Lute of the Month

Jan van Scorel (1495 - 1562) Portrait of a Luteplayer
Statens Museum for Kunst, København
|
This fine portrait in the tradition of Dürer and Holbein is attributed to Jan van Scorel. He was trained in Amsterdam and travelled more widely than many a modern painter! He was in Utrecht by 1517 and in 1519 he set off on a journey to Germany and went to Nürnberg to visit Dürer. By 1520 he was in Carinthia, where he painted a triptych still in Obervellach Parish Church. He went on to Venice, where he met and was influenced by Giorgione, and then on to Jerusalem on a pilgrimage. He returned to Venice in 1521 and then to Rome where he was fortunate enough to coincide with the Pontificate of Hadrian VI, the Utrecht Pope. He was appointed inspector of the Belvedere, painted the Pope, was made a Canon of Utrecht, and was deeply influenced by Michaelangelo and Raphael. After Hadrian died Scorel went back to Utrecht (1524), and then Haarlem. In 1540 he travelled to France but by 1550 was back in the Flanders, where he restored the Ghent Altar.
Here the fingerboard or varnish edge comes about the same distance down over the neck joint line as on the Scorel lute but the colour is more clearly the same as that of the back of the lute. (Look, too at the rose for comparison - this one is clearly NOT silver-gilt.)
Which leads us back to the question: was a separate fingerboard all that common anyway? We have very few early lutes with original necks, and those we do have tend to be expensive, top-of-the-range instruments, which have survived disproportionately because of their obvious collectable value. The 7 course lute by Giovanni Hieber of c1580, which seems to be of a more ordinary standard, simply has the top surface of the solid sycamore neck painted black, and this, or varnish, may have been much more common for the period than is now apparent. Especially when you remember how rare and expensive ebony and rosewood must then have been. The need for varnish to protect the upper part of the soundboard increased as the 16th century progressed and music reaching further up the scale became more common. Especially this would be the case before the invention of the little wooden soundboard frets which Dowland, in the introduction to his son's Varietie of Lute Lessons of 1610, attributed to the English player Mathias Mason .
Also this gradual colour change would be impossible if it were due to a change of the wood used. but there does seem to be a deepening of the colour on the neck itself, suggesting that there could also be a fingerboard, with or without varnish.
An interesting corollorary of this clearly evident varnish on the upper part of the soundboard is the lack of evidence for any varnish on the main body of the soundboard. It is hard to detect any finish at all on surviving lute soundboards. Following Peter Forrester's work on making historic oil varnishes (The Strad, April 1988 pp. 304-7) it is apparent that it is much harder to make a modern style clear varnish than a coloured one. Thus it may well be that normally the soundboard was not protected at all. Modern lutes without varnished soundboards often show the most disgusting amount of dirt, but this is largely due to to the use of modern copper-wound strings in the bass which corrode slightly with perspiration (some players' more than other's!) and leave greenish verdigris stains on unprotected wood. Gut by contrast, does not shed contamination to nearly the same extent, and so the need for protection may be a rather inadvertant consequence of inauthenticity! |
|
If anyone has any comments about these pictures which differ from or expand
on mine, please do either email me direct or submit them to the lutenet at antispam/lute@cs.dartmouth.edu and I will add them to this page. Do please adjust this address by hand to remove antispam/ |
| Lutes | Bows | |
| History of the Lute | Build your own Baroque Lute | Build your own Renaissance Lute |
Copyright 2000 by David Van Edwards