Complete Lute Works Vol. 2

Abstract

The performer studying the lute music of John Dowland is confronted with a dilemma in deciding which versions of the pieces to play. Dowland copied or published only a few of his lute solos, while most of them exist in copies whose authenticity may be questioned. Which versions are closest to his own vision? Like many Elizabethan composers, Dowland arranged and revised his music repeatedly. Which versions are the most representative, the earliest or the latest? Or, are they equally valid artistic expressions? Which ornamented settings are by Dowland himself and which the invention of a contemporary? Without Dowland's promised opera omnia, which was never published, we cannot be certain. Modern performances have tended to feature late versions of well-known pieces, while many of the rest, including the often charming early versions, remain neglected. Several "new" pieces and new versions of well-known works have surfaced over the past ten years, and questions have been raised as to the authenticity of others. Which are authentic, and which are imitations by less-gifted musicians? In this set of recordings I will attempt to present Dowland in a somewhat broader context, by including early and late versions of many works, as well as arrangements made by his contemporaries. It has been suggested that only the few lute solos published or signed by Dowland can be attributed to him with certainty, since works copied by others with his name attached may be arrangements by other lutenists. It is true that surviving versions of many pieces may not be exactly as Dowland conceived them, but works contained in manuscripts compiled by acquaintances, such as Matthew Holmes (Precentor and Singingman at Christ Church, Oxford, from 1588 to 1597), must be close to the "original versions," if indeed such things ever existed. Ornamentation was largely an improvisational rather thar a compositional art, so it would be surprising if Dowland did not ornament his works differently on different occasions. Many of his pieces, including Lachrimae, Can she excuse, Pipers Galliard, John Smith's Almaine and Mounsieur's Almaine, exist in different versions in sources that come from Dowland's circle. Some of the differences are undoubtedly due to alterations made by other lutenists, while others are the result of the Huid, improvisational nature of instrumental music at this time. Dowland complained about the copies of his music in William Barley's New Booke ofTabliture (1596), but that collection is a special case because of its great number of inaccuracies. Even the existence of an autograph copy is not a guarantee of the most convincing version. My Lady Hunnsdon s Pujfe survives in Dowland's hand in the Folger manuscript, but it is a pedantic setting which has the appearance of a teaching exercise and is not as compelling as the copy by Matthew Holmes in a manuscript bearing the composer's autograph on another page. Many of Dowland's early works exist in consort settings as well as solo versions. In many cases it is difficult, if not impossible, to tell whether the solo settings are simplified arrangements of the consort versions, or whether the consort versions are elaborations of the solo pieces. On the one hand, one assumes a lutenist would compose most of his music at his instrument. Dowland was an avid contrapuntist, however, and may have composed on paper, later arranging the pieces for lute. Unlike many continental composers, he was often willing to sacrifice contrapuntal integrity in the interest of payability and sonority on the lute. Another argument in favor of his having composed on paper, working out his lute versions later, is suggested by works such as A Dream, which seems static in a way lute pavans rarely are, especially in the treatment of sustained harmonies which lutenists usually embellished with moving notes or style brise figuration to simulate sustained notes. Many of Dowland's lute solos, especially the early works, survive without decorated repeats in the original sources. Presumably he improvised them himself, before becoming more fastidious later in his career when he began writing out all of the ornamentation. The solo versions of Lady Laiton's Almaine, for instance, are without ornaments, while the consort lute part has exuberant single-line diminutions on the repeats of each strain, leaving the harmonies to the accompanying instruments. The scribe in the Ernst Scheie Lute Book has added a bass line to these diminutions, turning it into a solo piece, much as Dowland himself did with works like Sir John Smith) Almaine. Dowland's process of revision can be plainly seen in the different versions of the Frog Galliard. The earliest version is very simple, with no decorated repeats, while later sources include elaborate ornamentation for both the right and left hand. John Dowland's career spans an era of considerable experimentation and transition in musical style, lute construction and playing technique. The early Elizabethan pavans and galliards—with their clear, short phrases, transparent textures and straight-forward ornamented repeats—were succeeded by longer, more complex works with freer, more rhapsodic ornamentation using richer textures. The c.assic diminution style (running passages) of the Renaissance was gradually combined with the new French practice of style brise, or breaking chords. The lowest register of the lute was also increasingly explored, and more bass strings were added.