[7.8.

2018–5:20pm] [1–5] Paper: OP-MLJJ180074

MANUSCRIPT CATEGORY: REVIEW

Author Query Form

Journal: Music & Letters
Article Doi: 10.1093/ml/gcy063
Article Title: Giovanni Gabrieli:Transmission and Reception of a Venetian Musical Tradition. Ed.
by Rodolfo Baroncini, David Bryant, and Luigi Collarile. Pp. viii þ 262.
Venetian Music: Studies I. (Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout, 2016. E100.
ISBN 978-2-503-57027-3.)
First Author: Tim Carter
Corr. Author: Tim Carter

AUTHOR QUERIES ^ TO BE ANSWERED BY THE CORRESPONDING AUTHOR

The following queries have arisen during the typesetting of your manuscript. Please click on each query
number and respond by indicating the change required within the text of the article. If no change is
needed please add a note saying ‘‘No change.’’

AQ1: Please check that all names have been spelled correctly and appear in the correct order.
Please also check that all initials are present. Please check that the author surnames (family
name) have been correctly identified by a pink background. If this is incorrect, please
identify the full surname of the relevant authors. Occasionally, the distinction between
surnames and forenames can be ambiguous, and this is to ensure that the authors’ full
surnames and forenames are tagged correctly, for accurate indexing online. Please also
check all author affiliations.
 MAKING CORRECTIONS TO YOUR PROOF
These instructions show you how to mark changes or add notes to your proofs using Adobe Acrobat Professional versions 7 and
onwards, or Adobe Reader DC. To check what version you are using go to Help then About. The latest version of Adobe Reader is
available for free from get.adobe.com/reader.

DISPLAYING THE TOOLBARS

Adobe Reader DC Acrobat Professional 7, 8, and 9

In Adobe Reader DC, the Comment toolbar can be found by In Adobe Professional, the Comment toolbar can be found by
clicking ‘Comment’ in the menu on the right-hand side of the clicking ‘Comment(s)’ in the top toolbar, and then clicking
page (shown below). ‘Show Comment & Markup Toolbar’ (shown below).

The toolbar shown below will then be displayed along the top.

The toolbar shown below will then display along the top.

USING TEXT EDITS AND COMMENTS IN ACROBAT USING COMMENTING TOOLS IN ADOBE READER
This is the quickest, simplest and easiest All commenting tools are displayed in the toolbar. You cannot use
method both to make corrections, and for your text edits, however you can still use highlighter, sticky notes, and a
corrections to be transferred and checked. variety of insert/replace text options.

POP-UP NOTES
In both Reader and Acrobat, when you insert or edit text a pop-up
box will appear. In Acrobat it looks like this:

1. Click Text Edits

2. Select the text to be annotated or place your cursor
at the insertion point and start typing.
3. Click the Text Edits drop down arrow and select the
required action.

You can also right click on selected text for a range In Reader it looks like this, and will appear in the right-hand pane:
of commenting options, or add sticky notes.

SAVING COMMENTS
In order to save your comments and notes, you need to save
the file (File, Save) when you close the document.

DO NOT MAKE ANY EDITS DIRECTLY INTO THE TEXT, USE COMMENTING TOOLS ONLY.
[7.8.2018–5:20pm] [1–5] Paper: OP-MLJJ180074
MANUSCRIPT CATEGORY:
Music & Letters ß The Author(s) (2018). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
REVIEW
Giovanni Gabrieli: Transmission and Reception of a
5 Venetian Musical Tradition. Ed. by Rodolfo
Baroncini, David Bryant, and Luigi
Collarile. Pp. viii þ 262. Venetian Music:
Studies I. (Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout,
2016. E100. ISBN 978-2-503-57027-3.)
10 Giovanni Gabrieli is guaranteed a place in our
textbook music histories, although his position
therein tends to be somewhat problematic
given that he sits on the cusp between the
musical Renaissance and Baroque without
15 quite summing up the former, nor clearly
setting the ground for the latter. In part that is
to do with the various musical styles apparent
in his rich output of vocal and instrumental
music, which extend far beyond his setting of
20 In ecclesiis, a somewhat untypical piece, in fact,
despite often being used to represent the
composer for teaching purposes in historical
anthologies of music. Perhaps more significant,
however, are the issues represented in the title
25 of the present essay collection: transmission, re-
ception, andçso we shall seeçthat pesky
notion of a specifically ‘Venetian’ musical
tradition.
Rodolfo Baroncini, David Bryant, and Luigi
30 Collarile convened a two-day seminar at the
Fondazioni Giorgio Cini, Venice, in December
2012 to mark the 400th anniversary of the com-
poser’s death (on 12 August 1612). Those
involved clearly had in their sights Baroncini’s
35 own magnum opus biography (Giovanni Gabrieli
(Palermo, 2012)): given Baroncini’s quite
stunning revelations based on a deep trawl of
Venetian archival sources barely touched by
other scholars, the seminar’s focus needed to be
40 elsewhere. Not much is added here in terms of
our knowledge of Gabrieli’s life, nor even of
our understanding of his music (Baroncini had
plenty of new things to say on that, too).
Rather, the fruits of the seminar presented here
45 fell into four thematic groups: ‘The Composer’s
Legacy: Gabrieli as Model’, ‘Source Studies:
Transmission and Interpretation of the Written
Music’, ‘Organs and Organists’, and ‘The
Composer’s Legacy: Nineteenth- and Twenti-
50 eth-Century Revival and Revisitations’. The
first and last of those parts intersect in
REVIEW
intriguing ways, as do the second and third.
Indeed, it is worth parsing this volume in ways
that cut across the categories identified by the
editors given thatçso I venture to suggestça 55
number of the questions left unanswered by
various of the contributors could well have
found a response elsewhere in the volume.
It is worth starting towards the end. As Iain
Fenlon reminds us (‘Constructing Images: 60
Giovanni Gabrieli and the Uses of History’,
pp. 207^17), the beginnings of the Gabrieli
revival can be located quite precisely with Carl
von Winterfeld’s three-volume Johannes Gabrieli
und sein Zeitalter (Berlin, 1834)ça truly remark- 65
able work for its timeçthat appeared two
years after his more neglected Johannes Pierluigi
von Palestrina: Seine Werke und deren Bedeutung fu«r
die Geschichte der Tonkunst (Breslau, 1832).
Winterfeld had various political agendas and 70
also a practical one, the latter involving the
creation of a repertory for the Singakademien
emerging across the German-speaking lands in
the nineteenth century. His aim, however, was
to establish a lineage from the Franco-Flemish 75
masters of the Renaissance through Lassus and
Gabrieli to Heinrich Schu«tz and thence, of
course, to Johann Sebastian Bach. He also
needed to fudge the confessional problem of
how Catholic composers might have sown the 80
seeds for the greatest works of the German Prot-
estant Baroque.
Schu«tz was one of a number of northerners
who travelled to Venice to study with
Giovanni Gabrieli, including Gregor Aichinger, 85
Melchior Borchgrevinck, Mogens Pedersn,
and several others. As many have noted, this
accounts for the remarkable spread of Gabrieli’s
music across the Alps in the course of the first
half of the seventeenth century, to which 90
Metode Kokole adds some new nuggets here in
‘Echoes of Giovanni Gabrieli’s Style in the
Territories between Koper and Graz in the
First Quarter of the Seventeenth Century’
(pp. 51^67). More troublesome, however, is the 95
question of Gabrieli’s Italian (or at least,
Venetian) students. It is now clear that he took
on apprentice organists in the manner of a
guild master: his arrangement made in 1583
1
[7.8.2018–5:20pm] [1–5] Paper: OP-MLJJ180074
MANUSCRIPT CATEGORY: REVIEW
with 18-year-old Zorzi, son of Francesco varoter
(a furrier), to teach him the organ for six years
in return for his earnings is typical, as is Gabri-
eli’s involvement in a ‘union’ of Venetian organ-
5 ists to sew up the market in 1603 (both are
reported in Marco di Pasquale’s ‘Giovanni
Battista Riccio’s Canzonas in the Light of his
Borrowings from Giovanni Gabrieli’, pp. 33^
49, at pp. 46 and 47). The benefits were clear
10 enough. By Jonathan Glixon’s count
(‘Students, Rivals and Contemporaries:
Organists in Venetian Churches at the Time of
Giovanni Gabrieli’, pp. 151^63), Venice had
seventy parish churches, forty-three monastic
15 churches, and forty-seven nunneries, with a
total of some 170 organs; Massimo Bisson
(‘Organs, Lofts and Spaces for Music in
Venetian Churches at the Time of Giovanni
Gabrieli’, pp. 165^92) instead estimates around
20 200 such instruments in the city. However,
Glixon knows the names of only twenty-seven
of the many organists that must have been
employed to play them (p. 152): this was the
underbelly of the musical profession in a city
25 that was, so Claudio Monteverdi famously
claimed, rich in potential for the earnings of
musicians at all levels.
Exactly what Gabrieli taught his apprentice-
pupils remains a matter of conjecture, although
30 presumably it involved the skills customarily
required of those auditioning for positions in
Venice’s leading churches. Stefano Lorenzetti
(‘‘‘Scritte nella mente’’? Giovanni Gabrieli’s
Keyboard Music and the Art of Improvised
35 Composition’, pp. 135^48) uses the various
components of the well-known ‘customary test
for aspiring organists in the church of St.
Mark’s, Venice’ to argue that its emphasis on
various kinds of improvisation explains, first,
40 why Gabrieli published relatively little
keyboard music, and second, how what
survives in print bears traces of such improvisa-
tion by way of the typical patterns associated
with contrappunto alla mente (such as standard
45 imitative sequences based on parallel-tenth pro-
gressions between the outer parts). These
patterns are, of course, ubiquitous in Renais-
sance polyphony for the obvious reason that all
music is in some sense composed alla mente, at
50 least in the first instance.
I shall return to the question of printing,
below. But the alla mente issue has a direct
bearing on one of the more important areas for
discussion in the present volume. Despite the
55 difficulty of identifying Gabrieli’s Italian
pupils, both Marco di Pasquale and, still more,
Rodolfo Baroncini (‘‘‘Et per tale confirmato
dall’auttorita' del signor Giovanni Gabrieli’’:
2
The Reception of Gabrieli as a Model by
Venetian and Non-Venetian Composers of the 60
New Generation (1600^1620)’, pp. 5^31)
identify works by Gabrieli’s younger
contemporaries and, it seems, followers that
somehow quote or refer to his music. Baroncini’s
tactic, for the most part, was to seek out same- 65
text settings, whereby any musical references to
Gabrieli might be construed as competition,
emulation, or homage, to adopt Howard
Mayer Brown’s well-known framework for con-
sidering these kinds of musical intertextualities, 70
unless they just involved plagiarism.
Baroncini finds ninety-six such citations
across a spread of composers ranging from
Alessandro Grandi and Giovanni Valentini to
relatively minor figures, and from the usual 75
suspects (Heinrich Schu«tz) to wholly surprising
ones (William Byrd). Some of the quotations
are obvious enough; other references or allu-
sions are less so depending on the extent to
which one should consider them standard 80
musical tropes whether or not generated by alla
mente procedures. The fact that most of them
concern the initial subjects of a given piece by
Gabrieli might or might not strengthen the
notion of any intended reference, especially in 85
the case of motets that could be drawing their
material from a common source such as plain-
chant (hence, I ask myself, the connection that
Baroncini makes between Gabrieli and Byrd’s
1605 setting of Beata es Virgo Maria?). It also 90
prompts the question of whether composers
‘borrowing’ from Gabrieli were relying on
aural or written transmission. But if Gabrieli is
using stock figures, it makes Baroncini’s
argument that much harder to prove, worthy 95
though his effort might be.
The top-scoring composer in terms of refer-
ences to Gabrieli is the Venetian organist and
violinist Giovanni Battista Riccio, who can
probably now be identified as a pupil of the 100
composer. As Rodolfo Baroncini and Marco di
Pasquale demonstrate, a number of Riccio’s
small-scale vocal and instrumental works take
their openings from Gabrieli. This may reflect
a typical teaching strategy (along the lines of 105
‘start with this and then proceed on your own’),
but it also means that Riccio provides, in
effect, a cut-down version of the Gabrieli style
to make it more accessible to those with
reduced musical resources. It further reveals 110
one of the several problems posed by Gabrieli’s
music even in his lifetime. His monumental
works in eight or more parts certainly met the
needs of particular Venetian ceremoniesçand
were clearly used thereinçbut they were much 115
less functional in other contexts. Nor did they
[7.8.2018–5:20pm] [1–5] Paper: OP-MLJJ180074
MANUSCRIPT CATEGORY: REVIEW
match the increasing trend in favour of smaller-
scale concertato pieces typical of the ‘modern’
style, whether or not in the manner of
Lodovico Grossi da Viadana. In his discussion
5 of ‘Cleffing, Ranges, Pitch and Sonority in the
Vocal Music of Andrea and Giovanni Gabrieli’
(pp. 107^33), Jeffrey Kurtzman pursues the
typical arguments in favour of chiavi alte (or
chiavette) transposition by way of typical vocal
10 ranges, but he also notes that Gabrieli’s large-
scale works were clearly adapted in perform-
ance in terms of instrumental participation or
substitution beyond what seems allowed by
their contemporary printed sources (this
15 further affects the issue of transposition).
David Bryant and Elena Quaranta make the
point still more forcefully for the larger
polychoral pieces by Gabrieli and his
contemporaries, which could typically be
20 reduced in various ways whether with the si
placet consent of the composer or not (‘Written
and Unwritten Practices in the Tradition of
Cori Spezzati: Gabrieli’s Contribution in
Context’, pp. 97^105). Likewise Philippe
25 Canguilhem advocates a wider variety of per-
formance options for Gabrieli’s instrumental
works, moving beyond their standard adoption
nowadays by brass ensembles or their cornett
and sackbut equivalents (‘On the Performance
30 of Giovanni Gabrieli’s Instrumental Ensemble
Music’, pp. 195^205).
The idea that the printed sources for late Re-
naissance and early Baroque music do not ne-
cessarily reflect performative contingency (or
35 exigency) is not new. But it raises the issue of
how and why Gabrieli became monumentalized
as he did. Lorenzetti’s question about Gabrieli
having printed far less keyboard music than he
must have ‘composed’ finds an easy answer in
40 the typical Catch 22 of print: Gabrieli was not
going to give away his secrets too easily if he
could claim six years’ worth of earnings from
any given apprentice-pupil. Nor was he likely
to issue music that was still somehow current in
45 the repertory unless there was good reason to
do so: this probably explains his posthumous
Canzone e sonate and the second book of
Symphoniae sacrae, both issued in 1615, just as
Giovanni Gabrieli himself produced a posthu-
50 mous volume comprising key works by his
uncle, Andrea, in 1587.
Yet publishing could also benefit composers,
and printers vied to secure the best of them.
While Luigi Collarile (‘Giovanni Gabrieli and
55 Andrea’s Musical Legacy: Lost Editions, Ghost
Editions, Editorial Strategies’, pp. 71^95) seeks
to identify some ‘lost’ editions of music by
Andrea and Giovanni Gabrieli (that is, which
3
we know were printed) and also some ‘ghost’
ones that persisted by mistake in nineteenth- 60
century catalogues, he also hints at some of the
competitive editorial strategies adopted in par-
ticular by the Gardano and Vincenti presses
for capturing the keyboard music of the major
Venetian organists. But the questions of what 65
these various prints convey, and of how they do
so, remain in terms of what they presented as
Gabrieli’s legacy both for his contemporaries
and in terms of his later reception history.
Thus the final essay here, ‘Giovanni Gabrieli 70
and the New Venetian School (Malipiero,
Maderna, Nono)’ by Paolo Dal Molin, Michele
Chiappini, and Francisco Rocca (pp. 219^46 ),
takes Iain Fenlon’s story one step further while
bringing us back to the issue of Gabrieli’s role 75
in the formation of a ‘Venetian school’. Gian
Francesco Malipiero was clear, at least early in
his career, that both Gabrielis were but a
stepping stone to the greatest ‘Venetian’
composer of the period, Claudio Monteverdi. 80
Even though Malipiero became more interested
in Giovanni Gabrieli later in his life, it was
more as a composer of instrumental music,
making him a distant predecessor to another
Venetian ‘master’, Antonio Vivaldi. Malipiero 85
clearly favoured Monteverdi (hence his single-
handed complete edition of the composer’s
works), who deserved greater credit both for
his role in developing early opera and for his
struggles with Giovanni Maria Artusi over the 90
seconda pratica. But Malipiero’s ambivalence
over Gabrieli was seemingly influenced by the
fact that the latter had been colonized, pre-
cisely, by the Germans: when Malipiero
proposed to the Fondazione Cini a complete 95
edition of both Gabrielis’ works in 1965, he
wanted to exclude as editors ‘foreign collabor-
ators, above all Germans who, thanks to Hitler,
emigrated to America. This would be a great
Venetian initiative’ (p. 222; the italics represent 100
Malipiero’s underlining in a letter to the
general secretary of the Fondazione, Vittore
Branca).
Malipiero clearly was not very sympathetic
to one of his former students, Armen 105
Carapetyan, who had already begun a
complete edition of Giovanni Gabrieli’s works
under the auspices of his American Institute of
Musicology (three volumes had appeared,
edited by Denis Arnold). Other of Malipiero’s 110
students, however, took their Venetian civic
pride in a different direction. Bruno Maderna
and Luigi Nono’s various interests in Gabrieli’s
music were both genuine and deepçNono
even owned and annotated a copy of one of 115
Arnold’s editions (p. 237)çbut they focused
[7.8.2018–5:20pm] [1–5] Paper: OP-MLJJ180074
MANUSCRIPT CATEGORY: REVIEW
primarily on the composer’s use of sound and
space, an acousmatic turn that clearly
influenced their instrumental works, and still
more their electronic ones. This, they might
5 well have claimed, is what defines a truly
‘Venetian’ school, influenced by the city itself
and its remarkable architectural landmarks.
The fact that their apparent justification for
this view of Gabrieli’s musicçlocating it in the
10 ‘hidden’ galleries of St Mark’s Basilicaçwould
soon be undermined by scholars working on
performance spaces in Venice probably would
not have concerned them greatly: Malipiero
himself disliked musicologists, accusing them
of pedantry and musical insensitivity (so 15
Fenlon notes on p. 212). But the present volume
has plenty to concern performers and com-
posers, as it does for those of us still seeking to
make sense of the complex cross-currents of
music in Italy around 1600. It is worthy of 20
serious attention.
TIM CARTER AQ1
University of North Carolina
doi:10.1093/ml/gcy063