Part 19

His widow was left with a family of eight daughters, she dying in poverty in 1689, which chronological fact disposes of the fiction, so widely circulated, that in consequence of the great grief he experienced upon the death of his wife he withdrew from the world, and became an inmate of a Benedictine monastery, and that he made within its walls the famous instruments known as "Elector Stainers," which he presented to the twelve Electors. Whether he made them to order, in the usual manner, whether he presented them, or where he made them, matters little; they are works of great merit, and need no mysterious surroundings to call attention to them. The followers of Stainer have been numerous, and are mentioned in the lists of German and English makers. Probably no maker is more mistaken than Stainer: the array of German instruments called by his name is at least ten times greater than the number he actually made. Nearly every high-built tub of a Violin sails under his colours. Instruments without any resemblance whatever to those of Stainer are accepted by the multitude as original Jacob Stainers. Much of this has arisen from the variety of style and work said to have been shown in the instruments of this maker. That this marked variety exists I do not believe. The pattern varies, but the same hand is traceable throughout.

STAINER, Markus, Kufstein, Tyrol, about 1659, described as a brother of Jacob. He styled himself on his label "Citizen and Violin-maker." Citizenship carried with it special privileges, and this maker apparently recognised the honour by having "Burger" after his name.

STAINER, Andreas, Absam, about 1660. Mention is made of a maker of Baryton Viols of this name.

STAUGTINGER, Mathias W., Wurzburg, about 1671. Maker of Viols and Lutes.

STEININGER, Jacob, Frankfort, about 1775. Son-in-law of the Violin-maker Dopfer, and uncle of Nicolas Diehl, to whom he gave instructions in Violin-making.

STEININGER, Franz, St. Petersburg, son of Jacob Steininger.

STOSS, ----. Makers of this name worked at Prague, Vienna, and Fussen, about the end of the 18th century.

STOSS, Martin, Vienna, about 1824. Flat model, good workmanship. Stradivari pattern, indifferent varnish.

STRAUBE, ----, Berlin, about 1775.

STRAUSS, Joseph, Neustadt, about 1750.

TIEFFENBRUCKER. There appear to have been several Lute-makers of this name working in the 16th century in Germany and elsewhere. No genuine Violins are known. _See_ DUIFFOPRUGCAR.

TIELKE, Joachim, Hamburg, about 1539-92. The name of Tielke is associated with the most remarkable instruments of the Lute and Guitar kind ever produced in relation to rich and chaste ornamentation. It is said there are glowing accounts in old German books of the magnificent instruments by Tielke, with elaborate designs in silver, gold, and jewels.[4] The ornamentation and workmanship seen in the best instruments of this maker bear the impress of Italian art of a high order, and evidence the employment of Italian draughtsmen by the house of Tielke. In the collection of instruments at Kensington is a Chiterna (an instrument of the Lute kind) of this make. The body is ornamented with tortoiseshell, with mythological figures in ivory and precious stones. It is signed, and dated 1539. In the possession of Mr. George Donaldson is a Guitar of this maker, signed, and dated 1592, which is considered to be the most artistic and highly ornamented work known by Joachim Tielke. It is wonderfully preserved, and admirably shows the style and character of the art-work of the period.

[Footnote 4: Engel's "Descriptive Catalogue of the Musical Instruments in Kensington Museum," 1874.]

TIELKE, Joachim, Hamburg, about 1660-86. Viol and Violin maker. The dates met with on the instruments signed "Tielke" cover a period of upwards of a century and a half, and thus evidence the existence of the house, in connection with the manufacture of musical instruments, through two or more generations. There is, of this maker, a Viola di Bordone in the collection at Kensington, dated 1686. Mention is made by Fetis of a Violin dated 1670, which was in the possession of Andre of Offenbach; and a Chiterna dated 1676, similar to that in the Kensington collection, is owned by Mr. George Donaldson. M. Chouquet, in his catalogue of the collection of instruments at the Conservatoire, Paris, refers to a Lute (No. 136) by Tielke.

VOEL, E., Mayence, about 1840. Excellent workmanship, scroll well cut. Stradivari model. The character of work is not unlike that of Bernard Fendt.

VOGEL, Wolfgang, Nuremberg, 1650.

[Illustration: _Plate XVI_. ANTONIO STRADIVARI. Date 1708. (HECTOR HAVEMEYER, ESQ.) ANTONIO STRADIVARI. Date 1736. GIUSEPPE GUARNERI DEL GESU. Date 1735. (G. HART.)]

VOGLER, Johann Georg, Wurzburg, about 1750.

Johann Georg Vogler, Lauten und Geigenmacher in Wurzburg. 17--

VOIGT, Martin, Hamburg, about 1726.[5]

[Footnote 5: About thirty makers named Voigt or Voight hail from Germany, some contemporary and others dating from the 18th and 19th centuries. Their work is not of sufficient importance to require special notice.--EDITORS.]

WAGNER, Joseph, 1730, Constance.

WEICKERT, Halle, 1800.

WEIGERT, ----, Lintz, about 1721. Maker of Viols.

WEISS, Jacob, Salzburg, 18th century.

Jacob Weiss, Lauten und Geigenmacher in Salzburg.

WENGER, G. F., Salzburg, 18th century.

WIDHALM, Leopold, Nuremburg, 18th century.

Leopold Widhalm Lauten und Geigenmacher, Nurnberg Fecit, A.

One of the best imitators of Stainer. The wood is frequently handsome, the work finished with care. Varnish, although wanting the delicacy of that of Stainer, is generally of good quality; its colour is mostly pale red. Nearly all his instruments are branded with the initials inside. His name has frequently been spelt Withalm.

WITTING, J. G., Mittenwald, about 1775.

WYEMANN, Cornelius, Amsterdam, 18th century.

ZWERGER, Antoni, Mittenwald, about 1750. Neat work, good wood, varnish of the character of that seen on the instruments of Kloz.

SECTION XI The English School

It is somewhat remarkable that the Continental writers on the Violin should have omitted to mention any English maker, either ancient or modern. Such an omission must have occurred either from want of information concerning our best makers, or, if known, they must have been deemed unworthy of the notice of our foreign friends. There is no mention of an English maker in the work of Fetis, "Antoine Stradivari," 1856, although numerous very inferior German and Italian makers are quoted. The same omission is also conspicuous in "Luthomonographie Historique et Raisonne," 1856, and Otto's "Ueber den Bau der Bogeninstrumente," &c., 1828. It may be that Continental connoisseurs have credited themselves with the works of our best makers, and expatriated them, while they have inexorably allowed bad English Fiddles to retain their nationality. However, it is my desire that my foreign brothers should be enlightened on this point, and in all candour informed of the array of makers that England has at different times produced, and is yet capable of producing, did but the new Violin command the price that would be a fair return for the time and skill required in the production of an instrument at once useful and artistic. It will be my endeavour to show forth the qualities of those of our makers whose names, as yet, seem never to have crossed the Channel, so that when these pages on the English School are read by distant connoisseurs, and the merits and shortcomings of the makers therein are fairly weighed by them, the good shall be found so to outweigh the indifferent as to entirely change the opinions formed of us as makers of the leading instrument.

Until the early nineteenth century makers of Violins in England would appear to have been comparatively numerous, if we take into consideration the undeveloped state of stringed instrument music at that period in this country. Among those makers were men of no ordinary genius--men who worked lovingly, guided by motives distinct from commercial gain, so long as they were allowed to live by their work. When, however, the duties on foreign musical instruments were removed, the effect was to partially swamp the gallant little band of Fiddle-makers, who were quite unable to compete with the French and German makers in _price_ (not _excellence_, be it distinctly understood, for we were undoubtedly ahead of our foreign competitors, both in style and finish, at this period). The prices commanded by many English makers previous to the repeal of the duty were thoroughly remunerative. Five to twenty pounds were given for English Violins, while Violoncellos and Tenors commanded prices proportionately high. The English Violin-makers were thus enabled to bestow artistic care in the making of their instruments. When, however, they were suddenly called upon to compete on equal terms with a legion of foreign manufacturers, the result was not so much that their ardour was damped, as that they themselves were extinguished, and served as another instance of the truth of the adage that "the good of the many is the bane of the few."

In matters of magnitude, whether artistic or otherwise, competition is undoubtedly healthy, there being always a small body of patrons who are willing to check the tendency to deteriorate, common to all productions, by encouraging the worker with extra remuneration, in order that a high degree of excellence may be maintained; but in matters confined to a small circle, as in the case of Violin-making, the number of those willing to encourage artistic workmanship is so minute as to fail even to support _one_ maker of excellence, and thus, when deprived suddenly of its legitimate protection, the art, with other similar handicrafts, must drift into decadence. If we look around the Violin world, it is everywhere much the same. In Italy there is no Stradivari in embryo, in France no coming Lupot, in Germany no Jacob Stainer, and in England no future Banks or Forster. Why so? The answer is twofold. Partly there is fault in the _demand_, arising from the marked preference of this age for cheapness at the expense of goodness; partly, too, there is a fault in the _supply_, a foolish desire on the part of the makers to give maturity to their instruments, wherein they always completely fail, yet they will not give up their conceit. Here, again, were we dealing with matters of greater magnitude, the evil influence would be lessened, the artistic impulses would still be felt, though in a less degree; whereas so contracted is the circle of the Violin world, that under any stress the support given to makers willing to bestow an artist's care on their work is totally inadequate.

The case of modern Violin-makers is unfortunate. Old Violins being immeasurably superior to modern productions, the demand must necessarily set steadily for the former, and the modern maker has only the few patrons of new work to support him. It cannot be expected that the players of to-day should patronise the modern Violin in order that the next generation should reap the benefit. Years since it was quite a different matter. The makers were well paid for their work, and new instruments were then made to supply wants similar to those which the horrid Mirecourt or Saxon copy fulfils at present. As with other things, so is it also with Violins; if they are to be produced with the stamp of artistic merit, they must be paid for accordingly; without patronage the worker necessarily becomes careless. Finding that his skill fails to attract attention, he gradually sinks down into the mere routine of the ordinary workman. When Italy shone brightest in art, the patronage and remuneration which the workers received was considerable. Had it been otherwise, the powers of its Raffaele, its Cellini, and last (though not least to the admirers of the Violin), its Stradivari, would have remained simply dormant. Art, like commerce, is regulated in a great measure by supply and demand. In Raffaele's day, sacred subjects were in demand; the Church was his great patron, and aided him in bringing forth the gift which nature had implanted within him. In modern times, landscape-painting became the favoured subject, particularly in England; the result of which preference has been to place us in the foremost rank in that branch of art. The stage furnishes another instance of the effect that patronage has in bringing forth latent talent. If the history of dramatic art be traced, it will be found that its chief works were written when the taste of an appreciative public could be securely counted upon. As it waned, so the writers of merit became rarer; or perhaps it would be more correct to say, the plays produced became less meritorious, the authors being constrained to pander to the prevailing tastes.

As further evidence of the effect of patronage on art, a case in point is found in the manufacture of Venetian glass. The Venetians, centuries ago, became famous for their works in glass, and the patronage they enjoyed was world-wide; but their country being thrown into an unsettled condition, capital drifted from it, until the blowing of glass, together with other industries, was comparatively extinguished. Within recent years the art of making glass has shown signs, even in Venice itself, of reviving with all its former vigour in the workshops of Salviati, the success of which is due in great measure to English capital.

With regard to English Violin manufacture, there would be no reason why Violins should not, at the present moment, be produced in England which should fully reach the standard of merit maintained in our forefathers' days, if only the patronage of the art occupied a larger area. The present dearth of English makers does not arise from any national want of talent for this particular handicraft; in fact, we have plenty of men quite as enthusiastic as our foreign friends for a vocation which, in England also, must be pronounced to be alike venerable in its antiquity and famed for the dexterity of its genius.

The earliest makers of Viols in England seem to have been Jay, Smith, Bolles, Ross, Addison, and Shaw, names thoroughly British. We may take this as good evidence that the making of Viols in England originated with the English, and was not commenced by settlers from the Continent. Doubtless the form of the English Viol and its brethren was taken from the Brescian makers, there being much affinity between these classes of instruments. In the few Violins extant by Christopher Wise the Italian character is very striking. In them we see a flat model, excellent outline, and varnish of good quality. The Viols of Jay have the same Italian character. Later on we have names of some reputation--Rayman, Urquhart, and Barak Norman. In the absence of any direct evidence as regards the nationality of these makers it is requisite to endeavour to trace the style belonging to their works. It will be observed that there was a great improvement in the style of work and varnish of instruments made in England, commencing with the time of Rayman, and it is probable that this step in advance was obtained from intercourse with Italy or the German Tyrol. Starting with Rayman, there is a German ring in the name which makes me think that he came from Germany, and, if so, brought with him the semi-Italian character of work common to the makers who lived so near Brescia. If the work and style of Rayman be carefully examined, it will be seen that there is much in common with the inferior Brescian makers. The outline is rugged, the sound-hole is of that Gothic form peculiar to Brescia; the head is distinct from that of the early English type. At the same period Urquhart made instruments of great merit, the varnish of which is superior to that of Rayman, but is evidently composed of similar ingredients. Its superiority may have arisen from a different mode of mixing only. The name of Urquhart has a North British sound, and it is probable that he was born in Scotland, and settled in London as an assistant to Rayman, who would impart to him the style of foreign work.

The semi-Italian character pervading the instruments made in England at this period seems to have culminated in the productions of Barak Norman, whose best works bear even a more marked Brescian character than those of Rayman. The model varies very much, sometimes being high, at other times very flat; in the latter case the results are instruments of the Maggini type. Barak Norman frequently double-purfled his instruments, and inserted a device in the purfling, evidently following Maggini in these particulars. With Barak Norman ends the list of English copyists of the Brescian makers.

We now arrive at the copyists of Jacob Stainer and the Amati, a class of makers who possessed great abilities, and knew how to use them. The first name to be mentioned is Benjamin Banks, of Salisbury, who may with propriety be termed the _English Amati_. He was the first English maker who recognised the superior form of Amati's model over that of Stainer, and devoted all his energies to successful imitation. Too much praise cannot be lavished on Banks for the example which he selected for himself and his fellow-makers.

Next follow the names of Forster, Duke, Hill, Wamsley, Betts, Gilkes, Hart, and Kennedy, together with those of Panormo, Fendt, and Lott, who, although not born in England, passed the greater part of their lives here, and therefore require to be classed with the English School. The mention of these makers will bring the reader to the present time.

Upon scanning this goodly list, there will be found ample evidence that we in England have had makers of sufficient merit to entitle us to rank as a distinct school--a school of no mean order. We may therefore assume that the Continental writers who from time to time have published lists of makers of the Violin, and have invariably ignored England, have erred through want of information regarding the capabilities of our makers, both ancient and modern.

The following list will be found to enumerate nearly the whole of the English makers, and indicate the distinctive character of their respective works.

SECTION XII English Makers

ABSAM, Thomas, Wakefield, 1833.

Made by Thomas Absam, Wakefield, Feb. 14, 1833.

ADAMS, Garmouth, Scotland, 1800.

ADDISON, William, London, 1670.

AIRETON, Edmund. Was originally employed in the workshop of Peter Wamsley, at the "Harp and Hautboy," in Piccadilly. He made a great many excellent Violins and Violoncellos, and chiefly copied Amati. Varnish of fair quality; colour yellow. He died at the advanced age of 80, in the year 1807.

ALDRED, ----, about 1560. Maker of Viols.

ASKEY, Samuel, London, about 1825.

BAINES, about 1780.

BAKER, ----, Oxford. Mention is made of a Viol of this maker in the catalogue of the music and instruments of Tom Britton, the small-coal man.

BALLANTINE, Edinburgh and Glasgow, 1850.

BANKS, Benjamin, Salisbury, born 1727, died 1795.

Benjamin Banks, Musical Instrument Maker In Catherine Street, Salisbury. 1780.

To this famous maker must be given the foremost place in the English School. He was a thorough artist, and would not have been thought lightly of had he worked in Cremona's school, and been judged by its standard. This may be considered excessive praise of our native maker; but an unprejudiced judge of work need only turn to the best specimens of Banks's instruments, and he will confess that I have merely recorded a _fact_.

Banks is, again, one of the many instances of men who have gained a lasting reputation, but whose histories have never reached the light to which their names have attained. How interesting would it be to obtain the name of his master in the knowledge of making instruments! No clue whatever remains by which we could arrive at a satisfactory conclusion on this point. That he was an enthusiast in his art is certain, and also that he was aware to some extent that he possessed talent of no mean description. This is evidenced by the fact that many of his instruments are branded with the letters B. B. in several places, as though he felt that sooner or later his works would be highly esteemed, and would survive base imitations, and that by carefully branding them he might prevent any doubt as to their author. Many of his best instruments are found to have no brand: it would seem, therefore, that he did not so mark them for some time. He appears to have early shown a preference for the model of Niccolo Amati, and laboured unceasingly in imitation of him, until he copied him with an exactness difficult to surpass. Now that time has mellowed his best works, they might pass as original Amatis with those not perfectly versed in the characteristics of the latter. Many German makers excelled as copyists of Amati; but these makers chiefly failed in their varnish, whereas Banks was most happy in this particular, both as regards colour and quality. If his varnish be closely examined, its purity and richness of colour are readily seen. It has all the characteristics of fine Italian varnish, being beautifully transparent, mellow, and rich in its varieties of tints. It must be distinctly understood that these remarks apply only to the very finest works of this maker, there being many specimens which bear the label of Banks in the framing of which he probably took but a small share, leaving the chief part to be done by his son and others. Banks cannot be considered as having been successful in the use of his varnish on the bellies of his instruments, as he has allowed it to clog the fibre, a blemish which affects the appearance very much, and has been the means of casting discredit on the varnish among those unacquainted with the real cause. The modelling is executed with skill. Fortunately, sufficient wood has been left in his instruments to enable time to exert its beneficial effects, a desideratum overlooked by many makers of good repute. The only feature of his work which can be considered as wanting in merit is the scroll, which is somewhat cramped, and fails to convey the meaning intended, viz., the following of Amati; but as this is a point having reference to appearance, and therefore solely affecting the connoisseur, it may be passed over lightly, and the more so when we consider that Banks was not the only clever workman who has failed in head-cutting. He made Violins, Tenors, and Violoncellos, all excellent; but the last-named have the preference. His large Violoncellos are the best; those of the smaller pattern are equally well made, but lack depth of tone. The red-varnished instruments are the favourites.

BANKS, Benjamin, son of the above, born in September, 1754; died January, 1820. Worked many years with his father at Salisbury, afterwards removed to London, and lived at 30, Sherrard Street, Golden Square.

BANKS, James.

James and Henry Banks, Musical Instrument Makers and Music Sellers, 18 Salisbury. 02

Brother of the above. For some years carried on the business of his father at Salisbury, in conjunction with his brother Henry. They ultimately sold the business and removed to Liverpool. The instruments of James and Henry Banks are of average merit.

BARNES, Robert, 1710. Worked with Thomas Smith at the "Harp and Hautboy" in Piccadilly. Afterwards partner with John Norris.

BARRETT, John, 1714.

John Barrett, at the Harp and Crown in Pickadilly, 17--

Made by John Barrett at ye Harp & Crown in Pickadilly, London, 17--

An average workman, who followed the model of Stainer. His shop bore the sign of the "Harp and Crown." Barrett was one of the earliest copyists of Stainer, and in the chain of English makers is linked with Barak Norman and Nathaniel Cross. The wood is generally of a very good quality, the varnish yellow.

BARTON, George, Old Bailey, London, about 1780-1810.

BETTS, John, born 1755, at Stamford, Lincolnshire, died in 1823.

Jo. Betts, No. 2, near Northgate the Royal Exchange, London, 17--