Introduction

A growing number of guitarists are now starting to explore more extensively the

repertoire of the early nineteenth century, moving beyond the limited selection of works

that became an established part of the guitar’s repertoire for the larger part of the

twentieth century. A significant catalyst which helped drive this process was the

publication of detailed studies of the lives of Mauro Giuliani (1781-1829) and Fernando

Sor (1778-1839). Thomas Heck’s Mauro Giuliani: Virtuoso Guitarist and Composer1,

although only published in 1995 was based on a PhD dissertation from 1970. At that time

it had a significant impact by providing the first comprehensive biography of Giuliani,

and more significantly, a complete catalogue of his works. Heck also acknowledged the

role of performance practice and briefly touched on a number of technical and

interpretive issues under the heading ‘Guitarism’.2 Sor was the subject of similarly

comprehensive research by Brian Jeffery in his 1977 publication Fernando Sor

Composer and Guitarist3.

Interest in this period was further enhanced following the publication of the complete

works of Fernando Sor (1778 – 1839), published in 19824 and the complete works of

Mauro Giuliani (1781 – 1829) published in 1986.5 Other publications of note that drew

1
Thomas F Heck, Mauro Giuliani: Virtuoso Guitarist and Composer (Columbus: Editions Orphée, 1995).
2
Ibid., 190-93.
3
Brian Jeffery, Fernando Sor, Composer and Guitarist, second ed. (Penderyn: TECLA, 1994).
4
Fernando Sor, The Complete Works for Guitar, ed. Brian Jeffery, 9 vols. (London: Tecla Editions, 1982),
112.
5
Mauro Giuliani, The Complete Works in Facsimilies of Original Editions - Mauro Giuliani, ed. Brian
Jeffery, 39 vols. (London: Tecla Editions, 1986).

2
attention to the substantial repertoire that existed for the nineteenth century guitar

included the collected works of Johann Kaspar Mertz (1806–1856),6 Marco Aurelio Zani

de Ferranti (1801-1878),7 Napoléon Coste (1805-1883)8 and Niccolò Paganini (1782 -

1840).9 The publication of collections of works by little known nineteenth century

composers including Juan Parga (1843-1899)10 and Jiménez Manjón (1866-1919)11,

further added to the developing interest amongst performers. These editions have

allowed the exploration and reappraisal of the creative output of both well known

composers from the period, by providing a true representation of their creative output,

and also the work of composers whose names were largely unknown until the appearance

of these publications.

This thesis will explore the interpretive insights to be gained by the contemporary

guitarist through a deeper understanding of the performance practices of the early

nineteenth century. With this goal established a number of key research objectives will be

addressed:

Research Objective One:

To provide a critical review of the central concepts that underpin the current debate

by leading practitioners and scholars in the field.

6
Johann Kaspar Mertz, Guitar Works, ed. Simon Wynberg, 10 vols. (Heidelberg: Chanterelle Verlag,
1985).
7
Marco Aurelio Zani de Ferranti, Guitar Works, ed. Simon Wynberg, 14 vols. (Heidelberg: Chanterelle,
1989).
8
Napoleon Coste, The Guitar Works of Napoleon Coste, ed. Simon Wynberg, 9 vols. (Heidelberg:
Chanterelle Verlag, 1983; reprint, 1986).
9
Niccolo Paganini, Niccolo Paganini Complete Works for Solo Guitar, ed. Giuseppe Gazzelloni, 3 vols.
(Chanterelle Verlag, 1987).
10
Juan Parga, Concert Works, ed. William Carter (Heidelberg: Chanterelle, 1990).
11
Antonio Jiménez Manjón, Collected Works for Guitar, ed. Alan Rinehart (Columbus: Mel Bay
Chanterelle, 1996).

3
Methodology:

This objective will be addressed by reviewing literature that has impacted on the

orientation of current thought which has stimulated some of the key discussions relating

to the topics of authenticity and performance practice (now also commonly referred to as

historically informed performance). Much of the seminal discussion on this topic

occurred during the 1970s and 1980s; the issues addressed however are still largely

topical and are the ones that still underscore the current debate. Bernard Sherman in his

publication Inside Early Music, Conversations with Performers (1997) demonstrated that

while knowledge of primary sources, instruments and their techniques has progressed, the

manner in which this information has been interpreted has not reached a consensus, but

has rather diversified into a range of interpretive approaches. Sherman categorised

performers into three broad types:

1. Artists of my first type uphold what we might call the central early-music tradition:
they adhere firmly to the ideal of trying to play music as it was played in its own
time.

2. The second type of artists I identify rejects, at least partially, the core ideal of
historical authenticity. Such artists aren’t complacent-they know their history and
have rethought their styles. But unlike Type Ones, they flout history openly when
they prefer something else.

3. The third type is often a subset of Type One, sharing the dedication to history… but it
uses history radically, to undermine a more basic assumption, one that the first two
groups share with the mainstream. This assumption is Werktreue-fidelity to the work-
and, behind that, the concept of the fixed, perfected work itself.12

Other key writers on the topic of authenticity include Richard Taruskin who built a

reputation during the 1980s for his challenges to the notion of authenticity and the

concept that the early music movement was not of value due to its historical credentials,

12
Bernard D. Sherman, Inside Early Music, Conversations with Performers (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1997), 391-93.

4
but rather as a result of its being a reflection of the most modern of styles. Peter Kivy’s

1995 exploration of the philosophical underpinning of the concept of authenticity

provided a thought provoking framework for questioning the practices that were

becoming adopted as the raison d’être of the movement.13

During the 1990’s a range of specialist books appeared on the topic of performance

practice with a focus on the nineteenth century. Some addressed a broad range of topics

such as Clive Brown’s Classical and Romantic Performance Practice 1750-1900

(1999)14 and others focused on specific areas of activity such as Richard Hudson’s

seminal overview of the history of tempo flexibility Stolen Time The History of Tempo

Rubato (1994).15 Peter le Huray’s Authenticity in performance, Eighteenth-century case

studies (1990)16 presented practical applications of historical informed performance

research to a collection of representative works, including those by Haydn, Mozart and

Beethoven. 1999 also saw the publication of Colin Lawson’s and Robin Stowell’s The

Historical Performance of Music, An Introduction.17 As well as a set of case studies the

book also gave an overview of the then current state of historical informed performance.

Attention was also drawn to the catalytic work of Nicholas Kenyon The Limits of

Authenticity presented in the Early Music in 1983 noting that he ‘…articulated for his

13
Peter Kivy, Authenticities: Philosophical Reflections on Musical Performance (Ithaca, NY: Cornell
Univ. Press, 1995).
14
Clive Brown, Classic and Romantic Performance Practice 1750 - 1900 (Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1999).
15
Richard Hudson, Stolen Time, the History of Tempo Rubato (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994).
16
Peter le Huray, Authenticity in Performance Eighteenth-Century Case Studies (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1990).
17
Colin Lawson and Robin Stowell, The Historical Performance of Music an Introduction (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1999).

5
contributors a number of pertinent questions.’18 The authors note that these questions

‘will be addressed in subsequent chapters’ suggesting that these questions were as

significant in 1999 as they were in 1984. Kenyon laid out these questions in his

introductory chapter to the 1988 ‘symposium’ Authenticity and Early Music:

1. Is the use of period instruments in re-creating the music of the past really a significant
factor compared with musical understanding, cultural and social context, acoustical
conditions, concert-giving situations?

2. Can the composer expect any influence over how his music is performed after he has
written it, and is there any moral obligation on us to fulfill his original intentions? If so,
how can these be discerned and what kind of evidence is relevant?

3. Are we more likely to understand a composer’s piece of music by restricting ourselves to

the means he had available when he wrote it, or does such a restriction inhibit our full
expression of the piece?

4. What is the relation between a performer’s and a scholar’s work in this area? How can
the scholar reconcile the need for an open verdict with the performer’s need to make a
practical decision; for the performer, what happens at the moment when the cautious
conclusions of musicological enquiry have to be turned into action?19

These questions are still pertinent to anyone wishing to explore the possibilities of

historically informed performance from whatever stance and will inform much of the

discussion in this thesis.

Research Objective Two:

To review the current state of understanding by contemporary guitarists of the

concept of historical informed performance (HIP)20 as it relates to the guitar in the

early nineteenth century

18
Ibid., 16.
19
Nicholas Kenyon, 'Introduction: Some Issues and Questions' in Authenticity and Early Music a
Symposium, ed. Nicholas Kenyon (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988), 12,13.
20
Bruce Haynes in his book The End of Early Music (New York, 2007) realised this acronym as 'Historical
Inspired Performance', a rather nice twist that reflects well the changing attitude towards the concept of
authenticity.

6
Methodology:

To undertake a review of the current literature on this topic, noting that published

research in this area is limited in quantity and scope, being either in the style of a broad

historic overview of the period or general interest material published in non-academic

journals and magazines.

Of particular note, however, are the following publications: The 1978 PhD thesis by Paul

Cox, Classic Guitar Technique and its Evolution as Reflected in the Method Books ca.

1770 – 185021, a book that as its title suggests focuses on guitar technique and not

interpretive issues. Seventy one treatises were cited which were used to give a detailed

insight into the development of guitar technique in the nineteenth century and how this

informed the development of contemporary guitar technique. The book chapter by

Richard Savino, Essential issues in performance practices of the classical guitar 1770 –

185022 was published as part of a collection of studies on the lute, vihuela and guitar in

1997. This chapter covered a broad range of issues both technically and interpretively.

Performance practice was also addressed with a revealing comment that set the modus

operandi:

Thoughtful consideration and deliberation can lead to interpretations that acknowledge,

but do not blindly follow, historical practices.23 (Sherman’s type two performer)

21
Paul Wathen Cox, Classic Guitar Technique and Its Evolution as Reflected in the Method Books Ca.
1770 - 1850 (PhD, Indiana University, 1978).
22
Richard Savino, 'Essential Issues in Performance Practices of the Classical Guitar 1770 - 1850,' in
Performance on the Lute, Guitar, and Vihuela, Historical Practice and Modern Interpretation, ed. Victor
Anand Coelho, Cambridge Studies in Performance Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1997).
23
Ibid., 200.

7
The chapter also contains useful recommendations as to how a contemporary guitarist

might accommodate the technical requirements of the nineteenth century guitar.

Representative of the brief introductory style article is Paul Sparks’ Guitar Performance

in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries published in the journal Performance Practice

Review in 1997. The article focuses on technical and theoretical issues with passing

reference to period treatises and acknowledgment of some of the major players and

pedagogues of the nineteenth century. Many articles have also appeared in the journal of

the American Guitar Foundation, primarily focusing on specific repertoire items

accompanied by brief biographical sketches of the composers.

Another key area of investigation in this thesis will be the analysis of recordings by

leading contemporary performers of works from the early nineteenth century. There will

be a particular focus on performers who are working with period instruments or who have

released recordings focusing specifically on the music of this period.

Research Objective Three

Provide a more comprehensive resource for practitioners in the field of guitar

performance by creating a broader contextual understanding of the guitar in the early

nineteenth century

8
Methodology:

To undertake a review of the major primary sources relating to guitar performance in the

early nineteenth century. As was highlighted in Paul Cox’s survey of guitar tutors from

the period, most focused on issues of technique and were primarily conceived as self

tuition books. There are however two major exceptions; the methods by Fernando Sor

(1834)24 and Dionisio Aguado (1834)25. Both of these methods, while providing detailed

technical information, also provide a wide range of recommendations regarding

interpretive practices. Both these methods range widely over subjects, some progressing

well beyond the level of rudimentary instruction. For example Aguado addressed the area

of improvisation26 and Sor the Analysis of the Accompaniment of part of Haydn’s

Oratorio, the Creation27 for which he included a guitar arrangement. Analysis of a

selection of major treatises by influential non-guitarist composers and performers of the

period underpins this area of the thesis. Included in this analysis are the treatises of Carl

Czerny (1839)28, Johann Nepomuk Hummel (1827)29 and Manuel Garcia (1847)30.

The Guitar and historical informed performance

While it might now be generally accepted by many scholars and leading practitioners that

to achieve authenticity in terms of historical verisimilitude is not an obtainable goal, the

24
Ferdinand Sor, Method for the Spanish Guitar, trans. A. Merrick (London: R. Cocks, 1832; reprint, Da
Capo Press).
25
Dionisio Aguado, New Guitar Method, ed. Brian Jeffery, trans. Louise Bigwood (Madrid: Tecla Editions,
1843; reprint, 1981).
26
Ibid., 144, 45.
27
Sor, Method for the Spanish Guitar, 39-42.
28
Carl Czerny, Complete Theoretical and Practical Piano Forte School Op. 500, 3 vols. (London: 1839).
29
Johann Nepomuk Hummel, A Complete Theoretical and Practical Course of Instruction of the Art of
Playing the Piano Forte (London: J. Boosey and Co., 1827).
30
Manuel Patricio Rodriguez Garcia, Garcia's New Treatise on the Art of Singing, trans. Donald V.
Paschke (London: Beale and Chappel, 1847).

9
desire still remains amongst a group within the performance fraternity. An area in which

this is particular noticeable is with the players exploring the use of period instruments.

Interest in the guitar repertoire of the early nineteenth century has often moved in tandem

with a desire to explore original instruments. The unique attributes of these instruments

can suggest to the performer interesting new technical and interpretive possibilities and as

such are very attractive to explore. The claim to be recreating the sounds that the

composer of an earlier historical period would have heard is still common. In a recent

lecture by the lutenist Paul O’Dette at the Adelaide International Guitar Festival in

November 2007 just such a claim was made. It should however be understood that this

was a lecture for an audience made up of the general public, guitar aficionados, teachers

and performers. I would argue that O’Dette’s comments were well judged for the

audience and perhaps reflected an understanding of the current state of knowledge

amongst the guitar fraternity and how this concept is interpreted. For the non specialist

this concept can be quite general, rather suggesting the possibility of a performance

enriched by the interpretive practices of the music’s original historical context rather than

recreating with any degree of veracity a past sound world.

Similar issues were addressed by Colin Lawson and Robin Stowell with the claim that the

case studies they presented in their 1999 overview of historical performance practice:

… provides an historical basis for artistic decision–making which has as its goal the re-
creation of a performance as close as possible to the composer’s original conception.31

31
Colin Lawson and Robin Stowell, The Historical Performance of Music an Introduction, Cambridge
Handbooks to the Historical Performance of Music (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), xii.

10
The caveat ‘as close as possible’ would satisfy the more critical of the historically

informed but still gives the general impression that recreating a performance as the

composer would have heard/ imagined it is a possibility. They continue to note that ‘the

general public has remained blissfully unaware’32 of the detail of the debate and the

balance that performers subjectively create between historical knowledge and practical

expediency. Acknowledging further the role of the performer Lawson and Stowell

comment that:

… period performance comprises – of necessity – a mixture of factual knowledge and

educated guesswork but also that close observance of theorist’s rules is no substitute for
artistry, taste and musical intelligence in bringing a performance to life…33

These seemingly opposed positions reflect those of the performer and musicologist, with the

performer having to consider issues that the musicologist has no direct need to consider.

Straddling both realms of activity the researcher/performer occupies the region of ‘action

research’, enabling theories to be tested in a performance environment, a significant contributing

factor to the context in which these works would have originally been heard.

The concept of authenticity itself, while now eschewed by leading practitioners in the mainstream

world of Early Music, is still an active term in the newly developing field of historically informed

performance on the guitar. Lawson and Stowell noted that [in 1999] ‘claims to authenticity or

even historical accuracy…. have become more muted.’34 By contrast a 2003 release of a compact

disc of classical and romantic guitar music by Dutch guitarist Izhar Elias on a period instrument

was accompanied by a reviewer’s quote from the Holland Early Music Festival of 2004

claiming that the nineteenth century guitar repertoire ‘… now gradually gets the authentic

32
Ibid.
33
Ibid.
34
Ibid., 15.

11
interpretation it deserves…’35 In this context authenticity still conveys some of the naive

enthusiasm and optimism with which the term used to be associated; a vital sense of

exploration with the perceived possibility of adding depth to interpretations of music of

the period. As Nicholas Kenyon noted in 2004 in his review of Peter Walls’ book

History, imagination and the performance of Music:

…the most rewarding parts of this book demonstrate anew what riches and insights can
be gained from exploring the treatises and information that are available to the player.36

This perspective reflects well the current sate of development in the field of guitar related

research in historical informed performance.

I will give the final word of this introduction to Bruce Haynes who in 2007 presented a vision of

what the ‘quest for authenticity’ in the twenty first century might truly mean, after reflecting on

several decades of heated debate and experimentation.

More than anything else, Authenticity seems to be a statement of intent. Totally accurate
historical performance is probably impossible to achieve. To know it has been achieved is
certainly impossible. But that isn’t the goal. What produces interesting results is the
attempt to be historically accurate that is, authentic.37

35
Quoted from the liner notes of: Mauro Giuliani, Izhar Elias Omaggio a Guadagnini, Classical and
Romantic Guitar Music (Alkmaar: Fineline Classical, Challenge Records, 2004).
36
Nicholas Kenyon, Review: Walls, Peter: History, Imagination and the Performance of Music, vol. 32,
Early Music (Oxford University Press, 2004), 459.
37
Bruce Haynes, The End of Early Music a Period Performer's History of Music for the Twenty-First
Century (New York: Oxford University Press, 2007), 10.

12