institute for Conservation, 1991)

Taruskin, Richard, Text and Act (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995)

Taruskin, Richard, ‘The authenticity movement can become a positivistic purgatory,

literalistic and dehumanizing’, Early Music, 12, 1 (1984), pp. 3-12.

Thein, Heinrich, ‘Zur Geschichte der Renaissance-Posaune von Jorg Neuschel(l557) und zu
ihrer Nachschopfung’, Basler Jahrbuch fur historische A4usikpraxis: eine Veroffentlichung
der Schola cantorum Basiliensis en der Musik-Akademie der Stadt Basel, 5 (198 l), ,pp. 377-
404.

Thompson, J., Manual of Curatorship: A Guide to Museum Practice (London: Buttenvorths,

1992)

Thompson, Michael, Rubbish Theory: the creation and destruction of value (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1979)

Thomson, Gary, The Museum Environment, 2nd. ed. (London: Buttenvorths, 1986)

Thomson, J.M., ‘Editorial’, Early Music, 1, 1 (1973), p. 1.

Thomson, J.M., ‘Editorial’, EarZ’Music, 11, 1 (1983), p. 2.

UKIC, Restoration of Early MusicaZ Instruments, Occasional Papers No. 6 (London: UIUC,
1987)
 443 ’

van der Meer, John Henry, ‘An example of harpsichord restoration’, The Galpin Society
Journal, 17 (1964), pp. 5-17.

Viollet-le-Duc, Eugkne-Emmanuel, Dictionnaire raisonnke de l ’architecturefranCaise du

x l e au XVIe sigcle, trans. K.D. Whitehead (New York: George Braziller Inc., 1990)

von Hornbostel, Erich and Sachs, Curt, ‘Systematik der Musikinstrumente: ein Versuch’,
Zeitschrift fu’r Ethnologie, 4&5 (1914), trans. A. Baines, ‘Classification of Musical
Instruments’, The Galpin Society Journal, 14 (1961), pp. 3-29.

von Imhoff, Christoff, The Conservator/Restorer: a Definition of the Profession (Paris:

ICOM, 1984)

Waitzman, Mimi, ‘From “Ancient Musicland” to “Authenticity”’, Music and Musicians, 37,
3 (1988), pp. 17-22.

Waitzman, Mimi, et al, ‘Basic Maintenance of Playing Instruments’, in The Care of Historic
Musical Instruments, R.L. Barclay, ed. (Ottawa: CCIMGC, 1998), pp. 83-108.

Watson, John, ‘Beyond Sound: The Other Voice of Historic Organs’, in Preprints of
Symposium: Historic Organs Reconsidered, Smithfield, Virginia, 15-17 January 1999, pp.
35-36.

Watson, John, ‘Historical Musical Instruments: A Claim to Use, An Obligation to Preserve’,

Journal of the American Musical Instrument Society, 17 (1991), pp. 69-82.

Werckmeister, Andreas, Erweiterte und Verbesserte Orgelprobe, trans. Krapf, Gerhardt

(Raleigh, S.C.: At the Sunbury, 1976)

Williams, Raymond, Keywords (London: Fontana, 1988)

Williams, Raymond, The Long Revolution (London: Greenwood Press, 1975)

World Book Encyclopedia (Chicago: World Book Inc., 1986)

Wraight, Denzil, ‘The Conservation of Keyboard Instruments’, in Per una carta Europea del
restaur0 (Florence: Societh Italiana di Musicologia, Leo S . Olschki, 1987), pp. 299-303.

Wraight, Denzil, ‘The Stringing of Italian Keyboard Insbuments c.1500 - c.1650’,

dissertation, Queen’s University of Belfast, 1997 (UMI Dissertations no. 9735 109)

Wynne-Davis, Marion, Penguin Guide to English Literature (London: Bloomsbury

Publishing Co., 1989)

Zadro, Michael, ‘Restoring woodwind instruments’, Early Music, 2,3 (1974), pp. 169-173.

i
 24 1

conjectured that some of the pilots which activate the hanxners had been repositioned during

this same ‘rn~dernization’.’~~

There is some conhsion as to when the distortion that made the instrument unplayable took

place. It was said to be ‘practically as sound and perfect as when made’ in 1919,I7Oyet ‘in

very bad state of repair’ in 1984.171Naylor states that he had ‘meant to have the piano

restored ever since it came to my brother and me in 1934’, indicating that at that time it was

in poor ~0ndition.I~~
It is clear that action to maintain the fortepiano’s musical quality ceased

some time after 1919.

Rationales

Early in this first treatment period there is the suggestion that ‘modernization’ had taken

place some time in the 19th century.’73Re-locating the pilots which activate the hammers,

and re-stringing in two different metals, argues a consciously technical intervention,

indicating an attempt to up-date or improve the instrument, thus placing the thinking upon its

disposition in the regimen of Currency.

Later in the period, antiquarian interest in the fortepiano is very clearly indicated by its status

as an heirloom, and the family tradition of its origin with the horticulturalist Bean in the mid-

18th century.‘74Feelings for its authenticity are expressed by the account of the champagne

libation that the fortepiano was accorded on its 200th birthday.17’ It is treasured in its role as

an exemplar of past tradition, but its hnctionality is not emphasised. Thus, a degree of

passive preservation results.