Venice, Schiavoni and the Dissemination of Early Modern Music: A Companion to Ivan Lukacic (Epitome Musical) 9782503601953, 2503601952

Citation preview

Venice, Schiavoni and the Dissemination of Early Modern Music. A Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Centre d’études supérieures de la Renaissance de Tours Université de Tours, UMR 7323 du CNRS Collection « Épitome musical » dirigée par Philippe Vendrix & Philippe Canguilhem Editorial Committee: Hyacinthe Belliot, Vincent Besson, Camilla Cavicchi, David Fiala, Daniel Saulnier, Solveig Serre, Vasco Zara Advisory board: Vincenzo Borghetti (Università di Verona), Marie-Alexis Colin (Université Libre de Bruxelles), Richard Freedman (Haverford College), Giuseppe Gerbino (Columbia University), Inga Mai Groote (Universität Zürich), Andrew Kirkman (University of Birmingham), Laurenz Lütteken (Universität Zürich), Pedro Memelsdorff (Centre d'études supérieures de la Renaissance de Tours), Kate van Orden (Harvard University), Yolanda Plumley (University of Exeter), Massimo Privitera (Università di Palermo), Jesse Rodin (Stanford University), Emilio Ros-Fabregas (CSIC-Barcelona), Katelijne Schiltz (Universität Regensburg), Thomas Schmidt (University of Manchester). Layout : Vito Balić

Arts Academy in Split Umjetnička akademija u Splitu.

Cover illustration: Camocio, Giovanni Francesco: [Atlante – Isole famose], [Venezia]: [Apresso G. F. Camocio], s.a. [between 1568–1571], München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Mapp. 180 h, https://mdz-nbnresolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb00003944-5. © 2022, Brepols Publishers n.v., Turnhout, Belgium. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher. ISBN: 978-2-503-60195-3 E-ISBN: 978-2-503-60196-0 DOI: 10.1484/M.EM-EB.5.131109 ISSN: 2565-8166 E-ISSN: 2565-9510 Printed in the EU on acid-free paper. D/2022/0095/220

Venice, Schiavoni and the Dissemination of Early Modern Music A Companion to Ivan Lukačić edited by

Vito Balić, Vincent Besson & Ennio Stipčević

Table of contents

List of figures

7

List of tables

10

List of musical examples

11

Foreword: Fragments on Lukačić Ennio Stipčević

13

Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648) Josip Vrandečić

23

Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past Lovorka Čoralić

37

Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić

51

Fra Ivan Marko (Giovanni Marco) Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica Ljudevit Maračić Il Collegio Illirico a Roma, Lukačić e la Dalmazia nei documenti veneziani Paolo Alberto Rismondo

65 79

Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies — A view from the perspective of digital musicology 91 Lucija Konfic Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato (Venetia, 1619) Jelena Knešaurek Carić New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620 Gabriele Taschetti The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri: a collection of small-scale motets from the Paduan area Chiara Comparin

5

121 135

155

Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento Aurelio Bianco

177

The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory Jacomien Prins

203

Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa Anna Laura Bellina

219

Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones (1620) and historically informed performances in Croatian festivals from 1980s to 2010s Dario Poljak

233

The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers Tomislav Bužić

243

Bibliography

257

Modern music editions (selection)

275

Index nominum

277

6

FIGURES

All illustrations are reproduced by kind permissions of copyright holders, and their permission must be obtained for any further reproduction. The illustration which are in the public domain and subject to Creative Commons CC BY licence are stated below. Ennio Stipčević: Foreword: Fragments on Lukačić (1–3) Fig. 1. Ivan Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones (Venice, 1620), the ‘Organum’ part, front page, Krakow, Biblioteca Jagiellońska, Mus. ant. pract. L 1040 (Reprint edn. Zagreb: MIC, 1998). [page 19] Fig. 2a–2b. Sicut cedrus, from the Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones, part of ‘Cantus’ and ‘Organum’, Krakow, Biblioteca Jagiellońska, Mus. ant. pract. L 1040 (Reprint edn. Zagreb: MIC, 1998). [20–21] Josip Vrandečić: Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648) (4) Fig. 1a–1b. The map of Central European lands: Il regno d’Ungaria, Transilvania, Schiavonia, Bosnia, Croatia, Dalmatia (Roma: Giac. Rossi, 1683), Zagreb, National and University Library, S-JZ-XVII-17 (http://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:238:830329). [22, 36] Lovorka Čoralić: Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past (5–6) Fig. 1. Lazaro da Curzola, Frottole nuoue de Lazaro da Cruzola. Con vna Barzelletta, & alcune Stanze ala Schiauonesca & due Barzellette alla Bergamascha. Cosa da ridere (1547), frontispiece, Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, Misc. 2231.4 (https://www.internetculturale.it/jmms/iccuviewer/iccu.jsp?id=oai%3A193.206.197.121%3A18%3AVE004 9%3AVEAE122612). By permission of Ministero della Cultura – Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana. Any further reproduction is prohibited. [49] Fig. 2. Gregorio Lambranzi, the dance Schiavona, from the Gregorio Lambranzi, Neue und Curieuse Theatralische Tantz-Schul, Zweitter theil (Nürnberg: Johan Jacob Wolrab, 1716), p. 6. [50] Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić: Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology (7–11) Fig. 1. Gulio Clovio, Full-page miniature of the Sermon on the Mount. Elaborate full border with human figures, Towneley Lectionary, 6v, New York, The New York Public Library, Manuscripts and Archives Division, MssCol 2557 (The New York Public Library Digital Collections, https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/items/510d47da-e645a3d9-e040-e00a18064a99). NYPL has deemed this image to be in the public domain. [55] Fig. 2. Andrea Meldola also known as Andrea Schiavone, Holy family with St Catherine and young John the Baptist (GG 325), Vienna, KHM-Museumsverband. [58] Fig. 3. Martino Rota (Martinus Rota Sibenicensis), Mary Magdalene, Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de España, ER/1284 (254) (The Hispanic Digital Library, http://bdh. bne.es/bnesearch/detalle/bdh0000024936). This BNE’s image subjects to CC BY 4.0 licence. [60] 7

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Fig. 4. Federico Bencovich, Abraham žrtvuje Izaka (The Sacrifice of Isaac), 1715, oil on canvas, 220.7 x 165.3 cm, Zagreb, The photographic collection of the Strossmayer’s Gallery of Old Masters of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, inv.num. SG-3. [63] Ljudevit Maračić: Fra Ivan Marko (Giovanni Marco) Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica (12–13) Fig. 1. Sibenicho (Šibenik): Giuseppe Rosaccio, Viaggio da Venetia, a Costantinopoli (Venetia: Appresso Giacomo Franco, 1606), 13r, Zagreb, National and University Library, RVI-16°-32, (http://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:238:634001, Image 37). [77] Fig. 2. Spalato (Split): G. Rosaccio, Viaggio da Venetia, a Costantinopoli, 16r, Zagreb, National and University Library, RVI-16°-32, (http://urn.nsk.hr/urn:nbn:hr:238:634001, Image 43). [78] Paolo Alberto Rismondo: Il Collegio Illirico a Roma, Lukačić e la Dalmazia nei documenti veneziani (14–15) Fig. 1. Venezia, Scuola Dalmata dei SS. Giorgio e Trifone, private collection. [89] Fig. 2. Roma, Collegio Illirico, private collection. Reproduced from Chiesa Sistina I, ed. Ratko Perić (Roma: Pontificio Collegio Croato di San Girolamo, 1989), p. 102. [90] Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies — A view from the perspective of digital musicology (16) Fig. 1. I. Lukačić, Corde et animo (T), from the anthology Promptuarii musici, III (Strasbourg: P. Ledertz, 1627) by Johann Donfrid, part of ‘Vox secunda’, CCI, München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, 4 Mus.pr. 451-1/3, p. 591, urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb00073473-7. [99] Jelena Knešaurek Carić: Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato (Venetia, 1619) (17–19) Fig. 1. Giorgio (Juraj) Alberti, Dialogo… (Venetia: Antonio Turino, 1619), frontispiece, Roma, Biblioteca universitaria Alessandrina. By permission of Ministero della Cultura – Biblioteca universitaria Alessandrina. [125] Fig. 2. Alberti’s example for rhythmic note values, G. Alberti, Dialogo, 27. By permission of Ministero della Cultura – Biblioteca universitaria Alessandrina. [128] Fig. 3. Proportions, G. Alberti, Dialogo, 31. By permission of Ministero della Cultura – Biblioteca universitaria Alessandrina. [129] Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri: a collection of small-scale motets from the Paduan area (20–22) Fig. 1. A. Gualtieri, Ave cor sanctissimae, The Governing Body of Christ Church, Oxford, Mus.931-935, Partbook of Canto, p. 5. [167] Fig. 2. A. Gualtieri, Veni, Domine, The Governing Body of Christ Church, Oxford, Mus.931-935, Partbook of Tenore, p. 16. [167] Fig. 3. A. Gualtieri, Sancta Maria, The Governing Body of Christ Church, Oxford, Mus.931-935, Partbook of Basso per l'organo, p. 4. [168] 8

Figures

Jacomien Prins: The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory (23–25) Fig. 1. Signs of the Alypius table corresponding with the Lydian mode, from Vincenzo Galilei, Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music, 240. [208] Fig. 2. Transcription of Patrizi’s interpretation of the ‘Hymn of Dionysius’, from F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 329. [208] Fig. 3. Diagram of the diatonic tetrachord-species, from Patrizi’s Della poetica, vol. 1, 345. [215] Anna Laura Bellina: Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa (26–28) Fig. 1. [Ippolito Mazarino], antiporta, Gli amori delusi da Amore (Torino: Colonna, 1688), Milano, Biblioteca Nazionale Braidense, Racc.dramm.2258 (http://opac.braidense.it/bid/MUS0319013). This image subjects to CC BY 3.0 IT licence by permission of Ministero della Cultura – Biblioteca nazionale Braidense. [225] Fig. 2. Iacopo Maggi, Georges Tasnière, antiporta, Amore vendicato (Torino: Colonna, 1688), Chicago, University of Chicago Library, PQ4561.A52 1688 (http://pi.lib.uchicago.edu/1001/cat/bib/11811206, University of Chicago Digital Preservation Collection). The owner of the original is Hanna Holborn Gray Special Collections Research Center at the University of Chicago. [226] Fig. 3. Alessandro Dalla Via, antiporta, L’oppresso sollevato (Venezia: Albrizzi, 1692), Rome, Deutsches Historisches Institut, Rar. Libr. Ven. 287/293#290, (https:// mdz-nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bsb00048567), © Deutsches Historisches Institut Rom. [229] Dario Poljak: Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones (1620) and historically informed performances in Croatian festivals from 1980s to 2010s (29–30) Fig. 1. I. Lukačić, Sicut cedrus, excerpt from the microfilm containing Dragan Plamenac’s transcription of Sacrae cantiones, Zagreb, Division for the History of Croatian Music of the Institute for the History of Croatian Literature, Theater and Music, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts. [234] Fig. 2. I. Lukačić, Osculetur me, excerpt from the microfilm containing Dragan Plamenac’s transcription of Sacrae cantiones, Zagreb, Division for the History of Croatian Music of the Institute for the History of Croatian Literature, Theater and Music, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts. [235] Tomislav Bužić: The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers (31) Fig. 1. Kuljerić’s Omaggio a Lukačić (Quam pulchra es), rehearsal letter F (undated score, probably from 1972)(private collection). [252]

9

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

TABLES Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies — A view from the perspective of digital musicology (1–5) Table 1. Text and formal disposition — G. Finetti and I. Lukačić: Nos autem gloriari oportet. [100] Table 2. Text and formal disposition — A. Mortaro: Nos autem gloriari oportet. [101] Table 3. Text and formal disposition — A. Cifra and I. Lukačić. [104] Table 4a, 4b. Pitch histograms of T1 and T2 parts in Corde et animo by A. Cifra and by I. Lukačić: a) A. Cifra : Corde et animo, T1 and T2 parts, b) I. Lukačić: Corde et animo, T1 and T2 parts. [105] Table 5a, 5b. Graphical presentation of the theme appearance in the Corde at animo motets by A. Cifra and I. Lukačić: a) A. Cifra: Corde et animo, b) I. Lukačić: Corde et animo. [106] Jelena Knešaurek Carić: Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato (Venetia, 1619) (6) Table 1. Hexachordal system with ‘positions’, from J. Alberti’s Dialogo.

[127]

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620 (7–14) Table 1. Tomaso Cecchini’s motet collections published before 1620. [137] Table 2. Structure of the motets of Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica (1619). [138] Table 3. Repetitions in the motets of Tomaso Cecchini’s Motetti a una voce sola (1617). [141–142] Table 4. The structure derived from the surviving parts of the motets Aspice Domine and Benedicam Dominum (1616). [143] Table 5. Conjectural reconstruction of the organisation of the motets Aspice Domine and Benedicam Dominum. [143] Table 6. Different types of motets within the four-part collection of Salmi et motetti (1616). [148] Table 7. Contents of the collection Motetti concertati a due voci (1613). [149–150] Table 8. Types of motets in Tomaso Cecchini’s collections published before 1620. [154] Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri: a collection of small-scale motets from the Paduan area (15–16) Tab. 1. Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci con le littanie della Beata Vergine a quattro, libro terzo. Opera X di Antonio Gualtieri maestro di capella della collegiata et delle sette chiese di Monselice (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1630), textual incipit and source. [159–160] Tab. 2. A. Gualtieri, Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (1630): clef and vocal range. [162] 10

Music examples

MUSIC EXAMPLES Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies — A view from the perspective of digital musicology (1–3) Mus. ex. 1a. I. Lukačić, Nos autem, b. 1–4. [102] Mus. ex. 1b. G. Finetti, Nos autem, b. 1–4. [102] Mus. ex. 1c. A. Mortaro, Nos autem, b. 1–3. [102] Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620 (4–11) Mus. ex. 1. T. Cecchini, Surge propera amica mea in Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica, bb. 9–16. [138] Mus. ex. 2. T. Cecchini, Iesum omnes agnoscite in Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica bb. 31–37. [139] Mus. ex. 3. Organ part of Domine ne in furore tuo in T. Cecchini’s Motetti a una voce sola (1617). [142] Mus. ex. 4. Hypothetical reconstruction of the ritornello and cadence of Benedicam Dominum (1616). [144] Mus. ex. 5. The duo C–B of Aspice Domine in Salmi et motetti concertati (1616). [145] Mus. ex. 6. Application of the imitative models typically used by Cecchini based on the surviving tenor in the second duo of the motet Aspice Domine. [146] Mus. ex. 7. T. Cecchini, Congratulamini for ‘due soprani o tenori in echo’, a hypothesis for the reconstruction of the missing vocal part. [151] Mus. ex. 8. Realisation of a unison canon over the surviving voice of the motet Expurgate vetus fermentum. [152] Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri: a collection of small-scale motets from the Paduan area (12–22) Mus. ex. 1. A. Gualtieri, O beatum virum, bb. 17–20. [163] Mus. ex. 2. A. Gualtieri, Sub tuum praesidium, bb. 1–4. [164] Mus. ex. 3a. A. Gualtieri, Sancta Maria succure, b. 17. [165] Mus. ex. 3b. A. Gualtieri, O beatum virum, b. 14. [165] Mus. ex. 4a. A. Gualtieri, O admirabile commercium, bb. 8–29. [165] Mus. ex. 4b. A. Gualtieri, O admirabile commercium, b. 41–62. [166] Mus. ex. 5. A. Gualtieri, Gaudeamus omnes fideles, bb. 50–52. [166] Mus. ex. 6. A. Gualtieri, Veni dilecte mi, bb. 1–2. [167] Mus. ex. 7. A. Gualtieri, Cor mundum, bb. 36–42. [168] Mus. ex. 8. A. Gualtieri, Laetanie della Beata Vergine, bb. 28–29. [173] Mus. ex. 9. A. Gualtieri, Laetanie della Beata Vergine, bb. 78–80. [173]

11

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento (23–38) Mus. ex. 1a. C. Farina, Pavana tertia, III rit., misure 49–56, parte di Canto. [196] Mus. ex. 1b. C. Farina, Pavana quinta, I rit., misure 18–23, parte di Canto. [196] Mus. ex. 2a. J. Dowland, Lachrimae amantis, I rit., misure 1–5 (parte di liuto omessa). [196] Mus. ex. 2b. C. Farina, Pavana prima, II rit., misure 29–32. [197] Mus. ex. 3. C. Farina, Pavana quarta, I rit., misure 1–24. [197–198] Mus. ex. 4. C. Farina, Pavana tertia, II rit., misure 37–48. [199] Mus. ex. 5. C. Farina, Pavana quinta, I rit., misure 11–17. [200] Mus. ex. 6a. M. Praetorius, Courante [du Tambour], I rit., misure 1–6, parte di Cantus. [200] Mus. ex. 6b. W. Brade, Couranten, I rit., misure 1–6, parte di Cantus. [200] Mus. ex. 6c. Anonymus, Volta, I rit., misure 1–6, parte di Cantus. [200] Mus. ex. 6d. M. Praetorius, Courante, I rit., misure 1–4, parte di Cantus. [201] Mus. ex. 6e. C. Farina, Correnta decima, I rit., misure 1–5, parte di Canto. [201] Mus. ex. 7a. C. Farina, Pavana quarta, III rit., misure 52–57, parte di Canto. [201] Mus. ex. 7b. C. Farina, Gagliarda ottava, I rit., misure 1–6, parte di Canto. [201] Mus. ex. 7c. C. Farina, Mascharata, misure 1–8 e 115–122, parte di Canto. [201] Mus. ex. 7d. C. Farina, Brandi, misure 1–8 e 25–32, parte di Canto. [202] Tomislav Bužić: The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers (39) Mus. ex. 1. Choral ritornello from Lukačić’s most famous motet Quam pulchra es. [248]

12

Foreword: Fragments on Lukačić

Ennio Stipčević Division for the History of Croatian Music, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Zagreb, Croatia

•1• We have gathered here to mark the 400th anniversary of the printing of Sacrae cantiones (Venice, 1620)1 by Ivan Lukačić (Šibenik, around 1585 – Split, 20 September 1648). Lukačić is today widely considered to be one of the best older Croatian composers, and an important figure of the Croatian musical Baroque, who has on several occasions been referred to as the ‘father of Croatian music’. However, Lukačić had no true heirs, and soon after his death his music was forgotten. •2• In his extensive monograph Slaveni u Renesansi, S. P. Novak specifically mentions the feeling of frustration that has pervaded Croatian historiography for centuries: Advocates of the uniqueness of the European Germanic-Roman Abendland have, with a certain peculiar joy, rejected parts of their own continuity in recent history, along with their culture and spirituality, unconvincingly arguing that these parts are non-European, that they are Asian, Byzantine, Greek, and that they have been cursed since the dawn of time.2

The fact that Lukačić and his contemporaries from the eastern Adriatic coast have remained ‘invisible’ in most reviews of early European Baroque music cannot be explained solely through the logic of politics! Musicology itself is partly to blame for this ‘invisibility’ of the musical history of Slavic peoples, as can be confirmed by the ‘Lukačić case’. •3• For many years, a number of studies of Lukačić and the music of his contemporaries from the ‘other, eastern coast of the Adriatic’ were mostly published only in Croatian and thus the international professional public had very limited access to them. A Companion to Lukačić, a collection of studies dedicated to Lukačić and the musical and cultural 1

2

Ioannis Lvcacih de Sebenico, Sacrae Cantiones Singulis Binis Ternis Quaternis Quinisque vocibus Concinendae (Venetiis: sub signo Gardani, 1620; anastatic edn., ed. Ennio Stipčević, Zagreb: MIC, Šibenik: Gradska knjižnica ‘Juraj Šižgorić’, 1998). Slobodan Prosperov Novak, Slaveni u Renesansi [Slavs in the Renaissance] (Zagreb: MH, 2009), 56. 13

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

contacts between the two Adriatic coasts, is the first such edited monograph published in both English and Italian.3 •4• At the turn of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the historical Croatian lands were shaken by grave political problems: Ottomans established their power in the eastern regions (Sclavonia), and southern parts of Croatia, while the Habsburgs and Venetians reigned over most of northern and coastal domini (Istria, Dalmatia). At the very south of the coastal regions stood Dubrovnik, which was a free city state with a developed cultural heritage. Musicians active in Croatian lands could have secure employment much easier in religious institutions. •5• Venice, la Serenissima, Queen of the Sea — the city where the Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones were printed — experienced its musical apogee during the Cinque- and Seicento. It was the focus of new trends in culture and the arts, a magnet for musicians from all parts of Europe, and indeed from the nearby areas just across the Adriatic inhabited mostly by Croats. Like the other peoples in multi-ethnic Venice, the Croatian community had its church and confraternity, known today as the Scuola Dalmata. Most of the Croatian people would get together on the Riva degli Schiavoni — the Quay of Slavs (Croats), one of the finest Venetian moorings for boats, extending from St Mark’s Square all the way over to the Arsenal. On the Riva degli Schiavoni the Croats had their traditional meeting places, which were spots for commerce and diplomacy. Studies by J. Vrandečić, L. Čoralić, and I. Prijatelj Pavičić provide an introduction to the political and cultural correlations between the Serenissima and its Croatian subjects along the eastern Adriatic coast and offer new insights based on a new historicist appraoch. For example, the meaning of the term Schiavoni clearly differed in Venice and in the regions to which it referred, namely the eastern, Croatian Adriatic coast. •6• Two Italian musicians were active along Croatian coastal areas for a long period of time. Gabriello Puliti (c. 1580–1642/3)4 from Montepulciano, was a Franciscan friar and organist who moved to Istria in 1604. He served as an organist and maestro di cappella in Trieste, Muggia, Capodistria (Koper), and Albona (Labin), and composed at least thirty-seven volumes, including different genres of music. Tomaso Cecchini (1580/82–1644)5, a ‘Veronese’, 3

4 5

The only bilingual monograph on Lukačić in Croatian and English, with an annotated and selected bibliography, is E. Stipčević, Ivan Lukačić (Zagreb: MIC, 2007). The book contains a DVD with the documentary movie U potrazi za Lukačićem / In Search of Lukačić, screenplay by E. Stipčević and Ivan Vidić, directed by Davor Šarić, and produced by Rudolf Vučić, Digital Film, Šibenik (Šibenik: Glazbena škola Ivana Lukačića, 2000). Ljudevit Anton Maračić, E. Stipčević, Gabriello Puliti (ca. 1580–1642/3): francescano, compositore, ‘Accademico armonico detto l’Allegro’ (Rovigno: Centro di ricerche storiche, 2021). E. Stipčević, Tomaso Cecchini [in Croatian and English] (Zagreb: MIC, 2015). 14

Ennio Stipčević: Foreword: Fragments on Lukačić

was active in Dalmatia from 1603, and as maestro di cappella of the cathedrals in Split and Hvar composed twenty-seven volumes of varied music. It was because of these two composers that Istria and Dalmatia were a part of the early Baroque musical scene in Europe. •7• The first bio-bibliographic data on Lukačić is provided in the musical lexicons of François-Joseph Fétis,6 Robert Eitner,7 and some other older bibliographic manuals. During the 18th and 19th centuries, when few high-quality lexicons and bibliographic publications by Croatian authors were published, Lukačić’s name had already been forgotten. Neither the learned historian Šime Ljubić nor the best older Croatian bibliographer Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski mentioned Lukačić in their publications.8 During the 1930s and 1940s young musicologist Dragan Plamenac discovered in early Croatian music his own Iliad and Hissarlik Mountain. •8• Dragan Plamenac (1895–1983) (real name Karl Siebenschein), member of a prominent Jewish family from Zagreb, was educated over a prolonged period and in various centers (Zagreb, Vienna, Prague, Paris), gaining an international reputation in 1927 when he edited the first volume of Johannes Ockeghem’s collected works. There is no need here to recall Plamenac’s curriculum in detail. However, when Plamenac returned to his homeland in 1928, he was offered the position of assistant professor, giving the first-ever lectures in musicology at Zagreb University. During the next ten years (1928–1939) he actively perused the music archives in Dalmatia and visited European libraries in search of old manuscripts and music prints.9 After several years of meticulous research, in late 1934 Plamenac published the article ‘Ivan Lukačić (1574–1648) — An Unknown Croatian Musician of the Early Baroque and his Motets’ in the Zagreb daily Obzor. This small newspaper article was a first-class cultural event, an unparalleled musicological discovery in Croatia. And at the end of 1935, when he prepared a concert called From the Croatian Musical Past in the hall of the Croatian Music Institute, with compositions by Vinko Jelić, Andrija Patricij, Julije Skjavetić, Tomaso Cecchini, and Ivan Lukačić, the Croatian audience suddenly discovered the unimaginable richness of Croatian Renaissance and Baroque music. At that time, Plamenac discovered more than 30 previously unknown printed collections of Croatian Renaissance and Baroque masters, but it seems that he was particularly impressed by the collection Sacrae cantiones. In the preface to the music edition of Ivan Lukačić, Odabrani 6 7

8

9

François-Joseph Fétis, ‘Lucacih (Jean)’, Biographie universelle des musiciens et bibligraphie générale de la musique, vol. 5 (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1863; 2nd edn. 1867), 359. Robert Eitner, ‘Lucacih (Johann)’, in Bibliographie der Musik-Sammelwerke des XVI. und XVII. Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Leo Liepmannssohn, 1877), 683; R. Eitner, ‘Lucacih, Giovanni’, Biographisch-Bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten, vol. 6 (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Haertel, 1902), 234. Simeone Gliubich (Šime Ljubić), Dizionario biografico degli uomini illustri della Dalmazia (Vienna: Rod. Lechner, Zara: Battara e Abelich, 1856; repr. Bologna: Forni, 1974); Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski, Bibliografia hrvatska [Croatian Bibliography] (Zagreb: Dragutin Albrecht, 1860; [Appendix, 1863]). See Dragan Plamenac, Glazba 16. i 17. stoljeća u Dalmaciji. Osam studija [Music of the 16th and 17th Centuries in Dalmatia. Eight studies], ed. E. Stipčević (Zagreb: MIC, Split: Književni krug, 1998). 15

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

moteti [Selected Motets]10 (the first such sheet music edition with works by an older Croatian composer), Plamenac wrote in ecstasy: ‘Thus, not every trace of local activity in this artistic field has been wiped out!’11 The preface to the sheet music edition of Odabrani moteti, although provided with very precise instructions, was rarely read by musicians, which led to incorrect interpretations of Lukačić’s music, with very large vocal ensembles and a completely inappropriate vocal technique. This topic is discussed in this book by a young musicologist and harpsichordist D. Poljak. A study by T. Bužić shows that Lukačić’s music still offers inspiration for contemporary composers, despite having been forgotten for centuries. •9• Not many facts are known about Lukačić’s life. We are not sure of the exact date of his birth, but we do know that he was baptized with the name Marko in the town of his birth in 1587, and that in 1597 he was accepted into the Order of Franciscan Conventuals at their Monastery in Šibenik, where he took the monastic name Ivan. He must have been exceptionally gifted as a youth since, in 1600, when he was only fifteen years old and only three years after he had taken holy orders, he was sent to Italy to study. By 1612, he was prefacing his signature with Baccalaureus, and he earned the title of magister musices in Rome in 1615. Lukačić may have received his general and music education in Venice, Padua, Loreto, or Rome, the Italian cities commonly chosen by the Croats of that time for their studies. There is insufficient information on Lukačić’s long stay in Italy. However, before his final return to his native country in 1618, Lukačić participated in several chapters of the Franciscan Province of Dalmatia. Upon his arrival in Split in 1620, he immediately took on a number of taxing and important duties: he became musicus perfectus at the cathedral and guardian of St. Francis’ monastery. He held the position of guardian almost until his death, was highly respected as an artist, and functioned as an energetic and successful administrator of his monastery community. He died on 20 September 1648. Based on newly discovered documents, church historian Lj. A. Maračić writes about the functions Lukačić held in his home Dalmatian Province of St. Jerome, while convincing assumptions about Lukačić’s schooling and possible influences by his Italian contemporaries are provided by P. A. Rismondo. • 10 • Lukačić’s daily life in Split was not free of problems. Owing to frequent and fierce battles against the Turks, a defensive bulwark was built next to the monastery of St. Francis, while the people of Dalmatia and Bosnia often faced plague epidemics. A sense of turbulence, further intensified by the rigid Venetian control over most parts of the Croatian coastal regions, was even reflected on the cover page and in the dedication of Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones. The cover states that the collection was ‘brought to the light’ by Lukačić’s fellow friar, composer Giacomo Finetti, at that time maestro di cappella in the Venetian church 10 Ivan Lukačić, Odabrani moteti (1620) [Selected Motets], ed. D. Plamenac (Zagreb: HGZ, 1935; 2nd edn. 11

1975). D. Plamenac, Predgovor [Introduction], in Ivan Lukačić, Odabrani moteti (1620), 3. 16

Ennio Stipčević: Foreword: Fragments on Lukačić

of S. Maria dei Frari. He persuaded Lukačić to collect some of his earlier compositions. According to the dedication, Finetti handed them to Lukačić’s superior, Sforza Ponzoni, the Archibshop of Split. Ponzoni had succeeded Archbishop Markantun de Dominis, a theological writer and prominent scholar. After a disagreement with papal teaching, in 1616 de Dominis was forced to leave the territory of the Venetian republic, including Split. Representatives of the Holy office then asked his nephews, Sforza Ponzoni and his brother, the distinguished painter Matej Ponzoni (Pončun), to recount the events. Finally, de Dominis was charged with heresy by the Holy office. Before his departure from Split, de Dominis tried to revive the cultural life in the city. De Dominis should probably be credited with the assignment of Veronese Tomaso Cecchini as maestro di cappella at the Split cathedral. Between 1612 and 1635, Cecchini had at least 27 collections of sacred and secular music, monodies, multi-part madrigals, and canzonettas, psalms, motets, and several books of Masses and instrumental sonatas published by well-known Venetian publishers Ricciardo Amadino and Giacomo an Alessandro Vincenti, thereby introducing many genres into Croatian musical practice. After receiving the position of Split Archbishop in 1616, Ponzoni had to seek a replacement for the now ex-chapel master of the cathedral. There was a permanent vocal ensemble, which had been systematised by de Dominis, and there was also an organist (Marcantonio Romano at this time), but a chapel master was still missing, someone to supervise all the musical activity. The local man Ivan Lukačić, in such conditions, must have seemed an ideal substitute. And so Lukačić and Cecchini, the two most important Croatian early Baroque composers, found themselves, by no fault of their own, on opposite sides of the Church: Cecchini was under the protection of his patron de Dominis, while Lukačić was looked after by Ponzoni and the chapter. Both Cecchini’s and Lukačić’s motets were included in then-contemporary CounterReformation anthologies, printed by German publishers. New comparative insights into Cecchini’s compositional opus are provided by C. Comparin and G. Taschetti. Interesting content is also demonstrated by L. Konfic, who discusses the dissemination of Lukačić’s motets from Sacrae cantiones. Using C. Farina’s instrumental opus as an example, Aurelio Bianco gives a wider perspective of the dissemination of Venetian music across Europe. It should not come as a surprise that F. Sponga Usper, a master of vocal-instrumental combinations, originally from Istria, is mentioned among other Venetian composers. • 11 • The contribution of writers, philosophers, and playwrights to the development of musical life can be best judged by the activities of more or less formal learned associations (Accademia Cinica in Zadar; Accademia dei Concordi in Dubrovnik). However, nowhere in Europe has the Italian opera libretto had such a decisive influence on original national drama production as it did in Dubrovnik during the 17th and 18th centuries. In the ‘Golden Age of Croatian Literature’ a hybrid drama genre was created. For more than a century, authors of this genre looked attentively toward the most important trends of Italian opera production, and followed them faithfully. Croatian Baroque writers even created a specific model of libretti without music! In this context, one should recall philosopher Francesco Patrizi (Frane Petrić) (1529–1597) from the island of Cherso (Cres), and his texts in which he 17

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

affirmed, more radically than his contemporaries, the idea of the total setting to music of classical tragedies and comedies, anticipating thus the opera spectacle which came about only a dozen years after his death. However, no radicalism could be expected from the treatise Dialogo (1619), written by the Split citizen Giorgio (Juraj) Alberti, ‘a young man of fifteen’. Domenico Giovanni Sebenico (Šibenik, 1630/40 – Cividale dei Friuli, 1705) stood out among the composers of Croatian origin from the second half of the seventeenth century. His compositional output has been partially discovered, while only printed librettos from the at least three operas that he wrote have been preserved. An interesting contribution on Petrić and the ‘birth’ of the favola in musica is given by J. Prins, a detailed comparative study of Alberti’s treatise is provided by J. Knešaurek, and librettos of Sebenico’s operas are informedly analyzed by A. L. Bellina. • 12 • The motets from the Sacrae cantiones, all 27 of them in total, were intended primarily for the local Dalmatian public and to meet the expectations of Split clerical circles and their prelates, even though they were most likely written during Lukačić’s long years of study in Italy. The texts of the motets were biblical and taken largely from the breviary and missal, with some minor changes in some psalmic verses, altering their order and even augmenting them with some new thoughts. The melodic inventiveness was usually fit within the framework of more restrained cadences. There is an obvious influence of the early-Baroque expressivity of Venetian liturgical music, while the restraint in expression could be interpreted by similarities with northern Italian Franciscan composers. To a certain extent, Lukačić’ as well as his contemporaries who were active along the Croatian coast, were limited by local performing capabilities and so their compositions were written mostly for vocal soloists or ensembles with some basso continuo instrumentation. The synthesis of the prima and seconda prattica were sociologically conditioned. Bearing in mind that stylistic particularism in music is a vital trait in the early Baroque, it is obvious that Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones represent a praiseworthy contribution to such contemporary tendencies.

18

Ennio Stipčević: Foreword: Fragments on Lukačić

Fig. 1. Ivan Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones (Venice, 1620), the ‘Organum’ part, front page; the only preserved copy is kept in Krakow, Biblioteca Jagiellońska, Mus. ant. pract. L 1040.

19

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Fig. 2a. Sicut cedrus, from the Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones, part of ‘Cantus’.

20

Ennio Stipčević: Foreword: Fragments on Lukačić

Fig. 2b. Sicut cedrus, from the Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones, part of ‘Organum’.

21

Fig. 1a. The part of the map Il regno d’Ungaria, Transilvania, Schiavonia, Bosnia, Croatia, Dalmatia (Roma: Giac. Rossi, 1683). See p. 36, fig. 1b, for the whole map.

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

22

Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648)

Josip Vrandečić Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Split, Croatia

Ivan Lukačić lived during a tumultuous era of Dalmatian history, between the two Ottoman-Venetian wars, the War of Cyprus (1570–1573) and that of Candia or Crete (1645–1648). The Cyprus war marked the lowest point of Dalmatian society in the 16th century. The decline of the eastern Adriatic Province began as early as its conquest by Venice at the beginning of the 15th century, since the Republic subordinated it to its colonial policy.1 By conquering Dalmatia it achieved two basic goals. First, control of the Province provided a convenient navigation route to the Levant. Second, it gained a stepping stone for trade penetration into the Balkans where it competed for trade in silver and raw materials against Dubrovnik and Florence.2 When Venice achieved both goals, it faced the Ottoman threat in the Balkans. This threat had been growing since the beginning of the 15th century and became ubiquitous after the fall of Bosnia in 1463. A buffer zone of Croatian counties in hinterland Dalmatia, located between the Ottoman and Venetian territories, protected Dalmatian communes from Turkish invasions at the turn of the century. However, when the towns of Knin, Skradin and Ostrovica fell in the early 16th century, and Klis in 1537, this protective zone was demolished. The Dalmatians became neighbors to the Ottomans along a long but shallow border that stretched from the Novigrad Sea near Zadar to the central-Dalmatia region of Omiš. The suffering of local Christians was best described by Šibenik humanist Juraj Šižgorić in his poem De Sibenicensis agri vastatione (Elegy on the Desolation of the Šibenik Field) printed in Venice in 1477. Marko Marulić, the world-renowned writer from Split, portrayed the distress even more extensively in his antiturcica opus.3 The daily suffering of the 1

2 3

On the economic effects of the Venetian administration in Dalmatia see Tomislav Raukar, Zadar u XV stoljeću. Ekonomski razvoj i društveni odnosi [Zadar in the 15th Century: Economic Development and Social Relationships] (Zagreb: Sveučilište; Cantar za povijesne znanosti, 1977); T. Raukar, ‘Venecija i ekonomski razvoj Dalmacije u XV i XVI stoljeću’ [Venice and the Economic Development of Dalmatia during the 15th and 16th Centuries], Radovi Instituta za hrvatsku povijest 10 (1977), 203–225; Oliver Jens Schmitt, ‘Das Venezianische Südosteuropa als Kommunikationsraum (ca. 1400–ca. 1600)’, in Balcani occidentali, Adriatico e Venezia fra XIII e XVIII secolo / Der westliche Balkan, der Adriaraum und Vendig (13.–18. Jahrhundert), eds. Gherardo Ortalli, O. J. Schmitt, Schriften der Balkankommission, vol. 50 (Vienna: VÖAW, 2009), 13–18. On the Venetian goals in the Adriatic see Ivan Pederin, Mletačka uprava, privreda i politika u Dalmaciji (1409–1797) [The Venetian Government, Economy and Politics in Dalmatia] (Dubrovnik: MH, 1990). On the Croatian writing about the Ottoman threat, see Neven Jovanović, ‘Antiturcica iterata – ponovni pogled na renesansnu hrvatsku protutursku književnost’ [Antiturcica iterata: Another Look at Croatian Anti-Turkish Writings during the Renaissance], Colloquia Maruliana 25 (2016), 101–148. 23

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

people were recorded by Venetian chronicler Marin Sanudo in his Diaries. According to him, in the period from 1499 to 1539, 10,421 people were killed or taken as slaves in the territories of the Zadar District and the neighboring Croatian county of Luka. The Šibenik District lost 1,698 people, Trogir 309 and Split 215 inhabitants, respectively. These human losses were accompanied by the economic suppression of the area, namely the destruction of agriculture and livestock. The once rich, fertile and densely populated core of the medieval Croatian state, located in the Dalmatian inland throughout Klis, Knin and Nin, was completely destroyed. When the Venetian fleet commander Vitturi visited Zadar in 1525, he was overwhelmed by the desert around the city. The Ottoman conquest triggered an ethnic cyclone in the Balkans including the Dalmatian backland. The popu-lation moved to central Europe, the Apennines and Istria, as well as within the walls of Dalmatian cities and along their remaining coastal and island communal areas. Šibenik, the birthplace of Ivan Lukačić, shared the fate of the rest of Dalmatia. During the Cyprus War, Dalmatian cities experienced Ottoman attacks, famine, plague and recruitment into the galleys. Eight galleys from the eastern Adriatic participated in the famous Lepanto battle in 1571, including that of St. George from Šibenik, under the command of captain Christopher Lučić. Only half of them returned home safe. The postwar demarcation line further reduced the territory of the communes. From the beginning of the Turkish threat to delimitation, Šibenik lost about 570 square kilometers or half its district. The commune was left without 300 villages. The rest of its suburban area stretched along the shallow coastal belt and islands from Rogoznica to Pirovac. The coastal settlements were filled with mainland refugees who sought protection behind their walls. In addition to Rogoznica and Pirovac, other villages, namely Krapanj, Vodice, Tribunj, Tijesno, Vrpolje and those on the islands of Murter, Zlarin, Kaprije and Žirje, slowly grew.4 The process of littoralisation, meaning the appearance of new villages in coastal areas, also occurred in the Zadar littoral, the Kaštela region nearby Split as well as on the island of Brač. The old population was fleeing to the coast, and in their place came the Morlacs, originally a Balkan population of Illirian descent, which was Romanized with the arrival of the Romans and then Slavicized throughout the medieval period.5 The Croatian character of Dalmatian cities was strengthened by the influx of refugees from the inland. Petar Zoranić, Juraj Baraković and Šime Budinić are well-known bearers of the Croatian Renaissance who moved to Zadar from the conquered Croatian hinterland. During Lukačić’s childhood, there was still a living awareness of the former greatness of the Šibenik commune and of Dalmatia as a whole. During the Middle Ages, especially through the 14th century under the rule of the Anjou dynasty, whose rule extended from Naples to the Baltic, Šibenik was as rich and populous as other Dalmatian communes. All of them equaled Dubrovnik in wealth and economic potential. They owned their mer4

5

For more details on Šibenik between the two wars, cf. Slavo Grubišić, Šibenik kroz stoljeća [Šibenik through the Centuries] (Šibenik: Muzej grada Šibenika, 1974); and Grga Novak, ‘Šibenik u razdoblju mletačke vladavine 1412.–1797. godine’ [Šibenik in the Period of the Venetian Government 1412–1727], in Šibenik: spomen zbornik o 900. obljetnici [Šibenik: Miscellanea on the Nineth Centenary], ed. Slavo Grubišić (Šibenik: Muzej grada Šibenika, 1976), 134–288. On the Ottoman-Venetian trade in Šibenik, see Kristijan Juran, ‘Morlaci u Šibeniku između Ciparskoga i Kandijskog rata (1570.-1645.)’ [Morlacs in Šibenik between the Cyprian and Candian Wars], Povijesni prilozi 49 (2015), 163–210: 167. 24

Josip Vrandečić: Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648)

chant fleets, salt pans, textile manufacturing and watermills, as well as produced plenty of land and sea products. The Venetian authorities conquered them economically in favor of their own production and trade. The Republic forbade them the construction of large merchant ships and the sale of salt was declared a state monopoly. They were left free only in agriculture but even this was affected by the Ottoman onslaught and the shrinking of the districts. The remaining communal and private capital was only invested in the construction of sacral and private buildings, among which there stands out the magnificent Šibenik Cathedral. The poet Hanibal Lucić of Hvar (1485–1553) praised the city of Dubrovnik because it was the only one in Dalmatia to preserve its freedom as a precondition for economic development. After the Cyprus War, Dalmatian society began to slowly recover but never to its previous level. After the war the lowest demographic of only 60,000 inhabitants of the province was recorded. In the year of Lukačić’s birth, in 1587, the city of Šibenik had only 6,440 inhabitants, while the commune numbered 10,508 in total. Yet compared to others, Šibenik was the most populous Dalmatian city. At that time 5,750 people lived in Zadar, less than 5,000 in Split, and a thousand in Trogir. The consequences of the wars were reflected in the high percentage of urban population that lived within city walls. The high rate of urbanization reflected the abandonment of villages and the lack of demographic potential for agricultural activity. In Šibenik, 60% of the district’s population lived within its walls and in the suburbs, and around 30–40% in Zadar, Trogir and Split, respectively.6 The wars also disrupted the sex, age and economic balance. Manning the galleys, war conflicts and emigration affected the male population, lowering its ratio in relation to the female population. Census records reveal that in Zadar in 1586 there were 1,259 women per thousand men, and in Trogir 1,149, respectively. There was a high proportion of children in the age structure. The Dalmatian parishes recorded that the number of births from 1580 to 1589 was around 30 per mille. In 1596, slightly less than half of Zadar’s population was younger than 16. The Ottoman wars, the loss of territory and the Venetian economic system deepened the disparity between public and private sectors and made the population dependent on the state. According to Zadar’s census of 1608, there were only 59 soil-tilling and 28 fishing families.7 Craftsmen and seafarers numbered 229 households, while nobles and civil servants put together lived in 93 households. The city had 292 priests ad nuns and 125 soldiers who covered their wage arrears by looting private property. However, Bishop of Verona Pietro Valier, the first post-Trident council Apostolic Visitator of Dalmatia, in 1579 saw the Dalmatian cities as vibrant Mediterranean communes that were slowly recovering. In his Šibenik’s record he stated that the people were brave, proud, agile and that much could be expected from them on land and at sea.8 In their streets he met various craftsmen, traders, servants, maids, sailors and peasants from the 6 7 8

Josip Vrandečić, Miroslav Bertoša, Dalmacija, Dubrovnik i Istra u ranom novom vijeku [Dalmatia, Dubrovnik and Istria in the Early Modern Age] (Zagreb: Leykam, 2007), 24–25. For more details on Zadar’s etnic structure see Roman Jelić, Stanovništvo Zadra 1608. godine [The inhabitants of Zadar: Year 1608] (Zadar: by author, 1985). Jadranka Neralić, ‘Slike iz svakodnevnoga života u Šibeniku prema vizitaciji apostolskoga vizitatora Agostina Valiera 1579. godine’ [Everyday life in Šibenik according to the apostolic visitator Agostino Valier from 1579], in Faust Vrančić i njegovo doba [Faust Vrančić and His Time], eds. Marijana Borić, Zrinka Blažević, Bojan Marotti (Prvić Luka: Memorijalni centar ‘Faust Vrančić’, 2018), 187–218. 25

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

immediate vicinity and the Šibenik frontier, those from Bosnia as well as from various Adriatic and Italian cities. In the daytime, everyone gathered mostly in the main city square, dominated by the aforementioned cathedral and the new monumental city lodge built in 1547. In the square, at the order and with the permission of the city-rector sent from Venice, the municipal messenger shouted the rector’s proclamations, advertised sales and donations and announced real estate auctions in the days and hours when it was most crowded.9 Sailors, fish merchants and various wanderers gathered at the port. The small town had an intellectual and cultural life, marked by Lukačić’s contemporaries such as innovator Faust Vrančić, historian Ivan Tomko Mrnavić and engraver and cartographer Natal Bonifacij. They continued the tradition of such glorious citizens as Juraj Dalmatinac, Juraj Šižgorić and Antun Vrančić. In Šibenik, as in other Dalmatian communes, the centuries-long conflict between citizens and nobles had been smoldering. The reports the Venetian city-rectors submitted to the government — to the Collegio or to the Senate in Venice — testified to the division of Dalmatian society, which was divided into nobles, citizens, artisans and peasants. In Šibenik, the most numerous inhabitants were peasants from the hinterland and they found protection within the city walls. The rectors suggested that they should be removed from the city and provided accommodation on the nearby Mandalina Peninsula.10 The peasants were said to be rude, to rebel easily, to hate nobles, and could not be suppressed by the local military guard in the case of a rebellion.11 In March 1589 there was a mass revolt of the people against the nobles. The rebels came before the Rector’s Palace, demanding the release of several detained fellows. Then they broke into the weapon depot and armed themselves even better. Since they were armed, their demands were met. The rebellion managed to survive until the end of the summer, when it was suppressed by the joint effort of Venetian mercenaries and Šibenik nobles. Venice jealously guarded Dalmatia, particularly Šibenik, for strategic reasons. Šibenik’s position was of great importance as it was located in the middle of its eastern Adriatic possessions. The river Krka connected the city with the hinterland. The river was considered the geo-strategic backbone of Dalmatia. The Ottomans intended to occupy it, as their siege of the city in 1647 would show, in order to build a fleet in its protected harbor. That is why the Venetians started a new, comprehensive program of military revolution alla moderna in Šibenik. The new construction technique required the erection of thicker and lower walls which would be impervious to artillery. The fortifications had to be reinforced by numerous bastions extending into space to keep the attacker at bay.12 Since the construction of new strongholds and the transformation of old ones was extremely expensive, the Venetians had to choose their priorities. Along the overstretched Mediterranean empire — the Stato da Màr — priority was given to Zadar and Corfu and further to the east to Nicosia and Famagusta in Cyprus as well as to the city of Candia in Crete. 9 J. Neralić, ‘Slike iz svakodnevnoga života u Šibeniku’, 188. 10 Mletačka uputstva i izvještaji / Commissiones et relationes Venetae, ed. Grga Novak, vol. 5 (Zagreb: JAZU, 11 12

1966), 81–82. Mletačka uputstva i izvještaji / Commissiones et relationes Venetae, ed. G. Novak, vol. 5, 141–142. On the impact of military revolution in Dalmatia, see J. Vrandečić, ‘The Military Revolution in Sixteenth and Seventeenth-Century Dalmatia’, in Melikov zbornik, eds. Rajko Bratož et al. (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, 2001), 289–310. 26

Josip Vrandečić: Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648)

In Dalmatia, however, they first built the fortress of St. Nicholas located at the entrance to the Šibenik canal. It was built in 1544 by the Venetian architect Giangirolamo Sanmicheli according to the modern principles of the time. After the erection of the fortress, they dedicated themselves to Zadar, so that the walls of other Dalmatian cities, including Šibenik, remained on hold until the beginning of the Cretan War. In addition to the rector, Venice sent a treasurer to Šibenik as well as 70 mercenaries stationed in the fortresses of St. Anne and St. Nicholas. The ramparts and city gates were guarded by citizens themselves. The Venetians therefore stated that the Dalmatian cities were in the hands of their citizens and not of the army. In addition to foot soldiers, the security of the Dalmatian communes was guarded by detachments of horsemen. The cavalry controlled the frontier, in the case of Šibenik the fertile area of Vrpolje or Donji Polje, planted with vines and olives, and Gornje Polje covered with grains. At the beginning of its rule, Venice recruited equestrians among the Greeks from its possessions. It later relied more and more on Croats from local communities or from the Habsburg areas. Dalmatian noblemen who largely lost their land through Ottoman conquests turned to military service during the 16th century. In the 1520s, members of the Dalmatian nobi-lity such as Nikola and Lombardin Detrico were already prominent representatives of the local soldiery. In the middle of the century, Frano Civalelli and Ivan Detrico were commanders of Croatian horsemen in the Zadar district. They were loyal to Venice as opposed to their ancestors who cherished the Hungarian-Croatian kings.13 The salaries of the condottiers were becoming an increasingly important part of the Dalmatian economy. The local soldier elite invested in the renovation of their palaces or the construction of fortified towers along the coast and on the islands. After suffering defeat in the Holy League War (1537–1540) against the Ottomans, and especially after the loss of Cyprus, Venice avoided an armed conflict with the Ottomans. The Turks were still strong, though after Sultan Suleiman’s death in 1566, their timar system began to show signs of weakness. The horsemen or sipahi were rewarded with revenues produced from the land as compensation for military service. Since the Ottoman Empire was scarce in metals, starting from the 1580s inflation eroded the real value of that which they extracted from the land. In addition, modern Habsburg fortifications built in Pannonia, such as Timisoara, Karlovac and Siget, hampered Ottoman progress and the sipahi began to settle permanently on their estates and to exploit nearby peasants. The elite infantry janissaries, who were not allowed to marry and who lived in Constantinople, were sent to troubled provinces to quell peasant revolts. They settled permanently there, then married and began to engage in trade and crafts.14 13 J. Vrandečić, M. Bertoša, Dalmacija, Dubrovnik i Istra u ranom novom vijeku, 35. 14 On Islam in Dalmatia see more in Hazim Šabanović, Bosanski pašaluk [Bosnian paschilic] (Sarajevo: Svjet-

lost, 1982); and J. Vrandečić, ‘Had an Ottoman Combatant any Chance to Win the Love of the Daughter of the Rector of the Dalmatian Town Zadar?’, Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru 34/21 (1994/95), 163–184; J. Vrandečić, ‘Islam Immediately beyond the Dalmatian Coast: The Three Reasons for Venetian Success’, in Balcani occidentali, Adriatico e Venezia fra XIII e XVIII secolo / Der westliche Balkan, der Adriaraum und Vendig (13.–18. Jahrhundert), eds. G. Ortalli, O. J. Schmitt, 287–308; and Snježana Buzov, ‘Vlach Villages, Pastures and Chiftliks: The Landscape of the Ottoman Borderlands in the 16th and 17th Centuries’, in Triplex Confinium (1500–1800): Ekohistorija, eds. Drago Roksandić et al. (Književni krug, Zagreb: Zavod za hrvatsku povijest Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, 2003), 227–242. 27

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Furthermore, Venice avoided the conflict because it was not interested in leaving the coast. As a naval trading power, it has always sought to conquer stations along the Adriatic and Ionian coasts and on the Aegean Sea as centers of commerce, money and espionage. The same colonial models were adopted by the Portuguese and the Dutch in the Indian Ocean. Contrary to them, the Spaniards and the Ottomans were interested in space because they lived off the land as compensation for soldiery. This Venetian model — the ‘trading station empire’ — also resulted in their scorched-earth policy as a strategy which was advocated by the military engineer Sforza Pallavicino, who modernized the walls of Zadar on the eve of the Cyprus War. This approach required destroying anything that might be useful to the enemy in the suburban territory beyond the reach of galleys guns. Although the Venetians during the Cyprus War briefly occupied Skradin, Klis and Makarska, they did not dare hold them and left them without a fight. Venetian neutrality was also imposed by European-wide circumstances. The Reformation divided European Christianity. The solidarity of common Respublica Christiana needed to resist the Ottomans fell apart. King Francis II of France openly cooperated with Suleiman against the Habsburgs, and in 1534 the Ottoman fleet wintered in Marseilles. The four Habsburg-Valois wars in the first part of the 16th century affected Italy as the main front. The war in the Apennines ended with the Habsburg victory. Venice was the only one to preserve independence but was surrounded on all sides by the Habsburg grip. On the Adriatic front relations between Venice and the Habsburgs were burdened by contentious issues: the Uskoks, the Venetian Dominion Maris Adriatici, and the unresolved frontier questions in Friuli.15 The Uskoks problem was a pressing matter, and it intensified after the Cyprus War. Uskoks fled to their stronghold Senj from the Balkan interior but also from the Venetian possessions and from the Pope’s provinces. They were aided by sympathizers everywhere in Istria and Dalmatia. The crisis over the Uskoks was exacerbated by their temporary conquest of the fortress of Klis in 1596, which was organized by the Habsburgs to drag Venice into the Long War in Pannonia (1593–1606) against the Ottomans. The venture caused great enthusiasm among the Dalmatian people. Not wanting to have a Habsburg fort at the doorstep of Split, the Venetians helped to bring the fortress back under control of the Ottomans. On December 29, 1596, the rector of Šibenik, Vettor Dolfino, at the Collegio in Venice, discussed the jubilation in Šibenik when the Uskoks had liberated Klis. He added with concern that there was a strong monarchist sentiment in Dalmatia. He emphasized that Venice is the master of the Province, as the Hungarian-Croatian ruler is far from Dalmatia, because everyone, in their hearts, considers the king to be their master.16 However, the Dalmatians remained faithful to Venice. They were surrounded by Turks and feared the penetration of Protestant heresy within their city walls. The Venetian ideologist Paolo Sarpi (1552–1626) pointed out in his script Opinione come debba governarsi internamente ed esternamente la Repubblica di Venezia that, 15

On the Habsburg-Venetain rivalry along the Adriatic, see J. Vrandečić, Zadarski nadbiskup Minuccio Minucci i njegova jadranska misija [Zadar archbishop Minuccio Minucci and his Adriatic mission] (Zagreb: Leykam international, Split: Filozofski fakultet, 2017), 112–117. On the Uskoks problem, see in detail: Catherine Wendy Bracewell, The Uskoks of Senj: Piracy, Banditry, and Holy War in the Sixteenth-Century Adriatic (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992). 16 Mletačka uputstva i izvještaji / Commissiones et relationes Venetae, ed. G. Novak, vol. 5, 267. 28

Josip Vrandečić: Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648)

unlike the unfaithful Greeks, who should be tamed as wild beasts, the fidelity of the Dalmatians was guaranteed because of the Ottoman threat. In addition to Ottoman trade, the Uskoks targeted Christian commerce as well, both Venetian and papal. Since the Venetians pledged in a peace treaty signed in 1573 to guarantee the safety of Adriatic navigation, the Ottoman Porta threatened to enter the Adriatic with one of their fleets. Venice manned galleys against the Uskoks, who had no effect against the light vessels. To the Archbishop of Zadar Minuccio Minucci, who in 1601 published a book on the Uskoks, the fight resembled a ‘lion and mosquito’ conflict.17 The Venetian deputies achieved next to nothing in negotiation with the Uskoks’ masters, the Habsburg Emperor Rudolf in Prague and the Archduke Charles in Graz. During Lukačić’s stay in Italy, the conflict escalated into the Uskok War (1615–1618), also known as the War of Gradiška on the Soča river, that was fought by the two Adriatic and Christian forces. Yet, the everyday life on the Dalmatian frontier was marked by intense relations of local populations. According to rectors’ reports, the Ottoman subjects visited Dalmatian cities on a daily basis. In the hinterland of the communes, Islamization was taking root, and mosques for the tiny Muslim elite began to be built in Skradin, Sinj, Vrlika, Knin and Drniš. This Muslim population, which was geographically separated from the Bosnian core, had to be organised and protected by Ottoman authorities. Military crews were set up, new forts were built, and waqf, the charitable endowment of buildings or other assets, were bequeathed by the high elite to support Islam there. However, the process of corruption of the timar system affected the borderland too, since the elite were more interested in trading with the coastal cities than going to the Pannonian battlefield. Although Islam had spread among native communities, Christian sources referred to them as Turks, as Christians have done since the Crusades, identifying the entire Islamic world with the Seljuks Turks first and later with the Ottomans.18 There were also some Venetian-ruled subjects who fled across the border before the law and by accepting Islam they hoped for social promotion in the Ottoman state. The religious worlds were still open and both authorities sought to attract as many populations as possible. Since the outbreak of the Long War in 1593, local Muslims were aggravated by the war effort against the Habsburgs in Pannonia, and they sought refuge along the Venetian coast. Every day, dozens of Ottoman subjects traded there, visiting relatives and friends, taverns and churches, or simply loitering in the city streets. The synodical proceedings of the Zadar Archdiocese, issued in September 1598, stipulated that local Christians should meet Muslims on the condition that their behavior ‘does not offend God.’19 The relations often ran against the In Coena Domini papal bull proclaimed in 1363 to regulate the attitude of Christians towards non-Christians. The bull prohibited the supply of Saracens, Turks, and other enemies of Christianity with weapons, ammunition and war material, and this sin triggered ipso facto excommunication from which only the pope could absolve. The latest version of the bull was announced in Dalmatia in 1594, but due to misery it did not root out corruption. In the Ottoman area, the Christian faith was not forbidden, 17 J. Vrandečić, Zadarski nadbiskup Minuccio Minucci, 113. 18 J. Vrandečić, ‘Pogled zadarskog nadbiskupa Minuccija na islamski svijet u njegovome gradu’ [The View of

the Zadar Archbishop Minucci on the Islamic Word in His Town], Forum Bosnae 66/14 (2007), 185–200.

19 For more details on the Synod, see in J. Vrandečić, Zadarski nadbiskup Minuccio Minucci, 197–205; Alberto

Marani, Atti pastorali di Minuccio Minucci, arcivescovo di Zara (1596–1604) (Roma: Storia e Letteratura, 1970). 29

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

but it was superficially celebrated, barely understood, and eventually lost. Some of the Dalmatian bishops, especially Minucci of Zadar, lured Muslims, especially those who fled to the Venetian side, to return to the Christian faith of their ancestors.20 He encouraged both state and Church authorities to secure the livelihood of the new Christians in Italy or Istria, far away from Ottoman authorities who objected to their subjects’ conversion. The Ottomans brought grain, meat, cheese and wool to the coast, and took in return fabrics, jewelry, clothing and salt.21 By losing land in the hinterland, Dalmatian cities could not produce enough grain to feed themselves. The entire yield of the Šibenik area could meet their needs for only three months, so grain was imported from the Ottomans. This trade began in the early 16th century when the situation stabilized after the Ottoman conquest. In 1525, the Turkish customs officer in Šibenik, Emin Jafar Čelebija, concluded an agreement with the Venetians under which Ottoman subjects could buy salt in exchange for selling their own products. In this case, for each bucket of salt, seven akches of tax revenue went to the Venetians and six to the Ottomans. The Emin also pledged to deter all border attacks on Šibenik’s villages and castles. In Dalmatia, Šibenik had the strongest trade with the inland over the centuries, until the construction of the international port in Split in 1592 that linked Constantinople with Venice. The Šibenik trade was estimated at 50,000 ducats a year, and that of Split prior to 1592, only the half of that amount. According to Venetian sources, life in Šibenik was better and cheaper than in other areas in Dalmatia. The export of Ottoman grain to the coast eroded the timar system further and opened up a battle for market surpluses between peasants and feudal lords who wanted to trade with the coast. The pressure on the peasantry for grain was riddled with violence and corruption against their own and Venetian subjects. On September 24, 1639, the local Turks cut down part of Novigrad’s vineyards, to which the Venetian subjects returned them, with deaths on both sides.22 The Venetians responded by selling salt. The largest Adriatic salt pans were on the island of Pag, and much smaller ones were in Šibenik. Some were private and some stateowned, but all the salt had to be handed over to state warehouses. In 1553, the state paid 12 soldi per bucket and then sold it for 24 to Venetian subjects and 34 to the Ottomans. The amount of salt sold in Šibenik was worth around 15,000 ducats a year. Due to the competition with Split and Trogir in attracting Ottoman merchants, Šibenik was forced to lower the price to 30 soldi. When export to the Ottomans was banned during the Cyprus War, Venetian General Jacob Foscarini spoke about smuggling salt into the hinterland, which brought huge profits. Venice wanted to destroy the Dubrovnik monopoly on salt eastward from the delta of Neretva river to that of Drim in Albania. Dubrovnik sold more salt in Bosnia and Venetian subjects were granted the possibility to sell their goods at Neretva only after the Dubrovnik salt was sold. Communal and state revenues depended on trade with the Ottomans. During the time of peace, Dalmatia was a financially active province. Due to the salt production of Pag, 20 J. Vrandečić, Zadarski nadbiskup Minuccio Minucci, 159–161. 21 K. Juran, ‘Morlaci u Šibeniku’, 167. 22 J. Vrandečić, Borba za Jadran u ranom novom vijeku: Mletačko-osmanski ratovi u venecijanskoj nuncijaturi

[Battle for the Adriatic in early modern times: The Venetian-Osmanlic wars during the Venetian nunciature] (Split: Filozofski fakultet, 2013), 45; Mletačka uputstva i izvještaji / Commissiones et relationes Venetae, ed. G. Novak, vol. 5. 30

Josip Vrandečić: Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648)

the province contribute more than it received from Venice. In 1559, the state chambers received 31,220 ducats in local taxes and 70,000 ducats from the salt, while administrative and military expenses amounted to 54,925 ducats.23 Zadar’s revenues in 1587 came to 8,000 ducats, while the revenues of Šibenik made 4,249.24 In addition to regular spending, mostly on salaries, there were extraordinary expenses, especially giving money to Turkish officials that amounted to more than a thousand ducats a year. They protested with letters, always ready to attack the expectations of bribes. It was not enough to donate only to the sanjaks-beys, the highest provincial authorities, but it was also necessary to provide for the lower officials. In addition, Ottoman subjects went with their ships to buy directly in Venice, bypassing Šibenik, at the expense of city customs. Even the people of Šibenik sometimes went to Ottoman-ruled Skradin to buy there. In order to help Dalmatia, ravaged by its colonial policy and Ottoman conquests, Venice began to relinquish its merchant monopoly, which required that Dalmatian ships could only trade in Venice. At the end of the 15th century, more than 60% of the Split trade, based on local agricultural products, was still taking place with Venice.25 The annual average of the export licenses of Split and Šibenik was about 250 licenses each. Split was the leading exporter of livestock, dried meat and figs. In the second half of the 16th century, the local exports of Šibenik to Habsburg and Papal Adriatic ports exceeded exports to Venice. In 1576, the Šibenik office issued 242 licenses for non-Venetian destinations and only 40 for Venice.26 The aforementioned writer Juraj Baraković loved Šibenik because it is full of merry folk where ‘the merchant always makes good money.’ Due to scarcity, rising prices and looming war-threats, at the end of the 16th century Dalmatian cities began to establish grain warehouses (fondaco) for storing both cereals and money. In Šibenik, the fondaco was founded in 1597 with the help of a state donation of 2,000 salt buckets as start-up capital. It sold the much needed Ottoman grain at set prices and protected the poor from usurers. When Lukačić entered the monastery of the Conventual Friars of Šibenik in 1597, the Bishop Vicenzo Arrigoni, a Dominican born in Brescia, exercised spiritual authority in the city. Like everywhere in Dalmatia, there were a large number of priests in the Diocese, but they were poor, and had modest theological knowledge, because no Dalmatian diocese had a seminary where they could be educated. Very rarely did they go to the Illyrian Institute of Saint Jerome in Rome or to the Jesuit seminary in Loreto near Ancona. The rector of Šibenik, Almoro Cornero, stated for Bishop Arrigoni that he was a poor but honorable prelate, that he was loyal to the government and that he never quarreled with the rectors of the commune over the competencies as other bishops did. From this part of Cornero’s report, there was a feeling of tension between Venice and the Church that grew after the Council of Trent. The Venetian authorities gladly accepted the dogmatic resolutions of the Council, but not their disciplinary ones, because they wanted to control their clergy. Small wonder, that four years after the occupation of Zadar 23 J. Vrandečić, M. Bertoša, Dalmacija, Dubrovnik i Istra u ranom novom vijeku, 28. 24 Mletačka uputstva i izvještaji / Commissiones et relationes Venetae, ed. G. Novak, vol. 4, (Zagreb: JAZU,

1964), 393–394.

25 J. Vrandečić, M. Bertoša, Dalmacija, Dubrovnik i Istra u ranom novom vijeku, 52. 26 On Šibenik’s export licenses and trade in general, see Josip Kolanović, Šibenik u kasnome srednjem vijeku

[Šibenik in the Late Medieval Age] (Zagreb: Školska knjiga, 1995). 31

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

in 1409, the Senate, by its decision of August 31, 1413, ordered that all bishops in Dalmatia could only be Venetian subjects.27 Relations between Venice and the Holy See were burdened with questions over church appointments and land property, the administration of dioceses and the actions of the Jesuits and the Inquisition. The Venetians considered the popes allies of the Habsburgs, and interpreted the Trident disciplinary as means of imposing political and spiritual control of both Madrid and Rome over Venice. After the Council, Venice resisted to an even greater extent the rising spiritual and political strength of the popes in Italy. The governing anti-Habsburg ‘Young party’ in the Senate, regarded the Council’s cannon as a novelty in the traditional fabric of Christian life. Ivan Lukačić, who went to Venice in 1600, witnessed this conflict firsthand. With the death of Pope Clement VIII in 1605, and with the arrival of Paul V, there was an open conflict between the Church and the state. The diplomatic quarrel and confrontation was triggered by a question of authority over the two clerics accused of committing murder at Terraferma. When the new Pope laid the Interdict in 1606, forbidding Mass and any sacrament service, the Doge Leonardo Donà banned its publication in the Venetian state, threatening death to those who obeyed Rome. State rights were persistently defended by the aforementioned priest Sarpi, who, in the heat of the dispute in 1616, in London printed the history of the Council of Trident written from an anti-Roman perspective. Despite the conflict, in Italy Lukačić, both in Rome and Venice, absorbed the freshness of the Baroque, in which Catholic reform found its dazzling artistic expression. Council reform was promoted by a generation of Church giants such as Carlo Borromeo, Roberto Bellarmino, Cesare Baronius and Filippo Neri, who, with the help of countless clerics and laity, restored the visible face of the Church. It unleashed the great spiritual powers that produced great works of art. Upon his return from Italy in Dalmatia, in 1616, Lukačić found a more peaceful province due to the remove of the Uskoks from the Adriatic. With the peace provisions of Madrid in 1617, which ended the War for Gradiška, they were moved from Senj to the interior. Since 1601, the General Providers, the highest Venetian authorities in Dalmatia, were sent in Zadar to spend three years in residence at the head of the Dalmatian military, civilian and judicial administration. At the local level, the central government, through the rectors, continued to control the Dalmatian communes. Venice added new operative provisions to the old Dalmatian statutes. As the nobility was biologically weakened, Venice relied more on popular assemblies than on noble councils for solving communal problems.28 The biggest change was witnessed by Lukačić in Split. The scars of the Klis episode that took place in 1596 were still alive in the city which zealously supported the Uskoks’ action. After the Ottomans returned the fort to their own hands, there was a retaliation of the Venetian authorities towards the Dalmatian legitimists. In addition, in 1607 Split experienced one of its greatest blows in history. As a consequence of international trade, a plague of epidemics entered the city via Sarajevo and from March to August killed more than a 27 Zvjezdan Strika, ‘“Catalogus episcoporum et archiepiscoporum urbis Jadertinae” arhiđakona Valerija Pon-

tea’ [‘Catalogus episcoporum et archiepiscoporum urbis Jadertinae’ of the Archidiaconus Valerio Ponte], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 48 (2006), 81–185: 167. On the conflict between Venice and the Church, see Jaska Kainulainen, Paolo Sarpi: A Servant of God and State (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014). 28 On Venetian reform efforts in Dalmatia, see I. Pederin, Mletačka uprava [The Venetian government]. 32

Josip Vrandečić: Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648)

thousand people. When Lukačić came to Split in 1620, the city had only 3400 inhabitants, a thousand fewer than in 1606.29 In Split Lukačić found a disturbed spiritual atmosphere caused by the exile of its former Archbishop Mark Antonio de Dominis to protestant England. With Rome’s approval, de Dominis left the chair of the Archdiocese in 1616 and then secretly fled to London in the same year.30 King James I welcomed him with open arms, in a sensitive time of religious tension ahead of the Thirty Years’ War, which would soon burst into Bohemia. The following year, he published in London the first volume of his capital work De republica ecclesiastica, which, because of his criticism of the Catholic Church, set off a real storm in Europe. When de Dominis decided to return to the Mother Church in 1622, his carriage from London to Dover was stoned. De Dominis’s unfortunate shadow high loomed over Split, in which the Holy Office in charge of heretics, in 1619, started legal proceedings against local tradesman Antonio Capogrosso, de Dominis’s friend. The process was conducted simultaneously in Venice and Split and, like all of them, was carried out thoroughly, involving numerous citizens of Split as witnesses.31 Twenty months after the initiation of the proceedings, in 1620 Capogrosso died in Venice and the litigation was closed without judgment. De Dominis’s fate and Capogrosso’s process outlined the spiritual efforts of the Archbishop’s successor, Sforza Ponzoni, a native of Venice and de Dominis’s nephew. He personally led the trial against Capogrosso, which was not easy for him. But despite the shadow of his great predecessor and uncle, Ponzoni actively encouraged council reform in Split. An important aspect of the reform was the promotion of Baroque art. Ivan Lukačić, the famous organist of his cathedral, and the Archbishop’s brother painter Matej Ponzoni, who painted five paintings in Split’s cathedral and others in Dalmatia, are the most significant representatives of the Baroque momentum in the Archdiocese.32 Dalmatian post-council bishops wanted their churches to sparkle with new reform fervor. In the case of Split, its history required it. In relation to Šibenik, Split represented a smaller urban area in terms of both population and territory. The closeness of the Ottomans was felt more immediately. After the Cyprus War, Split remained without the fortresses of Solin and Kamen, both located beyond the city’s walls. Yet, despite its losses, Split enjoyed a symbol of past greatness which exceeded its actual conditions. It was founded by Roman Emperor Diocletian. More significantly, the Archdiocese of Split, unlike other Dalmatian cities, had an indigenous saint — Saint Doimus, who was then believed to have been a disciple of Saint Peter. Thanks to this, Split, had already in the 10th century reaffirmed its preeminence over all Dalmatian dioceses. Until 1592, the economy of Split had been suffering due to its dwindling population and territory. Yet, the old noble entrepreneurial elite of Split had been restored by the arrival of several influential Apennine families which had left a strong economic and cultural mark on the town’s history. On the eve of the Venetian occupation, from central Italy, there came the families of Augubio and Cambi 29 On the plague in Split, see G. Novak, Povijest Splita [The History of Split], vol. 2 (Split: MH, 1961), 115–117. 30 On de Dominis, see Robert Holjevac, Markantun de Dominis (1560.–1624.): život i djelovanje u povijesnom

i teološkkom kontekstu (doctoral dissertation, Zagreb: Filozofski fakultet, 2010); cf. also Marcus Antonius de Dominis, A Manifestation of the Motives, ed. Vesna Tudjina-Gamulin (Zagreb: Croatian P.E.N. Centre, 1997). 31 More on the process in G. Novak, Povijest Splita [The History of Split], vol. 2, 121–137. 32 G. Novak, Povijest Splita [The History of Split], vol. 2, 410. 33

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

who engaged in trade and banking. The 16th century witnessed the rise of the Capogrosso family whose members bought real estate using the fall of prices during the Cyprus War. After the war, they came out as owners of 20 houses and outlets in Split, Trogir, Omiš and the island of Šolta. From the will of Jacob Capogrosso, written in 1594, it is evident that the family owned 141 pieces of real estate in Dalmatia. The value of their agricultural land scattered from Split to Šibenik was estimated at 50,000 ducats. The international trading port, known as scala, connected Venice to the entire Ottoman Empire. The port was created for political reasons. The strengthening of the Austrian and Spanish Habsburgs in the Adriatic at the end of the 16th century led to a rapprochement between Venice and the Ottomans. Venice sought to increase Split’s trade at the expense of the Habsburg ports in the north of the Adriatic, namely in Trieste, Rijeka and Senj, as well as in Dubrovnik in the south. Split’s project was initiated by the Jewish community in Constantinople which held the main threads of the Ottoman trade. Before the Cyprus War the merchant of Constantinople Joseph Nasi linked the Ottoman Empire to Europe through Dubrovnik and the papal port of Ancona. Nasi was an anti-Venetian and was an advocate of the Ottoman attack on Cyprus. After the war, and the death of Nasi and the belligerent Sultan Selim II, the relations between Venice and the Sublime Porte improved. An offer from a Jewish merchant residing in Split, Daniel Rodrigo, in 1578, to establish an international port, reflected the rapprochement.33 The Rector of Split, Alvise Loredan, then opposed Rodrigo’s initiative because he believed that the scala would provoke Ottoman attacks on the city. When the anti-Habsburg party of young senators prevailed in the Senate in the early 1580s, it opened the door for Rodrigo’s idea. The project was also aided by the Habsburg proposal in 1584 which suggested to Venice to give up its own sale of spices and in return to buy them at a modest price in Sevilla. The Senate rejected the offer and erected the lazzaretti in Split. After 1592 two commercial galleys from Venice came to Split, usually six times a year. Entrepreneurs who would lease galleys for about 20,000 ducats, after paying the crew, would earn 12,000 ducats. The annual state revenue of lazzaretti was 200,000 ducats and the cost of maintenance was only 4,000. Impressed by the rise of trade and profits, the Rector of Split, Marino Garzoni, declared in Venice in 1619 that the scale was ‘most precious.’34 After the establishment of Split trade, a community of Jews and Armenians engaged in international trade settled in the city. This commerce also attracted the Kavanjin family from the Garda Lake in northern Italy, who settled in Split between 1600 and 1605. In 1618, Marko Kavanjin founded, with two locals, a trading company engaged in trading the products of the Archdiocese of Split. Marko’s letters from 1605 to his death in 1660 reveal his extensive trade links with Sarajevo, Belgrade, Buda, Venice and Dubrovnik.35 The local population of Split did not play a significant role in this trade but benefited 33

On the international port in Split, see G. Novak, Povijest Splita [The History of Split], vol. 2, 138–147; and Mauro Bondioli, Maringela Nicolardi, Irena Radić Rossi, ‘Alvise Papali “conduttor” della galea da mercanzia per la scala di Spalato (1592–1596)’, in Pomorski Split do početka XX. stoljeća [Maritime Split until the Beginning of the 20th Century], (Split: Književni krug, 2019), 193–212. 34 G. Novak, Povijest Splita [The History of Split], vol. 2, 143. 35 Ćiro Čičin Šain, ‘Pisma Marka Kavanjina splitskog trgovca iz prve polovine XVII. stoljeća’ [Letters by Marko Kavanjin, Split merchant from the first half of the 17th century], Starine 49 (1959), 105–226. 34

Josip Vrandečić: Dalmatia in the time of Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648)

from the rise of the city. A Venetian report from 1590 points out already that the mainland trade from Split was so extensive that traders from India and Persia arrived in the port. It was added that Split represented the ‘golden ring’ of the meeting between East and West. The recovery of Dalmatia after the Cyprus War was offset by the next, the Fifth Ottoman-Venetian conflict, known as the Cretan War. Venetian trade with the East and post-Cyprus neutrality policy did not extinguish the potential for a clash. The Ottomans took advantage of the Christian powers engagements in the Thirty Years’ War to eliminate Venice from the Eastern Mediterranean.36 The war was triggered by the Knights of Malta, who at the end of September 1644 seized an Ottoman convoy sailing from Constantinople to Alexandria. The Knights then temporarily landed on Crete, which served Porta as a casus belli to discharge Venice from the island. All Dalmatian cities, except Zadar, entered the war with unprepared walls. The Archbishop of Split, Leonardo Bondumerius, who succeeded Ponzoni in 1641, retreated to his native Venice in fear, terrified by the dilapidated walls and the words of the citizens, who, as he stated, ‘would not dare speak at other times.’37 In July of 1646, the citizens in Šibenik and Split resisted attempts by the authorities to remove heavy cannons from the walls and replace them with lighter artillery. The Venetian war headquarters were set up in Split. It was headed by General Providores Leonardo Foscolo and Nicolo Dolfin, and it also included German Field Commander Christopher Martin Degenfeld, who would stand out in 1647 in the defense of Šibenik. Venetian politics still hoped that by avoiding provocations it would at least spare Dalmatia. In the summer of 1646, Ottoman commander Ibrahim Pasha, with 40,000 troops, wreaked havoc in the Zadar area. The Ottoman authorities launched a large-scale attack on Zadar and its area during which they occupied Novigrad and invaded Biograd.38 Zadar resisted because it possessed modern fortifications which could not have been threatened without an Ottoman siege fleet. The Venetians destroyed their own town of Nin so that the Turks would not use it as a stronghold which was near the precious salt pans in Pag. When the Venetians resisted the first blow, in August of the same year they organized a sudden strike on the fortress of Zadvarje in central Dalmatia, overlooking the Cetina river, which protected the entrance to the Makarska region. After the fortress was successfully conquered, the entire Makarska coast came under Venetian rule. In February of the next year, Providor Foscolo made use of snow-covered roads in Bosnia and suddenly attacked Ravni Kotari in the Zadar inland. From February to May, he conquered all the Ottoman strongholds there as well as Skradin near Šibenik. The towns were demolished and set on fire and their Muslim populations expelled, sold into slavery or nailed to the galleys. As they suffered a major blow in Dalmatia, in August 1647 the Ottomans, led by Mehmed Pasha Tekeli, attacked Šibenik with its 40,000 people. The main struggles were fought for the fortress of St. John, above the city, which the inhabitants themselves hastily built after the news of the beginning of the war. At the same time, the people of Split began to build 36 J. Vrandečić, Borba za Jadran [Battle for the Adriatic], 47. On the Veneatian-Ottoman wars, including the

Candian war, see in details: Tea Mayhew, Dalmatia between Ottoman and Venetian Rule: Contado di Zara, 1645–1718 (Rome: Viella, 2008). 37 J. Vrandečić, Borba za Jadran [Battle for the Adriatic], 52. 38 For details on military operations during the War of Candia, see Franjo Difnik, Povijest Kandijskog rata u Dalmaciji [The History of the Candian War in Dalmatia] (Split: Književni krug, 1986). 35

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

the fortress Gripe above the city, which would preserve Split during the Ottoman conquest of 1657. The heroic month-long defense of Šibenik was made up of Venetian mercenaries as well as the local population and Christian refugees who, under their chiefs, such as Vuk Mandušić and Stipan Sorić, had switched sides and contributed to the Venetian efforts. Shortly before his death on September 20, 1648, Lukačić witnessed the victorious liberation of Klis Fortress led by Providor Foscolo. The takeover was preceded by Foscolo’s conquest of Drniš, Knin and Vrlika, which tightened the rope around the remaining Ottoman forces in Dalmatia, who retreated to Sinj and Klis. Lukačić probably heard from Split the thunder of cannons that started bombing Klis in mid-March. What followed wasa bloody battle over the three walls that guarded the fort. The defenders surrendered on March 31, followed by a grand celebration across the Venetian Republic. Lukačić died almost certainly convinced of a full Christian victory in Dalmatia. It did not materialize at that time. After the war in 1669, in which Venice lost Crete, in Dalmatia it only gained Klis. However, the Venetian initiative would continue during the First and Second Morean Wars. They lasted with a small interruption from 1684 to 1718. Venice won this time in Dalmatia thanks to the implementation of a military revolution, the superiority of the Western economic system and, above all, the participation of the local population who wanted to overthrow the Ottoman rule. After the two wars Venetian rule expanded deeper inland up to the mountain range of Dinara and Kamešnica.

Fig. 1b. The map of Central European lands: Il regno d’Ungaria, Transilvania, Schiavonia, Bosnia, Croatia, Dalmatia (Roma: Giac. Rossi, 1683), Zagreb, National and University Library, S-JZ-XVII-17. 36

Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past Lovorka Čoralić Croatian Institute for the History, Zagreb, Croatia

Introduction References to the historical relations of Croatia and Venice are as old as the very existence of the two trans-Adriatic nations. From the early medieval period and the first reliable written sources to the daily electronic communication of the modern age, the exchange of people, thoughts and ideas between the two neighbouring coasts has endured and developed. Their both partaking in the Mediterranean and Adriatic clime, the centuries-long parallel common development of the state, economic familiarity, a single religious and civilization circle, a similar everyday life, similar needs and habits, these are just the most important, well known and deep-seated factors that have determined the millennial interweaving of eastern and western Adriatic. Studying the history of the Croatian Adriatic coast, then, beyond any doubt involves familiarity with and the assessment of Venetian presence, contributions and positive impulses to development. On the other hand, no less worthy of note are the known Croatian influences and concrete contributions to the history of the Serenissima and its capital. This paper will speak precisely of this, endeavouring on the basis of studies to date of original records in the archives in Venice to present the fundamental features of Croatian migration, presence and activity in Venice during the ‘long duration’ of their common historical development. It is also a contribution to the wider contextualisation (the historical framework and circumstances) of the life and activity of the accomplished Croatian musician Ivan Lukačić, directly connected by the creation and publication of his works with the city on the lagoons.1 1

The author of this article has written a number of papers and books about the Croatian community in Venice. Cf. Lovorka Čoralić, Hrvatska / Italija. Stoljetne veze: povijest, književnost i likovne umjetnosti / Croazia / Italia. I rapporti nei secoli: storia, letteratura, arti figurative (Edizione bilingue), ed. Natka Badurina, in Most / The Bridge. A Journal of Croatian Literature (Zagreb: Društvo hrvatskih književnika, 1997), chapter: ‘Povijest’ [History], 9–88; in Croatian with a version in Italian: ‘Storia’, 245–332; bibliography: 503–508); L. Čoralić, U gradu svetoga Marka: Povijest hrvatske zajednice u Mlecima [In the City of St Mark: the History of the Croatian Community in Venice] (Zagreb: Golden Marketing, 2001); L. Čoralić, Hrvatski prinosi mletačkoj kulturi: Odabrane teme [Croatian Contributions to Venetian Culture: Selected Topics] (Zagreb: Dom i svijet, 2003); L. Čoralić, ‘Croatian Migrations in the Italian Coastal Area in the Late Middle Ages and at the Beginning of the Early Modern Age’, Études Balkaniques 46/1–2 (2010), 223–248; cf. also L. Čoralić, Maja Katušić, ‘Migrations and permeations between two shores of the Adriatic: The Examples of Zadar, Kotor and Venice (17th and 18th Century)’, in Music Migrations in the Early Modern Age: People, Markets, Patterns, Styles, ed. Vjera Katalinić (Zagreb: Hrvatsko muzikološko društvo, 2016), 33–47; L. Čoralić, ‘Sulla scia delle prime testimonianze delle migrazioni croate a Venezia (dall’XI all’inizio del XV secolo)’, Review of Croatian History 13 (2017), 7–27. In these works, there is a detailed list of additional 37

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

The intensity of Croatian emigrations over the centuries The presence of Croatian immigrants in Venice can be divided into several phases with respect to the intensity of immigration and the frequency of their being mentioned in the sources of the place. In the period up to the 15th century, there was little immigration, and the notarial records tell of just the occasional immigrant of Croatian origin. At the beginning of the 15th century, the process of emigration suddenly strengthened, reaching a peak in the second half of the same century, this dynamic being retained in the first half of the 16th century. The reasons for this sudden immigration to Venice of immigrants from other parts of Europe, previously unrecorded, should be primarily sought in the increasingly complex political situation in south-east Europe. When Bosnia fell in 1463, the way was open for the Ottomans to penetrate deep into Croatia and the hinterland of Dalmatia. From the second half of the 15th century ever more disastrous inroads of the Ottomans were observed in the area of the Venetian possessions in Dalmatia. The fall of numerous forts in the hinterland in the first half of the 15th century meant that the cities of Dalmatia were directly menaced, and their territory was reduced to a narrow coastal and island zone, the conditions for trade and communications with the inland area being much impeded. A slow process of economic backwardness started in the coastal cities, and numerous inhabitants, under pressure from the constant danger of the war and the threats to their very existence determined to set off across the Adriatic and see better living conditions in a new setting, particularly in Venice. Some went off temporarily, carrying out the various entrepreneurial activities (seafaring, commerce), mostly alone without families and commonly returned to their homeland. The majority of the newcomers, especially those who were not very well off, remained in the city on the lagoons for good. There they founded new families, would find steady employment and in the course of time made themselves completely at home in the quotidian of the new setting. The intensity of emigration grew in parallel with the ever more exacerbated situation at home, and hence in the period of the strongest Ottoman pushes deep into the heart of Croatian space, trans-Adriatic emigration reached its highest level. At the end of the 16th century, this intensity gradually slackened, a marked drop continuing in the following decades, and in fact right down to the end of the Venetian Republic. In this period the wars gradually waned, the general political situation calmed and new opportunities for economic development arose. In the 18th century, then, the emigration of inhabitants of lower social status declined, while at the same time there was a heightened presence of members of prosperous middle-class families, which flourished economically through their ever more ramified business connections with the cities of Italy, above all with Venice.2

2

bibliographic units, some of which relate to the contributions of the Croatian artists of the early Modern Age, to both Venetian culture and the two-way cultural and artistic communication between two Adriatic coasts. In the first book mentioned, Croatian musicians in Venice are referred to on pp. 327–329. Also compare some major works of historiography that deal with foreign ethnic groups in Venice, and thus also with the Croatian or Schiavonian community. Brunehilde Imhaus, Le minoranze orientali a Venezia 1300–1510 (Roma: Il Veltro Editrice, 1997); Andrea Zannini, Venezia città aperta: Gli stranieri e la Serenissima XIV–XVIII secc. (Venezia: Marcianum Press, 2009); Ermanno Orlando, Migrazioni mediterranee: Migranti, minoranze e matrimoni a Venezia nel basso medioevo (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2014). L. Čoralić, U gradu svetoga Marka [In the City of St Mark], 75–83. 38

Lovorka Čoralić: Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past

One of the characteristics of the demographic development of Croatian immigrants in Venice is that they were relatively rapidly assimilated. It is a fact that groups of emigrants, however frequent and numerous they were, as early as the third or further in the fourth generation lost any awareness of their descent from Croats and became completely Venetian. This rapid assimilation was assisted by the similarity of the Venetian milieu with their own mother country, the big-city characteristics of the city on the lagoons, the very same (Catholic) religious ethos and some other factors favourable to assimilation (knowledge of the Venetian dialect, belonging to the same state community, being mixed with other ethnic groups and so on). It is worth mentioning that awareness of belonging to one’s own ethnic (or home country) group was more marked in the descendants of those groups of immigrants who arrived in Venice in the period of the most intensive migrations to the western coast of the Adriatic. Their very numerousness — which marked them even among immigrants of other ethnic groups — brought them more closely together, and it was ipso facto possible for consciousness of one’s descent to be handed down and preserved in the first of the generations to come. In a later period, when the wave of immigrants declined, the homogeneity of the emigration was enfeebled, and the process of assimilation was much faster than in the preceding period. The origins of the immigrants While analysing the structure of Croatian immigrants in terms of the particular region they belonged to, it is necessary to remark that it is impossible to ascertain in any detail the place from which some of them came. For quite a large number of the immigrants, general names were used, mostly drawing on the geographical definition of Schiavonia (de Schiavonia, de Sclavonia, Sclavone, Schiavone, Schiavon), which indicated that they came from the hinterland of the eastern Adriatic coast.3 Similarly, immigrants from Istria, Dalmatia and Bosnia were labelled de Dalmazia, Dalmata, Dalmatinus or else de Istria, Istriano, Istrianus and there were also the terms Bossina, Bossniaco and so on. An analysis of the origins of the incomers in terms of concrete provincial units of that time (the period from the 15th to the 18th century) shows that most of them arrived from the Venetian acquisitions on the eastern Adriatic coast (the provinces of Istria, Dalmatia and Albania).4 Only a few came from Venetian Istria5 — the northernmost trans-Adriatic 3

4 5

As well as the term Schiavonia also to be found to define the origins of Croatian immigrants is the term Morlachia, which probably relates to the hinterland of the Dalmatian cities. A close synonym for these terms is Illyricum, although this concept can refer to a much wider territorial unit than those preceding it. About 6.8% of all Croats settled in Venice came from Schiavonia. The concept Schiavon/e might refer to immigrants from the cities, and this name is used for numerous visual and musical artists. Since for the Venetians Schiavoni labelled immigrants from the Croatian ethnic area, for the present purpose we have decided to call them all Croats. Information from the catalogue or, as it were, advertisement that that was kept by the Venetian printer and bookseller Bartolomeo Occhi tells us of this: in the pamphlet, it is said specifically that Riva degli Schiavoni refers to Riva od Harvatou. Cf. L. Čoralić, Venecija. Kraljica mora s lagunarnih sprudova: Povijest Mletačke Republike [Venice. Queen of the Sea from Lagoon Shoals: The History of the Venetian Republic] (Samobor: Meridijani, 2004), 131. For general information about the origins of emigrants from the eastern coast of the Adriatic, cf: L. Čoralić, U gradu svetoga Marka [In the City of St Mark], 84–100. Venetian Istria is the term for the Venetian possessions in Istria from 1420 to 1797. It covered the most part 39

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

territory that was part of the Serenissima — about two per cent of all the immigrants being considered here. Most of them were from Pula, Poreč, Umag and Buzet, while other Istrian cities were mentioned to a lesser extent (Rovinj, Labin, Momjan and Vižinada).6 Many more immigrants arrived from the largest Venetian possession, Dalmatia (46%). In the lead here was Zadar, the capital of the province and the leading economic centre,7 which was followed with far fewer emigrants by the other large Dalmatian centres (Split, Šibenik, Trogir, Omiš, Makarska) and the islands (Rab, Pag, Hvar, Brač, Korčula, Vis). Other Dalmatian cities (and smaller regions) are mentioned only with respect to some individual example (Vrana, Novigrad Zadarski, Klis, Kaštela, Omiš, Makarska littoral, Obrovac, Osor, Poljica, Skradin and elsewhere).8 The division of immigrants from the cities of Venetian Albania9 shows similar proportions (31% of total immigrants). From the main city of the province, Kotor, the most emigrants in the total ratio of all the cities of the eastern Adriatic coast was recorded. Quite a lot of emigrants (though fewer than from Kotor) derived from Prčanj, Perast, Dobrota, Risan, Bar, Budva, Herceg Novi and the autonomous commune of Paštrovići.10 of the peninsula, apart from a minor central part (the Duchy of Pazin). This research does not take in the cities of Venetian Istria that are today part of the Republic of Slovenia (Kopar, Piran, Izola). Cf. L. Čoralić, U gradu svetoga Marka [In the City of St Mark], 87, 443. 6 Cf., for example, L. Čoralić, ‘Istrani u Mlecima, XV–XVIII st.’ [Istrians in Venice, 15th to 18th c.], Vjesnik Istarskog arhiva 4–5 (1994–1995), 15–30. 7 L. Čoralić, ‘Zadrani u Veneciji od XIV. do xviii. stoljeća’ [Zadar People in Venice from the 14th to the 18th century], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 35 (1993), 63–119. 8 See for example some of these papers: L. Čoralić, ‘Trogirani u Veneciji od XIV. do XVIII. stoljeća’ [Trogir People in Venice from the 14th to the 18th c.], Vartal. Časopis za kulturu III/1–2 (1994), 51–90; L. Čoralić, ‘Splićani u Veneciji od XIV. do XVIII. stoljeća’ [Split People in Venice from the 14th to the 18th century], in Zbornik radova posvećenih sedamdesetogodišnjici života Danice Božić-Bužančić [A Miscellany of Papers dedicated to the Seventieth Birthday of Danica Božić-Bužančić], ed. Nataša Bajić-Žarko, Građa i prilozi za povijest Dalmacije 12 (1996), 109–156; L. Čoralić, ‘Hvarani u Mlecima (XV.–XVIII. stoljeće)’ [Hvar People in Venice (15th to 18th century], Rasprave iz hrvatske kulturne prošlosti 2 (2002), 211–282; L. Čoralić, Šibenčani u Mlecima [Šibenik People in Venice] (Šibenik: Juraj Šižgorić, 2003); L. Čoralić, ‘Rabljani u Mlecima (od srednjega vijeka do kraja 18. stoljeća)’ [Rab People in Venice (from the Middle Ages to the end of the 18th c.], in Rapski zbornik II. [A Rab Miscellany], eds. Josip Andrić, Robert Lončarić (Rab: MH, 2012), 43–55. 9 Venetian Albania (Albania Veneta) refers to acquisitions of Venice in the far south of the eastern Adriatic coast. It covered Boka Kotorska, with its cities (apart from Herceg Novi and Risan, which it won in the Morean War), the area of Budva, Paštrović, Bar, Ulcinj and the present-day Albanian coastline with the cities of Shkoder and Lezhe. The Venetians lost the area from Bar to the end of the Albanian littoral (and never regained it) from the end of the 15th to the end of the 16th century. 10 Cf., for example, L. Čoralić, ‘Iz prošlosti Paštrovića’ [From the past of Paštrovići], Historijski zbornik 49 (1996), 137–159; L. Čoralić, ‘Iz prošlosti Prčanja u XVII. st. (admiral Bokeljske mornarice – Tripun Luković)’ [From the Past of Prčanj in the 17th century (admiral of the Boka Marine – Tripun Luković], in Spomenica Ljube Bobana 1933.–1994. [Festschift for Ljubo Boban 1933–1994], eds. Ivo Goldstein, Mira Kolar-Dimitrijević, Marijan Maticka (Zagreb: Zavod za hrvatsku povijest Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, 1996), 95–103; L. Čoralić, ‘Iseljenici iz grada Kotora u Mlecima (XV.–XVIII. st.)’ [Emigrants from the city of Kotor in Venice (15th to 18th c.)], Povijesni prilozi 17/17 (1998), 133–155; L. Čoralić, ‘Peraštani u Mlecima (15.–18. stoljeće)’ [People from Perast in Venice (15th to 18th c.], in Stjepanu Antoljaku u čast (zbornik) [A Miscealany in honour of Stjepan Antoljak], ed. Josip Kolanović (Zagreb: Hrvatski državni arhiv, 2003), 199–210; L. Čoralić, Barani u Mlecima. Povijest jedne hrvatske iseljeničke zajednice [Bar people in Venice. History of a Croatian émigré community] (Zagreb: Dom i svijet i Hrvatsko građansko društvo Crne Gore, 2006); L. Čoralić, ‘Letters and Communications of the Rectors of Budva, Bar and Ulcinj as a Source for the Diplomatic and Political History of Venetian Albania in the Sixteenth Century’, Études Balkaniques 45/3 (2009), 89–108. 40

Lovorka Čoralić: Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past

Over the centuries, there were a lot of emigrants from the area of the independent Dubrovnik Republic in Venice, on either a permanent or a temporary basis (about 7%). Most of them were from Dubrovnik city, but there were some from other parts of the Republic (Ston, Pelješac, Župa Dubrovačka, the Elaphite Islands and so on).11 The spatial range of the area that covered all the immigrants to Venice from the Kingdom of Croatia and Slavonia (about 6% of the total number of immigrants) is fairly large and covers several regional units (Slavonia, Zagreb and surrounds, Lika and Krbava, the northern coast, part of the Dalmatian hinterland and today’s Bosnia). There were the most from the northern coastal towns of Senj and Rijeka, the Frankopan possession of Modruš and from Zagreb (and immediate surroundings) as well as Požega.12 Finally, from the area of the Kingdom of Bosnia of that time just a small number of newcomers were recorded, marked according to the cities from which they came. Expressly mentioned a little more was Krupa, while single examples are noted from the settlements of Jajce, Kreševo and Sana.13 Occupations The professions of the Croats in Venice were primarily oriented to activities that were traditional in their home regions.14 Numerous immigrants found good jobs in the shipyards of the state arsenal, where there was always a need for skilled carpenters, shipwrights, joiners, and those who made sails, oars and maritime equipment. Also in demand were skilled sailors — ordinary seamen, rowers, helmsmen and captains. Some of the mariners did not join the navy but set up their own shipping business. They had small vessels, boats and gondolas, with which they had a share in the carriage of goods and passengers along the canals and lagoons. Some of them got into privately owned shipyards, worked for independent shipwrights, and after some time would open their own workshops for the maintenance and building of ships. In addition to this numerically rather large group of sailors, numerous captains, owners and masters of ships lived in Venice, which was for most of 11

Ilija Mitić, ‘Prilog proučavanju odnosa Dubrovnika i Venecije u XVII i XVIII stoljeću’ [Contribution to the study of Dubrovnik – Venetian relations in the 17th and 18th century], Anali Historijskog instituta JAZU u Dubrovniku 13–14 (1976), 117–141; Bariša Krekić, ‘Mlečani u Dubrovniku i Dubrovčani u Mlecima kao vlasnici nekretnina u XIV. stoljeću’ [Venetians in Dubrovnik and Dubrovnik People in Venice as Owners of Real Properties in the 14th century], Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Dubrovniku 28 (1990), 7–40; L. Čoralić, ‘Dubrovčani u Veneciji od XIII. do XVIII. stoljeća’ [Dubrovnik people in Venice from the 13th to the 18th century], Dubrovnik Annals 32 (1994), 15–57; L. Čoralić, ‘The Ragusans in Venice from the Thirteenth to the Eighteenth Century’, Dubrovnik Annals 3 (1999), 13–40. 12 Cf., for example, L. Čoralić, ‘Doseljenici iz Požege u Veneciji u XV. i XVI. stoljeću’ [Immigrants from Požega in Venice in the 15th and 16th centuries], Osječki zbornik 21 (1991), 87–98; L. Čoralić, ‘Senjani u Veneciji od 15. do 18. stoljeća’ [Senj People in Venice from the 15th to the 18th c.], Senjski zbornik 20 (1993), 79–102; L. Čoralić, ‘Zagrepčani u Veneciji u XV. i XVI. stoljeću’ [Zagreb People in Venice in the 15th and 16th century], Iz starog i novog Zagreba 7 (1996), 19–34. 13 Immigrants from Bosnia accounted for not more than about 1.5% of all Croatian immigrants in Venice. Cf: L. Čoralić, ‘Prilozi poznavanju prisutnosti i djelovanja doseljenika iz Bosne u Veneciji od XIV. do XVII. stoljeća’ [Contributions to knowledge on the presence and activity of immigrants from Bosnia in Venice from the 14th to the 17th century], Historijski zbornik 46/1 (1993), 31–60. 14 For more detailed information about the occupations of Croats in Venice: L. Čoralić, U gradu svetoga Marka [In the City of St Mark], 122–170. 41

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

them not their permanent residence.15 Venice was also visited by numerous merchants (mainly from Boka Kotorska and Dubrovnik), who transported and sold farm products and livestock from the Dalmatian hinterland and the countries of the Balkans. They were economically the wealthiest class, and their generous deeds of gift to the Croatian confraternity in Venice tells of the constant maintenance of their homeland identity of the trans-Adriatic emigrant groups. Particularly distinguished were the Croatian ship owners and traders from Boka, the prominent maritime families of which (Dabinović, Florio, Đurović, Ivanović, Kamenarović, Lazzari, Luković, Marović, Radimiri, Tripković, Verona, Zbutega and others) kept up for generations the mercantile and cultural links between the cities of the eastern and the western Adriatic coast.16 Numerous emigrants dealt with various trades (shoemakers, tailors, dyers, weavers, spinners, cloth workers, rope makers, furriers, chest makers, bakers, barbers, cooks, candle makers, armourers and so on) and petty retailers (second-hand goods dealers, small shopkeepers). These activities were commonly labour intensive and brought small earnings, and those who performed them belonged to the middling and lower classes of commoner. Most of the emigrants from Croatia belonged to this, the most numerous immigrant population of Venice. Finally, it should be remarked that the Croats in Venice were often engaged in spiritual matters, as parish priests and chaplains in some of the parishes, people in the monastic orders), as well as soldiers in the land units of the Venetian stato da mar. Of course, there were also artists who visited the city on the lagoons only temporarily. Places of residence An important factor in keeping Croatian immigrants together was their place of residence. In the Venetian sources, the parts of the city are indicated by the name of the area (the sestiere) and by the parishes (confinio, contrada). Newcomers from the eastern Adriatic are mostly mentioned as inhabitants of the eastern city area of Castello. It was located alongside the long Venetian waterfront, the longest and the most favourable for tying up ships, which was actually named in the written sources of the time after the Croatian immigrants Quay of the Croats or Riva degli Schiavoni. Located in this area was the Arsenal, which must have been then the leading military-maritime complex in the Mediterranean, employing a thousand immigrants from the trans-Adriatic space. In the heart of this neighbourhood 15

A lot of information about Croatian captains and merchants in Venice is contained in the collection of registers of Nikola Čolak, Hrvatski pomorski regesti (Regesti marittimi croati), I–II, Padua: Centro di Studi Storici Croati – Venezia: 1985, 1993 as well as in the third volume published by the History Department of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Split, ed. Zrinka Podhraški Čizmek, Split, 2008. Cf. also L. Čoralić, ‘Hrvati i mletački Arsenal’ [Croats and the Venetian Arsenal], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 39 (1997), 167–181; L. Čoralić, ‘Hrvatski barkarioli i gondolijeri u Mlecima tijekom prošlosti’ [Croatian Barcaroli and Gondoliers in Venice in the Past], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 41 (1999), 27–50; L. Čoralić, ‘Iz pomorske prošlosti istočnoga Jadrana: tragovima hrvatskih kapetana i paruna brodova u Mlecima’ [From the maritime past of the Eastern Adriatic: traces of Croatian Captains and Ship-Owners in Venice], Zbornik Odsjeka za povijesne znanosti Zavoda za povijesne i društvene znanosti HAZU u Zagrebu 19 (2001), 143–182. 16 L. Čoralić, ‘Prilog poznavanju prisutnosti i djelovanja hrvatskih trgovaca u Mlecima (15.–18. stoljeće)’ [Contribution to the knowledge of the presence and activity of Croatian Merchants in Venice (15th to 18th century], Povijesni prilozi 21/22 (2002), 41–73. 42

Lovorka Čoralić: Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past

the Croatian Confraternity of St George and St Tryphon was founded. Pursuant to notarial documents (wills) it is possible approximately to calculate the percentage share of Croatian immigrants in Castello. From a sample of a little more than twenty notaries examined (more than 5,200 wills), it is visible that the Croats at the time when they were most numerous (from about 1450 to the end of the 16th century) comprised about a tenth of the population. Since they were probably not more given to writing wills than other inhabitants of this neighbourhood, it is probable that this number reflects their percentage in the overall population. Unfortunately, the first complete census of Castello comes from no earlier than the first half of the 16th century (1540), when it had a population of 23,611. Accordingly it can be assumed that the number of Croatian immigrants in Castello (particularly in the parish of San Pietro di Castello) ranged between two and three thousand (about 10%). As well as in the central parish, the immigrants are often mentioned as living in other parishes of Castello (San Provolo, San Giovanni in Bragora, San Giovanni Novo, Santa Maria Formosa, San Antonin, San Severo and others). Although not nearly so frequently, the trans-Adriatic immigrants were also recorded in the central city area of San Marco. Here we are primarily talking of newcomers who came from the non-Venetian areas (Dubrovnik Republic, Croatian northern coast, Zagreb, Slavonia) and as for the parishes they lived in, there is most mention of San Moisè, San Fantin, San Salvatore, San Vitale, San Maurizio, San Luca, San Giuliano and Santa Maria del Zobenigo). Somewhat fewer than in San Marco, also featuring in the structure of the places of residence of the immigrants were the areas of Cannaregio (particularly the parishes of San Canciano, Santa Sofia, Santa Marcuola, San Geremia, San Marziale) and Dorsoduro (the parishes of San Pantaleon, San Trovaso, San Barnaba, Santa Agnesa, San Gregorio, San Angelo Raffaele) while the other two Venetian areas (San Polo, Santa Croce) recorded far fewer Croats. Outside the city itself, Venetian sources mention them in the islands of the lagoons. Most of these were in the fishing village of Chioggia; some, very advantageously, took jobs in the glassmaking industry on Murano, while others are mentioned as inhabitants of Giudecca, Lido, Burano and other islands.17 Traces of Croatian place names in Venice The presence of Croats in Venice has been marked permanently in the centennial memory of the city, in the names of streets, mansions, passages, canals, bridges and other public spaces of the city with which in many ways their everyday life connected them. Most such places were located in the area of Castello. On the very Riva degli Schiavoni (opposite the Danieli Excelsior Hotel), on a stone mooring slab there is an inscription that tells us this part of the coast was reserved for the mooring of ships owned by people from the islands of Brač and Hvar (Fine di stazion dei abitanti della Brazza e di Lesina).18 In the neighbouring 17 L. Čoralić, ‘Giudecca, Murano, Chioggia ... Hrvati na otocima mletačke lagune’ [Giudecca, Murano

Chioggia … Croats on the Islands of the Venetian Lagoon], Povijesni prilozi 21/23 (2002), 117–144; L. Čoralić, ‘Sulle tracce degli immigrati croati sull’isola veneta della Giudecca (dal ‘400 al ‘600)’, in Književnost, umjetnost, kultura između dviju obala Jadrana i dalje od mora IV. / Letteratura, arte, cultura tra le due sponde dell’Adriatico ed oltre IV, eds. Nedjeljka Balić Nižić, Luciana Borsetto, Andrijana Jusup Magazin (Zadar: Sveučilište u Zadru, 2016), 513–526; L. Čoralić, ‘Relazioni culturali e artistiche tra le due sponde dell’Adriatico: i vetrai dalmati sull’isola di Murano’, Istorijski zapisi 89/3–4 (2016), 241–254. 18 Marin Zaninović, ‘Zapisi o Hvaru i Veneciji’ [Writings about Hvar and Venice], Hvarski zbornik 4 (1976), 197–202; L. Čoralić, Hrvatski prinosi mletačkoj kulturi [Croatian Contributions to Venetian Culture], 214. 43

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

streets and passages traders exhibited their wares, particularly those from Dalmatia and Boka. Inside the neighbourhood, particularly in the direction of the Cathedral of San Pietro di Castello, were streets and yards the names of which tell of the origins of the former population (Calle Schiavona, Calle Schiavoncina, Corte Schiavona). Here there was a court or smallish piazza (today a little street because of rebuilding) which got its name from its former owner, the respectable Venetian citizen and merchant Petar Fazinić of Hvar (Corte Piero di Lesina), and not far from it are streets named after Pelješka and Šolta Island (Corte Sabbioncella, Corte Solta).19 In San Marco, the central area, close to the church of San Luca, there is the Calle delle schiavine, which took its name from the woollen cloak or schiavina, a characteristic part of the dress of immigrants from the eastern coast. Finally, when we are dealing with place names deriving from some of the prominent citizens, it is worthwhile mentioning the bridge located in the central spot of Murano Island (alongside the Fondamenta dei vetrai) named after the famed master glassmaker from Split, Juraj (Giorgio) Ballarin (Ponte Ballarin, today known as Ponte del mezzo).20 Croats and the Venetian feasts An important role in the everyday urban life of the city on the lagoons was played — as everywhere in the western Europe of bygone centuries, — by public and church feasts. On the days they were held, they were factors of cohesion and unity of the city society and with their visual expression had a profound effect on the emotions and common mentality of the citizens. In Castello — where there was the highest concentration of Croatian immigrants, during the past numerous public and ecclesiastical feasts were recorded, some of which, impressive for the importance and brilliance attending them, came into being precisely as memorials of historical events connected with the coast on the other side of the Adriatic. The feast known as Le Marie (held on Candlemas, February 2), celebrated the liberation of Venetian girls and women whom the pirates of the Neretva abducted in 934. On this day, alongside a solemn mass in the Cathedral of San Pietro di Castello, a procession to the Basilica San Marco and a race of two ships (which symbolically recreated the abduction and liberation of the women) gifts were made to the twelve comeliest young women.21 One of the best known of the feasts in Venice was that for Ascension, or Sensa, which, in addition to the symbolic wedding of doge and sea marked by the casting of rings into the sea, celebrated the conquering campaign of Doge Pietro III Orseolo and the subjugation of Dalmatia to Venetian rule (1000).22 In Castello feasts were held in the open air, in front of the church campo, where, because of the cramped nature of the churches and their inability to take in the huge mass of local people and the still more numerous pilgrims from elsewhere, mass was sometimes celebrated and on the feast day 19 L. Čoralić, Hrvatski prinosi mletačkoj kulturi [Croatian Contributions to Venetian Culture], 217–226. 20 For the famed Murano glassmaking family, the Ballarini, cf. L. Čoralić, ‘Ballarini – istaknuta obitelj

muranskih staklara dalmatinskoga podrijetla’ [The Ballarini – a prominent family of Murano glassmakers of Dalmatian descent], Građa i prilozi za povijest Dalmacije 13 (1997), 113–144; Sergio Ballarin, I Ballarin di Murano (Venezia/Mestre: Stamperia Cetid, 2006). 21 Giuseppe Tassini, Feste, spettacoli divertimenti e piaceri degli antichi Veneziani (Venezia: Filippi editore, 1961), 9–13. 22 G. Tassini, Feste, spettacoli divertimenti, 15–22. 44

Lovorka Čoralić: Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past

of the patron of the church, pardons were distributed. Various games, plays and entertainments were organised on the feast days, by far the best known among them being the well-known battles between the inhabitants of Castello (the Castellani) and Cannaregio (the Cannaruoli or the Nicolotti), which was described early in the last century in a small treatise by an anonymous writer from Dalmatia.23 On the squares of the parish churches, specially made decorations and the banners of the local confraternities were displayed, and the commons were regaled by singers, instrumentalists, reciters, actors and many other entertainers. In the 16th century, a well received figure at such like folk events in Castello was the reciter Antonio Molino known as Burchiello, who performed his dramatic monologues and poems in Greek and Croatian.24 These feasts were remembered in the chronicles for the abundant quantities of food and drink handed out to the gathered people. Names of numerous kinds of edibles were acquired quite often while entertainments and feasts were being put on The local hospitality outlets (trattorie, osterie) dated their origins precisely to the habit of marking of such events. In Castello especially in the very busy commercial street Calle delle Rasse many taverns were formed, partly because of the need for the often-held public and church feasts, but still mainly because of their position on the journey from the Riva degli Schiavoni inland; during their existence they were closely connected with incomers of Croatian origin, who were in some examples the owners of them.25 In one of these, it seems, the drink ombra was invented (actually an ordinary small glass of white wine), the name being given by a ‘Professor Maršić’, whose surname, although we know little of him, suggests that his origins certainly should be sought in one of the cities of Dalmatia.26 The Croatian Confraternity of St George and St Tryphon (Scuola degli Schiavoni) The Venetian confraternities were an important factor in bringing the population of the city’s areas and parishes together, as well as a means by which the central government controlled social currents in the city and involved, in certain forms of public life, the greatest part of the population, the commoners, on an equal basis. Venetian confraternities (scuole) were classified according to their wealth into big and little — the Scuole grandi and Scuole piccolo. Most numerous were the small confraternities, organised on the basis of the common professional activity among the members, or according to their ethnic origins, or only on account of the veneration of their patrons (the Marian confraternity for 23 Breve Dissertazioni sopra l’origine delle cosi dette forze d’ercole sostenute dalla due parti denominate Castellani

e Nicolotti scritta dal Dalmata F. C. D. M., Venezia 1816. Cf: G. Tassini, Feste, spettacoli divertimenti, 36.

24 G. Tassini, Feste, spettacoli divertimenti, 128. 25 In Calle delle Rasse: L’antico trovatore, La nuova grotta, Città d’ancona, Giglio d’oro. Immigrants of Croatian

origins are also mentioned as tavern owners in other parts of the city. For example, the owner of the L’Orsetta tavern on the square in front of the grandiose Basilica Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari is mentioned in the 19th century by Antonio Radić. The Osteria della Maddalena on Burano belonged to a certain Skopinić (whose home was in the Kvarner), while the Crovato family was connected to the Al Calice tavern in the parish of San Salvador, area of San Marco. Cf. Elio Zorzi, Osterie Veneziane (Venezia: Filippi editore, 1967), 114, 119, 127, 199, 218. 26 Hans Barth, Osterie. Guida spirituale delle osterie italiane da Verona a Capri (Roma: Le Monier, 1910), 52–53; E. Zorzi, Osterie Veneziane, 218–219. 45

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

example).27 There are some prominent national or ethnic confraternities: the Albanian (San Maurizio), the Greek (San Zorzi dei Greci) and the confraternity of the Croatian immigrants, St George and St Tryphon (referred to in the sources variously as Scuola degli Schiavoni, Scuola dei ss. Giorgio e Trifone, Scuola del nazione illirica, Scuola Dalmata).28 It was founded on March 24th 1451, and was officially recognised by a decision of the Venetian Council of Ten on May 19th the same year. In its first century it had its seat in the Church of St John of the Temple (San Zuanne dei Furlani, San Zuanne del Tempio) in which it possessed four tombs for the interment of the brothers and one altar for the celebration of mass. All immigrants from the eastern coasts of the Adriatic could be members of the confraternity but in fact most of them came from the Venetian possessions. In the number of members, in their figuring in the leading bodies of the association and in terms of their material support and gifts, it was the immigrants from Boka Kotorska that were the most distinct. They are also attributed with urging the Venetian government to officially recognise the confraternity, and the confraternity took its name from the main patron saint of Boka — Saint Tryphon. It early one acquired significant support and recognition from the leading dignitaries of the church. In 1464 Cardinal Bessarion, a prominent Byzantine humanist and champion of wars against the Ottomans, imparted an indulgence to the confraternity, relating to the feasts of St George, St Tryphon, St Jerome, the Sacred Body of Christ and on the first Sunday after the Assumption.29 In 1502 the commander of the Venetian navy, Paolo Valaresso, made the confraternity a gift of the valuable relic of St George that had hitherto been the property of the Patriarch of Jerusalem. In the same year, Apostolic Legate Angelo Leonini, Bishop of Tivoli, bestowed a new indulgence on the confraternity. This related to the Altar of St George, and it was used for giving pardons to the faithful who on St George’s Day, St Tryphon’s, St Jerome’s, St John the Baptist’s and every second Sunday in the month visited the said altar and expressed their veneration of the protector of the confraternity.30

27 A lot has been written about the Venetian confraternities. Some of the more important secondary sources

are: Francesca Ortalli, ‘Per salute delle anime e delli corpi’. Scuole piccole a Venezia nel tardo Medioevo (Venezia: Marsilio editore, 2001); Gastone Vio, Le Scuole piccole nella Venezia dei Dogi. Note d’archivio per la storia delle confraternite veneziane (Vicenza: Angelo Colla editore, 2004); Silvia Gramigna, Annalisa Perissa, Scuole grandi e piccole a Venezia tra arte e storia. Confraternite di mestieri e devozione in sei itinerari (Venezia: Grafiche 2am, 2008); Barbara Vanin, Paolo Eleuteri, Le mariegole della Biblioteca del Museo Correr (Venezia: Marsilio editore, 2010). 28 Niko Luković, ‘Bratovština bokeljskih pomoraca sv. Đorđa i Tripuna u Mlecima’ [The Confraternity of Boka Mariners of St George and St Tryphon in Venice], Godišnjak Pomorskog muzeja u Kotoru 6 (1957), 33–43; Rodolfo Palluchini, Guido Perocco, I teleri di Carpaccio nella Scuola di San Giorgio degli Schiavoni (Milano: Rizzoli, 1961); G. Perocco, Carpaccio nella Scuola di San Giorgio degli Schiavoni (Venezia: Scuola Dalmata, 1964); L. Čoralić, ‘La Scuola Dalmata dei SS. Giorgio e Trifone nei testamenti degli immigrati dalla sponda orientale dell’Adriatico’, Scuola Dalmata 27 (1994), 13–26; L. Čoralić, Hrvatski prinosi mletačkoj kulturi [Croatian Contributions to Venetian Culture], 159–210. 29 L. Čoralić, ‘Kardinal Bessarion i Hrvati’ [Cardinal Bessarion and the Croats], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 40 (1998), 143–160. 30 L. Čoralić, ‘Papa Aleksandar VI. i hrvatska Bratovština sv. Jurja i Tripuna u Mlecima’ [Pope Alexander VI and the Croatian Confraternity of St George and St Tryphon in Venice], Croatica christiana periodica 14/46 (2000), 21–28. 46

Lovorka Čoralić: Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past

In the first half of the 16th century the confraternity was ever more frequently in conflict with the head of the Church of St John of the Temple. Since the numbers of the members of the fraternity reached a peak in those years, in which the confraternity was very wealthy, it was decided to put up a new seat and a new church. In 1551, right by the Church of St John of the Temple and alongside the canal of the Fondamento degli Schiavoni a new seat and church were erected. The church was built in the style of the late Venetian Renaissance, and the architect was the distinguished master builder of the arsenal, Giovanni de Zan. During the first half of the 16th century, the artistically most valuable decoration of the confraternity was created — a cycle of paintings by the Venetian Renaissance master Vittore Carpaccio with scenes from the life of St George (slaying the dragon, the triumph, St George converting the inhabitants of the Libyan city of Selene), of St Tryphon (the miracle), St Jerome (St Jerome bringing the lion into the monastery, his death), St Matthew (the calling of St Matthew) and St Augustine (the vision of the saint). Carpaccio’s work is still today to be found in the confraternity, gracing the ground floor of its seat. In the sacristy there is an especially valuable document about the origin of the confraternity — a Statute or Mariegola that apart from its artistic value (a silver relief on the boards, numerous miniatures) has great value for the study of the beginnings and development of the society. It was confirmed by the Council of Ten in 1455 and contains 54 basic chapters and 12 additions, which comprise decisions of the Major Council made from 1456 to 1497. It contains the rules governing the organisation and basic tasks of the confraternity, the offices and the way in which individual officers are elected, the general rules, and the obligations of the members.31 Conclusion Venice, ‘a city that was called Babylon in little’, owes its rich history in part to the many ethnic groups, their customs, their individual inputs and their diversities, which made the city on the lagoons the liveliest multicultural milieu on the Mediterranean. In histories that deal with the foreign communities in Venice, more attention has been paid to the German, Jewish, Greek and Armenian groups, while some others, like the Croat and Albanian, have not been referenced in proportion to their importance. The Croatian community had a notable role, one borne out in the sources, in the creation of the multinational character of Venice. In this context, here only the most important excerpts from the centuries of the long history of the Croats in the city on the lagoons have been presented in condensed outlines. Each of the themes studied here would merit a separate chapter, separate elaboration. Sailors, tradesmen, priests and those in religious orders, soldiers, government officers, household servants and, which is very important for the study of Croatian-Venetian cultural and artistic relations, visual artists, writers, musicians, practitioners of the fine crafts; all of these are groups that by individual treatment make up the mosaic of the Croatian immigrant community in the city of St Mark. As for artists, and this essay is intended for a collection dedicated to the great composer Lukačić, the immediate objective is to contextualise Venice and its population (primarily that part of it that hailed from the eastern Adriatic) in a wider temporal framework and in a diverse 31

L. Čoralić, Hrvatski prinosi mletačkoj kulturi [Croatian Contributions to Venetian Culture], 172–180. 47

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

spectrum of activity. We can only begin to imagine, for at this point in time we do not have much biographical information about the musicians, that during the composer’s stay in Venice, where he published the collection Sacrae cantiones (1620), met, associated and made friends with contemporary musicians like Francesco Sponga Usper (1560/61–1641), Damjan Nembri of Hvar (born 1584), the painter Matej Ponzoni (or Pončun) (1584–post 1663) or perhaps with Murano glassmakers from the Ballarin family. He might also in Venice have met Croatian writers and scholars who published their works there in the printing shops of the Ginami and Occhi families, intellectuals studying in Padua, perhaps remaining there to teach. He certainly did move in the circle of the religious of the powerful Franciscan abbey of Santa Maria dei Frari; and it is certain that in a city of such a marked liveliness he must have met ordinary people from our country — sailors and merchants, tradesmen and soldiers, scions of noble families from Istria to Boka, as well as paupers, beggars and people on the outskirts of social life. We shall probably never get to know some of these stories that it would be nice to retell. Still, we believe that in the future, careful reading of the archival records from the rich Venetian archives and libraries will give rise to new understanding about Lukačić, as well as about the Croatian community in the capital of the Serenissima. The Croatian Radio Television choir repaid something of our debt to him and other musicians in the excellent recording Croatian Music on the Riva dei Schiavoni, released in Zagreb in 2012. We believe that historians will find in the long-forgotten archival documents a few more fragments from the mosaic of the life and art of this remarkable Šibenik Franciscan and composer. Translated by Graham McMaster

48

Lovorka Čoralić: Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past

Fig. 1. Lazaro da Curzola, Frottole nuoue de Lazaro da Cruzola. Con vna Barzelletta, & alcune Stanze ala Schiauonesca & due Barzellette alla Bergamascha. Cosa da ridere (1547), 1, Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, Misc. 2231.4.

49

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Fig. 2. Gregorio Lambranzi, the dance Schiavona, from the Gregorio Lambranzi, Neue und Curieuse Theatralische Tantz-Schul, Zweitter theil (Nürnberg: Johan Jacob Wolrab, 1716), 6.

50

Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology*

Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić The Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Split, Croatia 

During the centuries of Venetian rule, from the 15th century to 1797, individuals and large groups of people and populations moved from the east coast to the west coast of the Adriatic. On the west coast they were called Schiavoni. One chapter of the story of our emigrants belongs to the artists called Schiavoni, who were painters, graphic artists, sculptors and architects whose major part of their opus, or their entire opus, was realised outside their home country. Thanks to their artistic achievements, some of them are recorded in numerous reviews of Italian art.1 Among them the most well known in the Early modern period were certainly sculptors Giovanni Dalmata (in Croatian: Ivan Duknović; Giovanni di Traù, Ioannes Dalmata, Joannes Duchnouich marmorarius, Johannes Duknovic de Tragurio (b. c. 1440; d. after 1509))2 and Francesco Laurana (Franjo Vranjanin (1425–1502)), architect Luciano Laurana (in Croatian: Lucijan Vranjanin (b. c. 1420–1425; d. 1479)), painter Giorgio Schiavone (in Croatian: Juraj Ćulinović; Gregorio Schiavone, Georgius Thomae de Squarcionibus, Sclavonus, Dalmaticus Squarcioni discipulus, Giorgio di Tomaso dei Ciulini (b. around 1433–1436; d. 1504))3, painter and graphic artist Andrea Meldola (in Croatian: Andrija Medulić; Andrea Schiavone, Andrea Meldolla (1503–1563))4, miniaturist Giulio Clovio (in Croatian: Julije Klović; Giulio Clovio Croata, Clovius, Klovio, Glović; Giorgio Giulio, Georgius Julius (1498–1578))5 and painter Federico Bencovich (in Croatian: Federiko *

1

2 3 4

5

This paper has been created under the project Rituals, Ceremonies and Symbols of the Croatian Middle Ages in the European Context (800-1600), coordinated by Robert Kurelić, PhD at the Department of History of the Faculty of Humanities of the Juraj Dobrila University of Pula. There is a great deal of literature on this topic. See Kruno Prijatelj, ‘Likovni umjetnici “Schiavoni” iz Dalmacije u 15. stoljeću’ [Fine Artists from Dalmatia Called “Schiavoni” in the 15th Century], Mogućnosti 38 (1991), 260–269; Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić, ‘Dioklecijanova palača i Schiavoni u talijanskoj umjetnosti xv – XVIII. st.’, in Hrvatska / Italija. Stoljetne veze: povijest, književnost, likovne umjetnosti / Croazia / Italia. I rapporti nei secoli: storia, letteratura, arti figurative (Edizione bilingue), Most: Biblioteka Relations, ed. Natka Badurina (Zagreb: Društvo hrvatskih književnika, 1997), 211–226; I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni. Umjetnici, nacija, ideologija [Schiavoni. Artists, Nation, Ideology] (Zagreb: Jesenski i Turk, 2018). Igor Fisković, ‘Duknović, Ivan’, in Hrvatski biografski leksikon, vol. 3 (Zagreb: LZMK, 1993), 690–693. K. Prijatelj, ‘Ćulinović, Juraj’, in Hrvatski biografski leksikon, vol. 3 (Zagreb: LZMK, 1993), 167–169. Francis L. Richardson, Andrea Schiavone, Oxford Studies in the History of Art and Architecture (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980); Milan Pelc, Višnja Flego, ‘Medulić, Andrija’,  in Hrvatski biografski leksikon (Zagreb: LZMK, 2015), http://hbl.lzmk.hr/clanak.aspx?id=11880, accessed 6 December 2019; Chiara Callegari, Vincenzo Mancini (eds.), Andrea Schiavone. Pittura, incisione, disegno nella Venezia del Cinquecento, Proceedings of International Symposium (Fondazione Giorgio Cini and Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, Venezia, 31 March–2 April 2016) (Venezia: Fondazione Giorgio Cini, 2018). M. Pelc, V. Flego, ‘Klović, Juraj Julije’, in Hrvatski biografski leksikon, vol. 7 (Zagreb: LZMK, 2009), 399– 51

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Benković, who also appeared in various sources as Benconich, Bencovich Schiaon, Bencovick, Benkowitsch, Federigetto Dalmatino, Frederichetti, Federighetto, Frederighetti (1677–1753)).6 According to the traditional understanding, the essence of their national identity is in their personal names and surnames, which were considered to be the safest signifier (Fr. signifiant) of both their national and homeland affiliation.7 In this paper, which appears in a collection of papers dedicated to the famous composer Ivan Marko Lukačić (Giovanni Marco Lucacich (c. 1585–1648)), who was educated and at one time worked in Italy, we will look more closely at the opuses of three of the above mentioned artists, miniaturist Giulio Clovio, and painters Andrea Meldola and Federico Benković, who in their opuses referenced the period to which Lukačić belonged as well, and they were also related to Venice, the city where Lukačić was educated. One of the greatest 16th-century Schiavoni artists was the last great miniaturist of Western Europe, Giulio Clovio, born in Grisone (Grižane), Vinodol, in the northern Croatian coastal region. He died in Rome about ten years before the birth of composer Ivan Lukačić in Sebenico (Šibenik). The most significant biography of Clovio from the 16th century is that by Giorgio Vasari (1511−1574) published in 1568 (Le vite de più eccellenti architetti, pittori e scultori), in which the author spares no words of praise for the miniaturist and calls him the ‘Michelangelo of Miniature Art’.8 Sonnets were written in his honour by Giacomo Cenzi (1565, published by Dionisio Atanagi), Alessandro Contarini, Antonio Allegretti and Benedetto Varchi, and many other contemporaries.9 Painter and writer Francisco de Holanda, in his work Da Pintura Antiga. Diálogos em Roma, celebrates Clovio as ‘Mais consumado de todos os luminadores d’este mundo’.10 Then he was forgotten until the 19th century when the first monographs about him were published, written in a scientific style from the pen of William Bradley, in London,11 and in Croatia by Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski.12 Thanks to the fruitful work of 19th-century historians, the most important historical sources were published, along with numerous letters, and eventually Clovio’s 406; Jasminka Poklečki Stošić (ed.), Julije Klović, najveći minijaturist renesanse / Giulio Clovio – The Greatest Miniaturist of the Renaissance, Exhibition Catalogue (Zagreb: Galerija Klovićevi dvori, 2012). 6 K. Prijatelj, ‘Benković, Federiko’, Hrvatski biografski leksikon, vol. 1 (Zagreb: Jugoslavenski leksikografski zavod, 1983), 659–663. 7 In historiography, the terms Schiavoni and Dalmati have been considered as ethnolinguistic terms, national qualifiers, and as regional identity labels. See I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni. Umjetnici, nacija, ideologija, 9–10. 8 ‘There was never, and perhaps for many centuries, there will never be a miniaturist — or we would say a painter of small things — as outstanding and superb as don Giulio Clovio, because he far surpassed all painters who ever painted miniatures.’ Giorgio Vasari, Le vite dei più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architetti, ed. Maurizio Marini (Introduction) (Roma: Grandi Tascabili Economici Newton, 2004; facs. of the 1568 edn.), 1326–1331. M. Pelc, Fontes Clovianae. Julije Klović u dokumentima svoga doba [Fontes Clovianae. Giulio Clovio in the Documents of His Time] (Zagreb: MH, 1998). 9 Thes sonnets were translated into Croatian by Tonko Maroević and, together with Italian originals, they were published in M. Pelc, Fontes Clovianae, 13–17, 147–149. 10 The latest information on any mention of Clovio along with Francisco de Holanda is summarized in the article by Valerija Macan Lukavečki, ‘Julije Klović, umjetnik iz Vinodola u europskom humanizmu’ [Giulio Clovio, The Artist from Vinodol in European Humanism], Riječki teološki časopis 52/2 (2018), 223–242: 225. 11 John William Bradley, The Life and Works of Giorgio Giulio Clovio, Miniaturist, with Notices of his Contemporaries, and of the Art of Book Decoration in the Sixteenth Century (London: B. Quaritch, 1891). 12 Ivan Kukuljević Sakcinski, Slovnik umjetnikah jugoslavenskih [Dictionary of South Slav Artists] (Zagreb: Tiskara Ljudevita Gaja, 1858), 155–188; I. Kukuljević Sakcinski, Jure Glović, prozvan Julijo Klovio, hrvatski sitnoslikar [J. Glović, Called J. Klovio, the Croatian Miniaturist] (Zagreb: MH, 1878), 178. 52

Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić: Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology

will, which contained much new knowledge, but also raised some questions about Clovio’s work and his cooperation with artists of that time.13 In the past century, apart from several monographs, a series of articles on the history of Clovio’s life was published as well. In 2012/2013 Zagreb hosted a retrospective exhibition that sought to bring his talent, skill and personal contribution to the art of the miniature to the Croatian audience, as well as providing historical facts on the circumstances in which he created them. It is assumed that Clovio came to Venice in 1516 to the court of Cardinal Domenico Grimani. After Venice he went to Rome to come into contact with the famous mannerist artist Giulio Roman, who left a mark on his style; similarly, when Clovio made the acquaintance of Michelangelo Buonarroti, it soon resulted in the exchange of numerous drawings and, Michelangelo’s style and iconography had a major influence on Clovio’s work. Around 1523 he went to Hungary to work at the court of Louis II. In 1526 Clovio was back in Rome, where he stayed with Cardinal Lorenzo Campeggio, and in 1527 in Mantova, he joined the Order of Scopetines, changed his name from Giorgio (Juraj) to Giulio (Julije), and lived in a convent in Candiana. There he probably met miniaturist artist Girolamo dai Libri from Verona. He collaborated with Girolamo dei Libri on illuminating the frontispiece of the Coral, which is today at the Royal Library in London, and was exhibited at the Zagreb exhibition. From 1534 to 1538 Clovio worked for Cardinal Marino Grimani, Domenico Grimani’s nephew, at that time Papal nuncio in Perugia. In the year 1539–1540, he joined the service of Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, grandson of Pope Paul III. For a time he used to work for a powerful Florentine Medici family. He resided in Parma and Piacenza as well, where he worked for Ottavio Farnese, Cardinal Alessandro’s brother. The most important and outstanding artists of the time, such as the aforementioned Michelangelo and the great Venetian painter Tiziano (Titian), worked at the Farnese court. During that period, Giulio Clovio met El Greco as well, the famous Greek painter of Cretan origin, who painted several portraits of Clovio, the most famous of which are those at the Galleria Nazionale di Capodimonte in Naples. Moreover, the Cretan perpetuated his character in the painting of the Exile of the Traders from the Temple, and in the company of Tiziano and Michelangelo. The portrait of Clovio from the Schoor Collection in London was recently attributed to El Greco.14 The dignified old man in the painting has similar facial features to those in the aforementioned portrait from the Galleria Nazionale di Capodimonte in Naples. The story goes that Clovio introduced El Greco to the cultural milieu of Cardinal Farnese’s court. In return El Greco painted three of his portraits! Sofonisba Anguissola (1532–1625), a famous portrait painter from Cremona, also painted the portrait of Clovio which is now in the Collection of the respectable art historian Federico Zeri in Mentana. She presented him at an advanced age with a brush as a painting weapon in his right hand! In his left hand he is holding a miniature of a female portrait.15 13

M. Pelc, Fontes Clovinianae; M. Pelc, Julije Klović u grafici [Giulio Clovio in Prints] (Zagreb: HAZU, 1998); M. Pelc (ed.), Klovićev zbornik, minijatura – crtež – grafika 1450.–1700. [Klović’s Proceedings: Miniatures – Drawings – Graphics], Scientific Conference Proceedings on the occasion of the 500th anniversary of the birth of Giorgio Giulio Clovio, Zagreb, 22–24 October 1998 (Zagreb: HAZU, Institut za povijest umjetnosti, 2001); J. Poklečki Stošić (ed.), Julije Klović, najveći minijaturist renesanse. 14 Isabella Panfido, ‘L’enigma El Greco arriva a Treviso’, Corriere veneto su arte, cultura e tempo libero, Treviso, 23 October 2015. 15 Annemie Leemans, ‘Tra storia e leggenda, Indagini sul network artistico tra Sofonissba Anguisola, Giulio 53

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

He illustrated three manuscripts for Marino Grimani. Roman and Venetian influences, as well as Dürer’s influence, is felt in the Grimani Evangelistary (Evangeliarium Grimani), a manuscript kept at The Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana (lat. 1, 103 (=11925) in Venice, some researchers believe it was made between 1531 and 1534).16 The Stuart de Rothesay Hours is kept at the British Library in London (Ms: ADD.20927).17 It is decorated with scenes from the Old and New Testaments. Grimani’s Commentary on the Epistle of St Paul, illustrated by Clovio’s illuminations, which is kept at Soane’s Museum London (Ms. II), has attracted the particular attention of researchers.18 The two miniatures — St Paul blinding Elimas, and The Three Virtues — today at the Musée du Louvre (Departments des Arts Graphiques in Paris, Fonds des dessins et miniatures, RF 3987), seem to have belonged to another of Grimani’s text of Commentary on the same epistle. From 1539 to 1546, Clovio painted the Officium Virginis for Cardinal Farnese (The Farnese Book of Hours). One of his most famous works is The Prayer Book, today kept at the Pierpont Morgan Library (Ms. 69).19 Apart from scenes from the Old and New Testaments, the artist from Vinodol, who signed his work as Croata, painted miniatures presenting motifs from the life of Cardinal Farnese’s family, and historical and mythological-allegorical contents as well.20 I would conclude this concise overview of his most famous works with four miniatures that adorn the so-called Towneley Lectionary at the New York Public Library.21 Previously, I expressed the opinion that one of them, depicting the Sermon on the Mount, contained portraits of the most important persons of the Farnese family and their closest circle, including a self-portrait of the very painter.22

16 17 18

19

20 21 22

Clovio e Levina Teerlinc’, Intrecci d’arte 3 (2014), 35–55: 40–42, 44, 48. Valerija Macan, Giorgio Giulio Clovio, ovvero l’ultima stagione dell’arte della miniatura (doctoral dissertation, Pontificia Università Gregoriana, Roma: Facoltà di Storia e dei Beni culturali di Chiesa, 2010), 145; Valerija Macan Lukavečki, Hrvatski velikan Juraj Julije Klović [The Great Croatian Man Juraj Julije Klović] (Vinkovci: Privlačica, 2019). V. Macan Lukavečki, ‘Evanđelistar Grimani (Evangeliarium)’, in Julije Klović, najveći minijaturist renesanse, ed. J. Poklečki Stošić, 94–99. V. Macan Lukavečki, ‘Evanđelistar Grimani (Evangeliarium)’, 88–93. Maria Cionini Visani, ‘Un itinerario nel manierismo italiano, Giulio Clovio’, Arte Veneta 25 (1971), 119– 144: 126–130; M. Cionini Visani, Julije Klović [Giulio Clovio] (Zagreb: Nakladni zavod Matice hrvatske, 1977), 88; I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni, 23–24; Elena Calvillo, ‘Romanità and Grazia: Giulio Clovio’s Pauline Frontispieces for Marino Grimani’, The Art Bulletin 82 (2000), 280–297; E. Calvillo, Imitation and Invention in the Service of Rome: Giulio Clovio’s Works for Cardinals Marino Grimani and Alessandro Farnese (doctoral dissertation, Baltimore-Maryland: John Hopkins University, 2003), 16–17. Časoslov Farnese s minijaturama Julija Klovića [The Farnese Book of Hours with Miniatures by Giulio Clovio]. Full facsimile edition of the original MS M.69 owned by Pierpont Morgan Library, New York. Comments: Wiliam M. Voelkle and Ivan Golub, foreword Miroslav Begović (Zagreb: HAZU, Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 2001). I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Julije Klović, Ikonografske studije (Zagreb: MH, 1999). V. Macan Lukavečki, ‘Lekcionar Towneley / Lekcionar Farnese’, in Julije Klović, najveći minijaturist renesanse, 107–114. I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Julije Klović, Ikonografske studije, 122; I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni, 74–75. 54

Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić: Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology

Fig. 1. Giulio Clovio, Full-page miniature of the Sermon on the Mount. Elaborate full border with human figures, Towneley Lectionary, 6v, The New York Public Library Digital Collections.

55

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Andrea Meldola was believed to have been of Sebenico origin, though his family descended from Emilia.23 This legend was first recorded in his first biography by Carlo Ridolfi and published in the book Le maraviglie dell’arte ovvero, Le vite degli illustri pittori Veneti e dello Stato (1648). Trusting Ridolfi, Marija Horvat (Horvatova), children’s literature writer and mother-in-law of the famous Zagreb art historian Arthur Schneider, introduced him in her story ‘Andrija Medulić’ as an artist born in Sebenico.24 Her book has remained unaddressed in Croatian historiography. Carlo Ridolfi describes his difficult break through life. Ridolfi believed that Meldola was of Croatian origin, born in Sebenico. He writes that Meldola’s parents were Schiavoni from Sebenico, who moved from Sebenico to Venice. Horvat’s version is different. She writes and describes the life of Meldola’s parents and his whole family as people from Sebenico. Simone (Šimun), his father, she writes, was killed near Jajce fighting in the war against the Ottomans. Medulić as an underage boy lived with his sisters Stana and Bira, and uncle Rocco (Roko), who also fought against the Turks. As a boy, Marija Horvat writes in her story that Medulić tended and reared sheep. It is interesting how the use and phenomenon of this literary stereotype lived on in ancient historiographies, from Vasari’s stories about Giotto to the biography of Ivan Meštrović, who, as a boy, was really a shepherd. Further on, Horvat writes that Meldola decided to board a ship to Venice and leave the family and the city of Sebenico in search of a better, more prosperous life. There he met Tiziano, from whom he received his teaching lessons and who helped him in the beginning of his career. Marija Horvat took this over from Ridolfi.25 This narrative of Meldola’s difficult breakthrough in his career was formed due to Ridolfi’s biography, and it lasted for a long time in Croatian historiography. This narrative is reflected in Horvat’s book. The literary stereotype is her comparison of the city of Venice to Sodom, a biblical stereotype for a city that plunged deeply into immorality owing to its richness and arrogance. This, too, is a narrative that persists in Croatian historiography on Venice.26 Venice’s cruelty to newcomers already appeared in Antun Nemčić’s Putositnice (Travelogue Fragments).27 He was once attributed with the altarpiece of The Adoration of the Magi, in the Sebenico Cathedral.28 Therefore, Marija Horvat ends her narrative with the anecdote that he made this painting based on Tiziano’s recommendation for the Cathedral in the city where he was born — as believed at that time. 23 He was a son of the Venetian officer Simone, who operated near Nadin, in the vicinity of Zadar. There

24 25 26 27 28

were three male generations in the Meldola family originally from Mel, in Emilia Romagna, all officers in the Venetian army. The painter’s grandfather, Andriolo, is mentioned in 1479 in Zadar. His sons, Sebastiano and Simone, Andrea’s father, took care of his business too. Cf. Giuseppe Praga, ‘Dalla patria e del casato di Andrea Meldola’, Atti e memorie della società e patria dalmata (1930), 84–85. The question is when Andrea came to Venice. Cf. I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni, 91. Angelo Maria Monaco, ‘Schiavone pittore e incisore. Topoi consolidati e fortuna critica tra Sei e Settecento’, in Andrea Schiavone. Pittura, incisione, disegno nella Venezia del Cinquecento, eds. C. Callegari, V. Mancini, 81–94. Marija Horvat (Horvatova), Andrija Medulić (Zagreb: Hrv. pedagoško-književni zbor, 1915). Carlo Ridolfi, Le maraviglie dell’arte ovvero, Le vite degli illustri pittori Veneti e dello Stato (Venezia: Giovanni Battista Segua, 1648), 227–238. I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni, 92–93. Antun Nemčić Gostovinski, Putositnice [Travelogue Fragments], ed. Ivo Zalar (Zagreb: Nart-trgovina, 1996), 182. Ana Šitina, ‘Opus Bernardina Ricciardija na istočnoj jadranskoj obali’ [Bernardino Ricciardi’s Oeuvre on the Eastern Adriatic], Ars Adriatica 7 (2017), 195–212: 201–203. 56

Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić: Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology

He is said to have resided in Emilia, where he came into contact with the art of the famous mannerist painter Francesco Mazzola. Today, it is presumed that he got to know Parmigianino’s works thanks to variations of his engravings executed by the monogrammist FP (active from 1530 to 1550). Parmigianino’s engravings and drawings were then circulated in Venice, which, as Chiara Callegari29 writes, was also evident in his contemporaries Girolamo da Treviso, Alessandro Vittoria and Francesco da Santacroce. The explicit influence of Parmigianino is evident in Meldola’s early engravings, such as depictions of Apollo and Daphne, Judith, Hercules, Nessus and Deianira, dating from 1540 to 1542. His influence from 1541 to 1544 is evident in Meldola’s painting too. In the period from 1540 to 1545 he worked with Tintoretto to create frescoes at the Zeno di Crociferi Palace. He is believed to have influenced young Tintoretto at the time. The first phase, characterized by pittura di macchia, is followed by the classicizing period from 1547 to 1557. In the church of St Sebastian in Venice he then painted vault frescoes in the Chapel of Marcantonio Grimani (scenes of the Arrest of Christ, The Agony in the Garden, the Entombment and Resurrection of Christ) and an altarpiece of Christ and His Companions on the Road to Emmaus in the Pellegrini Chapel (1548–1552). A series of paintings dedicated to the legend of Eros and Psyche stands out within the group of his works of mythological content. Within the group of preserved works of sacral themes, three paintings stand out (The Annunciation, The Adoration of the Shepherds, and The Adoration of the Magi) at the Church of Santa Maria dei Carmini in Venice. The Adoration of the Magi in Milan’s Ambrosiana belongs to the mature stage. In Ridolfi’s book of biographies of Venetian painters, Meldola’s character was immortalized by Venetian graphic artist Giuseppe Piccini. The cap with the raised, curved rim that Meldola wears in Piccini’s graphic is probably a crvenkapa, that is, a red hat worn by the Schiavoni, i.e. the Morlacchi. Piccini depicted the painter as a mature, masculine-clad man in a dolama. This is a type of coat with slashed sleeves, decorative bands sewn onto the dolama fastened with simple buttons in a row. The Venetians called it ‘caxacha’ or ‘casacchetta’. In the 16th and 17th centuries, such dolamas were worn in Venice by Croats and Dalmatians.30 It signified both class and national affiliation. Piccini defined the painter’s social and national identity by depicting his clothing in the portrait. However, Ridolfi noted his modest way of dressing, which also reflected his psychological virtues: ‘He dressed so simply that no one could ever imagine how so much virtue was hidden beneath the poor clothes: that the wrinkled shell of a marine snail (dye murex) hides precious pearls.’31 Ridolfi also writes that in his painting you feel ‘istinto della sua nazione’. That is why for a long time in historiography it used to be written that Meldola’s specific (mannerist) expression was a reflection of ‘his nation’s instincts’, the belief that the stylistic specificities of a Schiavone artist could be interpreted as ‘the artistic substrate that they used to bring from their native land’.32 It is about an identity construction of Meldola’s 29 Chiara Callegari, ‘Andrea Schiavone e l’incisione: dal pregiudizio alla modernità’, in Splendori del Rina-

scimento tra Parmigianino, Tintoretto e Tiziano, eds. Enrico Maria Dal Pozzolo, Lionello Puppi (Venezia: Museo Correr, 2015), 67–76. 30 I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni, 94–96. 31 C. Ridolfi, Le maravigile dell’arte, 239; I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni, 96. 32 K. Prijatelj, Andrija Medulić Schiavone (Zagreb: JAZU, 1952); I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni, 81–82. 57

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

character in art history33, whose integral part was the assumption that he was of Schiavone or of Illyrian origin.

Fig. 2. Andrea Meldolla also known as Andrea Schiavone, Holy family with St Catherine and young John the Baptist, Vienna, KHM-Museumsverband.

33

I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schiavoni, 82–83. 58

Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić: Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology

It was long believed that two of Meldola’s self-portraits were preserved. As things stand today, not one seems to have been. In other words, neither the supposed self-portrait in the collection in the Kunsthistorishes Museum in Vienna, nor the one from the collection in the Pitti Palace in Florence, have survived. It was long written that Andrea Meldola paved the way for the final chapter of Venetian painting in Cinquecento, that without him it would not have been possible to imagine art of Tintoretto, Jacopo di Ponte di Bassano and El Greco. He is one of the first Venetian painters to abandon classical Renaissance balanced composition and meticulous drawing and to embrace the influences of Parmigianino. He painted with a vigorous brushstroke, applying paint in broad strokes and macchie (smears). Therefore, when talking about him, we talk about his characteristic ‘gusto per la macchia’, based on smears and broad brushstrokes of paint. Apart from Meldola, one of the earliest prominent representatives of Mannerism in Venetian art, among the 16th-century Schiavoni artists, two graphic artists and cartographers from Šibenik are worth noting: Natale Bonifacio (in Croatian: Natale Bonifačić (1537–1592))34 and Martino Rota (in Croatian: Martin Rota Kolunić (c. 1540–1583))35, who combined elements of high Renaissance and Mannerism in their expression. Engraver Natale Bonifacio made prints based on paintings by contemporary artists such as Tiziano, Taddeo and Federico Zuccari. Among his most famous prints are those made for the book by the Roman architect Domenico Fontana Del mondo tenuto nel transportare l’obelisco vaticano, published in Rome in 1589. It describes the architectural endeavours of the time of Pope Sixtus V, the pope who restored the Institute of St Jerome in Rome. His famous collection of maps of the Illyrian provinces, made for the fraternity of St Jerome in Rome, depicted famous people, cities, national costumes and coats of arms from Schiavonia. Martino Rota lived and worked in Venice, Rome, Vienna and Prague, where he died. Between 1571 and 1572 in Venice, he made several prints relating to the Cyprus War (1570– 1573): the conclusion of the papal Christian counter-Ottoman alliance of Pope Pius V, the naval war with the Ottomans, and the victory of the Christian allied ships at Lepanto. He created engravings of works of the old masters — Dürer, Michelangelo, Tiziano and Clovio. He made engravings of a sacral, allegorical and mythological character. He designed the engravings of maps, floor plans and vedute of the cities of Naples, Venice and Rome for the 1572 Atlas of F. Valerio. He designed a map of central Dalmatia for the Atlas of F. Camozzi, Isole famose, porti, fortezze e terre marittime sottoposte alla Serenissima Signoria di Venezia (1571–1572).

34 M. Pelc, Natale Bonifacio (Zagreb: Institut za povijest umjetnosti, Šibenik: Gradska knjižnica ‘Juraj 35

Šižgorić’, 1997). M. Pelc, Život i djelo šibenskog bakroresca Martina Rote Kolunića [The Life and Work of Šibenik Engraver Martino Rota Kolunić] (Zagreb: NSK, Šibenik: Gradska knjižnica ‘Juraj Šižgorić’, 1997). 59

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Fig. 3. Martino Rota (Martinus Rota Sibenicensis), Mary Magdalene, Madrid, Biblioteca Nacional de España, ER/1284 (254).

It should be remembered that at the time when the renowned Croatian composer Ivan Lukačić (1587–1648) died in Split, the Candian War (1645–1669) was exhausting Dalmatia, which was going through a major economic crisis. After the war, this Venetian region emerged impoverished and devastated. Therefore, the period preceding the outbreak of the Morean War (1684–1699) was characterized by the huge economic migration of the population from Dalmatia to Venice. It was then that the elder brother of the painter Federico Benković, Leopoldo, was mentioned as a member of the cavalry unit 60

Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić: Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology

Croati a cavallo.36 The Benković family belonged to the nobility of isola di Brazza (Brač).37 The painter Benković was born in Venice.38 In Bologna he learned his craft under the painter Carlo Cignani (1628–1719). Giuseppe Maria Crespi (1665–1747) worked in Bologna at the time, and according to experts also influenced Benković.39 On the other hand, let us mention, it is thought that his painting at that time influenced the young Giovanni Battista Tiepolo. Benković moved to Vienna in 1716. There he would be distinguished by four compositions of an allegorical character, and mythological and religious content, which he painted for Archbishop Franz Lothar von Schönborn’s Gallery of the Weissenstein castle in Pommersfelden. In the third decade of the 18th century he returned to Venice and Lombardy. Then he painted his famous altarpieces of St Francis of Paola in the Church of the Holy Trinity in Crema and of Blessed Pietro Gambacorti in the Church of St Sebastian in Venice. It is probably from this stage that he painted The Escape to Egypt in Tomo da Feltre and the Entombment and a group of saints at the church of the Castle in the village Borgo San Giacomo. Surrounded by a lack of understanding in the Venetian milieu that praised Tiepolo’s painting, he returned to Vienna. There he worked for the residence of the nephew of Franz Lothar, the Imperial Undersecretary, Friedrich Carl von Schönborn in Würzburg.40 Some scholars say that a self-portrait from the Galleria del Accademia in Venice, dated by Wart Arslan around 1715, and by Krückmann to the late 1730s, is a testimony to the artist’s physical appearance.41 The portrait shows the painter’s dandy posture, dressed as a baroque gentiluomo with a baroque wig on his head, holding a palette with a brush in his left hand, and with his right hand pointing at a sculpture of a foot. His body movements testify that the artist is aware of his success. I trust Krückmann’s opinion that this is Benković’s self-portrait and that it dates from the fifth decade of his life when he was at the height of his career as a court painter of Friedrich Carl von Schönborn, painting for his castle in Würzburg. While staying in Vienna (with some interruptions) from 1716 to 1746, Benković is believed to have become one of the most important connections 36 Lovorka Čoralić, Maja Katušić, ‘Dalmatinci najviši časnici mletačkih prekomorskih postrojbi u 18. sto-

37

38

39 40 41

ljeću’ [Dalmatians – The Highest Officers of the Venetian Overseas Units in the 18th Century], in Dalmacija u prostoru i vremenu, Što Dalmacija jest, a što nije? [Dalmatia in Space and Time - What Dalmatia Is and Isn’t?], Proceedings from Scientific Conference, Zadar, 14–16 June 2012, eds. Lena Mirošević, Vera Graovac Matassi (Zadar: Sveučilište u Zadru, 2014), 99–129. The ‘Benković alias Baloi’ family is mentioned for the first time in 1657 in the island of Brazza nobility census. Cf. I. Prijatelj Pavičić, Schaovoni, 110-110. Following the expulsion of the Ottomans from the Macarsca Riviera in 1683 in the Morean War, they settled in Almissa (Omiš), and with a marriage in the early 19th century, one branch of the family moved to Imotski. Cf. K. Prijatelj, ‘Benković, Federiko (Benconich, Bencovich Schiaon, Bencowick, Benkowitsch, Federigetto Dalmatino, Frederichetti, Federighetto, Frederighetti’ in Hrvatski biografski leksikon, vol. 1 (Zagreb: Jugoslavenski leksikografski zavod, 1983), 659. I. Prijatelj Pavičić, ‘Plemić među slikarima i slikar plemstva galantnog doba: Federiko Benković’ [Nobleman Among Painters and a Painter of the Nobility Gallant Era: Federico Benković], in Ljudi 18. stoljeća na hrvatskom prostoru. Od plemića i crkvenih dostojanstvenika do težaka i ribara [Men of the Eighteenth Century from the Croatian Area: From Noblemen and Prelates to Tenant-Peasants and Fishermen], eds. Lovorka Čoralić et al. (Zagreb: Hrvatski institut za povijest, 2016), 566–577. K. Prijatelj, Federiko Benković (Zagreb: JAZU, 1952), 8. Peter Olaf Krückmann, Federico Bencovich, 1677–1753 (Hildesheim: Olms, 1988), 316–321. P. Olaf Krückmann, Federico Bencovich, 265–266. 61

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

between the Habsburg metropolis and Venice. It is thought that his Venice-BolognaLombardy synthesis was closely related to Austrian painters, precisely thanks to the specific Nordic component of his painting. He is often associated with the syntagm of the last great Schiavone. However, several other Schiavoni painters were prominent in Venice during the 18th century. For example, there is Tiepolo’s follower, Michele (Michelangelo) Schiavone (1712–1772), named Chiogiotto.42 Another of Tiepolo’s follower, Giovanni Francesco Soliman (in Croatian: Ivan Franjo Soliman (1715–1784)), may have been of Dalmatian origin.43 In the 19th century, several members of a Schiavone painting family, originally from Chioggia, stood out as well. The founder of the family was the late Baroque painter Michele Schiavone. His son’s name was Felice, and his grandson Natale Schiavone / Schiavoni (1777–1858), was called pittore delle grazie. Apart from Venice, he worked in Vienna and Milan. Natale’s children were painters: Felice Schiavoni (1803-1868) and Giovanni Schiavone/Schiavoni (1804–1858). They both painted in the spirit of academicism. Their work marked the late years of Austrian rule in the city on the lagoons, until the beginning of the Risorgimento. Apart from exploring the formation of the artistic and stylistic identities of a group of artists called Schiavoni in the history of art, an analysis of the changes in their political identities in historiography is interesting as well, where ideology becomes manifest throughout history. Artists called Schiavoni were recognised as one of the strong characteristics of national cultural identity during the Illyrian movement. At that time, as part of the political imagery, their identity struggle between politically opposite options, Dalmatian autonomists and Croatian integralists, was used. Researching the history of this reception, we examine how the history of canon formation and metanarratives were present in Croatian, European and world art history ever since the 19th century. Investment in the public presentation of these artists as the most successful Croats in history, in the dawn of the 1990s, became a key element of Croatian state policy. Then, scientific interest was renewed in issues of European, Mediterranean and Croatian, regional, symbolic and artistic identities. Not only did it result in numerous exhibitions, congresses, and in scientific and professional publications, but it also resulted in the purchase of many of their works. Since the time of the Illyrian movement, they have continually been a strong sign of national identity in this region as indisputably the most significant figures in Croatian and world art history.

42 K. Prijatelj, ‘Za Michelangela Schiavona’ [For Michelangelo Schiavone], Radovi Instituta za povijest umjet-

nosti 18 (1994), 61–65.

43 K. Prijatelj, ‘Jedan dalmatinski učenik Tiepola’ [One Dalmatian Student of Tiepolo’s], Mogućnosti 3 (1971),

328–330; Radoslav Tomić, ‘Dva priloga za baroknu umjetnost u Boki kotorskoj’ [Two Contributions to Baroque Art in Boka kotorska], Radovi Instituta za povijest umjetnosti 34 (2010), 117–120. 62

Ivana Prijatelj Pavičić: Schiavoni: artists, nation, ideology

Fig. 4. Federiko Benković (1677(?)–1753), Abraham žrtvuje Izaka (The Sacrifice of Isaac), 1715, oil on canvas, 220.7 x 165.3 cm, Zagreb, The photographic collection of the Strossmayer’s Gallery of Old Masters, inv.num. SG-3.

63

Fra Ivan Marko (Giovanni Marco) Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica Ljudevit Maračić Convento di San Antonio, Zagreb, Croazia

Quando nel novembre del 1985 si tenne a Zagabria (Zagreb) il convegno scientifico per il 400.o anniversario della nascita di fra Ivan Marko Lukačić (Giovanni Marco Lucacich) (1585–1648),1 i cui Atti videro la luce dopo poco più di un anno sotto il titolo ‘Lukačić’,2 alcuni attenti partecipanti ebbero a dolersi della difficoltà, per la scarsità di indagini archivistiche mirate, di farsi un’immagine compiuta di questo importante musicista barocco croato. Lucacich fu anche uno stimato francescano conventuale, attivo nella sua Provincia dalmata di S. Girolamo in importanti incarichi, principalmente nel convento spalatino di S. Francesco e nella Custodia zaratina, che peraltro comprendeva sia il patrio convento di Sebenico (Šibenik) sia quello di Spalato (Split) in cui visse. In realtà, proprio in occasione di quel convegno vennero presentati i risultati di un’indagine biografica, ancorché limitata, fatta nell’archivio conventuale di Spalato (Roščić) e di un’altra sul suo periodo romano di formazione e specializzazione (Mrkonjić).3 Tutti gli altri partecipanti si limitarono a trattare, così com’era previsto, la sua produzione musicale e gli ambienti che a Spalato avevano influito sulla sua fortunata carriera di musicista in quella città. Trascorso un buon trentennio da quella data, varie circostanze e motivazioni hanno fatto sì che mi dedicassi in Zagabria al riordino dell’intero archivio centrale della Provincia croata dei frati minori conventuali, in cui numerose scatole di cartone custodivano, ben protette, le sue plurisecolari carte, mai sufficientemente studiate e inaccessibili al grande pubblico. Frutto di quel lavoro, che mi ha regalato molta soddisfazione e qualche sorpresa, sono stati due cospicui volumi dal titolo di Provincijski povjesni arhiv (L’archivio storico

1 2

3

Nel nostro lavoro per corretezza usiamo i cognomi croati come vengono trascritti nei documenti: Lucacich, Misercich, Sussich, ecc. Cf. Lukačić, Zbornik radova znanstvenog skupa održanog u povodu 400. obljetnice rođenja Ivana Marka Lukačića [Atti del convegno, tenuto nel 400.o anniversario dalla nascita di Ivan Marko Lukačić], a cura di Ljudevit Maračić (Zagreb, 1987). Cf. pure Ćiril Petešić, ‘Nekoliko priloga poznavanju naše starije muzičke prošlosti’ [Alcuni contributti sulla conoscenza della nostra musica antica], Rad JAZU 337 (1965), 199–219; Dragan Plamenac, ‘Tragom Ivana Lukačića i nekih njegovih suvremenika’ [Sulle tracce di Ivan Lukačić e di alcuni suoi contemporanei], Rad JAZU 351 (1968), 63–90 (ristampato in Dragan Plamenac, Glazba 16. i 17. stoljeća u Dalmaciji. Osam studija [Musica in Dalmazia nel Cinque e Seicento. Otto studi], a cura di Ennio Stipčević (Zagreb: MIC, Split: Književni krug, 1988), 159–189). Nikola Mate Roščić, ‘Redovnički lik Ivana Marka Lukačića u svjetlu novih podataka’ [Il profilo religioso di Ivan Marko Lukačić alla luce di dati recenti], in Lukačić, a cura di Lj. Maračić, 50–62; Tomislav Mrkonjić, ‘Lukačićev boravak u Rimu’ [Il soggiorno di Lukačić a Roma], in Lukačić, a cura di Lj. Maračić, 63–79. 65

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

della Provincia).4 In quella impresa ho rivolto la mia prevalente attenzione alle figure più rappresentative e conosciute di religiosi della Provincia di S. Girolamo, e ciò nel periodo tra il 1559 e il 1827. In coincidenya con la prima data fu istituito l’archivio provinciale e si cominciò a inserirvi le delibere dei Capitoli e le relazioni delle visite canoniche, mentre la seconda segna l’evento della fusione della Provincia di S. Girolamo con quella patavina di S. Antonio di Padova; da quell’anno l’archivio delle Provincie unite ebbe la sua sede in Padova e quivi rimase fino alla successiva separazione del 1907, quando si ristabilì la situazione anteriore al 1827. Da allora in poi la parte storica dell’archivio, insieme con i documenti prodotti successivamente, si trova custodita nell’Archivio della Provincia presso la sede di questa, sul colle di Santo Spirito (Sveti Duh) a Zagabria. L’archivio storico dell’odierna Provincia croata di S. Girolamo conserva tra l’altro dodici codici manoscritti di grande formato, portanti fin dall’inizio il titolo di Acta Provinciae, benché accanto ai verbali capitolari e alle relazioni visitazionali essi contengano anche diversi altri tipi di scritture, quali la corrispondenza con la Curia generale, la registrazione di ammissione, professione dei voti e decesso dei singoli frati, assieme a molte altre annotazioni che possono suscitare l’interesse degli appassionati di Storia. La numerazione di questi codici segue il procedere cronologico degli atti in essi contenuti; così ad esempio il primo volume racchiude le scritture effettuate tra il 1559 e il 1588 e così di seguito nei rimanenti fino all’ultimo volume; la periodizzazione, con qualche sovrapposizione, non segue uno schema fisso per ciascuno di essi; gli autori delle scritture sono in primo luogo il segretario provinciale e, meno frequentemente, lo stesso ministro provinciale; la grafia e l’uso dei verbi alla prima persona del tempo presente indicativo ce li rende facilmente riconoscibili. Nel corso di tale opera di riordino e di trascrizione ho deciso di citare (tra virgolette), ove ritenuto utile, porzioni letterali di testo, perlopiù in latino, con l’indicazione dei numeri (tra parentesi) di volume e pagina o foglio da cui si citano. Occorre qui notare che in due dei codici le pagine non sono numerate, per cui il rimando delle citazioni poteva risultare problematico; il riferimento alla posizione nel testo dei brani citati veniva però qui facilitato dalla progressiva intestazione annuale dei vari paragrafi, o almeno dalla presenza dell’anno di riferimento all’interno dei testi, i quali venivano appunto vergati perlopiù in stretto ordine cronologico. Per quanto attiene specialmente a fra Ivan Marko Lukačić (Giovanni Marco Lucacich), del quale ho curato di riportare fedelmente e integralmente ogni dato relativo alla biografia e all’attività, tengo a sottolineare che gran parte di tali dati veniva allora pubblicata per la prima volta; il loro utilizzo potrà contribuire validamente alla compiuta composizione del mosaico biografico di questo nostro illustre religioso. *** La prima menzione di fra Ivan Marko Lukačić (Giovanni Marco Lucacich) nell’Archivio della Provincia di S. Girolamo dei frati minori conventuali (che a quel tempo portava il nome ufficiale di Provincia Dalmatiae Sancti Hieronymi fratrum minorum conventualium) 4

Ljudevit Anton Maračić, Provincijski povijesni arhiv, arhivsko gradivo… (1559–1827) [L’archivio storico della Provincia], II volumi (Zagreb: Provincia croata dei frati minori conventuali, 2015), vol. I: Popis i opis materijala; vol. II: Izbor i obrada materijala. Il primo volume contiene descrizione ed estratti dal testo in ordine cronologico, il secondo propone un esame tematico di avvenimenti, argomenti e persone. 66

Ljudevit Maračić: Fra Ivan Marko Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica

compare nel secondo volume degli Atti della Provincia (1588–1605) per mano del ministro provinciale PMg Nicola Sola da Pirano, quando questi presiedeva, il 1 giugno 1597, nel convento di S. Francesco in Sebenico la Congregazione della Custodia di Zara, la quale nel proprio nome da tempo conservava il ricordo del perduto convento zaratino di S. Francesco e che a quella data comprendeva i conventi di Pago (Pag), Sebenico, Traù (Trogir) e Spalato. In quella occasione il provinciale Sola costituì commissario provinciale a Sebenico il PBacc Marco Leon da Cherso. Nel verbale della Congregazione custodiale del 1 giugno 1597 incontriamo un dettaglio importantissimo: in questa data nel convento di S. Francesco di Sebenico venivano accolti nella Provincia dalmata di S. Girolamo dell’Ordine dei frati minori conventuali: Marco del fu Giovanni Lucacich e Pietro del fu Antonio Mislich. Entrambi avevano all’incirca tredici anni, età allora consueta per l’ammissione al noviziato.5 Dopo quella data, nella parte storica dell’archivio della Provincia di S. Girolamo il nome Lucacich non è più menzionato per un lungo spazio di anni. Possiamo supporre che il nostro risiedesse fuori provincia per ragioni di studio e di perfezionamento musicale; nelle successive menzioni, per il resto della sua vita, il suo nome appare perlopiù preceduto dal titolo di PBacc, mag. mus. (padre baccelliere, maestro di musica). Il Capitolo provinciale tenutosi nel convento di S. Francesco di Pirano a partire dal giorno 30 agosto 1612, nel quale dopo un intervallo venne rieletto ministro provinciale il PMg Nicola Sola nativo di quella città, riporta nel verbale canonico agli Atti la notizia del ritorno di p. Lucacich, attribuendogli il grado di baccalaureus ma non ancora quello di magister musices. Nella stessa riunione venne proposto ed eletto a capo della Custodia di Zara proprio il giovane PBacc Ioannes de Sebenico.6 Negli Atti della Provincia (vol. IV, anni 1603–1628) incontriamo di nuovo il nome di Lucacich nel 1616, quando ancora a Pirano (Piran) si tiene, a partire dal 23 settembre, un Capitolo provinciale in cui sarà eletto ministro provinciale il PMg Simone Marelli da Arbe, religioso abile ma divisivo, pieno di iniziativa ma anche dotato di forte spirito polemico; il suo nome ricorre spesso per aver osteggiato proposte o determinate figure di confratelli durante quel capitolo, ma anche al di fuori di esso. Con lui il nostro avrà in seguito parecchie occasioni di contrasto (e il Marelli ne ebbe con diversi altri, tra i quali i più noti sono il già citato provinciale Sola e il teologo Ferchio/Ferkić). Nel corso di questo capitolo piranese sarà ancora il nostro Giovanni da Sebenico7 ad essere rieletto custode della Custodia di Zara, preferito al concittadino PMg Nicodemo Juricich che sarà più tardi ministro provinciale. Tale notizia, in cui non si attribuisce ancora al nostro il titolo professionale di magister musices (peraltro neanche quello di baccalaureus), ci fa pensare che già allora il giovane frate sebenicese godesse della stima dei suoi confratelli, al punto di venire preferito al suo concittadino più anziano, noto e apprezzato pater magister. Degno di interesse è anche il fatto che in questo stesso capitolo provinciale fossero presenti in qualità di vocales, ma anche di colleghi musicisti, i due più illustri compositori che la Provincia possa ancora 5

6 7

‘Pro conventu Sebenicensi Marcus filius def. Ioannis Lucacich et Petrus def. (?) Antonij Mislich … eodem aetate annorum tredecim in circa’ (II, f. 130r). Marco era il nome di battesimo di Lucacich, Giovanni invece quello assunto quando professò i voti da religioso francescano. Acta Provinciae, IV tomo, senza indicazione del numero di pagina; questo volume è privo di paginazione. Il rimando al luogo del testo è reso possibile grazie alla menzione dell’anno di riferimento. ‘Frater Ioannes de Sebenico’ (IV, senza indicazione di pagina per il motivo citato). 67

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

vantare: Giovanni Lucacich e Gabriello Puliti. Saranno amici per altri trent’anni, fino alla morte di uno di essi.8 La successiva menzione di fra Lucacich compare in data 21 giugno 1620, quando nel terzo libro degli Atti (anni 1608–1628) si annota come durante la visita canonica del provinciale PMg Simone Marelli da Arbe al convento spalatino di S. Francesco (di norma tali visitationes si svolgevano annualmente) veniva nominato nuovo guardiano di quel convento il PBacc Giovanni da Sebenico, senza riportare il suo cognome: Lucacich.9 A partire da questo momento il nome del frate compositore sebenicese compare sempre più spesso negli Atti, a volte accompagnato dal cognome, a volte senza, ma sempre con l’indicazione della sua origine: da Sebenico. Così il celebre ministro provinciale PMg Biagio Posarich da Cherso, già segretario dell’Ordine a Roma e principale responsabile delle importanti riforme nelle sue Provincie, durante la seconda visita canonica iniziata a Veglia nella Pasqua del 1622, giunto a Spalato in data 8 giugno, nella relazione sullo stato della chiesa conventuale annota la presenza di alcuni difetti nella conservazione delle sacre reliquie e ne dispone il trasferimento in luogo più appropriato.10 Nello stesso contesto troviamo la prova della riconosciuta competenza musicale di p. Lucacich, quando il provinciale Posarich gli raccomanda di provvedere anche alla formazione musicale dei confratelli.11 Questo intervento testimonia come a quel tempo si desse grande importanza all’uso della musica nelle chiese dei conventi; non per nulla negli anni di vita di fra Giovanni Lucacich fioriscono in Provincia altri due rinomati frati compositori: PBacc Gabriele Politi da Montepulciano nella Custodia istriana e PBacc Bonaventura Rinaldi da Veglia nella Custodia d’Arbe. Per quanto attiene poi alla diligenza e alla competenza dimostrate da Lucacich nell’amministrare e migliorare il convento spalatino di cui resterà per lunghi anni guardiano, risalta due anni più tardi la notazione visitazionale dello stesso provinciale Posarich, in cui elogia l’ordinato stato del convento, la bella concordia dei frati e la generosità del guardiano che devolve regolarmente parte dei compensi ricevuti per il suo servizio di maestro di cappella nella cattedrale; apprezza inoltre il fatto che l’arcivescovo cittadino abbia voluto di buon grado contribuire alle spese di restauro dei locali conventuali.12 Il religioso sebenicese e ministro provinciale PMg Nicodemo Juricich, che governò la Provincia per un solo biennio prima dell’improvvisa scomparsa nel 1626 a Veglia mentre visitava il locale convento di S. Francesco, l’anno prima (1625) aveva visitato canonicamente il patrio convento di S. Francesco in Sebenico ed era stato informato della cattiva fama di un frate sebenicese, p. Nicola Burogna. Aperto pertanto contro di lui un processo, lo aveva invitato a difendersi dalle accuse in pubblica sessione nel refettorio del convento; ma il frate incriminato si era guardato bene dal presentarsi (III, f . 191). Incontreremo questo indegno religioso più volte in avvenire, per il semplice fatto che sarà proprio il 8

Più sul Puliti e i suoi contatti con Lukačić e gli altri musicisti francescani conventuali contemporanei, attivi in Istria e Dalmazia, vedi in Ljudevit Anton Maračić, Ennio Stipčević, Gabriello Puliti (ca. 1580–1642/3): francescano, compositore, ‘Accademico armonico detto l’Allegro’ (Rovigno: Centro di ricerche storiche, 2021). 9 ‘Pbacc. magistrum musices fr. Ioannem a Sibenico’ (III, f. 96). 10 ‘Sacras reliquias in quadam capsam indecenter servatas reperijt’ (III, f. 156r). 11 ‘Guardiano imposuit ut ipsos musicam doceret’ (III, f. 156r). 12 ‘Fratres in pace invenit… Aliquas celulas a p.re m.ro Joanne suis … parte sumptibus, ac illmi Domini Archiepiscopi auxilio exornatas invenit’ (III, f. 180). 68

Ljudevit Maračić: Fra Ivan Marko Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica

nostro Lucacich ad essere incaricato di seguirne la vicenda disciplinare dopo che il provinciale, vista la sua riottosità e i pubblici scandali, l’ebbe cacciato da tutti i conventi della Provincia, vietandogli di avvicinarsi ad alcuno di essi e denunciandolo ai referenti della giustizia civile; quest’ultima avrebbe poi provveduto a punirlo esemplarmente (III, 205). Presente ancora alla Congregazione capitolare riunita in Albona il 17 giugno 1627 in qualità di definitore della Custodia zaratina e guardiano del convento di Spalato, sembra che il Lucacich fosse destinato ad affrontare spesso simili vicende, riguardanti religiosi che non si attenevano allo stile di vita proprio dell’Ordine. Già pochi giorni prima, il 12 giugno, si era trovato di fronte a un caso increscioso sull’isola di Pago, quando in qualità di definitore della Custodia scortava nella visita canonica il PMg Giovanni Pellegrini, commissario generale e più tardi successore del da poco defunto provinciale PMg Nicodemo Juricich. Quella volta si era trattato di un frate fuggitivo, PBacc Maurizio da Monte Missone, già scomunicato dai superiori per apostasia; entrato però, non si sa come, nelle grazie del Capitano di Pago, aveva ottenuto il perdono e la liberazione da ogni pena, in pubblica sessione davanti a tutti i confratelli del locale convento e alla presenza del PBacc Giovanni Lucacich definitore custodiale e del guardiano di Sebenico fra Stefano da Lissa, tutti in itinere verso la congregazione capitolare di Albona.13 Allora il religioso incolpato aveva solennemente promesso obbedienza davanti a tutti, sottoscrivendo il verbale insieme con il padre segretario; non sappiamo se il fortunato frate abbia poi tenuto fede al suo impegno, giacché in futuro di lui non avremo più notizia. Intanto, il caso del frate sebenicese Nicola Burogna si era tutt’altro che risolto, anzi andava peggiorando, tanto che il 26 febbraio 1628 il commissario generale Pellegrini ordina al guardiano di Spalato, il nostro PBacc Giovanni da Sebenico, di far condurre il frate ribelle sotto buona scorta a Capodistria, suo luogo di residenza: l’indegno sacerdote, religioso della nostra Provincia, si era macchiato di ulteriori colpe, incorrendo nelle ire delle autorità civili; per questo, dopo averlo privato dei diritti elettivi attivo e passivo, adesso il commissario Pellegrini decide di mettere un termine a tutta l’incresciosa faccenda.14 Il processo durerà degli anni e si concluderà con una sentenza davvero esemplare: le preposte autorità veneziane lo condanneranno ‘alla galera’, mandandolo a remare per alcuni anni sulle navi della patria flotta. Sorprende il fatto che, parecchi anni dopo, nel Capitolo provinciale iniziato il 5 novembre 1644, viene accolta la richiesta di tale Lorenzo Jetta da Sebenico di adire la procura della Repubblica al fine di liberare p. Nicola Burogna dalla pena già tanto lungamente sofferta,15 purché la cosa non avvenga a detrimento delle casse del convento di Sebenico o della Provincia. Non sappiamo quanto a lungo questo frate avesse effettivamente faticato ai remi delle venete galee; è da supporsi almeno che, dopo questo passo ufficiale dei suoi antichi superiori, egli abbia finalmente ricuperato la libertà. Durante questo stesso capitolo p. Giovanni Lucacich viene confermato a capo della Custodia zaratina. In un precedente Capitolo provinciale, quello tenutosi in Sebenico a partire dal 5 novembre del 1624, quello in cui venne eletto ministro provinciale il già citato PMg Nicodemo Juricich, partecipa, oltre a Lucacich con il suo titolo di moderator musicae anche un altro musicista già molto noto, il PBacc Bonaventura Rinaldi da Veglia, organista (pulsator 13 ‘Pbacc. Ioannem a Sebenico, magistro musices, et p. Stephanum ab Issa, guardiano Sibenici’ (III, f. 192). 14 ‘Bene ac diligenter custoditum ...ob multa mala ac pessima ab eo perpetrata’(III, f. 199r–200). 15 ‘A triremis’ (VIII, f. 63). 69

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

organi).16 Nello stesso capitolo si elegge primo predicatore un altro religioso musicista, il PBacc Claudio de Montetorto, proveniente da una provincia d’Italia. Il Lucacich vi partecipa come guardiano di Spalato e definitore della Custodia di Zara.17 Il 17 giugno 1627 si apre a Pirano una Congregazione capitolare e dei dieci vocales presenti incontriamo, come definitore della Custodia di Zara, anche il padre baccelliere e magister musices fra Giovanni Lucacich da Sebenico; nel corso di essa egli verrà confermato guardiano di Spalato. Oltre alla nomina di custodi e guardiani, sembra che la relazione agli Atti dovesse contenere diversi altri argomenti e risoluzioni interessanti, ma lo stato di deterioramento del codice, specie in queste pagine, ci impedisce di decifrare qualcosa di più preciso. Si tratta in tutto di una dozzina di pagine, alcune talmente danneggiate da non potersi isolare in esse neppure qualche parola. I pochi passi appena leggibili ci consentono però di farci un’idea qua e là dell’argomento trattato. In più di una pagina si citano decreti finanziari, problemi di contabilità e accenni a debiti. Così, si dispone che la Provincia (‘tota Provincia’) debba sobbarcarsi le spese di cura e farmaci del ministro provinciale (verosimilmente il già citato PMg Nicodemo da Sebenico). Sarebbe molto interessante conoscere qualcosa di più circa i problemi finanziari e i debiti del convento di Sebenico, ma le due pagine dedicate ad essi ci risultano praticamente illeggibili; veniamo a sapere soltanto che il convento è tenuto a rimborsare 30 lire all’ex provinciale PMg Simone Marelli da Arbe; si fa poi cenno di alcuni debiti del convento contratti con il PMg Jacopo Drasa da Cherso, procuratore della Provincia a Venezia, e subito dopo si legge anche, proprio nelle righe più danneggiate, il nome del ‘mag. musices et pbacc. Ioannes de Sibenico’; è davvero difficile immaginarci un legame tra il nostro frate e questo particolare contesto, dato che egli da anni ormai vive e opera a Spalato; problematico arguire che possa qui trattarsi del regolamento finale delle spese da lui incorse per la pubblicazione a Venezia nel 1622 della collezione delle sue Sacrae Cantiones. Si fa pure il nome di una Maddalena Juricich di Sebenico, ‘cognata’ del defunto provinciale Nicodemo, la quale pretende la restituzione di un prestito di 80 lire che asserisce di aver fatto al convento; richiesta che la congregazione le nega.18 Vorremmo davvero capire con chiarezza il legame del Lucacich con tali questioni di danaro, ma il nostro desiderio sembra destinato a rimanere tale. Nel corso della Congregazione provinciale tenutasi a Cherso (Cres) a partire dal 23 giugno 1634 (vol. V, anni 1632–1644) il PMg Simone Marelli, sempre molto attivo nel porre questioni e suggerirne le soluzioni alle assemblee della Provincia, introdusse come primo argomento di discussione il problema dei compensi dei religiosi operanti come organisti e direttori del coro nelle chiese non appartenenti all’Ordine, con tacita ma ovvia allusione al caso Lucacich. Il dibattito evidenziò come fino a quel tempo gli interessati avessero sempre versato buona parte dei loro compensi al convento nel quale risiedevano, e che perciò non si dovesse pretendere che li versassero per intero, visto che gli operatori musicali avevano le 16 Nella precedente congregazione capitolare, riunita il 31 maggio del 1622 a Pola, il frate veglioto RP Bona-

ventura Rinaldi, magister musices, era stato nominato ‘definitore ex gratia’ (cioè per libera scelta del ministro provinciale); tale decisione era stata accolta con grande favore dai congregati tutti (‘omnes libentissime elegerunt’), prova della grande stima goduta da Rinaldi tra i confratelli, nonostante che come guardiano di Veglia avesse avuto anche lui delle incomprensioni con l’allora provinciale Marelli (IV, senza indicazione di pagina, anno 1624). 17 Cf. tomo IV, s. i. p., ma del 1624). 18 ‘Pretendebat libras circiter octoginta… omnibus unanimiter consentientibus statutum fuit nihil ei persolvere’ (IV, f. 85r). 70

Ljudevit Maračić: Fra Ivan Marko Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica

loro particolari spese da soddisfare. Dopodiché Marelli domandò al ministro provinciale PMg Jacopo Drasa se intendesse procedere contro il PBacc Giovanni da Sebenico, che nel precedente capitolo a Capodistria era stato messo sotto accusa (‘querelatus’). Il provinciale gli chiese di porre debitamente per iscritto le accuse in questione, dato che le carte di quel capitolo erano andate perdute nel naufragio della notte dell’8 ottobre 1632 presso Cattaro; in quella disavventura i frati ebbero salva la vita, ma perdettero tutti i loro averi, finanche gli abiti che avevano indosso. Di che cosa si trattasse, possiamo capire qualcosa di più dalla documentazione successiva. In data 20 settembre 1634 il vicario generale, il napoletano PMg Giobatta da Bitonto, cui era affidato il governo dell’Ordine dopo la morte del ministro generale in attesa della convocazione del Capitolo generale, scrive al provinciale Drasa di aver condotto le dovute indagini sul Lucacich e di avere appreso da persone stimate e degne di fede come il PBacc Giovanni da Sebenico avesse condotto nel migliore dei modi il convento di Spalato, tanto da meritarsi dalla Provincia di poter esercitare il guardianato senza limiti di tempo.19 A questo inusuale stato di cose il vicario generale non si oppone, autorizza il provinciale a mantenere nella carica il guardiano, purché non manchi di tenerne costantemente al corrente la Curia generale.20 Ma nonostante ciò le acque non si calmarono del tutto. A Cherso, nei lavori del Capitolo provinciale iniziato il 22 giugno 1636, il PMg Simone Marelli ebbe a ridire, come di consueto, a proposito di alcune proposte e candidature, le quali però passarono tutte al momento del voto. Essendo stata proposta la candidatura a custode della Custodia di Zara del PBacc Giovanni da Sebenico, il Marelli si oppose con forza alla sua elezione, adducendo il fatto che in passato il frate sebenicese, nella sua qualità di custode, ebbe a confinare in convento, suscitando lo scandalo della cittadinanza, il guardiano di Traù p. Bernardo Bastia da Muggia; lo incolpò inoltre di aver tenuto quest’ultimo in cella anche a Spalato, portandolo quasi alla disperazione;21 accusò infine il Lucacich di aver venduto una pietra d’altare a dei Giudei, i quali poi avrebbero utilizzato il sacro marmo per il proprio cimitero. Il presidente del capitolo, PMg Andrea Zane da Venezia, dopo un breve consulto e senza ulteriori indagini, che ritenne non necessarie, decise che non si dovesse procedere oltre, giacché il Lucacich non aveva fatto altro che seguire le direttive della Provincia, e lo confermò nella carica di definitore. Nel corso della sessione il nostro venne rieletto guardiano di Spalato, con soli due voti contrari.22 Al fine di comprendere meglio questa dolorosa vicenda che collega il PBacc Giovanni Lucacich con il frate muggesano p. Bernardo Bastia, occorre accennare ad alcuni fatti che già in passato avevano destato in Provincia dei forti dubbi, forse persino dello scandalo, attorno alla figura del Bastia. Così il 1 maggio 1622 il provinciale PMg Biagio Posarich, in visita canonica a Muggia, aveva trovato che tra i frati del locale convento perduravano malumori e un diffuso clima di tensione, e che p. Bernardo, membro del convento nella propria città natale, era noto girovagare tra gli ambienti cittadini assentandosi per lunghi periodi di tempo. Convocato dal ministro provinciale, non si era fatto trovare e aveva tentato di nascondersi in un altro convento; scoperto, era riuscito a fuggire di nuovo e a raggiungere addirittura Padova, ma gli era andata male anche quella volta, finendo rinchiuso 19 20 21 22

‘...se ne sia portato molto bene … avendo lasciata indeterminata quella carica’ (V, f. 97). Vol. V, ff. 78v–79. ‘Ipsum quasi ad disperationis casum induxit … ’; ‘lapides sacros positos super altaria’ (V, ff. 113–131). Cf. Vol. VI, ff. 123v, 129. 71

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

nella prigione del convento patavino. Passato qualche tempo, il frate fuggitivo venne restituito alla propria Provincia e ricollocato nel patrio convento (III, f. 155). Quattro anni più tardi, il 23 settembre 1626, davanti al ministro provinciale PMg Giovanni Pellegrini in visita canonica, venne aperta con la forza, in presenza dei confratelli, la porta della stanza di p. Bastia, che nella sua qualità di procuratore conventuale conservava i libri contabili. In tale occasione gli vennero trovati molti altri libri, tra cui anche dei quaderni di musica; di sicuro, questo particolare potrà suscitare ulteriori domande, suggestive specialmente per chi si interessa di cose musicali.23 Si trovò anche del veleno, ma da una rapida inchiesta fra i confratelli risultò che lo aveva adoperato soltanto per uccidere un cane; una vicina se n’era lamentata con i religiosi (f. 185r)24. Con quanto detto ci si aspetterebbe che l’elenco dei casi e delle triste imprese del sorprendente frate muggesano sia esaurito. Non è così. Il 18 novembre 1633 il ministro provinciale PMg Jacopo Drasa, trovandosi a Venezia per affari del suo incarico, venne a sapere che a Muggia le autorità locali avevano arrestato e rinchiuso nel carcere di Capodistria proprio p. Bernardo Bastia, accusato di aver bestemmiato, pare, il nome di Dio e della Chiesa. Sorprendentemente, il frate incolpato aveva fatto appello direttamente al Doge (che ne informò il provinciale presente a Venezia). Il supremo magistrato, intesi il provveditore d’Istria e il capitano di Capodistria, riterrà bene di far liberare l’infelice religioso e di rinviarlo al patrio convento di Muggia. Il suo animo irrequieto non era destinato ancora a trovar pace, poiché alcuni anni dopo, come si è detto, lo ritroviamo guardiano a Traù ma vittima ancora della sua riprovevole condotta. Non ci sorprende che il custode Lucacich avesse ricevuto ordine dal ministro provinciale di fermare il Bastia e di farlo tornare in Istria. Questo deciso intervento non era forse piaciuto a tutti. A Spalato, nel corso della sua prima visita canonica, il neoeletto provinciale PMg Matteo Sussich da Cherso dava inizio, il 10 novembre 1636, alla istruttoria delle accuse portate a Lucacich dal Marelli. Qui, dopo esaustive indagini, si trovò che le accuse erano ingiustificate. La relazione sull’istruttoria che ci è pervenuta agli Atti dichiara che stavolta si è indagato persino più diligentemente e scrupolosamente del consueto; ciò è comprensibile, poiché nel precedente capitolo erano state dette pesanti parole sul conto della condotta, e persino della correttezza amministrativa, del PBacc Giovanni Lucacich. La conclusione sarà pienamente assolutoria: grazie a Dio, al termine dell’inchiesta nulla è stato trovato che meriti una punizione.25 Che tutte queste insidie dirette contro la reputazione del Lucacich non abbiano influito più di tanto sulla sua vita e sulla sua opera, ci testimoniano numerosi riconoscimenti portati al suo buon servizio nell’ambito del convento spalatino e della Custodia di Zara. Così, nella Congregazione provinciale tenuta a Muggia il 26 giugno 1638, cui egli partecipa di persona, fra Giovanni Lucacich è proposto come definitore della Custodia di Zara e riceve tutti i voti a suo favore, dunque anche quello del PMg Simone Marelli, che è presente; proposto come guardiano di Spalato, egli passa con un solo voto contrario; l’altro candi23 ‘Etiam nonnullos libros musices’ (III, f. 185). 24 Cf. Acta Provinciae, vol. III, f. 185r. 25 ‘De vita et moribus guardiani et fratrum diligentius quam alibi inquisivit, eo quia in proxime elapso

capitulo coram pleno deffinitorio multa contra dictum guardianum p. bacc. Ioannem a Sibenico, musices magistrum, de pernitiosa vita et gravamina eius administratione audierat; Deo tamen gratias, in inquisitione nihil punitive dignum invenit’ (VI, ff. 138–138r). 72

Ljudevit Maračić: Fra Ivan Marko Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica

dato, p. Francesco da Lussino, riceve tutti voti contrari eccetto due. (Non desti meraviglia che i candidati proposti ricevano alle volte un numero ineguale di suffragi: nei capitoli e congregazioni provinciali era norma votare allo stesso tempo per entrambi i proposti, così ognuno poteva anche dare il voto favorevole a entrambi).26 Al termine di questa congregazione il PBacc Giovanni Lucacich avanzò la proposta che il successivo capitolo provinciale si tenesse nel convento di S. Francesco di Spalato, a spese di questo; la sua iniziativa suscitò una discussione piuttosto vivace e alla fine si demandò la decisione al ministro generale. Il fatto che tale capitolo si riunì nel 1640 a Pirano (ad esso partecipò un gran numero di vocales, in tutto 43 padri capitolari, che il convento spalatino avrebbe a mala pena potuto ospitare) dimostra che la proposta di Lucacich non venne accolta, peraltro risparmiandogli le non indifferenti spese che si sarebbe dovuto accollare in caso contrario.27 Un altro avvenimento inusuale doveva quell’anno segnare il guardianato spalatino di Lucacich. Ai primi di ottobre del 1638, nel corso della sua terza visita canonica, il ministro provinciale PMg Giovanni Matteo Sussich era giunto a Spalato. Com’era consuetudine, compiuta la visita, questi aveva fatto celebrare una messa solenne in suffragio dei defunti.28 Trascorsi invano altri dieci giorni in attesa che il tempo si rimettesse al bello, egli rinunciò alla traversata verso Lissa (Vis), prese congedo dal guardiano e dai confratelli e si rimise in mare alla volta di Traù. A questo punto avvenne un autentico dramma, destinato a una tragica conclusione e di cui il guardiano Lucacich fu testimone. Fatto non più di mezzo miglio fuori dal porto, come annota vivacemente l’estensore della nota, si alzò improvvisamente un forte vento contrario, con grande sgomento di tutti a bordo della barca, perfino del pur esperto nocchiero Matteo. Costui, non sapendo più che fare, cercò il consiglio del socio del provinciale, PBacc Marco Leon da Cherso, che aveva fama di abile marinaio. Accostatosi a lui, sia avvide subito che questi stava male. Ognuno allora si dette da fare, applicando tutti i metodi di quel tempo per farlo rinvenire, compresa la respirazione artificiale, ma con scarsi risultati. Fatto ritorno a Spalato, si chiamò subito un medico, che non poté far altro che constatare la morte del frate chersino a seguito di un colpo apoplettico. Il provinciale aveva fatto in tempo a dargli l’assoluzione e a raccomandarne l’anima a Dio. Il viaggio venne sospeso, il defunto frate fu seppellito nel cimitero conventuale, una solenne messa cantata di suffragio venne celebrata nella chiesa del convento. E’ da ritenersi che lo stesso guardiano vi sia intervenuto e che, nella sua qualità di stimato musicista e maestro di cappella della cattedrale, abbia fatto partecipare alla solenne liturgia anche componenti del coro da lui diretto.29 L’anno successivo, il 18 giugno 1639, sempre nel corso di una visita canonica, accadde che il ministro provinciale PMg Giovanni Matteo Sussich incontrasse forti venti di scirocco navigando da Sebenico alla volta di Traù e Spalato, costringendolo a rientrare in 26 ‘Propositus in prima sessione ad definitorem Custodiae Jaderae ven.dus fr. Bacc. Joannes Lucacich a Sibe-

nico mg. mus., obtinuit in suffragatione vota affirmativa omnia’ (VI, f. 164). ‘Pro guardiano Conv. Spalati propositus ven.dus fr. Bacc. Ioannes Lucacich a Sibenico, qui in suffragatione obtinuit vota affirmativa 9, negativum 1, ipso non suffragante…; fr. Franiscus a Lossigno obtinuit aff. 2, negativa 9’ (VI, f. 166v). 27 ‘Obtulit mag. mus. Guardianus Spalatensis sumptibus se celebrare velle capitulum futurum. provinciale Spalati, et omnia exponere se velle qua necessaria sunt pro dicto Capitulo exceptis tam expensis Provinciae Commissarii Generalis. Responsum et resolutum est post multas et lungas alternationes quod remittatur ad patrem Rev.mum Generalem determinatio talis propositionis’ (VI, ff. 169v–170). 28 ‘Iusserat sacrum magnum pro christicolis nostris decantanandum fore’ (VI, f. 182r). 29 ‘Cantatur sacrum solemniter in cantu figurali’ (VI, f. 184r). 73

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

porto, tra l’altro in cattive condizioni di salute; su consiglio del medico, dovette trattenersi a Sebenico una settimana intera prima di ritentare la partenza. Egli decise pertanto che fosse il guardiano di Spalato PBacc Giovanni Lucacich a effettuare in vece sua la visita prevista al convento di Traù.30 Proprio durante questa sosta in Sebenico del provinciale Sussich, il 19 giugno 1639 venne accolto nell’Ordine dei minori conventuali e ammesso tra i chierici del locale convento Giovanni Matteo Lucacich da Sebenico.31 Questi era nipote del guardiano di Spalato, PBacc Giovanni Lucacich, e anche a causa di tale sovrapposizione di nomi sarebbe bene chiamare sempre Giovanni Marco lo zio e Giovanni Matteo il nipote. Quest’ultimo lo incontreremo ancora negli Atti della Provincia: così nel periodo dal 1641 al 1643 (vol. VII, anni 1640–1653) si legge una serie di annotazioni relative alle successive tappe della sua vita di religioso e poi di sacerdote, tra le quali l’approvazione della tonsura e la professione dei quattro ordini minori, i quali avviano il religioso verso l’ordinazione sacerdotale.32 E l’8 giugno 1643 a Spalato il provinciale PMg Zaccaria de Zaccariis concede il suo assenso affinché il novizio fra Giovanni Matteo Lucacich da Sebenico professi i voti proprio nelle mani dello zio, PBacc Giovanni Marco; una opportunità alquanto rara a trovarsi negli Atti della Provincia.33 Nel già ricordato capitolo provinciale, riunito il 16 maggio 1640 e giorni seguenti a Pirano, il PBacc Giovanni Marco Lucacich da Sebenico viene scelto come custode della Custodia di Zara a fronte dell’altro candidato, PMg Giovanni Capich de Andreis da Spalato.34 Lucacich ebbe un solo voto contrario, mentre il Capich ne ottenne solo uno favorevole, il che farebbe supporre che i due si siano votati reciprocamente, a testimonianza dell’alta stima in cui l’uno teneva l’altro. E’ interessante notare come il Lucacich, oltre a tenere eccezionalmente per tanti anni l’uffizio di guardiano nello stesso convento (Spalato), circostanza non prevista dalla regola dell’Ordine, a livello di Custodia abbia alternato l’incarico di custode con quello di definitore pro tempore. Il suo incarico di custode richiedeva che visitasse ogni anno ciascuno dei conventi della Custodia (che allora comprendeva i conventi di Spalato, Pago, Sebenico e Traù); nella qualità di definitore temporaneo aveva il diritto di partecipare alle sedute del definitorio provinciale quando questo si riuniva nel territorio della sua Custodia. Tutte mansioni, dunque, che richiedevano una considerevole mobilità. Oltre a ciò, egli era anche in grado di assumere incarichi speciali, come quello di commissario provinciale nella Custodia, per esempio il 24 settembre 1640, quando il provinciale PMg Zaccaria de Zaccariis da Pirano lo nominò suo rappresentante in alcune particolari circostanze.35 30 ‘Post visitationem sibenicensem mandavit conventum traguriense ptri . Bacc.o Lucacich in regressu suo’ 31 32 33 34

35

(VI, f. 194). ‘Receptus est ad habitum religionis fr. Johannes Mattheus Lucacich a Sibenico et clericorum numero cooptatus’ (VI, f. 195). ‘26 octobris 1642 fr. Joannes Matthaeus Lucacich de Sibenico obtinuit licentiam ad tonsuram et quatuor minores ordines’ (VII, f. 11r). ‘Dedit licentiam novitio fr. Joanni Mattheo Lucacich de Sibenico emittendi professionem in manibus rev. di patris bacc. et mag. musices Joannis Lucacich, Custodis Jaderae’ (VII, f. 19). ‘Pro custode Custodiae Jadrensis propositi fuerunt rev. Ioannes Lucacich Sibenicensis et fr. Ioannes de Anfreis de Spalato. Joannes bacc. Lucacich obtinuit vota affirmativa 14 et unum negativum et fr. Joannes de Andreis aff.a 1 et negativa 14’ (VI, f. 229). ‘Commissarium provinciale patrem bacc.um Joannem Lucacich, mag. musices et Jadrae custodem’ (VI, f. 5r). 74

Ljudevit Maračić: Fra Ivan Marko Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica

Scorrendo gli Atti della Provincia incontriamo ancora altre volte il Lucacich nella sua qualità di guardiano di Spalato: nella Congregazione provinciale riunita dal 25 maggio 1642 sull’isola di Lissa (che sarà l’ultima ospitata dal convento isolano di S. Girolamo), egli sarà proposto e poi confermato guardiano con un solo voto contrario, preferito al suo avversario (se così è lecito espimersi) p. Girolamo Besca da Traù, il quale ottenne solo voti contrari;36 conclusa la congregazione sull’isola, il ministro provinciale PMg Zaccaria de Zaccariis inizia subito la sua terza visita canonica e il 4 giugno 1642, a Spalato, visiona l’intera amministrazione gestita dal guardiano uscente e appena confermato; egli la approva e ratifica senza opporre alcuna obiezione.37 Lo stesso provinciale de Zaccariis, giunto al termine del proprio mandato, elenca i nomi dei confratelli che sono deceduti durante il suo provincialato: tra gli altri ricorda il PBacc Gabriello Puliti da Montepulciano, magister musices, morto a Trieste in data non riportata ma comunque non anteriore al 1644, poiché prima di lui, nel 1644, egli registra il decesso del PMg Biagio Posarich da Cherso, che lo aveva preceduto come ministro provinciale, da lui esaltato come vanto della Provincia e gloria conventuale, presso il quale il de Zaccariis era stato per sei anni segretario e procuratore dell’Ordine.38 Il successivo Capitolo provinciale si tenne il 5 novembre 1644 a Sebenico, al quale però molti che avevano il titolo e il dovere di parteciparvi non poterono farlo; la peste, che affliggeva ormai gran parte della Dalmazia, sconsigliava gli spostamenti tra una città e l’altra. Lo stesso capo della Custodia di Zara, nel cui territorio quel capitolo aveva luogo, non poté essere presente e venne sostituito dal guardiano di Sebenico, p. Francesco Simonich da Sebenico. Anche al discreto (notaio) di Spalato fu impossibile venirci. Sappiamo tuttavia, grazie ad un’annotazione successiva (VII, f. 59), che Lucacich invece trovò il modo di parteciparvi. Durante questa assemblea riunita nella sua città natale egli fu ancora una volta proposto e poi eletto custode della Custodia zaratina; ebbe 12 voti favorevoli e 2 contrari, mentre al secondo candidato, un altro religioso di Sebenico, il futuro provinciale PBacc Simone Misercich, andarono solo 9 favorevoli con 5 contrari;39 questa fu l’ultima volta che i confratelli gli affidarono questo importante incarico. Oramai la sua vita terrena si avvicinava al termine, eppure in questa assemblea egli ebbe ancora una volta l’amarezza di assistere agli ostinati maneggi, per lo più vani, del PMg Simone Marelli da Arbe contro proposte e candidature di confratelli nelle assise della Provincia; lui stesso ne aveva abbondantemente sofferto in passato. Nel corso di questo Capitolo provinciale, infatti, il Marelli dimostrò che, nonostante l’età, non aveva per nulla perso l’inclinazione alla critica di persone e di fatti. Suo bersaglio questa volta fu il famoso teologo patavino Matteo Ferchio, membro del convento di S. Francesco a Veglia. Benché assente per i motivi di sanità pubblica che sappiamo, come membro del convento veglioto e illustre cattedratico, egli aveva il diritto di partecipare al capitolo provinciale, ma sin dall’inizio dei lavori tale 36 ‘Pro guardianatu Spalati propositus est pr. bacc. et mag. musices Joannes Lucacich, qui habuit affirmativa

decem, negativum unum – in secundo loco propositus est fr. Hyeronimus Besca de Tragurio et habuit affermativum nullum et omnia negativa’ (VII, f. 31r). 37 ‘Adninistrationem p.tris guardiani bacc. Ioannis Lucacich solidavit et approbavit’ (VII, f. 36). 38 ‘Provinciae decus et honor totius Ordinis, cui fuit socius et procurator Ordinis’ (VII, f. 55). 39 ‘Pro custode custodiae Jadrensis electus est pbacc et mag. musices Ioannes Lucacich de Sibenico, qui habuit vota aff.va 12 et neg. 2, in secundo vero loco propositum fuit pbacc Simon Misercich, qui habuit vota aff.va 9, neg. 5’ (VII, f. 64). 75

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

titolo gli venne vivacemente contestato dall’ex provinciale PMg Simone Marelli da Arbe, in contrasto con il PMg Jacopo Drasa da Cherso che invece sosteneva i diritti del Ferchio. Il primo sosteneva che l’annosa presenza del teologo a Padova lo aveva fatto decadere dal diritto di rappresentanza del convento di origine, a favore del convento di residenza effettiva. Sulla questione dei diritti del Ferchio venne interpellato, seguendo la prassi del tempo, lo stesso podestà e capitano di Sebenico, Nicolò Marcello, il quale sollecitò i padri capitolari a proseguire nei lavori senza attardarsi in sottigliezze formali (VII, ff. 60, 62v). Consultando l’elenco dei religiosi ammessi, dimessi, professi e defunti in questo quadriennio troviamo alcuni riferimenti ad entrambi i nostri frati di Sebenico, zio e nipote. Veniamo così a sapere che il 25 aprile 1648 il più giovane, fra Giovanni Matteo, venne ordinato sacerdote e che lo stesso anno, senza precisazione di data, venne a morire il PBacc Giovanni Marco Lucacich suo zio.40 Il giovane Lucacich vivrà soltanto quattro anni del suo sacerdozio, poiché già nel 1652 si registra il suo trapasso da questa vita.41 Altro dato degno di nota, subito dopo quest’ultima annotazione troviamo riportato che in quell’anno muore ad Arbe (Rab) il PMg Simone Marelli, che aveva talmente osteggiato e amareggiato in vita il grande musicista e degno frate PBacc Giovanni Marco Lucacich, da costituire, per noi che indaghiamo la sua vita, un caso di inusuale e curiosa rilevanza. *** Infine, prima di concludere il nostro discorso, per testimoniare e provare il perdurante ricordo che del p. Giovanni Lucacich frate e musicista coltivarono i suoi confratelli, vale la pena di segnalare il Libro giornale della Custodia di Zara, in cui i custodi inventariavano anche i beni artistici presenti nel convento e nella chiesa di S. Francesco di Sebenico. Nel 1658, dunque un decennio dopo la sua morte, nella chiesa il custode visionava e registrava due grandi tele, una raffigurante il ‘beato’ Nicola Tavilić (benché non ancora proclamato tale), l’altra con il ritratto di Giovanni Lucacich.42 Due anni più tardi viene riportato che questo quadro si conserva in una stanza del convento (1660, f. 7). Nel secondo Libro della Custodia zaratina, come gli altri conservato a Sebenico, troviamo altri riferimenti relativi al ritratto del Lucacich; tuttavia di questa tela oggi non si ha più traccia, andata perduta chissà dove o forse anche trafugata. Un’ultima notizia ci resta nel terzo libro di questa serie, dove leggiamo che nel 1727 un ritratto di p. Lucacich è presente in un locale del convento sebenicese di S. Francesco.43 Il ritrovamento di un ritratto di Giovanni Marco Lucacich sarebbe senz’altro una piacevole sorpresa per tutti, non solo per il pubblico dei cultori di musica, ma sopratutto per l’intera famiglia dei suoi confratelli della Provincia francescana conventuale che egli ha tanto arricchito e onorato. 40 ‘Die 25 aprilis 1648 dimissus est ad sacrum presbyteriatus ordinem fr. Joannes Matthaeus Lucacich de

Sibenico’ (VII, f. 126). Index fratrum qui vitam cum morte commutarunt: ‘...PBacc Joannes Lucacich de Sibenico, mag. musices’ (VII, f. 127v). 41 ‘1652 – Index fratrum qui in hoc quadriennio vitam cum morte commutarunt: ...pfr. Joannes Matthaeus Lucacich, sacerdos sibenicensis’ (VII, f. 152). 42 ‘Un quadro grande con l’effigie di B. Nicolò Tavileo; un quadro grande dove è ritrato il Padre Luchacich (sic!)’ – (Archivio del convento di S. Francesco in Sebenico, Libro Custodiale, f. 3). 43 ‘1727. Nella terza camara: Un ritratto del p. Lucacich’ (Archivio del convento di S. Francesco in Sebenico, Inventaria Custodiae Jadrensis, pag. 63). Menziona il ritratto di Lukačić anche Dragan Plamenac, ‘Tragom Ivana Lukačića’ [‘Sulle tracce di Ivan Lukačić’], 87. 76

Fig. 1. Città di Sebenico (Šibenik): Giuseppe Rosaccio, Viaggio da Venetia, a Costantinopoli (Venetia: Appresso Giacomo Franco, 1606), p. 13r, Zagreb, National and University Library, RVI-16°-32.

Ljudevit Maračić: Fra Ivan Marko Lukačić alla luce della più recente documentazione archivistica

77

Fig. 2. Città di Spalato (Split): G. Rosaccio, Viaggio da Venetia, a Costantinopoli, p. 16r, Zagreb, National and University Library, RVI-16°-32. Nella p. 15v si trova questa osservazione: ‘Città come le altre in Schiauonia, ne molto grande ne molto ricca.’

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

78

Il Collegio Illirico a Roma,1 Lukačić e la Dalmazia nei documenti veneziani* Paolo Alberto Rismondo Venezia, Italia

Nelle società d’antico regime, l’ampia circolazione di musicisti delle più varie nazionalità in tutta Europa era un processo in atto già in epoche relativamente antiche; le diversità linguistiche, infatti, non giocavano un ruolo determinante nella carriera di un musicista già formato. Nella Dalmazia del Seicento, è noto che buona parte della popolazione parlava correntemente ‘schiavone’; questo era il termine (certamente impreciso e probabilmente molto comprensivo) usato per designare la lingua corrente in quei territori, nei documenti veneziani.2 Eppure, si può notare che molti tra i maestri di cappella delle maggiori chiese dalmate non erano originari di quelle località: per esempio, il veronese Tommaso Cecchini fu maestro delle cappelle delle chiese maggiori di Spalato e Lesina; mentre a Muggia, Capodistria, Albona, Trieste, fu attivo il toscano Gabriello Puliti.3 Questi musicisti probabilmente non 1

*

2

3

Si è adottata questa denominazione, attestata dalla documentazione coeva (cfr. infra a p. 3), per garantire insieme praticità ed omogeneità nelle citazioni di quest’istituzione, che oggi ha legittimamente assunto altra denominazione, in seguito alle vicende storiche successive (cfr. nota 5). Corre l’obbligo di ringraziare il personale delle istituzioni veneziane che hanno fornito il materiale e l’assistenza per la stesura di questo studio: in primo luogo ovviamente, ambedue a Venezia, l’Archivio di Stato e la Biblioteca Marciana. Si è utilizzata l’abbreviazione I-Vas ad indicare la documentazione conservata presso l’Archivio di Stato di Venezia; a questa abbreviazione possono seguire quelle relative ai fondi Senato, Dispacci, Dispacci degli ambasciatori e residenti, Roma (SDDaR); e Senato, Dispacci, Dispacci dei rettori, Dalmazia (SDDrD). Ringrazio inoltre i proff. Ennio Stipčević e Arnaldo Morelli per i suggerimenti e l’assistenza. La trascrizione dei documenti si attiene all’originale, con qualche moderata modernizzazione; si sono modificate talvolta le forme vernacolari veneziane per avvicinarle all’uso italiano attuale, per favorire la comprensione da parte del lettore internazionale. Cfr. Manlio Cortelazzo, ‘Il linguaggio schiavonesco nel Cinquecento veneziano’, Atti dell’Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere e Arti, Classe di scienze morali, lettere ed arti 130 (1971–1972), 113–160. Le differenze linguistiche sono ben documentate negli atti ufficiali veneziani dell’epoca; per esempio, a Sebenico era regolarmente retribuito ‘Vittor Ursin interprete della lingua schiava’; cfr., per esempio, il rendiconto allegato al dispaccio del 16 agosto 1611, da Sebenico, di Nicolò Marcello ‘conte e capitano’ (I-Vas, SDDrD, filza 10, cc.n.n.). Il vescovo di Traù, Marzio Andreucci, il 27 gennaio 1613 inoltrò una preoccupatissima petizione al senato veneto: il suo vicario ‘Pietro Thomasso d’Almissa’, era stato ‘cacciato’ dal rettore veneziano della città, e il vescovo lamentava che con tale atto ‘il governo della mia Chiesa resterà in totale sterminio, poiché non è persona in quel luogo, che sia pur mediocremente abile per tal carico; né io mi posso servire di vicari d’altra nazione, essendogli necessaria la lingua dalmata per la formazione dei processi, per sentire i casi riservati nelle confessioni, e in molte altre occorrenze.’ (I-Vas, SDDrD, filza 11, alla data); per un altro importante esempio relativo ai monasteri sebenicensi (dove, tra l’altro, venne ordinato Lukačić), v. oltre a nota 7. Bojan Bujić, ‘Cecchino, Tommaso’, MGG2, Personenteil, vol. 4 (2000), coll. 513–514; E. Stipčević, ‘Puliti, 79

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

comprendevano la lingua parlata dalla popolazione delle località in cui operarono; ma si deve supporre che ciò non li ostacolasse nello svolgimento delle loro mansioni. Al contrario, l’istruzione di un giovane cantore o musico avveniva solitamente in giovanissima età, e perciò, usualmente, nella sua lingua natia. Questa ovvia constatazione aveva conseguenze decisive nelle peculiari situazioni istriana, e dalmata: i giovanissimi aspiranti musicisti di origine istriana, specialmente se provenienti dalla fascia costiera dove l’italiano (o almeno il suo dialetto locale del tempo) era più frequente, preferivano portarsi a Venezia; certamente perché la città capitale dello stato cui i residenti istriani erano sottoposti non era poi molto lontana, ma anche perché, evidentemente, non vi erano difficoltà di comprensione tra maestri e giovani allievi.4 Le cose stavano assai diversamente per i giovanissimi aspiranti musicisti dalmati, che parlavano correntemente ‘schiavone’: paradossalmente sembra che per questi ultimi fosse più agevole trovare buoni insegnanti nella propria lingua nativa nel Collegio Illirico di Roma, piuttosto che a Venezia dove non esisteva un’istituzione omologa.5 Quelli nati nella parte di territorio dalmata sottoposta alla dominazione imperiale preferivano invece trasferirsi a Graz; come fece, per esempio, il fiumano Vinko Jelić.6 Del resto, a quel tempo in Dalmazia l’istruzione musicale degli allievi non particolarmente abbienti era fornita soprattutto nell’ambito di istituzioni ecclesiastiche, dove si parlava correntemente lingua ‘schiavona’.7 Anche i giovani chierici dalmati, se volevano proseguire i loro studi umanistici e poter poi tentare la difficile ascesa ai gradi superiori della carriera ecclesiastica, non andavano a Venezia, città capitale dello stato cui erano sottoposti; ma preferivano portarsi anch’essi nel citato collegio romano, o nel più vicino collegio gesuita di Ancona.8

4

5

6 7

8

Gabriello OFMConv.’, MGG2, Personenteil, vol. 13 (2005), coll. 1047–1048. Cfr. pure Ivano Cavallini, ‘The “Other” Coastal Area of Venice: Musical Ties with Istria and Dalmatia’, in A Companion to Music in Seventeenth-Century Venice, a cura di Katelijne Schiltz (Leiden–Boston: Brill, 2019), 493–535. Così accadde per i pochi musicisti di origine istriana che poterono intraprendere una carriera di qualche spicco: ottimo esempio Francesco Sponga, poi detto Usper dal nome dell’avvocato veneziano che lo protesse sin dai suoi primi passi nella città capoluogo dello stato, dove Sponga-Usper studiò con Andrea Gabrieli. Cfr. Paolo A. Rismondo, ‘Sponga, Francesco, detto Usper’, Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 93 (2018), 762–765; cf. pure E. Stipčević, Francesco Sponga-Usper (Zagreb: MIC, 2008). L’istituzione romana è tuttora esistente, con il nome di ‘Pontificio Collegio Croato di San Girolamo’; per cenni sulla sua costituzione e continuazione, tra tardo Cinque e Settecento, si vedano Gaetano Moroni, Dizionario di erudizione storico – ecclesiastica da S. Pietro sino ai nostri giorni, vol. XIV (Venezia: tip. Emiliana 1842), 156-157; Luca Testa, Fondazione e primo sviluppo del Seminario romano, 1565–1608 (Roma: Pontificia università gregoriana, 2002) (Tesi Gregoriana, Ser. Storia ecclesiastica, 4), 135–137. Com’è noto, le scuole veneziane (e così anche la Scuola dalmata dei Ss. Giorgio e Trifone) non erano istituzioni dedite all’istruzione, ma piuttosto assimilabili a confraternite laicali; cfr. qui, nello studio di Lovorka Čoralić, ‘Lukačić’s fellow countrymen in Venice in the past’, il paragrafo ‘The Croatian Confraternity of St George and St Tryphon (Scuola degli Schiavoni)’, 45–47). Cfr. Zdravko Blažeković, ‘Jelić, Jelich, Jelik, Jelitsch, eigentlich Jeličić, Jelicich, Jelitschitsch, Vinko, Vincentio’, MGG2, Personenteil, vol. 9 (2003), coll. 995–997. Le testimonianze in merito sono numerose; si cita soltanto la lettera inviata al senato veneziano dal ‘conte e capitano’ Pietro Morosini, del 10 ottobre 1619: rispondendo a precise richieste del governo circa la ‘qualità’ dei frati dei tre monasteri posti sotto nel territorio da lui amministrato (‘due francescani, e il terzo domenicano’), egli assicurava che non soltanto ‘i superiori, che governano essi monasteri sono sudditi nativi, ma anche gli altri, non tornando conto (per quanto intendo) a sudditi alieni di venir qui, per non aver la lingua’ (I-Vas, SDDrD, filza 21, alla data). Cfr. oltre, nota 13. 80

Paolo Alberto Rismondo: Il Collegio Illirico a Roma, Lukačić e la Dalmazia nei documenti veneziani

Entrambi, giovani chierici e aspiranti musicisti, così facendo seguivano la ben nota rotta commerciale che legava da secoli le due sponde opposte dell’Adriatico, le località dalmate e lo scalo di Ancona (assai più vicina alle coste dalmate, rispetto a Venezia), e di lì, eventualmente, a Roma9. Gli atti veneziani documentano inoltre l’assidua presenza, nelle località costiere dalmate, di mercanti marchigiani, e di militari della stessa origine addetti alle locali fortificazioni.10 Nel portarsi presso il romano Collegio Illirico di Roma, per completare i suoi studi legali ed ecclesiastici, Lukačić seguì quindi una ben consolidata consuetudine; si può ragionevolmente supporre che contemporaneamente abbia compiuto a Roma anche gli studi musicali, presso qualche musicista operante in quell’ambito. Entrò nell’ordine dei francescani conventuali nel convento di S. Francesco a Sebenico nel 1597, fu inviato a Roma nel 1600, nel 1612 vi ottenne il baccalaureato;11 diresse le esecuzioni musicali in occasione della festività annuale presso la chiesa annessa al Collegio Illirico, San Girolamo degli Schiavoni, il 30 settembre 1614, e ai Santissimi Apostoli il 30 marzo 1615.12 Il Collegio Illirico di Roma Istituzione appartata e senz’altro meno importante rispetto agli altri grandi Collegi romani, il Collegio Illirico non era molto noto neppure all’ambasciata veneziana a Roma. Questa non ebbe modo di occuparsene sino al 1614, quando una petizione di anonimo lamentava che alcuni dalmati, sudditi veneziani, ne erano stati ingiustamente esclusi. Lo stesso anonimo estensore dubitava che i suoi compatrioti potessero avere notizia dell’ 9

Vedi Renzo Paci, ‘La scala di Spalato e la politica veneziana in Adriatico’, Quaderni storici 5/13 (1) (1970), 48–105: 77 segg.; Aleksandar Stipčević, ‘Circolazione dei libri tra le Marche e la Dalmazia nel ’500 e ’600’, in Marche e Dalmazia tra Umanesimo e Barocco, a cura di Sante Graciotti, Marina Massa, Giovanna Pirani (Reggio Emilia: Diabasis, 1993), 197–203; Marcello Mastrosanti, Il 1500 ad Ancona. Rapporti con Fiume, Istria, Dalmazia attraverso i documenti (Ancona: Poligrafica Bellomo, 2011), 141–164, 285–299; Visualizing Past in a Foreign Country: Schiavoni/Illyrian Confraternities and Colleges in Early Modern Italy in comparative perspective, a cura di Giuseppe Capriotti, Francesca Coltrinari, Jasenka Gudelj, Il capitale culturale, Supplementi 7 (2018). Ringrazio il prof. Ennio Stipčević per l’assistenza. 10 Qualche esempio, scelto tra i tanti possibili: lo ‘strenuo Capitan Camillo Recuperci da Osimo servente con italiana Compagnia alla Custodia del Castel vecchio di questa Città’ citato in dispaccio da Sebenico del 22 aprile 1610, di Nicolò Marcello ‘Conte e Capitano’ della località (I-Vas, SDDrD, filza 9, alla data); il ‘Colonnello Giulio Cliseo da Montelbotto’ (Montalboddo, oggi Ostra in prov. di Ancona), citato in dispaccio del 14 aprile 1613 di Zaccaria Soranzo reggente veneziano di Cattaro (ivi, filza 12, alla data). 11 Le fonti documentarie dell’archivio del Collegio sono note da tempo agli studiosi, almeno sin dallo studio dell’insigne musicologo Dragan Plamenac, ‘Music of the 16th and the 17th Centuries in Dalmatia’, in Papers Read at the International Congress of Musicology Held at New York, September 11th to 16th, 1939, a cura di Arthur Mendel, Gustave Reese, Gilbert Chase (New York: Music Educators’ National Conference, AMS, 1944), 21–51. Più recentemente i dati relativi a Lukačić sono stati ribaditi e precisati da Arnaldo Morelli, ‘La musica a S. Girolamo dei Croati. Note d’archivio’, in Chiesa Sistina, a cura di Ratko Perić, Collectanea Croatico-Hieronymiana de Urbe 3, vol. II (Roma: Pontificio Collegio Croato di San Girolamo, 1990), 121–132: 127–128 (ringrazio il prof. Morelli per l’assistenza); cfr. inoltre le ‘voci’ delle principali enciclopedie musicali; nell’edizione moderna della raccolta di Lukačić (Fr. Joannis Lukačić, Sacrae Cantiones, Venetiis MDCXX, a cura di Ennio Stipčević, Tomislav Bužić (Padova, Zagabria: Centro Studi Antoniani, in stampa), e nella pagine web del sito Musiciens à Rome de 1570 à 1750 contenenti dati raccolti da Jean Lionnet (http://philidor3.cmbv.fr/ark:/13681/5f9scvgh9rigtvxdp0pi/not-233801, visitato il 26 agosto 2021). 12 Cfr. la citata pagina web Musiciens à Rome de 1570 à 1750. 81

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

istituzione,13 perché si sentì in dovere di accludere una breve descrizione del collegio, ‘chiamato di S. Gierolamo degli Illirici, eretto per ricetto di poveri della nazione’; e un elenco di persone degne di esserne escluse a causa della loro scarsa fedeltà alla serenissima. Al primo posto di quest’elenco spicca ‘Don Simone de Giorgi Zantino14 Arciprete di Santo Girolamo de gli Illirici di Roma’, accusato di ‘aver strappato pubblicamente l’arma della Serenissima Republica nella festa del detto santo’ (la stessa festività alla quale, due anni dopo, darà il suo contributo musicale lo stesso Lukačić).15 È noto che in simili occasioni festive era uso appendere all’esterno della chiesa le ‘armi’ (ovvero stemmi) di quelle nazioni o di quelle personalità notevoli che promuovevano la festività, o in onore delle quali essa era celebrata.16 L’offesa fatta all’insegna della serenissima in un occasione festiva così ufficiale, da parte dell’ecclesiastico di più alto grado di quella chiesa, era il segno evidente della scarsa considerazione, se non aperto disprezzo, nella quale era tenuto lo stato veneziano dalle più notevoli personalità del Collegio Illirico. La documentazione veneziana non ci offre ulteriori notizie sul Collegio sino al 1619, proprio a ridosso della stampa delle composizioni di Lukačić. In quell’anno, il governo centrale veneziano ebbe notizia dal suo rappresentante a Traù (Trogir) del tentativo di una consistente parte del clero dalmata di grado più alto, che avrebbe voluto trasferire il collegio alla sua sede precedente, Loreto. Egli inviò copia della petizione inviata dal clero locale alla curia romana, nella quale si ricordava ‘il gran giovamento ch’apportava alle desolate Chiese di Dalmatia, ridotte in estrema miseria dalla tirannide turchesca, la fondazione del Collegio Illirico di trenta alunni fatta già dalla santa memoria di Gregorio XIII, nella città di Loreto’. Denunciava inoltre il ‘grandissimo disavantaggio, e danno’, che aveva patito ‘la nostra Chiesa, e la nazione [dalmata]’ con il trasferimento del Collegio a Roma attuato nel 1593, provvedimento che, secondo la petizione, era all’origine di una forte diminuzione del numero degli allievi del collegio.17 Venezia lamentava da parte sua di non essere stata messa a parte del progetto del clero dalmata; e sospettava che l’evidente mancanza di tatto fosse stata commessa volonta13

14 15 16

17

In una carta databile successivamente al 1624, conservata tra le carte informative provenienti dall’archivio antico dell’ambasciata veneziana a Roma, si riassumono succintamente le vicende del collegio, evidentemente allo scopo di dare ai diplomatici veneziani almeno un’informazione di base sull’istituzione: dalla fondazione che sarebbe avvenuta nel 1578 a Loreto, al successivo trasferimento a Roma (dapprima nel Seminario Romano, quindi nel Collegio Clementino; cfr. infra), al ritorno, nel 1624, alla sede lauretana ‘sotto il governo totale de’ Padri Gesuiti tanto di Rettore, quanto di Maestri, e altri’. In un’epoca di poco successiva, approssimativamente contemporanea alla stesura del breve memoriale, i ‘giovani’ del Collegio ‘procurarono per quanto s’intende […] ritornare a Roma’, per una serie di ragioni non molto convincenti, ma enumerate con evidente soddisfazione dall’anonimo redattore (cfr. infra). Ms. Venezia, Biblioteca Civica Correr d’Arte e Storia Veneziana, ms. Cicogna 2004, c.n.n. (al n° 18 secondo il catalogo antico dei manoscritti stilato dall’erudito veneziano Emanuele Cicogna). Cioè originario di Zante, isola dell’arcipelago greco nel mar Ionio, allora sottoposta al dominio veneziano. La petizione e l’elenco allegato si trovano in I-Vas, SDDaR, filza 66, rispettivamente a f. 306r e f. 307r; allegati al dispaccio dell’ambasciatore Tommaso Contarini, del 28 gennaio 1612, ff. 301r–320r. Per un esempio dalle carte della Scuola grande di S. Rocco di Venezia (citata qui oltre), cfr. I-Vas, Scuola Grande di San Rocco, Seconda consegna, b. 159, c.n.n. datata 13 agosto 1609, relativa alle spese da sostenersi per la festività della scuola (15 agosto): ‘una arma del Serenissimo principe e una del magnifico Guardian [Grande]’. Cfr. le copie delle suppliche (datate 3 e 16 aprile 1619) che avrebbero dovuto essere presentate dai messi dalmati alla curia papale, annesse al dispaccio del 16 agosto 1619, da Traù, di Filippo Molin ‘Conte et Capitano’, in I-Vas, SDDrD, filza 20, alla data. 82

Paolo Alberto Rismondo: Il Collegio Illirico a Roma, Lukačić e la Dalmazia nei documenti veneziani

riamente, con la segreta intenzione di affidare il Collegio Illirico, una volta trasferito a Loreto, alle cure dei padri gesuiti. Ciò contrastava con i provvedimenti assai severi contro quell’ordine emessi da Venezia qualche anno prima, nonostante il parere contrario di buona parte della nobiltà veneziana, che inviava da tempo i propri rampolli a collegi tenuti da gesuiti, dentro e fuori i confini veneziani, e ne apprezzava i metodi didattici.18 Il provvedimento avrebbe certamente colpito anche il Collegio Illirico a Loreto, se fosse stato retto da gesuiti; i giovani sudditi veneziani giunti a studiare presso quello di Ancona erano stati sollecitamente richiamati dall’ambasciatore veneziano a Roma Tommaso Contarini, affinché ne uscissero al più presto.19 In un primo tempo, i messi dalmati inviati a Roma diedero ampie assicurazioni all’ambasciatore veneziano presso la Santa Sede, e con un certo successo: il Collegio sarebbe stato affidato non a gesuiti, ma a preti secolari. Il diplomatico nei suoi dispacci al senato confermò almeno parzialmente la situazione, e in primo tempo sembrò appoggiare, sia pure cautamente e parzialmente, l’iniziativa;20 ma dovette poi constatare che il comportamento dell’unico messo dalmata rimasto a Roma, da lui fatto seguire e osservare, attestava il suo costante contatto con numerosi padri gesuiti. Ancora pochi giorni più tardi l’ambasciatore espresse la convinzione che, una volta trasferito il collegio a Loreto, ‘in poco tempo ne avrebbero i Gesuiti preso il pristino possesso’;21 in pieno accordo con il governo, egli perciò redarguì severamente il messo, e sostanzialmente proibì la prosecuzione dell’iniziativa. Evidentemente l’ambasciatore non era completamente convinto di aver definitivamente risolto la situazione del Collegio in senso positivo per Venezia, perché nel settembre successivo, in occasione dell’annuale ‘festa’, si recò personalmente presso la chiesa della nazione dalmata, e osservò che non era dato adeguato spicco all’insegna della Serenissima repubblica appesa all’esterno della chiesa. Le ‘armi’ erano esposte in due ‘ordini’, ovvero due file orizzontali; ‘nel primo v’erano le armi del Papa, dell’Imperatore, del Re Cattolico, e del Popolo Romano, nel secondo ordine vi erano le armi dei Cardinali, e di S. Marco’. L’ambasciatore, evidentemente per reazione allo sfregio fatto all’arma della Serenissima occorso qualche anno prima, fece ‘levar l’arma nostra, e riponerla nel suo loco nel primo ordine, dove stesse congiunta a quella dell’Imperatore’.22 18

19 20 21 22

Cfr. Gianvittorio Signorotto, ‘Il rientro dei Gesuiti a Venezia: la trattativa (1606-1657)’, in I gesuiti e Venezia: momenti e problemi di storia veneziana della Compagnia di Gesù, a cura di Mario Zanardi (Venezia, Padova: Giunta regionale del Veneto, Gregoriana ed., 1994), 385–419: 387–388, e bibliografia ulteriore lì citata. I-Vas, SDDaR, filza 67, dispaccio n° 8, 46r–52v, 31 marzo 1612; ivi, dispaccio n° 13, 7 aprile 1612, ff 62r– 66v: f. 66v e 67r; ivi, dispaccio n° 53, ff. 323r–324v, 18 agosto 1612: f. 323r e ff. 325r–332r. Le precedenti informazioni e citazioni sono tratte da I-Vas, SDDaR, filza 82, dispaccio 268, ff. 42r–44v, 24 agosto 1619. Ivi, dispaccio 273 del 31 agosto 1619, f. 66rv. Al tempo degli Antichi Regimi, dispute simili erano prese assai seriamente: nel quarto decennio del Seicento, il duca di Savoia tentò di arrogarsi il titolo di ‘re di Cipro’ – il titolo era peraltro puramente onorifico, dato che quell’isola, dopo il dominio veneziano terminato nel 1573, era saldamente nelle mani degli Ottomani –, al che Venezia reagì interrompendo nel 1630 le relazioni diplomatiche. Queste furono riprese soltanto nel 1664, e subito l’ambasciatore sabaudo a Venezia tentò di inalberare uno stemma reale sopra il portone della sua residenza, con ‘tutt’i quarti eziandio di Cipro’, su segreto suggerimento del duca stesso. La reazione veneziana fu pronta e durissima, e si evitò una nuova rottura solo grazie ad un attento lavorìo diplomatico; il ducato sabaudo riuscì ad ottenere un titolo reale (quello di Sicilia) soltanto nel 1713. Cfr. P. A. Rismondo, ‘“Frutti nati all’ombre”. Giovanni Battista e Paolo Piazza. Diplomazia, politica, spionaggio e musica a Venezia nel Seicento’, Studi Secenteschi 60 (2019), 61–126: 110–112. 83

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Probabilmente anche sulla scorta di notizie più fresche e precise, il diplomatico concludeva che la segnalazione precedente, fatta dall’anonimo estensore della precedente petizione del 1614, non era stata frutto di dicerie senza fondamento: ‘la verità è che questi Canonici [del Collegio Illirico] son divisi, essendo parte nostri sudditi, e parte sudditi della Casa d’A[ustria;] passano tra essi gran rancori, e vi sono perpetui litigi’ e ‘molte volte’ era capitato che alcuni sudditi veneziani tra i componenti del collegio ‘con[tro] il dovere’ si intendevano con gli ‘Austriaci’.23 La testimonianza dell’ambasciatore veneziano è precisa: all’interno del Collegio Illirico erano in atto forti e durature tensioni tra le fazioni che si raggruppavano attorno alle ambascerie degli stati che controllavano il territorio dalmata, cioè Venezia da una parte, e dall’altra l’Impero asburgico con sede a Vienna (collegato a sua volta con la Spagna, retta dalla medesima dinastia degli Asburgo); il che del resto trovava corrispondenza con quanto, in quegli stessi anni, accadeva in Dalmazia, nella stessa Venezia e nel territorio di terraferma da lei controllato.24 Inoltre, agli occhi della nobiltà veneziana del tempo – ma non senza qualche ragione oggettiva – anche il Papato era fortemente influenzato dalla Spagna ed dall’Impero.25 Lukačić, il Collegio, e il cantore Francesco Strisevio Ovviamente non è possibile individuare con certezza una relazione tra l’edizione veneziana delle composizioni di Lukačić, e l’iniziativa che il diplomatico veneziano prese pubblicamente durante la ‘festa’ nella chiesa di San Gerolamo degli Illirici del 1619; non è improbabile, peraltro, che in quell’occasione siano state eseguite alcune tra le composizioni contenute in quella pubblicazione. La documentazione non offre elementi sufficienti per poter stabilire con certezza se Lukačić parteggiasse con una delle due fazioni che si fronteggiavano all’interno del Collegio; e comunque, ovviamente, il suo stato clericale certamente gli imponeva cautela, prudenza ed equidistanza. Si potrebbe ipotizzare che la stampa delle sue composizioni sia stata supportata dalla fazione veneziana per rimarcare l’importanza dello stato veneziano come patrocinatore del Collegio – del quale il musicista era stato uno dei più importanti allievi –, allo scopo di avvalorare l’appoggio del governo veneziano alla permanenza del collegio a Roma e, invece, la sua contrarietà al progetto del suo spostamento a Loreto. L’ipotesi opposta – cioè che il musicista dalmata godesse del patrocinio della fazione imperiale-spagnola, ben documentata nelle città dalmate, aperte a traffici mercantili della più varia provenienza, e quindi a suggestioni politiche e culturali altrettanto varie, come 23 Dal cit. dispaccio datato 9 novembre 1619, a ff. 172rv, 175r. 24 Per la situazione in Dalmazia cfr. Catherine Wendy Bracewell, The Uskoks of Senj. Piracy, Banditry and Holy

War in the Sixteenth-Century Adriatic (Ithaca, London: Cornell University Press, 1992), 28; per la situazione veneziana, con riflessi nel campo musicale, cfr. p. es. P. A. Rismondo, ‘“Frutti nati all’ombre”’, 61–67. 25 Quasi tutti i dispacci inviati settimanalmente dall’ambasciatore veneziano a Roma contengono considerazioni più o meno ampie circa il pesante influsso che la Spagna e l’Impero, tramite i suoi ambasciatori a Roma, esercitava sulla Santa Sede. Più in particolare, non senza qualche malignità si coglievano le occasioni opportune per enumerare le ‘pensioni’ che l’ambasciatore spagnolo (certamente su preciso mandato del suo re) versava ai singoli cardinali della sua fazione (per esempio cfr. I-Vas, SDDaR, filza 99, dispaccio n. 394, 10 febbraio 1629, ff. 445r–448r: ff. 445v–446r). L’influenza dell’Impero sul papato si fece sentire particolarmente in relazione alle ben nota vicende del patriarcato di Aquileia. 84

Paolo Alberto Rismondo: Il Collegio Illirico a Roma, Lukačić e la Dalmazia nei documenti veneziani

Sebenico e Spalato –26 è suggerita invece dal fatto che nella relativamente copiosa documentazione veneziana, compulsata ormai da generazioni di studiosi di tutto il mondo, non si è sinora rinvenuto alcun cenno riguardante Lukačić. L’ipotesi sembra inoltre corroborata dal forte contrasto della figura del compositore dalmata rispetto a quella di un suo concittadino e collega musicista, Francesco Strisevio.27 Questi era invece assai ben sostenuto dal governo veneziano; il suo nome è registrato negli atti della cappella ducale marciana, nella quale proprio nel 1619 ebbe l’onore di essere assunto come cantore effettivo e stabile.28 Peraltro, solo poche registrazioni dei salari da lui riscossi sono sopravvissute, tra 1622 e 1624,29 ed un’ultima annotazione del 1626 c’informa che sino al novembre dell’anno precedente era stato a Roma per un tempo imprecisato.30 Secondo la documentazione romana, invece, proprio nel 1626 sarebbe stato ammesso nella cappella papale, e in quell’anno e nei due successivi avrebbe diretto le musiche per la ‘festa’ nella citata chiesa di S. Gerolamo degli Schiavoni annessa al Collegio Illirico; e grazie ad un breve papale era passato dall’ordine francescano a quello dei frati di S. Spirito in Saxia.31 L’ultima annotazione veneziana che lo riguarda sembra suggerire che nel 1627 aveva abbandonato, forse definitivamente, la cappella ducale.32 Nel 1629 lasciò comunque anche la cappella papale per tornare nella natia 26 In merito si veda R. Paci, ‘La scala di Spalato’, cit., in particolare pp. 73 segg.; C. W. Bracewell, The Uskoks

of Senj, ivi.

27 Il nome ‘Strisevio’ col quale il cantore è ricordato nella documentazione romana è certamente l’italia-

28

29

30

31

32

nizzazione di un nome locale. A titolo di ipotesi, si dà conto dell’esistenza di un possibile predecessore (probabilmente componente di una famiglia nobile locale) di questo cantore musicista, citato in dispacci del rettore veneziano di Sebenico, ‘Domino Francesco Strisoevich Governatore di questa Cavalleria’, giunto in quella località ‘con le lanze spezzate, e con quaranta Albanesi delle barche armate’ su comando del governatore generale in Dalmazia per la difesa del ‘Castello di Verpoglie’, ma poi rimasto a Sebenico dopo la ritirata del pericolo turco; I-Vas, SDDrD, filza 2, dispaccio 14 febbraio 1604, da Sebenico, di Leonardo Giustinian ‘Conte et capitano’, alla data; inoltre ivi, dispacci del 13 aprile e 27 settembre 1603 di Ludovico Baffo ‘Conte e Capitano’. Si trattava, comunque, di episodi che contribuirono a porre in buona luce il milite presso la nobiltà veneziana inviata alla reggenza di Sebenico; il che potrebbe spiegare il favore che il cantore marciano omonimo, forse suo successore, godette presso la procuratia de supra, pur non avendo, molto probabilmente, grande esperienza musicale. Il 18 dicembre 1619 venne assunto quale ‘soprano’ il ‘pre fra Francesco da Sebenico dell’ordine de San Francesco zocolante dalmatin eunuco’ (con 80 ducati annui di salario), che è stato possibile identificare con buona certezza, stante la concomitante documentazione romana, con il cantore operante presso la chiesa romana di San Girolamo degli Schiavoni; I-Vas, Procuratia de Supra, registro 141, f. 120r. Alcuni piccoli pagamenti aggiuntivi, probabilmente per prestazioni ‘straordinarie’ (solistiche, o almeno di particolare spicco) sono in I-Vas, Procuratia de Supra, registro 52, f. 235s e 236s, alle date 4 e 22 dicembre 1622 (3 e 4 ducati rispettivamente); in altri casi, il 29 luglio 1623 e 9 maggio 1624, sono registrati i pagamenti quadrimestrali per il suo salario, che ebbe un aumento di 20 ducati nel 1623 (id., f. 237s e 237d). Molto probabilmente è lui il ‘padre Zoccolante’ citato nella ‘polizza’ di spese per la musica per la festa annuale della Scuola Grande di S. Rocco dell’anno 1624, tenuta sotto la direzione di Alessandro Grandi (alla quale partecipò anche Giacomo Finetti, per il quale v. oltre); I-Vas, Scuola grande di San Rocco, Seconda consegna, b. 166, cc.n.n, s.d. Il 15 aprile di quell’anno gli venne retribuito metà del suo stipendio annuale di 100 ducati, ‘da primo Novembro passato, che dopo ritornato da Roma, ritornò in capella, fin tutto il presente’; beneficiò inoltre della consueta ‘regalia da Pasqua’ (I-Vas, Procuratia de supra, reg. 31, cc. n.n., alla data). Cfr. A. Morelli, ‘La musica a S. Girolamo dei Croati’, 129; cfr. anche la pagina web dedicatagli nella citata banca dati curata da J. Lionnet, Musiciens à Rome de 1570 à 1750, sotto ‘STRISENIO [sic], Francesco’, (http://philidor.cmbv.fr/ark:/13681/5f9scvgh9rigtvxdp0pi/not-238326, visitato il 26 agosto 2021). Cfr. I-Vas, Procuratia de Supra, reg. 9, alla data 29 novembre 1627, annotazioni relative a paghe dovute al cantore il 22 dicembre 1622, e il 29 luglio 1623, e forse allora non riscosse. 85

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Sebenico, munito di un beneficio concessogli dall’ordine cui era stato aggregato tre anni prima. Malgrado alcune discrepanze tra documentazione romana e veneziana, si può affermare con buona certezza che il percorso di questo cantore fu assai diverso, quasi opposto si direbbe, rispetto a quello di Lukačić: da Sebenico a Venezia, quindi a Roma, e finalmente il ritorno in patria. Non sembra però che Strisevio abbia mai goduto delle cariche musicali relativamente elevate alle quali era giunto, in patria, il suo conterraneo più anziano: infatti, Lukačić da Roma tornò nel 1618 in Dalmazia, risiedette qualche tempo a Sebenico, e nel 1620 si trasferì a Spalato ricoprendovi la carica di maestro di cappella della cattedrale. La carriera di Strisevio potrebbe perciò considerarsi un ulteriore elemento a sostegno dell’ipotesi dell’appartenenza di Lukačić alla ‘fazione imperiale’. Quest’ultimo, infatti, nonostante fosse più esperto musicalmente, e avesse ricoperto cariche assai più elevate rispetto al suo più giovane collega, non ottenne mai, dallo stato veneziano, posizioni all’interno della cappella ducale marciana; e neppure sono documentate sue attività musicali a Venezia. La scoperta di qualche sparsa annotazione nella documentazione veneziana non cambierebbe sostanzialmente questo scenario complessivo. Giacomo Finetti ‘maestro di cappella de’ Frari’ L’unico elemento sinora venuto alla luce, che relazioni Lukačić con l’ambiente veneziano, è la curatela della sua raccolta da parte del frate francescano, musicista e compositore d’origine marchigiana Giacomo Finetti. Forse un po’ sbrigativamente si è supposto, sulla base dei frontespizi delle sue numerose raccolte edite a Venezia, che questi abbia esercitato la carica di maestro della cappella della chiesa veneziana dei Frari dal 1617 al 1629, essendo monaco francescano nell’attiguo convento, dal quale la chiesa dipendeva.33 Di certo, nell’esigua documentazione superstite proveniente dallo stesso convento egli non è mai esplicitamente citato.34 La mancanza assoluta del suo nome, nel solo registro capitolare del monastero pertinente al periodo in esame, parrebbe contraddire l’ipotesi di una sua residenza stabile;35 d’altra parte, altre fonti indicano con evidenza una certa rilassatezza nell’obbligo di residenza dei frati.36 33

Su Finetti v. Fulvia Morabito, Gunther Morche, ‘Finetti, Giacomo’, MGG2, Personenteil, vol. 6 (2001), coll. 1186–1187; cfr. anche P. Antonio Sartori Ofm Conv., Archivio Sartori. Documenti di storia e arte francescana, III/2, Evoluzione del francescanesimo nelle tre Venezia - Monasteri contrade località - Abitanti di Padova medioevale, a cura di P. Giovanni Luisetto Ofm conv. (Padova: Biblioteca Antoniana, Basilica del Santo, 1988), 1311, al numero 174. 34 Jonathan Glixon, ‘Reconstructing the Musical Establishment of Santa Maria dei Frari, Venice’, in Barocco Padano e musici francescani. L’apporto dei maestri conventuali. Atti del XVI Convegno internazionale sul barocco padano (secoli XVII–XVIII), Padova, 1–3 luglio 2013, a cura di Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan, Barocco Padano 8 (Padova: Centro studi antoniani, 2014), 79–98: 83–84, 86; ma cfr. qui oltre. 35 Cfr. I-Vas, Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, 14, registro ‘Consiliorum / 1629 24 Gen° sino 1632 14 maggio’. È invece riportata con buona evidenza la petizione presentata dal suo (presunto) successore ‘Fra Carlo Pesaro’, ivi, p. 118, in capitolo 13 dicembre 1631; vi si ricorda come ‘con l’occasione delli travagli communi’, cioè il precedente contagio pestilenziale, il monastero e la chiesa annessa si trovassero senza maestro di cappella. Sono registrate inoltre le presenze dello stesso Pesaro in due riunioni capitolari come ‘Magister musices’ (ivi, p. 119 e 120, rispettivamente in capitoli del 20 aprile e 9 maggio 1632) e la successiva conferma della sua elezione (ivi, p. 122, 10 maggio 1632). 36 Cfr. I-Vas, SDDaR, filza 108, dispaccio 279, 22 ottobre 1633, ff. 168r–172r: f. 168v–169r. Per un esempio più tardo cfr. P. A. Rismondo, ‘Frutti nati all’ombre’, cit., pp. 81–82 e 111–116; vi è tra l’altro descritta la figura 86

Paolo Alberto Rismondo: Il Collegio Illirico a Roma, Lukačić e la Dalmazia nei documenti veneziani

Ben più utili, al fine di stabilire la presenza di Finetti a Venezia, sono le annotazioni presenti nella più corposa documentazione dell’antico archivio della Scuola di San Rocco, istituzione il cui edificio si erge a poche decine di metri dalla chiesa del convento dei Frari, e che approfittava di questa stretta contiguità per chiamare i frati del convento ad officiare durante le festività e ricorrenze religiose. Se Finetti fu tra i cantori della festa annuale della scuola nel 1616, e direttore della medesima festa nel 1626 e forse nel 1629,37 il ‘Padre Maestro di Capella di Frari’ (o dizioni consimili) è documentato come cantore per le esequie delle mansionarie più ricche gestite dalla scuola per tutto il periodo dal 1621 al 1630.38 È ragionevole identificare questa figura con Finetti, sulla base delle contemporanee testimonianze dedotte dai frontespizi delle sue raccolte.39 Sembra che Finetti sia stato vittima della pestilenza che colpì Venezia tra 1630 e 1631.40 Nel 1631, con una loro petizione,41 i padri del convento chiesero un leggero aumento dell’emolumento a loro versato per celebrare le usuali ‘tre messe quotidiane’. La petizione fu respinta con maggioranza larghissima, e negli anni successivi assai raramente i padri del convento di Frari furono chiamati ad officiare le celebrazioni della Scuola; perciò non deve

37

38

39

40 41

di fra’ Paolo Piazza, importante componente seicentesco del convento dei Frari, le cui le attività ufficiose di mediatore e diplomatico implicarono di certo frequenti uscite dal convento, per abboccamenti con l’ambasciatore sabaudo a Venezia, conte Bigliore. Alcune disposizioni emanate durante il capitolo del convento tenutosi il primo marzo 1630 sembrano suggerire una notevole libertà dei frati: vi si stigmatizza ‘l’uso abominevole d’andare a vedere la Guerra [si intende la ‘guerra dei pugni’, tra arsenalotti e nicolotti, tipico divertimento veneziano], udir comedie, li vestimenti di colore con adornamenti, le scarpe o pianelle con tacchetti, le barbe rase, e mostachi tirati’, il che implica che quei comportamenti non erano infrequenti in periodi precedenti; cfr. I-Vas, Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, 14, registro ‘Consiliorum [etc.]’, 35–52, al n° 21. Per la festa del 1616 la polizza relativa elenca un ‘donativo al maestro di cappella dei Frari’, di dieci ducati; I-Vas, Scuola Grande di S. Rocco, Seconda consegna, busta 162, cc. n.n. (e ciò vale per tutte le buste di questo fondo, cit. qui in seguito). La polizza di pagamento per la festa del 1626 specifica il pagamento al ‘Padre maestro Finetti mastro de capella […] per lui come per li altri cantori e sonadori da lui invitati’ (ivi, busta 167). Si tratta dell’unica esplicita menzione del suo nominativo negli atti della Scuola; J. Glixon, Honoring God and the City. Music at the Venetian Confraternities, 1260–1807 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), 287. Nel 1629, l’elenco delle spese affrontate dalla scuola per la festa annuale è assai più generica; le uniche spese di ordine musicale sono un unico ingente pagamento ‘alli musici et sonadori per la festa’, al quale fa seguito una più modesta retribuzione ‘al padre maestro di capella di Frari – ducati 20 £ 124’ (ivi, busta 169, alla data). Si fa riferimento alle polizze di pagamenti per mansionarie ordinate da membri della Scuola, contenute nelle buste di cauzioni della scuola grande di San Rocco dal 1621 al 1630 (ivi, buste 165–169). La citazione sopra riportata è da ivi, b. 167, s.d. [polizza di spese fatte per l’anniversario del ‘quondam Illustrissimo signor Nicolò Moro’, 1626]). J. Glixon, ‘Reconstructing the Musical Establishment of Santa Maria dei Frari, Venice’, 96–97. Almeno sin dalla raccolta Il Primo Libro de Concerti a quattro Voci […], Venezia, ‘Appresso Bartholomeo Magni’, 1618 (RISM A/I F-0819, Catalogo della Biblioteca del Liceo Musicale di Bologna II, p. 421) Finetti è detto ‘Maestro di Cappella della Gran Chà di Venetia’ (il monastero veneziano dei Frari era comunemente detto la ‘Ca’ Granda’ ), o diciture consimili; e poi sino alle ultime raccolte di sue composizioni, pubblicate nel 1629. Le raccolte edite da Finetti sono elencate in coda alla citata voce di F. Morabito, G. Morche, ‘Finetti, Giacomo’, e a quella in Jerome Roche, ‘Finetti, Giacomo’, NGroveD, vol. 8 (2001), 828–829. Secondo i registri dell’ordine cui faceva parte, Finetti sarebbe deceduto il 22 giugno 1631; A. Sartori, Archivio Sartori III/2, 1271, 1311. Ivi, busta 170, s.d.; la petizione è posta in testa al fascicolo relativo all’anno 1631. 87

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

stupire se un ‘maestro di cappella dei Frari’ – chiunque egli fosse – non si trovi più citato nella documentazione dell’istituzione laica.42 Ipotesi sulla formazione musicale di Lukačić La conoscenza personale, se non un vero e proprio allievato, tra Lukačić e Finetti potrebbe aver avuto luogo grazie ad un viaggio del musicista dalmata a Venezia; ma la documentazione sinora rinvenuta non sembra appoggiare l’ipotesi di un’assenza prolungata del musicista dalmata dalla sua terra natale, dopo il suo giovanile periodo romano. Cosicché, sembra più probabile che la curatela della raccolta di Lukačić sia stata affidata a Finetti in primo luogo in considerazione della competenza musicale di quest’ultimo, nota e riconosciuta nell’ambiente musicale cittadino; secondariamente per la comune appartenenza all’ordine francescano; e forse, infine, grazie a relazioni e contatti oggi difficili da precisare, attivati in seguito ai sopra citati rapporti commerciali e culturali tra la Dalmazia e la costa marchigiana dalla quale proveniva Finetti, punto obbligato di passaggio per i chierici dalmati come Lukačić, in viaggio per Roma e il suo Collegio Illirico. Se si volessero trovare dei paralleli o parentele dirette alle composizioni contenute nell’unica raccolta conservata di Lukačić, e quindi avanzare un’ipotesi circa l’ambiente che caratterizzò la formazione del compositore, questi andrebbero ricercati nelle opere composte da musicisti che gravitavano nell’ambiente del Collegio Illirico stesso, e che lo precedettero nelle sue attività di direttore musicale nella chiesa aggregata:43 Alessandro Costantini,44 Ottavio Catalani (rinomato insegnante,45 la cui pregevole raccolta Sacrarum cantionum […] liber primus potrebbe costituire il modello ideale della raccolta del nostro),46 e Abbondio Antonelli.47 D’altra parte l’ambiente musicale romano, in generale, era indubbiamente ricchissimo di personalità assai ricercate sul piano artistico e didattico.48 Tutto ciò trova conferma nella tendenza stilistica generale osservabile nelle composizioni del maestro dalmata, che predilige una sobria levigatezza melodica e un attento 42 Ivi, alle date 5 maggio, 13 ottobre, 29 settembre, 28 novembre 1631. 43 Cfr. A. Morelli, ‘La musica a S. Girolamo dei Croati’, 127; cfr. pure Ennio Stipčević, Ivan Lukačić (Zagreb:

MIC, 2007) [con testo parallelo in lingua croata e inglese].

44 Nativo di Ancona come Finetti, e allievo di Giovanni Battista Nanino; cfr. Colin Timms, Graham Dixon,

‘Costantini, Alessandro’, NGroveD, vol. 6 (2001), 526.

45 Sono documentati come suoi allievi Giovanni Felice Sances [Sancies, Sanci, Sanes, Sanchez], uno dei più

importanti cantori e compositori romani che funsero da tramite tra l’ambiente musicale nativo, e quello nascente dell’‘opera in musica’ a Venezia (cfr. P. A. Rismondo, ‘Sances (Sanci, Sonzi, Sonci, Sanchez)’, Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 90 (2018), 130–133); Francesco Severi (autore di una raccolta di Salmi passaggiati … sopra i falsi bordoni di tutti i tuoni ecclesiastici (Roma, 1615), importante dal punto di vista didattico perché documenta l’ornamentazione vocale in uso nelle cappelle romane del tempo); e Nicolò Borboni [Borbone], per i quali si rimanda alle voci dei principali sussidi bibliografici. 46 Cfr. J. Roche, ‘Catalani [Catalano], Ottavio [Ottaviano]’, NGroveD, vol. 5 (2001), 278; un’ottima riproduzione della raccolta è liberamente scaricabile dal sito della Library of Congress, Washington (USA) (https://memory.loc.gov/natlib/ihas/service/vaultscan.3/200154729/200154729.pdf, visitato il 26 agosto 2021). 47 Cfr. Patricia Ann Myers, ‘Antonelli. Italian family of composers. Abundio [Abbondio, Abondio, Abundii] Antonelli [Antonelli da Fabrica, Antonellio, Antinello]’, NGroveD, vol. 1 (2001), 760–761. 48 Si veda in merito Giancarlo Rostirolla, ‘Alcune note sulla professione di cantore e di cantante nella Roma del Sei e Settecento’, in Roma moderna e contemporanea 4/1 (1996), 37–74. 88

Paolo Alberto Rismondo: Il Collegio Illirico a Roma, Lukačić e la Dalmazia nei documenti veneziani

controllo della tessitura contrappuntistica, osservabile nelle composizioni dei maestri romani citati, ancora influenzati dalla lezione palestriniana;49 piuttosto che la ricerca di sgargianti e improvvisi contrasti armonici e di tessitura (introdotti magari a scapito dell’ equilibrio nella linea melodica e nella tessitura contrappuntistica), caratteri stilistici tipici invece della produzione dei maestri veneziani coevi.50

Fig. 1. Venezia, Scuola Dalmata dei SS. Giorgio e Trifone.

49 Come hanno osservato D. Plamenac, ‘Music of the 16th and the 17th Centuries in Dalmatia’, 50; Niall

O’Loughlin, ‘A note on Lukačić’, The Musical Times 114/1563 (1973), 479–480.

50 Cfr. P. A. Rismondo, ‘Sponga, Francesco, detto Usper’, 764. 89

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Fig. 2. Roma, Collegio Illirico (la collezione private; reproduzione dal Chiesa Sistina I, a cura di Ratko Perić, Roma: Pontificio Collegio Croato di San Girolamo, 1989, p. 102).

90

Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies — A view from the perspective of digital musicology 1 Lucija Konfic Division for the History of Croatian Music Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Zagreb, Croatia

Can the inclusion of a composer’s work in a printed anthology be considered an acknowledgment of its quality? Such collections also served to create repertoire standards, to popularize certain authors, and to introduce new stylistic preferences. It is known that the motets of Ivan Lukačić (c. 1585–1648), originally published in his only preserved collection Sacrae cantiones (Venice: A. Gardano, 1620), were included in two important musical anthologies of his time: Deliciae sacrae musicae by Johann Reininger (Ingolstadt: Gregor Haenlin, 1626), and in the third volume of the Promptuarii musici (Strasbourg: Paul Ledertz, 1627), by Johann Donfrid.2 To illustrate the importance of this inclusion, we will use the words of Ennio Stipčević: Having his place in these well-regarded anthologies, Lukačić confirmed his Europe-wide reputation. The motets from the collection Sacrae cantiones were accepted not only in local dimensions, and not only in Venice, but were, it would seem, performed in the music cappellae of northern Europe.3

Given the respected company in which Lukačić’s works have been found in the context of these musical anthologies, and which have so far not received much attention in terms of comparing musical features, the aim of this article is to take the initial steps in examining the similarities and differences of musical expressions of some of the composers included in these anthologies. Especially, a comparison will be made of the compositions by Ivan Lukačić and Giacomo Finetti, the latter of whom Stipčević believes was the person responsible for the inclusion of Lukačić’s compositions in these collections.4 But, one of the premises of this article is the question: Can the tools of digital musicology help us to get to know the most important similarities and differences between Lukačić and Finetti?5 1

2 3 4 5

A shorter version of this essay was published in Croatian: Lucija Konfic, ‘Skladbe Ivana Lukačića u kontekstu onodobnih glazbenih antologija – pogled iz perspektive digitalne muzikologije’, in Između srednje Europe i Mediterana: glazba, književnost i izvedbene umjetnosti / Bertween Central Europe and the Mediterranean: Music, Literature and the Performing Arts, eds. Ivana Tomić Ferić, Antonela Marić (Split: Sveučilište u Splitu, Umjetnička akademija, Filozofski fakultet, 2021), 259–277. The extensive collection of Promptuarii musici by J. Donfrid was published in three volumes: Pars Prima 1622, Pars Altera 1623, and Pars Tertia 1627. Ennio Stipčević, Ivan Lukačić (Zagreb: MIC, 2007), 117. E. Stipčević, Ivan Lukačić, 117. The term ‘digital musicology’ is used to denote a broad field of musicological research involving various types of digital technology, or as the intersection of digital humanities and musicology. For an overview 91

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

For this purpose, the music21 tool will be used for the analysis of musical parameters, i.e. for the creation of a so-called pitch histogram. We emphasize that the applied quantitative methods of analysis, no matter how visually attractive, are not sufficient in themselves, but with adequate interpretation should serve as a supplement to the classical analysis of musical features. Authors who have previously dealt with Lukačić6 emphasize the importance of his presence in the above-mentioned collections. Lovro Županović prepared and published four motets from the Promptuarii musici.7 In several of his papers, the same author discusses Lukačić’s work in the context of domestic and foreign musicians — mostly in comparison with Tomaso Cecchini, Vinko Jelić, and Heinrich Schütz.8 One very important paper is by Koraljka Kos, who made a detailed comparative analysis of Lukačić’s and Schütz’s compositions.9 Stipčević emphasizes the importance of comparing Lukačić with Giacomo Finetti (because of the possibility that Lukačić studied with him, and since Finetti’s complete works were not available in a modern edition, this comparison was omitted), but also with Gabriello Puliti and Tomaso Cecchini, providing useful guidelines for future work, meaning the connection of Puliti and Lukačić through Finetti, the music settings of some similar texts, as well as the probable acquaintance, in person or through their compositions, between Lukačić and Cecchini in Split or Hvar.10 Both musical collections — Deliciae sacrae musicae and Promptuarii musici (vol. 3) — were published in the midst of the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648) in the heart of Europe (the south-western part of the Holy Roman Empire). In the context of the turmoil between Catholics and Protestants, they must have played an important role in promoting the Catholic faith.

of the various methods and application of digital humanity in field of music see, for example, Ichiro Fujinaga, Susan Forscher Weiss, ‘Music’, in A Companion to Digital Humanities, eds. Susan Schreibman, Ray Siemens, John Unsworth (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004); http://digitalhumanities.org/companion/, accessed 1 December 2020. 6 Dragan Plamenac, Lovro Županović, Josip Andreis, Albe Vidaković, Ennio Stipčević. 7 L. Županović, ‘Četiri moteta Ivana Lukačića. Iz zbirke Promptuarium musicum Johanna Donfrida’ [Four Motets by Ivan Lukačić: From the Collection Promptuarium musicum by Johann Donfrid], Zvuk 91 (1969), 32–37. 8 L. Županović, ‘Umjetnost Ivana Lukačića Šibenčanina’ [The Art of Ivan Lukačić of Šibenik], Radovi JAZU u Zadru 13–14 (1967), 377–400; L. Županović, ‘Mjesto i značenje Ivana Marka Lukačića u hrvatskoj i inozemnoj glazbi njegova vremena i danas’ [The Significance and Place of Ivan Marko Lukačić in the Croatian and Foreign Music of His Time and Today], in Lukačić: zbornik radova znanstvenog skupa održanog u povodu 400. obljetnice rođenja Ivana Marka Lukačića, ed. Ljudevit Maračić (Zagreb: Provincijalat franjevaca konventualaca, 1987), 134–152. 9 Koraljka Kos, ‘Vertonungen lateinischer Texte von Schütz und Lukačić. Vergleichende Analyse / Schützove i Lukačićeve skladbe na latinske tekstove. Usporedbena analiza’, in The Musical Baroque, Western Slavs, and the Spirit of the European Cultural Communion: Proceedings of the International Musicological Symposium Held in Zagreb, Croatia, on October 12-14, 1989 = Glazbeni barok i zapadni Slaveni u kontekstu europskog kulturnog zajedništva: Radovi sa znanstvenog skupa održanog u Zagrebu 12–14. 10. 1989, ed. Stanislav Tuksar (Zagreb: HMD, HAZU, 1993), 45–61; 197–213. 10 E. Stipčević, ‘Komparativne zagonetke u vezi sa Sacrae cantiones Ivana Lukačića Šibenčanina’ [Comparative Puzzles Regarding the Sacrae cantiones by Ivan Lukačić of Šibenik], Sveta Cecilija 53/1 (1983), 2–3. 92

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

Deliciae sacrae musicae (1626) The collection Deliciae sacrae musicae for four voices (soprano, alto, tenor and bass) and organ basso continuo is preserved today in The British Library in soprano and tenor parts.11 They were collected by a teacher (ludimoderator) Johann / Joannes Reininger from Oberstdorf (Oberstdorf im Allgäu), about whose life and work we have almost no information.12 These ‘delights’ of sacred music dedicated to ‘Almighty God, Christ and his wonderful Mother’13 are organized into six sections: 1) For the name of Jesus (De nomine Iesu); 2) Songs for the feast of the Corpus Christi (Cantiones in festo Corporis Christi, quarum etiam usus est sub sacra elevatione & communione); 3) Songs for the Great Mother Virgin Mary (Cantiones Magnae Matri Mariae Virgini accommodatae); 4) Songs for the feasts of St apostles, martyrs, confessors and virgins (Cantiones de SS. Apostolorum, Martyrum, Confessorum & Virginum festivitatibus in communi); 5. Various songs that can be used throughout the year (Concentus varii selectioresque qui omni tempore SS. Ecclesiae usuiesse possunt); and 6) Corollary of the Holy Cross and other songs by unknown authors (Corollarium de Sancta Cruce; cui accesserunt quaedam aliae Cantilenae incertorum Authorum). Numerous questions arise: How was the selection of compositions and composers represented in this collection made? Which composers are represented with more compositions and why? How did it come to be that certain names today considered ‘Kleinmeister’, or even completely forgotten, were included? Did private contacts play a role in the selection or did the editor include what was ‘at hand’? For example, a large number of represented composers published collections named Sacrae cantiones, Cantiones sacrae, Sacrarum cantionum, Sacra cantica, Sacri concentus… from the last ten years of the 16th century to circa 1620 (but mostly in the decade 1610–1620). Regarding the model of compilation, this anthology belongs to the so-called florilegio type — an anthology collected from previously published works14 with the likely goal of gathering in one place a high-quality repertoire of sacred composition for the whole church year and various types of festivities.15 The collection is dedicated to baron Konrad von Bemelberg-Hohenburg,16 and includes music by selected ‘music teachers’ — ‘isthaec de selectissimis quibusque Musices Magistris, quos ipsi illi Arioni aut Amphioni, Orpheo vel Timotheo aequipares, Celeumata 11

12

13 14

15 16

GB-Lbl, The British Library, Music Collections C.92, RISM ID: 993121625. I thank E. Stipčević for kindly providing me with a microfilm copy of this source as well as digital copies of other comparative sources. For a full description, cf. Appendix. Joannes Reininger is cited as ‘Obersdorffensis Algoius Ludi ad D. Virginis Danuvverdae Rector’ on the front page of the Deliciae sacrae. In the court records of Helmstadt we find the name of Johann Reininger in 1624 as a Catholic pastor. Can we assume that this is the same person and that he was also active in that South German city?, Ortsgerichtsbuch von 1589, http://www.helmstadt-ufr.de/Gemeindearchiv.n67. html, accessed 1 December 2020. ‘Deo opt. max. Christo et eius Matri admirabili.’ Giulia M. Ongaro, ‘Venetian Printed Anthologies of Music in the 1560s and the Role of the Editor’, in The Dissemination of Music. Studies in the History of Music Publishing, ed. Hans Lenneberg (London, New York: Routledge, 1994; eBook 2013), 43–69. On music editing of the time in Germany and in general see more in Susan Lewis Hammond, Editing Music in Early Modern Germany (London, New York: Routledge, 2016). We can assume that this is Konrad XII von Bemelberg-Hohenburg (1578–1628). According to the preserved material, Konrad undertook a tour (Kavaliersreise) in Italy in the years 1596–1600 which also coincides with the Italian-oriented repertoire of the collection dedicated to him. See https://manuscripta. at/hs_detail.php?ID=25021. 93

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

collegi, quae fessas iactat atàt ásque mentes pia grataque excitatione coelestem in portum animarent.’17 Bearing in mind the ingratitude of generalizations, and given that we are dealing with a number of special and specific destinies of various composers, let us mention some interesting facts. Out of a total of 176 compositions, as many as seventeen are anonymous authors (Incerti). Most of the composers are represented with one piece — thirty-two of them,18 there are thirteen composers with two to four pieces,19 while there are twelve with five or more pieces.20 Of the composers of the older generation, only Agostino Bendinelli (c. 1550–1598), Giovanni Croce (c. 1557–1609), Johannes de Fossa (c. 1540–1603), Orlando di Lasso (c. 1532–1594), and Orazio Vecchi (1550–1605) are included. From the Italian cultural circles, Roman and Venetian circles stand out, while the composers of German cultural circles (e.g. Augsburg, Munich) also have an orientation towards Italian role models or educational centres. Such is the case, for example, with Hans Leo Hassler21 or Gregor Aichinger, an Augsburg composer and organist, whom Hettrick considers to be ‘[…] with Hans Leo Hassler among the most important and prolific composers in southern Germany in the late 16th and early 17th centuries’,22 and who travelled twice to Venice and Rome for musical studies (1584–88; 1598–1600). Along with Aichinger, Urban Loth, Rudolph de Lasso, Heinrich Pfendner, and Christoph Sätzl belonged to a group of German Catholic composers who promoted the concertato motet in the German lands of the time: He [Loth] was one of a group of Catholic musicians (including Aichinger, Pfendner, Rudolph Lassus and Sätzl) in south Germany and Austria who in the early 17th century took up the form of the concertato motet for few voices and developed it along German lines.23

On the other hand, as expected, there are also included Italian composers who had built their careers north of the Alps: Giovanni Battista Baccinetti (Poland), Stefano Bernardi (Salzburg), Bernardino Borlasca (Munich, Vienna), Giovanni Martino Cesare (Günzburg, Munich), and Alessandro Gualtieri (Salzburg). In general, this anthology fits completely 17 From the dedication of Deliciae sacrae musicae; cf. Appendix. 18 Aichinger, Gregor; Aichmiller, Johann; Allegri, Gregorio; Baccinetti, Giovanni Battista; Bendinelli, Agostino;

19

20

21 22 23

Bianchi, Andrea; Borlasca, Bernardino; Borsaro, Arcangelo; Brunelli, Antonio; Capello, Giovanni Francesco; Crivelli, Ludovico[?]; Croce, Giovanni; Damasceni, Ioan; Erbach, Christian; Fattorini, Gabriele; Hassler, Hans Leo; Keifferer, Christian; Krumper, Wilhelm; Lasso, Orlando di; Leva, Bentivoglio; Loth, Urban; Lukačić, Ivan; Marchesi, Berardo; Mezzogorri, Giovanni Nicolò; Naldi, Hortensio; Plautz, Gabriel; Riedel, Johann; Sätzl, Christoph; Serra, Michelangelo; Ursini, Lucio; Vecchi, Orazio Tiberio; Victorinus, Georg. Banchieri, Adriano (3); Bussoni, Arcangelo (3); Cesare, Giovanni Martino (3); Crotti, Arcangelo (2); Fossa, Johannes de (2); Galli, Sisto (2); Ghizzolo, Giovanni (4); Lemes, Andrea (2); Leoni, Leone (3); Nodari, Giovanni Paolo (2); Pfendner, Heinrich (3); Posch, Isaac (3); Zucchini, Gregorio (4). Agazzari, Agostino (7), Bernardi, Stefano (8); Borgo, Domenico (5); Cecchini, Tomaso (8); Cesena, Giovanni Battista (14); Cifra, Antonio (6); Finetti, Giacomo (7); Gualtieri, Alessandro (8); Lasso, Rudolph di (5); Mortaro, Antonio (5); Viadana, Lodovico (9); Widman, B. (5). Walter Blankenburg, revised by Vincent J. Panetta, ‘Hans [Johann] Leo Hassler [Haslerus]’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.013.90000380199, accessed 27 December 2019. William E. Hettrick, ‘Aichinger, Gregor’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi.org/10.1093/ gmo/9781561592630.article.00345, accessed 27 December 2019. A. Lindsey Kirwan, revised by Stephan Hörner, ‘Loth, Urban’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi. org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.17017, accessed 27 December 2019. 94

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

into the phenomenon of the penetration of Italian culture, in the first half of the 17th century, into the North, which has been the subject of numerous studies (in general and on individual subjects).24 At first glance, it could be said that the collection advocated an early Baroque style, but was more conservative — more antico than moderno. However, the four-part disposition has been refreshed with new stylistic changes which is promoted in the motets of Delicae sacrae musicae. Such a style was traditional enough to comply with the stricter regulations of the Council of Trent and counter-reformation aspirations, and yet new enough to suit the spirit of a time affected by dynamic change. Ivan Lukačić is represented in the collection Delicae sacrae musicae with one motet — the four-part (CCCC/TTTT) Ex ore infantium (in the collection under No. CII, in the section Various songs), which is one of the best examples of Lukačić’s mastery of polyphonic technique.25 It is possible that his inclusion in the collection was facilitated by his acquaintance with his Franciscan confrere Giacomo Finetti, as Stipčević suggests. Finetti is one of the most frequently represented Italian authors in the Nordic countries — his works were published as individual collections and are included in several anthologies. However, Lukačić’s studies in Rome and the acquaintances he gained there should not be excluded as the possible connection for his inclusion in this collection. G. Finetti (1577–1631) is represented in the collection with seven motets. They are: O vos charissimi (No. XLVII, CCAB), Adest nobis dilectissimi (No. LI, CCAB), Iucundare et laetare (No. LV, CATB), O crux ave spes unica (No. CXLVIII, CATB), Nos autem gloriari (No. CLII, TTAB) originally published in the collection Corona Mariae quatuor concinenda (Venice: Bartholomeo Magni, 1622),26 as well as Tu gloria Ierusalem (No. LVII, CATB) and Deus misereatur nostri (br. CXXIII, CCTB) from Finetti’s collection Concerti a quattro voci con il basso per l’organo (Venice: Herede di Angelo Gardano, 1612).27 Represented to the same degree as Finetti is Tomaso Cecchini (c. 1583–1644), Lukačić’s predecessor in Split. Eight of his compositions are included in Reininger’s anthology. These are: Sancta Maria dulcis et pia (No. XLII, CATB), O quam gloriosum est regnum (No. LXXV, ATTB), Benedicam Dominum (No. XCVI, CATB), Iubilate Deo omnis terra (No. CI, CATB), Aspice Domine de fede sancta tua (No. CVIII, CATB), Super fluminis Babylonis 24 See for example: The Early Baroque Era. From the Late 16th Century to the 1660s, ed. Curtis Price (Lon-

don: Macmillan Press, 1993); Lorenzo Bianconi, Il Seicento (Torino: EDT, 1991); Stephen Rose, ‘Music in the Market-Place’, in The Cambridge History of Seventeenth Century Music, ed. Tim Carter, John Butt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 55–87; on Paduan composers, see Chiara Comparin, ‘Mapping the Presence of Paduan Repertoire in European Anthologies in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century’, Musicologica Brunensia 53/2 (2018), 25–40; on Gabrielis in the northern Europe, cf. Lars Berglund, ‘Transferring the Gabrielis to the North. On the Reception of Andrea and Giovanni Gabrieli in Seventeenth-Century Scandinavia’, Musica Iagellonica 8 (2017), 139–156.; Justyna Szombara, ‘Music by Andrea and Giovanni Gabrieli in the Library of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Gdańsk’, Musica Iagellonica 8 (2017), 117–137. 25 L. Županović, ‘Mjesto i značenje Ivana Marka Lukačića’, 136. 26 The collection was recently published in a modern edition: Giacomo Finetti, Corona Mariae a quattro voci, Venezia 1622, eds. Tomislav Bužić, Dario Poljak, CMF 25/9 (Padova: Centro studi Antoniani, 2019), with an introduction by E. Stipčević, (series Giacomo Finetti. Opera omnia, vol. IX, ed. E. Stipčević). 27 G. Finetti, Concerti a quattro voci con il basso per l’organo (1612), CMF 25/4 (Padova: Centro studi Antoniani, 2019), transcribed by Ivana Jurenec (Giacomo Finetti. Opera omnia, vol. IV). The 1612 edition was marked as novamente ristampati, which could indicate that the collection was created even earlier. 95

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

(No. CXVII, CATB), and In spiritu humilitatis (No. CXXI, CATB), originally published in the collection Salmi, et motetti concertati a quattro voci piene op. 9 (Venice: G. Vincenti, 1616),28 while Laudate Dominum Sanctis eius (No. CLXXI, CATTB) was published in the collection Psalmi, missa et alia cantica quinque vocibus op. 14 (Venice: A. Vincenti, 1619).29 The latter composition is one of the three five-part motets in Deliciae sacrae. In addition to Cecchini, these are only O sacrum convivium (No. XXIII, CCATB) by Johannes de Fossa and O pie pelicane (No. XXIV, CCATB) by Hans Leo Hassler. As to the ways in which these compositions came to the compiler of the Delicae sacrae we can only speculate for now. From the channels of purchasing printed music there stands out the book and music fairs in Frankfurt and Leipzig, or it could have been the private contacts of musicians (either for printed materials or handwritten music) that the musicians themselves, or through colleagues, presented to institutions or potential patrons.30 Promptuarii musici concentus ecclesiasticos (1627) The collection Promptuarii musici, concentus ecclesiasticos also includes Italian and German composers: ‘diversis et praestantissimis Germaniae, Italia & aliis aliarum terrarum Musicis collectos exibens’. The third part of the collection is dedicated to the pastor and musician Zacharia Schnizer and contains 286 compositions.31 The collection is divided into the following sections: 1. For Advent (In adventu Domini); 2. For the Feast of St. Andrew the Apostle (In festo S. Andreae Apostoli); 3. For St. Nicholas Bishop (De S. Nicolao Episcopo et Confessore); 4. For the Feast of St. Thomas the Apostle (In festo S. Thomae Apostoli); 5. For Christmas (In Nativitate Domini nostri Iesu Christi); 6. For the Feast of St. Stephen the First Martyr (In festo S. Stephani Prothomartyris); 7. For the Feast of St John the Apostle and Evangelist (In festo S. Ioannis Apostoli et Evangelistae); 8. For the Circumcision of Jesus (In Circumcisione Domini); 9. For the Epiphany (In Epiphania Domini); 10. For the Third Sunday after the Epiphany (Dominica III. Post Epiphaniam); 11. For the Feast of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary (In Festo Purificationis Beatae 28 Tomaso Cecchini, Salmi, et motetti concerati a quattro voci piene et mutate a beneplacito de Cantori con il

Basso per l’Organo, libro primo, op. 9 (Venice, 1616) is preserved only in Canto part in Piran (Slovenia), Parish Office Piran (SL-Pžu). 29 T. Cecchini, Psalmi, missa et alia cantica quinque vocibus una cum gravi parte pro Organo et un Echo nel fine a Otto voci, op. 14 (Venice, 1619) is completely preserved in the Universitätsbibliothek Johann Christian Senckenberg, Frankfurt am Main (D-F), RISM ID 990001588. See also the recently published edition T. Cecchini, Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica quinque vocibus (1619), Opera omnia, vol. 6 (Zagreb: Vatroslav Lisinski Concert Hall, MIC, 2019), introduced and edited by Gabriele Taschetti. 30 See more in S. Rose, ‘The Mechanisms of the Music Trade in Central Germany, 1600–40’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association 130/1 (2005), 1–37; The Dissemination of Music: Studies in the History of Music Publishing, ed. H. Lenneberg (London, New York: Routledge, 2013); H. Lenneberg, On the Publishing and Dissemination of Music 1500–1850 (Hillsdale: Pendragon Press, 2003), 54–73; C. Comparin: ‘Mapping the Presence of Paduan Repertoire’, 33–34. 31 On the three volumes of the collection and their editor, see Jerome Roche, ‘Donfrid [Donfried], Johann [Johannes]’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.07998, accessed 27 December 2019. Lists of composers can be found at RISM, RISM ID: 993121633; as well as at http://www3.cpdl.org/wiki/index.php/Promptuarii_musici_concentus_ecclesiasticos,_Pars_Tertia_ (Johann_Donfrid). Cf. also Appendix. 96

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

Mariae Virginis); 12. For the Annunciation to the Blessed Virgin Mary (De Annunciatione B. Mariae semper Virginis); 13. For the Glorious Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ (De gloriosissima Resurrectione Domini nostri Iesu Christi); 14. For the Holy Easter Time (De sanctis tempore Paschali); 15. For the Feast of the Discovery and Exaltation of the Holy Cross (In festo Inventionis et Exultationis S. Crucis); 16. For the Ascension of the Lord (In Ascensione Domini); 17. For the Feast of Pentecost (In festo Pentecostes); 18. For the Feast of St Trinity (In festo SS. et Individuae Trinitatis); 19. For the Feast of Corpus Christi (In festo Corporis Christi); 20. For the Birth of St John the Baptist (In Nativitate S. Joannis Baptistae praecursoris Domini nostri Iesu Christi); 21. For the Feast of the Apostles Peter and Paul (In festis SS. Apostolorum Petri et Pauli); 22. For the Conversion and Commemoration of St Paul the Apostle (In Conversione et Commemoratione S. Pauli Apostoli); 23. For the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary (In Visitatione B. Mariae semper Virginis); 24. For the Feast of the Holy Guardian Angels (In festo S. Angeli Custodis); 25. For the Feast of Mary Magdalene (In festo S. Mariae Magdalenae); 26. For the Feast of St. James the Apostle (In festo S. Jacobi Apostoli); 27. For the Feast of the Transfiguration (In festo Transfigurationis); 28. For the Feast of S. Lawrence the Martyr (In festo S. Laurentii Martyris); 29. For the Ascension of the Blessed Virgin Mary (In Assumptione B. Mariae semper Virginis); 30. For the Nativity of the Virgin Mary (In Nativitate B. Mariae Virginis); 31. For the Consecration of St Michael the Archangel (In Dedicatione S. Michaelis Archangeli); 32. For the Feast of St Francis and his Stigmata (In festo S. Francisci et Stigmatum eiusdem); 33. For the Feast of St Simon and Judas the Apostles (In festo SS. apostolorum Simonis et Judae); 34. For the Feast of All Saints (In festo Omnium Sanctorum); 35. For the Feast of St. Martin the Bishop and Confessor (In festo S. Martini Episcopi et Confessoris); 36. For the Feast of St Cecilia Virgin and Martyr (In festo S. Caeciliae Virginis et Martyris); 37. For the Feast of St Catherine Virgin and Martyr (In festo S. Catharinae Virginis et Martyris); and 38. For the Consecration of the Church (In Dedicatione Ecclesiae). It includes all major holidays, Marian, and more important feasts for saints in the church year. Unlike Deliciae sacrae, in which only four-part motets are selected (with a few five-part motets), this anthology puts in the foreground compositions for two (142) or three (85) voices, with a significant, but somewhat smaller presence, of four-part compositions (53), several five-part compositions (4), and one eight-part composition. Composers represented by the greatest number of pieces in Promptuarii musici III are Giovanni Francesco Anerio (54); Urban Loth (25); Giacomo Finetti (19); Alessandro Grandi (18); Antonio Cifra (14); Vincenzo Pace (12); Christoph Sätzl (12); Heinrich Pfendner (9) to which we can add Lodovico Viadana (7); Agostino Agazzari (5); and Ivan Lukačić (5). There are 24 composers with 2-4 compositions included,32 33 with one,33 and 32 Aichinger, Gregor (2), Amon, Blasius [Ammon, Blasius] (2); Antonelli, Abondio (2); Banchieri, Adri-

ano (3); Benn, Johann (3); Bernardi, Stefano (3); Borsaro, Archangelo (4); Cesare, Giovanni Martino (4); Capello, Giovanni Francesco (2); Capriccio, Giorgio (2); Croce, Giovanni (3); Erbach, Christian (3); Fossa, Johannes de (2); Grani, Alvise (2); Hassler, Hans Leo (3); Holzner, Anton (4); Jelić, Vinko [Jelich, Vincentio] (4); Lasso, Rudolph di (2); Leimberer, Alexander (2); Leone, Leoni (2); Mezzogorri, Giovanni Nicolò (3); Mortaro, Antonio (2); Uffereri, J. D. [Giovanni Damasceni] (2); Viadana, Giacomo Moro da (3). 33 Aglione, Alessandro; Aichmiller, Johann; Baccinetti, Giovanni Battista; Balbi, Aloisio [Balbi, Luigi]; Ballioni, H. [Baglioni, Girolamo]; Belli, Giulio; Binago, Benedetto; Burlini, Antonio; Civita, Giacomo de; Cocciola, Giovani Battista; Fattorini, Gabriele; Gallo, Vincenzo; Geisenhof, Johann; Krumper, Guilielmo [Krumper, Wilhelm]; Lagkhner, David; Lasso, Orlando di; Miserocca, Sebastiano [Miseroca, Bastiano]; 97

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

there are 8 compositions by anonymous authors (Anonymus, Incerti, Ignorati). Among the composers of the older generation are Giovanni Croce, Johannes de Fossa, Orlando di Lasso, and Orazio Vecchi, who can also be found in Deliciae, as well as Antonio Mortaro (c. 1550–c. 1620), Jacob Regnart (c. 1540–1599), and Orazio Scaletta (c. 1550–1630). In both collections we find, therefore, the following composers: Agazzari, Aichinger, Aichmiller, Baccinetti, Banchieri, Bernardi, Cesare, Capello, Cifra, Croce, Erbach, Fattorini, Finetti, Fossa, Hassler, O. di Lasso, R. di Lasso, Leone, Loth, Lukačić, Mezzogorri, Mortaro, Pfendner, Sätzl, Ursini, Orazio Vecchi, and Viadana. Lukačić is represented in the Promptuarii by five compositions: the two-part Corde et animo (No. 201, TT, for the feast of Nativity of Mary), Sancta et immaculata (No. 23, CC/ TT, for Christmas); Sancti mei (No. 235, TT, for the feast of All Saints); the three-part Domine puer meus (No. 49, CTB, for the third Sunday after the Epiphany); and Nos autem gloriari (No. 80, CCB/TTB, for the feast of the Holy Cross); all are from the collection Sacrae cantiones. With nineteen motets, Finetti is one of the most represented composers in this collection. Although some of his compositions had been published in various earlier collections — the two-part Andreas Christi famulus (No. 11, TB), Egredimini et videte (No. 179, AA), Lapidabant Stephanum (No. 39, TT), Valde honorandus est (No. 40, TT), and Verbum caro factum est (No. 27, TT) in Sacrae cantiones a 2 voci e b. c. (Venice: B. Magni, 1620 4th edition);34 and Hodie apparuerunt (No. 172, CC), Vox dilecti mei (No. 148, CT) in Motecta binis vocibus concinenda (Venice: A. Gardano, & Fratres, 1611; 1621 5th edition),35 and the four-part Aquae multae (No. 161, CATB) in Concerti a quattro voci (Venice: Herede di A. Gardano, 1612) — we can speculate that the main source for the editor of Promptuarii musici III was probably the collection Concerti ecclesiastici, published in Antwerpen in 1621.36 It includes almost all of Finetti’s compositions from this collection.37 The remaining four four-part motets were published in the already-mentioned collection Corona Mariae: Gaudens gaudebo (No. 41, CCAB), Nos autem gloriari (No. 86, ATTB), O crux ave spes unica (No. 83, CATB), and Sonet vox tuae (No. 282, CCAB). As we can see, the two compositions — O crux ave spes unica and Nos autem gloriari — coincide with the Deliciae sacrae.

34 35

36

37

Montesardo, H. [Montersardo, Girolamo]; Monteverdi, Claudio; Pace, Pietro; Pauser, Johann; Praetorius, Michael; Racholdinger, Elias [Racholdinger, Helia]; Regnard, J. [Regnart, Jacob]; Scaletta, Orazio; D’India, Sigismondo; Spinelli, J. N. [Spinello, Giovanni Nicolo]; Stopper, Melchior; Tomasi, Blasio; Ursini, Lucio; Vecchi, Orazio Tiberio; Viadana, Bernardo; Waidmann, Adam. G. Finetti, Sacrae cantiones a 2 voci e b.c., ed. Tea Kulaš, Opera Omnia, vol. V, CMF 25/5 (Padova: Centro Studi Antoniani, 2019). See Jeffrey Kurtzman, Anne Schnoebelen, ‘A Catalogue of Mass, Office and Holy Week Music Printed in Italy: 1516–1770’, JSCM Instrumenta 2 (2014), http://sscm-jscm.org/instrumenta/vol-2/, accessed 27 December 2019. G. Finetti, Concerti ecclesiastici II, III et IV vocibus cum basso generali ad organum (Antwerp: Pierre Phalèse, 1621). See also a modern edition: G. Finetti, Concerti Ecclesiastici (1621). Motets for Two, Three or Four Voices and Basso Continuo, ed. Janet E. Hunt, hhttp://www.huntmusic.us/music-of-giacomo-finetti, accessed 11 December 2021. The two-part Andreas Christi famulus (TB), Domus pudici pectoris (TT), Egredimini et videte (AA), Hodie apparuerunt (CC), Lapidabant Stephanum (TT), Valde honorandus est (TT), Verbum caro factum est (TT), Vox dilecti mei (CT); the three-part Angelus ad pastores ait (CTB), Assumpta est Maria (CCB), Dies sanctificatus (CTB), Ego mater pulchrae (CTB), Quem vidistis pastores (CAB), Tria sunt munera (TTB), and the four-part Aquae multae (CATB). 98

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

Fig. 1. I. Lukačić, Corde et animo (T), from the anthology Promptuarii musici, III (1627) by Johann Donfrid, part of ‘Vox secunda’, CCI, München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, 4 Mus.pr. 451-1/3.

99

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

In the context of this anthology, we must also point out the presence of Vinko Jelić with four compositions: Doctor bonus et amicus (No. 6, CC) and O pretiosum at admirandum convivium (No. 111, TTB), from the Parnassia militia (Strasbourg: Paul Ledertz, 1622).38 The motets Salve radix sancta (No. 285, CA) and Salvum fac populum (No. 286, AA) were published one year after Promptuarii musici III in Jelić’s collection Arion primus (Strasbourg: P. Ledertz, 1628).39 Nos autem gloriari oportet It was Giacomo Finetti who was responsible for the publication of Lukačić’s only preserved collection Sacrae cantiones in Venice in 1620, as stated on the cover and in the dedication of the collection. Whether Lukačić studied with him cannot yet be reliably determined. To compare their compositional approaches, we will take the example of their setting to music the text Nos autem gloriari, both included in the anthology Promptuarii musici III (Lukačić, No. 80, CCB/TTB; Finetti, No. 86, ATTB). Given the very individual approach to all the kinds of different texts of their motets, this can by no means be a comparison of their compositional idioms. In this example Lukačić takes only the text of the antiphon of the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross (Gal. 6, 14; Missale Romanum, Feria II, V Maioris hebdomadae, Introitus), while Finetti completes it in the middle part with a paraphrase of the Hail Mary prayer (Lk 1, 28) and Alleluia. Table 1. Text and formal disposition — G. Finetti and I. Lukačić: Nos autem gloriari oportet.

Finetti Nos autem gloriari oportet in Cruce Domini nostri Iesu Christi: in quo est salus, vita, et resurrectio nostra: per quem salvati, et liberati sumus, Alleluia. Alleluia. Ave Sancta Crux gratia plena. Dominus tecum benedicta, tu benedicta inter omnes arbores et benedictus fructus qui pependit in te, Jesu Christus. Per quem salvati et liberati sumus, Alleluia. Alleluia

Lukačić A

A B C

B

D

Nos autem gloriari oportet in Cruce Domini nostri Iesu Christi in quo est salus, vita, et resurrectio nostra. Per quem salvati, et liberati sumus.

C/A’

B’ Coda

Lukačić uses a three-part disposition with two high voices and a bass (CCB/TTB) and a doric mode on the tone g. He is stylistically more equalized — he uses the imitation technique throughout the composition: at the beginning it brings a contrast of bass voice in the long note values (nos autem) and two higher voices interact in the imitative game (gloriari oportet), achieving an expressive gradation by multiple repetitions of the text, and at the end of the section all voices unite in a polyphonic structure in common cel38 https://dizbi.hazu.hr/a/?pr=i&id=12174, accessed 11 December 2021. 39 https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b90627089, accessed 11 December 2021. 100

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

ebration (gloriari oportet). In the second section (in Cruce Domini), all three voices participate equally, with a calm character and longer note values in contrast to the previous ‘celebratory’ character. This section is followed by a close imitative three-part polyphony (in quo est salus) which corresponds to the initial section. The last section begins with a short contrasting homophonic section in triple measure (per quem salvati) which flows into the final, rhythmically freer imitative end (et liberates sumus). Finetti opts for a four-part disposition (TTAB) and F major. He puts into contrast two opposed surfaces: the initial (nos autem) and the central (ave Sancta Crux), which are a dynamic imitative play of only two tenors, in duple measure and shorter note values, and are separated by all four parts, including the triple metric sections of longer duration and meditative character (et resurrectio; per quem salvati). In the polyphonic section an imitation in the manner of an echo comes to the fore in which the two tenors alternate motifs, thus emphasizing the characteristic words. To the previous two examples we can add a third setting of the same text in the Promptuarii musici collection by another Franciscan composer and organist from Milan — Antonio Mortaro (c. 1550–c. 1620). His motet Nos autem (No. 78, CCB) was originally published in his collection Sacrae cantiones (1598),40 which provides ‘interesting examples of the developing concertato style.’41 Mortaro’s Nos autem takes the same text as Lukačić, adding the final Alleluia. He uses a three-part disposition (for two high voices and bass), similar to Lukačić, and a dense imitation style in which all three voices participate equally. Each stanza of the text is repeated multiple times and forms musical units that flow into each other. Table 2. Text and formal disposition — A. Mortaro: Nos autem gloriari oportet.

Mortaro Nos autem gloriari oportet in Cruce Domini nostri Iesu Christi: in quo est salus, vita, et resurrectio nostra: per quem salvati, et liberati sumus Alleluia.

A B C D Coda

40 Antonio Mortaro, Sacrae cantiones tribus vocibus concinendae (Mediolani: Simonis Tini & Io. Franciscum Bisu-

tium, 1598), https://imslp.org/wiki/Sacrae_cantiones_(Mortaro%2C_Antonio), accessed 11 December 2021.

41 J. Roche, revised by Tim Carter, ‘Mortaro, Antonio’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi.org/10.1093/

gmo/9781561592630.article.19172, accessed 27 December 2019. 101

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Common to all three composers is the use of a characteristic motif for setting to music the words gloriari oportet:42 Mus. ex. 1a. I. Lukačić, Nos autem, b. 1–4.

Mus. ex. 1b. G. Finetti, Nos autem, b. 1–4.

Mus. ex. 1c. A. Mortaro, Nos autem, b. 1–3.

42 On imitation and musical conventions in relation to text (text-specific musical conventions), see

Michele Fromson, ‘A Conjunction of Rhetoric and Music: Structural Modelling in the Italian CounterReformation Motet’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association 117/ 2 (1992), 208–246. 102

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

We can also find a certain similarity between Mortaro and Lukačić in the organization of sections as well as in the motif work (besides the motif on the text gloriari oportet see also in quo est salus). Analysis of parts using the music21 tool In this paper, we have also dealt with a comparison of the highest parts of Lukačić’s and Finetti’s compositions in the collection Deliciae sacrae musicae (Ingolstadt: G. Haenlin, 1625) with the help of the music21 digital tool.43 The comparison of only one part of a polyphonic composition certainly gives us only a partial picture of its particularities. It is a fortunate circumstance that today we have, completely preserved, other parts of Lukačić’s and Finetti’s compositions. Unfortunately, this is not the case with, for example, Cecchini, whose motets from the Deliciae sacrae musicae, except Laudate Dominum Sanctis eius, are preserved only in the soprano part. In addition, a better usability of tools such as music21 could be obtained on a larger corpus, e.g. on an entire collection. This, however, was not possible within the framework of this paper, but it is certainly a roadmap for some future projects. The music21 tool allows you to analyse, view, and transform music into specific symbolic forms. A prerequisite for such processing is a computer-readable musical format.44 We have used graphs of the tones used in the composition (a pitch histogram) and pitch and duration graphs which both serve for easier visualization and analysis. Beside Lukačić’s and Finetti’s motets from the Deliciae sacrae musicae, Lukačić’s compositions from the Promptuarii musici III were added in order to have both composers equally represented in the analysis. According to the graphs, it can be seen that Lukačić is more inclined to use a wider tonal space (decima-undecima/tenth-eleventh) in the highest part, while Finetti (as well as Cecchini) uses a slightly smaller range (octava-decima/octave-tenth). In Lukačić’s composition, in relation to Finetti, we find a greater tendency to achieve one melodic climax of the highest part. In both composers, as expected, most of the movements are within the range of fifth to sixth. In Lukačić’s case, the tones most often used in the highest part are the basic tone or the third from the basic tone, while Finetti sets the highest part around the third and the fifth in relation to the basic tone. Finetti’s composition Tu gloria Ierusalem, written for four voices (CATB), is organized in alternating tutti sections as refrains (Tu gloria) and solo monody stanzas (first C, then A, then T and finally B) in a similar way as Lukačić’s Quam pulchra es is formally organized (in which the solo sections are in CBAT order). However, the cantus part of Finetti’s composition Tu gloria Ierusalem is set as completely diatonic, without major leaps, which we find only between phrases: an ascending minor sixth between the first and the second 43 See more about the music21 tool in Michael Scott Cuthbert, Christopher Ariza, ‘music21: A Toolkit for

Computer-Aided Musicology and Symbolic Music Data’, in 11th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR 2010), August 9–13, 2010, Utrecht, Netherlands, eds. J. Stephen Downie, Remco C. Veltkamp, 637–642, http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/84963, accessed 15 November 2019. 44 We have used the musicXML format extracted from the Sibelius program. I would like to thank my husband Davor Konfic for his help in transcribing the examples into Sibelius, as well as colleagues Tomislav Bužić, Dario Poljak, and Ivana Jurenec for providing their copies of Sibelius files for selected parts of Finetti’s compositions. 103

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

phrases of the solo section (Iudith – canebant), as well as an ascending octave between the second and the third phrases (Israel – et benedicentes). The melody of the cantus in Lukačić’s Quam pulchra es is far more developed with more frequent and larger melodic leaps and modulations. The pitch histogram of the cantus part of Finetti’s Tu gloria Ierusalem point us to a possible resemblance to Lukačić’s three-part motet Domine puer meus (CTB), whose formal disposition has no common points with Tu gloria Ierusalem, i.e. it is organized as a series of solo passages with a final climax uniting all parts of the Et sanatus est Puer. A similarity is evident in the diatonic setting of the part, a mostly gradual movement, and approximately the same ambitus (an octave in Finetti’s motet vs a ninth in Lukačić’s). This is generally true for a large number of compositions of the time. What is missed in this generalization are the details of the motivic work, meaning the nature of the melodic movement that can reveal the particularities of the composer’s style.45 We can examine this with another example: in the collection Promptuarii musici III (Strasburg: P. Ladertz, 1627), in addition to Lukačić’s setting of the text Corde et animo, there is included a setting of the same text by Antonio Cifra, a Roman composer and Lukačić’s contemporary (1584–1629), from 1609 a maestro di cappella in Loreto.46 Cifra’s motet Corde et animo was published in the second book of his motets Il secondo libro de motetti a due, tre, et quattro voci (in the Promptuarii musici No. 204).47 Table 3. Text and formal disposition — A. Cifra and I. Lukačić.

A. Cifra Corde et animo Corde et animo Christo canamus gloriam Corde et animo Christo canamus gloriam Christo canamus gloriam in hac sacra solemnitate praecelsae genitricis Dei Mariae in hac sacra solemnitate praecelsae genitricis Dei Mariae

I. Lukačić a a b a b b

A

c d c d

B

A

a a b a b c/a’ c/a’ c/a’ B d e e Coda f

Corde et animo Corde et animo Christo canamus gloriam Corde et animo Christo canamus gloriam in hac sacra solemnitate in hac sacra solemnitate in hac sacra solemnitate praecelsae genitricis Dei Mariae genitricis Dei Mariae Alleluia.

45 The relationship between music and words opens up a whole new set of problems and possibilities, so we

will not consider it here.

46 The connections of the Croatian coast with Loreto are already obvious and known because of the Jesuit

school – Collegio illirico di Loretto. For recent research on the tradition of church music from the Basilica of the Holy House in Loreto transferred to the Cathedral of St. James in Šibenik in the 19th century, see Snježana Miklaušić-Ćeran, ‘Glazba u Katedrali sv. Jakova u Šibeniku početkom druge polovine 19. stoljeća’ [Music in the Šibenik Cathedral of St Jacob], in Glazbe Jadrana – identitet, utjecaji i tradicije [Music of the Adriatic – Identity, Influences, and Traditions], eds. Ivana Paula Gortan-Carlin, Branko Radić (Novigrad: Katedra Čakavskog sabora za glazbu, 2019), 27–74. 47 We cite it according to the edition from 1630; Antonio Cifra, Il secondo libro de motetti a due, tre, et quattro voci d’ Antonio Cifra Romano. Novamente corretti, e ristampati: con il Basso continuo per l’Organo (Roma: Appresso Gio. Battista Robletti, 1630), https://opacplus.bsb-muenchen.de/title/BV007779153, accessed 11 December 2021. The first edition of the second book of motets was published in 1609. 104

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

Both Cifra’s and Lukačić’s motets were written for two tenors accompanied by basso continuo. They are settings of a short text of the antiphon for the feast of the birth of Mary: Corde et animo Christo canamus gloriam, in hac sacra sollemnitate praecelsae Genetricis Dei Virginis Mariae. Both composers build a similar short form based on repetitions of individual sections of the text: in Cifra we can distinguish two main parts, and in Lukačić also two, but with an addition of a final (si placet) Alleluia. From the pitch histogram of the individual parts, certain similarities in approach can be read: their range is within the ninth (T1 in Cifra’s motet, T2 in Lukačić’s) or tenth (T2 in Cifra’s motet, T1 in Lukačić’s). Most of the movement takes place within the fifth, and one climax can be found in the T1 part in both composers, while T2 part reaches its highest tone several times. The movement of the parts is predominantly diatonic. Table 4a, 4b. Pitch histograms of T1 and T2 parts in Corde et animo by A. Cifra and by I. Lukačić: a) A. Cifra : Corde et animo, T1 and T2 parts

b) I. Lukačić: Corde et animo, T1 and T2 parts

In both motets we can see the equal importance of both vocal parts in the alternation through which the musical action is built. The parts are constantly intertwined and crossed. In Cifra’s example, the change of the quadruple and triple measures comes to the fore, while Lukačić builds the entire motet on a quadruple measure. The treatment of the text is mostly syllabic. We find melismas in Cifra’s motet as a supplement to the glorification in the word gloriam, and in Lukačić’s, in addition to gloriam, the words animo and canamus are also treated melismatically. In Cifra’s Corde the ‘A’ section is characterized by an imitative play between voices, while in the ‘B’ section there is a homophonic relationship of the parts. In the ‘a’ section 105

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

the theme (Corde) is firstly completely presented in the T1 part and then the T2 imitates it on the fifth. In section ‘b’ (Christo) the imitation is narrower and the measure is changed to triple. T1 repeats the theme on the fifth, but also joins homophonically in the imitative appearance of the T2, which also brings out the theme on the fifth. The theme Christo, for the second time, is firstly presented by the T2 and then, in the same way as before, both parts perform in a close imitation. The ‘B’ part starts with a homophonic treatment of the in hac section (in thirds) and the T1 part continues with a solo section praecelsae. When repeated, the parts change roles, but remain in a homophonic texture until the cadence on the Dei Mariae text. Likewise, in Lukačić’s motet section ‘A’ is characterized by very similar procedures. In his case, the first section includes the in hac sacra solemnitate part. The first theme ‘a’ in Lukačić’s motet is very distinguished — it is built on a major triad. It is presented firstly in the T1 part, and then the T2 imitates it. The T2 part continues to bring up the theme ‘b’ (Christo). A return to the Corde theme follows, but in a close imitation of both parts (first the T1 and then the T2) and in the same imitative way continues with the ‘b’ theme. The T1 part then presents a ‘c’ theme that could be understood as a variant (inverse) of the first. It appears firstly in the T1 part, then in T2 part, imitating it on the fifth, and then in both parts in close imitation. The word praecelsae brings a certain respite: both tenors perform it homophonically in thirds. But, unlike Cifra, Lukačić returns to the polyphonic treatment of the parts and the section genitricis is repeated in close imitation (T2-T1 and then T1-T2 in the ratio of the fifth). The final Alleluia seems to summarize all the actions: the solo presentation of the subject in one part, then the imitation in the other part, the homophony in thirds, and the final close imitation. Table 5a, 5b. Graphical presentation of the theme appearance in the Corde at animo motets by A. Cifra and I. Lukačić: a) A. Cifra: Corde et animo

b) I. Lukačić: Corde et animo

Thus, in both Cifra’s and Lukačić’s motets Corde et animo, we find a similar approach in the first section of the composition. In the second, their approach differs — Lukačić returns to the polyphonic texture while Cifra remains with the homophonic. Some general features could be observed by making a pitch histogram, but for most of the analysis — the relationship of parts, themes, and motivic development — a classical analytical approach was required. The example of the motet Corde et animo showed that Cifra’s and 106

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

Lukačić’s compositions should be more thoroughly compared. This is supported by the fact that we can find settings of the same texts by both composers. Concluding remarks This paper focuses on compositions by Ivan Lukačić, which are represented in two Central European musical anthologies — Deliciae sacrae musicae by Johann Reininger and Prompturii musici III by Johann Donfrid. There are a total of six motets (1+5): in the first anthology there is a four-part Ex ore infantium, while in the second there are the two- and three-part Corde et animo, Sancta et immaculata, Sancti mei, Domine puer meus, and Nos autem gloriari. Some particularities are highlighted in both collections. We cannot answer why the choice fell on these particular compositions of Lukačić’s (a question also posed by Županović).48 The starting point of these collections was probably to gather suitable and high-quality compositions in one place that could be used for a particular feast. The texts in this regard were limited, for which reason in both collections, compositions composed on the same texts were included in several cases. In musical terms, the style sought to be promoted prevailed, as well as the quality of the composer’s work. With the example of the motet Nos autem gloriari, which was set to music by Lukačić and G. Finetti, an attempt was made to compare their compositional approaches. The similarities and differences between them, as well as those in relation to A. Mortaro in his composition of the same name, indicate that the work on the comparison of these composers should continue. This was also done for the motets Corde et animo by Lukačić and A. Cifra. But we also wanted to examine whether the digital tool music21, which can be used to create pitch histograms and pitch and duration graphs of individual parts, can help us find similarities and differences between the selected composers. In this case, it was done on a small sample — only for Lukačić’s motets and a selected few of Finetti’s. These graphs, in a practical way, visually presented some general features of the compositions, i.e. selected parts: the range used in a composition, the densest movement of the part, the tones used, the alterations used, and the tendency to melodic climax. But even with these interesting visualization tools it is not possible to determine the details of the motif work and the nature of the melodic movement in which the particularities of a composer’s style lie. Graphs created with the music21 tool would achieve greater usability on a larger corpus, e.g. on the entire collection. But the question also arises as to whether the making of a graph of only one part is sufficient for polyphonic compositions in which two, three, or more voices participate equally. All this requires a far larger project than the one intended here: preparing and editing the parts and transcribing them into a machine-readable format, as well as additional research into whether the complete composition is preserved and available elsewhere (for compositions of the incompletely preserved Deliciae sacrae musicae), etc. All this should not be discouraging, but an incentive and invitation to try out the new tools of digital musicology.

48 L. Županović, ‘Četiri moteta Ivana Lukačića’, 36. 107

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Appendix: bibliography 1) IOANNIS / LVCACIH / DE SEBENICO / In Metropolitana Spalatensi Ecclesia Musices Praefecti. / Sacrae Cantiones Singulis Binis Ternis Quaternis / Quinisque vocibus Concinendae / A IACOBO FINETTO ANCONITANO / In Ecclesia Magnae Domus Venetiarum Musices Magistro. / In Lucem Editae / CON PRIVILEGIO. / ORGANVM / SVB SIGNO GARDANI. VENETIIS MDCXX. ILL.MO ET REV.MO DOMINO / AC PATRONO COLENDISSIMO / D. SFORZAE PONZONIO / Archiepiscopo Spalatensi. / F. IACOBVS FINETTVS ANCONITANVS S. P. D. QVAE singula, eaque maxima, Praesul Illustrrissime in Principibus, idest tuis similibus, viris, iure homines suspicere consueuerunt, ea mihi sese suspicienda in te obijciunt vniuersa: admirabilis prudentia: singularis in Deum pietas, & religio: demum insignis in omnes beneficentia, ac liberalitas. Fama quidem ipsa, haec non obscura, ac multo notiora sunt, atque Illustriora praeconio Reuerendi Partris F. Ioannis à Sebenico praestantisssimi Musices Magistri; cuius, tanta, tamque frequens virtutum tuarum extitit commendatio vt summae mihi felicitatis loco ducerem, si ignotam obseruantiae meae propensionem quoquomodo possem, testatam apud te relinqverem. Arrisit vero in praesens optatis fortuna meis: nam Sacras cantione, quas vir de Arte Canendi optime meritus, in mei gratiam, Musicis expresit notis, eas, collectas praelo subiicere, cum euiterer, Amplissimo nomini tuo, iure quodam suo dicandum non dubitaui: ratus, pro summa Authoris in te obseruantia, eas fore tibi non iniucundas. Quare patere, Antistites Amplissime, vt tuo illae vultus Clypeo, in confertissimam Musicae sectatorum turbam iam prodeant securae. Pro tua vero in omnes benignitate, gratiam tuam aucupanti mihi hoc tribue, vt in beneuolentia, Patrocinioque tuo, perpetuo conquiescam. Quo Praesidio letabor ego vel maxime, à Deoque id contendam, vt, te, ad Patriae, ad sui, Ecclesiaeque Decus, conseruet, quam diutissime, ac semper incolumen reddat. Vale. Venetiis Die 25. Martii Anno ab Incarnatione MDCXX. [p. 29] INDEX A VNA VOCE Cantabo Domino Sicut Cedrus Suscipiat Dominus Osculetur me Trahe me post te Coeli enarrant

Canto ouer Tenore Canto o Tenore Canto o Tenore Altus Altus Bassus

1 2 3 4 5 6

A DOI Benedic Domine Orantibus in loco Gaudens Gaudebo Quemadmodum Venis Sponsa Christi Sancta & immaculata Domine Quinque talenta Sancti mei Da Pacem Domine Sacerdotes Dei Cantate Domino Corde & animo In lectulo meo Exultauit cor meum

Canto & Alto Canto & Alto Canto & Tenore Alto & Tenore A Doi Alti A Doi Sopr. ouer Ten A Doi Sopr. ouer Ten. A Doi Ten. ouer Sop. A Doi Ten. ouer Sopr. A Doi Ten. ouer Sopr. A Doi Ten. ouer Sopr. A Doi Ten. ouer Sopr. A Doi Can. ouer Ten. & Basso A Doi Can. ouer Ten.. & Basso

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 16 17 18 19

108

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

A TRE Domine Puer meus Nos autem Responde Virgo A QVATRO Ex ore infantium Quam Pulchra es Canite & psallite A CINQVE Panis Angelicus

FINIS

Cant. Ten & Basso Doi Can ouer Ten. & Basso A Tenori In Ecco

20 21 22

Ex ore infantium Can. Alto Ten. & Basso Can. Alto Ten. & Baso & Quinta pars Si placet

23 24

Can. Alto Ten. & Basso

28

26

(Krakow, Biblioteca Jagiellońska; unicum: C, A, T, B, Bc)

2) Deliciae Sacrae Musicae / DEO OPT. MAX. / CHRISTO ET EIVS / MATRI ADMIRABILI, SI- / gno Crucis triumphali, & omnibus sub / eo hic pugnantibus, ibi aeternum / triumphantibus laboriose / concinnatae. / QVAS EX LECTISSIMO / LECTISSIMORVM NOSTRI AEVI / MVSICORVM PENV, QVATERNIS VO- / CIBVS, CVM BASSO AD ORGANVM APPLI- / cato, suauissime modulandas exprompsit / publicoq’. bono, ac suis impensis / publicè posuit, / JOANNES REININGER / OBERSDORFFENSIS ALGOIVS, LVDI / ad D. Virginis Danuvverdae Rector. / CANTVS / INGOLSTADII, / Ex Typographeo Musico GREGORII HAENLINI. / M DC. XXVI. ILLVSTRI AC GE- / NEROSO D. D. CONRADO / L. BARONI IN BEMELBERG ET HO- / CHENBVRG, DOMINO IN MARCHTBISSINGEN / ET EROLZHEIMB, S. CAESAREAE MAIEST: CONSILIA- / rio, nec non eiusdem simul ac Sereniss: LEOPOLDI Ar- / chid: consiliorum intimorum Directori, Do- / mino suo clementissimo. ARION fidium arte praecelebris cantor, Illustris Domine, in salum sese praecipiti saltu è naui eiecerat, auro simul ac vitae seruandae, quibus insidias tendi haud falsò credebat, ab ijs ipsis quibus cum vnâ vehebat. Hic ille in reseriâ ludere velut periculi securus, & delphinorum agmen canoro plectro in subsidium conuocare. Adsunt & suauitate cantus subacti terga illico subdunt, quibus Fidicen tutus insidens aut etiam inambulans aduersum in littus & praedonum insidias, & turbulenti Neptuni minas testudine cum delphino pro naui vsus feliciter euasit. Vitam mortalium non nemo haud absurdè cum maritimis periculis affinem dixerit: Superi, quam frequens vtrinq’ ad perniciem illex Siren & Charybdis & Scylla quàm praestantes animas sorbensterra, mari ! atque vt de secundo vento nauigatio succedat, nunquam est perpetua felix aura, quin saepius ex aduerso reflans nunc scopulis inferat, iam in sublime abripiat rursum dehiscente fluctu premat. Haec maris vitaeq’ nostrae alternans est vicißitudo, & raro stans fortuna, quae nos aerumnas inter & gaudia, curasq’ & otia circumagit, donec excipimur portu. Vt alacri tutoque remigio per omnē Neptuni rabiem, per omnes vitae insidias aut insanias; nostra puppis ad Arionis modum prosperè decurrat, ist haec de selectißimis quibúsque Musices Magistris, quos ipsi illi Arioni aut Amphioni, Orpheo vel Timotheo aequipares, Celeumata collegi, quae fessas iactatásque mentes piâ gratáque excitatione coelestem in portum animarent. Quos flores aut congestas gemmas vocum TIBI Illustris Domine meritò dedicatas volo. Nam & hanc olim vrbem cum rapidi fluctus torquerēt pronis in vada ciuibus Tv Legatus primum, mox & à Magno Boiorum Principe praefectus, nauim vrbis mediam per tempestatem scitâ adeo habenâ flectebas, vt compositis paullatim procellis sua flustra & malaciam iam tum coeperit admirari. Nempe ad clauum cum sedebas, varium & discordem ciuem suaui moderamine legibus & concordiae restituebas: cuius consilijs & vigilantiae adspirabat Magna Numinis Mater, haec tibi vela & vota secundabat, quam tu supplice animo & diuite auro egregiè à te cultam in aede parochiale splendidissimè exornabas. Et nunc quoque sed difficilioribus rerum publicarum gubernaculis adsides, multa vbi & implexa negotiorum, asperae atque exercitae imperiorum curae, & inde incertus euentu animus veluti in mari fluctuatur: cui demulcendo atque illis mitigandis vel sedandis praecellentes prope omnes Christianos Arionas suorum modulorum elegantiae 109

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

TIBI occinere iubeo: Accipe & fruere, quod Magno TUO Nomini labor meus cum studio concinnauit, siue fidei pignus, siue grati in te animi symbolum. TVA & clarißimae originis tuae in me meósque merita inuitabant, vt nouam hanc quanquam submißâ & venerantis specie, à te gratiam postularem, qui pios hosce concentuum lepôres aure atq’ animo admissos insuper & patrocinio tuereris. Sic Illustris Domine qui inter lectißimos nobilitatis ac sapientiae proceres (sine assentatione dicam) multo vertice emines, Natales anni Kal.auspicatò inchoa, saepius repete, semper faelix TVAS, Austriacas, imperij fortunas regere. Donavverdae, Cal. Ianuarijs. cI. Ic. xxvi. Illustris Dominationis Tuae / Deuotißimus Cliens / Ioannes Reininger Ludimoderator VVerdaeus. INDEX SACRARVM CAN- / TIONVM. DE NOMINE IESV. 1. O Magnum nomen Domini. Io. de Fossa. Nel canitur suauius II. Pars. 2. Omnis terra adoret te Riedelij 3. Amor Iesu dulcißimus Aug. Agazz.

C. C. B. B. C. C. B. B. C. C. A. B.

CANTIONES IN FESTO COR- / poris Christi, quarum etiam vsus est sub sa- / cra eleuatione & communione. 4. O sacrum conuiuium. Ant. Mortarij. C. A. T. B. 5. O salutaris hostia. Agazzarij. C. C. B. B. 6. Domine Iesu Christe. Incerti. C. C. A. T. 7. O quam suauis. Ioan. Bapt. Cesenae. C. A. T. B. 8. Venite amici. Dominici Borgij C. A. T. B. 9. Iesu mi dulcißime. Greg. Zuchinij. C. A. T. B. 10. Salue Iesu. Agazzarij. C. A. T. B. 11. O Iesu dulcißime. Ioan. Bap. Cesenae. C. A. T. B. 12. Domine Iesu Christe. Mart. Caesaris. C. C. B. B. 13. Anima Christi. Henrici Pfendneri C. A. T. B. 14. O sacrum conuiuium. Alex. Gualt. C. A T. B. 15. Ecce panis Angelorum. Brunelli. C. C. A. T. 16. O sacrum conuiuium. Borlasca. C. C. A. B. 17. Adoramus te Christe. Lud. Viadana. C. A. T. B. 18. O Domine Iesu Archang. Crotti C. A. T. B. 19. O salutaris hostia. Christ. Keufferer. C. C. A. T. 20. Tua Iesu dilectio. Incerti. C. C. A. T. 21. O salutaris hostia. Rudolph de Lasso C. C. A. B. 22. O sacrum conuiuium à 5. Io. de Foss. C. C. A. T. B. 23. O pie Pelicane à 5. Leon Hassler C. C. A. T. B. CANTIONES MAGNAE MATRI / Mariae Virgini accommodatae. 25. Ave Maria. Rudolph de Lasso. C. A. T. B. 26. Pulchra es, ó Maria Eiusdem. C. A. T. B. 27. Ego in altißimis habitaui. Mortarij. C. A. T. B. 28. Inuiolata. Anton. Mortarij. C. A. T. B. 29. Veni in hortum. Adrian Banchieri. C. A. T. B. 30. O Mariae. Ioan. Bapt. Cesenae. C. A. T. B. 31. Veni dilecte mi. Anton. Cifra. C. C. A. B. 32. Egredimini filiae Sion. Mezzogori. C. A. T. B. 33. Quae est ista. Dominici Borgij. C. A. T. B. 34. Benedicta & venerab. Pauli Nod. C. A. T. B. 35. Maria Mater gratiae. Zuchinij. C. A. T. B. 36. Aue pia Mater Dei. Borgij. C. A. T. B. 37. Ego flos campi. Greg. Zuchinij. C. A. T. B. 38. Ego dormio. Io. Bapt. Cesenae. C. A. T. B. 110

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

39. En dilectus 40. Cantate Domino.

Adriani Banchieri. Ioan. Bapt. Cesen.

C. C. T. B. C. A. T. B.

T. Sol. 41. Surrexi ut aparirem 42. Sancta Maria. 43. Pulchra es ó Maria 44. Maria mater gratiae. 45. Gabriel Angelus. 46. Quomodo fiet istud. 47. O vos charißimi. 48. Indica mihi. 49. Dilectus meus. 50. Congratulamini mihi. 51. Adest nobis dilectiß 52. Dilectus meus. 53. Ingredimini omnes. 54. Ave Regina coelorum. 55. Iucundare & laetare. 56. Dic Maria. 57. Tu gloria Ierusalem. 58. Aue mundi spes Maria. 59. Pulchra es amica mea. 60. Tota pulchra es. 61. Salue radix sancta. 62. O beata Virgo. 63. O Maria. 64. Osculetur me. 65. Decantemus in hac die

Leonis Leonij. Thom. Cecchini. Hortensij Naldi. Henr. Pfendn. Mart. Caesaris. Rap. Cesena. Iacobi Fineti. Leonis Leonij. Dominici Criuelli Gualtierij. Iacobi Fineti. Ludouici Viadana. Ioan. Ghizzoli. Archan. Crotti. Iacobi Fineti. Gabriel Plautzij. Iacobi Fineti. Plautzij. Cesenae. Eiusdem. Hen. Pfendneri. Archang. Buxenij. Eiusdem. Stephani Bernardi. Incerti.

C. C. B. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. C. A. T. C. A. T. B. C. C. A. B. C. C. B. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. C. A. B. C. C. B. B. C. A. T. B. C. C. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. C. B. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. C. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. C. T. B.

CANTIONES DE SS. APOSTO- / lorum, Martyrum, Confessorum & Virginum festiuitatibus in communi. 66. Gloriosi Principes. Antonij Cifra. C. C. A. B. 67. Omnes gentes. Lucij Vrsini. 2. C. vel T. B. B. 68. Omnes gentes. Rudolphi de Lasso. C. C. vel. T. T. B. B. 69. Estote fortes. Steph. Bernardi. C. A. T. B. 70. Isti sunt triumphatores. Eiusdem. C. A. T. B. 71. Vidi coniunctos viros. Gualtierij. C. A. T. B. 72. Isti sunt. Christoph. Satzl. A. T. B. B. 73. Beati eritis. Ioannis Croce. C. A. T. B. 74. Filiae Ierusalem. Lud. Viadanae. C. C. C. B. 75. O quam gloriosum. Cecchini. A. T. T. B. 76. Cantabant Sancti. Viadanae. C. C. A. B. 77. Ecce quam bonum. Gregorij Aichinger. C. A. T. B. 78. Sanctorum meritis. Lud. Viadana. C. A. T. B. 79. Hi sunt. Ioan. Damasceni. C. C. vel. T. T. B. B. 80. Verbera carnificum. Cesenae. C. A. T. B. 81. Laetamini in Domino. Ioannis Aichmiller. C. A. T. B. 82. Alleluia. Rudolphi de Lasso. C. C. vel. T. T. A. B. 83. Colletemur omnes Gualtierij. C. T. T. B. 84. Iste sanctus. Leonis Leonij. A. A. T. T. 85. Euge serue bone. Vechij. C. A. T. B. 86. Domine praevenisti eum. Incerti. C. A. T. B. 87. Domine quis habitabit. Ghizzoli. C. A. T. B. 88. Beatus vir. Anton. Cifrae. C. C. A. B. 111

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

89. Os Iusti. 90. Sacerdos Dei. 91. Ecce Sacerdos magnus. 92. Stabunt Iusti. 93. Coelorum cives plaudite. 94. Sancti N. 95. Veni sponsa Christi.

Ioan. Pauli Nodarij. D. Borgij. Cesenae. Ioan. Bapt. Cesenae, Eiusdem. Dominici Borgij. Cesenae.

C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. C. A. T. B. A. T. T. B.

CONCENTVS VARII SELECTIO- / resque qui omni tempore SS. Ecclesiae vsui esse posiunt. 96. Benedicam Dominum. Cecchini. C. A. T. B. 97. Cantate Domino. Mart. Caesaris. C. C. A. T. 98. Cantamus Domino. Gualtierij. C. A. T. B. 99. Exultate Deo. Archangeli Borsarij. C. C. vel 2. T. 2. B. 100. Venite exultemus. Isaci Poschii. C. C. A. T. 101. Iubilate Deo. Thomae Cecchini. C. A. T. B. 102. Ex ore infantium. Ioan. Lucacih. 4. C. vel 4 T. 103. Laetentur coeli. Fr. Syxti Galli. C. T. T. B. 104. Magnum Dominum. Eiusdem. C. C. T. B. 105. Exurgat Deus. Isaci Poschij. C. C. B. B. 106. Exultate Iusti. Alex Gualterij. C. A. T. B. 107. Aeterne Rex. Baccineti. C. A. T. B. 108. Aspice Domine. Thomae Cecchini. C. A. T. B. 109. Voce mea. Gualtierij. A. T. T. B. 110. Misericordiae. Eiusdem. C. A. T. B. 111. In te Domine speraui. Andr. Lemes. C. C. B. B. 112. Confitebor tibi Domine. Eiusdem. C. C. B. B. 113. Imple os nostrum. Lud. Viadanae C. C. B. B. 114. Laudate pueri. Ioan. Ghizzoli. C. C. A. B. 115. Iubilate Deo. Franc. Capelli. C. T. T. B. 116. Iubilate Deo. Isaci Poschij. C. A. T. B. 117. Super flumina Babylonis. Cecchini. C. A. T. B. 118. Cantate Domino. Greg. Allegrij. C. C. A. B. 119. Exultate Deo. Ludou. Viadanae. C. A. T. B: 120. Impetum inimicorum. Ghizzoli. C. A. T. B. 121. In spiritu humilitatis. Cecchini. C. A. T. B. 122. Cantate Domino. Lud. Viadanae. C. A. T. B. 123. Deus misereatur. Iacobi Fineti. C. C. T. B. 124. O Iesu mi dulcißime. Agazzarij. C. C. A. B. 125. Iesus auctor clementiae. Eiusdem. C. C. A. B. 126. Exaudi Deus. Gabr. Fattorini. C. A. T. B. 127.Domine quando veneris. Incerti. C. A. T. B. 128. Peccaui Incerti. C. A. T. B. 129. In monte oliveti. Incerti C. A. T. B. 130. Cantate Domino Incerti. C. A. T. B. 131. Asserte Domino. Bentiuoglij Leuae. C. A. T. B. 132. Confitebor tibi Domine. Ioan. Bapt. Cesenae C. A. T. B. 133. Iubilate. August. Bendinelli. C. C. T. B. 134. Nisi Dominus. Incerti C. A. T. B. Cum dederit. II. Pars. 135. Voce mea. Steph. Bernardi. C. A. T. B. 136. Ecce quam bonum Christ. Erbach. C. C. B. B. 137. Anima nostra. Steph. Bernardi. C. C. A. T. 138. Exultate Iusti. Eiusdem C. C. A. T. 139. Emitte Spiritum. Anton Mortarij C. A. T. B. 140. Leuaui oculos. Eiusdem. C. A. T. B. 112

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

141. In conuertendo. Adriani Banchier. 142. Laudate pueri Dominum. Bernardi Viadanae. 143. Terra mota est. Antonij Cifrae 144. Aue Rex noster. Eiusdem. 145.Laudate Dominum de coelis. Eiusdem. 146.Sit nomen Domini benedictum. Zuchinij.

C. C. B. B. C. C. B. B. C. C. B. B. C. C. A. B. C. C. C. B. C. A. T. B.

COROLLARIVM / DE SANCTA CRVCE; CVI AC- / cesserunt quaedam aliae Cantilenae incer- / torum Authorum. 147. Crux fidelis. Anton. Brunelli. C. C. A. T. 148. O crux. Iacobi Fineti. C. A. T. B. 149. Flecte ramos. Agazzarij. C. C. A. B. 150. Super omnia ligna. Stephani Bernardi. C. A. T. B. 151. Hoc signum crucis Krumper C. C. B. B. 152. Nos autem. Iacobi Fineti. A. T. T. B. 153. Crux fidelis. Agazzarij. C. C. A. B. 154. Veni consolator. Vrbani Loth. C. C. B. B. 155. Salue crux sancta. Eiusdem. C. C. B. B. 156. Originale crimen. II. Pars 157. Te Deum laudamus. Michaelis Angeli Serra. C. A. T. B. 158. Te Deum laudamus. And. Blanci. C. A. T. B. 159. Vanitas vanitatum. Incerti. A. T. T. B. 160. Vanitas vanitatum. Gabr. Fattor. C. A. T. B. 161. Nobilißime Iesu. Incerti. C. C. A. T. 162. Benignißime Iesu Incerti. C. C. A. T. 163. Domine Iesu. Incerti. C. A. T. B. 164. Amantißime Iesu. Incerti. C. A. T. B. 165. Diligam igitur. Incerti. C. A. T. B. 166. Dulcis Iesu. Incerti. C. C. A. B. 167. O dulcißime Iesu. Incerti. C. C. A. T. 168. Gustate & videte. Steph. Bernard. C. C. A. B. 169. Anima Christi. Georg. Victorini. C. C. B. B. 170. Laudent Deum cithara. Orlandi de Lasso. C. A. T. B. 171. Laudate Dominum. à 5. Thomae Cecchini. C. A. T. T. B. 172. Alma Redemptoris. Bartholomei Vidman C. A. T. B. 173. Aue Regina caelorum. Eiusdem. C. A. T. B. 174. Salue Regina. Eiusdem. C. A. T. B. 175. Aue Maria. Eiusdem. C. A. T. B. (RISM 1626/2)

3) BASSUS GENERALIS / SIVE CONTINUUS / PROMPTUARII MVSICI, / CONCENTVS / ECCLESIASTICOS CCLXXXVI. / SELECTISSIMOS II. III. & IV. / Vocum. / E / DIVERSIS ET PRAESTANTISSIMIS GERMANIAE, / Italiae & aliis Musicis collectos exhibens. / PARS TERTIA / QUAE EST / DE FESTIS MOBILIBVS ET PRO- / priis Sanctorum Celebratinbus per totum / annum, / OPERA ET STUDIO / IOANNIS DONFIRDI, SCHOLAE NECCARO. / Rottenburgicae, nec non ad D. Martini ibidem / Musices moderatoris / [Sign.] / AVGVSTAE TREBOCORVM. / Typis & Sumptibus PAULI LEDERTZ, Bibliop. / Anno M. DC. XXVII. REVERENDO AC PERERV- / DITO VIRO, / DN. ZACHARIAE / SCHNIZER, / NOBILIS PAROECIAE NEOHVSANAE / VIGILANTI PAROCHO, / MUSARUM PATRONO. / MUSICORUM MAGISTRO. 113

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

ITa planè est, Rnde, Dne ita tua ipsius VOX nobis testata est. Qui te viderunt (ij sunt tota nostra Civitas) ij scient; qui te non viderunt, huic programmati credent. Quid si etiam hi te videant ? Minùs credent, quia huiusmodi vocem in sene negabunt. Quid si verò audiant ? Tunc ob vocem, senem te negabunt. Nam rara avis in terris, Senex Musicus ; quem Aegyptii Sacerdotes per hieroglyphicam Cygni effigiem significabant: quippe quem omnes eò suaviùs modulariferunt, quò magis in senium vergit. Hunc tu imitari perge, canta, vel ad mortem usque laetus. En, tibi ego materiam subministro, unde unde [!] collectam, Ergo, inquis, nihil tuum, nihil non alienum offers. Hoc ipso, Rnde. Dne, tibi placere, commendari tibi volo. De meo non possum, studui igitur, ut possem de alieno. Si namque de arte, quam amas, hi auctores tibi commendantur, salva res est; ego de utilitate tibi commendabor, quia hos tuà gratià collegi; his tu nunc patrocinare. Musica, ut audio, praeter alias liberales artes, tibi olim ad dignitatem, in qua nunc es, multùm patrocinata est; quo tu jure non vicissim eiusdem Patronus eris? Fac ergo rogatus, id, quod debes facere; hos auctores à me benignè suscipe, quos nòsti; tuere, quos potes; ama, quos soles. Deus Ter Opt. te suum Psalten remunerabitur, quando non fabulosus Parnassus, sed ille tibi adedundus est mons, in quo beneplacitum est Deo, habitare in eo: tunc demum & cantasse te gaudebis, & in aeternum cantabis. Quod tamen, ut serò fiat, Deum precor, Tu interim vive, vale, canta. Rottenburgi ad Neccarum. Anno post partum Virginis Deiparae1627. Ipso Beatissimae Virginis Assumpta festo. Reae Tuae / Studiosißimus / IOANNES DONFRID. INDEX / SACRORVM CON- / CERTVVM HVIVS TERTIAE / PARTIS, IVXTA ORDINEM FE- / storum omnium solennium tam de tempore quam / de Sanctis in particulari, per totum / annnum. IN ADVENTV DOMINI. 1. Orietur sicut Sol. 2. Montes & colles. 3. Veni redemptor. 4. Laetentur coeli. 5. Laetentur coeli.

a 2. duo Cantus. a 2. duo Tenores. a 3. duo C.& Baritonus. a 3. duo Cant. & Bassus A 3. duo C. vel T. & Bass.

Io. Franc. Anerij. Io. Franc. Anerij. Michaelis Praetorii. Vincentij Pacij. Ioannis Benn.

IN FESTO S. ANDREAE APOSTOLI. 6. Doctor bonus & amicus. a 2. duo Cantus. 7. Maximilla Christo. a 2. duo Canrus[!]. 8. Beatus Andreas. a 2. Altus & Tenor. 9. Cum pervenisset Beatus. a 2. duo T. vel Cant. 10. Beatus Andreas. a 2. duo Tenores. 11. Andreas Christi famulus. a 2. Ten. & Bass. 12. Andreas Christi famulus. a 2. duo Bassi. 13. Videns crucem Andreas. a 4. duo C. & 2. B. 14. Doctor bonus & amicus. a 4. duo T. & 2. B. 15. Andreas ad Christi vocem. a 4. C. A. T. B.

Vincentii Ielich Io Franc. Anerij. Io. Franc. Anerij. Vrbani Loth. Io.Bapt. Baccinetti. Iacobi Finetti. Io. Franc. Anerij Vincentij Pacij Archangeli Borsari Blasii Ammonis

DE S. NICOLAO EPISCOPO ET / Confessore. 16. Summe Dei Praesul. a 2. duo T. vel Cant. 17. Beatus Nicolaus. a 2. duo T. vel Cant. 18. Nos qui sumus. a 4 C. A. T. B.

Vrbani Loth. Vrbani Loth. Orlandi de Lasso.

IN FESTO S. THOMAE / Apostoli. 19. Quia vidisti me Thoma. a 2. duo Cant. 20. Inter digitum tuum. a 2. Ten & Bass. 21. Quia vidisti me Thoma. a 4. C. A. T. B.

Anonymi. Vrbani Loth. Blasii Ammonis.

IN NATIVITATE DOMINI NOSTRI / Jesu Christi. 22. Hodie nobis de coelo. a 2. duo Cantus. 23. Sancta & immaculata. a 2. duo C. vel T. 24. Hodie Christus natus. a 2. duo C. vel T. 25. Facta est cum Angelo. a 2. Cant. & Ten. 26. Hodie nobis de coelo. a 2. duo Cant. 27. Verbum caro factum. a 2. duo Ten. 28. Domus pudici pectoris. a 2. duo Ten.

Vincentii Pacii. Ioannis Lucacih. Vincentii Pacii. Io. Franc. Anerii. Alexandri Grandi. Iacobi Fineti. Iacobi Fineti.

114

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

29. Pastores ad Pastores. 30. Quem vidistis pastores. 31. Angelus ad pastores. 32. Dies sanctificatus. 33. Verbum caro factum est. 34. Gloria in excelsis. 35. Beata viscera Mariae. 36. Resonet in laudibus. 37. Puer natus in Bethlehem. 38. Fit porta Christi pervia.

a 3. duo C. & B. a 3 C. A. B. a 3. C. T. & B. a 3. C. T. & B. a 3. 2 T. v. C. & B. a 3. 2 C. v. T. & B. a 4. 2 C. v. T. & 2. B. a 4. C. A. T. B. a 5. C. A. TT. B. a 5. C. A. TT. B.

Henrici Pfendneri. Iacobi Fineti. Iacobi Fineti. Iacobi Fineti. Io. Leonis Hasleri. Orphei Vecchi. Alexandri Grandi. Christophori Sâtzl. Christophori Sâtzl. Iacobi Regnardi.

IN FESTO S. STEPHANI PRO- / thomartyris. 39. Lapidabant Stephanum. a 2. duo Tenores.

Iacobi Fineti.

IN FESTO S. JOANNIS APOSTOLI / & Evangelistae 40. Valde honorandus est. a 2. duo Tenores. 41. Gaudens gaudebo. a 4. duo C. A. & B.

Iacobi Fineti. Iacobi Fineti.

IN CIRCVMCISIONE DOMINI. 42. O admirabile commercium. a 3. duo C. & B.

Io. Franc. Anerii.

IN EPIPHANIA DOMINI. 43. Stella ista sicut. 44.Omnes de Saba. 45. Tria sunt munera. 46. Videntes stellam. 47. Dominator Dominus. 48. Tria sunt munera.

Io Franc. Anerii. Io. Franc. Anerii. Io. Franc. Anerii. Christophori Sâtzl. Vrbani Loth. Iacobi Fineti.

a 2. duo Cantus. a 2. Cant. & Bass. a 3. duo C. & B. a 3. A. T. B. a 3. A. T. B. a 3. duo T. & B.

DOMINICA III. POST EPIPHANIAM 49. Domine puer meus. a 3. Cant. Ten. Bass.

Io. Lucacih.

In Festo Purificationis B. Mariae Virginis. 50. Cum iduerent puerum. a 3. duo C. & B. 51. Hodie B. Virgo. a 4. A. T. BB.

Io. Franc. Anerii. Christophori Sâtzl.

DE ANNVNCIATIONE B. MARIAE / semper Virginis. 52. Gaude Maria virgo. à 2. Alt. & Ten. 53. Mittit ad virginem. à 2. duo Ten. 54. Quomodo fiet istud. a 3. duo C. & B. 55. Dabit ei sedem. a 3. tres T. 56. Missus est Angelus. à 4. C. A. T. B. 57. Missus est Angelus Gab. a 5. 2. C. A. T. B.

Io. Franc. Anerij. Vrbani Loth. Ioan. Franc. Anerij. Alexandri Grandi. Ioannis de Fossa. Alexandri Grandi.

DE GLORIOSISSIMA RESVRRECTIONE / Domini nostri Iesu Christi. 58. Angelus autem Domini. a 2. duo Ten. Vincentii Pacii. 59. Prae timore autem. a 2. duo Tenores. Ioan. Franc. Anerij. 60. Et ecce terrae motus. a 2. duo Bassi. Anonymi. 61. Et ecce terrae motus. a 2. duo Bassi. Vincentii Pacii. 62. Quis revolvet nob. a 3. 3. C. in Dialogo. Vincentii Pacii. 63. Surrexit pastor bonus. a 3. A. T. & B. Incerti. 64. Alleluia. Surrexit Christus. a 3. 2. T. v. C. & B. Hieronymi Ballionii. 65. Dum transisser Sabbathum. a 4. C. A. T. B. Christiani Erbach. 66. Resonent Organa, a 4. C. A. T. B. Gabrielis Fattorini. 67. Surgens Iesus Dominus. a 4. C. A. T. B. Ioannis Geisenhof. 115

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

DE SANCTIS TEMPORE / Paschali 68. Stabunt justi. a 3. tres C. aut T. 69. Hi sunt quos aliquando. a 4. 2. C. v. T. & 2. B.

Antonii Holzner. Io. Damasc. Vffererii.

IN FESTO INVENTIONIS ET EXVLTA- / tionis S. Crucis. 70. O crux ave spes. à 2. duo Cantus. 71. Ecce crucem Domini à 2. duo Cantus 72. Haec est arbor digniss. à 2 duo Cant. 73. Per lignum servi facti. à 2. Cant. & Ten. 74. Hoc signum crucis. à 2. Altus & T. 75. Salva nos Christe. à 2. Alt. & T. 76. O bona crux. à 2 duo Tenores. 77. O magnum pietatis. à 2. Cant. & B. 78. Nos autem gloriari. à 3. duo C. & B. 79. Crux fidelis inter. à 3. A. T. & B. 80. Nos autem gloriari. a 3. 2. C. v. T. & B. 81. Titulus triumphalis. a 4. 3. C. & T. 82. Dic Maria quid vidisti. a 4. C. A. T. B. 83. O crux ave spes unica. a 4 C. A. T. B. 84. Haec est arbor digniss. a 4. C. v. 2. T. & 2. B. 85. Hoc signum crucis. a 4. 2. C. & 2. B. 86. Nos autem gloriari. a 4. A. T. T. B.

Alexandri Grandi. Io. Franc. Anerii. Alexandri Grandi. Io. Franc. Anerij. Ludovici Viadanae. Io. Franc. Anerii. Ludovici Viadanae. Io. Franc. Anerij. Antonii Mortarii. Christophori Sâtzl. Ioannis Lucacih. Danielis Lagkhneri. Ludovici Viadanae. Iacobi Finetti. Archangeli Borsari. Guilielmi Krumper. Iacobi Fineti.

IN ASCENSIONE DOMINI. 87. Viri Galilaei. 88. Exaltate regem. 89. O rex gloriae. 90. O rex gloriae.

à 2. Duo Cantus. a 2. duo Tenores. a 3. C. & 2. T. a 3 A. T. B.

Io. Franc. Anerii. Io. Franc. Anerii. Antonii Holzner. Christoph. Sâtzl.

IN FESTO PENTECOSTES. 91. Cum complerentur. 92. Fontes & omnia. 93. Dum complerentur. 94. Repleti sunt omnes. 95. Veni sancte Spiritus. 96. Dum complerentur. 97. Sic Deus dilexit. 98. Si quis diligit me. 99. Veni consolator optime.

à 2. duo Cant. à 2. Cant. & Ten. a 2. duo Cant. a 2. duo Ten. a 2. C. & B. à 3. duo C. & Barit. à 3. duo C. & B. à 3. duo C. & B. a 4. 2. C. v. 2. T. Barit. B.

Io. Franc. Anerii. Io. Franc. Anerii. Alexandri Grandi. Alexandri Grandi. Alexandri Leimberer. Henrici Pfendneri. Io. Mart. Caesaris. Io. Mart. Caesaris. Vrbani Loth.

IN FESTO SS. ET INDIVIDVAE / Trinitatis. 100. Tibi laus. a 2. Cant. & Ten. 101. O altitudo divitiarum. a 2. duo Cantus. 102. Libera nos & salva. a 2 Alt. & Ten. 103. Gloria patri. a 3. C. A. T. 104. Benedicta sit sancta. a 3. duo C. & B. 105. Benedicta sit sancta. a 3. A. T. B. 106. Benedictus es Domine. a 4. 3. C. v. T. & B. 107. Benedictus es Domine. a 4. C. A. T. B.

Horatii Scalettae. Ignorati. Ioan. Franc. Anerij. Alexandri Grandi. Henrici Pfendneri. Alexandri Grandi. Ioannis Croce. Sebastiani Miserocca.

IN FESTO CORPORIS CHRISTI 108. O magnum Sacramentum. a 3. Cant. Ten. Bass. 109. Caro mea verè est cibus. a 3. duo T. & B. 110. O pie Pelicane. a 3. 2. T. seu C. & B. 111. O pretiosum & admirand. a 3. duo T. & B.

Alexandri Grandi. Gregori Aichinger. Io. Joannis Hasleri. Vincentii Ielich.

116

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

In Nativitate S. Ioannis Baptistae Praecursoris Domini / nostri Iesu Christi. 112. Inter natos mulierum. à 2. duo Cantus. Io. Franc. Anerii. 113. Hic est praecursor dilectus. a 2. duo Cant. Alexandri Grandi. 114. Elizabeth Zachariae. a 2. 2. C. aut T. Christiani Erbach. 115. Iste puer magnus. a 2. duo Cantus. Io. Franc. Anerii. 116. Innuebant patri. a 2. duo Ten. Henrici Pfendneri. 117. Ioannes vocabitur. a 2. duo T. v. C. Antonij Cifra. 118. Tu puer Propheta. a 2. duo T. v. C. Vrbani Loth. 119. Innuebant patri. a 2. duo Tenores. Io. Franc. Anerii. 120. Puer qui natus. a 2. Cant. & B. Blasii Tomasii. 121. Ioannes est nomen. a 2. duo Bassi. Io. Franc. Anerii. 122. Gabriel Angelus. a 3. duo C. & B. Antonij Holzner. 123. Puer qui natus est. a 3. duo C. v. T. & B. Ioannis Aichmiller. 124. Audite Insulae. a 3. duo C. v. T. & B. Christiani Erbach. 125. Puer qui natus est. a 4. C. v. 2. T. & 2. B. Archangeli Borsari. 126. Vt queant laxis. a 4. A. T. & 2. B. Christophori Sâtzl. IN FESTIS SS. APOSTOLORVM / Petri & Pauli. 127. Herodes Rex. à 2. duo Cantus. 128. Dixit Angelus ad Pet. à 2. duo Cantus. 129. Surge Petre & indue. à 2. 2. C. vel. T. 130. Argentum & aurum. à 2. Alt. & Ten. 131. Misit Dominus Ang. à 2. duo Ten. 132. Petre amas me. a 2. Cant. & B. 133. Petre amas me. à 2. T. & B. 134. Gloriosi principes. à 3. tres Cant. 135. Quem dicunt homin. à 3. duo C. & B. 136. Solve jubente Deo. à 3. A. T. & B. 137. Tu es Petrus. à 3. A. T. & B. 138. Petrus Apostolus. à 4. C. A. T. B.

Io. Franc. Anerij. Anonymi. Iacobi Mori Viadanae. Io. Franc. Anerii. Io. Franc. Anerij. Aloysii Balbi. Vrbani Loth. Antonij Cifra. Petri Pace. Vrbani Loth. Christophori Sâtzl. Ioannis de Fossa.

IN CONVERSIONE ET COMMEMORA- / tione S. Pauli Apostoli. 139. Ego plantavi. à 2. Cant. & Ten. Ioan. Franc. Anerij. 140. Saule quid me. à 2. Altus & B. Vrbani Loth. 141. Libenter gloriabor. à 2. Alt. & Bass. Ioan. Franc. Anerij. 142. Iter faciente Paulo. à 3. duo C. & Barit. Incerti. 143. Ne magnitudo revel. à 3. duo C. & B. Ioan. Franc. Anerij. IN VISITATIONE B. MARIAE / semper Virginis. 144. Surge propera amica. à 2. duo Cant. 145. Sancta Maria succ. à 2. duo Cant. 146. De montib. Mariae. à 2. duo Cant. 147. Surge propera. à 2. duo Cantus. 148. Vox dilecti mei. à 2. Cant. & Ten. 149. Surgens Maria grav. à 3. C. A. T. 150. Beata viscera M. à 3. duo C. & B.

Stephani Bernardi Veron. Claudii Monteverde. Steph. Bernardi Veron. Leonis Leonij. Iacobi Finetti. Vrbani Loth. Steph Bernardi Veron.

IN FESTO S. ANGELI / Custodis. 151. Benedicite Domino. à 2. duo Cantus. 152. Angele Dei qui cust. à 2. duo C. vel T. 153. Custos mi Angele. a 2. duo T. vel. C. 154. Audivi vocem Ang. a 2. duo Tenores. 155. Angeli Domini. a 3. tres Cantus.

Augustini Agazzarij. Lucii Vrsini. Vrbani Loth. Augustini Agazzarij. Abundii Antonellii.

117

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

IN FESTO S. MARIAE / Magdalenae. 156. Laeva eius sub cap. à 2. duo Tenores. 157. Gaude pia Magdal. à 2. duo T. vel C. 158. Dimissa sunt ei. à 2. Ten. & Bass. 159. Iam hiems transiit. a 3. tres Cantus. 160. Beatae Mariae Magd. a 3. T. & 2. B. 161. Aquae multae non a 4. C. A. T. B.

Io. Franc. Anerij Vrbani Loth. Ioannis Benn. Io. Franc. Anerij. Christophori Sâtzl. Iacobi Finetti.

IN FESTO S. IACOBI / Apostoli. 162. O Beate Dei Athleta. à 2. duo T. vel C. 163. O sanctissime Iacobe. à 3. duo C. v. T. & B.

Vrbani Loth. Adami Waidman.

IN FESTO TRANSFIGVRA- / tionis. 164. Resplenduit facies. à 2. duo Tenores.

Antonij Cifra.

IN FESTO S. LAVRENTII / Martyris. 165. Tanquam aurum in à 2. duo Cantus. 166. Beatus Laurentius. a 2. duo Ten. 167. In craticula. a 2. duo T. v. C. 168. Laurentius. a 2. duo Ten. 169. Probasti nos Deus. a 2. duo Bassi. 170. Levita Laurentius. à 3. duo C. & B.

Antonij Cifra. Io. Franc. Anerij. Vrbani Loth. Antonij Cifra. Augustini Agazzarii. Ioan. Franc. Anerij.

IN ASSVMPTIONE B. MARIAE / semper Virginis. 171. Assumpta est Maria. a 2. duo Cantus. 172. Hodie apparuerunt. a 2. duo Cantus. 173. Virgo prudentissima. a 2. duo Cantus. 174. Pulchra es amica mea. a 2. duo C. vel T. 175. Assumpta est Maria. a 2. duo Cantus. 176. Vidi speciosam sicut. a 2. duo Cantus. 177. Pulchra es & decora. a 2. duo C. vel T. 178. Sicut Cedrus exaltata sum. a 2. duo Cantus. 179. Egredimini & videte. a 2. duo Alti. 180. Assumpta est Maria. a 2. Cant. & Ten. 181. Virgo prudentissima. a 2. duo Tenores. 182. Vidi speciosam ascend. a 2. duo Tenores. 183. In odorem unguentorum. a 2. duo Tenores. 184. Virgo prudentissima. a 2. duo Tenores. 185. Assumpta est Maria. a 2. duo Tenores. 186. Vidi speciosam sicut. a 2. duo T. vel C. 187. Vidi speciosam sicut. a 2. C. & Baritonus. 188. Assumpta est Maria. a 2. Cant. & Bass. 189. Pulcra es amica mea. a 2. C. vel T. & B. 190. Assumpta est Maria. a 3. C. vel T. & B. 191. Ego mater pulcrae. a 3. C. T. & Bass. 192. Quae est ista quae. a 3. A. T. & Bass. 193. Egredimini filiae Syon. a 3. A. T. & Bass. 194. Quae est ista quae. a 3. A. T. & Bass. 195. Maria virgo assumpta. a 3. duo T. & B. 196. Hodie Maria virgo. a 3. A. T. & Bass. 197. Egredimini & videte. a 4. C. A. T. B. 198. Egredimini filiae Syon. a 4. C. A. T. B. 199. Vidi speciosam. a 4. A. T. T. B. 200. Beata es virgo Maria. a 4. 2. C. v. T. & 2. B.

Antonij Cifra. Iacobi Fineti. Bernardi Viadanae. Io. Francisci Anerii. Io. Martini Caesaris. Augustini Agazzarii. Adriani Banchieri. Antonij Cifra. Iacobi Fineti. Io. Franc. Anerij. Antonii Cifra. Iacobi de Civita. Io. Franc. Anerii. Antonii Holzner. Henrici Pfendneri. Vrbani Loth. Adriani Banchieri. August. Agazzarii. Io. Nicolai Mezzogorri. Iacobi Fineti. Iacobi Fineti. Io. Nicol. Mezzogorri. Leonis Leonii. Aluisi Grani. Ioannis Pauseri Henrici Pfendneri. Ludovici Viadanae. Io. Nicol. Mezzogorri. Alexandri Grandi. Aluisi Grani.

118

Lucija Konfic: Compositions by Ivan Lukačić in the context of contemporary music anthologies

IN NATIVITATE B. MARIAE / Virginis. 201. Corde & animo. a 2. duo Tenores. 202. Nativitas tua. a 2. duo Tenores. 203. Nativitas est hodie. a 2. duo Tenores. 204. Corde & animo. a 2. duo Tenores. 205. Nativitas tua. a 3. 2. C. vel T. & B. 206. Nativitas tua. a 3. duo T. & B. 207. O speciosa inter filias. a 3. 2. C. vel T. & B. 208. Laetamini vos ô Coeli. a 3. C. T. v. 2. T. & B.

Ioannis Lucacih. Henrici Pfendneri. Io. Franc. Anerii. Antonii Cifra. Gregorii Aichinger. Vrbani Loth. Alexandri Grandi. Alexandri Grandi.

IN DEDICATIONE S. MICHAELIS / Archangeli 209. Dum praeliaretur. a 2. duo Cantus. 210. Factum est silentium. a 2. Cant. & Ten. 211. Stetit Angelus. a 2. duo Tenore 212. Michael Archangele. a 2. duo Tenores. 213. Sancte Michael. a 3. tres Tenores. 214. Princeps gloriosissime. a 3. 2. C. v. T. & B. 215. Factum est silentium. a 3. duo Ten. & B. 216. Factum est silentium a 4. C. A. T. B.

Antonii Cifra. Io. Franc. Anerii. Antonii Cifra. Anonymi. Vrbani Loth. Gregorii Capricii. Ioannis Benn. Io. Damasc. Uffererii.

In festo S. Francisci & / Stigmatum ejusdem. 217.Salve sancte Pater. a 2. Cant. & Ten. 218. Franciscus pauper & a 2. duo Tenores. 219. Crucis arbor eximia. a 2. duo Tenores 220. Sancte Francisce propera a 3. duo C. & Bass 221. Alleluia. Gaudeamus. a 3. duo C. v. T. & B. 222. Coelorum candor splend.49 a 3. Alt. Ten. Bass. 224. Deus meus & omnia a 4. duo C. A. & B. 225. Gaudeamus omnes. a 4. C. A. T. B. 226. Crucis vox hunc. alloq. a 4. duo C. & 2. B. 227. O sanctissime Confessor a 4. 2. C. v. T. & 2. B. 228. O Pater ô Francisce. a 4. TT. & BB.

Io. Franc. Anerii. Antonii Cifra. Io. Franc. Anerii. Antonii Mortarii. Iacobi Mori Viadanae. Vrbani Loth. Vincentii Galli. Io. Franc. Capelli. Io. Franc. Anerii. Iacobi Mori Viadanae. Ludovici Viadanae.

In festo SS. Apostolorvm Simonis & Iudae. 229. Isti sunt duo viri. a 2. Alt. & Ten. 230. Deus qui nos per. à 2. Alt. & Ten. 231. Isti sunt duae olivae. à 2. duo Tenores.

Ludovici Viadanae. Vrbani Loth. Io. Mart. Caesaris.

IN FESTO OMNIVM SAN- / ctorum. 232. Vidi turbam magn. à 2. duo Cant. 233. Vidi turbam magn. à 2. duo Tenores. 234. Redemisti nos Dom. à 2. duo Tenores. 235. Sancti mei qui in à 2. duo Tenores. 236. Qui sunt hi, qui ut à 2. duo T. v. C. 237. Exultate iusti in D. à 2. Cant. & Bass. 238. Cantabant sancti. à 2. Ten. & Bass. 239. Benedicite Dominū. à 3. tres Tenores. 240. Laetamini in Dom. à 3. duo C. & B. 241. Cantemus Domino. à 3. duo C. & B. 242. Benedicite Dom. à 3. duo C. & B. 243. O quam gloriosum. à 3. duo C. & B. 244. Alleluia Laudem a 3. 2. C. v. T. & B. 245. Congratulamini. a 4. C. A. T. B.

Io. Franc. Anerii. Vincentij Pacij. Io. Franc. Anerij. Ioannis Lucacih. Vrbani Loth. Adriani Banchieri. Alexandri Aglione. Antonij Cifra. Benedicti Binaghi. Alexandri Leimberer. Vincentij Pacij. Hieronymi Montesardi. Io. Leonis Hasleri. Alexandri Grandi.

49 No. 223 is missing. 119

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

246. Beati eritis. 247. Et vidi alterum. 248. Exultate justi in D. 249. Ecce vicit leo de. 250. O quam gloriosum. 251. O quam gloriosum.

a 4. C. A. T. B. a 4. C. A. T. B. a 4. C. A. T. B. a 4. C. A. B. B. a 4. CC. & BB. a 4. C. T. BB.

Ioannis Croce. Sigismundi de India. Ludovici Viadanae. Antonii Burlini. Henrici Pfendneri. Archangeli Borsari.

IN FESTO S. MARTINI EPISCOPI / & Confessoris. 252. O virum ineffabil. a 2. duo Cantus. 253. Sacerdos Dei Mart. a 2. C. & T. 254.Domine Deus nost. a 2. duo T. aut. C. 255. Oculis ac manibus. a 2. Altus & Bassus. 256. Dixerunt discipuli. a 3. duo C. & B. 257. O beatum virum. a 3. Alt. Ten. Bass.

Io. Franc. Anerij. Io. Franc. Anerij. Vrbani Loth. Io Franc. Anerij. Abundij Antonellij. Christophori Sâtzl.

IN FESTO S. CAECILIAE VIR- / ginis & Martyris. 258. Cantantibus organ. a 2. duo Cantus. 259. Virgo gloriosa Caecil. a 2. duo T. v. C. 260. Virgo gloriosa semp. a 2. duo Tenores. 261. Cantantibus Organ. a 2. C. vel T. & B. 262. Caecilia virgo clariss. a 3. duo C. & B. 263. Cilicio Caecilia. a 3. A. T. & B. 264. Cantantibus Organ. a 3. A. T. & B. 265. Cantantib. Organis. a 4. C. C. A. B. 266. Cantantib. Organ. a 4. C. A. T. B.

Io. Franc. Anerij. Vrbani Loth. Io. Franc. Anerij. Io. Nicol. Spinelli. Alexandri Grandi. Alexandri Grandi. Christophori Sâtzl. Vincentij Pacij. Heliae Racholdinger.

IN FESTO S. CATHARINAE VIR- / ginis & Martyris. 267. Catharina virgo. a 2. C. & T. 268. Gaude virgo Cathar. a 2. duo T. seu C. 269. Ave virginum gēma. a 3. duo C. & B. 270. Liberasti me D. a 3. duo C. & B.

Antonij Cifra. Vrbani Loth. Iulij Belli. Io. Franc. Anerii.

IN DEDICATIONE / Ecclesiae. 271. Domum tuam dec. 272. Zachaeus praecurr. Et festinans. II. pars. 273. O quam metuendus 274. O quam metuend. 275. Zachaee festinans. 276. O quam bene fun 277. O quam metuend. 278. Alleluia. Gaudeam. 279. Omnes gentes pl. 280. Psallite Deo nostro. 281. Ecce vicit leo de tribu. 282. Sonet vox tua in auribus. 283. Omnes gentes plaud. 284. Gaudeamus omnes. 285. Salve mundi gloria. 286. Salvum fac populum. FINIS. (RISM 1627/1)

a 2. duo Cantus. a 2. Alt. & Ten.

Vincentii Pacii. Anonymi.

a 2. duo Tenores. a 3. duo C. & T. a 3. 2. C. v. T. B. a 4. CC. A. T. a 4. CC. A. B. a 4. 2. C. v. 2. T. A. & B. a 4. 2. C. v. 2. T. A. & B. a 4. C. 2. T. & B. a 5. C. A. TT. B. a 4. C.C. A. & B. a 4. C. TT. & B. a 8. 2. C. 2. A. 2. T. 2. B. a 2. C. & A. a 2. duo A.

Henrici Pfendnerii. Io. Bapt. Cocciolae. Georgii Capricii. Io. Franc. Anerii. Vincentii Pacii. Rudolphi de Lasso. Rudolphi de Lasso. Ioannis Croce. Christophori Sâtzl. Iacobi Finetti. Io. Franc. Capelli. Melchioris Stopperi. R. Vincentius Ielich. R. Vincentius Ielich.

120

Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato (Venetia, 1619) Jelena Knešaurek Carić Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb, Croatia

Introduction Music theory and its history, as important today as they were in the past as basic tools for reading and performing music, for composing new pieces and for the critical analysis of those that already exist, rarely took part in musicological research until the second part of the 20th century.1 According to the historiographical and musicological premises accepted from the 19th century that insisted on primary sources and a teleological idea of development, the score was much more appreciated than any written text on music. This correlates to the dominant historiographical discourse in most music histories that extensively list and describe composers and pieces whose repute is confirmed through innumerable musicological analyses as well as on concert hall stages, while minor composers or even phenomena (for instance cantus fractus, or even the Gregorian chant throughout the 16th, 17th, and 18th centuries) get little or no attention at all. However, from the second half of the 20th century, inspired and encouraged by the French annalists and New History, minor composers have slowly taken up their positions in the music history. At the same time interest grows for music theory and its critical analysis, especially for that which does not correspond to tonality as it was defined throughout the late 18th and 19th centuries. It seems that atonal and post-tonal music composed during the 20th century seeks new analytical paradigms as well as the possibility of redefining basic terms such as notation, music piece (opus), composer, music, etc. thus enabling a more conscious approach to Medieval, Renaissance and Baroque music and its theory. Following the paths of foreign researchers and considering the fact that the Croatian culture of the 16th and 17th centuries, divided between and being a part of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, Venice, and the Ottoman Empire, might be characterized as ‘peripheral culture’,2 Croatian musicologists 1

2

However, fundamental work has been done during the period of the rise of modern sciences in musicology. This is a compendium of old texts on music written by famous priest, scientist, philologist, theologist, and musicologist Martin Gerbert who, in 1784, published three volumes of Scriptores ecclesiastici de musica sacra potissimum. It might be said that the work fits into the enlightened atmosphere of the second part of the 18th century. Cf. Scriptores ecclesiastici de musica sacra potissimum ex variis Italiae, Galliae, & Germaniae codicibus manuscriptis collecti et nunc primum publica luce donati a Martino Gerberto. Monasterii et congreg. S. Blasii in Silva Nigra abbate. Typis San-Blasianis. MDCCLXXXIV. URL: https://archive.org/details/scriptoreseccle00gerbgoog/page/n6/mode/2up, accessed 14 November 2019. Ljubo Karaman, O djelovanju domaće sredine u umjetnosti hrvatskih krajeva [On the Impact of the Local Environment in the Art of Croatian Regions] (Zagreb: MH, 1963). 121

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

began research into previously ignored archives as well as engaging in analysis of old encyclopedias, dictionaries, and lexicons that could provide information on old Croatian musicians (no matter if they were Croatians only by name, place of birth, or whether they were foreigners living and working in Croatian lands and thus contributing to its music culture). This research enabled awareness of the so-called ‘change of quality’, the phrase that describes the general state of Croatian Baroque music culture coined by Ennio Stipčević.3 The carefully articulated and engaging idea of a ‘change of quality’, as well as the contemporary vivid interest in Posttridental culture, made Juraj Alberti and his Dialogo attractive as the first printed Croatian manual on music theory and, at the same time, as the source for the comparison of similar texts published in the area regardless of their incomparability with the most prominent theoreticians. Thus, the cultural colonialism that exists even today in traditional positivist (music) historiography confronts and coexists with the New History interdisciplinary approach which questions the idea about regular style sequencing and urges the need for flexibility while analysing and explaining music pieces as well as music theory. Juraj Alberti earned a place in Croatian music history as the author of the first published book on music theory written by a Croatian. This manual, written in the form of a dialogue, is titled Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato and was published by Antonio Turino in Venice in 1619. Despite its above-mentioned primacy, it is still rather unknown (excluding basic information about the book and the author) and until now was only extensively analysed fifty years ago by Josip Andreis. His article, published in 1969,4 was based on the text preserved in the private library of the Politeo family in Starigrad on the island of Hvar. Because of the current family situation, this copy was no longer available for textual analysis. However, Ennio Stipčević detected another copy in the Alessandrina library in Rome.5 Alberti and his Dialogo were subjects of a few other articles published by Ennio Stipčević, who published an article for MGG2 Online6, as well as Stanislav Tuksar.7

3 4 5

6 7

Cf. Ennio Stipčević, Hrvatska glazba. Povijest hrvatske glazbe do 20. stoljeća [Croatian Music: A History of Croatian Music until the 20th Century] (Zagreb: Školska knjiga, 1997). Josip Andreis, ‘Albertijev “Dijalog” o 350 – godišnjici objavljivanja’ [Alberti’s Dialogo – The 350th Anniversary of its Publishing], Arti musices 1 (1969), 91–105. After all the efforts to get the copy from Hvar failed, H. E. Ambassador of the Republic of Croatia in the Vatican Neven Pelicarić and the Secretary for Culture and Media in the Embassy of the Republic of Croatia in Italy helped us to obtain the microfilm from Alessandrina detected by Ennio Stipčević, on which this text is based. E. Stipčević, ‘Alberti, Juraj, Giorgio’, MGG Online, https://www.mgg-online.com/article?id=mgg00225&v=1.0&rs=mgg00225, accessed 26 November 2019. E. Stipčević writes about Alberti more extensively in his book Musica Incognita: Ivan Lukačić i njegovo doba [Musica Incognita: Ivan Lukačić and His Time] (Šibenik: GK ‘Juraj Šižgorić’, 1998), and in the monograph Renaissance Music and Culture in Croatia (Turnhout: Brepols, 2016); Stanislav Tuksar wrote about him recently in the article ‘Misao o glazbi u autora podrijetlom iz hrvatskih povijesnih zemalja u tiskom objavljenim djelima 16. i 17. stoljeća’ [Thoughts on Music by Authors that Come from Croatian Lands], Filozofska istraživanja 36/2 (2016), 273–287. 122

Jelena Knešaurek Carić: Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato

Juraj Alberti’s biography The biography of Juraj Alberti has been missing many details until now. Almost everything we know about the author who, at the early age of fifteen, decided to write a manual on figural singing, we get from his very mouth, from the cover sheet and from the introduction to the book. Thus, most of the data available until now about the young theoretician was published on the cover sheet, according to the custom of the time. In the manner of Renaissance and Baroque studies, a biography was the sine qua non for the very possibility of publishing any kind of text. At least pro forma. It was also the way to prove the capability of the author to manage the subject. Juraj Alberti was born in Split in 1604. His father was Matej (Mattheo), doctor of philosophy. We find civil and church law information in the very first sentence below the title: ‘Composto dal Signor Giorgio Alberti giovane d’anni quindeci (Figliuolo del Sig. Mattheo Dottore di Filosofia, & d’una & l’altra Legge, Gentilhuomo di Spalato)’. Juraj Alberti’s competences were acknowledged by mentioning his teachers: ‘Scolaro delli SS. Musici il R. D. Romano Michaeli Romano Mansionario della Patriarcal d’Aquileia & del Sig. Martio Valinea Gentilhuomo d’Urbino, Musico Straordinario di San Marco.’ We have quite a lot of information about Romano Mich(a)eli: he was a pupil of the famous Francesco Soriano,8 whose position as the master of the chapel in Concordia Sagittaria’s dome9 he inherited after Soriano’s death. He was known for his polyphonic canons, but his most influential work was on music theory, Musica vaga et artificiosa, published in Venice in 1615. There he discusses the canon as a composition form and offers plenty of music examples, mentioning also many famous contemporary Italian composers.10 Unlike Micheli, Martio Valinea’s life and work are still a mystery. We know only that he was a member of the Urbino aristocracy and that he was an extraordinary musician in the Saint Mark Basilica in Venice: ‘Sig. Martio Valinea Gentilhuomo d’Urbino, Musico Straordinario in San Marco.’ In his above-mentioned article, Josip Andreis reported on Alberti’s brief acquisition of musical knowledge,11 which included the ability to sing madrigals and, generally, on the 8

‘Soriano, Francesco. – Musicista (Soriano al Cimino 1549 – Roma 1621), maestro di cappella e compositore di musiche sacre e profane. Studiò con G.B. Montanari, G.M. Nanino e Palestrina. Fra le chiese in cui fu maestro di cappella figurano quelle romane di San Luigi dei Francesi, Santa Maria Maggiore, San Giovanni in Laterano e infine (1603–1620) San Pietro. Di lui si hanno, fra l’altro, tre libri di madrigali.’ Alberto Pironti, ‘Soriano, Francesco’, Enciclopedia Dantesca (1970), http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/ francesco-soriano_%28Enciclopedia-Dantesca%29/, accessed 12 July 2019. 9 Andreis was wrong about the place where Micheli worked. He claimed he was a master of the chapel in Concordia sulla Secchia in the Modena province. Nevertheless, the Italian biographical lexicon informs us that a cathedral in Concordia Sagittaria, Veneto, was Micheli’s workplace. Saverio Franchi, ‘Micheli, Romano’, Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 74 (2010), http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/romano-micheli_(Dizionario-Biografico)/, accessed 23 December 2019. 10 The main source for Romano Mich(a)eli’s biography is A Biographical and Historical Dictionary of Musicians from the Earliest Ages to the Present Time, vol. 2 (London: Sainsbury and Co., 2nd edn. 1827), 159–160; cf. the web page https://books.google.hr/books?id=cTNDAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=hr&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false, accessed 23 December 2021. Musica vaga et artificiosa (Venetia, Giacomo Vincenti, 1615) is digitalized and available on the page https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015056390308&view=1up&seq=8, accessed 14 July 2019. 11 If it is not otherwise noted, citations from Italian sources follow contemporary orthography, i.e.the capital letters and small letters ‘u’ instead of ‘v’ and abbreviations are dissolved. In the foreword Alberti writes 123

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

content of the manual. There he also pleads for future deeper analysis and comparison to similar contemporary works. It should be noted that, at the beginning of the 17th century, Split experienced a cultural prosperity that was strongly fostered by bishop Marco Antonio de Dominis (Markantun de Dominis). Although there were some clues about the ideological rivalry between the bishop and the Alberti family, the cultural atmosphere in early Baroque Split encouraged the role of music in the cultivation of the city’s identity.12 Juraj Alberti decided to write a manual for learning how to sing canto figurato quickly and easily. Indeed, he highlighted the fact that he learned to sing madrigals in the very short period of only three months. These facts define the limits of the theory he intended to expose: they were based on the need to perform. It is worth reminding ourselves that cantus fractus (a rhythmicized form of plainchant) acquired the status of a notable musicological subject and was created as a new theoretical topic at the end of the 20th century, despite its significance in music practice from the 14th until the 19th century.13 The possible reason for this late recognition of its importance might be the continuity in reporting discontentment regarding rhythmicized choral (unlike freerhythmed diatonic choral, ie. the Gregorian chant) in many different papal documents, statutes of many church orders, bishops’ admonitions to the local priests, etc.14 Notwithstanding the disregard of it by music theoreticians, from the 14th up to the 19th century we find figural singing as a regular and even frequent practice recorded in plenty of liturgical books, particularly in Dalmatia whose music culture was strongly influenced by Italian music.15 After a short presentation of Alberti’s Dialogo, we shall draw attention to the possible analogies with contemporary works published by Italian writers.

12

13

14 15

about his education: ‘in casa esso Reverendo Signor Don Romano ancora lui si degno per quel poco tempo de vinti giorni in circa fin che parti per la sua residenca col detto Valinea, qual dopoi che partito sul Reverendo Romano non cesio a darmi i suoi ammaestramenti, & essercitarmi con precetti, & maniere che dal detto Dialogo ciascuno potra vedere, si che a Natale subsequente mi trovai in stato di antare sicuramente li madrigali solfegiando facendo qualche poco di studio prima, & anco mediocremente le parole, & in questo mentre appresi dal detto Valinea qualche coseta di sonar in liuto mentre che lui incompagnia mia sonava di teorba, & ancora in questo mentre appresi sonar honestamente bene di chitarra’ (G. Alberti, Dialogo, 2), and also at the very beginning of Dialogo Micheli says: ‘Se ben figliuolo mio, io vedo, & con mio gran gusto, che in cosi breve tempo di tre mesi, che voi privo a fatto di musica’ (G. Alberti, Dialogo, 4). In 1606, in Split’s cathedral, there was an inauguration of the restoration of the choir initiated by the new archbishop Marco Antonio de Dominis (in Croatian: Markantun de Dominis). As a member of a noble family from the island of Rab, he was educated in Italy at the Illyrian College at Loreto and at the University of Padua. He taught mathematics, logic, and rhetoric at Padua and Brescia. In 1596 he was, through imperial influence, appointed Bishop of Senj (Segna, Seng) and Modruš in Croatia in August 1600, and transferred in November 1602 to the archiepiscopal see of Split, thus gaining the title of ‘Dalmatiae et Croatiae Primas’. On the possible political and ideological rivalry between Alberti’s family and archbishop de Dominis, see the previously mentioned article by S. Tuksar, ‘Misao o glazbi’, 275. See Hana Breko Kustura, ‘Svjedočanstvo ritmiziranog korala (cantus fractusa) iz Samostana sv. Frane na Obali u Splitu: kantual Giuseppea d’Andrija iz 1707. godine’ [Testimony of cantus fractus from the Franciscan Monastery in Split: Chant Book by Giuseppe d’Andri from 1707], Bašćinski glasi 13 (2017–2018), 5–20: 8–11. Cf. Robert F. Hayburn, Papal Legislation on Sacred Music: 95 A.D. to 1977 A.D. (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1979). More about the subject in H. Breko Kustura, ‘Svjedočanstvo ritmiziranog korala’. 124

Jelena Knešaurek Carić: Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato

Fig. 1. Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti, Dialogo… (Venetia: Antonio Turino, 1619), frontispiece.

125

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Music theory in Alberti’s Dialogo Dialogo per imparare con brevità à cantar canto figurato has 38 pages and, according to the conventions of the time, the dialogue between the pupil and the master is preceded by censor Ioannes Dominicus Vignutius’ approval, a dedication to patron Duke of Urbino,16 and an introduction ‘to the benevolent reader’, typical Renaissance paratexts (seuils)17 that disclose information about the writer and the intention of the piece. In this case, they are the only source for the author’s biography. Since Josip Andreis extensively wrote on Alberti’s biography, we shall focus on the theoretical content of the text in the context of recent studies on Renaissance music theory, with reference to similar, contemporary texts published in the same cultural area. Alberti’s booklet is not divided into chapters and the text takes place in continuity. However, the content is indicated at the top of every page and at the very end of the booklet we find the content divided by the page number. The disposition of themes suggests twenty one units. Also, some explanations are amended with music examples. Master’s compliment from the very beginning of the text informs us about Alberti’s capability of quick learning. In only three months he taught him how to sing madrigals: ‘io vedo, & con mio gran gusto, che in cosi breve tempo di tre mesi, che voi privo a fatto di Musica, […], havete fatto tal profitto, che da vostra posta facendo la batuta cantate solfegiando li Madrigali’,18 and at the same time there unfolds the purpose of the manual. Master refers to Aristotle and his methodological request for a definition as the beginning of any kind of research, but Alberti declines it because of his young age19 and emphasizes God’s help that inspired him to obtain knowledge about music. Pupil (Alberti) defines music as one or more voices that consist of different tones regulated in proportion: ‘Musica e una ò più voci diversisone regolate á proportione.’20 Asked to clarify his definition he replies that the voice that consists of only one tone is a cry or an exclamation, while the phrase ‘regulated in proportions’ (’regolate à proportione’) is explained by listing all the content of the manual which is:21 stave with notes, solmization, seven positions, three clefs — C, G and F, two modes (b mole and b quadro), four mutations, bar lines, rhythm and note values, time signatures, dotted notes, rests and dotted rests, and syncopation. Bearing in mind the text size, we shall present the facts that Alberti himself regarded as unavoidable for successful figural singing learning.

16 ‘Al sereniss. sig. sig. et patron mio colendiss il sig. don Federico Feltrio della Rovere Prencipe d’Urbino.

&c.’ G. Alberti, Dialogo, [3].

17 Gérard Genette wrote extensively on the importance of paratext. These supplements or benches (fr. seuils)

18 19 20 21

are extremely important in the old literature where they allow us to reconstruct otherwise unreachable information about the author and its subject. Cf. G. Genette, Seuils (Paris: Seuil, 1989). G. Alberti, Dialogo, 7. ‘Se questa sia dottrina d’Aristotele, non lo posso sapere, non havendolo sin qui per l’eta mia studiato, se bene con l’aiuto Divino’, G. Alberti, Dialogo, 8. G. Alberti, Dialogo, 8. ‘Regolate à proportione s’ha da sapere che gl’antichi Musici per regolar la voce diversisona à proportione perche renda melodia, & si possi chiamar Musica, formorno alcune regole, che consistono in una scala di più gradi in sei sillabe, in sette dittioni, che altri le chiamano positioni, tra le quali sono tre chiavi. In due modi uno che si dice per b mole, & l’altro per b quadro, in quatro mutationi, nella batuta nelle otto figure col ponto o senza, & in alcune pause, & in certe sincope.’ G. Alberti, Dialogo, 9. 126

Jelena Knešaurek Carić: Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato

A stave comprises five lines and four spaces as well as one ledger line above and one below the stave. Then, he exposes the six-syllable system attributed to Guido from Arezzo, a system based on the hexachord as the fundament of music theory. In this system there are six hexachords from G to e2 and each is attributed with the same six syllables. The essence of the hexachord system is that each hexachord includes only one semitone, the one between Mi and Fa. A series of seven overlapping hexachords completed the gamut of formally recognized musical tones, a span of two and one-fourth octaves, containing the notes of the C major scale plus Bb.Those beginning on C are natural (hexachordum naturale) because they do not contain B or Bb. Hexachordum durum is the one which starts on G, and hexachordum molle is the one which starts on F. Because of the disproportion of the number of notes in a hexachord (which is six), and the number of notes in church modes (which is seven), Renaissance theory uses ‘positions’. These ‘Dittioni overo Positioni’ are positions in the scale from G to e2 where the change of syllable is required if the melody transfers to another hexachord. They are necessary for a successful application of the concept of relative solmization22 and actually present the place in which mutation (mutatio) begins. Mutation is the subject elaborated on page 21 of Dialogo and is explained as a process which might be comparable to contemporary modulation. In practice it means that mutation enables the singer to apply the solmization syllables to any series of notes they encountered, although they would take the musical context into consideration in choosing the best note on which to mutate.23 ‘By the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the sixnote sequence offered a fixed interval pattern that the singer could apply to pitches within the gamut, that is, the regular range on the hand, had been well established. The process of mutation was required to allow singers to shift in a seamless fashion from one deduction, effectively swapping one of Guido’s solmisation syllables for a different one on the same sung pitch.’24

Table 1. Hexachordal system with ‘positions’.

Alberti avoids Guido’s hand, claiming that it is not necessary in the process of learning how to sing. However, encouraged by Master, he compares Guido’s hand as a mnemotech22 ‘Quanto alle Dittioni, overo Positioni quelle si nominano, & ordinano a questo modo, una dietro altra,

& fanno una rota perpetua passando da G sol re ut alla dittion di A la mi re, nel assendere, & cosi ad altre gradatim, & versa vice’, G. Alberti, Dialogo, 12. 23 Cf. ‘Mutation’, Encyclopaedia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/art/mutation-music, accessed 24 November 2019. 24 Adam Whittaker, ‘Signposting Mutation in the Fourteenth- and Fifteenth- Music Theory Treatises’, Plainsong & Medieval Music 26/1 (2017), 37–61. 127

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

nical device which offers twenty positions and the seven positions explained in Dialogo that enable singing figural melodies. Claiming simplicity he invokes Aristotle with his famous sentence from Physics (I, 7, 189b23): ‘Non debet fieri per plura, quod potest fieri per pauciora, & aeque bene.’ Then he proceeds with explaining three clefs on four staves,25 as the G clef may be positioned on the fourth (G-Sol-Fa-Ut) and on the second (G-SolRe-Ut) line of the stave. Beside the clefs, he lists eleven notes which can be noted on the stave according to the clef explained. It is interesting that Alberti omits elaborating intervals. Still, they find their place in the part called ‘Come si agiusta la voce gradatim & a saltarelle’26 which is, in fact, a list of exercises for singing intervals — second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and octave. The first part of the manual is thus finished and the second one begins by defining a battuta (Alberti writes batuta) and rhythmic note values written down in white mensural notation. A battuta comprises two parts (battere and levare) that are actually considered one beat (hand down and up): ‘La batuta non è altro che una mesura di tempo denotato col motto della mano.’ Rhythmic values (valore) are organized in eight figures (figurae) and are perfect and imperfect as well as rests (pause). The perfect ones can fill one beat, while imperfect ones need to be combined to fill one beat: ‘Le figure sono otto quattro prime si dicono perfette, per essere che sono suficiente per se sole per far la batuta intiera, & perfetta; e quattro altre susequente, che dicono imperfette, perche non sono sufficiente da se sole, senza multiplicari loro numero, o senza aiuto di altre figure, o perfette, o imperfette a fare la battuta intiera.’27 These figures are: maxima, longa, breve, semibreve, minima, semiminima, croma, and semicroma and are presented as follows:

Fig. 2. Alberti’s example for rhythmic note values, Dialogo, 27.

In the example the number above the note describes the number of beats encompassed by the rhythmic value of the perfect notes, which are maxima, longa, breve, and semibreve: ‘Massima e di valore di otto battute, Lunga di quattro, Breve di due, Semibreve de una, & queste sono le quattro perfette…’28 The number above rhythmic values called minima, semiminima, croma, and semicroma describes the imperfect figures: ‘in questo modo, che in una batuta vanno duoi minime, overo quattro semiminime, overo otto crome, overo sedici semicrome.’ Dots (ponti), just as today, increase the duration of the basic note by half of its original value. Subsequent dots add progressively halved values. Rhythmic values of the rests (pause) correlate with those of notes: Massima, Lunga, Breve, Semibreve, Mezza, Sospir, Mezza Sospir, and Quarto di Sospir. Relating to the change of note duration, Alberti 25 26 27 28

See A. Whittaker, ‘Signposting Mutation’, 98. G. Alberti, Dialogo, 23–24. G. Alberti, Dialogo, 27. G. Alberti, Dialogo, 27. 128

Jelena Knešaurek Carić: Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato

gives examples for the proportions noted with a circle or half of a circle. However, he does not explain the whole system of proportions already in use but lists four basic proportions (proportio) Alla breve, Tripla, Sesquialtera, and Hemiolia, and explains them by giving examples. It is very important to emphasize that Alberti, although he uses the white mensural notation that was mostly abandoned in the 17th century, is informed about contemporary meter in music. He insists on a beat as a norm in music writing. Binary mensuration is both a standard and ideal and the mensural system he proposes is the one accepted and practiced from 1600 to c. 1800, which makes him up-to-date.29 Up to the beginning of the 17th century an old mensural system was in use in which the ternary division of the meter is considered perfect (perfectio).30

Fig. 3. Proportions as presented in Dialogo, 31.

The last part of the manual is devoted to exercises and instructions for the singer. He explicates how to adjust the voice to the meter and how to keep the tempo of the musical piece. Then he offers some exercises for improving pronunciation and, at the very end, examples for participating in polyphonic singing. The last page of the manual offers a very short demonstration of proportions. These proportions are not, as one might think, the proportions related to meter (tripla, sesquialtera, etc.), but the proportions considered as relations between different voices. Still, the way the voices should be led does not interest Alberti, nor should it interest anyone who wants to learn how to sing: it is a subject that should be scrutinized by composers, the young author concludes. 29 See George Houle, Meter in Music, 1600–1800: Performance, Perception, and Notation (Bloomington &

Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987). The point is that Alberti extensively, as much as he can in this short text, explains the system of pauses (pause), dots (figure ponti), ligaturae, and syncopae, insisting all the time on a binary system of dividing the beat. He is aware of modern intentions in, for instance, ‘ligature delle figure’: ‘L’altro caso procede dale ligature di esse figure le quali ligature, se ben sono multiplici, però non intendo parlare de tutte, ma solo delle otto infrascritte, perche li moderni per levar la confusione havendo dato il bando alle altre, di esse sole otto hanno voluto alcuna volta servirsi’, Cf. G. Alberti, Dialogo, 31. 30 The system of proportions was in use from the end of the 14th until the end of the 16th century, when it was replaced by a new metric system which forms the basis of the contemporary one. However, many signs and names were still in use, and many changed their meaning. Alberti takes some of the note values and symbols from the older system (ligaturae, for instance), while the bar and division of the note values belongs to the new one. 129

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Canto figurato — between vivid practice and hidden theory As forewarned by Josip Andreis, one can encounter quite a lot of objections to Alberti’s manual: his low level of Italian language knowledge, inapt disposition of the subjects discussed, often unclear explanation of the material exposed, lack of precise definitions or even the complete absence of basic music theory subjects such as interval or modus. If we accept the imperative to consent to dominant west European music history achievements, there is no doubt that this manual attains local needs for music learning which makes it a priori excluded from the imagined chain of constant improvement, a red thread in many European music historiographies. Still, if we choose to study it from the aspect of microhistory or history from below as a possible key for unlocking the reasons for writing and publishing this booklet, we get the opportunity to compare it to other similar, contemporary works, even those written by the most significant theoreticians of the time. Furthermore, we obtain a position for better understanding the need for this kind of manual on figural singing (canto figurato). Canto figurato (lat. cantus figuratus) is a type of Christian liturgical singing which, unlike plainsong, consists of rhythmic melodies. Apart from describing rhythmic monody in liturgical and paraliturgical repertory, the term also refers to polyphonic singing, ie. counterpoint added to the main, plainsong melody. Although in many treatises preserved from the time plainsong and its theory is dominant,31 there are still some texts that, along with cantus gregorianus, explain the cantus figuratus as an additional subject.32 In this article we shall compare few manuals that discuss the canto figurato and that were published in Italy in the first two decades of the 17th century. We will also explore web databases such as Saggi musicali italiani (SMI)33 as well as one of the still most relevant

31

See http://canto-fermo.univ-tours.fr/items/browse?collection=1, accessed 06 November 2019. On this web page we find the sources for canto fermo theory. However, even if not clearly noted, the authors of the page are aware of the canto fratto: ‘I trattati italiani di canto fermo offrono anche altre tematiche. Il soggetto più trattato è il canto fratto: il periodo in cui gli autori lo menzionano va dal Canto harmonico... di Andrea da Modena (1690) al Breve ragguaglio... di Della Gatta (1793). Inoltre, è opportuno notare che, durante quest’epoca, la pubblicazione del Cantore ecclesiastico di Foglietti (1788) provoca la congiunzione tra canto fratto peninsulare e plain-chant musical francese. Si fa riferimento al soggetto del canto fratto, senza usarne direttamente il concetto, anche quando Giuseppe Frezza Dalle Grotte informa il suo lettore delle figure ritmiche di quella tipologia di canto senza spiegare le ragioni.’ http://canto-fermo.univ-tours.fr/exhibits/ show/studio/studio7, accessed 06 November 2019. 32 The previously mentioned source http://canto-fermo.univ-tours.fr/exhibits/show/studio/studio7, accessed 27 November 2019 says: ‘Il canto figurato - cioè la “vera” musica - si trova associato a parecchi trattati di canto fermo. Certi metodi sono esplicitamente dedicati ad un insegnamento “integrato” della musica che, sin dal loro titolo, combina insieme canto fermo e canto figurato (Lanfranco, 1533; Aron, 1545; Verrato, 1623; Picerli, 1630; Cavalliere, 1634; Avella, 1657; Bismantova, 1677; Bertalotti, 1698). Altri metodi sono dedicati esclusivamente al canto fermo ma sono pensati come momento di un percorso musicale più ampio: Illuminato Aiguino fece pubblicare nel 1562 La illuminata de tutti i tuoni di canto fermo e poi, nel 1581, Il tesoro illuminato di tutti i tuoni di canto figurato. Ottavio Ferraro divise la sua Opera nova in due volumi (...di canto fermo e ...di canto figurato) pubblicati lo stesso anno, nel 1620. Nella trattatistica italiana, la vicinanza tra canto figurato e canto fermo sembra tuttavia un fenomeno circoscrivibile ai secoli XVI e XVII. Soltanto alcuni testi settecenteschi mostrano nel titolo l’intenzione di voler trattare i due argomenti, mentre i riedizioni di trattati seicenteschi mantengono un capitolo o una sezione che affrontino la teoria della musica figurata.’ 33 Cf. http://www.chmtl.indiana.edu/smi/. 130

Jelena Knešaurek Carić: Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato

published sources for the history of music theory, Music Theory from Zarlino to Schenker: A Bibliography and Guide by David Damschroder and David Russell Williams.34 Adriano Banchieri’s treatise Cartella musicale from 161435 is a significant and sizable manual for Gregorian and figural singing. Because of its length (it contains 266 pages!) it would be hard to compare it to Alberti’s booklet. However, the manuals Cartella overo regole utilissime à quelli che desiderano imparare il canto figurato from 160136 and La cartellina musicale,37 which are also written in the form of a dialogue and published, just like Dialogo, in Venice in 1615, contain a list of subjects considering basic music theory, focusing primarily on figural singing. Cartella overo regole utilissime has 79 pages and reveals the author’s excellent education in music theory. The introduction traditionally reminds the reader of all the benefits music has on one’s soul and body, following the scholastic manner of teaching music in the system of septem artes liberales, and thus referring to Greek authors (Plato and Aristotle), church fathers (St. Augustinus), and probably the most famous Renaissance theoretician Gioseffo Zarlino. Banchieri propounds that the instructions are meant for ‘gli desiderosi d’imparare la professione di cantare’, and the pupil at the very beginning of the book emphasizes his wish to learn to sing his part safely, with his knowledge based on a good fundament: ‘che io impari cantare la mia parte sicura, & con gli reali fondamenti.’38 The main formal difference is the concept of asking and answering. While in Alberti’s Dialogo the pupil is the one who explains the subject considered by answering his teacher’s questions, in Banchieri’s Cartella overo regole utilissime the master is the one who teaches and the pupil listens and asks questions. The groundwork for Banchieri’s text keeps Guido’s Hand. Banchieri also differentiates ordines (Grave for bass, Acuto for tenor and alto and Sopraacuto for soprano), extensively elaborates clefs and the positions of notes b quadro and b mole, and offers examples for every theoretical explanation that makes the treatise more comprehensible. In the first part of Banchieri’s manual there is a clear explanation of mutation. The second part, just as Alberti’s, is devoted to rhythm and tactus. Rhythmic values of the notes and rests, as well as the bar, are explained in the same way as in Alberti’s text: ‘Battuta altro non è che posare e levare di mano.’39 However, Banchieri offers an explanation of dots (punti) more clearly than Alberti does, dividing them, according to mensural system, into Punto di perfettione, Punto di Augmentatione, Punto di Divisione, and Punto di Alteratione. Still, the only sign needed by a singer is the last one which increases the duration of the basic note by half of its original value: ‘vagliono la metà più che vagliono le semplice.’ Banchieri is very clear while explaining the tactus (batuta) too. There are il tempo perfetto (the tactus unit is brevis) and il tempo imperfetto 34 The book is vol. 4 of ‘Harmonologia’ series by Joel Lester (ed.) (Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1990). 35 Adriano Banchieri, Cartella musicale nel canto figurato, fermo, et contrapunto (Venetia: Giacomo Vin-

centi, 1614).

36 The full title is: Cartella overo regole utilissime à quelli che desiderano imparare il canto figurato. Nuovamente

da varie opinioni di Musici eccelenti ridotte in un piacevole Dialogo di maestro, & Discepolo. Et divise in due parti per Adriano Banchieri Bolognese, organista di Santa Maria di Regola (Venetia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1601). http://www.bibliotecamusica.it/cmbm/viewschedatwbca.asp?path=/cmbm/images/ripro/gaspari/_C/C062/, accessed 19 November 2019. 37 A. Banchieri, La cartellina musicale che in documenti facili ridotti dall’antico allo istile moderno introduce i principianti à sicuro posesso del canto figurato (Venetia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1615). 38 A. Banchieri, Cartella overo regole utilissime, 8 39 A. Banchieri, Cartella overo regole utilissime, 44. 131

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

(the tactus unit is semibrevis), although the last one is much more frequent in practice.40 Then he exposes different kinds of cadences, voice interval exercises, forbidden melodic lines, and finally correct word pronunciation in Latin and Italian (volgare). At the very end of the manual the author includes a two-voice composition. La cartellina musicale41 from 1615 is even more clearly articulated, although it is an excerpt on figural singing from the previously published Cartella musicale (1614). Banchieri and Alberti share the subjects they expose in their manuals as well as the idea of efficiency and simplicity, thus eliminating everything that might confuse a pupil. Nevertheless, Banchieri is older, better educated, and a more experienced author, which results in a superior style of language, clear definitions, and plenty of examples. More closely resembling Alberti’s manual is the one written by Giovanni Maria Verrati (1490–1563) and also published in Venice in 1623, Il Verrato insegna con nova e brevissima inventione facile per imparare per tutte le chiave, à leggere le notte, cantare e portar la batuda, con cinque sole regole in Dialogo, ciove Maestro, & Discepolo. Verrati was a Carmelite, a famous theologist, and professor in Bologna and Ferrara, as well as being a fateful contestant against Protestantism. His treatise on music theory relating to Gregorian and figural singing was published posthumously by Bartolomeo Magni. Its size as well as content is almost identical to Alberti’s Dialogo. Still, for Verrati music is a harmony of temperate voices invented for enjoyment: ‘La musicha, ch’altro non e che un armonia, di temperate voci per diletto ritrovata’, and its rules can be summarized in five prescriptions. He claims it be a new invention that offers extreme promptitude in education, which is also emphasized in the title of the book where he promises the acquisition of all the knowledge requested in becoming a singer in only fifteen or twenty days.42 Just as Alberti, Verrati starts with solmization and proceeds to clefs, positions, and mutations, which he explains in detail. He also uses a five-line stave and white choral notation. At the end of the booklet, Verrati adds ‘Epilogo di tutta l’Opera’ which is, actually, a brief summary. The most important difference between Alberti and Verrati is that the latter gives an example for every definition. A painstaking comparative analysis of all the mentioned manuals would 40 However, in the third edition of Cartella Banchieri says: ‘Dagli Musici antichi vari & diversamente furono

praticati gli Tempi musicali, & sotto quelli componevansi infiite proportioni di Triple, Quadruple, Quintuple, Sestuple, & via multiplicando; tuttavia perche rendevano lungo tempo, & grandissima difficolta praticargli, gli Musici moderni quelli hanno dimessi, & per maggior docilità, gli hanno ridotti a dui, l’uno diremmo Tempo perfetto maggiore, & il secondo Tempo perfetto minore sotto il perfetto maggiore si mandano dui Semibrevi (che fanno una breve per battuta, & sotto il perfetto minore si mandano dui Minime) che sono una Semibreve per battuta, tanto di note nell’uno & l’altro come di Pause.’ A. Banchieri, Cartella musicale, 28–29. 41 The full title is La Cartellina musicale che in documenti facili ridotti dall’Antico allo Istile moderno introduce i principianti a sicuro posesso del Canto Figurato. … In Venetia. Appresso Giacomo Vincenti MDCXV. Digitalized on https://imslp.org/wiki/La_cartellina_musicale%2C_Op.35_(Banchieri%2C_Adriano), accessed 25 November 2019. Unlike Cartella musicale it was written in a form of a manual with definitions and examples, without the dialogical element. 42 The full title is: Il Verrato/ insegna/ con Nova e Brevissima inventione facile per imparare/ tutte le Chiave, a leggere le note, Cantare/ & portar la batuda, con cinque/ sole Regole in Dialogo ciove/ Maestro, & Discepolo./ Opera molto profitevole a chi desidera in quindeci o venti giorni/ imparare per cantare tanto Canto Fermo/ quanto Figurato./ Con un Epilogo breve per li Maestri/ che Insegnano./ DI/ f. GIO MARIA VERRATO/ Da Ferrara Carmelitano della Congregatione di Mantua,/ Organista, e Maestro publico Di Humanita/ in Toscolano nella Riviera di Bressia/ NOVAMENTE STAMPATA./ In Venetia MDCXXIII./ Appresso Bartholomeo Magni. 132

Jelena Knešaurek Carić: Juraj (Giorgio) Alberti: Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato

certainly provide many more interesting pieces of data about figural singing theory in northern Italy and Dalmatia and elucidate the relationship between ‘old’ music theory and the ‘new’ one. The latter one began at the beginning of the 17th century and paved the way for the modern music theory which we still use today as a basic tool in music education. Conclusion There is no doubt that (musical) works of art of the highest order were, are, and will be of the utmost interest for researchers presenting the highlights of human creativity. However, it should be remembered that they were performed periodically on special occasions and in the places that could afford these, often very expensive, performances. For church music these special occasions were festivities of all kinds. Alberti’s manual, and many others of the kind, were probably intended for the clergy, or for those preparing to become clergy, but probably for singers’ laics as well, for those who should participate in the musical part of the liturgy. Thus, one should not search for signs of accuracy or the development of thought in this sort of booklet. The importance of Alberti’s text resides in the fact that it provides us with knowledge about music which was required for everyday music practice, that which guarantees the continuity necessary for any sort of development.43 In Croatian music historiography one can often find a question about the disproportion between the number of composers and compositions found in the libraries and texts that mull over music, no matter if the subject is musica theorica or musica practica. This phenomenon, nevertheless, does not look so enigmatic if we bear in mind the humanistic way of education that incorporated music theory as a part of the quadrivium. This means that a noteworthy number of people who attended church schools learned music theory. Apart from that, all the churches, particularly the more significant ones, featured a choir. For participating in the choir, even if performing only Gregorian and figural chants written down in the liturgical books, one needed a manual for singing, not for composing. Very often, monks, priests, and laic singers brought music with them when moving from one place to another. Thus, together with the material already existing in the church, they could satisfy the average demands for music in the liturgy. The lack of more complex treatises, composers, and compositions is understandable if we consider the social and economic conditions in the Croatian lands of the time. Giorgio Alberti’s Dialogo is a rare witness to the local music practice and its theoretical needs. Alberti was a young man from Split who, possibly, directed his knowledge to his local community and for many in his city made available even elementary music education. To us, his booklet provides information about the contemporary music practice and aesthetics that existed in Split, as well as in northern Italy, at the beginning of the 17th century. 43 On the subject see the article Daniele Torelli, ‘“Cantores inchoent sequentem Antiphonam”. Canto piano

e canto figurato nella liturgia quotidiana tra Cinque e Seicento’, in Barocco Padano 6. Atti del XIV Convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII, Brescia, 16–18 luglio 2007, eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2010), 219–249: ‘Vorrei considerare più particolarmente le forme e i fenomeni musicali giustappunto laddove i riti e le celebrazioni si svolgevano in base a schemi festivi di grado decisamente minore, se non pure feriale, ovvero quando non erano disponibili compagini vocali e strumentali di professionisti, ossia quando gli attori delle parti musicali comunque previste erano principalmente – se non esclusivamente – i membri del clero tenuti a partecipare all’azione liturgica.’ 133

New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620 Gabriele Taschetti Università degli Studi di Padova, Italy

Tomaso Cecchini (Verona?, c. 1580 – Lesina / Hvar, 1644) was one of the most important musicians active in Dalmatia in the first half of the 17th century. His presence is recorded at the cathedral of St. Doimus in Split as chapel master (1603?–1614) and later at the cathedral of Lesina (today Hvar), initially as chapel master (1614–1635), then as organist (1635–1644).1 The vicissitudes linked to bishop of Split Marcantonio de Dominis (Rab, c. 1560 – Rome, 1624) contributed, to some extent, to Cecchini’s departure from the Split institution in 1614 and, more or less directly, determined the circumstances that allowed the election of Ivan Lukačić as chapel master of the same cathedral in 1620.2 Although the two musicians alternated occupying the same position a few years apart, and worked simultaneously in a geographically circumscribed area, no documents have emerged to prove contact between them.3 Nevertheless, it is known that Cecchini continued to maintain relations with the cathedral of Split even after the arrival of Lukačić.4 The only printed collections of sacred music published in the first half of the 17th century by musicians active in Dalmatia can be traced back to these two composers, as far as it is known. We have only one collection of Ivan Lukačić’s music, which includes heterogeneous compositions, both in terms of the number of voices and the compositional techniques used, presumably composed over a period of one or two lustra.5 On the other hand, we can observe the stages of Tomaso Cecchini’s production cycle, since they are marked by many very different collections, although in his early years of activity at 1 2

3 4

5

For an in-depth monographic study of Tomaso Cecchini, see Ennio Stipčević, Tomaso Cecchini (Zagreb: MIC, 2015). On some aspects of the Cecchini–De Dominis connections, see the article by Gabriele Taschetti, ‘Marcantonio De Dominis: a Patron manqué for Tomaso Cecchini?’, in Music Patronage in Italy, ed. Galliano Ciliberti, Studies on Italian Music History 15 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2021), 147–164. For a more general view, see Stanislav Tuksar, ‘Music, Reformation and Catholic Renewal in Early 17th-Century Dalmatia’, in Barocco Padano 7. Atti del XV Convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII, Milano, 14–16 luglio 2009, eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2012), 401–412. Cf. E. Stipčević, ‘The Social and Historical Status of Music and Musicians in Croatia in the Early Baroque’, International Review of the Aesthetics and Sociology of Music 18/1 (1987), 3–17. In 1624, in fact, Tomaso Cecchini made a dedication to the ‘molto illustri e reverendi signori, li signori canonici et capitulo della Chiesa Metropolitana di Spalato’ (most illustrious and reverend lords, the canons and the chapter of Split cathedral) his Terzo libro delle messe ariose (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1624). Ivan Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones singulis, binis, ternis, quaternis, quinisque vocibus concinendae (Venezia: sub signo Gardani 1620) = RISM A/I L 2928a. See E. Stipčević, Ivan Lukačić (Zagreb: MIC, 2007). The dedicatory letter is dated 25 March 1620. 135

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

least, each was dedicated to music for a specific number of voices. As the only collection by Ivan Lukačić was printed in 1620, we then examined the motets that Cecchini had already published before that date, along with some of their features.6 Contrary to standard approaches, we have tried to take into account, as far as possible, also the collections that have come to us incompletely, which are usually neglected. As happens in the case of many other contemporary composers, in fact, the catalogue of Tomaso Cecchini’s works is somehow incomplete and a substantial part of his known collections are only partially preserved.7 Such a scenario has so far discouraged a comprehensive approach to the analysis of his production.8 The present study therefore aims to examine the compositional techniques used by Cecchini, with particular reference to the motets included in complete and incomplete collections published prior to 1620, the year in which Ivan Lukačić’s Sacrae Cantiones were printed. The collections examined here were published between 1613 — when the Motetti concertati a due voci were printed —9 and 1619 — the year the Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica were published.10 The latter is the only collection, among those analysed in this study, to have come to us complete in all of its part-books. Considering other incomplete collections,11 it is possible to count four known editions of motets published between 1613 and 1619. Yet, according to some indexes of music publishers and booksellers, the number of works of the same genre published by Cecchini in that period would be at least six (see table 1).12 6

For an insight into the small-scale motet in the Dalmatian area see E. Stipčević, ‘The Small-Scale Motet in Dalmatia in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century’, Musicologica Istropolitana 12 (2017), 103–118. 7 The last known work by Tomaso Cecchini — of which, unfortunately, the only known example was lost during World War II — bears the number of opus 27. There are 14 collections preserved today and only 9 of them have reached us in complete form. For a list of Cecchini’s works, see E. Stipčević, Tomaso Cecchini, 100–120. 8 The scholar Janez Höfler, in an article in which he communicated the discovery of two incomplete prints of Cecchini’s, had already proposed: ‘An in-depth study of both collections (which is not at all the task of this communication) can show many characteristics of Cecchini’s compositional craftsmanship, despite their fragmentary condition’ (trans. by author). See Janez Höfler, ‘Dvije zbirke skladbi Tome Cecchinija’ [Two Collections by Tomaso Cecchini], Sv. Cecilija 40/2 (1970), 45. 9 T. Cecchini, Motetti concertati a due voci (Venezia: Ricciardo Amadino, 1613) = RISM A/I C 1670. 10 T. Cecchini, Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica quinque vocibus (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1619) = RISM A/I C 1675. Critical edition by Gabriele Taschetti (Zagreb: MIC 2019). See also, Gabriele Taschetti, ‘L’ op. 14 di Tomaso Cecchini (1619) tra Dalmazia veneziana e Ungheria reale’, in Između Srednje Europe i Mediterana: glazba, književnost i izvedbene umjetnosti / Between Central Europe and the Mediterranean: Music, Literature and the Performing Arts, eds. Ivana Tomić Ferić, Antonela Marić (Split: Umjetnička akademija u Splitu, Filozofski fakultet u Splitu 2021), 103–118. 11 The already mentioned collection of Mottetti concertati (1613); the book Salmi et motetti concertati a quattro voci piene (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1616), not listed in RISM; the print Motetti a una voce sola (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1617) = RISM A/I C 1674. 12 Three more titles of lost sacred collections from the same period can be identified. The following collections are included in the sales catalogues of the Augsburg bookseller Kaspar Fluhrschütz: ‘Motetti, psalmi, magnif, à 3, Tomaso Cechini, cum bas.’ (years 1616, 1618, and 1619), ‘Lamentationes, Miserere mei Deus, a 2. cum basso, Tomasi Cechini. Venet.’ (years 1616, 1618, 1619, 1620), and ‘Motetti Concertati a 2. di Tamasi Cechini lib. 2. cum basso. Venet.’ (years 1618, 1619, 1628). See Richard Schaal, Die Kataloge des Augsburger Musikalien-Händlers Kaspar Flurschütz 1613–1628, Quellenkataloge zur Musikgeschichte Heraus-gegeben von Richard Schaal (Wilhelmshaven: Heinrichshofen’s Verlag, 1974). Probably due to an oversight, Schaal did not transcribe the first occurrence of the collection of three-voice motets in the 1616 catalogue. However, 136

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

Table 1. Tomaso Cecchini’s motet collections published before 1620. Extant part-books 1613

Motetti concertati a due voci

Venezia: Amadino

1 (B)

1616

Salmi, et motetti concertati a quattro voci piene

Venezia: Vincenti

1 (C)

1617

Motetti a una voce sola

Venezia: Vincenti

1 (Bc)

Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica quinque vocibus

Venezia: Vincenti

6 (C, A, T, B, Q, Bc)

1619

Lost collections ad1616

Motetti, psalmi, magnif, à 3 [...] cum bas.

ad1617

Motetti Concertati a 2. [...] lib. 2 cum basso

1. Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica quinque vocibus (1619) The collection Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica (Venice, 1619), as the only one of the period under examination to be complete, can be used as a privileged starting point for the stylistic-formal analysis of Cecchini’s motet production. The work, as the title suggests, is conceptually divided into three parts. The first and the second parts are dedicated respectively to Vespers and Mass, while the last part consists of five motets. The whole collection is written for five voices and basso continuo. The writing of the psalms and the Magnificat is prevalently vertical-harmonic. The division into verses can be clearly heard thanks to the use of frequent perfect cadences that punctuate each composition. In these psalms Cecchini creates an ongoing play of contrasts between more or less numerous choral subgroups thanks to alternating between episodes involving a limited number of different voices and episodes in which all the voices are used. The frequent changes of texture succeed each other without ever causing interruptions in the vocal intarsia. Sometimes the composer shortly develops small contrapuntal sections. Such procedures are also found in the Gloria and the Credo of the Mass, while the Kyrie, the Sanctus and the Agnus Dei are constructed with a greater use of contrapuntal devices starting from the same soggetto. The third and last part, which is devoted to motets, is useful to identify some typical stylistic-formal features of Cecchini’s writing. These compositions include similar sections as those used as a ritornello. Each motet in fact contains a vertical-homorhythmic section in perfect time in which all the voices are involved and which returns equal to itself throughout the composition.13 These triple-time ritornelli alternate with mainly the entry can be seen in Officina musica selectissimorum tam veterum quam recentium Auctorum, que [sic] extat in aedibus Caspari Fluhrschüz ciuis Augustani (Augsburg: Christoph Mang), A5r, the only copy being held at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz, shelfmark Mus.ant.theor. F 115/2. The second book of motets for two voices and the Lamentations with the Miserere also appear in the index of the Venetian publisher Alessandro Vincenti of 1621. See Oscar Mischiati, Indici, cataloghi e avvisi degli editori musicali italiani dal 1591 al 1798 (Firenze: Olschki, 1984). In a musical inventory of the chapter library of Hvar Cathedral — where Cecchini was active from 1614 to 1644, first as chapel master and then as organist — compiled by Giovanni Andrea Nembri between 1646 and 1647, a third book of motets for two voices is mentioned, although no indication is given as to its date. Cf. Maja Milošević, ‘The Inventory of Music Material from the Hvar Chapter in 1646 and 1647’, in Studies on the Reception of Italian Music in Central-eastern Europe in the 16th and 17th Century, ed. Marina Toffetti (Kraków: Musica Jagellonica, 2018), 85–118. 13 The ritornello of the motet Confitemini Domino is written in imperfect time; however, the incipit is, de 137

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

contrapuntal-imitative episodes for two or three voices in imperfect time, in which different vocal combinations are used (see table 2).14 Table 2. Structure of the motets of Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica (1619). Surge propera

a

b

a

c

a

TUTTI

C-T

TUTTI

A-Q

TUTTI C-B

a C-A-B TUTTI

c

a

Q-T

TUTTI TUTTI

a

b

a

c

a

TUTTI

C-T

TUTTI

A-Q-B TUTTI TUTTI

a

b

a’

c

a’

TUTTI

A-T

TUTTI

Q-B

TUTTI C

a

b

Iesum omnes a agnoscite TUTTI Cantemus Domino Confitemini Domino Laudate Dominum

TUTTI

b

d

a TUTTI

cadence cadence d

c e f d C-A-T A-Q-B TUTTI C-T-B C-A-Q

a

cadence

TUTTI

TUTTI

g a h A-Q-T TUTTI TUTTI

cadence TUTTI

In the sections in imperfect time, the composer constructs short segments of pseudocanonic imitation for two voices, mainly at the octave or in unison, but also at the fourth or fifth. In such episodes, the roles of dux and comes are frequently switched between the voices (see examples 1 and 2). In most of the three-voice episodes, the imitation mainly involves two of them, while a third voice is used as a free part. However, the imitations only remain strict for a few breves, being interrupted by frequent cadences. The presence of small imitative segments and the prevalence of writing for pairs of voices, as well as the use of basso continuo, are elements that define the small-scale motet, which gained increasing popularity since the end of the 16th century and the first decades of the 17th century.15 Mus. ex. 1. Tomaso Cecchini, Surge propera amica mea in Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica, bb. 9–16.

facto, in triple time. In the ritornello of the Laudate Dominum segments in imperfect and perfect time are combined. Cf. T. Cecchini, Psalmi, missa et alia cantica. 14 In this table, and in nos. 4 and 5, the formal structure of the motets is outlined. In the top row of each motet the individual sections are marked with a letter of the alphabet in order to make any repetitions evident. Next to each letter all the time indications that appear in the episode are given in sequence. In the lower line the voices singing in each section are listed (C: cantus; A: altus; Q: quintus; T: tenor; B: bassus). 15 Robert L. Kendrick, The Sounds of Milan 1585–1650 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), 234–244; Noel O’Regan, ‘The Church Triumphant: Music in the Liturgy’, in The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-Century Music, edited by Tim Carter and John Butt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 283–323: 308–314. 138

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

Mus. ex. 2. Tomaso Cecchini, Iesum omnes agnoscite in Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica bb. 31–37.

It will be shown how these five motets from the collection Psalmi, missa et alia cantica — the only ones composed by Cecchini before 1620 and which remain complete today — do not represent the full range of techniques used by the composer. Nevertheless, they prove to be particularly valuable since they provide various elements to identify, with a greater degree of certainty, which of the incomplete collections contain motets of the same kind. 2. Motetti a una voce sola (1617) The collection Motetti a una voce sola (Venezia: Vincenti, 1617) was presumably published in two booklets, of which only the one containing the ‘parte per sonar’ has survived.16 The lack of the vocal part, besides foreclosing our global knowledge of these motets, impedes the analysis of some elements that can usually be observed in music that has 16 The only copy of this part-book is kept at the British Library in London under the shelfmark Music Col-

lections K.8.h.26. According to the possession note on the title page, in 1623 the copy must have belonged to the Jesuit College of Vienna. 139

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

reached us in an incomplete state but of which one of the voices survive. For example, it is not possible to grasp any peculiar aspects of the melodic features or any traces of imitation between the instrumental and the vocal parts.17 Only in the motets for solo bass it is possible that the basso continuo partially follows the vocal melodic line, as happens for example in a later collection by Cecchini which includes compositions for bass and organ.18 Nevertheless, on the basis of the available material, it is not possible to ascertain with any certainty when this occurs and when it does not. It is not even possible to understand exactly which lyrics were used by the composer. The textual incipits given in the table and at the beginning of each motet on the organ part, although sometimes referring to precise liturgical texts, do not provide sufficient details to identify with full certainty which other portions of the text have been set.19 Despite being hampered by such and other impediments, the analysis of this collection may prove to be fruitful for our purpose. A careful reading of the ‘parte per sonar’ reveals some unique formal characteristics in Cecchini’s motet production before 1620. Indeed, it should be noted that about one third of the motets show internal repetitions of various kinds. Although the repetitions in the basso continuo do not necessarily imply that the vocal part acts in the same way, this is likely to have happened. Moreover, as we have seen and will see again, Cecchini often uses repetitions. The repetitions present in this collection are different from those that occur in Psalmi, missa et alia cantica (1619), where they mainly consist of the same ternary section appearing at the beginning, in the middle, and at the end of a motet. In some cases, as in the motets Cantabo Domino and Diligam te Domine (see tab. 3, nn. 6 and 29) only the repetition of a small phrase occurs. In other cases, such as in Domine ne in furore tuo (n. 23, see example 3), a larger portion is repeated twice in a row, or by interposing a small cadence or another episode between the repetitions, as happens in Benedicam Dominum (n. 2). Finally, in the motets Exultate Deo (n. 25) and Audi Domine (27), a repetition sign appears.20 Such a sign could indicate either the repetition of the section that comes before or after it, or both. However, in another collection by Cecchini, in correspondence to this same sign, the indication ‘seguitate’ (go ahead) is added, suggesting that the section preceding the sign should not be repeated.21 It is therefore possible to assign an A-B-B structure to motets with the repetition sign. Provided that the textual incipits of compositions with such internal articulation patterns can be traced back to antiphons 17 It can nonetheless be taken into account that in Cecchini’s writing, as in that of other contemporary com-

18 19

20

21

posers, the thoroughbass tends to incorporate the rhythmic patterns of the voice, even in correspondence to the repeated notes, whereas other musicians tend to group the values into a single longer note. See T. Cecchini, Cinque messe a due voci [...] et vinti due motetti a voce sola [...] con otto sonate (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1627) = RISM A/I C 1677. In Audi Domine (table 3, n. 27), at the beginning of the second section, the indication ‘ut sint oculi’ appears. The text could therefore be identified with that of the responsory ‘Audi, Domine, hymnum et orationem qua servus tuus orat coram te hodie; ut sint oculi tui aperti, et aures tuae intentae, super domum istam die ac nocte.’ Similar solutions can be found in other contemporary collections. Among the various works, it is worth mentioning the Sacri concerti (1600) by Gabriele Fattorini, where the repetition sign is used, for example, in the motet Laetamini in Domino. See Gabriele Fattorini, I sacri concerti a due voci facili, & commodi da cantare, & sonare con l’organo a voci piene, & mutate a beneplacito de cantori, co ‘l basso generale per maggior commodita de gl’organisti (Venezia: Ricciardo Amadino, 1600) = RISM A/I F 129. Cf. T. Cecchini, Cinque messe, 1627. 140

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

and responsories, it is probable that in these instances the musical form could have been guided by the peculiar articulation of the liturgical text. Unfortunately, in the absence of the vocal part (and therefore of the words), it is not possible to carry out any verification in this regard. Such formal schemes — which, if not ‘responsorial’, one could at least define as ‘with repetitions’ — appear only in this collection by Cecchini among those published before 1620. As we shall see, the composer mainly uses other repetition solutions within his motets from this period.22 Table 3. Repetitions in the motets of Tomaso Cecchini’s Motetti a una voce sola (1617). CANTO, o TENORE 1.Repleatur os meum

A-B-C-B-cadence

2.Benedicam Dominum

A-B-cadence-B

3.O quam suavis est

A-B-cadence-B-cadence’

4.Audi Domine 5.Recordare Domine

A-B-C-B

6.Cantabo Domino

repetition of the first phrase (3 breves) in the middle of the motet

7.O Iesu mi dulcissime 8.O bone Iesu 9.O sacrum convivium 10.O quam pulchra es

A-B-B

11.Salve radix sancta

A-B-B-cadence

12.Dilectus meus

A-B-C-B-D-B

13.Egredimini

A-B-B

14.Vulnerasti cor meum 15.Peccavi

A-B-B

16.Angustie (sic) mihi sunt

A-B-C-B

17.Desu canticum

A-B-C-B-D-B-cadence

18.Confitebor tibi Domine 19.Obsecro Domine 20.Benedictus Dominus 21.Paratum cor meum 22.In te Domine speravi ALTO 23.Domine ne in furore

A-B-B

24.Audi filia Sion

A-cadence-A-B-C-D-C

25.Exultate Deo

A:||:B (B includes the repetition of an episode in triple meter)

22 There are no motets of this type in Ivan Lukačić’s Sacrae Cantiones. However, the collection Motetti a una

voce sola is important for tracing possible contacts between Cecchini and Lukačić, as it was dedicated to Marcantonio Romano, who was the organist of the Split cathedral at the time. It is possible that, in a way, when Lukačić came to Split in 1620, these motets by Cecchini (still) found their place in the soundscape of the cathedral. 141

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

26.Quando Iesus diligitur

A-B-B

BASSO 27.Audi Domine

A:||:B

28.Exaudi Deus 29.Diligam te Domine

the same cadence occurs in the middle and at the end of the motet

Mus. ex. 3. Organ part of Domine ne in furore tuo in Tomaso Cecchini’s Motetti a una voce sola (1617).

3. Salmi et motetti concertati a quattro voci piene (1616) Among Cecchini’s collections of motets printed before 1620, the closest to Psalmi, missa et alia cantica in the number of voices is Salmi et motetti concertati a quattro voci piene (Venice, 1616). Of this collection, only one incomplete exemplar is known to date, consisting of only the cantus part-book.23 Some of the motets included therein have been 23 The part-book is kept in the chapter’s library of Piran. Ennio Stipčević offers the following observation:

‘The question arises as to whether it is possible that this collection [...] might have been consulted by some of the participants of the Franciscan general chapter in Piran, for example, Ivan Lukačić or Gabriello Puliti.’ See E. Stipčević, Tomaso Cecchini, 78–79. On this collection, see J. Höfler, ‘Dvije zbirke skladbi Tome Cecchinija’, 44–45. 142

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

reprinted in later anthologies: in particular Aspice Domine and Benedicam Dominum, both present in the miscellanies Deliciae sacrae musicae (Ingolstadt, 1626) and Corona sacra (Antwerp, 1626). Of the former, only the cantus and tenor part-books survived, while the tenor, basuss and basso continuo of the latter are extant. Considering all the available parts (the one from Cecchini’s individual print and the others from the two anthologies), these two motets would only lack the altus. It is therefore possible to rely on the three surviving voices and the basso continuo part to begin to observe their structure (see table 4), which appears very similar to the one we found in the motets of the 1619 print. Table 4.24 The structure derived from the surviving parts of the motets Aspice Domine and Benedicam Dominum (1616). b

a

Aspice Domine Benedicam Dominum

b

a

c

a

C-T-B C-B

C-T-B T c

a

C-T-B C

C-T-B –

a

cadence

C-T-B C-T-B a

d

C-T-B T

 a

 e

C-T-B  B

 a

cadence

C-T-B C-T-B

As has been pointed out, one of the criteria adopted by Cecchini in the episodes in the imperfect time of the motets of 1619 consists in using all the available voices, either alone or in different combinations (see table 2 above). It therefore seems likely that also in the 1616 collection the composer adopted a similar modus operandi, on the basis of which a hypothesis on the identification of the interventions of the missing altus within the structure of the motets Aspice Domine and Benedicam Dominum is proposed (see table 5). Table 5. Conjectural reconstruction of the organisation of the motets Aspice Domine and Benedicam Dominum. Aspice Domine Benedicam Dominum

a

b

a

c

a

cadence

[TUTTI] C-B [TUTTI] [A-]T [TUTTI] [TUTTI] a

b

[TUTTI] C

a

c

[TUTTI] [A]

a

d

[TUTTI] T

 a

e

[TUTTI] B

 a

cadence

[TUTTI] [TUTTI]

It is also reasonable to assume that, within the ternary ritornelli, the lost altus part could fit into the concatenation of chords already defined by the available parts maintaining the homorhythmic pattern. Taking a further step, we could identify some possible melodic lines of the lost voice which are consistent with the movement of the other parts, without however claiming to give back the precise will of the composer, which remains inaccessible.25 In order to achieve this, it will be sufficient to respect the usual rules of conducting 24 See footnote 14. 25 Some key issues are discussed in essays such as that of Marina Toffetti, ‘Restoring a Masterpiece: Some

Remarks on the Reconstruction of the Missing Part in Girolamo Frescobaldi’s Liber secundus diversarum modulationum (Rome, 1627)’, Musica Iagellonica 7 (2013), 5–24; see M. Toffetti, Introduzione alla filologia musicale (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, Roma: Società Editrice di Musicologia, in print). See also the outcomes of the research project The Lost Voices Project: Companion resource to Les livres de Chansons Nouvelles de Nicolas Du Chemin (1549–1568), hosted by the Centre d’Études Supérieures de la Renaissance in Tours, France directed by Richard Freedman (Haverford College) and Philippe Vendrix (CESR) on http://digitalduchemin.org/, accessed 15 May 2020. 143

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

the parts,26 to follow the numbers given in the basso continuo and to limit the doublings. It will be noticed that, operating within these parameters, almost every harmony in the episode will offer only one possibility of completion in the register of the altus, thus giving a greater degree of plausibility to the proposed reconstruction hypothesis, or at least a smaller degree of error (see example 4).27 Mus. ex. 4. Hypothetical reconstruction of the ritornello and cadence of Benedicam Dominum (1616).28

As is suggested by Table 5, it may be reasonably supposed that in Benedicam Dominum an alternation of tutti and solo episodes was assigned, respectively, to the voices C, [A], T and B.29 The only ‘lost’ solo episode could thus be that of the altus, for which a reconstruction hypothesis is not proposed, as the only boundaries within which to operate would be the harmonies proposed by the basso continuo and the lyrics, as long as we know which they were.30 If Benedicam Dominum may have been built on the tutti-solo alternation, the motet Aspice Domine might have been based on a tutti-duo structure (table 5). Accepting such a hypothesis, the first duo would consist of the surviving voices of cantus and bassus, while the second one could involve the parts of altus (lost) and tenor (extant). Further in this direction, we could count on the fact that the C-B duo might be complete and rely on it to investigate which kind of interaction occurs between the two voices (see example 5). 26 Cf. Peter Schubert, ‘Four-Part Writing’ (chap. 17), in Modal Counterpoint, Renaissance Style (New York: 27

28

29 30

Oxford University Press, 2nd edn. 2008,), 243–260. The intersection between the two upper voices in the lower range of cantus can be found in other compositions by Cecchini. See for example his Otto messe brevi, facile et ariose [...] a quattro voci pari (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1617). The vocal bass is identical to the instrumental one, of which the numbering is given in the example. NB: Here and in the following examples, the reconstructed voice has been made evident by the use of smaller typefaces. Similar alternation between solo and tutti is present in the four-voice motet Quam pulchra es, amica mea by I. Lukačić, where the solo episodes are written, respectively, for the voices C, B, A, T. The existence of solo assigned to the altus is suggested by the presence of rests in all the extant voices and, in the same place, of the indication ‘Magnificate’ in the basso continuo part of the anthology Corona Sacra (1626), which allows to exclude that it was a purely instrumental section. Moreover, the indication suggests that the verse ‘Magnificate Dominum mecum, et exaltemus nomen eius in idipsum’ of the psalm Benedicam Dominum in omni tempore was sung in the solo episode. 144

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

Mus. ex. 5. The duo C–B of Aspice Domine in Salmi et motetti concertati (1616).

First of all, there are some interaction modalities between the two voices C-B that are also exploited in Psalms, missa, et alia cantica (1619): short pseudo-canonic imitations at the unison, octave or fifteenth (see examples 1 and 2). Assuming that there was a similar interaction also between the parts of the [A-]T duo and taking into account that, as happens in a contemporary collection of four-voice masses by Cecchini (1617),31 the range of the altus could have been almost completely overlapping that of the tenor, it is possible to identify all the possible imitations implicitly suggested in the existing voice. There will therefore 31

T. Cecchini, Otto messe brevi, facili et ariose, 1617. 145

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

be an episode in which brief unison imitations are made between the two voices with an exchange of the roles of dux and comes, as observed in other motets by Cecchini (see example 2). Even if the composer had originally exploited all the points of imitation that can be deduced from the existing part, there is still more room for interpretation in those passages and clausulae in which a pseudo-canonic imitation seems to be inapplicable. Mus. ex. 6. Application of the imitative models typically used by Cecchini based on the surviving tenor in the second duo of the motet Aspice Domine.

It has been observed that in the imperfect time episodes of these four-part motets the writing is for one or two voices and basso continuo. It was also pointed out that the increase in voices in the tutti passages implies a decrease in complexity, thus limiting the musical discourse to a series of chordal concatenations. To find this same method of writing in several of Cecchini’s works, where it was known until now that, before 1620, he had used it only in one collection of 1619, makes it possible to reconsider its importance within the composer’s output.32 32 This type of motet will also be used by Cecchini later, as for example in the now incomplete collection

Messa, salmi et motetti a sette voci (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1620), not listed in RISM. With reference to this collection, Janez Höfler has already pointed out that ‘the indications in the preserved basso continuo reveal that the compositions in this book, despite the prescribed basic number of voices, are essentially in 146

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

One of the major examples of this type of motet can be identified in the collection of Concerti ecclesiastici by Gabriele Fattorini (Rome, 1600).33 The compositions in this work, originally conceived for two voices, likewise feature a constant alternation between homorythmic ritornelli in perfect tempo and contrapuntal-imitative sections in triple time. The same collection was reprinted in 1602 with the addition of four additional voices, called ‘ripieni’, which intervene in the ritornelli to enrich the texture without increasing the contrapuntal or rhythmic complexity.34 If, on the one hand, the incomplete collection of the Salmi et motetti concertati (1616) helps to understand more adequately the relevance of a particular compositional model within Cecchini’s production, it also reveals that he employed various techniques over the period under consideration. Observing only the cantus part, which is the only one known in the whole collection, it can be distinguished in which motets the composer uses choruses and in which he does not. If we then add the tenor part of the motets included in the anthology Deliciae sacrae musicae (1626), and which do not have ritornelli or repetitions, we can clearly see that they display a contrapuntal-imitative texture from the beginning to the end in an apparently throughcomposed form, at least limited to the two extant voices. The only complete examples of Cecchini’s throughcomposed imitative music before 1620 are the eight masses for four voices of 1617 and the mass for five voices published in the Psalmi, missa et alia cantica of 1619;35 otherwise, this compositional typology is not traceable in this composer’s known complete motets. It is therefore possible that, alongside those with choruses known today, there were a number of imitative motets for several voices of which, however, no complete example has survived. Such considerations allow to revise our understanding of Cecchini’s production, giving back the idea of a rather well-balanced catalogue between new compositional models and the legacies of the most a concertato style because they contain many episodes for three, four, and even two parts alternating with tutti.’ See J. Höfler, ‘Dvije zbirke skladbi Tome Cecchinija’, 45. 33 G. Fattorini, I sacri concerti a due voci (1600). See Christopher Wilkinson, ‘Gabriele Fattorini: Rival of Viadana’, Music & Letters 65/4 (1984), 329–336. 34 G. Fattorini, I sacri concerti a due voci […] novamente ristampati, & corretti, con una nova aggiunta di alcuni ripieni a quattro per cantare a dui chori, & un breve avertimento & modo di servirsi di essi (Venezia: Ricciardo Amadino, 1602). In the edition there are some performance instructions in which Fattorini specifies that ‘I detti ripieni si potranno concertare nell’istesso organo ove cantano le due voci ordinarie, o in un’altro [sic] separato, overo in capella con multiplicate voci, et instrumenti, e cosi in molti altri variati modi, che dal prudente musico facilmente potranno essere inventati, avertendo l’organista di sonare a tutto organo pieno detti ripieni. Et affin che si dia campo di usare in diverse maniere questi concerti, non si resta di avisare che se bene gl’aggiunti ripieni sono à quattro voci, tutto il corpo però della musica canta leggitimamente [sic] à 5. à 6. & à 7. voci; oltra che i bassi sono duplicati per il rispetto ch’a gl’intendenti è noto’ (The aforementioned ripieni can be played in a concerted manner on the same organ to which the two ordinary voices sing or on another, separate one, or [they can be performed] in the choir with vocal and instrumental doublings, and thus in many other varied ways which can be easily devised by a prudent musician, with the organist taking care to play these ripieni with full organ. And in order to make it possible to use these concertos in different ways, it should be noted that if the added ripieni are four voices, the whole ensemble legitimately sings with 5, 6, and 7 voices; moreover, the basses are doubled for the reason that experts know). Cecchini may also have concerted his motets in ‘many other varied ways’, increasing or reducing the number of parts if deemed necessary. 35 Cf. Bojan Bujić, ‘Cecchinijeve mise iz godine 1617 [Cecchini’s Masses from 1617]’, Arti musices 1 (1969), 105–114; G. Taschetti, Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica (Venezia, 1619) di Tomaso Cecchini. Edizione critica e analisi (MA dissertation, Università degli Studi di Padova, 2019), 25–37. 147

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

ancient stylus ecclesiasticus.36 The following table illustrates the presence of ritornelli within the motets of the collection Salmi et motetti concertati a quattro voci piene del 1616 (see table 6).37 Table 6. Different types of motets within the four-part collection of Salmi et motetti (1616).38 ritornelli

time changes tacet in the surviving voices

Sancta Maria

5

X

T; C; C-T

Aspice Domine

3

X

T[-A]; C-B

Super Flumina Babilonis Iubilate Deo Benedicam Dominum

–

–

–

2; 2

X

–

5

X

[A-]T-B; C-T-B; C-[A-]B; C-[A-]T

In spiritu humilitatis

–

–

–

Quem vidistis pastores39

–

X

TI

Angelus Domini

2A

X

–

Iesu nostra remptio

5

X

C

Benedictus sit

–

X

–

Ornaverunt faciem templi

2A

X

–

O quam gloriosum

–

X

C

Iter faciente Paulo. Echo à 840

–

X

C II-T II

xx39 xx40 36 Cf. N. O’Regan, ‘The Church Triumphant’, 295–300. 37 The table does not include the psalms, Magnificat and falsobordoni which are present in the collection. The

falsobordoni in this print are not mentioned in the most recent bibliography on Cecchini. They therefore reveal once again completely new aspects of this composer’s production and help to outline a more varied picture of the soundscape of the Cathedral of Lesina (Hvar) in which Cecchini was active at the time of their publication. On this subject see Daniele Torelli, ‘“Cantores inchoent sequentem Antiphonam”. Canto piano e canto figurato nella liturgia quotidiana tra Cinque e Seicento’, in Barocco Padano 6. Atti del XIV convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII, Brescia, 16–18 luglio 2007, eds. A. Colzani, A. Luppi, M. Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2010), 219–249. 38 Of the underlined motets, voices C and T are available, while those in bold consist of C, T, B and Bc, but do not have A. All the other motets consist of C only, with the exception of the last eight-voice motet. The numerals in the second column indicate the number of repetitions of possible ritornelli. Each of them is in ternary time and corresponds to the first episode of the relative composition, except in cases in which there is an A next to the number, indicating the repetition of a short segment in ternary time on the word ‘Alleluia’ which does not appear at the beginning of the motet. The composition Iubilate Deo has two different ritornelli, each repeated twice. In the third column, an ‘x’ indicates the presence of any changes in tempo. The last column indicates the presence of entire sections of rests in the available voices and, where possible, the succession of such sections within the composition. The latter information, when read together with the one given in the second column, allows to identify a potential division of the motet into sections. It also proposes a hypothesis of identification of the tacet in the altus. The complete absence of rests, mensural changes and repetitions suggest a throughcomposed form. The melodic morphology of the surviving parts, which is not discussed here, would constitute a further useful element for the classification of these motets. 39 The cantus part-book contains the tenor primus of the motet Quem vidistis pastores, which is evidently intended for a particular ensemble. 40 The surviving parts of this motet suggest that it may have been intended for a double-choir organic, where the second choir responds in echo. It could therefore be the first evidence of double-choir practice in Dalmatia. Cecchini’s first compositions for such an ensemble to be complete are the mass for eight voices 148

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

4. Motetti concertati a due voci (1613) The collection of Motetti concertati a due voci from 1613 discloses further aspects of Cecchini’s production which have never before been taken into consideration. This edition is most likely the one to which Michael Praetorius also referred in the third volume of his Syntagma Musicum (1619). In the chapter devoted to the definition of the terms ‘motet’ and ‘concert’, Praetorius reports that ‘Thomas Cechinus entitles his bicinia ‘Motetti concertati.”’41 When considering Cecchini’s collections that have come down to us, the only one to which Praetorius could refer would be that of the Motetti concertati a due voci (Venice, 1613); however, it seems that he had published at least two other books of motets for two voices which have not reached us.42 Moreover, the possibility that Praetorius was alluding to more than one collection cannot be excluded. We know this print of 1613 by means of a sole exemplar consisting only of the booklet of the bassus, while originally there must have been at least two other part-books: one containing the upper voice of each motet and another with the ‘basso continuo per l’organo’, as stated on the frontispiece of the surviving part. Table 7. Contents of the collection Motetti concertati a due voci (1613). 1.Cantemus Domino

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

2.Decantabat populus

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

3.Exultate Deo

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

4.Iam de somno

Due Soprani, o Tenori, in Echo

5.Congratulamini

Due Soprani, o Tenori, in Echo

6.Gaude virgo gloriosa

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

7.Veni dilecte mi

Alto, e Basso

8.Introduxit me rex

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

9.O Iesu amabilissime

Due Tenori, o Soprani

10.Ecce quam bonum

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

11.Iubilate Deo

Tenore, o Canto, e Basso

12.Confitebor tibi Domine

Alto, e Tenore; overo Tenore, o Canto, e Basso

13.Virgo decus nemorum

Due Soprani, o Tenori, in Echo

14.De ore prudentis

Due Bassi

15.Amavit eum Dominus

Due Bassi

16.O Iesu dulcis memoria

Tenore, o Soprano, e Basso

17.Ave verum corpus

Alto, e Tenore; overo Tenore, o Canto e Basso

18.Exaltabo te

Alto, e Tenore; overo Canto, o Tenore e Basso

19.Rutilans Aurora

Tenore, o Canto, e Basso

20.Veni Domine Iesu Christe

Tenore, o Canto, e Basso

called ‘la Celeste’ and the Magnificat del sesto tuono included in his own third book of Messe ariose (1624). See E. Stipčević, Tomaso Cecchini, 78–79. 41 See Michael Praetorius, Syntagmatis musici Michaelis Praetorii C. tomus tertius (Wolfenbüttel: Elias Holwein, 1619), 8. 42 Cf. M. Milošević, ‘The inventory of music material’. 149

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

21.Amor Iesu dulcissime

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

22.Bonum est confiteri Domino

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

23.Salve Regina

Due Soprani, o Tenori

24.Veni sancte Spiritus

Due Tenori, o Soprani

25.Benedic anima mea Domino

Tenore, o Canto, e Basso

26.Tribulationes civitatum

Canto, o Tenore, e Basso

27.Veni sponsa Christi

Canto, o [recte e] Tenore; overo Alto, e Basso

28.Expurgate vetus

Due Soprani, o Tenori, e Basso

29.Super flumina babilonis

Tenore, e due Bassi

30.Laudate pueri 4 Toni

Due Soprani o Tenori

As the table shows (see table 7), this collection presents a wide variety of vocal combinations. In addition, as will be evidenced, a rather wide range of compositional techniques can be observed in this work by simply examining the way the surviving part is conducted. Indeed, by identifying the presence and extent of the rests, the eventual occurrences of repeated sections, the melodic and rhythmic profile, it is at times possible to deduce which kind of interaction could have occurred between the surviving voice and the lost one, allowing us to outline the conformation of the latter.43 Here can be found the same forms that Cecchini will use in the following collections, such as a motet with ritornelli and frequent sonority changes (e.g. Ecce quam bonum, Amor Iesu dulcissime) or more traditional stile antico motets, where the sound and texture would seem to remain unchanged from beginning to end, with a continuous flow of contrapuntal invention, at least in the surviving voice. In addition to these typologies, the collection includes as many as three motets ‘in echo’. Two of them, Iam de somno and Virgo decus nemorum, are based on texts already used in the same way by other composers and suggest such a type of realisation in echo.44 These poems consist in fact of a series of questions which are answered in rhyme by some bisyllables or trisyllables, as an echo, with 43 On accepting this type of procedure it soon becomes clear that it, combined with a deep knowledge of the

present repertoire, has many positive advantages. Among them there is certainly the ability to understand the extent to which the lost music contributed to the overall sound, which, in some respects, is quite crucial when studying the general characteristics of a composition, of a collection, or of an entire musical genre. Nevertheless, such an approach sometimes makes it possible to come up with almost self-evident musical solutions which, even if not necessarily adopted by the composer, could be among the possibilities taken into consideration during the creative process. 44 Among the composers who have set these texts to music with the echo technique there are Giovanni Croce (1594), Baldissera Donato (1599), Lodovico Viadana (1602), Francesco Capello (1610), and Pietro Lappi (1614). The text of the motet of Virgo decus nemorum is by Alessandro Gatti and is included in the collection Madrigali di Alessandro Gatti alli serenis.mi sig.ri d. Alfonso, & d. Luigi d’Este (Venezia: Battista Ciotti, 1604). From this same collection Cecchini has drawn other texts of a profane nature that he has set in his prints Amorosi concetti. Madrigali a voce sola […] libro primo (Venezia: Ricciardo Amadino, 1612) = RISM A/I C 1668, Canti spirituali a una, due et tre voci (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1613) = RISM A/I C 1669 and Amorosi concetti. Il terzo libro de’ madrigali (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1616) = RISM A/I C 1671. On the text Virgo decus nemorum and the musical settings of Alessandro Gatti’s madrigals, see Rodolfo Baroncini, ‘Alessandro Gatti, poeta ed erudito veneziano della fine del Cinquecento: due testi in latino per Croce e Giovanni Gabrieli’, Recercare 22, 1–2 (2010), 51–80. 150

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

an interplay of significations.45 As an example, in Virgo decus nemorum, we find verses such as ‘Quis natus Virgine Magnus? Agnus’ or ‘Num moriens? Oriens’.46 In the extant partbook of Cecchini’s collection, the voice that responds in echo, singing the few responsive syllables, has survived, thus leaving a page with a handful of notes versus many breves of rest in both motets of this type. A different use of the echo procedure is to be found in the motet Congratulamini for two canti or tenors. As in Iam de somno and Virgo decus nemorum the surviving part bears the heading ‘risposta d’Echo’, since it is conceived as a response, Congratulamini is simply marked ‘in Echo’. At first glance, this page appears quite different from that of the other two compositions in echo, as the voice written on it sings along the entire length of the motet without significant rests. So this echo, unlike that of the aforementioned two motets, would seem to ‘comment’ on the lost voice entirely and continuously rather than being limited to a few short answers, which implies a different kind of interaction between the two parts. A closer look at the available voice reveals that each measure can be combined in consonance with the following one, which would allow this line to be overlapped with itself by moving it forward or backward by a semibrevis (perfect or imperfect). That means that, with this melody, it would be possible to realise a unison canon, which could well simulate the echo phenomenon. Since the part starts with a rest and bears the indication ‘in Echo’, it is reasonable to assume that it is the comes of a potential canon. Hence, an attempt is made to use the same line as a dux to obtain a unison canon with the extant voice (see example 7).47 Mus. ex. 7. Tomaso Cecchini, Congratulamini for ‘due soprani o tenori in echo’, a hypothesis for the reconstruction of the missing vocal part.

The unison canon would seem to continue without interruption until the end of the motet. Such a rigorous use of canonic imitation cannot be found in any other known collection of this composer, who, as we have seen, will often employ short, freer imitations. In this same collection, the composer uses the canon in unison several times with different levels of complexity. In particular, he clearly employs this technique to create compositions for three voices, as in the case of the motet Super flumina Babilonis, whose surviving part bears the heading ‘A tre voci. Bassus primus et secundus ut infra’ and presents a signum congruentiae. The motet is therefore made up of a lost tenor part and a unison canon between two basses, which makes it possible to print all three voices on two pages 45 The same treatment, widely used in sacred and secular vocal music, is also employed in Ivan Lukačić’s

Responde Virgo for three tenors. The motet has a kind of double echo, where the first tenor sings the whole text, the second sings the answers in echo, and the third replicates the answer at the distance of one semibrevis. 46 See A. Gatti, Madrigali, 1604, 94, n. 84. 47 A basic accompanying line is also proposed. 151

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

only. The collection seems to contain a composition conceived in the same way. This too is for three voices, two of which are in the same range: the motet Expurgate vetus fermentum for two tenors and bass, of which only the lower voice survives. It can be assumed that, as happens in the motet previously described, this three-voice composition may have been conceived as a combination of two voices in unison canon and a free part. The very nature of the surviving part suggests such a construction. By dividing the lower part of the bass into segments of the length of one brevis each, it can be noticed that almost all of them can be overlapped with the subsequent one without causing any dissonance. In other words, each pair of breves can be used as a bass for two repetitions of a hypothetical melodic segment. This suggests that the lost part could consist of a unison canon, with the second voice entering after one brevis. It is not possible to tell from the surviving part which line Cecchini had used to realise the hypothetical canon; nevertheless, to see to what extent it is possible to attempt a realisation helps to support the hypothesis that the composer might have used this very procedure. The following hypothesis is therefore proposed for purely illustrative purposes.48 Mus. ex. 8. Realisation of a unison canon over the surviving voice of the motet Expurgate vetus fermentum.

It has been illustrated how the analysis of incomplete collections could reveal new aspects of one composer’s production. The collection Motetti concertati a due voci (1613) is particularly revelatory in this respect. Within it, in fact, a wide variety of techniques are found that have never before been observed in Cecchini’s production. The surviving pages of this collection convey the idea of a composer interested in the most modern solutions, as is the case of the echo technique, of which he may have also made use its spatial dimension 48 It is possible to make several unison canons over this bass; however, since the melody must meet certain

combination and conduction criteria, the possibilities are relatively limited. It is therefore possible to operate within more restricted boundaries than the other motet in which, above two basses in the canon, there was supposedly a free part. The practice of composing canons above or below a given part (be it a cantus prius factus or an original melody) is witnessed in treatises such as Le istitutioni harmoniche by Gioseffo Zarlino. In chapter 63 of the third part of the treatise, the theorist exposes ‘a way to make counterpoint for three voices, which some practical musicians are used to doing over the plainchant, or over any other subject, with some obligation; as, for example, that of doing do two parts, singing one after the other in consequence, or imitation, for rather a long time span’ (‘un modo di far contrapunto a tre voci, il quale costumano alcuni prattici facendolo sopra il canto fermo, o sopra qualunque altro soggetto, con qualche obligo; come sarebbe il far due parti, che cantino l’una dopo l’altra in consequenza, overo nella imitatione, per alquanto spacio di tempo’). See Gioseffo Zarlino, Le istitutioni harmoniche (Venezia: [Pietro da Fino], 1558), 251. 152

Gabriele Taschetti: New insights into Tomaso Cecchini’s motet production prior to 1620

during the performance. On the other hand, the three motets which are presumably constructed with a canonical procedure testify the use of the typical artifices of the ancient style which is not possible to observe in other collections of this composer. It is worth mentioning that, in accordance with the stylistic transformation process of the time, in subsequent collections Cecchini tends to abandon these compositional treatments in preference to more modern solutions. It may also be possible that at the time of the publication of his first collections, Cecchini was more strongly influenced by his studies in counterpoint. The uncertainty about his birth date, moreover, and the lack of information about his early years of activity, raise the doubt that his formative years should be placed somewhat later than has been assumed so far.49 Regardless, the established idea of Cecchini progressively abandoning the ornamental Caccinian style50 and moving in the direction of a higher technical-formal simplification51 must now necessarily be accompanied by a greater awareness of what his starting point was. He can be certainly included among the many composers who contributed to the intricate phase of stylistic and formal renewal of the early 17th century. Nonetheless, despite the lack of any information about his musical education and the fact that many of his early collections are now lost or incomplete, it is possible to begin to consider the idea that he had mastered the most refined contrapuntal techniques and had also proven to be able to apply them with a fair amount of compositional skill.

49 The musicologist Dragan Plamenac, author of the first comprehensive study on Tomaso Cecchini, wel-

comes with reservations the information about his early years in Split (1603–1606), reported in some articles by other scholars due to the lack of any reference to archival documentation. See Niko Kalogjera, ‘Povjesne crtice o glazbenim prilikama splitske stolne crkve [Historical Sketches on the Musical Conditions of the Split Cathedral]’, Sv. Cecilija 18/4 (1924), 126–128: 127: ‘From 1603 to 1606 Jacob Bertoni was organist, and the provisional “magister capellae” was Toma Cechino. From 1609 to 1636 Marco Antonio Romano served as organist. In 1614 the already mentioned provisional chapel master Toma Cochino (Cechino) was appointed on a permanent basis’ (trans. by author). On the one hand, the fact that this research is apparently independent leads to the belief that the information is genuine, even if inaccurate. On the other hand, Plamenac himself recalls that in January 1924 a fire destroyed many documents of the bishop’s curia in Split. See Dragan Plamenac, ‘Toma Cecchini, kapelnik stolnih crkava u Splitu i Hvaru u prvoj polovici XVII stoljeća: bio-bibliografska studija’ [Tomaso Cecchini, Chapel Master of the Cathedrals of Split and Hvar in the First Half of the 17th Century: A Bio-bibliographical Study], Rad Jugoslavenske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti 262 (1938), 77–125: 81. 50 S. Tuksar, ‘The Composers of Lombardy and the Po Valley and the Preserved Repertories of the 17th and 18th-Century Split cappella musicale’, in Barocco Padano 3. Atti dell’XI Convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII, Brescia, 16–18 luglio 2001, eds. A. Colzani, A. Luppi, M. Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2004), 184–185. 51 In addition to the already mentioned monograph by Ennio Stipčević (footnote 1), see E. Stipčević, ‘Musica moderna and Local Tradition: The Case of Tomaso Cecchini Veronese in Dalmatia’, in Italian Music in Central-Eastern Europe Around Mikołaj Zieleński’s Offertoria and Communiones (1611), eds. Tomasz Jeż, Barbara Przybyszewska-Jarmińska, Marina Toffetti (Venezia: Edizioni Fondazione Levi, 2015), 325–347. 153

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Table 8. Types of motets in Tomaso Cecchini’s collections published before 1620.

Collections

concertato concertato with ritornelli with repetitions

stylus ecclesiasticus strict or/and ‘in eco’ canonic throughcomposed

Complete Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica 5 vv. 1619 (5)

x

Incomplete x

Motetti 1 v. (Bc) 1617 (29)

x

Salmi et motetti 4 vv. (C) 1616 (13)

x

x

x

Motetti concertati 2 vv. (B) 1613 (30)

x

x

x

x x

Lost, from the same period Motetti Concertati a 2. [...] lib. 2 cum basso ad1617 Motetti, psalmi, magnif, à 3 [...] cum bas ad1616

In the light of all this, it has to be taken into account that, at the beginning of 1620, at least 77 printed motets by Tomaso Cecchini were supposedly circulating —52 of which we know only five — and that the variety of compositional solutions was then presumably proportional to their number. This should be enough to give us an idea of the extent to which Cecchini was a prolific and creative composer, although little remains of his copious production of motets. This contribution is also meant to be an invitation to study incomplete collections: a very common type of source, now largely neglected, which demonstrates how much our concept of what is ‘lost’ needs further reconsideration.

52 If, as far as printed music is concerned, we consider that the now lost second book of Motetti concertati

for two voices may have contained about the same number of compositions as the first book of 1613 (30), and that the lost collection ‘Motetti, psalmi, magnif, à 3’ had a similar structure to the Salmi et motetti concertati for four voices published in 1616 (4 psalms, 2 magnificats, 9 falsobordoni, 13 motets), it is easy to suppose that Cecchini had published more than 100 motets before 1620. This without considering the other lost collections of which we do not know the date of publication, such as the third book of Motetti concertati. See footnote 12. 154

The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri: a collection of small-scale motets from the Paduan area Chiara Comparin Università di Padova, Italy

This paper examines the last collection of Antonio Gualtieri (Monselice, 1574–1661): the Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, Bartolomeo Magni, 1630). In this collection we can identify the stylistic and technical innovations of the accompanied monody and concertato style undertaken at the beginning of the seventeenth century with Le nuove musiche (Firenze, 1601) by Giulio Caccini, the Cento concerti ecclesiastici (Venezia, 1602) by Lodovico da Viadana, and later with the collections of many other composers of the time. Moreover, from a broader perspective, in the productions of Antonio Gualtieri we can find the changes that were taking place in the musical chapels and in European musical taste at the beginning of the seventeenth century. In fact, Gualtieri’s activity is placed at the moment of the transition from large- to small-scale motets and compositions, which were more easily adapted to the different needs of musical chapels, in particular to those of the centres considered minor or peripheral, such as those in which Gualtieri worked. During his long career, Antonio Gualtieri came into contact with particularly important centres of the musical scene of the time: Padua, the chapels of the cathedral and the Basilica of Saint Anthony, and above all with Venice, where not only did St. Mark’s Basilica house one of the most prestigious institutions at an international level, but where musical life was particularly widespread. The whole city of Venice was involved in musical activity that, starting from the basilica, radiated to the cathedral of San Pietro in Castello, the monasteries, convents, parish churches, brotherhoods, new theatrical institutions, numerous hospitals, and major and minor schools.1 No less significant, however, was his commitment to centres such as San Daniele del Friuli, Monselice, and Montagnana which, although usually considered peripheral, were nevertheless characterized by an intense musical life, as well as by the presence of composers, which ensured their contacts with the most artistically up-to-date and innovative centres. One of the most significant innovations between the end of the sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth century is certainly that of monody with a basso continuo 1

On Venetian musical activity outside the Ducal Chapel, cf. Rodolfo Baroncini, ‘Monteverdi a Venezia: l’azione in città’, in Monteverdi a San Marco. Venezia 1613–1643, eds. R. Baroncini, Marco Di Pasquale (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, 2020), 155–183; Antonio Lovato, ‘Venedig. Neue Impulse für die Kirchenmusik an San Marco im Cinquecento’, in Zentren der Kirchenmusik, eds. Matthias Schneider, Beate Bugenhagen, Enzyklopädie der Kirchenmusik, vol. 2 (Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 2001), 106–127; Elena Quaranta, Oltre San Marco. Organizzazione e prassi della musica nelle chiese di Venezia nel Rinascimento (Firenze: Olschki, 1998). 155

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

accompaniment, or the motet with a few voices supported by the basso continuo. In this period, it is difficult to find a composer, more or less well-known, who did not try his hand at this new musical technique. As clearly highlighted in the preface to Cento Concerti Ecclesiastici by Ludovico Grossi da Viadana, the new type of musical writing mainly responded to needs of a practical nature, as it offered a more easily performed repertoire than motets with four or more voices.2 In fact, in this period a general re-sizing of the musical chapels can be observed,3 to such an extent that Jerome Roche identified this phenomenon as one of the main reasons for the diffusion of the new genre of the small-scale motet. The chapels no longer had adequate resources for the performance of the motets of Palestrina, Andrea and Giovanni Gabrieli or other contemporary masters that called for polychoral forces.4 This trend is clearly perceptible in the numerous collections of motets with few voices and basso continuo printed in Italy and outside the peninsula between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which included compositions for different vocal registers and for various combinations of voices. Also the sacred works of Antonio Gualtieri somehow reflect what was happening in this period. His first collection, the Motecta octonis vocibus (Venezia, 1604), reflects the specificities of his educational environment, Padua Cathedral, and that of his first assignment as choirmaster at the parish church of St. Michael in San Daniele del Friuli (1596–1605). After studying at Padua Cathedral, the composer arrived in 2

3

4

‘There are many reasons (kind readers) that prompted me to compose this sort of Concerti: among them this is one of the most important: to see that now and then some singers, who wanted to sing in an organ with either three voices or with two or with one alone, were forced - due to the lack of compositions which suited their needs - to resort to motets with five, six, seven and even eight voices, which, on account of the connection these should have with the other voices, […] led the piece to be imperfect or boring or unsiutable and little pleasing to those who wished to listen: not to mention the very great discomfort for the singers in singing them. Having thought several times quite deeply about this difficulty, I tired myself greatly in seeking a way to remedy to some extent this so notable a lack. And I think that, with God’s help, I have finally found a solution, and for this purpose I composed some of my Concerti, for one solo voice for the Sopranos, for the Altos, for the Tenors, for the Basses, and some others for the same parts with different accompaniments.’ (‘Molte sono state le cagioni (cortesi lettori) che mi hanno indotto a comporre questa sorte di Concerti: fra le quali questa è stata una delle principali: il vedere cioè, che volendo alle volte qualche Cantore cantare in un organo, o con tre voci; o con due, o con una sola, erano astretti per mancamento di compositioni a proposito loro di appligliarsi ad una, o due, o tre parti di Motetti a cinque, a sei, a sette et anche a Otto, le quali per la unione che devono avere con le altre parti […] rendevano la maniera del canto, o imperfetta, o noiosa, od inetta, et poco grata a quelli, che stavano ad udire: senza che vi era anco incommodo grandissimo di cantori in cantarle. Là dove avendo avuto più volte non poca considerazione sopra tali difficultà, mi sono affaticato assai per investigare il modo di supplire in qualche parte a così notabile mancamento, et credo la Dio mercè di averlo all’ultimo ritrovato, avendo per questo effetto composti alcuni di questi miei Concerti, con una voce sola per i soprani, per gli alti, per i tenori, per i bassi: et alcuni altri poi per le istesse parti accompagnate diversamente’); Ludovico da Viadana, Cento concerti ecclesiastici (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1605), prefazione ‘A benigni lettori’. Taking into consideration, for example, the musical resources of Saint Anthony’s chapel in the first thirty years of the seventeenth century, we can see that also in Padua, between 1619 and 1630, there was a slight decrease compared to the first sixteen years of the seventeenth century, although in these thirty years the Paduan chapel still had an average of about twenty members, including singers and instrumentalists; Maurizio Padoan, ‘La musica al Santo di Padova (1580–1650). Dinamiche finanziarie, organici e compiete quaresimali’, in Barocco Padano e musici francescani. L’apporto dei maestri conventuali. Atti del XVI Convegno internazionale sul barocco padano (secoli XVII–XVIII), Padova, 1–3 luglio 2013, eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, M. Padoan, Barocco Padano 8 (Padova: Centro Studi Antoniani, 2014), 17–78: 24–32 and 50. Jerome Roche, ‘Music at S. Maria Maggiore, Bergamo, 1614–1643’, Music and letters 47/4 (1966), 296–312: 305. 156

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

Friuli thanks to an authoritative letter of introduction from the patriarch of Aquileia who, in turn, took into account the request of another figure of great authority (‘altro personaggio di molta autorità’). Considering the content of the dedication note in the polychoral Motecta5 of Gualtieri, we can easily hypothesize that such an authoritative figure can be identified as the bishop Marco II Cornaro, who, during his episcopate, gave an extraordinary impulse to the musical life of the cathedral and of the entire city of Padua.6 As was the case in the cathedral of Padua, in San Daniele the musical activity was also based on the teaching given to pueri and clerics, who had a special music library and some instruments at their disposal. Thanks to the studies of Franco Colussi, who reviewed the inventories and expense notes of the various churches in the Friulian territory, we know that polychoral practice was certainly not an exception in that region, to such an extent that there are at least a hundred books with polychoral compositions, written by about forty authors.7 5

6

7

‘Illustriss.mo ac reverend.mo DD Marco Cornelio Episcopo patavino. Domino, ac patrono colendisismo. Et praeclara tua in me merita et singularis in te mea observantia iure quidem postulare videbatur, ut tibi non obscurum aliquod grati animi iam tandem testimonium exhiberem. Quare, cum haec motecta in praesentia edere statuissem, ea tibi presuli humanissime, christianae nobilitatis decus, et ecclesiasticae dignitatis ornamentum dicanda, et consacrando constitui, qui, et beneficentia tua singolari quasi virtutis incitamento me ad illum opus, et studium ab ineunte aetate benignissime impulisti, et tam egregiam tuam rebus nostris consulendi voluntatem nunc sudoris sui fructu non undequaque; destitutam libentissime intelliges.’ (‘To the most illustrious and highly reverend Marco Cornelio, by the gift of God Bishop of Padua, Lord and highly honourable Patron. It seemed an evident need that your distinct merits in my regard and also my special deference in your regard required, quite rightly, that I, at last, should offer you a clear testimony of my grateful spirit. Having now decided to publish these Motets I deemed it dutiful to dedicate them with devoted spirit to you, who are a highly cultured bishop and represent an honour for the dignity of the Church. With your singular magnanimity you have spurred me to undertake this work and have encouraged me in my studies since my earliest years. Now you can understand, with pleasure, how your precious dedication shown in guiding me in my work has by no means been without fruit as the effort merited’); cf. Antonio Gualtieri, Motecta octonis vocibus (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1604), dedicatory. We may recall, for example, the establishment of the devotional practice of the Forty Hours, a sort of ‘spiritual carnival’ which proved to be an opportunity to perform majestic vocal and instrumental concerts of sacred music, with the cathedral chapel enriched by the contribution of singers and instrumentalists from Venice, Verona, and Milan. The bishop’s interest in musical art is also shown by the numerous collections that the composers of the time dedicated to him: Marc’Antonio Pordenon, Il quinto libro di madrigali a 5 voci (Venezia: Angelo Gardano, 1578); Ludovico Grossi da Viadana, Completorium Romanum (Venezia: Ricciardo Amadino, 1597); Giovanni Croce, Vespertina omnium solemnitatum psalmodia (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1597); Girolamo Lambardi, Antiphonarium vespertinum (Caenobio Sancti Spiritus prope Venetias, 1597); A. Gualtieri, Motecta octonis vocibus (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1604); Stefano Landi, Primo libro dei madrigali a 5 voci (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1619); Giovanni Ghizzolo, Messe parte per capella et parte per concerto (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1625). On the importance of Marco II Cornaro in Paduan musical life, see Antonio Garbelotto, Un vescovo musicista a Padova nel 500: Marco Cornaro (Padova: Società Cooperativa Tipografica, 1954); A. Lovato, ‘La musica sacra nell’attività pastorale del vescovo di Padova Marco Corner (1557–1625)’, Studia patavina 34 (1987), 29–50; A. Lovato, ‘Il vescovo di Padova Marco II Cornaro (1557–1625) e il theatrum sacrum per il carnevale spirituale’, Musica e Figura 4 (2017), 71–97. Music for two and three choirs by Giovanni and Andrea Gabrieli, Giovanni Croce, Pierluigi da Palestrina, Claudio Merulo, Antonio Mortaro, Orazio Colombani, Girolamo Lambardi, Giovanni Matteo Asola, Oliviero Ballis, and Pietro Lappi was performed in Udine, Cividale, Portogruaro, Gemona, Sacile, and Valvasone; Franco Colussi, ‘Tracce di musica policorale in alcuni centri del Friuli storico tra Cinque e seicento’, in La musica policorale in Italia e nell’Europa centro-orientale fra Cinque e Seicento, eds. Aleksandra Patalas, Marina Toffetti (Venezia: Fondazione Ugo e Olga Levi, 2012), 101–158. 157

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

In San Daniele, Gualtieri was therefore able to test the value of the know-ledge and skills acquired in Padua, enriching his experience by coming into contact with other composers.8 His first collection is therefore the fruit of these influences, reformulated in a personal way. After his engagement at the musical chapel of San Daniele del Friuli, Gualtieri was appointed choirmaster at his native Monselice, and later at Montagnana. In this period the composer’s creative activity was particularly fruitful. In fact, between 1608 and 1632 he published all the works that have come down to us, with the exception of the aforementioned Motecta octonis vocibus (Venezia, 1604).9 In the musical output of Antonio Gualtieri we also find two collections of motets for a few voices and basso continuo, which testify to how the composer was able to assimilate the technical and stylistic innovations of the early seventeenth century through a personal language that was well suited to the needs of the chapels in which he worked.10 The evolution of Gualtieri’s writing finds its full realization in the last collection printed before his transfer to Venice:11 the Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 8

It should be remembered that in this period the land of Friuli was an obligatory passage both for many Italian musicians who aspired to a position in the court of Emperor Rudolf II and other courts across the Alps, and for the musicians from central Europe who went to Venice to learn the compositional techniques, experimented in the Cappella Marciana in a period of strong stylistic innovations. 9 The corpus of Antonio Gualtieri’s musical works includes three volumes of sacred music — (Motecta octonis vocibus (Venezia: Giacomo Vicenti, 1604); Il secondo libro de mottetti, a una e due voci (Venezia: erede di Angelo Gardano, 1612); Motetti a una, doi, tre & quatro voci con le littanie della B. Vergine a 4 (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1630) and three sylloges of secular music — Amorosi diletti a tre voci (Venezia: Angelo Gardano & fratelli, 1608); Il secondo libro de madrigali a cinque voci (Venezia, aere Bartolomeo Magni, 1613); Madrigali concertati a una, due, et tre voci (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1625). To these prints we should add another from 1611, Il primo libro di mottetti a due voci which, although included in some music dictionaries, is not currently included in the RISM among Gualtieri’s works. It is reported by Robert Eitner who, in his encyclopedic work, records a copy of it at the University Library of Königsberg. As is known, following the Second World War many works in that library were lost, or emigrated to Lithuania, Russia, and Poland, but the research carried out so far has not allowed us to trace the work attributed to Gualtieri. Robert Eitner, Biographisch-bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten christlicher Zeitrechnung bis Mitte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts (Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1959–1960), III–IV, 398–399; Josef Müller, Die musikalischen Schätze der Königlichen- und Universitäts-bibliothek zu Königsberg in Preußen (Bonn: Marcus, 1870), 189–190. 10 On Antonio Gualtieri, see ‘Gualtieri, Antonio’, Dizionario Enciclopedico della Musica e dei Musicisti, Le biografie, ed. Alberto Basso, vol. 3 (Torino: UTET, 1986), 346; Gunther Morche, ‘Gualtieri, Antonio’ MGG2, Personenteil, vol. 8 (2002), coll. 140–142; J. Roche, Elizabeth Roche, ‘Gualtieri, Antonio’, NGroveD, vol. 10 (2001), 472–473; F. Colussi, ‘Gualtieri, Antonio’, in Nuovo Liruti. Dizionario biografico dei friulani 2. L’età veneta, II, eds. Cesare Scalon, Claudio Griggio, Ugo Rozzo (Udine: Forum, 2009), 1385–1388; F. Colussi, ‘Tracce di musica policorale’; Chiara Comparin, Antonio Gualtieri (Monselice, 1574–1661). Opere sacre e profane (doctoral dissertation, Università degli Studi di Padova, 2015); C. Comparin, ‘Il secondo libro de mottetti a una e due voci di Antonio Gualtieri e il Parnassus Musicus Ferdinandaeus’, De musica disserenda 13/1–2 (2017), 169–189; C. Comparin, ‘Antonio Gualtieri, Amorosi diletti a tre voci (Venezia, 1608)’, Musica e Figura 4 (2017), 99–123; Francesco Passadore, Musica e musicisti a Rovigo tra Rinascimento e Barocco (Rovigo: Minelliana, 1987), 48–56; A. Lovato, ‘Musica e liturgia nella collegiata di S. Giustina’, in Monselice nei secoli, ed. Antonio Rigon (Treviso: Canova, 2009), 231–249. 11 In 1632 Antonio Gualtieri moved to Venice with his large family, as documented by the family status in the registry office of the parish of San Samuele, now kept in the State Archive of Venice (Venezia, Archivio di Stato, Provveditori alla Sanità, Anagrafi 1642, Reg. 571, fasc. II, Sestier di S. Marco, Parrocchia di S. Samuele, pages not numbered). Thanks to his good qualities (‘buone qualità’), on 20 November 1633 he found employment at the Ospedale della Pietà, taking over from the late Alvise Grani the task of giving a musical education to the young girls of this place (‘insegnar di musica, et sonar alle fie [= figlie] di questo 158

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

1630). With this collection, the composer brings to full maturity his interpretation of the concertato style, of the new language, and of the modern expressive research that he had begun to experiment with in the collection of 1612, and which, in this last work, also finds expression in the instrumental contribution that enriches the music.12 Antonio Gualtieri’s tenth work, the Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci, is dedicated to Domenico Padovano, ‘monaco cassinense et elemosinario del re christianissimo’.13 Although the dedication does not provide any useful information for a sure identification of the dedicatee, it still suggests that he was not a simple ‘amateur’ of the musical art, but on the contrary an expert connoisseur of the discipline.14 The texts set to music The collection contains 17 motets and the litanies of the Blessed Virgin. These are compositions from one to four voices which, as was usual in contemporary collections of motets, included different vocal combinations in order to meet the practical needs already highlighted above. Most of the texts set to music are taken from the Bible or from the Antiphonale monasticum,15 but in some motets it is possible to find traces of prayers or hymns typical of the popular devotion that deserve to be highlighted (Tab. 1). Tab. 1. Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci con le littanie della Beata Vergine a quattro, libro terzo. Opera X di Antonio Gualtieri maestro di capella della collegiata et delle sette chiese di Monselice (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1630), textual incipit and source.

12

13 14

15

Textual incipit

Textual source

Christi corpus ave

Or. Salutatio ad Dominum Iesum Christum

Ave cor sanctissimae

Centone

loco’), and in 1635, he was elected teacher of the boys of the Church of San Marco (‘maestro delli zaghi [ragazzi] della chiesa di San Marco’). Two years later, following a competition, he obtained the position of Master of the Clerics of the Seminary of San Marco. Venezia, Archivio di Stato, Procuratia de Supra Chiesa San Marco, b. 89, proc. 200, Maestro di canto (1485-1734), c. 11; Venezia, Archivio di Stato, Procuratia de Supra del Seminario, b. 156, proc. 316, Maestro di canto del Seminario di Castello (1579-1781), c. 8v. It is not the first time that Gualtieri included some instrumental parts in his compositions. In fact, in the madrigal Tre gratiosi amanti (for solo voice, two choirs for four voices, and chitarrone) published in Il secondo libro de madrigali a cinque voci (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1613), now incomplete, we find a Basso part for the chitarrone that accompanied the interventions of the solo voice and the line of the Alto and the Tenor of the second choir which, as indicated in the partbooks (Voce & Viola), provided for the doubling of the Viola. The partbooks of the Canto and the Bass of the second choir are now lost but it is very probable that all four parts envisaged instrumental doubling or could be performed by the instruments in the absence of the necessary vocal resources. A. Gualtieri, Motetti a uno, doi, tre & quatro voci con le littanie della B. Vergine a 4 (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1630), frontispiece. ‘These motets of mine, recently composed (almost my musical offspring), now due to be published, can find no more faithful an escort nor more solid a support than your highly honoured person and for your perfect knowledge of this harmonic science’ (‘Questi miei motetti, dovendo (quasi mio musical parto) hor hora uscire alla luce et incaminarsi alle destinate stampe, non possono ritrovare scorta più fida né appoggio più sicuro della honorevolissima persona di Vostra Signoria molto reverenda et per la perfetta sua cognitione di questa harmonica scienza’); A. Gualtieri, Mottetti a uno, doi, tre & quatro voci con le littanie della B. Vergine a 4 (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1630), dedicatoria. Antiphonale monasticum (Solesmes: Abbaye de Saint-Pierre, 1995). 159

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Cor mundum crea

Psalm 50, 12–14

Sancta Maria succurre

Oration16

O admirabile commercium

Ant. In Circumcisione Domini et octava Nativitatis

Deus misereatur nostri

Psalm 66, 2–3

Vox dicentis clama

Isaiah, 40, 6–7

Viderunt omnes fines

Psalm 97, 2–4

O beatum virum

Ant. In festo S. Martini, episcopi et confessoris17

Sub tuum praesidium

Ant. In honorem B. Mariae Virginis

Miserere mei Domine

Psalm 85, 3–4,6

O Domine Iesu Christe

Septem precationes Sancti Gregorii de Passione Domini

Gaudeamus omnes fideles

Antiphon

Cum iucunditate nativitatem

Ant. In Nativitate B. Mariae Virginis

Veni dilecte mi

Canticle of Canticles, 7, 11–12; 8, 1

Veni Domine in cor

Centone

O dulce nomen Iesus

Psalm 133, 1–2

Laetanie della Beata Vergine

Lauretan litanies

Christi corpus is a setting of the first four verses of the Salutatio ad Dominum Iesum Christum, a prayer by Saint Anselm of Aosta (1033–1109), also included in De Vita Scholastica of Bonvesin de la Riva.18 O domine Iesu Christe, on the other hand, is taken from the Septem precationes, which a persistent medieval tradition attributed to Pope Gregory I. These prayers were associated with devotion to the crucifixion and, more generally, with the Passion of Christ, and were subsequently also used for Eucharistic worship. These types of texts, suitable for individual meditation, were highly appreciated by the modern devotee and, between the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, they converged in books of hours for private use. During the sixteenth century they became printed anthologies of devotional prayers, which favoured their diffusion at all levels, thanks to the new spirituality nurtured by religious orders following the Council of Trent. Such a devotional repertoire could not go unnoticed by musicians; indeed, the prayer to the crucified Jesus was also set polyphonically by the greatest composers active between the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.19 16 Patrologia Latina, ed. Jacques Paul Migne, vol. 39 (Paris: apud Garnier fratres, 1865), col. 2107; and Henri

Barré, Prières anciennes de l’Occident à la Mère du Sauveur (Paris: Lethielleux, 1963), 125.

17 Antiphon for the feast of Saint Martin, adaptable in practice to other Saint Days according to the specific

needs. Indeed, Antonio Gualtieri omits the name of the saint and inserts an ‘N’, so that the composition could be used on the occasion of various feasts. 18 It is a composition of 936 elegiac couplets with the insertion of eight miracula pro exemplo in prose, which was the subject of repeated adaptations and settings up to the twentieth century. Cf. Bonvesin de la Riva, Vita Scholastica, ed. Ezio Franceschini, Testi e documenti di storia e di letteratura latina medioevale 5 (Padova: Gregoriana, 1943), 401–404; Hermann Adalbert Daniel, Thesaurus Hymnologicus, vol. 1 (Lipsia: J. T Loeschke, 1855; anastatic edn. Hildesheim, New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 1973), 328; Franz Joseph Mone, Hymni latini medii aevi, vol. 1 (Friburgi Brisgoviae: Herder, 1853; anastatic edn. Bologna: Forni editore, 1969), 281; Patrologia Latina, ed. J. P. Migne, vol. 158 (Paris: apud Garnier fratres, 1864), coll. 1035–1036. 19 A composition by Josquin Desprez with this text was included by Ottaviano Petrucci in the Motetti de Passione, de Cruce, de Sacramento, de Beata Virgine et huiusmodi B (Venice: Ottaviano Petrucci, 1503) (RISM BI 15031). Later the same text was also set to music by many other composers: Giovanni Pierluigi da Pal160

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

As far as the lyrics are concerned, the case of the motet Ave cor sanctissimae virginis is particularly interesting, as it sets an anonymous Marian text that has no correspondence in other books, but which reflects the spread of devotion and worship in honour of the immaculate heart of Mary promoted in the first half of the seventeenth century by Giovanni Eudes. Ave, cor sanctissimae virginis, gaudium angelorum. Ave, cor santissimae virginis, paradisus Dei. Ave, cor sanctissimae virginis, triclinium fulgidae semperque tranquile Trinitatis. Ave, vernans rosa caelestis amoenitatis, Maria virgo ex qua nasci et ex cuius lacteRex pascicaelorum voluit, Iesus Christus splendor paternae gloriae.

The pia oratio is a cento which, at the incipit obtained from the angelic greeting, combines invocations of various derivations, all linked to the new post-Tridentine devotion.20 At the end of the collection Gualtieri set to music Lauretan litanies, which had a great success in popular devotion and in the musical settings by composers of all ages. The musical settings The work, which consists of the partbooks of Canto, Alto, Tenor, Basso and ‘basso per l’organ’, is now preserved in unicum at the Christ Church Library in Oxford.21 The main novelty is found in the two motets which also include an instrumental part: Veni Domine in cor for tenor, two violins,22 and basso continuo, and O dulce nomen Iesus for tenor, two violins, trombone, and basso continuo.23 As was customary, in this collection there is also a homogeneity between the voices of the same register: in each motet they proceed in the same vocal range, one not imposing itself on the others. This characteristic is also found in the motets of the Lukačić collection. In fact, in compositions that provide two or more melodic lines sung by the same vocal register, both composers develop the melodic design,

20

21 22 23

estrina (G. P. da Palestrina, Le opere complete, V. Il libro primo dei mottetti a 5, 6 e 7 voci secondo la ristampa del 1600, ed. Raffaele Casimiri (Roma: Edizione fratelli Scalera, 1939), 193–195), Francisco Guerrero and Thomás Luis de Victoria. In the Venetian context we should mention the settings by Giovanni Gabrieli (G. Gabrieli, Opera omnia, vol. 1, ed. Denis Arnold (Rome: American Institute of Musicology, 1956–1969), 93–98), and Giovanni Bassano (RISM AI / 1, B 1233), who composed a small-scale motet on the same text, along with the one for three voices by Claudio Monteverdi in 1582; cf. C. Monteverdi, Opera omnia, XVI. Sacrae Cantiunculae, Madrigali Spiruali a quattro, Canzonette a tre voci, ed. Anthony Pryer (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio Monteverdi, 2012). These are the Litanies of the Most Holy Name of Jesus (‘gaudium angelorum’), approved for domestic devotion by Sixtus V in 1585 and again disseminated by the Jesuits; the prayer to the Virgin of St. Bernard (‘vere paradisus Dei es tu’) was revived in 1609 by the Lateran canon Giovanni Battista Guarini; and the Salutatio beatae Mariae (‘Ave, Maria, candidum lilium fulgidae semperque tranquillae Trinitatis, / rosaque perfulgida coelicae amoenitatis, de qua nasci et de cuius lacte pasci Rex coelorum voluit’), attributed to St. Gertrude of Helfta, but also to St. Brigid of Sweden, was taken up and spread by the aforementioned Giovanni Eudes. Cf. Giovanni Battista Guarini, Della gierarchia overo del sacro regno di Maria vergine, madre di Dio e reina del cielo (Venezia: Evangelista Denchino e Gio. Battista Pulciani, 1609), 43; Jean Eudes, Oeuvres complètes (Paris: Beauchesne, 1905–1909), vol. 8, 467. Oxford, Christ Church Library, Mus.931-5(11). The parts of the two violins are found in the Alto and Basso partbooks. The parts of the two violins are notated in the Canto and the Alto partbooks, while the trombone line is included in the Basso partbook. 161

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

maintaining the same tessitura for both voices. This occurs in five motets by Gualtieri, whereas the presence of this way of proceeding is more significant within Ivan Lukačić’s collection. Particularly interesting, from this point of view, is the motet Ex ore infantium for four equal voices (‘Cantus sive Tenor’) which, after a canonic incipit, goes on with an imitative writing characterized by a continuous and balanced interweaving of the voices without a predominance of one line over the others.24 In general, the voices sing their respective melodic lines in their usual tessitura, without excesses towards the high or low register (Tab. 2). In this regard, we can recall once again that Gualtieri composed this collection while he was choirmaster in Monselice, and it is likely that the collection was designed to be performed also by non-professional singers. Tab. 2. A. Gualtieri, Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (1630): clef and vocal range. Canto Christi corpus ave (C/T, bc) Ave cor sanctissimae (C/T, bc) Cor mundum crea (C/T, bc) Sancta Maria succurre (T, bc) O admirabile commercium (T, bc) Deus misereatur nostri (T/C, bc) Vox dicentis clama (B, bc) Viderunt omnes fines (B, bc) O beatum virum (B, bc) Sub tuum praesidium (C, T, bc) Miserere mei Domine (2 T, bc) O Domine Iesu (T, B, bc) Gaudeamus omnes fideles (2 T, bc) Cum iucunditate nativitatem (2 B, bc) Veni dilecte mi (2 A, bc) Veni Domine in cor (T, 2 vl, bc) O dulce nomen Iesus (T, 2 vl, trb, bc) Laetanie della Beata Vergine (C, A, T, B, bc)

Alto

Tenore

Clef Range Clef

Clef

Range

Do1

Re3-Mib4

Re2-Mib3

Fa4

1

Do

Re3-Mi4

Re2-Mi3

Fa4

Do1

Re3-Mi4

Re2-Mi3

Fa4

Do2-Mi3

Fa4

Do4

Re2-Fa3

Fa4

Do4

Re2-Fa3

1

Do

Do3-Mi4

Do

Re2-Fa3

4

Do

Do2-Fa3

Do

Do#2-Sol3

Do

4 4

Fa4

Do

Do3-Mi4

Fa4

Fa

Sol1-Do3

Fa4

Fa

4

Fa1-Re3

Fa4 Fa4 Fa4

Fa

Sol1-Do3

Fa4

Do

Do2-Sol3

Do

Re2-Sol3

Fa4

Fa

Sol1-Do3

Fa

Sol1-Do3

Fa4

4

1

Sol1-Re3

4

Re2-Mi3

4

Sol2-Si3

4

4

4

Do

4

4

Do Sol2-La3

Fa4

3

4

Do

Si2-Re3

Do

4

Re2-Re3

Do La2-La3 Do

4

Re2-Mi3

3

Clef

Do4

Fa

3

Range

Basso per l’organo

Clef

Re3-Fa4

Range

Basso

Fa4 Fa4 Fa

4

Fa1-Do3

Fa4

The most common tactus is tempus imperfectum, exceptions being the motets Sancta Maria succurre and Cum iucunditate nativitatem, which are composed in tempus perfectum. The musical figures used a range from the semiquaver to the longa. All the compositions, with the exception of Gaudeamus omnes fideles, present one or more episodes in ternary mensura which create a certain variety in the course of the composition with the use of hemiolia, especially in the cadences. In general, the rhythmic profile of the melody appears more elaborate and less linear than in the previous collections. We can observe a tendency to exploit dotted rhythmic figures or different combinations of rapid values that make the rhythmic structure of the composition more varied and lively. For example, words of jubilation or invitation to praise are set in triple time, or with particular rhythmic sequences, as in the case of the 24 Ivan Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones, Venezia, 1620, mottetti a 1 – 5 voci, Introduction, transcription, and realisation

of basso continuo: Ennio Stipčević, ed. Ludovico Bertazzo, CMF 1 (Padova: Messaggero, 1986), n. 24. 162

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

verb ‘laetantur’ (O beatum virum), which is ‘drawn’ with the group formed by a quaver and two semiquavers, followed by the succession of a dotted quaver-semiquaver (Ex. 1). In some motets,25 the rhythmic figure of semiquaver-dotted quaver, which had been characteristic since the collection of 1612, can be found. Mus. ex. 1. A. Gualtieri, O beatum virum, bb. 17–20.

The importance of underlining the intimate link between text and music has always been one of the aspects which composers of all ages have had to tackle. Although in Italian musical treatises there is no systematic codification of rhetorical-musical figures — as is the case in France, England, and Germany — there is no doubt that there was a clear and conscious knowledge of the phenomenon.26 The treatises by Nicola Vicentino and Gioseffo Zarlino also contain explicit indications of the modalities of the relationship between word and music and of the importance of knowledge of rhetorical devices.27 Vicentino, in L’antica musica ridotta alla moderna prattica (Venezia, 1555), repeatedly insists on the concept that music must express the meaning of the words, and the composer ‘will only need to give spirit to the words and transform the sentiments (bitter, sweet, joyful, sad) into music according to the subject of the text.’28 25 These are the motets Deus misereatur nostri, Viderunt omnes fines and O beatum virum. 26 Silvio Perlini, Elementi di Retorica musicale (Milano: Ricordi, 2002), 5–14. 27 Zarlino, in chapter 25, titled ‘What Anyone Desiring to Achieve Perfection in Music Should Know’

(‘Quel, che deve avere ciascuno, che desidera di venire a qualche perfezione nella musica’) writes: ‘Anyone who wishes to achieve a perfect knowledge of music must be familiar with rhetoric, mathematics, and natural philosophy; the greater his ignorance in these discipines, considered necessary, the more difficult it will be to achieve what he desires, namely perfection in the art of music’ (‘Volendo dunque acquistare la perfetta cognizione della Musica, è di bisogno che sia dotato di tutte queste cose [studio della retorica, della matematica e della filosofia naturale]; […] tanto meno potrà arrivare a quel grado, che lui desidera; et con tanta maggior difficoltà li potrà arrivare, quanta maggiore sarà la ignoranza delle cose nominate [retorica, matematica e filosofia naturale], che sono di maggiore importanza, et più necessarie.’); Gioseffo Zarlino, Le istitutioni harmoniche (Venezia: [Pietro da Fino], 1558), part IV, ch. 35, 344. 28 ‘Sarà solamente obligato a dar l’anima, a quelle parole e con l’Armonia dimostrare le sue passioni, quando aspre, e dolci, e quando allegre, e quando meste, e secondo il loro suggietto.’ Nicola Vicentino, L’antica musica ridotta alla moderna prattica (Roma: Antonio Barre, 1555), ch. XV, fol. 48r. Vicentino returns to the same topic in chapter XXIX, stating that: ‘Music that sets a text must express the concept, the passions and the effects of the words through harmony. The composer must therefore comply with the meaning of the text by proposing, for example, more consonances and a fast pace if the theme is joyful, while fewer 163

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

The use of melody or other musical aspects in a mimetic key is a common procedure among composers of this era. Antonio Gualtieri also proves to have had a good knowledge and mastery of musical rhetoric in all his productions, from the polychoral motets and the concertato madrigals to the motets of 1630. His mastery again emerges from the teachings received at Padua Cathedral29 and the works of contemporary musicians that he was able to encounter, and perhaps perform, also during his stay in Monselice and Montagnana, two peripheral locations, yet closely linked to the two main Paduan musical centres: the Duomo and the Basilica del Santo.30 Within his last collection, for example, recourse to repetitio or anaphora is very frequent, and can be witnessed in the following compositions: Cor mundum crea, Vox dicentis clama, O Domine Iesu Christe, Cum iucunditate nativitatem, and Veni dilecte mi. Very similar to repetitio, and equally used, is the polyptoton, present in five compositions: Cor mundum crea, O Domine Iesu Christe, Cum iucunditate nativitatem, Veni Domine, and Sub tuum praesidium (Ex. 2). Also, the motets published in the only printed collection known to us by Lukačić are rich in these rhetorical procedures, which create an interesting interplay between the vocal lines and are well demonstrated, for example, by the motet Sancta et immaculata, characterized by a close exchange of the same melodic lines between the two voices.31 Mus. ex. 2. A. Gualtieri, Sub tuum praesidium, bb. 1–4.

consonances and a slow pace will be suitable for a sad text.’; N. Vicentino, L’antica musica ridotta alla moderna prattica, ch. XXIX, fol. 86r. 29 The teaching was based on the needs of the cathedral and took place in the annexed school of grammar and singing which, since Medieval times, had the function of preparing pueri, clerics, and choristers under the guidance of a magister cantus and, then, of the choirmaster. Osvaldo Gambassi, Pueri cantores nelle cattedrali d’Italia tra Medioevo e età moderna. Le scuole eugeniane, scuole di canto annesse alle cappelle musicali (Firenze: Olschki, 1997); A. Lovato, ‘Teoria e didattica del canto piano’, in Musica e liturgia nella riforma tridentina, Trento: Castello del Buonconsiglio, 23 settembre – 26 novembre 1995, eds. Danilo Curti, Marco Gozzi (Trento: Provincia autonoma di Trento, 1995), 57–67. 30 See note no. 44 relating to the book patrimony of the musical chapel of Montagnana. 31 I. Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones, no. 12. 164

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

Another rhetorical figure widely used by Gualtieri is the anabasis which recurs, for example, in the words ‘Regina coeli’ (Sancta Maria succurre, Ex. 3a) and ‘paradisum’ (O beatum virum), sung with an ascending motion. On the other hand, the first appearance of the word ‘paradisum’ occurs by reaching the highest notes (C3 and D3), with the typical effect of the hyperbole, which pushes the voice above the acute limit of its tessitura (eg. 3b). Mus. ex. 3a. A. Gualtieri, Sancta Maria succure, b. 17.

Mus. ex. 3b. A. Gualtieri, O beatum virum, b. 14.

Compared to the previous collection of small-scale motets, the structure of these compositions differs significantly: here, the melodic lines alternate in more complex imitative episodes, where the imitation is sometimes very strict, and often creates a rhythmic-melodic interweaving of singular vivacity. At other times Gualtieri repeats the same melodicharmonic setting for different textual segments, as in the motet O admirabile commercium, where there is a correspondence between ‘Creator generis humani’ and the final ‘alleluia’, slightly varied thanks to the introduction of a diminution which does not appear in the first episode (Ex. 4a, 4b). Mus. ex. 4a. A. Gualtieri, O admirabile commercium, bb. 8–29.

165

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Mus. ex. 4b. A. Gualtieri, O admirabile commercium, b. 41–62.

The concluding section of all the motets is characterized by a rich melodic flourish, particularly in the compositions for two voices (Ex. 5). This technique links the compositions of Gualtieri32 and Lukačić33 to those of many other contemporary musicians. In this regard, it is possible that these composers knew and could have been, at least in part, influenced by Claudio Monteverdi’s motets, characterized, especially in the final bars, by long and rapid melodic designs. Mus. ex. 5. A. Gualtieri, Gaudeamus omnes fideles, bb. 50–52.

In some passages Gualtieri uses figures already very widespread in the musical writing of the time, such as the descending third used to set the invitation (‘Veni’) at the opening of the motet Veni dilecte mi (Ex. 6) and Veni Domine in cor, where a procedure that had already been experimented with in the motet Veni pulchritudo animae of 1612, and which we also find in the thirteenth motet of Lukačić’s collection, Domine, quinque talenta, is used again to set the ‘ecce’ adverb.34 Similarly, the repetition (epiphora) returns on the word ‘alleluia’ in various compositions: Sancta Maria succure, Viderunt omnes fines, O beatum virum, and Gaudeamus omnes fideles.

32 A. Gualtieri, Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci, nos. 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 12, 13, 17. 33 I. Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones, nos. 2, 5, 8, 12, 15, 23. 34 I. Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones, no. 13. 166

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

Mus. ex. 6. A. Gualtieri, Veni dilecte mi, bb. 1–2.

In order to obtain an emphatic effect, the composer uses the slur to link two notes of different pitches. This sign clearly shows a specific way of performing which provides a greater stress on the first of the two notes. The graphic precision used in indicating this articulation sign, better than that of previous prints, confirms the expressive importance that the musician intended to attribute to such details (Fig. 1). Another indication of performance practice reported by the composer is the ribattuta di gola, indicated by the succession of four semiquavers (Fig. 2). This example and the choice, quite frequent in Gualtieri’s prints, to notate in extenso diminutions that any professional singer would certainly have been able to introduce extemporaneously, demonstrate how Gualtieri used to indicate, in a slavish manner, some musical details whose clarification could have been omitted, since they were of common use. However, this aspect could also reveal the fact that Gualtieri wanted to help and guide the correct performance of his motets even among non-professional singers, who might find themselves performing his music. We can in fact hypothesize that in the musical chapel of Monselice, where Gualtieri composed his motets, professional singers and instrumentalists were not always available, as was the case in the richest Venetian or Paduan ensembles; thus, with such indications, Gualtieri perhaps tried to help any amateur singers who intended to perform his compositions.

Fig. 1. A. Gualtieri, Ave cor sanctissimae, The Governing Body of Christ Church, Oxford, Mus.931-935, Partbook of Canto, p. 5.

Fig. 2. A. Gualtieri, Veni, Domine, The Governing Body of Christ Church, Oxford, Mus.931-935, Partbook of Tenore, p. 16. 167

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

The variety and complexity of the structure achieved in this collection are also more evident in the harmonic writing, which is somewhat more elaborate and refined compared to previous works. This is confirmed, for example, by a more articulated basso continuo line which, in addition to playing the role of harmonic support, often enters into dialogue with the singing line. This also happened in the collection of 1612, although it appeared sporadically and was limited to short motifs, while now the dialogue becomes much more organic and insistent (Ex. 7). Mus. ex. 7. A. Gualtieri, Cor mundum, bb. 36–42.

A further aspect deserves our attention. As far as the final cadences are concerned, only six motets present the plagal cadence, while the remaining twelve feature a perfect cadence. The further evolution of musical writing is confirmed by the numerous indications that Gualtieri places in the figuring of the basso continuo, which in the previous collection was completely absent.

Fig. 3. A. Gualtieri, Sancta Maria, The Governing Body of Christ Church, Oxford, Mus.931-935, Partbook of Basso per l'organo, p. 4.

Among the motets for solo voice, Sancta Maria proves particularly interesting; in the course of the sixteenth century, the text of this motet had become an expression of popu-lar devotion to Our Lady of Perpetual Help, also entering the liturgy as an antiphon to the Magnificat for the feast of Our Lady of the Snows, and then for the Common of the Blessed Virgin Mary. The widespread diffusion and notoriety of the text resulted in a significant number of settings by numerous musicians. Among these we also find some masters with 168

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

whom Antonio Gualtieri may have had more direct contact: see, for instance, the motets on the same text by Andrea Gabrieli (six-voice motet),35 Giovanni Gabrieli (seven-voice motet),36 Lodovico Viadana (motet for one voice and basso continuo),37 and Claudio Monteverdi (motet for two voices and basso continuo).38 Compared to the examples available to him, Gualtieri gives a very personal interpretation of the devotional text. In fact, for the first time in this collection, the incipit, which sets to music the invocation to the Virgin Mary, takes on the tempus perfectum in the rhythm of the hemiolia. The next verse, in tempus imperfectum, is characterised by the insistent repetition of the plea for help (‘iuva’), proposed eight times in the typical dotted quaver followed by a semiquaver and with the interval of a descending fourth. The mensura becomes triple once again on ‘Regina coeli refove flebiles’ and, after the motif ‘ora pro populo’ in common time, it returns for a third time in the concluding phrase ‘sentiant ideo tuum iuvamen’, which alternates twice with the ‘alleluia’ in duple mensura. While the last two episodes in triple time are built on the canon imitation between the basso continuo line and the tenor, the embellishment of the ‘alleluia’ is particularly rich, first intoned with a series of quavers and then with a long drawing of semiquavers. It is a rather complex construction with respect to Antonio Gualtieri’s usual writing, here rendered particularly varied by the continuous change of time signature which, however, respects the symmetrical subdivision of the text.39 Antonio Gualtieri’s adherence to the concertato style is evidenced by the two motets for solo voice (tenor) and instruments (violin and trombone) Veni Domine in cor (T, 2 vl, bc) and O dulce nomen Iesus (T, 2 vl, trb, bc). This is certainly not a novelty in the motets’ structure particularly as regards the Lombardy-Veneto area, as already at the end of the sixteenth century there are several compositions in which the voices are combined with one or more instruments. However, it must be noted that, especially at the beginning of the seventeenth century, the motet with instruments is an exception and not a consolidated practice as will happen after 1610, the year of the publication of Monteverdi’s Vespro.40 35

36

37 38

39

40

Andrea Gabrieli, Concerti di Andrea, et di Gio: Gabrieli organisti della Sereniss. Sig. di Venetia Continenti musica di chiesa, madrigali, et altro, per voci et stromenti musicali; à 6. 7. 8. 10. 12. et 16. […] Libro 1. et 2. (Venezia: Angelo Gardano, 1587); A. Gabrieli, Opera, XI. Concerti di Andrea, et di Gio: Gabrieli organisti della Sereniss. Sig. di Venetia Continenti musica di chiesa, madrigali, et altro, per voci et stromenti musicali; à 6. 7. 8. 10. 12. et 16. […] Libro 1. et 2., Venezia, Angelo Gardano, 1587, ed. David Bryant, 2 vols., Edizione Nazionale delle opere di Andrea Gabrieli, 11.i–ii (Milano: Ricordi, 1989), 1. G. Gabrieli, Sacrae Symphoniae (Venezia: Angelo Gardano, 1597); G. Gabrieli: Opera omnia, 6 vols., ed. D. Arnold, Corpus Mensurabilis Musicae 12a (Roma: American Institute of Musicology, 1956–1969), vol. I, 86–92. L. da Viadana, Cento concerti ecclesiastici; L. da Viadana, Cento concerti ecclesiastici, ed. Claudio Gallico (Kassel, Bärenreiter, 1964), 40–41. Promptuarii musici concentus ecclesiasticos CCLXXXVI. selectissimos, II. III. & IV. vocum. Cum basso continuo & generali, organo applicato, e diversis et praestantissimis Germaniae Italiae et alis aliarum terrarum musicis collectos exhibens, pars tertia ... Opera et studio Joannis Donfried, scholae Neccaro Rottenburgicae, nec non ad D. Martini ibidem musices moderatoris (Strasbourg: P. Ledertz, 1627). C. Monteverdi, Tutte le opere, vol. 16/2, ed. Gian Francesco Malipiero (Vienna: Universal Edition, 1942), 511–516. RISM AI, A 552; BI, 16271. Some analogies can be found with the setting of the same text published by Claudio Monteverdi (1618 and 1627) who, also for the phrase ‘sentiant’, had used the triple mensura with the same descending melodic design by conjunct motion and the same dotted semibreve-minim-semibreve rhythmic figure. Lodovico Viadana, in 1602, had also set the conclusion section in tempus perfectum. C. Monteverdi, Sanctissimae Virgini Missa senis vocibus ac Vesperae pluribus decantande cum nonnullis sacris Concentibus ad sacella sive principum cubicula accomodata (Venezia: Ricciardo Amadino, 1610); C. Monte169

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

From the investigation carried out by Rodobaldo Tibaldi on motet prints published between 1600 and 1630, there are about sixty prints containing motets with instruments which, with rare exceptions, constitute a minor part of the collection in which they are included.41 For his compositions Antonio Gualtieri uses two ensembles widely employed in the collections of motets printed in the first thirty years of the seventeenth century. In particular, the voice and two violins ensemble is documented in various sylloges.42 Among these, the three collections printed by Alessandro Grandi between 1621 and 1629 stand out, in which the motet with this medium is abundantly represented.43 However, the ensemble with two violins, trombone and basso continuo is found only in three compositions of the collection Ecclesiastica armonia de concerti by Leandro Gallerano.44 On the title page of this collection, the composer from Brescia defines himself as the ‘maestro di cappella della veneranda Arca del Glorioso Santo Antonio de Padoa’, and it is difficult to assume that Gualtieri was not aware of these compositions. However, it must be kept in mind that the choice of these instruments can also find justification in the ensemble that Gualtieri had at his disposal in the centres where he worked. As for the periods of activity in his native place, Monselice (1606–1613, 1621–1632, and 1650–1661), we know that Antonio Gualtieri was the first choirmaster hired with this title. Nevertheless, the archive documents do not make any mention of the presence of a vocal and instrumental ensemble, just as there is no expenses report indicating the purchase of music prints. The documentation relating to the years of his activity in nearby Montagnana (1613–1621) is however lost, but thanks to an inventory of 1658 which lists the prints in the possession of the musical chapel, it is possible to reconstruct the consistency and evolution of the repertoire presumably performed between the end of the sixteenth century and the middle of the following century.45 The names of the musicians and the compositions present in this document testify to the coexistence of different styles and schools, and it is evident how the Renaissance polyphony coexisted with the new concertato style.46 A public music school and a chapel formed by

41

42 43

44

45 46

verdi, Opera, IX. Missa da capella a sei. Vespro della beata Vergine, ed. Antonio Delfino (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio Monteverdi, 2005); RISM AI, M 3445. With some exceptions in which there is a more significant presence, in these collections we find from one to four motets for voice or voices and instruments. Rodobaldo Tibaldi, ‘Strumenti e forme strumentali nel mottetto italiano del primo Seicento: alcune riflessioni’, in Barocco Padano 6. Atti del Convegno Atti del XIV Convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII, Brescia, 16–18 luglio 2007, eds. A. Colzani, A. Luppi, M. Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2010), 7–96. Among the forty-five collections listed by Tibaldi, eleven present compositions for solo voice, two violins, and basso continuo. Cf. R. Tibaldi, ‘Strumenti e forme strumentali’, 68–85. Alessandro Grandi, Motetti con sinfonie libro I (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1621) (9 motets); A. Grandi, Motetti con sinfonie libro II (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1625) (7 motets); A. Grandi, Motetti con sinfonie libro III (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1629) (14 motets) = RISM AI, G 3445, G 3448, G 3450; cf. R. Tibaldi, ‘Strumenti e forme strumentali’, 80, 82 and 84. Nolite me considerare (C, 2 vl, trb), Gaudeat Ecclesia (C, B, 2 vl, trb) and Sono tubae tympano (C, C, 2 vl and trb). Leandro Gallerano, Ecclesiastica armonia de concerti a 1.2.3.4.5 (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1624); RISM AI, G 156; R. Tibaldi, ‘Strumenti e forme strumentali’, 81. Pierpaolo Scattolin, ‘La cappella musicale del duomo di Montagnana (1592–1682). Profilo storico’, Rassegna Veneta di Studi Musicali 15–16 (1999/2000), 287–374. With the exception of Cristobal Morales, the composers included in this inventory are all Italian: Costanzo Porta, Vincenzo Ruffo, Giovanni Matteo Asola, Giovanni Rovetta, Maurizio Cazzati, Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina, Jacopo Antonio Cardillo, Bartolomeo Cappelli, Massimo Ferrari, Ludovico Grossi da Via170

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

a choir of eight / ten choristers and supported by the organ and some instruments such as cornetto, violins, viola, violone, trombone, and bassoon were also active in the area.47 As usually happened in the musical chapels of northern Italy, documentary sources confirm that the instruments joined the voices, acting as an accompaniment or even replacing a vocal line: the cornetto could play in place of the soprano and the trombone in place of the bass.48 In fact, if the ensemble with two violins and trombone does not often appear among the collections of the early seventeenth century, it is equally true, as the list compiled by Tibaldi testifies, that the trombone was among the most used instruments, above all thanks to its coloristic function which guaranteed a reliable effect that could be easily achieved even in peripheral music centres.49 Returning to the two motets of Gualtieri, the text of the motet Veni Domine consists of a first sentence, which expands the incipit of the antiphon ‘Veni Domine et noli tardare’ to the Lauds of the sixth weekday after the third Sunday of Advent,50 together with some of the numerous invocations contained in the pia oratio ad Iesum, ‘O bone Iesu, o piissime Iesu, o dulcissime Iesu’, and to the supplication expressed in the greater doxology.51 Like other texts, this prayer, assembled from a text by Anselm of Aosta and appropriated by the spirituality of the modern devotio, was widely disseminated in the books of hours of the Middle Ages and in the manuals of devout prayers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, when devotion in the name of Jesus was taken up and expanded by the Jesuits. As regularly appears in this collection, Gualtieri divides the composition into three periods: the first episode sets the phrase of liturgical derivation and the first two invocations of the pia oratio in duple time; a section in mensura ternaria for the supplication ‘suscipe depraecationem nostram et noli tardare’ follows; and finally, the composer constructs a third phrase in tempus imperfectum, combining the initial invitation ‘veni, Domine, in cor nostrum’ with the invocation ‘miserere nobis’. The most evident aspect lies in the recurrent exhortation ‘veni’, repeated 25 times during the composition. The intonation of the invitation, proposed by the violins and accompanied by the basso continuo, is then resumed by the tenor with an interval of a descending minor third and then with the ribattuta di gola, obtained through the succession of four semiquavers. In the continuous interweaving of the invitation and supplication, Gualtieri’s motet alternates episodes in which the voice is accompanied by the basso continuo alone with episodes in which it enters into dialogue with the violins. In these circumstances there is a close relationship between the tenor and the first violin, which often offer the same melody, proceeding either in different pitches or in thirds.

47 48 49

50 51

dana, Giulio Belli, Francesco Stivori, Orazio Filliberi, and Antonio dalla Tavola; cf. P. Scattolin, ‘La cappella musicale’, 302–305. P. Scattolin, ‘La cappella musicale’, 292–293, 299–305. Montagnana, Municipal Archive, Libro delle parti, II. c. 148v; cf. P. Scattolin, ‘La cappella musicale’, 301. In this period, the trombone, in addition to being used as a substitute for a medium-low voice, was widely used in ensembles of three or four instruments with the aim of contrasting a group characterized by a rich and solemn sonority with another formed by one or two voices and organ with a more lively writing; cf. R. Tibaldi, ‘Strumenti e forme strumentali’, 23, 68–85. Breviarium romanum. Editio princeps (1568), anastatic edn., introduction and appendix by Manlio Sodi, Achille Maria Triacca (Città del Vaticano: Libreria editrice vaticana, 1999), 166. Missale Romanum. Editio princeps (1570), anastatic edn., eds. M. Sodi, A. M. Triacca (Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1998), 295. 171

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

On the other hand, the motet O dulce nomen Iesus for tenor solo, two violins, trombone, and basso continuo reserves a single episode of five bars for the dialogue between the soloist and the two violins, while in the concluding bars the entire ensemble is gathered. In fact, the motet is built on the alternation between instrumental parts and tenor accompanied by solo organ. The trombone, in turn, reproduces the basso continuo line exactly and plays only in correspondence with the exclusively instrumental sections. Although references to liturgical, patristic, and devotional texts are evident, the text of the motet proves to be an unicum. The incipit, for example, refers to the pia oratio ad Iesum, while the praise ‘splendor aeternis luminis’ refers to the hemistich inserted into various hymns, as well as the affirmation ‘tu salus mundi’;52 the epithet ‘paradisus deliciarum’ commonly occurs in anthologies of prayers intended for private meditation. The ‘toto corde’ affirmation belongs to the penitential repertoire and, instead, ‘amore tui langueo’ refers to the Canticum canticorum, from which the text of the fifteenth motet of the collection, Veni dilecte mi, is also borrowed. Other statements derive from the literature relating to the cult of the Cross, such as the ‘vulnerum tuorum’ or ‘paradisi gloria’, which closes the sequence Stabat mater dolorosa. To set such a composite text, Antonio Gualtieri uses an organization in eight sentences which, alternating between tempus perfectum and tempus imperfectum, ensure an orderly and fully perceptible scansion of the text. Furthermore, within each phrase, he alternates the instrumental motifs with those assigned to the tenor accompanied by the basso continuo. In fact, the soloist voice enters into dialogue with the instrumental ensemble (two violins and trombone) only on two occasions. The phrase ‘Tu salus mundi’ seems to act as the glue for the whole composition and, by being repeated three times, it assumes the function of a refrain and guarantees unity and coherence to the whole. The line of the solo voice is characterized by a frequent melismatic embellishment, whose function is to highlight the most significant words from an expressive point of view, such as ‘flamma’, ‘caritate’, and ‘gloria’. Gualtieri’s collection ends with the ‘Laetanie della Beata Vergine’ for four voices and basso continuo, where episodes requiring the involvement of the entire ensemble alternate with those in which the melody is entrusted to one or two voices accompanied by the organ. Although there are no explicit indications in the printed score, it can be assumed that these motifs were entrusted to a single voice, given the increase in diminutions that Gualtieri uses. Generally, the four voices respond, almost always homorhythmically, to the invocation entrusted to a single singer. The settings for four voices concern the two Kyrie eleison in the opening as well as the invocations ‘Spiritus sancte Deus’, ‘Mater Christi’, ‘Speculum iustitiae’, ‘Causa nostra laetitiae’, ‘Vas spirituale’, and ‘Vas insigne devotionis’. The invocation to the ‘Mater Christi’, and the motif ‘Vas spirituale’, are anticipated by an interruptio in all the parts in order to give greater emphasis to the lyrics (Ex. 8). The same procedure can be found in Lukačić’s motets Quam pulchra es and Canite et psallite. In these motets the choral sections, mainly in homorhythmic writing or with short imitative cues, are interspersed with solo phrases entrusted to the individual voices which, through more diminished and elaborate lines, intone the lyrics of the motets.53 A possible reference for this type of compositional structure is Claudio Monteverdi’s Vespro della 52 Liber Hymnarius (Solesmes: Abbaye Saint-Pierre, 1983), 191, 228–229. 53 I. Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones, nos. 25-26. 172

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

Beata Vergine (Venice, 1610) which, although in a larger structure, presents the same alternation between solos and choir particularly in the hymn Ave Maris stella and in the two Magnificat that majestically conclude the collection, also contributing to a more conscious use of the instruments within the motet.54 Mus. ex. 8. A. Gualtieri, Laetanie della Beata Vergine, bb. 28–29.

In the Litanies that conclude Gualtieri’s collection, the four voices also come together in the final ‘Agnus Dei’, in which the invocation ‘miserere nobis’ is preceded by a pause that, once again, affects all the voices and in which the homorhythmic movement of the canto and bass is interrupted by the lines of the alto and tenor, characterized by a more lively rhythmic design with the characteristic alla zoppa rhythm, a semiquaver-dotted quaver (Ex. 9). The basso continuo duplicates the bass line, except for phrases in which the voice intones a solo fragment. Mus. ex. 9. A. Gualtieri, Laetanie della Beata Vergine, bb. 78–80.

54 C. Monteverdi, Sanctissimae Virgini Missa senis vocibus ac Vesperae. 173

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Consistent with the stylistic evolution starting at the beginning of the seventeenth century, Antonio Gualtieri, with his 1612 and 1630 prints, abandons the eight-part polyphony to arrive at the more modern concertato style with a few voices and basso continuo, experimenting in particular with motets for one, two, and three voices, and basso continuo, enriched, in two cases, by the presence of instrumental parts. The path taken by Viadana and continued by many other composers probably not only served as a model for numerous composers involved in the sacred genre, but was particularly prominent among the musicians who worked in the chapels of northern Italy or who came into contact with these environments. In Padua, since the beginning of the seventeenth century, the sacred monody had a notable development, mainly thanks to the masters who lent their services there. Luigi Balbi, Amadio Freddi, Bartolomeo Barbarino, and Leandro Gallerano were among the main figures of the new genre and their compositions were included in various sacred anthologies of the time.55 The most stimulating examples, however, came from Venice, where Claudio Monteverdi, Alessandro Grandi, Giovanni Rovetta, and Tarquinio Merula were active. Monteverdi had masterfully indicated the possible expressive outcomes of the new language in the Vespro della Beata Vergine (1610) and, subsequently, in the Selva morale e spirituale (1641), where numerous compositions for one, two, and three voices are included. In these compositions with one or a few voices and basso continuo, the agility of the vocal lines reaches unusual and surprising results.56 Ultimately, Antonio Gualtieri’s last collection, the Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci, is fully part of this climate of the constant evolution of sacred music, testifying to how even centres considered minor were able to incorporate stylistic innovations, adapting them to their needs and the resources in their possession. In fact, in his compositions the voice supported by the basso continuo allows a freedom of the vocal line that was almost completely unknown in the previous polyphonic motets, revealing a new and greater attention to the vocal technique that the new type of musical writing entailed. For a more in-depth and broader reflection on the evolution of Gualtieri’s writing in the field of the small-scale motet with instrumental accompaniment, it would have been interesting to be able to analyze the Mottecta duabus vocibus (1611), now missing, and to have access to some scores which are contemporary or posterior to his Venetian stay (1632–1650). In fact, although all of Gualtieri’s surviving musical production dates from the years spent between Monselice and Montagnana (1606–1630), it seems unlikely that during the Venetian period he interrupted his compositional activity. More likely, it is safe to assume that he did not make his works public in print due to the onerous and multiple commitments undertaken as a result of his family’s economic problems.57 It is therefore 55

RISM A I, B 748; A I, B 873-874; A I, F 1831, G 156; C. Comparin, ‘Mapping the Presence of Paduan Repertoire in European Anthologies in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century’, Musicologica Brunensia 53/2 (2018), 25–40; F. Passadore, ‘I musicisti del Santo e il mottetto a voce sola nel primo Seicento’, Il Santo. Rivista antoniana di storia dottrina arte, series II, 32/2–3 (1992), 163–182. 56 C. Monteverdi, Sanctissimae Virgini; C. Monteverdi, Selva morale e spirituale (Venezia: Bartolomeo Magni, 1640); C. Monteverdi, Selva. Cf. RISM A I/6, M 3445-3446; C. Monteverdi, Opera IX, 325–327; C. Monteverdi, Opera XV; C. Monteverdi, Selva morale e spirituale, 2 vols., ed. Denis Stevens (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio Monteverdi, 1998). 57 Proof of the economic problems faced by the Gualtieri family can be found in the advance request for two years’ wages for the marriage of a daughter, granted by the Procurators of San Marco on 29 July 174

Chiara Comparin: The Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (Venezia, 1630) by Antonio Gualtieri

not possible for us to verify whether, and possibly in what way, the activity at the most important institution of the time and the contact with the most renowned masters of the seventeenth century, among whom the name of Claudio Monteverdi stands out, may have influenced the musical grammar of the composer from Monselice.

1640. Cf. Venezia, Archivio di Stato, Procuratia de Supra, Chiesa di S. Marco, Reg. 144, Terminazioni (1637-1648), c. 62. 175

Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento Aurelio Bianco Université de Strasbourg, France

Il violinista mantovano Carlo Farina è oggi riconosciuto come una delle più singolari personalità della tradizione strumentale d’inizio Seicento. Rappresentante modello del musicista itinerante di epoca barocca, Farina conobbe impieghi in numerose istituzioni musicali non solo in Italia ma anche e soprattutto nell’area centro-europea. Così al pari di tanti colleghi del tempo come Francesco e Gabriele Usper o ancora Ivan Lukačić, a più riprese ‘lontani dalla patria’,1 Farina dovette e seppe adattarsi a consuetudini e gusti musicali differenti. La sua influenza sul repertorio violinistico oltremontano resta indiscussa; di lui si ricorda in primo luogo il celebre Capriccio stravagante, archetipo della musica a programma di area austro-tedesca tra XVII e XVIII secolo. Con il presente saggio s’intende ripercorrere i punti salienti della carriera di Farina nonché offrire un compendio della parte meno indagata della sua produzione strumentale: la musica di danza.2 Carlo Farina nasce a Mantova verso il 1595.3 Figlio di uno tra i più fedeli strumentisti al servizio dei Gonzaga, un tal Luigi Farina suonatore di violone, Carlo compì il proprio apprendistato professionale verosimilmente nell’ambito familiare e nella cerchia dei violinisti attivi a palazzo ducale, come Salomone Rossi o i fratelli Orazio e Giovanni Battista Rubini; null’altro purtroppo si può aggiungere su questo primissimo periodo della vita del musicista.4 Le prime informazioni certe su Farina rimontano all’aprile del 1622 1 2

3

4

Francesco Sponga Usper, Messa e salmi da concertarsi nell’organo et anco con diversi stromenti (Venezia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1614), lettera dedicatoria. I componimenti in questione appaiono in cinque raccolte edite tra il 1626 e il 1628: Carlo Farina, Libro delle pavane gagliarde, brand: mascharata, aria franzesa, volte, balletti, sonate canzone. à 2. 3. 4. voce, con il basso per sonare (Dresden: Wolfgang Seiffert (Gimel Bergen), 1626); C. Farina, Ander Theil newer Paduanen, Gagliarden, Couranten, Frantzösischen Arien [...] mit Vier Stimmen (Dresden: autore (Gimel Bergen), 1627); C. Farina, Il terzo libro delle pavane, gagliarde brand: mascharata, arie franzese, volte, corrente, sinfonie, a 3. 4. voci, con il basso per sonare (Dresden: autore (Gimel Bergen), 1627); C. Farina, Il quarto libro delle pavane gagliarde, balletti, volte, passamezi, sonate, canzon: a. 2. 3. & 4. voci, con il basso per sonare (Dresden: Johann Gonkeritz, 1628); C. Farina, Fünffter Theil newer Pavanen, Gagliarden, Brand: Mascharaden, Balletten, Sonaten. Mit 2. 3. und 4. Stimmen (Dresden: Gimel Bergen, 1628). La maggior parte delle considerazioni sulla vita del musicista fanno riferimento ad un mio precedente saggio. Si tratta qui dell’occasione di riconsiderare alcuni aspetti della sua biografia alla luce di più recenti acquisizioni storiografiche, cfr. Aurelio Bianco, ‘Nach englischer und frantzösichert Art’. Vie et oeuvre de Carlo Farina (Turnhout: Brepols, 2010). Sugli strumentisti al servizio dei Gonzaga all’inizio del Seicento, cfr. Susan Parisi, Ducal Patronage of Music in Mantua, 1587–1627: An Archival Study, 2 voll. (Ph.D. Diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1989); Rodolfo Baroncini, ‘Scelte e idiomi strumentali nell’‘Orfeo’ e in altri luoghi monteverdiani’, in 177

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

quando è possibile attestarne la presenza a Venezia, allo stato attuale non sono tuttavia ricostruibili i contorni delle attività svolte in Laguna.5 Il soggiorno veneziano non dovette prolungarsi oltre l’inizio del 1624 visto che in un qualche momento di quello stesso anno Farina doveva già trovarsi a Praga al servizio del cardinale Ernst Adalbert von Harrach. Malauguratamente, l’unica fonte d’informazione certa sul trascorso boemo del musicista è la lettera di raccomandazione con la quale Farina venne successivamente presentato alla corte dell’elettore di Sassonia.6 Ciò nonostante, nel documento in questione si legge che il violinista italiano aveva servito il cardinale von Harrach per ‘un certo tempo’, cosa che lascerebbe intuire che la permanenza a Praga non dovesse essere stata poi così breve.7 D’altro canto, alcune situazioni sulle quali riverremo più avanti sembrerebbero effettivamente confermare una siffatta evenienza.8 Comunque stiano le cose, all’agosto del 1625 rimonta l’arrivo di Farina a Dresda dove venne assunto in qualità di Konzertmeister nella cappella dell’elettore Giovanni Giorgio I di Sassonia. Si trattava senz’altro di un importante riconoscimento professionale, basti ricordare che il suo diretto superiore era Heinrich Schütz all’epoca, com’è noto, direttore della compagine vocale e strumentale di corte.9 Gli anni passati a Dresda non sono particolarmente ricchi d’informazioni sull’operato di Farina.10 Fanno tuttavia eccezione alcuni avvenimenti del tutto straordinari di cui il musicista fu certamente testimone. Tra queste vicende vanno annoverati i festeggiamenti tenutisi nella Claudio Monteverdi. Studi e prospettive, a cura di R. Baroncini, Paola Besutti, Teresa Gialdroni (Firenze: Olschki, 1998), 289–332. 5 L’informazione è deducibile da un documento d’ordine amministrativo in cui Farina testimonia di conoscere uno dei figli di Monteverdi, circostanza questa che lascerebbe anche intuire un rapporto di una qualche amicizia con il maestro cremonese. È peraltro da questo stesso documento che si ricava che il musicista mantovano doveva essere nato intorno al 1595 e che era senz’altro figlio del già menzionato Luigi Farina; Venezia, Archivio storico del Patriarcato, Curia antica, Legitimitatum, reg. 9, f. 230v–231r; cfr. R. Baroncini, ‘Monteverdi in Venice: new documents and perspectives’, Early Music 45/3 (2017), 365–376: 370–371. 6 Dresda, Sächsisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Loc. 7328, Cammersachen Anno 1625, Bl. 258, cfr. Manfred Fechner, ‘Bemerkungen zu Carlo Farina und seiner Instrumentalmusik’, Schütz-Jahrbuch 18 (1996), 109–122: 122. 7 ‘Durchleuchtigster Hochgeborner Churfürst Gnädigster Herr, E. Churf: G […] wie gegenwartiger Carolo Varino de Mantua seiner profession ein musicus auf der Viola ein Zeitlang allhier bey dem herrnn Pragerischenn Erzbischoff sich aufgehalten, izo aber resolire, seine gelegennheit anders zuesuchenn, Dahero Ihr hoch F: G: seinethalbenn mich intercedendo ersuchtt, denselbenen ann E: Churf: G: unnterthanigst zue commendirn. Wann mir dann unnverborgen, E: Churf: G:’; M. Fechner, ‘Bemerkungen zu Carlo Farina’, 122. 8 La presenza di Farina nell’area austro-boema fu senz’altro favorita dall’arrivo di Eleonora Gonzaga a Vienna una volta divenuta moglie (1622) dell’imperatore Ferdinando II d’Asburgo. Nel solco di queste particolari relazioni tra Mantova e la corte imperiale si possono annoverare i viaggi di altri violinisti concittadini di Farina come Giovanni Battista Buonamente (Vienna e Praga) o i già citati fratelli Rubini (Vienna). Sul primo si rimanda a Peter Allsop, Cavalier Giovanni Battista Buonamente: Franciscan Violinist (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005), 43–72. Sul passaggio di Orazio e Giovanni Battista Rubini a Vienna si veda Romolo Quazza, La guerra per la successione di Mantova e del Monferrato, 1628–1631 (Mantova: Mondovi, 1926), vol. I, 95. 9 Il salario percepito da Farina si elevava a 228 Gulden e 12 Groschen all’anno, senza dubbio una cifra di tutto rispetto, cfr. Agatha Kobuch, ‘Neue Aspekte zur Biographie von Heinrich Schütz und zur Geschichte der Dresdner Hofkapelle’, in Heinrich Schütz im Spannungsfeld seines und unseres Jahrhunderts, a cura di Wolfram Steude (Leipzig: Peters, 1987), vol. I, 62. 10 Si tratta per lo più di documenti d’ordine amministrativo relativi al funzionamento della cappella, cfr. Erich H. Müller, Heinrich Schütz. Gesammelte Briefe und Schriften (Regensburg: Gustav Bosse, 1931), 85–87, 99–100. 178

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

primavera 1627 in occasione del matrimonio tra Sofia Eleonora, una delle figlie dell’elettore di Sassonia, e il landgravio d’Assia-Darmstadt.11 Per quelle medesime circostanze Schütz compose la Dafne, primo melodramma in lingua tedesca oggi purtroppo perduto. Non vi sono dubbi che Farina abbia svolto un ruolo di primo piano proprio per quanto riguarda l’allestimento della ‘prima’ della Dafne. La didascalia che accompagna l’ottava gagliarda del suo terzo libro lascerebbe infatti intendere che Schütz gli avesse affidato il compito di scrivere perlomeno una parte degli interventi strumentali dell’opera.12 Nell’autunno di quello stesso anno il musicista italiano seguì l’elettore di Sassonia a Mühlhausen in occasione del raduno dei principi elettori.13 Un atto amministrativo redatto per quella medesime circostanze ben testimonia del credito accordato al violinista italiano perché Farina figura per l’appunto nella lista di strumentisti e cantori selezionati per accompagnare l’elettore durante questo suo viaggio.14 Per quell’importante avvenimento politico Schütz compose il mottetto Da pacem, Domine, in diebus nostris, per due cori e basso continuo. Dato che questo componimento prevede l’impiego di un ensemble di cinque strumenti a corda, è assai verosimile che Farina abbia preso parte alla sua prima esecuzione.15 Malgrado una situazione apparentemente favorevole, Farina non si trattenne a Dresda oltre l’estate del 1628. Tali circostanze sono l’immancabile riflesso del coinvolgimento sempre più diretto del Ducato di Sassonia nella Guerra dei Trent’anni.16 In effetti, le difficoltà d’ordine economico incontrate alla corte sassone finirono per mettere in discussione l’esistenza stessa della cappella. Molti musicisti furono obbligati ad andarsene o quantomeno a rinunciare all’idea che il loro salario venisse corrisposto regolarmente.17 Lo stesso Schütz fu costretto a reclamare più volte il proprio compenso, senza peraltro ottenere particolare soddisfazione;18 così nel 1633, stanco di questa situazione – per quanto formalmente ancora alle dipendenze di Giorgio I di Sassonia – finì per accettare l’incarico di maestro di cappella 11

12

13 14 15 16 17

18

Per l’importante avvenimento dinastico la corte dell’elettore si trasferì al gran completo nel castello di Torgau, non lontano dalla capitale de Ducato di Sassonia. Il nutrito numero d’inservienti al seguito dell’elettore comportava anche musicisti scelti della Hofkapelle, in primo luogo il direttore Schütz e il Konzertmeister Farina. Sui festeggiamenti nuziali del 1627, cfr. M. Fechner, ‘Bemerkungen zu Carlo Farina’, 120; Helen Watanabe-O’Kelly, Court Culture in Dresden. From Renaissance to Baroque (Houndmills – New York: Palgrave, 2002), 167–168. ‘Questa gagliarda e stata sonata & cantata in ecco, sopra le nozze dell’Eccellentissmo. Sigr. landgravia d’Hassia, quando fu rappresentata in musica la comedia della Dafne à Torga’. Bisogna però dire che i tentativi di correlare questa danza al libretto di Martin Opitz, l’autore del testo della Dafne, non hanno dato risultati soddisfacenti. Su questo perduto melodramma di Schütz, cfr. Wolfram Steude, ‘Heinrich Schütz und die erste deutsche Oper’, in Von Isaac bis Bach. Studien zur älteren deutschen Musikgeschichte. Festschrift Martin Just zum 60. Geburtstag, a cura di Frank Heidlberger, Wolfgang Osthoff, Reinhard Wiesend (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1991), 169–179. La Dieta si tenne dal 4 ottobre al 5 novembre del 1627. E. H. Müller, Heinrich Schütz. Gesammelte Briefe und Schriften, 85–87. Heinrich Schütz, Da pacem, Domine, in diebus nostris; ed. mod. a cura di Werner Bittinger, Neue Schütz-Ausgabe (vol. 38), SWV 465 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1971), 75–103. Sulle differenti fasi del conflitto si rimanda al documentatissimo saggio di Henri Sacchi, La Guerre de Trente Ans (Paris: L’Armattan, 1991), nuova ed. rivista e corretta, 3 voll. (Paris: L’Armattan, 2003). Le disavventure dall’arpista Elias Pinckler ben testimoniano della situazione vissuta dai musicisti attivi a Dresda. Privo di altri sostentamenti, lo sventurato strumentista si trovo così a corto di danaro che fu persino obbligato a vendere il proprio strumento, cfr. Ferruccio Civra, Heinrich Schütz (Palermo: L’Epos, 2004), 202. F. Civra, Heinrich Schütz, 235. 179

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

ad interim alla corte di Cristiano IV di Danimarca. Senso della realità o dell’opportunismo, Farina non attese così a lungo il momento di rassegnare le proprie dimissioni dalla Hofkapelle.19 Non vi sono dubbi che subito dopo aver lasciato Dresda Farina si sia diretto verso Bonn, all’altro capo del Germania, perché alla fine di gennaio del 1629 si trova sicuramente nella cittadina renana in qualità di musico del principe-vescovo di Colonia Ferdinando di Baviera.20 È possibile che le condizioni di questo suo nuovo impiego fossero maturate al tempo del già menzionato soggiorno a Mülhausen (autunno del 1627).21 Non sembra però che questa sistemazione sia stata particolarmente soddisfacente dato che Farina non si trattenne al servizio di Ferdinando di Baviera oltre la fine di marzo di quel medesimo anno.22 Se per buona parte del triennio 1629–1631 non è possibile seguire gli spostamenti del musicista, è comunque lecito immaginare che intorno alla fine del 1630 avesse già ripreso il cammino verso l’Italia; difficilmente però in direzione della natia Mantova dove doveva pur ancor avvalersi di qualche conoscenza e protezione. In ragione del contenzioso dinastico dovuto alla morte di Vincenzo II Gonzaga, la cittadina lombarda fu proprio allora rovinosamente trascinata nel conflitto che opponeva i Borbone agli Asburgo, non si trattava pertanto del migliore momento per farvi ritorno.23 Ovunque si fosse trovato in quegli anni, verso la fine del 1631 Farina ricompare a Parma come strumentista della cappella della chiesa di S. Maria della Steccata, istituzione religiosa strettamente legata alla corte dei

19 Farina venne poi sostituito da Francesco Castelli, altro violinista d’origine mantovana. A compimento di

20

21

22

23

quanto detto sulla situazione della cappella di corte, anche a quest’ultimo non venne riservato un trattamento particolarmente favorevole. Anzi, Schütz dovette intervenire più volte in suo favore affinché gli venisse versato lo stipendio pattuito, cfr. E. H. Müller, Heinrich Schütz. Gesammelte Briefe und Schriften, 105–106. Figura di primissimo ordine nel panorama politico tedesco d’inizio Seicento, il nuovo datore di lavoro di Farina apparteneva al potentissimo casato dei Wittelsbach. Nonostante la carica rivestita a Colonia, Ferdinando di Baviera risiedeva quasi sempre a Bonn. L’arcivescovo cumulava anche la dignità di principe-vescovo di Liegi e sotto la sua diretta amministrazione rientravano i vescovadi di Münster, Hildesheim e Paderborn nonché l’abbazia di Stavelot-Malmedy. Sull’azione politica di Ferdinando di Baviera, cfr. Heinrich Schneider, ‘Die Politik des Kölner Kurfürsten Ferdinand (1577–1650) im Dreissigjährigen Krieg’, in Zur Geschichte und Kunst im Erzbistum Köln. Festschrift für Wilhelm Neuss, a cura di Robert Haaß, Studien zur Kölner Kirchengeschichte 5 (1960), 117–137. Ferdinando di Baviera non aveva partecipato al raduno dei principi elettori ma era stato rappresentato da una nutrita ambasceria. Considerato che Farina avrebbe difficilmente potuto intraprendere un così lungo viaggio senza alcuna garanzia di lavoro, sembra credibile che proprio nel mese passato a Mülhausen fosse riuscito a negoziare l’incarico poi assunto a Bonn. Sul raduno degli elettori, cfr. H. Sacchi, La Guerre de Trente Ans, vol. II, 184. Riportiamo qui integralmente l’unico documento che attesta il soggiorno del violinista italiano nella cittadina tedesca: ‘Sig.r Carlo Farina ist den 20 Januarij [1]629. ankommen hat wochentlichs 2 gf [Goldgulden] Costgelts und Monatlichs 12 Rd [Richsdaler, variante renana di Reichsthaler] besoldung, darauff ist zalt den 17. Martii - 36’; Düsseldorf, Nordrhein-Westfälisches Hauptstaatsarchiv, Kurköln IV, Hofkammer, Rechnungen, Landrentmeisterei, reg. 2721 (1628–1629), 25v; cfr. Klaus Weiler, ‘Musiker am kurkölnischen Hofe des 17. Jahrhunderts’, in Festschrift Karl Gustav Fellerer zum 60. Geburtstag, a cura di Herbert Drux, Klaus Wolfgang Niemöller, Walter Thoene, Studien zur Musikgeschichte des Rheinlandes II, 52 (Köln: Arno Volk, 1962), 285–307: 290. Si fa qui riferimento alla così detta Guerra di successione del Ducato di Mantova che oppose il partito filofrancese dei Gonzaga-Nevers a quello filoimperiale dei Gonzaga di Guastalla. Priva di un sostanziale aiuto francese, Mantova fu sottoposta ad un terribile saccheggio dopo che una virulenta epidemia di peste ne aveva fiaccato ogni resistenza. Sugli avvenimenti bellici del 1628–1631, cfr. R. Quazza, La guerra. 180

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

Farnese.24 Tale collaborazione prese avvio il primo novembre ma ci volle più di un mese prima che Farina venisse ufficialmente ammesso nel novero dei salariati.25 Il compenso ammontava a ‘scudi sei di provisione al mese’,26 una cifra tutto sommato non particolarmente elevata se si considera che coincide con quanto lì percepito, pochi anni prima, da un allora esordiente Andrea Falconieri.27 Probabile riflesso di qualche malumore, la permanenza di Farina a Parma non andò al di là dell’agosto del 1632.28 Va tuttavia segnalato che il soggiorno parmense accomuna la carriera di Farina alle massime figure del violinismo italiano di primo Seicento, come Biagio Marini e Giovanni Battista Buonamente entrambi attivi alla Steccata per qualche tempo.29 Gli anni immediatamente successivi alla partenza dalla cittadina emiliana corrispondono ad un ulteriore buco nella biografia del musicista, situazione che tuttavia può essere parzialmente colmata da una lettera in cui Farina stesso afferma di essere stato al servizio del duca di Modena Francesco I d’Este per all’incirca un triennio.30 Certa è invece una sua fugace apparizione a Lucca nell’estate del 1635 quando venne ingaggiato in occasione della Festa della S. Croce;31 la generosa remunerazione di otto scudi, ben più di quanto percepito alla Steccata in un intero mese di lavoro, lascerebbe intendere che per tali circostanze Farina fosse stato assoldato in qualità di primo violino.32 Sul finire del 1636 Farina riprese nuovamente il cammino verso l’Europa del Nord giacché nei primissimi giorni dell’anno successivo si trovava a Danzica. In una supplica indirizzata al consiglio municipale della cittadina baltica il musicista italiano si proponeva per un qualche incarico senza mancare di sottolineare di essere musicista noto, come ben lo dimostrava il fatto di aver dato alle stampe le proprie musiche.33 Questo suo scritto 24 Nestore Pelicelli, ‘Musicisti in Parma nel sec. XVII. – La Cappella della Steccata – Musicisti della Cappella

corale della Steccata nel sec. XVII’, Note d’archivio per la storia musicale 9/3–4 (1932), 217–246: 234.

25 La nomina venne ratificata una volta riconosciuto che ‘nel concerto della musica dell’Oratorio della B[e-

26 27 28 29

30 31 32 33

ata] V[ergine] della Steccata fosse buona la parte del violino’; Parma, Archivio dell’Ordine costantiniano di S. Giorgio, 1631–1632, c. 235, cfr. R. Baroncini, ‘Carlo Farina’, in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani (Roma: Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana, 1968), vol. XXXXIV, 289–332: 795. R. Baroncini, ‘Carlo Farina’, 795. Dinko Fabris, Andrea Falconieri Napoletano. Un liutista-compositore del Seicento (Roma: Torre d’Orfeo, 1987), 25. R. Baroncini, ‘Carlo Farina’, 795. Marini fu assunto all’inizio del 1621 e resterà alla Steccata sino all’aprile del 1623. Gli incarichi ufficiali del musicista bresciano prevedevano anche un impiego nella cappella di corte. Su quest’aspetto della carriera di Marini, cfr. A. Bianco, Emilie Corswarem, Philippe Vendrix, ‘Gilles Hayne, Biagio Marini et le duc de Neuburg’, Studi Musicali 36/2 (2007), 363–441: 378; A. Bianco, Sara Dieci, Biagio Marini. Madrigali et Symfonie (Turnhout: Brepols, 2014), 23–24. Alla partenza di Farina da Parma si ricollega in un qualche modo il Buonamente dato che sarà proprio quest’ultimo a succedergli alla Steccata nell’estate del 1632. Su questa fase della vita di Buonamente, cfr. P. Allsop, Cavalier Giovanni Battista Buonamente, 78–79. Cfr. nota 34. Festività che cade il 4 settembre; cfr. Luigi Nerici, Storia della musica in Lucca (Lucca: Giusti, 1879; ed. facsimile, Bologna: Forni, 1969), 387. R. Baroncini, ‘Carlo Farina’, 796. ‘Ich Gegenwertig nicht unterlassen wollen Einem Erb. Hochw. Rahtt alhie zur stelle meine unterwilligste Dienste hiemit zu praesentiren, nicht zweifelnde, daß E. E. Hrl. meine geringe person, weil ich meine Compositiones auch in offentlichen Druck habe ausgehenn lassen, wurde bekandt sein’, cfr. Hermann Rauschning, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig. Von den Anfängen bis zur Auflösung der Kirchenkapellen, Quellen und Darstellungen zur Geschichte Westpreußens 15 (Danzig/Gdańsk: Rosenberg, 1931), 155. Il documento non è datato ma la risposta del consiglio comunale rimonta al 13 gennaio del 1637. 181

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

assume ai nostri occhi un’ulteriore importanza perché, oltre al fatto di testimoniare che il duca di Modena doveva essere stato il suo precedente datore di lavoro, vi si può leggere che i contatti con Schütz non dovevano essersi del tutto interrotti e che anzi fosse stato proprio quest’ultimo ad incoraggiare il violinista italiano in questa nuova avventura.34 Nei dieci anni che avevano seguito la partenza di Farina da Dresda le condizioni della cappella ducale non erano però particolarmente migliorate. Appare pertanto verosimile pensare che Schütz volesse invitare Farina alla corte danese, là dove egli stesso aveva trovato protezione sin dal 1633.35 Ritornato a Dresda alla fine del 1635 con la speranza di rimanervi il meno possibile, Schütz fu costretto a rimandare questi suoi propositi; a nulla valsero le suppliche rivolte all’elettore di Sassonia, timoroso (non a torto) di perdere per sempre il suo più celebre musicista. Se questi contatti tra i due musicisti erano effettivamente maturati nella prospettiva di un impiego alla corte danese, una volta partito dall’Italia al povero Farina non restava altro che accettare di buon grado che la tournée in Danimarca fosse rinviata a tempi migliori.36 Fortunatamente per lui, il consiglio municipale di Danzica non tardò a dare risposta alle richieste del musicista italiano; la morte del primo violino della Marienkirche, l’inglese Valentin Flood, offriva infatti a Farina l’opportunità di assicurarsi tale mansione.37 Purtroppo le attività della cappella erano all’epoca funestate dalle relazioni tutt’altro che idilliache tra il direttore Kaspar Förster il Vecchio e l’organista Paul Siefert. Queste tensioni finirono per attirare su Farina le antipatie del Kapellmeister.38 A questo clima deprecabile va aggiunto che ben presto prese vita una fortissima rivalità tra Farina stesso e il violinista Michael Meyer, altro strumentista della cappella.39 Attraverso due lettere di protesta, Farina non mancò di segnalare il suo disappunto al consiglio municipale, senza però ottenere completa soddisfazione. In sostanza gli si faceva capire chiaramente che se non era contento delle condizioni di lavoro poteva benissimo andarsene.40 Si chiudeva così, al più tardi nell’agosto del 1637, questa sua tormentatissima esperienza professionale. Non è dato sapere dove Farina si sia diretto nel periodo immediatamente successivo a questi avvenimenti, quello che è certo è che nella primavera del 1639 doveva

34

35 36

37 38

39

40

È pertanto verosimile che il musicista sia arrivato a Danzica tra la fine di dicembre del 1636 e i primissimi giorni dell’anno successivo. ‘Und kan hiemit E. E. Herl. unterdienstlich nicht verhalten, daß nachdem ich auf des Hrn. Sagitarii Curfürstl. Sächsischen Capellmeister schreiben und vocation eine weite reise aus Italien von dem Fürsten von Modena, dem ich ietzo 3 Jahr gedienet, und des Kriegswesens halber nicht lenger allda mich aufhalten wollen, durchreisende anhero nach Dantzigk gelanget und an etzliche Kauffleute anhero gerecommandiret’; H. Rauschning, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig, 155. W. Steude, ‘Zum gegenwärtigen Stand der Schütz-Biographik’, Schütz-Jahrbuch 12 (1990), 7–30: 19. La presenza di Farina a Danzica non è contraddittoria rispetto all’ipotesi di un suo viaggio in Danimarca. In questa fase della Guerra dei Trent’anni raggiungere Copenaghen via la Polonia e il Baltico era senz’altro percorso meno periglioso che attraversare l’intera Germania. H. Rauschning, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig, 155. Per Förster i rapporti tra il violinista italiano e il Siefert dovevano apparire fin troppo cordiali. In effetti sembra che questi ultimi si esibissero in pubblico, l’uno all’organo e l’altro al violino, con una certa ricorrenza e ciò bastava per fare dell’ultimo arrivato un acerrimo nemico del maestro di cappella. Forte della sua posizione, Förster aveva buon gioco ad infastidire il collega italiano in ogni frangente. Meyer non perdeva occasione di escludere Farina da impegni professionali come matrimoni, battesimi o altre cerimonie di questo genere con cui era possibile arrotondare uno stipendio non particolarmente gratificante. Le suppliche di Farina e le deliberazioni del consiglio municipale sono riportate in H. Rauschning, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig, 156–158. 182

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

sicuramente trovarsi a Vienna al servizio di Eleonora Gonzaga, moglie dell’oramai defunto Ferdinando II e matrigna del nuovo imperatore Ferdinando III. L’origine mantovana della nuova datrice di lavoro di Farina doveva aver senz’altro agevolato la posizione del musicista a corte, il salario di trenta fiorini al mese è certo prova di un trattamento più che favorevole. Detto questo, le informazioni su questa fase della carriera di Farina sono ancora una volta estremamente frammentarie. In effetti, l’unico documento che ne attesta il passaggio a Vienna è null’altro che l’atto testamentario del musicista. Redatto il 22 luglio del 1639, il documento venne aperto il 5 agosto successivo; evidentemente Farina era oramai deceduto da qualche giorno.41 La produzione musicale oggi nota di Farina è interamente riconducibile al periodo passato (1625–1628) alla corte dell’elettore Giovanni Giorgio I di Sassonia.42 I dedicatari del primo, del secondo e del terzo libro sono rispettivamente il datore di lavoro di Farina a 41 Il testamento di Farina permette tuttavia di stabilire che il musicista era stato assunto a corte perlomeno a

partire dall’aprile di quello stesso anno; Vienna, Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv, Stadtarchiv, Städtische Ämter, Alte Ziviljustiz, Testamente, 4937/17 Jahrhundert. L’atto è parzialmente trascritto in Herbert Seifert, ‘Die Musiker der beiden Kaiserinnen Eleonora Gonzaga’, in Festschrift Othmar Wessely zum 60. Geburtstag, a cura di Manfred Angerer, Eva Diettrich, Gerlinde Haas, Christa Harten, Gerald Florian Messner, Walter Pass, H. Seifert (Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1982), 527–554: 538–539. Tra i testimoni del testamento compaiono il confessore di Farina e alcuni musicisti della corte imperiale, primo fra tutti lo strumentista Giovanni Chilese. Si riporta qui di seguito il documento completo: ‘In nomine Domini Jesus Christi, Beatae, Mariae, Virginis, et Omnium Sanctis; Vienna, die 22 julij 1639. Caso, che al Nostro Signore piacesse in questa presente infermità chiamarmi a se, ho voluto disporre di come il mio havere et pretentioni che io tengo in Germania, in questa carta infrascritte, et notate, f[att]a per darli in elemosina per tante messe per l’anima mia in maggior numero che si può, et competente alla elemosina et poi per far dare sepoltura al mio corpo in S. Geronimo de Padri Zoccolanti, contentandosi loro, perciò à questo fine hò pregato le S[igno]rie vostre, cioè voi molto rev[eren]do Padre Miche[le] Zoccolante mio confessore, S[igno]r Giacomo Filippo Ferrari, S[igno]r Giovanni Chilese, et S[igno]r Balthassar Pernestain, à quali di presente in questa carta notifico come di sopra, si degnino disponere proporziona[tamen]te conforme la mia volontà sopra detta, et qua[n]to di come notate qui à basso, cioè 1° Mi trovo una cassa co[n] dentro due valige, nelle quali vi sono dentro diverse cosette, et robe — 2° Detta cassa sola, nuda, è di Biaggio Sante vicino — 3° E nelle mani del S[igno]r Gio[vanni] Chilese uno paio di calzoni listati d’argento, un colletto con maniche listate d’argento, [un] cappello nero con centiglio d’oro di [illeggibile], et un violino — 4° Tengo nel mio [illeggibile] p[er] mio uso un picciolo matarasso, con suoi cuscini, due mantelli; una spada et altri utensili di casa à comune uso — 5° Resto creditore di salario p[er] il mio servitio prestato alla Maestà dell’Imperatrice Eleonora, di quattro mesi, à trenta fiorini p[er] Mese — Ultimo di quanto ho notificato di sopra, voglio si paghino i miei debiti, et del rimanente sia disposto tutto in elemosina alli sopra detti Padri Zoccolanti conforme la mia volontà sopradetta et in fede. Io Carlo Farina confesso come di sopra. Io R[evernd]o Micheli Palma confessore affermo come di sopra. Io Giacomo Filippo Ferrari affermo come sopra. Io Gio[van Battista] Chilese affermo ut supra. Io Balthasara Pernstein affermo come di sopra’. 42 Alle cinque raccolte a stampa vanno aggiunte anche sette danze manoscritte (tutte notate con il sistema dell’intavolatura organistica), brani senza dubbio composti in occasione dei festeggiamenti nuziali di Torgau (1627). Anzi, esattamente come l’ottava gagliarda del terzo libro di Farina stesso, è possibile che una parte di queste danze debba essere ricondotta alla prima esecuzione della Dafne di Schütz (cfr. note 11 e 12). Si riportano qui di seguito i titoli di questi componimenti, si noti a tal proposito come il secondo della lista si adatti particolarmente bene all’ambientazione pastorale della sopracitata opera di Schütz: 1) Der Englenter Ballet, 2) Dreyer Pastores Ballet, 3) Gran Ballet der durchlauchtige Hochgeborer Fürstin und Frawen Sophia Eleonoren lantgräfin in Hessen zu Dorgau gehalten, 4) Galliarda, 5) Englendischer Tantz, 6) Englisch Stück, 7) Der Getreuen Mohren Ballet meinß gnedigen Fürsten und Hern L[andgraf ]: Görgen bey I[hrer] F[ürstl.] g[naden] Verlöbnus geholten zu Dresten; Darmstadt, Hessische Landes- und Hochschulbibliothek, Mus. ms. 1196. 183

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Dresda, Magdalena Sybilla di Hoenzollern, moglie dell’elettore, e il langravio Giorgio II di Hesse-Darmstadt, a suo turno marito di una delle figlie della coppia principesca; una strategia volta evidentemente a saldare il più possibile la rete di protezioni e amicizie a Dresda. Sotto questo medesimo versante, le due ultime raccolte del musicista italiano tradiscono invece le relazioni e i contatti da lui intessuti nell’area boema. Il quarto libro è infatti edito sotto la protezione dell’arcivescovo di Praga, il cardinale Ernst Adalbert von Harrach, al cui servizio Farina si era trattenuto immediatamente prima di raggiungere Dresda.43 Quanto al dedicatario della sua quinta ed ultima raccolta, si tratta del barone Johann Wilhelm von Schwanberg, altro rappresentante dell’entourage politico-amministrativo austro-boemo d’inizio Seicento. Non vi sono infatti dubbi che quest’ultimo debba essere identificato con il barone Jan Vilém ze Švamberka. A differenza di molti esponenti del suo casato, Johann Wilhelm era cattolico e pertanto non aveva partecipato alla rivolta del 1618–1620. La lealtà verso gli Asburgo gli aveva garantito di sfuggire alle misure draconiane adottate nei confronti dei partigiani di Federico V del Palatinato. Una volta ristabilito l’ordine a Praga, i vincoli con il partito pro-imperiale si erano ulteriormente saldati grazie ad un’accorta politica matrimoniale. A questo proposito si ricorda che Anna Eusebia, una delle figlie di Johann Wilhelm, convolò a nozze con Leonard Ulrich von Harrach, uno dei nipoti dell’arcivescovo di Praga.44 Anche se nella lettera dedicatoria dell’ultimo libro di Farina non sono precisati i termini del rapporto professionale contratto con il barone von Schwanberg, il musicista evoca servigi offerti in un momento in cui evidentemente doveva ancora trovarsi in Boemia. Tutte queste circostanze consentono di affermare che il soggiorno a Praga non dovesse essere stato una semplice tappa del viaggio che lo aveva condotto da Venezia in Germania. Anzi, è molto probabile che con questi suoi omaggi musicali un Farina oramai sul piede di partenza da Dresda avesse cercato di mettere a frutto vecchie conoscenze allo scopo di rinvigorire una collaborazione professionale con il cardinale Ernst Adalbert von Harrach o con il barone Johann Wilhelm von Schwanberg.45 43 Figura di primissimo piano dell’intelligentzia austro-boema del tempo, il cardinale era un grande ammira-

tore dell’arte italiana ed in particolar modo della musica. Tra i primissimi patrocinatori del melodramma in Europa centrale, è proprio a lui che si deve l’arrivo a Vienna del librettista Francesco Sbarra; sull’argomento, cfr. Massimo Catalano, ‘L’arrivo di Francesco Sbarra in Europa centrale e la mediazione del Cardinale Ernst Adalbert von Harrach’, in Theater am Hof und für das Volk. Beiträge zur vergleichenden Theater- und Kulturgeschichte. Festschrift für Otto G. Schindler, a cura di Brigitte Marschall, Maske und Kothurn 48/1–4 (2002), 203–213. 44 Sugli Švamberka, cfr. August Sedláček, ‘Ze Švamberka’, in Ottův Slovník Naučný (Praha: J. Otto, 1888– 1909), vol. 24 (1906), 848-853; M. Catalano, La Boemia e la riconquista delle coscienze. Ernst Adalbert von Harrach e la Controriforma in Europa centrale (1620–1667) (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 2005), 520. 45 Si è già osservato che la presenza di musicisti mantovani nell’area austro-boema può essere messa in relazione al matrimonio tra l’imperatore Ferdinando II e Eleonora Gonzaga. Nondimeno, per quanto riguarda Farina è forse possibile precisare ulteriormente i contorni del suo arrivo in Boemia: il padre dell’arcivescovo di Praga non era altri che Karl von Harrach. Cavaliere del Toson d’oro e Hofmeister alla corte imperiale, quest’ultimo svolse un ruolo decisivo nella politica estera degli Asburgo. Particolarmente importanti furono i rapporti intessuti nel milieu politico-diplomatico italiano e nella cerchia degli italiani a Vienna. A lui stesso spettò il prestigiosissimo incarico di accogliere in Austria il corteo della nuova Kaiserin. Gli Harrach erano strettamente imparentati con il casato dei Waldstein a cui apparteneva Albrecht Wenzel Eusebius, il potentissimo generale oggi perlopiù noto come Wallenstein. Coincidenza vuole che fosse stato proprio il di lui zio Adam von Waldstein a perorare l’assunzione di Farina a Dresda (cfr. note n. 6 e n. 7). L’idea che il musicista italiano avesse avuto modo di tessere con gli Harrach un rapporto partico184

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

Il contenuto delle cinque raccolte di Farina permette di considerare l’insieme della musica del violinista italiano come un corpus piuttosto omogeneo. Se si esclude il già citato Capriccio stravagante, dieci sonate, due canzoni, e sei brevi sinfonie, si tratta unicamente di musica di danza: trentadue gagliarde, ventiquattro pavane, diciotto correnti, tredici balletti, nove volte, tre brandi e due passamezzi. A questo nutrito gruppo di brani bisogna inoltre aggiungere cinque Arie francesi e tre Mascarate, componimenti che per taglio musicale non si distinguono poi così tanto dalle vere e proprie danze.46 Nel titolo della seconda e della quinta pubblicazione, Farina definisce i propri lavori come ‘Teutschen Täntzen’.47 In effetti, lo stile musicale di questi suoi componimenti riflette consuetudini più vicine alla tradizione strumentale centro-europea che non a quella lombardo-mantovana.48 Le raccolte di Farina si collocano così a pieno titolo in quell’amplissimo numero di antologie di musica di danza date alle stampe nell’area tedesca durante i primi trenta/quarant’anni del Seicento. Se si considera più in particolare il periodo 1601–1628, più di cento pubblicazioni di questo genere furono lanciate sul mercato editoriale con picchi di sei o sette libri per anno nel 1604, 1609, 1610 e 1617.49 Nel ventaglio decisamente ampio di autori impegnati in questo specifico campo figurano non solo strumentisti ma anche compositori di primissimo piano come Melchior Franck, Hans Leo Hassler, Valentin Haussmann, Samuel Scheidt e Johann Hermann Schein. Resta naturalmente aperto il discorso relativo all’impiego di questo vastissimo repertorio.50 In ragione di un suo rapido consumo, la musica di danza funzionale non necessitava di particolari attenzioni. Ogni buon strumentista e ballerino del tempo era sicuramente in grado di adattare in funzione delle necessità e dei mezzi a disposizione un comune patrimonio di melodie. Naturalmente la linea di demarcazione tra la musica di danza ‘da ballo’ e ‘da camera’ era all’epoca piuttosto ambigua. D’altra parte un brano si presta, oggi come allora, ad essere utilizzato nei più diversi ambiti semplicemente in base al modo stesso di eseguirlo. Separare in compartimenti stagni questi aspetti della musica di danza può pertanto offrire facilmente il fianco alla critica.51 Detto questo le danze tedesche di primo Seicento, in particolar modo le pavane e le gagliarde, appaiono nel loro insieme troppo irregolari dal punto di vista metrico per poter essere pensate per un uso squisitamente coreutico. La struttura fugata della pavana n. 7 del celebre Banchetto musicale di Johann Hermann Schein52 o ancor più una di Matthias Mercker

46 47 48

49

50 51 52

larmente saldo sembra pertanto rafforzarsi sempre di più. Sul ruolo e la posizione dagli Harrach a Vienna e a Praga, cfr. M. Catalano, La Boemia e la riconquista delle coscienze, 10–14. Ad eccezione di due Passamezzi a tre (Canto primo, Canto secondo e Basso), tutti i brani in stile di danza presentano una scrittura a quattro parti sempre nelle tessiture di soprano, alto, tenore e basso. Si tratta dei due libri in cui è adottata la lingua tedesca; il primo e il terzo ricorrono invece all’italiano, il quarto all’italiano e al latino. L’adesione a modelli ‘nordici’ appare evidente anche dal raffronto con altri musicisti d’origine italiana attivi nell’area tedesca in quei medesimi anni. Si pensi – per restare confinati al contesto violinistico del tempo – ai già menzionati Giovanni Battista Buonamente e Biagio Marini. Una lista abbastanza completa di queste raccolte si trova in Ernst Meyer, Die mehrstimmige Spielmusik des 17. Jahrhunderts in Nord- und Mitteleuropa. Mit einem Verzeichnis der deutschen Kammer- und Orchestermusikwerke des 17. Jahrhunderts (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1934), 176–258. Si tenga inoltre presente che alle già numerose stampe andrebbero aggiunte anche le fonti manoscritte. Si tratta di centinaia di brani dato che mediamente ogni raccolta ne contempla almeno una ventina. Massimo Privitera, Arcangelo Corelli (Palermo: L’Epos, 2000), 142. Johann Hermann Schein, Banchetto musicale (Leipzig: Abraham Lamberg und Caspar Kloseman, 1617). 185

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

dalla seconda antologia di Zacharias Füllsack e Christian Hildebrand53 sono un esemplare campione di questa situazione. Allo stesso tempo, un idioma strumentale caratterizzato da un non trascurabile livello tecnico-esecutivo mal si presta ad accompagnare veri e propri movimenti di danza, come accade ad esempio in un balletto del compositore Andreas Hammerschmidt.54 Sostanzialmente concepito alla maniera di un set of variations in cui i due strumenti acuti si inseguono in sempre più sofisticate diminuzioni questo brano non si distingue poi molto dalle sonate-variazione di autori italiani dell’epoca, basti qui ricordare quelle di Salomone Rossi55 o le ancora più tardive Arie strumentali di Marco Uccellini.56 Non diversamente da quella dei colleghi tedeschi, la musica di Farina non manca di esempi (in particolar modo nelle pavane) in cui il musicista si lascia andare ad una scrittura che può rendere effettivamente giustizia alle doti violinistiche dell’esecutore: figurazioni in arpeggio, ampli intervalli, un’estensione fino al Re5, rapidi passaggi di semicroma e biscroma sono l’evidente espressione di un linguaggio strumentale che quanto a difficoltà può rivaleggiare con il coevo repertorio sonatistico (cfr. esempi n. 1a–1b). Interessante può essere in tal senso il confronto con le sonate di Farina stesso, in particolare quelle per strumento solo con accompagnamento di sostegno armonico. Pur adottando qui una scrittura all’avanguardia e di chiara impronta violinistica (si tratta dei primissimi casi in cui si fa ampio ricorso a passaggi con doppie corde),57 questi suoi lavori risultano decisamente meno ambiziosi sul piano dell’esplorazione del registro acuto dello strumento.58 Nelle danze di Farina la voce maggiormente sollecitata da una scrittura strumentale, tale da imporre qualche complicazione tecnico-esecutiva, è ovviamente quella più acuta, si possono tuttavia segnalare anche casi in cui la parte di basso non sfigura affatto rispetto a quella del violino (cfr. esempio n. 5). Un siffatto approccio strumentale – non poi così lontano dal nuovo idioma concertato – tende inevitabilmente a rimettere in discussione alcuni parametri musicali come quello della velocità esecutiva, aspetto che è poi uno degli elementi distintivi tra una danza e l’altra. Il caso più evidente di questi mutamenti è rappresentato dalla gagliarda, danza che in questo contesto musicale tende a perdere sempre più la propria verve per divenire, come la pavana, genere grave e affettuoso. A questo proposito il compositore tedesco Johann Vierdanck afferma che ‘die Pavanen, und sonderlich die Gagliarden, einen gantz langsamen und von Correnten Arth weit unterschieden Tact, (wie erfahrenen Instrumen53

54 55

56 57 58

Il brano (coppia pavana-gagliarda n. 9) è di fatto molto prossimo allo stile del ricercare; Zacharias Füllsack, Christian Hildebrand, Ander Theil. Außerlesener lieblicher Paduanen und auch so viel Galliarden (Hamburg: eredi di Philipp von Ohr, 1609). Andreas Hammerschmidt, Ander Theil Newer Paduanen, Canzonen, Galliarden, Balleten, Mascharaden, Françoischen Arien, Courenten und Sarabanden, mit 5. und 3. Stimmen (Freiberg: Georg Beuther, 1639). Salomone Rossi, Il terzo libro de varie sonate, sinfonie, gagliarde, brandi e corrente, per sonar due viole da braccio & un chitarrone (Venezia: appresso Alessandro Vincenti, 1623) (terza edizione di una perduta stampa del 1613); S. Rossi, Il quarto libro de varie sonate, sinfonie, gagliarde, brandi e corrente, per sonar due violini et un chittarrone (Venezia: appresso Alessandro Vincenti, 1622). Marco Uccellini, Sonate, arie, et correnti (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1642); M. Uccellini, Sonate, correnti, et arie (Venezia: Alessandro Vincenti, 1645). Si vedano in particolare la sonata La Franziosina (misure 187–216) e la sonata La Desperata (misure 78–99), rispettivamente dal primo e dal quinto libro. Le sonate di Farina prevedono effettivamente smanicamenti meno arditi, peraltro quasi sempre compensati da un ritorno ‘morbido’ in prima posizione mediante l’impiego della corda vuota o perché in concomitanza di pause. 186

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

tisten bekant) erfordern thuen ohne welche sie ihren gebührlichen effect nicht erreichen werden’.59 Questa tendenza a ripensare la gagliarda, già riscontrabile all’inizio del secolo nei lavori di Jacobus Schultz e di Matthäus Maerker,60 diviene tutto sommato abbastanza usuale all’epoca delle pubblicazioni di Farina. Così, delle trentadue gagliarde del musicista italiano la maggior parte risponde a questo particolare stile; si prenda a titolo di esempio la quinta gagliarda del suo ultimo libro, brano ampiamente giocato sul dialogo tra gli strumenti acuti e quelli gravi.61 Non sorprende pertanto che già all’epoca alcuni autori avvertano la necessità di presentare i propri componimenti in una nuova dimensione musicale. È il caso di Georg Engelmann che ricorre alla locuzione ‘concerto’ in apertura delle sue pubblicazioni quasi a voler prendere le distanze da espressioni più tradizionalmente impiegate nella musica di danza funzionale: ‘Fasciculus quinque vocum concentuum, cujusmodi paduanas & galliardas vulgo vocare solent’.62 I processi di stilizzazione di questo repertorio risultano particolarmente evidenti nel momento in cui persino i principi ritmico-metrici soggiacenti ad ogni danza non rappresentano più necessariamente un obbligo. Ad esempio, una danza di metro binario come la pavana può prevedere più o meno estese sezioni ternarie. Situazioni di questo genere appaiono nelle Neue funffstimmige Paduane und Galliarde (1604) di Valentin Haussmann63 o nella prima raccolta (1616) dell’appena citato Georg Engelmann.64 Dal canto suo Johann Hermann Schein (1617)65 offre un ventaglio ancora più rimarcabile di pavana inframezzando a breve distanza passaggi in metro binario e ternario in maniera non dissimile da un precedente lavoro 59 Johann Vierdanck, Erster Theil, newer Pavanen, Galliarden, Balletten und Correnten, mit zwey violinen und

60 61

62

63 64 65

einem violon, nebenst dem basso continuo (Greifswald: Jakob Jeger, 1637), ristampa Rostock: Johann Hallervord (Johann Richel), 1641. Nell’affermazione del musicista tedesco si può quasi leggere una nota polemica nei confronti di chi continui ad eseguire le gagliarde con tempi veloci. La dicotomia tra pratica strumentale e teoria musicale è ben documentata da Praetorius quando classifica la gagliarda tra le danze rapide o, più in generale, tra i componimenti che necessitano tempi esecutivi vivaci: ‘Galliarda Italicé Gagliarda. est strenuitas, fortitudo, vigor, in Frantzösischer Sprach Gailliard oder Gaillardise, und heist eine gerade Geschwindigzeit’ e ‘Sesquialtera verò in madrigalibus, præsertim autem in Galliardis, Courrantis, Voltis & aliis id generis Cantionibus, in quibus celeriori Tactu necessariò opus est, retineatur’, Michael Praetorius, Syntagma musicum [...] tomus tertius (Wolfenbüttel: Elias Holwein, 1619), 26, 53. Z. Füllsack, C. Hildebrand, Außerlesener Paduanen und Galliarden. Erster Theil (Hamburg: Philipp von Ohr, 1607), rispettivamente coppia pavana-gagliarda n. 8 e n. 12. Talune gagliarde di carattere più spigliato sembrano invece maggiormente tradire l’origine mantovana di Farina, è il caso della n. 1 e n. 7 dal terzo libro. Inevitabile appare allora il raffronto con le musiche del concittadino Salomone Rossi, ed in particolar modo con le gagliarde (per quanto si tratti qui di una scrittura a tre o a cinque parti) delle raccolte del 1607 e del 1608; S. Rossi, Il primo libro delle sinfonie et gagliarde a tre, quatro, & a cinque voci (Venezia: Ricciardo Amadino, 1607); S. Rossi, Il secondo libro delle sinfonie è gagliarde à tre voci (Venezia: Ricciardo Amadino, 1608). Georg Engelmann, Fasciculus quinque vocum concentuum, cujusmodi Paduanas & Galliardas vulgo vocare solent (Leipzig: Thomas Schürers Erben (Lorenz Kober), 1616). Un’identica situazione si presenta nelle sue due successive pubblicazioni: G. Engelmann, Fasciculus sive missus secundus quinque vocum concentuum, cujusmodi Paduanas & Galliardas vulgo vocant (Leipzig: Thomas Schürers Erben (Lorenz Kober), 1617); G. Engelmann, Fasciculus [...] quinque vocum concentuum, cujusmodi Paduanas & Galliardas vulgo vocare solent (Leipzig: Thomas Schürers Erben (Johann Glück), 1622). Valentin Haussmann, Neue fünffstimmige Paduane und Galliarde, auff Instrumenten fürnemlich auff Fiolen lieblich zugebrauchen (Nürnberg: Paul Kauffmann, 1604), pavana n. 13. G. Engelmann, Fasciculus quinque vocum concentuum, brano n. 19, ‘Paduana Moroscopoh’. J. H. Schein, Banchetto musicale, pavana della suite n. 18. 187

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

del violinista inglese William Brade (1614).66 Quando Praetorius afferma che si possono riscontrare ‘exempla sextuplae in pavanis anglicis’ sembra suggerire che tali procedimenti fossero stati introdotti in Germania da musicisti originari dell’Inghilterra (come l’appena citato Brade).67 Anche se le affermazioni del musicografico tedesco devono talvolta essere prese con cautela, non vi è dubbio che gli strumentisti d’oltre Manica abbiano svolto un ruolo determinate in questo particolare contesto strumentale, tanto che è possibile parlare di repertorio di danza anglo-tedesco piuttosto che tedesco tout court.68 Oltre a virtuosi del calibro di William Brade o di Thomas Simpson, lunga è in effetti la lista di strumentisti inglesi attivi nella Germania centro-settentrionale durante i primi cinquant’anni del XVII secolo: William Benthon, John Dixon, Robert Foissen, Valentin Flood, Bendict Greepe, Franciscus Hedgemann, Jack Jordan, Thomas Mons, David et John Morell, John Myners, Charles O’Reilly, Walter Rowe, Henry Sandam, John Stanleys, Maurice Webster e molti altri ancora.69 In buona parte costituita da pavane di autori inglesi alle quali dei musicisti tedeschi avevano aggiunto loro gagliarde, la prima antologia di danze di Zacharias Füllsack e di Christian Hildebrand è un eccellente esempio di questa sinergia tra la tradizione strumentale britannica e quella più squisitamente continentale.70 Il caso più significativo di interdipendenza tra la consort music inglese propriamente detta e la musica di danza tedesca è senza dubbio offerto, tanto per l’importanza dell’autore tanto per la qualità musicale, dalla celebre raccolta di John Dowland Lachrimae, or Seaven Teares Figured in Seaven Passionate Pavans;71 al punto che il genere stesso de la pavana ‘affettuosa’, senz’altro la più alta espressione del repertorio di danza anglo-tedesco, è in un qualche modo legato alla figura del liutista inglese. Senza voler entrare nel dettaglio di questa sua raccolta, ed in particolare modo nel merito di tutti gli aspetti che la riconducono ai temi della melancolia così cari alla società inglese del tempo, Lachrimae conobbe una larghissima diffusione sul continente. Innumerevoli sono infatti i brani elaborati a partire dallo struggente motivo sui cui si articolano le sette ‘dolorose’ pavane di Dowland.72 Verso la metà del xvii secolo questa melodia doveva ancora riscuotere una certa popolarità visto 66 Si ricorda che Brade era stato attivo in Germania tra Amburgo, Berlino, Bückenburg, Gottorf e Halle non-

67 68

69

70

71 72

ché alla corte del re di Danimarca. In questo suo medesimo libro è peraltro contenuta una gagliarda la cui ultima sezione è interamente in metro binario; William Brade, Newe außerlesene Paduanen und Galliarden mit 6. Stimmen, so zuvor niemals in Druck kommen, auff allen Musicalischen Instrumenten und insonderheit auff Fiolen lieblich zu gebrauchen (Hamburg: Michael Hering (Heinrich Carstens), 1614), rispettivamente gagliarda n. 7 e pavana n. 11. Per la vita e l’opera del musicista inglese si rimanda a Calvin Huber, The Life and Music of William Brade, 2 voll. (Ph.D. Diss., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1965). M. Praetorius, Syntagma musicum [...] tomus tertius, capitolo De sextupla, seu tactu trochaico diminuto, 73. L’argomento è esaustivamente trattato in Werner Braun, Britannia abundans. Deutsch-englische Musikbeziehungen zur Shakespearezeit (Tutzing: Schneider, 1977); Peter Holman, Four and Twenty Fiddlers: the Violin at the English Court, 1540–1690 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 144–172. W. Braun, Britannia abundans, 46–47; P. Holman, Four and Twenty Fiddlers, 161–162; E. Meyer, Early English Chamber Music (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1946), nuova ed. a cura di Diana Poulton (Boston: Marion Boyars, 1982), 56. Tra i compositori d’origine inglese si segnalano W. Brade, J. Dowland, E. Johnson, B. Greepe, A. Holborne, T. Mons e P. Philips, tra quelli tedeschi M. Borchgrevinck, J. Harding, J. Sommer e J. Schultz; Z. Füllsack, C. Hildebrand, Außerlesener Paduanen und Galliarden. Erster Theil. John Dowland, Lachrimae (London: John Windet, s.d. [1604]). Vastissima la bibliografia dedicata a questo ciclo di pavane. Si rimanda pertanto a un relativamente recente e ben articolato saggio di P. Holman, Dowland: Lachrimae (1604) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999). 188

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

che Johan Schop, tra le massime figure della scuola violinistica nordeuropea del tempo, la impiega in un ciclo di sette variazioni (proprio come Dowland).73 Farina non si sottrae certo a queste consuetudini perché presenta il tema di Lachrimae in ben tre delle sue pavane.74 Non è poi così importante sapere se si tratta di citazioni dirette di Dowland o il frutto dell’emulazione di una delle tante parafrasi della musica del compositore inglese, resta però vero che Farina adotta non solo il soggetto motivico ma anche il movimento per grado congiunto della parte di basso della sesta pavana-variazione di Dowland: Lachrimae amantis (cfr. esempi n. 2a–2b). La pavana ‘lamento’, così tipica dello stile strumentale anglo-tedesco, doveva aver particolarmente sedotto Farina perché quelle da lui composte tradiscono, nel loro insieme, un approccio del tutto similare.75 Insisteremo soprattutto su questa danza perché è proprio qui che Farina sfoggia tutto il suo savoir-faire e, in ogni caso, si tratta dei componimenti su cui sostanzialmente si reggono le sue cinque pubblicazioni. Da un punto di vista generale si può sottolineare l’utilizzo di tonalità all’epoca relativamente poco usuali come quella di mi minore, si guardi ad esempio la ‘scura’ seconda pavana del quarto libro, oppure la tendenza ad appropriarsi di topoi del repertorio vocale più alla moda, basti qui citare il movimento cromatico discendente del basso posto ad apertura della prima pavana del libro del 1626. Altrettanto significativa è la propensione ad impiegare su larga scala dissonanze brusche tanto da farne quasi una caratteristica distintiva del suo stile strumentale (che è invero anche un tratto stilistico tipico della consort music inglese), come accade in conclusione del brano testé citato.76 Così, malgrado gli schemi imposti dalle strutture di danza, Farina costruisce percorsi sonori del tutto inattesi per l’ascoltatore. La prima sezione della quarta pavana della sua seconda raccolta può essere presa a modello della qualità musicale raggiunta dal violinista italiano (cfr. esempio n. 3). La struttura tonale (Sol m. – Sib M – Sol m.) e la divisione in frasi regolari possono apparire tutto sommato abbastanza convenzionali. Nondimeno, il discorso è impreziosito da una serie di procedimenti retoricoaffettivi certamente ben calcolati: salita con forzato movimento parallelo delle voci (misure 5–8), cadenza con cromatismo (misura 10), cadenza evitata (diretta verso il Re, misure 73 Il titolo del brano è emblematicamente Lachrime Pavaen; Paulus Matthysz, ’T Uitnement Kabinet, Eer-

ste deel (Amsterdam: autore, s.d. [1646], ristampa c. 1655). Attivo in vari centri tedeschi, Schop operò in particolar modo tra Amburgo e Copenaghen, là dove venne sicuramente in contatto con musicisti d’origine inglese. 74 Si vedano la Pavana prima (II refrain) del secondo libro e la Pavana prima (I e III refrain) e la Pavana tertia (II e III refrain) dalla quarta raccolta. 75 Si ricorda che nel momento in cui Farina dava alle stampe le proprie musiche, la pavana era praticamente scomparsa dal panorama musicale italiano. Una Pavaniglia dal celebre Scolaro del milanese Gasparo Zanetti, rappresenta un caso del tutto eccezionale; Gasparo Zanetti, Il scolaro (Milano: Carlo Camagno, 1645). Una raccolta oggi perduta (1603) di Riccardo Rognoni, altro autore di area milanese, può essere considerata come l’ultima antologia strumentale italiana in cui le pavane dovevano occupare, se non la parte dominante, almeno un qualche spazio. L’informazione è fornita verso la fine del Seicento dall’erudito Filippo Picinelli in occasione di un elogio del musicista lombardo: ‘Contribuisca pure la mia penna le dovute lodi à Riccardo Rognone, che eccellente sonatore di violino, ed altri strumenti di corda, e da fiato, riuscì un Orfeo de i suoi tempi’, segue poi una succinta lista delle raccolte del Rognoni che si conclude con la citazione del libro in questione: ‘Pavane, e balli con 2. Canzoni, e diverse sorti di brandi per suonare à 4. e 5. Milano 1603’; Filippo Picinelli, Ateneo dei letterati milanesi (Milano: Francesco Vigone, 1670), 482. 76 Nel movimentato finale del Basso, il passaggio La-Re-Do-Si bemolle (misura 55) si scontra con un tenuto Do diesis (sensibile di Re) della parte di alto, amplificando oltremodo la tensione proprio in prossimità dell’ultima cadenza. 189

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

14–15), arricchimento-complicazione della cadenza finale (con grado congiunto al basso) mediante l’aggiunta del Mi (battere delle misure 22 e 23). Rimarcabile l’effetto offerto dal saltus duriusculus – con tanto d’intervallo d’ottava diminuita – alla ventesima battuta (C), espediente retorico che di fatto chiude la prima sezione del brano. L’eleganza del gesto musicale appare evidente sin dalle misure iniziali quando la parte di Canto presenta due cellule motiviche a specchio (A1 e A2), seguite poi dalla ripetizione della prima idea musicale seppur timidamente ornamentata (A3). Anche se in questa pavana sono praticamente assenti le volatine e i passaggi diminuiti, il linguaggio è tipicamente violinistico: dopo il salto di ottava (misura 5) la prima voce copre in brevissimo spazio un intervallo di tredicesima a partire dal risonante Re vuoto dello strumento, per poi ridiscendere dolcemente di una sesta (B + B1). La coerenza musicale della pavana è assicurata non solo dal segmento B1, riproposto con qualche variante tra la dodicesima e la tredicesima battuta ma, e ancor di più, dal movimento cromatico Fa-Mi-Mi bemolle-Re (D) poi ripreso e amplificato (misure 52–54 e 57–59) nella terza e conclusiva sezione della pavana (fuori esempio). Se si volesse guardare ancora più dall’alto il brano, a questa prima sezione fa eco il secondo ritornello, con il suo carattere divagante, seguito poi dal terzo refrain il cui compito principale è quello di ripristinare l’ordine tonale, non senza però aver ostacolato questo percorso (dapprima con una cadenza perfetta in Si bemolle, poi con una cadenza sospesa sul Fa). La tonalità di Sol m. si riafferma infatti solo nelle ultimissime misure in coincidenza di una specie di pedale affidato alla parte del violino la cui progressiva diminuzione dei valori contribuisce, quasi come una preghiera, a rendere ancora più sofferto il finale della pavana. Non sorprende che brani di questo genere potessero trovare spazio anche in libri di musica sacra come accade ad esempio in una raccolta di mottetti di Paul Luetkeman (1605)77 e in maniera ancora più evidente con le Intraden di Michael Altenburg (1620), pubblicazione quest’ultima esplicitamente riservata ad un uso liturgico.78 Anche se le antologie di Farina non rientrano in questa casistica, due inventari della metà del XVII secolo testimoniano che tre delle sue raccolte avevano fatto parte del repertorio musicale della Chiesa evangelica di Bratislava.79 Queste due liste, redatte rispettivamente nel 1651 e nel 1657 (oramai a più di dieci anni dalla morte del musicista italiano) sono tutto quello che resta oggi di una pratica liturgico-musicale improntata alle tendenze più moderne. Il repertorio strumentale è ben rappresentato da generi che sembrano meglio adattarsi a un contesto religioso come le ‘Sonate e Canzone’ di Giovanni Battista Buonamente.80 77 Paul Luetkeman, Motetae (Patria rara tibi lucent iam lumina [a 6 v]; Die Allmacht Gottes jeder frist [a 5 v];

Paduan [a 6 v]; Wolauff von hinnen wir fahren [a 5 v.] aliquot VI. & V. vocum [...], (s.l [Stettin]: Martin Müller, s.d. [1605]). 78 Michael Altenburg, Erster Theil. Newer lieblicher und zierlicher Intraden, mit sechs Stimmen. Welche zu förderst auff Geigen Lauten Instrumenten und Orgelwerck gerichtet sind, darein zugleich eine Choralstimm aus dem Gesangbuch [...] kan mit gesungen werden (Erfurt: Johann Röhbock, 1620). 79 ‘Libri Tres di Pavana Gagli[arde] Courente exc. di Carolo Farina’ e ‘Pavane[n] von Carlo Farina und Gagli[arden]’, cfr. Jana Kalinayová, Hudobné inventáre a repertoár viachlasnej hudby na Slovensku v 16.–17. storoči (Bratislava: Slovenské národné múzeum – Hudobné múzeum, 1994), ed. tedesca a cura di Karol Tauber, Musikinventare und das Repertoire der Mehrstimmigen Musik in der Slowakei im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert (Bratislava: Slowakisches Nationalmuseum–Musikmuseum, 1995), 49, 58. 80 J. Kalinayová, Hudobné inventáre, p. 58. Le musiche di Buonamente menzionate in quei due medesimi elenchi dovrebbero corrispondere alla sesta raccolta del suo catalogo a stampa; Giovanni Battista Buonamente, Sonate, et canzoni a due, tre, quattro, cinque, et a sei voci [...] libro sesto (Venezia: appresso Alessandro Vincenti, 1636). 190

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

Ciò nonostante il caso di Farina non è del tutto isolato, l’impiego di musica di danza nella Chiesa evangelica di Bratislava viene infatti confermato da una raccolta del musicista tedesco Samuel Michael: ‘Paduanen, Balletten etc. Sam. Michaelis’.81 L’esecuzione di brani di derivazione coreutica in un contesto liturgico o devozionale non doveva pertanto essere percepita all’epoca come qualche cosa di straordinario. Del resto, gli appelli papali a bandire la musica di danza in chiesa suggerisce che, a dispetto dei vari divieti, tale pratica fosse generalizzata anche a Sud delle Alpi.82 Un ulteriore trait d’union tra il repertorio di danza inglese e tedesco può essere individuato nell’adozione di modelli derivati dal genere dell’In nomine. Com’è noto, quest’ultimo è un’elaborazione strumentale del passaggio In nomine Domini dalla messa Gloria tibi Trinitas di John Taverner, sezione del componimento da cui viene per l’appunto estrapolata la melodia poi impiegata a guisa di cantus firmus; una tradizione musicale destinata ad avere successo tra i compositori inglesi fino all’epoca di Henry Purcell. Verso la fine del Cinquecento si possono tuttavia annoverare già delle significative varianti rispetto al vero e proprio In nomine; in particolar modo poi nel contesto specifico della musica di danza, si ricorda qui un ‘In Nomine Pavin’ dal First Booke of Consort Lesson di Thomas Morley (1599).83 Una pavana dell’inglese Edward Johnson e una gagliarda del musicista tedesco Johann Sommer, entrambe edite ad Amburgo nel 1607, sono un bell’esempio di musica di danza ‘continentale’ prossima allo stile dell’In nomine.84 Qualche anno prima, a riprova che non si trattava certo di casi eccezionali, Valentin Haussmann aveva inserito nelle sue Neue Intrade – raccolta nella quale le pavane e le gagliarde sono emblematicamente definite ‘all’inglese’ – una pavana il cui terzo refrain è interamente pensato su un motivo a valori di semibreve derivato da un analogo lavoro dell’inglese Peter Philips.85 Inoltre, delle ventuno pavane contenute nel Banchetto musicale di Johann Hermann Schein tre sono integralmente o parzialmente costruite su cantus firmus.86 Anche se Farina non impiega procedimenti così sofisticati, la terza pavana del suo quarto libro è in gran parte organizzata su un breve motivo di tre note (La-Si-Re) alternato tra le parti di Canto e di Basso (cfr. esempio n. 4). Una scrittura del tutto simile si riscontra anche nella quinta pavana della sua terza raccolta; in questo caso il motivo appare ancora più singolare perché è desunto da una sequenza di appena due note: Do-Re per la voce acuta e La-Sol per quella grave (cfr. esempio n. 5). La reiterazione, quasi martellante, di passaggi di questo genere aveva non di rado delle vere e proprie finalità mimetico-descrittive. Più particolarmente si 81

82 83

84

85 86

J. Kalinayová, Hudobné inventáre, 49. Si tratta verosimilmente dell’antologia di danza edita dal musicista tedesco nel 1627; Samuel Michael, Neue Paduanen, Intraden, Balletten, Alemanden, Auffzüge, Galliarden, Volten, Couranten und Schertzi, mit 5. 4. und 3. Stimmen (Leipzig: Michael Waßmann, 1627). P. Allsop, The Italian ‘Trio’ Sonata: from its Origins until Corelli (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), 53. Il brano in questione è attribuibile al compositore Nicholas Strogers; Thomas Morley, First Booke of Consort Lesson (London: William Barley, 1599). L’argomento è esaustivamente trattato in E. Meyer, Early English Chamber Music, in particolar modo nel III e IV capitolo. Z. Füllsack, C. Hildebrand, Außerlesener Paduanen und Galliarden. Erster Theil. Il cantus firmus su cui si articolano queste danze è derivato dal popolare motivo d’origine inglese Roland. Questo stesso soggetto è impiegato da Haussmann in una sua pavana e nella la Fuga secunda. 4. vocum dalla seconda raccolta del 1604; V. Haussmann, Neue fünffstimmige Paduane und Galliarde. Sull’argomento, cfr. W. Braun, Britannia abundans, 219–221. V. Haussmann, Neue Intrade, mit sechs und fünff Stimmen (Nürnberg: Paul Kauffmann, 1604), pavana n. 10, cfr. P. Holman, Four and Twenty Fiddlers, 163. J. H. Schein, Banchetto musicale, pavane n. 7, n. 11 e n. 14. 191

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

trattava di evocare suoni di carillons cittadini,87 si ricorda qui a titolo di esempio la celebre Sonnerie de Sainte-Geneviève du Mont de Paris di Marin Marais.88 Sempre al suono delle campane, in questo caso ‘a morto’, vanno invece ricondotte alcune déplorations strumentali come l’altrettanto famoso Tombeau de Mr. de Blancrocher di Louis Couperin.89 Alla fine del Seicento, Johann Heinrich Schmelzer utilizza analoghi procedimenti nella sezione la Campanella di una serenata per ensemble di corde.90 È sintomatico che il passaggio in questione incastoni a mo’ di ritornello un vero e proprio Lamento strumentale.91 Nonostante si debba scorgere in quest’ultimo esempio un chiaro intento ironico dato che si trattava di compiangere la ‘dipartita’ del Carnevale, ciò non cambia nella sostanza il significato che si deve accordare a casi di questo genere.92 Per quanto sia difficile da dimostrare, è tutto sommato abbastanza plausibile che il tintinnio di note di queste due ultime pavane di Farina debba essere ricondotto proprio a questo singolare filone strumentale. È altresì vero che i ritmi irregolari e il disegno melodico dei passaggi maggiormente diminuiti di queste stesse pavane ricordano stilemi tipici del folklore musicale dell’Europa dell’Est (si veda la misura 44 dell’esempio n. 4). Numerose sono peraltro le raccolte tedesche del tempo che contemplano delle ‘Polnische Täntzen’. Si possono citare in tal senso autori come Valentin Haussmann, Johannes Christoph Demantius, Johann Christenius e Georg Vintz.93 In confronto con quelle inglesi si può tranquillamente affermare che le danze polacche si caratterizzavano per una maggiore semplicità, non a caso nella prefazione del suo Venusgarten (1602) Haussmann indica che le Triple possono essere improvvisate alla maniera polacca.94 Se si esclude quanto evocato a proposito delle due sopracitate pavane di Farina, 87 L’argomento è trattato in Bertrand Porot, ‘Ville réelle, ville imaginée dans les pièces de clavecin de François

88 89 90 91 92 93

94

Couperin’, in Mélodies urbaines. La musique dans les villes d’Europe (XVIe – XIXe siècles), a cura di Laure Gauthier, Mélanie Traversier (Paris: PUPS, 2008), 255–283. Marin Marais, La Gamme et autres morceaux de symphonie pour violon, la viole et le clavecin (Paris: autore, 1723). Louis Couperin, Tombeau de Mr. de Blancrocher; Parigi, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Manoscritto Bauyn de Bersan (dopo il 1658), Rés. Vm7 674, voll. II, f. 49r–49v. Johann Heinrich Schmelzer, Serenata con altre arie; Kroměřiz, Arcibiskupský Archiv, A 760. Il componimento alterna i seguenti movimenti: Serenata, Erlicino, Adagio, Allegro, Ciaccona, Campanella, Lamento, [Campanella ut supra e finisce]. Sulla serenata di Schmelzer, cfr. Charles E. Brewer, The Instrumental Music of Schmeltzer, Biber, Muffat and their Contemporaries (Burlington: Ashgate, 2011), 86–87. V. Haussmann, Venusgarten, Darinnen Hundert Ausserlesene gantz Liebliche mehrerntheils Polnische Täntze, unter welche ersten fünfftzige feine höfliche Amorosische Texte (Nürnberg: Paul Kauffmann, 1602); V. Haussmann, Rest von Polnischen und andern Täntzen, nach art, wie im Venusgarten zu finden (Nürnberg: Paul Kauffmann, 1603); Johannes Christoph Demantius, Conviviorum Deliciae. Das ist: Neue Liebliche Intraden und Aufzüge, neben künstlichen Galliarden, und frölichen polnischen Täntzen (Nürnberg: David Kauffmann (Balthasar Scherff), 1608); Johann Christenius, Omnigeni. Mancherley Manier, neuer weltlicher Lieder, Paduanen, Intraden, teutscher und polnischer Täntze (Erfurt: Johann Birckner, 1619); J. Christenius, Gülden Venus Pfeil. In welchem zu befinden, neue weltliche Lieder, teutsche und polnische Täntze (Leipzig: Elias Rehefeld und Johann Grosse (Friedrich Lanckisch), 1619); Georg Vintz, Intraden, Couranten, Galliarden, Balletten, Alamanden, und etliche Täntze auff Polnische Arth. (s.l. [Erfurt]: Johann Birckner (Friedrich Melchior Dedekind), 1630). V. Haussmann, Venusgarten; sull’argomento, cfr. E. Meyer, ‘Concerted Instrumental Music’, in The New Oxford History of Music, vol. IV, The Age of Humanism (1540–1630), a cura di Gerald Abraham (Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press, 1968), 550–601 (ed. italiana a cura di Francesco Bussi, ‘La musica strumentale “concertata”’, in L’età del Rinascimento 1540–1630 (Milano: Feltrinelli, 1978), terza ed., vol. IV (II), 640–642). 192

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

non sembra però che il musicista italiano avesse avuto un particolare interesse per questo stile di danza. Che nel corso della vita si fosse dovuto confrontare con questa tradizione strumentale è tuttavia confermato dalle sue stesse parole, per quanto siamo ormai in un momento successivo alla data di edizione delle sue raccolte.95 Quest’interessantissima contaminazione di stili che accomuna l’insieme del repertorio strumentale tedesco di primo Seicento è ulteriormente impreziosita dalla presenza di elementi indiscutibilmente riferibili alla musica di danza francese. Evidenze di questo tipo sono confortate sin dai titoli delle raccolte, come accade ad esempio in una del tedesco Valerius Otto (1611)96 o in una dell’inglese William Brade (1621).97 Le cinque Arie francesi di Farina testimoniano, perlomeno sul versante terminologico, un qualche riscontro tra la produzione del violinista italiano e gli stili musicali transalpini; più difficile è naturalmente voler individuare in questi medesimi brani tratti idiomatici necessariamente riconducibili a delle precise pratiche strumentali. Comunque si voglia vedere la cosa, le Arie francesi di Farina si caratterizzano per l’impiego di strutture a refrain e profili ritmico-melodici tipici della musica di derivazione coreutica. Naturalmente, tra le tante antologie tedesche debitrici dello stile di danza francese emerge Terpsichore musarum di Michael Praetorius.98 Il caso è ancora più emblematico se si considera l’orientamento quasi enciclopedico che il musicografo tedesco aveva voluto conferire a questa sua pubblicazione.99 Praetorius aveva operato in stretto contatto con dei violinisti francesi alla corte di Wolfenbüttel tanto che dei trecentododici brani che compongono il suo libro la maggior parte è costituita da arrangiamenti di danze attribuibili a Antoine Emeraud e a Pierre Francisque Caroubel.100 La familiarità dei musicisti di area tedesca con questo repertorio è ben testimoniata dalle numerose concordanze motiviche riscontrabili in Praetorius,101 in particolar modo per quanto riguarda danze come la corrente e la volta che sono poi più squisitamente espressione dello stile coreutico francese (cfr. esempi n. 6a–6c). Anche se con Farina non si registrano casi di questo genere si possono pur tuttavia segnalare dell’evidenti affinità motiviche, probabile riflesso di un comune patrimonio strumentale (cfr. esempi n. 6d–6e). Un altro elemento che fa pensare a Praetorius è ravvisabile nella struttura stessa delle correnti di Farina. Difatti ad eccezione della sesta del terzo libro, che è suddivisa in tre sezioni (ed è peraltro una delle più interessanti), le restanti diciassette adottano una struttura bipartita proprio come avviene nella maggior parte di quelle del musicografo tedesco. 95 L’informazione è deducibile da una delle lettere di protesta inoltrate dal musicista alla municipalità di

96 97 98 99

100 101

Danzica: ‘Das aber Michel Meyer vorwendet, ich absentire mich der Polnischen Täntze, wie woll ich gemeiniglich einem an meine Stelle gelassen, ist er selbst ursach, das er mich gemeiniglich in die Kammer geordnet, und selbsten an dem principal Ortt, wo die führnemsten Leute sein aufzuwarten sich unterstande’, cfr. H. Rauschning, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig, 156. Valerius Otto, Newe Paduanen, Galliarden, Intraden vnd Currenten, nach englischer vnd frantzösischer Art (Leipzig: Abraham Lamberg, 1611). W. Brade, Newe lustige Volten, Couranten, Balletten, Padoanen, Galliarden, Masqueraden, auch allerley arth newer Frantzösischer Täntze (Berlin: Martin Guth (Georg Runge), 1621). M. Praetorius, Terpsichore, Musarum Aoniarum (Wolfenbüttel: autore (Fürstliche Druckerei), 1612). Stando a quanto indicato nella prefazione del libro, Praetorius voleva dar seguito a questa raccolta con una o più pubblicazioni dedicate agli altri stili nazionali di danza. Malauguratamente, questo suo progetto non sarà mai portato a termine. Originario di Cremona, Pietro Francesco Carubelli si stabilì alla corte Francese verso il 1575 dove svolse buona parte della carriera acquisendo poi anche la cittadinanza francese. W. Braun, Britannia abundans, 183–185. 193

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

L’articolazione a tre refrains continuò invece ad essere più lungamente privilegiata in Germania – secondo schemi consolidati sin dal tardo Cinquecento – proprio per quanto concerne le danze meno vincolate alla tradizione strumentale francese.102 Va però detto (a riprova dell’eclettismo di Farina) che in Italia l’organizzazione bipartita della corrente, come del resto di tutte le altre danze, era oramai un fatto ampiamente acquisito. Sempre riguardo alla corrente, si può in ultimo aggiungere che i compositori tedeschi concepiscono questa danza anche in maniera decisamente più complessa rispetto a quanto detto a proposito di Praetorius e di Farina stesso. Una situazione di questo genere si manifesta abbastanza regolarmente nella raccolta di Schein del 1617, tanto che qui, al pari della pavana, la corrente può addirittura costituire la parte più elaborata della suite.103 In una direzione esattamente opposta a quella appena indicata si muovono tutto sommato le volte, i balletti e i Passemezzi di Farina (per quanto questi ultimi siano caratterizzati da una scrittura non priva di qualche interesse tecnico-strumentale). Si può pertanto affermare che, non diversamente dalle proprie correnti, l’insieme di queste danze rappresenti la parte più leggera, per così dire, della produzione musicale del violinista italiano. Anche se Praetorius qualifica i brani di Terpsichore musarum come danze alla francese alcune di esse impiegano motivi quali Packington’s Pound, Wolsey’s Wilde e Light of Love, segno che il patrimonio di melodie inglesi era oramai talmente radicato nella tradizione strumentale continentale che anche per il musicografo tedesco diventava difficile distinguerne l’origine. Quello che appare invece come una caratteristica più propriamente autoctona è la tendenza a organizzare le danze in suites legate tematicamente, si tratta di un ulteriore sviluppo della semplice coppia variata pavana-gagliarda. Le raccolte di Paul Peuerl,104 Paul Rivander,105 Johann Hermann Schein106 e ancora più tardi di Andreas Hammerschmidt107 e Johann Neubauer108 ben testimoniano di questa situazione. Farina non sembra essere particolarmente interessato a seguire questa strada dato che nelle sue cinque raccolte i brani sono ordinati per genere (prima tutte le pavane, poi le gagliarde e così via dicendo), senza che vi si possa scorgere un’apparente correlazione motivica. La composizione della suite, che con Schein si era stabilizzata nella successione Padovana, Gagliarda, Courante e Allemande-Tripla, deve pertanto compiersi attraverso parentele tonali. Se si considera che nelle raccolte di Farina il numero delle gagliarde e delle correnti è quasi sempre superiore a quello delle pavane, ne risulta che a seconda delle situazioni è possibile compiere scelte alternative. Ciò detto, anche se non si registrano vere e proprie concordanze melodiche, cellule tematiche di matrice comune permettono di ipotizzare una relazione privilegiata tra due o più danze. Un interessante esempio di questo tipo ci è 102 Non sorprende a questo proposito che tutte le pavane e la maggior parte delle gagliarde di Farina siano

103 104 105 106 107 108

organizzate in tre sezioni sul modello di quelle di Brade, Dowland, Haussmann, Scheidt, Schein e di Simpson. Si vedano in particolare modo la dodicesima e la ventesima corrente (peraltro entrambe tripartite); J. H. Schein, Banchetto musicale. Paul Peuerl, Neue Padovan, Intrada, Däntz unnd Galliarda (Nürnberg: Abraham Wagenmann, 1611). Paul Rivander, Prati Musici (Ansbach: Paul Böhem, 1613). J. H. Schein, Banchetto musicale. A. Hammerschmidt, Ander Theil Newer Paduanen. Johann Neubauer, Neue Pavanen, Galliarden, Balletten, Couranten, Allmanden und Sarabanden; Kassel, Murhardschen Bibliothek der Stadt, ms. I, S. 46. 194

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

offerto dalla quarta pavana e dall’ottava gagliarda del suo secondo libro. In effetti, nonostante i due brani siano assolutamente indipendenti l’uno dall’altro, le prime misure della gagliarda riprendono lo stesso movimento cromatico corrispondente alla parte conclusiva della pavana. In sostanza si può parlare di un procedimento più moderno rispetto alla consuetudine di variare ritmicamente il medesimo materiale musicale (esempi n. 7a–7b). All’abitudine di pensare le danze in maniera più o meno autonoma si sottraggono invece le Mascharate e i Brandi di Farina stesso, vere e proprie suites organizzate sulla variazione di una o più idee musicali, senza dubbio un mezzo per equilibrare la lunghezza di questi suoi componimenti.109 Qui Farina procede attraverso la rielaborazione stretta del materiale tematico o ancora una volta con meccanismi di trasformazione motivica più liberi ed in definitiva meno prevedibili (esempi n. 7c–7d). Su questa stessa linea si muovono anche i tre Balletti allemanni posti a conclusione del suo secondo libro, brani che per scrittura e stile musicale ricordano la coppia Allemanda-Tripla con cui si chiudono le suites di Schein.110 Sul finire degli anni Venti del Seicento, dopo due/tre generazioni di musicisti impegnati nella produzione di musica danza, la fortuna di questo repertorio sembra conoscere in tutta l’area tedesca una repentina battuta d’arresto. Tale declino può essere senz’altro messo in relazione agli eventi bellici che scuotono l’Europa centrale in quei medesimi anni.111 Si fa qui evidentemente riferimento a quell’insieme di conflitti per convezione chiamati Guerra dei Trent’anni, le cui miserie furono già all’epoca descritte in pamphlets e pubblicazioni come The Lamentation of Germany,112 il celebre romanzo Der abenteuerliche Simplicissimus113 o le stampe di Jacques Callot.114 Nonostante la storiografia più recente abbia parzialmente ridimensionato l’impatto della guerra nel contesto socio-economico tedesco del tempo,115 non vi sono dubbi che l’aggravamento del conflitto durante la così detta ‘fase svedese’ inferse un colpo mortale ad ogni tipo di attività commerciale ed imprenditoriale. La recessione economica non mancò di fare sentire i propri effetti sul mercato librario e in particolar modo nel settore musicale.116 Nel momento in cui Farina dava alle stampe le sue due ultime raccolte (1628) solo una pubblicazione di Nikolaus Bleyer contribuì ad arricchire l’un tempo fiorente repertorio di danza tedesco.117 Così, quasi simbolicamente, con questi due libri di Farina cala il sipario su quella vivacissima stagione musicale ed 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116

117

Fino a 361 misure senza contare i ritornelli. J. H. Schein, Banchetto musicale. E. Meyer, Concerted Instrumental Music, (ed. italiana), vol. IV (II), 638. Philip Vincent, The Lamentations of Germany (London: E. G[riffin] (John Rothwell), 1638). Hans Jakob Christoffel von Grimmelshausen, Der abenteuerliche Simplicissimus (Monpelgart: Johann Fillion, 1669; recte Nürenberg, 1668). Jacques Callot, Les misères et les malheurs de la guerre représentés par Jacques Callot noble lorrain (Paris: Israël Henriet, 1633). Geoffrey Parker, The Thirty Years’ War (London – New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984), ed. italiana, La Guerra dei Trent’anni (Milano: Vita e Pensiero, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 1994), 332–357. Anche un musicista di prim’ordine come Schütz fu costretto ad adattarsi a questa situazione. Il maestro tedesco non dimenticò peraltro di stigmatizzare le difficoltà del momento in un celebre passo dalla prefazione dei ‘Concerti’ del 1636; H. Schütz, Erster Theil Kleiner geistlichen Conzerten (Leipzig: Gottfried Grosse (Gregor Ritzsch), 1636). Nikolaus Bleyer, Erster Theil newer Paduanen, Galliarden, Balletten, Mascaraden, und Couranten mit 5. Stimmen neben einem General Bass (Hamburg: Michael Hering (Lorentz Pfeiffer), 1628). 195

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

editoriale iniziata un trentennio prima. I segni della ripresa incominciarono a manifestarsi solo dopo la metà del secolo ma i successivi sviluppi della consort music tedesca marcano, oltre l’inevitabile salto generazionale, anche un sostanziale cambio di gusto.118 Esempi musicali Esempio 1a. C. Farina, Pavana tertia, III rit., misure 49–56, parte di Canto.119

Esempio 1b. C. Farina, Pavana quinta, I rit., misure 18–23, parte di Canto.120

Esempio 2a. J. Dowland, Lachrimae amantis, I rit., misure 1–5 (parte di liuto omessa).121

118 Sull’argomento, cfr. Michael Robertson, The Courtly Consort Suite in German-Speaking Europe, 1650–1706

(Burlington: Ashgate, 2009); M. Robertson, Consort Suites and Dance Music by Town Musicians in German-Speaking Europe, 1648–1700 (Burlington: Ashgate, 2016). 119 C. Farina, Ander Theil newer Paduanen, Gagliarden. 120 C. Farina, Il terzo libro delle pavane, gagliarde. 121 J. Dowland, Lachrimae. 196

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

Esempio 2b. C. Farina, Pavana prima, II rit., misure 29–32.122

Esempio 3. C. Farina, Pavana quarta, I rit., misure 1–24.123

122 C. Farina, Ander Theil newer Paduanen, Gagliarden. 123 C. Farina, Ander Theil newer Paduanen, Gagliarden. 197

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

198

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

Esempio 4. C. Farina, Pavana tertia, II rit., misure 37–48.124

124 C. Farina, Il quarto libro delle pavane gagliarde. 199

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Esempio 5. C. Farina, Pavana quinta, I rit., misure 11–17.125

Esempio 6a. M. Praetorius, Courante [du Tambour], I rit., misure 1–6, parte di Cantus.126

Esempio 6b. W. Brade, Couranten, I rit., misure 1–6, parte di Cantus.127

Esempio 6c. Anonymus, Volta, I rit., misure 1–6, parte di Cantus.128

125 126 127 128

C. Farina, Il terzo libro delle pavane, gagliarde. M. Praetorius, Terpsichore. W. Brade, Newe lustige Volten, Couranten, Balletten. Thomas Simpson, Taffel Consort (Hamburg: Paul Lang (Michael Hering), 1621). 200

Aurelio Bianco: Carlo Farina e il repertorio di danza tedesco d’inizio Seicento

Esempio 6d. M. Praetorius, Courante, I rit., misure 1–4, parte di Cantus.129

Esempio 6e. C. Farina, Correnta decima, I rit., misure 1–5, parte di Canto.130

Esempio 7a. C. Farina, Pavana quarta, III rit., misure 52–57, parte di Canto.131

Esempio 7b. C. Farina, Gagliarda ottava, I rit., misure 1–6, parte di Canto.132

Esempio 7c. C. Farina, Mascharata, misure 1–8 e 115–122, parte di Canto.133

129 130 131 132 133

M. Praetorius, Terpsichore. C. Farina, Ander Theil newer Paduanen, Gagliarden. C. Farina, Ander Theil newer Paduanen, Gagliarden. C. Farina, Ander Theil newer Paduanen, Gagliarden. C. Farina, Libro delle pavane gagliarde. 201

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Esempio 7d. C. Farina, Brandi, misure 1–8 e 25–32, parte di Canto.134

134 C. Farina, Libro delle pavane gagliarde. 202

The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory Jacomien Prins Ca’Foscari University of Venice, Italy

1. Introduction In philosopher Francesco Patrizi’s (1529–1597) autobiography, he describes how, during the beginning of his career, his affairs in the service of the Venetian nobleman Giorgio Contarini took him twice to Cyprus.1 In this period he built up a collection of Greek manuscripts and acquired a mastery of the Greek language, as well as its philosophy and music theory, which distinguished him during his later years.2 In a preface to Patrizi’s Latin edition of an important Greek manuscript, the publisher Domenico Mammarelli praised the pioneering work of the philosopher as follows: This [commentary], like many other Greek manuscripts concerning any aspect of science, he [Patrizi] acquired through great diligence, a lot of effort and at high costs; some he transcribed; others, which had been written in ancient script, he bought and took with him to Italy, before the Turks plundered that island [Cyprus], so that they might be used by himself and, one day, by other scholars of future generations.3 1

2

3

This autobiographical letter (Lettere e Opuscoli Inediti, ed. Danilo Aguzzi-Barbagli (Florence: Istituto Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento, 1975), 47) was published for the first time in Angelo Solerti, ‘Autobiografia di Francesco Patricio’, Archivio Storico per Trieste, l’Istria e il Trentino 3 (1884–6), 280–281. Informative introductions to Patrizi’s (sometimes referred to as Franciscus Patritius Venetus) philosophy are by Paul O. Kristeller, Eight Philosophers of the Italian Renaissance (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964), Cap. 7, ‘Patrizi’, 110–126; Cesare Vasoli, Francesco Patrizi da Cherso (Rome: Bulzoni Editore, 1989); and Brian P. Copenhaver, Charles B. Schmitt, Renaissance Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), ‘Francesco Patrizi’, 187–195. A bibliography regarding Patrizi can be found in Mario Emilio Cosenza, Biographical and Bibliographical Dictionary of the Italian Humanists and of the World of Classical Scholarship in Italy, 1300–1800 (IH, Boston: G. K. Hall, 1962), 21962, 2634–2639. Emil Jacobs, ‘Francesco Patrizi und seine Sammlung griechischer Handschriften in der Bibliothek des Escorial’, Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen XXV (1908), 19–47; Maria Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, Bibliothecae selectae: da Cusano a Leopardi, ed. Eugenio Canone (Florence: Olschki, 1993), 73–118. The Ambrosiana in Milan holds a copy of Patrizi’s list of Greek manuscripts, which hitherto has not been studied in detail. ‘Eas, simul cum alijs multis libris Graecis, omni scientiarum genere refertis, quos magna ille diligentia, labore ac sumptibus conquisierat, manu scriptis, partim tunc transcriptis, partim, ut vetustiore manu scripti erant, coemptis, secum ante Turcicam eius insulae devastationem in Italiam annexerat. uti sibi, alijsque studiosis aliquando in posterum prodessent.’ Pseudo-Johannis Philoponi, Expositiones in omnes XIV Aristotelis Libros methaphysicos, ‘Typographus ad Lectores’, Francesco Patrizi (trans.) (Ferrara, 1583), [s.p]. The manuscript is listed as ‘48. Philoponi commentaria in 14 libros Metaphysicos’. See M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 88. 203

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

From the inventory of Patrizi’s collection of seventy-four Greek manuscripts in the Royal Library in Berlin, discovered by Emil Jacobs in 1908, we know that it included important texts concerning ancient Greek music-theoretical thought.4 These treatises were among the texts that Patrizi ‘used himself and were used by other musical scholars of future generations.’ In this article, I investigate how Patrizi used them in the context of his poetics and how their rediscovery influenced sixteenth-century musical thought. His Greek library reflects Patrizi’s interest in a kind of encyclopaedic knowledge that was used to revive important parts of the culture in which he lived. Expectations were high that this revival could result from a thorough study of ancient sources. Patrizi’s interest in mathematics and music found its origin in his admiration for Plato, and his interest in poetics as the expression of the deeper truths of a prisca theologia — the doctrine that claims that a single, true theology exists, which unites all religions, and which was given by God to humanity in antiquity — inspired him to formulate a musical poetics.5 Patrizi, during his working life, had access to many Greek philosophical, theological, scientific, poetical and music-theoretical sources, which became available in his time partly through his own purchases of manuscripts. Along with the increase of available sources, as a scholar of his time Patrizi became very interested in the content of these sources and tried to use them to realize his own research agendas. One of his ambitions was to replace the Aristotelian philosophy of his time with a new religious philosophy that would better reflect the structure and functioning of the universe. Christian Europe had never been a tolerant society, but during the sixteenth century the religious controversies brought on by the Reformation deeply influenced all kinds of scholarly practices. In this tense climate, Patrizi used views from Greek manuscripts, including those he purchased on Cyprus, for the formulation of his new philosophy of the universe, because he was convinced that by doing so, he could not only reconcile Catholic faith with philosophy, but also bring church reformers back to the Mother Church.6 Patrizi’s attempt to formulate a new philosophy was accompanied by an attempt to replace the dominant Aristotelian poetics of his time with a new poetics. In the Platonic and humanist poetics he presented in his Della poetica (On Poetics, 1586), Patrizi inserted long digressions on ancient Greek music theory and practice.7 Just as philosophical and 4 5

6

7

For a detailed discussion of this list, see M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 83–91. Patrizi’s philosophy of music is analysed in D. Aguzzi-Barbagli, ‘Francesco Patrizi e l’umanesimo musicale del Cinquecento’, L’umanesimo in Istria, Atti del Convegno internazionale di studio, Venezia, 30–31 Marzo–1 Aprile 1981, eds. Vittore Branca, Sante Graciotti (Florence: Olschki, 1983), 63–90; Claude V. Palisca, Humanism in Italian Renaissance Musical Thought (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1985), 402–405, 412–418, 425–426; Ann E. Moyer, Musica Scientia: Musical Scholarship in the Italian Renaissance (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992), ‘Francesco Patrizi da Cherso’, 235–241; Jacomien Prins, Echoes of an Invisible World: Marsilio Ficino and Francesco Patrizi on Cosmic Order and Music Theory (Leiden: Brill, 2014), 311–401. This philosophy is formulated in Patrizi’s Nova de Universis Philosophia (Ferrara, Mammarelli, 1591; reprinted with variants in Venice, by Meietti, retrodated to 1593, and in London in 1611). An in-depth study of Patrizi’s Nova de universis philosophia is given by Benjamin Brickman, An Introduction to Francesco Patrizi’s ‘Nova de universis philosophia’ (PhD dissertation, New York, Columbia University, 1941). For Patrizi’s theory of world harmony, see J. Prins, Echoes of an Invisible World, 217–310. Patrizi’s poetics is analysed in Bernard Weinberg, A History of Literary Criticism in the Italian Renaissance, 2 vols. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 2: 765–786, 1024–25; Baxter Hathaway, The Age of Criticism: The Late Renaissance in Italy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1962), 77ff; B. Hathaway, 204

Jacomien Prins: The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory

cosmological sources should help to formulate a better worldview, music-theoretical sources should help to revive the musical practice of its time, which, in his view, had drifted far from the powerful musical practices of the ancient Greeks.8 To assess whether the musical practices of the ancient Greeks could be restored, in the first part of his Della poetica, which is titled “Deca istoriale” (Ten Books on History), Patrizi critically examined important surviving music materials. The influence of Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on the formulation of his account of Greek music theory will be investigated in this chapter on the basis of three case studies:9 2. The influence of Alypius’ Introduction to Music on Patrizi’s thesis that ancient poetry was sung; 3. The influence of Aristoxenus’ Elements of Rhythm on Patrizi’s ideas about the use of rhythm in ancient poetry; 4. The influence of Aristoxenus’ Elements of Harmony on Patrizi’s ideas about the use of harmony in ancient poetry. 2. The influence of Alypius’ Introduction to Music on Patrizi’s thesis that ancient poetry was sung Next to his own texts on poetics and aesthetics, Patrizi’s letters are an important source to identify the influence of Greek music manuscripts on his musical thought. A letter to Alfonso II d’Este from 1579 testifies, for example, to his struggle to purchase the Greek manuscripts he needed for his study of ancient music while he was working at the university of Ferrara and writing his Della poetica, because they did not pay him a decent salary.10 To solve this problem, Patrizi asked some of his colleagues and friends to lend him the books and manuscripts he needed for his studies, as evidenced by a letter to his friend Pinelli.11 Having sent a manuscript to Pinelli, Patrizi asked his friend in this letter to inform him which musical manuscripts he had in his possession, and also, more specifically, whether he possessed a copy of Porphyry’s Commentary on Ptolemy’s Harmonics.12 Marvels and Commonplaces: Renaissance Literary Criticism (New York: Random House, 1986), 431–436; Lina Bolzoni, L’universo dei poemi possibili: Studi su Francesco Patrizi da Cherso (Rome: Bulzoni, 1980); L. Bolzoni, ‘La “Poetica” del Patrizi e la cultura Veneta del primo cinquecento’, in L’umanesimo in Istria, eds. V. Branca, S. Graciotti, 19–36. 8 During Patrizi’s life only one volume of his Della poetica was published: Francesco Patrizi, Della poetica, la deca istoriale (Ferrara: Baldini, 1586). The volume is the first part of D. Aguzzi-Barbagli, Della poetica edizione critica, 3 vols. (Florence: Istituto Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento, 1969–1971), vol. 1: La deca istoriale, 1969, vol. 2: La deca disputata, 1969 and vol. 3, 1971. 9 Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts includes the following music manuscripts: 20. Bryennij Harmonica; 21. Aristoxeni Musica; 22. Anatolij et Nicomachi Theologumena Arithmeticae Pythagoreae. Theonis Smyrnaei De Musica Platonis; 23. Porphyrij commentaria in Ptolemaei musicam. In quo etiam Alypij Musica. Patrizi, moreover, also translated and published a fragment from the Peripatetic De audibilibus preserved as a quotation in Porphyry’s Commentary on Ptolemy’s Harmonics. See M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 85 and 99, nt. 61. 10 F. Patrizi, Lettere, ed. D. Aguzzi-Barbagli, 23. Quoted in M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 105–106. 11 F. Patrizi, Lettere, ed. D. Aguzzi-Barbagli, 36–38. The manuscript is listed as ‘23. Porphyrij commentaria in Ptolemaei musicam. In quo etiam Alypij Musica’. See M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 85. 12 For Porphyry, see Greek Musical Writings: II, Harmonic and Acoustic Theory, ed. Andrew Barker, 2 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984–1989), 229–244. 205

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Patrizi knew Porphyry’s commentary because it was part of the collection of Greek manuscripts he purchased on Cyprus. Presumably, he had sold his own copy of the manuscript and now needed the source for his investigations of Greek music theory. In this case study, I focus on Patrizi’s use of Alypius’s Introduction to Music that was bound together with Porphyry’s Commentary.13 Patrizi presented tabular descriptions of two forms of ancient Greek notation included in Alypius’s Introduction to Music in book 6 of Della poetica within his argument that ancient poetry is sung.14 He had encountered this idea, for example, in a classification of different uses of the voice included in Boethius’ De institutione musica (Fundamentals of Music), in which his famous predecessor explained that to these [two types of using the voice], as Albinus asserts, is added a third, different kind, which can incorporate intermediate voices, .15

Patrizi was in search of a kind of singing style that was more expressive than speech, but not as melodious as song, which was developed in the early Italian operas of the late sixteenth century and became known as the ‘stile rappresentativo’.16 It is a dramatic recitative style in which melodies move freely over a foundation of simple chords. To reconstruct the singing style allegedly used for ancient Greek poetry, Patrizi also consulted Alypius’s Eisagōgē mousikē (Introduction to Music). Alypius’ Introduction to Music contains the famous tabular descriptions of two forms of ancient Greek notation, which are named after the author. In my opinion, Patrizi initially failed to understand its value. It seems that with regard to this treatise, his need for money was originally stronger than his scholarly interest; Patrizi tried to sell the majority of his 13

The manuscript is listed as ‘23. Porphyrij commentaria in Ptolemaei musicam. In quo etiam Alypij’. See M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 85. 14 F. Patrizi, Della poetica, book 6, 309–337. Alypius (4th–5th century AD, Alexandria, Egypt) is the author of Eisagoge Mousike (Introduction to Music), a work that contains tabular descriptions of two forms of ancient Greek notation; the tables indicate the interaction of the notation with the Greek modal system. Although the work was written well after the music in question, it is of fundamental importance in transcribing extant pieces into modern notation. The treatise survives incomplete; in its full form it may have contained additional information concerning Greek music theory. The earliest of the thirty-four surviving manuscripts is from the twelfth century, yet the treatise seems to have been largely ignored until the late sixteenth century, when it drew the attention of Vincenzo Galilei and his circle. The authoritative edition is by Karl von Jan in Musici Scriptores Graeci: Aristoteles, Euclides, Nicomachus, Bacchius, Gaudentius, Alypius et melodiarum veterum quidquid exstat (1899; reprinted Stuttgart: Teubner, 1995). See Thomas J. Mathiesen, Apollo’s Lyre: Greek Music and Music Theory in Antiquity and the Middle Ages (Lincoln, Neb.: University of Nebraska Press, 1999), 593–608; T. J. Mathiesen, ‘Alypius [Alypios]’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.00718, accessed 30 September 2021, 15 ‘Ogni maniera, adunque, di poesia fu cantata e ne gli agoni, e in altre occasioni di feste, e di conviti, e d’altre. Nè so per qual cagione, non se ne assegnando niuna, un certo Albino, da Boezio allegato, dica: ’. F. Patrizi, Della poetica, 336. Cf. Boethius, Fundamentals of Music I.12, trans. with intro. and notes by Calvin M. Bower, ed. by C. V. Palisca (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989), 20–21. 16 For the ‘stile rappresentativo’, see Tim Carter, ‘Stile rappresentativo (It.: ‘theatrical style’)’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.26774, accessed 30 September 2021. 206

Jacomien Prins: The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory

Greek manuscripts to the King of Spain.17 Later on, Patrizi had a second chance to value Alypius’ Introduction to Music appropriately, especially the Alypius table. Nonetheless, as I shall argue, he needed the genius of Vincenzo Galilei to understand its significance.18 During the Renaissance, many scholars tried to revive ancient music practices. However, until the penultimate decade of the sixteenth century, humanists had no immediate knowledge of the musical practice of ancient Greece. Therefore, the true nature of ancient Greek music could only be discussed on the basis of indirect information. Even though some fragments of Greek music were preserved in the form of Greek letters noted on top of the words of a text, no one possessed the technique necessary to decipher them. The relationship between these letters and musical notes seemed to be lost forever. Yet, a breakthrough in the reconstruction of ancient musical practices was precipitated by the discovery of a few fragments of Greek music as well as a table enabling late sixteenth-century humanists to decipher old Greek music notation. This was the so-called Alypius table.19 Vincenzo Galilei published these fragments along with their original text and notation, as well as the table, in his Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music (Dialogo della musica antica et della moderna, 1581) (fig. 1).20 Patrizi carefully studied the material in Galilei’s book and later on, in his Della poetica, he reproduced it, but with his own interpretation and conclusions.21

17 See E. Jacobs, ‘Francesco Patrizi und seine Sammlung griechischer Handschriften’, 19–20. 18 Patrizi refers explicitly to Vincenzo Galilei in his argumentation that poems were accompanied by har-

mony in antiquity. See F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 354.

19 For a general introduction into the history of this discovery, see T. J. Mathiesen, Apollo’s Lyre, 56–58, and

583–584. For editions, transcriptions, and a study of these hymns and their sources see Egert Pöhlmann, Denkmäler altgriechischer Musik: Sammlung, Übertragung und Erläuterung aller Fragmente und Fälschungen (Nürnberg: Hans Carl, 1970), 13–31. For Vincenzo Galilei’s discussion of these musical fragments and the tables of Alypius, see Vincenzo Galilei, Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music, ed., trans. and intro. C. V. Palisca (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003), lxi, 229–244 (original source: V. Galilei, Dialogo della Musica Antica et delle Moderna, Florence, 1581; facs. repr. New York: Broude Brothers, 1967)). 20 Signs of the Alypius table corresponding with the Lydian mode, from V. Galilei, Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music, 240. 21 F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 327–337. This passage is analyzed in Stanislav Tuksar, ‘Franjo Petris: On Deciphering old Greek Music Notation’, in Croatian Renaissance Music Theorists, trans. Sonja Bašić (Zagreb: Music Information Centre, 1980), 79–104; C. V. Palisca, Humanism in Italian Renaissance Musical Thought, 417–418. See also V. Galilei, Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music, ‘Introduction’, xxix. 207

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Fig. 1. Signs of the Alypius table corresponding with the Lydian mode, from Vincenzo Galilei, Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music, 240.

Galilei had received the Greek manuscripts from Girolamo Mei; however, I have not found any evidence that Mei acquired or somehow consulted or otherwise took notice of the contents of Patrizi’s Cypriot copy of Alypius’ Introduction to Music.22 Having studied Galilei’s interpretation of Alypius in his Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music, Patrizi also attempted to decipher one of the musical fragments with the help of the Alypius table and included a report of his own interpretation in his Della poetica. The fragments comprise three hymns, or odes: one to the Muse, one to the Sun and one to Nemesis.23 The first composition is attributed to Dionysius, and the other two to the lyrical poet Mesomedes. The first hymn, ‘Canta musa mia cara’ (‘Sing, my dear muse’), is reproduced by Patrizi (fig. 2).24

Fig. 2. Transcription of Patrizi’s interpretation of the ‘Hymn of Dionysius’, from F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 329. 22 For the contacts between Patrizi and the Florentine Camerata, in particular the members Giovanni Bardi

and Girolamo Mei, see C. V. Palisca, ‘The Alterati of Florence, Pioneers in the Theory of Dramatic music’, in New Looks at Italian Opera: Essays in Honor of Donald G. Grout, ed. William W. Austin (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1968), 9–38. 23 The transcription of Patrizi’s interpretation of the Hymn of Dionysius, is from F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 329. 24 This figure is based on Claude V. Palisca’s reconstruction of Patrizi’s solution in his Humanism in Italian Renaissance Musical Thought, 418. 208

Jacomien Prins: The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory

Patrizi succeeded in deciphering this musical fragment with the help of the Alypius table. The table gives the rule of thumb for translating the Greek letters into pitches. Patrizi adopted Vincenzo Galilei’s view that the songs were composed in the Lydian mode. Consequently, he equated the minuscule ‘sigma’ with the Lydian hypate meson (corresponding to the modern tone a). The identification of the minuscule ‘zeta’ with the Lydian paranete diezeugmenon and nete synemmenon, which, in the Greek perfect tone system, denote the same tone (corresponding to the modern tone e); and the minuscule ‘phi’ for the Lydian lichanos hypaton in the voice (corresponding to the tone g). Finally, the last syllable, which contains no letter for its tone, was interpreted by Patrizi as a minuscule ‘sigma’ (corresponding to the modern tone a).25 Even though Patrizi was convinced that, in antiquity, Greek tragedies had been sung in the way described by Boethius and that the music of his time should be modelled after these ancient examples, his Della poetica also testifies to the critical ‘modern’ insight that the study of the scarce evidence of these ancient practices could never revive them. This may explain why he was not always interested in the precise details of Greek music theory and often looked at them through the lens of a historian. He did not raise the question, for example, of whether the dimensions of the intervals of the Lydian mode in ancient Pythagorean tuning correspond exactly to the intervals in the tuning system of his own time. Presumably, the traces he found in his ancient sources for the thesis that ancient poetry was song in a kind of ‘stile rappresentativo’ sufficed not only to convince his readers but also contemporary composers to start composing in this style. 3. The influence of Aristoxenus’ Elements of Rhythm on Patrizi’s ideas about the use of rhythm in ancient poetry In Della poetica, Patrizi also argued that ancient poetry was not only sung, it was also rhythmical and often accompanied by instruments, dance and corporeal poses and movements.26 As part of his analysis of the causes of the great power of ancient Greek vocal music, Patrizi repeatedly addressed rhythm, which, together with melody and harmony, was listed as a major element occurring in its effects. In book 8, he quoted the pseudoAristotelian Problems to demonstrate that we ‘enjoy rhythm because it has a recognizable and orderly number and moves us in an orderly fashion.’27 According to this source, every poem and song should be in line with the rhythms of the human body to have maximum effect on the human body and soul.28 In book 7 of Della poetica, Patrizi already quoted the passage from which this sentence is taken in full. As an answer to his own question of ‘Why does everyone enjoy rhythm and melody and in general all concords?’ he quoted the Problems as follows:29 25 F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 329. In this place Patrizi refers to V. Galilei, Dialogue on Ancient and

Modern Music, ‘[Four Ancient Songs]’, 238–241.

26 F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 309. 27 [cf.

Probl. 920b]. F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 375. Cf. Aristotle, Problems, chapter XIX, Probl. 920b, pp. 562–563. 28 F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 376. 29 [cf. Probl. 920b], F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 340. 209

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Is it because we naturally enjoy natural movements? Now a sign of this is that children enjoy these straightaway from birth. And we enjoy different types of melody because of habituation. But we enjoy rhythm because it has a recognizable and orderly number and moves us in an orderly fashion; for orderly movement is naturally more akin to us than disorderly movement, and so is more natural. And here is an indication of this: by exercising and drinking and eating in an orderly fashion we preserve and improve our nature and power, but in a disorderly fashion we ruin and derange it: for diseases are movements of the order of the body not in accordance with nature.30

As part of a subsequent detailed survey of the importance of rhythmics in the works of Greek authors such as Plato and Aristides Quintilianus31, he included Psellus’ definition of ritmopeia (the art of rhythm), who described the different subsections of the field as follows:32 33

Inspired by his source, Aristoxenus’ Rhythmic Elements, Psellus divided the art and science of rhythm into the three subsections of metrics (concerning the basic rhythmic structure of a verse or lines in verse), harmonics and rhythmics. The subsequent discussion of rhythm in Patrizi’s Della poetica, including a detailed discussion of metrical feet, is inspired by Aristides Quintilianus, for whom Aristoxenus’ Rhythmic Elements was a major source.34 Aristides had defined a foot as a part of a complex 30 Cf. Probl. 920b. F. Patrizi, Della poetica, 340. For Aristides Quintilianus, see A. Barker (ed.), Greek Musical Writings: II, Harmonic and Acoustic Theory, 392–535; T. J. Mathiesen, ‘Aristides Quintilianus [Aristeidēs Koïntilianos]’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.01244, accessed 30 September 2021. The quotation comes from a manuscript, identified by Jacopo Morelli in Codice Marciano DXXIV which is part of the collection of the Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana in Venice, and which is published in his edition of Aristoxeni rythmicorum elementorum fragmenta; cf. Aristidis oratio adversus Leptinem, ed. Jacopo Morelli (Venice: typis Caroli Palesii, 1785), 266–305. The origin of the copy of Psellus’ fragment in Della poetica is unknown, but it cannot be ruled out that it was part of the collection of Psellus’ manuscripts titled ‘Unicus’ or ‘Rarus’ in the list of Greek manuscripts that Patrizi purchased on Cyprus. See M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 11, 57 and 63 resp. at 84, 89 and 90. [cf. Psellus, Aristoxeni rythmicorum elementorum fragmenta]. F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 310–311. For Aristoxenus’s Rhythmic Elements, see A. Barker (ed.), Greek Musical Writings: II, Harmonic and Acoustic 210

Jacomien Prins: The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory

rhythm through which we understand the whole.35 It has two parts, arsis and thesis and as such is the basic repeating rhythmic unit that forms part of a line of verse. In his discussion of the genera of feet, Aristides first discussed the dactyl, which is a long syllable followed by two short syllables.36 Patrizi followed him in his discussion of metrical feet in ancient Greek poetry.37 His long digression on feet is included in Della poetica to demonstrate that metrical feet were used in Greek sung poetry to make them more powerful, pleasant and understandable. In Della poetica Patrizi gathered as much evidence as possible about the use of rhythm and meter in ancient Greek poetry. Yet he nowhere explained how this knowledge could be used to revive ancient music. In the preface to his L’Eridano, however, he had argued that when modern scholars tried to revive the powers of ancient music, they often failed to understand that it is almost impossible to use, for example, the information about metrical feet in ancient Greek poetry to compose Italian songs. Accordingly, he advised to creatively adapt the ancient Greek model of the dactylic hexameter, the rhythmic scheme often used in classical epic poetry, so that it would reflect the inherent rhythm used in Italian diction: And while in my Dialogues on the Poetics of Music I already considered that nature itself made, in the words of this language [i.e., Italian], the three harmonies, that is, the octave, the fourth and the fifth, which are the three simple [melodic] consonances of the music of antiquity, indicated respectively by the terms ‘diapason’, ‘diatessaron’ and ‘diapente’, I decided to apply them to the construction of metrical feet. … In my attempt to compose verse with metrical feet made in this way, I saw very clearly that this speech [i.e., Italian] could not contain a diatessaron except at the beginning of a phrase; and this is because it has the sound of a dactyl, which is opposed to the diatessaron.38

Based on a comparison between the use of harmonies, that is, melodic intervals, in ancient Greek and modern Italian, Patrizi drew the conclusion that of ‘the octave, the fourth and the fifth, which are the three simple [melodic] consonances of the music of antiquity’, the fourth is seldom used in modern spoken Italian. Having done some further experimentation with the metrical feet of ancient Greek poetry, he came to the conclusion that the melodic and rhythmic components of Greek and Italian are far less similar than originally expected:

35 36 37 38

Theory, 185–189. Inspired by Aristoxenus’s Rhythmic Elements Aristides Quintilianus dealt with rhythmics in chapters 13–19 of his De musica book 1. See Aristides, De musica, book 1, 13–19, in A. Barker (ed.), Greek Musical Writings: II, Harmonic and Acoustic Theory, 433–445. Aristides, De musica, book 1, chapter 14, in A. Barker (ed.), Greek Musical Writings: II, Harmonic and Acoustic Theory, 437. Aristides, De musica, book 1, chapter 15, in A. Barker (ed.), Greek Musical Writings: II, Harmonic and Acoustic Theory, 439. F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 318–319. ‘Et havendo io già ne’miei dialoghi della musica considerato che la natura stessa avea posto nelle parole di queste lingua (italiana) le tre armonie, ottava, quarta e quinta, che sono le tre semplici consonanze de gli antichi musici, diapason, diatesseron e diapente; deliberai di servirmi di loro per piedi. ... In provando io adunque di fare i versi con così fatti piedi, chiarissimamente vidi che questa favella non pativa di ricevere, fuori che nel primo luogo, il diatesseron; e questo perché egli ha suono di dattilo, col quale ella ha tanta nemistà.’ L’Eridano, ‘Sostentamenti’, in D. Aguzzi-Barbagli, ‘Francesco Patrizi e l’umanesimo musicale del Cinquecento’, 72. 211

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Thereafter, I decide to conform to its will [i.e., the genius of the Italian language]; and after I had rejected this metrical foot [i.e., the dactyl], I limited myself to the other two, the octave and the fifth; and I regulated them to the rules [of Italian] in such a way that their cadences, which consist of accents, corresponded with the even syllables, beginning, like the verse used in this language, from the fourth: and in this way the five metrical feet of my verse appeared to be in the same proportion as in ordinary verse. … And in this way, I divided my verse into two kinds of metrical feet, in the same way the Greeks and Romans had always done; and I gave the verse the same number of metrical feet that they had given it. Subsequently, I always ended up with thirteen syllables … And this became the undisputed foundation [of my art of writing verse], which is not based on foreign [or ancient] elements, but on the essential [art of ] singing and love for this [Italian] tongue.39

In his search for an answer to the question of how rhythm was imposed in ancient Greek sung poetry upon melody and diction, Patrizi came to the conclusion that this knowledge was merely interesting from a historical point of view but could not be used to revive ancient musical practices. Rhythm and meter certainly were important factors in causing wonderful effects in ancient Greek music, but in order to revive the powers of this music one should take the diction of the modern Italian language as a point of departure for the composition of songs. The fact that following the natural speech rhythm of a language became a new norm in the musical aesthetics of the late sixteenth century is reflected here in Patrizi’s Della poetica. Due to the scarce evidence, ancient Greek sung poetry could increasingly be associated with the new dramatic recitative style, in which melodies should follow the natural rhythm of speech as well as the emotional concepts expressed in speech. His historical interest in the rhythm and meter of Greek metric poetry, and his study of sources such as Aristoxenus’ Rhythmic Elements, Psellus and Aristides Quintilianus, did not bring Patrizi any closer to the rhythm used in the ancient recitative style he was interested in. Yet it laid the foundation for the myth of Italian as the most suitable language for music. 4. The influence of Aristoxenus’ Elements of Harmony on Patrizi’s ideas about the use of harmony in ancient poetry Patrizi’s arguments for the theses that ancient Greek poetry was sung and that it made use of rhythm and meter were quite easy to follow and his audience found them convincing, because famous authorities in the history of music theory, such as Boethius, had provided textual evidence for the use of a kind of recitative style in between reciting and singing. Yet it was much more difficult to demonstrate that ancient Greek sung poetry made use of harmonic rules and that these rules could be used as a base for the vocal music of his time. Notwithstanding the apparent difficulties and confusion over melodic and harmonic 39 ‘Fu adunque a me da governarsi a voglia di lei; e, rifiutato questo piede, mi ritenni gli altri due, ottava e

quinta; e gli regolai in modo che le cadenze loro, che sono gli accenti, venissero a posarsi in su le sillabe pari, incominciando nel modo del verso usato in questa lingua, dalla quarta; e riuscirono i cinque piedi del mio della medesima ragione di tutto il verso commune. ... E così misurai io il mio verso con due maniere di piedi, come i Greci e i Latini fatto avevano; e tanti gliene diedi quanti gliene aveano essi dato. E appresso venne egli di tredeci sillabe a riuscire sempre .... E fu il ... fondamento (del mio verso) sicuro, non sopra straniera cosa, ma sopra essenziale del canto e amata da questa favella.’ L’Eridano, ‘Sostentamenti’, in D. Aguzzi-Barbagli, ‘Francesco Patrizi e l’umanesimo musicale del Cinquecento’, 72. 212

Jacomien Prins: The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory

intervals, Patrizi was convinced that in order to revive the powers of ancient vocal music, close attention should also be paid to the role of harmony, either in sounds or voices. In his view, the harmony of a poem particularly determined the emotional responses of a listener to that poem. The last part of the question ‘Why does everyone enjoy rhythm and melody and in general all concords?’ was answered again by quoting the pseudo-Aristotelian Problems:40 41

In this passage Patrizi adopted the opinion of the writer of the Problems, who had argued that enjoying melody belonged to the realm of nurture but enjoying the order in rhythm or harmony was given by nature. We enjoy rhythm and harmony because they have a recognizable and orderly numerical pattern and move our souls in an orderly fashion. Given the correspondence between the passions of the soul and musical movements, humans were said to be very susceptible to music. In Patrizi’s view, it was highly likely that the powerful effects of ancient Greek sung poetry were caused by their harmonies. Consequently, Patrizi was not primarily interested in the effects of certain chords and harmonic modulations, but in harmony as a means to magnify the effect of certain words or phrases in a poem. It can be gathered from his list of Greek manuscripts that Patrizi was deeply interested in the history of Pythagorean proportions and ideas.42 He must have known Boethius’ division of music into three kinds: cosmic music, human music and instrumental music.43 According to the Pythagorean theory described by Boethius, cosmic music could be found in the harmonious proportions of the planetary orbits as well as in the relationship between the four elements and four seasons. Moreover, these numerical proportions were the very same as the ones that produce musical harmonies (concords, or symphonies) in earthly music (octave 1:2, fifth 2:3 and fourth 3:4). In addition, human music was defined in terms of a well-ordered proportional relationship between the different parts of the human body, the human soul, and between the human body and soul. According to the quotation above from the pseudo-Aristotelian Problems, harmony had such a powerful effect on the passions of the soul because the movements of two different tones that vibrate 40 [Cf. Probl. 920b]. F.

Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 340. See Aristotle, Problems, ed. and trans. Robert Mayhew and David C. Mirhady, 2 vols. (Cambridge, MA: 1961, 1965), vol. 1, Book XIX, Probl. 920b, vol. 1, 562–563. 41 ‘E delle sinfonia ci dilettiamo, perchè sono temperament di contrarie cose, tra loro proporzionate. E la proporzione ordine è, ch’a natura è piacente. E ogni cosa temperate è della non temperate più piacente.’ [Cf. Probl. 920b]. F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 340-341. See Aristotle, Problems, Book XIX, Probl. 920b, vol. 1, 562–563. The Problems is not included in the list of Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts. 42 Patrizi used some of the Pythagorean manuscripts he purchased on Cyprus in his treatise De numerorum mysteriis (On the Mystery of Numbers, 1594) [Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana (cod. H180 inf., 142–72)], but the manuscript remained unfinished, which may indicate that the revival of Pythagorean theory as part of the prisca theologia became an increasingly more difficult project to defend. This treatise — commissioned by Cardinal Federico Borromeo who was mainly interested in traditional cosmology and mathematical science — in my view, could best be interpreted as occasional. See M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 112. 43 Boethius, Fundamentals of Music I.2, 9. 213

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

orderly in harmony could produce a similar effect in the motions of the soul, which led to pleasure and tranquility. Even though it is not entirely clear whether Patrizi conceived of ‘simfonie’ (harmonies, concords) as melodic or as harmonic intervals or chords, given that he dealt with melody and harmony as different parameters, it is highly likely that he had some kinds of chords in mind that were supposed to build a foundation for the melodies used in ancient Greek poems. Given the fact that Patrizi tried to revive the harmonizing effects of ancient Greek sung poetry, it is quite remarkable that he did not theorize about them in the terms of Pythagorean mathematical proportions used by his predecessors. Rather than discussing music in terms of numerical proportions, in his account of harmony Patrizi followed Aristoxenus again who, in sharp contrast with the Pythagoreans, had argued in his Elementa Harmonica (Elements of Harmony) against Pythagoras by stating that harmonious sound cannot be defined in terms of simple numerical ratios.44 Moreover, he argued that music should be an autonomous discipline rather than being included in the quadrivium together with arithmetic and astronomy. While the Pythagoreans defined musical intervals in terms of the ratio or proportion between two, or more, numbers, Aristoxenus defined musical intervals in terms of sound rather than number. In sharp contrast to Pythagorean theory, Patrizi argued along the lines of Aristoxenian music theory that ultimately, consonances are constituted in the sense of hearing.45 Just as in the case of the Alypius’ tables and presumably also Aristoxenus’ Rhythmic Elements, he used one of the books on the list of Greek manuscripts he purchased on Cyprus to formulate his argument.46 Patrizi continued his investigation of the use of harmony in Greek poems by listing the effects of the different Greek tonoi on the listener.47 Following his ancient sources, Patrizi 44 Aristoxenus’ (fl. c. 370 BC) principal work was the treatise On Harmonics, which has come down to

us under the title Harmonic Elements (Harmonika stoicheia), which was the first part of a larger work, On Music, in which the author studied the various branches of the subject, in particular rhythm. Only fragments of the Rhythmic Elements have survived, either through quotations by later authors (Aristides Quintilianus and more particularly Michael Psellus). He rejected the opinion of the Pythagoreans that arithmetic rules were the ultimate measuring system for intervals and that in every system there must be found a mathematical coincidence before such a system can be said to be harmonic. In his second book he asserted that it is by hearing instead of rational calculation that we judge of the magnitude of an interval. And furthermore he wrote that there is no other way of arriving at the knowledge of music than through auditory perception and memory. The nature of Aristoxenus’ scales and genera deviated sharply from his predecessors. Aristoxenus introduced a radically different model for creating scales. Instead of using discrete ratios to place intervals, as did the Pythagoreans before him, he used continuously variable quantities. Hence the structuring of his tetrachords and the resulting scales have other qualities of consonance. See A. Barker (ed.), Greek Musical Writings: II, Harmonic and Acoustic Theory, 119–89; Annie Bélis, ‘Aristoxenus’, Grove Music Online (2001), https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.01248, accessed 30 September 2021. 45 For an introduction to the story of the transition from thinking in terms of numbers to thinking in terms of sound, see Michael Fend, ‘The Changing Functions of Senso and Ragione in Italian Music Theory of the Late Sixteenth Century’, in The Second Sense: Studies in Hearing and Musical Judgement from Antiquity to the Seventeenth Century, eds. Charles Burnett, M. Fend, Penelope Gouk (London: The Warburg Institute, University of London, 1991), 199–202; and for the Renaissance revival of Aristoxenus, see C. V. Palisca, Studies in the History of Italian Music and Music Theory (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994), ‘Aristoxenus Redeemed in the Renaissance’, 189–199. 46 The manuscript is listed as 21. Aristoxeni Musica. M. Muccillo, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, 85. 47 Unfortunately the passage in which Aristoxenus enumerated the tonoi has not survived. 214

Jacomien Prins: The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory

defined them as Dorian, Aeolian, Ionian, Lydian and Phrygian.48 Yet he seemed to confuse the tonoi with modes by showing no awareness that they are grouped on the basis of the affinity of their tones, which allows modulation from one tonus to another. Moreover, he did not discuss the tonoi in terms of specific musical scales or melodic formulae, but explained that every tonus is associated with a specific emotional effect on the listener: Of these five harmonies, three in total were in use, as Aristotle mentions, and he praises certain authors of music treatises, according to which a first group of harmonies were moral and ethical, a second group pathetic and passionate, and a third group enthusiastic and infuriating, as were also the melodies and the songs which they served.49

Subsequently, Patrizi discussed the three genera, but it is not entirely clear whether he associated them with the three groups of specific harmonies that he mentioned in this quotation. In his discussion of the three genera a new view on musical quantity manifested itself that is inspired by Aristoxenus rather than by Pythagoras.50 Aristoxenus was the first to define genus in terms of the position of the two movable notes within a tetrachord (spanning the interval of a fourth), which divided a tetrachord into three intervals of varying sizes. He described three genera: the enharmonic, the chromatic and the diatonic. The enharmonic tetrachord consists of a ditone followed by two quarter tones, moving from top to bottom; the chromatic — a tone-and-a-half, a semitone and a semitone; and the diatonic — a tone, a tone and a semitone. Patrizi adopted Aristoxenus’s division of the fourth into thirty parts, and explained that the two variable notes can be defined in terms of different positions on a line: 6 and 18 for the diatonic; 6 and 12 for the chromatic; and 3 and 6 for the enharmonic (fig. 3).

Fig. 3. Diagram of the diatonic tetrachord-species, from Patrizi’s Della poetica, vol. 1, 345.

In Patrizi’s explanation of the diagram it is not entirely sure whether the lines refer to an abstract concept of sound, as intended by Aristoxenus, or to the length of a string.51 Patrizi admitted himself that he had no clue how the effects of the Greek musical tonoi, which were presented by Aristoxenus as the laws of harmonics, should be explained in terms of the three genera.52 Presumably, he lost his interest in the topic because these 48 F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 342–344. 49 ‘Di queste cinque armonie tre furon in somma l’opera e gli uffici, come Aristotile riferisce [cf. Politiká

1341b], e loda alcuni scrittori della musica, secondo i quali furono morali e etiche, altre patetiche e passionate, et le terze entusiastiche e infurianti, secondo che anche erano i meli e i canti a’ quali elleno servivano.’ F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 344. 50 F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 345–347. See J. Prins, Echoes of an Invisible World, 252–257. 51 See J. Prins, Echoes of an Invisible World, 256. 52 F. Patrizi, Della poetica, vol. 1, 347. 215

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

harmonics laws were related to melodic intervals and nothing could be found in the source about the simple chords that, in his view, were supposed to be the harmonic foundation of ancient Greek sung poetry. It is highly likely that with his purchase of Aristoxenus’ Elements of Harmony Patrizi contributed something to the shift in sixteenth-century music theory from thinking in terms of number to thinking in terms of sound. Moyer correctly observed that given that Patrizi’s discussion of the genera became a subject of debate for Ercole Bottrigari and Giovanni Maria Artusi, the music theoretical digressions in Della poetica should be read as a work that mattered to Italian music scholars in the second half of the sixteenth century.53 Having said that, the fundamental shift in theories on tuning and temperament did not originate from Patrizi’s study of Aristoxenus’ Elements of Harmony, but from the way in which Vincenzo Galilei made use of his source. If Patrizi was acquainted with Galilei’s interpretation of this source, he did not fully understand its implications.54 Last, even though Patrizi’s discussion of these very elements of harmony was quite confusing, it may have helped to reinvent the mythical recitative style of the ancient Greeks, because in the absence of evidence it opened the possibility of thinking about the simple chords used in ancient Greek poetry. 5. Conclusion The three case-studies presented in this paper strongly suggest that Patrizi had a good eye for the developments that took place in the musical world of his time. Many of the musical manuscripts he had taken from Cyprus played an important role in the transformation that took place in the Italian musical thought and practice of the second half of the sixteenth century. In his discussion of ancient Greek music theory and practice, Patrizi used both technical and literary sources and occasionally consulted the work of contemporary musical scholars such as Vincenzo Galilei to understand the complex Greek music theory of his sources. Patrizi’s study of the small fragments of ancient Greek music, as well as of Aristoxenus’ music theory, testifies to the enormous challenges Renaissance scholars were facing in making sense of ancient Greek musical culture. Especially, the Platonic dogma that ancient poetry was based on harmonic laws remained a mystery for Patrizi. He was well aware that Pythagorean harmonics were incompatible with the musical and poetic practice of his own time, but he failed to understand the alternative Aristoxenian harmonics, which is not based on numbers but on sound. Patrizi only had a vague intuition that the tonoi, which he seems to have confused with the modes, were used to express specific mental states and to modulate

53

Ercole Bottrigari, Il Patricio: overo de tetracordi armonici di Aristosseno; parere, et vera dimostratione (Patrizi: On the Harmonic Tetrachords of Aristoxenus; Appearance and True Demonstration) (Bologna: Forni Editore, 1985; Originally published in Bologna, 1593), 45–56; and Giovanni Maria Artusi, L’Artusi overo delle imperfettioni della moderna musica (Artusi: On the Imperfections of Modern Music), (1603; facs. ed. Bologna: Forni Editore, 1970) 1–54. See A. E. Moyer, Musica Scientia, 235. 54 For Vincenzo Galilei’s discussion of equal temperament and the diatonic octave, see his Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music, ‘Why Aristoxenus Divided the Diatessaron into Sixty Parts’, 105–106, and ‘The Author defends Aristoxenus’, 127. 216

Jacomien Prins: The influence of Francesco Patrizi’s collection of Greek manuscripts on his music theory

from one mood to another, but the technical description of the tonoi and genera was too complex for him. It is interesting to see that Patrizi was both interested in theories about the expression and the control of the passions of the soul by music. He associated Greek harmonics first of all with the expression of emotions, yet in the field of rhythm Patrizi argued for a more traditional position, in which human nature is defined in idealized terms as ordered rhythmical nature, and music and poetry as means to enjoy, enhance, or restore an idealized original natural state of order and tranquillity. Quite paradoxically, the increasing availability of Greek theoretical material on music did not lead to a revival of the powers of ancient music, but to Patrizi’s insight that the gap between Greek antiquity and the Italian Renaissance was simply too big for such an enterprise. But we owe it partly to the fascination for ancient Greek music of Renaissance scholars such as Patrizi, that many valuable manuscripts were rediscovered, studied and preserved for future generations, and that we can still enjoy music written in the ‘stile rappresentativo’.

217

Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa Anna Laura Bellina Università di Padova, Italia

Non c’è accordo fra gli studiosi a proposito di Giovanni Domenico Sebenico,1 nato secondo alcuni a Šibenik in Dalmazia oppure secondo altri nello sperduto paesino di Corbola, governato dagli Estensi e soggetto alle funeste piene del Po. Stando alle fonti più attendibili, era invece di Corbolone,2 vicino a San Stino di Livenza e alla splendida abbazia di Sesto al Reghena, e dunque suddito della Serenissima che dominava le terre veneto-udinesi, oltre alle coste dell’antica Illiria, dal XV secolo alla caduta della repubblica nel 1797. Al giorno d’oggi il cognome Sebenico, assai raro in Italia, è attestato nel Friuli e nelle Marche,3 in particolare ad Ancona che si trova alla medesima latitudine della cittadina croata sulla riva opposta dell’Adriatico: 43 gradi nord. Benché sia incerta la data in cui il compositore venne alla luce, molto più tarda di quella di Ivan Lukačić e fissata dai repertori al 1630 o meglio al 1640, bisogna supporre che avesse almeno una ventina d’anni quando divenne cantore e poi vicemaestro di cappella a Cividale nel 1660. Nel 1663 Sebenico approda a Venezia, dove l’ensemble del doge Domenico II Contarini lo accoglie come tenore a San Marco fino al 1666. Improbabile quindi la notizia che in questa occasione abbia studiato con Giovanni Legrenzi che allora lavorava a Ferrara per l’Accademia dello Spirito Santo e che raggiunse la Serenissima intorno al 1670, 1

2

3

Le citazioni, se mancano i numeri delle pagine o delle scene, sono sempre tratte dal frontespizio del libretto in questione e trascritte secondo l’uso filologico moderno e consolidato, abbassando le maiuscole, eliminando l’h etimologica, rendendo -ti- o -tti- più vocale con -zi- o con -zzi- e svolgendo le abbreviazioni ma lasciando inalterata la morfologia (per esempio ‘libraro’), l’alternanza doppie / scempie (per esempio ‘machina’) e alcune particolarità grafiche nel francese (per esempio ‘Nuict’) che tuttora ne conserva numerose altre senza pronunciarle. Ovviamente non si annotano i riferimenti che si ritengono di dominio pubblico e che si trovano in qualunque repertorio accreditato. Per le biblioteche si usano le sigle RISM. Tutti i siti sono stati consultati per l’ultima volta in data 31 ottobre 2019. D’ora in poi le indicazioni biografiche fornite nel testo e prive di riscontro in nota si basano sulle solide ricerche d’archivio di Alba Zanini, ‘Sebenico, Giovanni Domenico’, in Dizionario biografico dei friulani, Nuovo Liruti on line, s.v., www.dizionariobiograficodeifriulani.it. Cfr. anche Miloš Velimirović, ‘Giovanni Sebenico (Prispevek k biografiji) / Giovanni Sebenico (Contributions to the biography)’, Muzikološki zbornik 1 (1965), 49–58. A. Zanini, ‘La cappella musicale del duomo di Cividale nell’età barocca’, in Ecco mormorar l’onde. La musica nel Barocco, a cura di Carlo de Incontrera, Alba Zanini (Monfalcone: Teatro di Monfalcone, 1995), 285–314: 294–297; Lovro Županović, ‘Sebenico, Giovanni’, Grove Music Online (2001; updated 2013), s.v., https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.25289. Cf, www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=cognomiditalia; www.paginebianche.it/ricerca?qs=sebenico&dv=Italia. 219

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

contribuendo al vivace mercato operistico.4 Frattanto, concluso il soggiorno lagunare, Sebenico si trasferiva in Inghilterra al servizio di Carlo II Stuart e della moglie Caterina di Braganza,5 devotissima infanta del Portogallo, che assisteva alle funzioni e animava un salotto in cui ‘there was but one voice that alone did appear considerable’, quella del ‘seignor Joanni [sic]’.6 Benché a Londra avesse ottenuto l’ambita carica di master of Italian music e di organista nel 1668, tuttavia nel 1673, quando il parlamento deliberò di licenziare i dipendenti cattolici di Whitehall, fu costretto a tornare in Italia con un impiego presso la corte piemontese che gli mise a disposizione una troupe di circa quindici cantori e un’orchestra di oltre venti elementi. Molto tempo prima ossia nel 1608, Margherita di Savoia, figlia di Carlo Emanuele I, aveva sposato Francesco IV, il futuro duca di Mantova in trono per pochi mesi nel 1612. Reduce dalle ‘sontuose feste’ per le nozze, culminate con L’Arianna,7 sembra che l’erede Gonzaga, in visita alla corte della moglie nel 1610, abbia voluto sbalordire il suocero sfoggiando una replica dell’Orfeo.8 L’anno successivo, quando le due famiglie si riuniscono a Casale Monferrato, cittadella strategica di comune interesse, Il rapimento di Proserpina si rappresenta con la musica di Giulio Cesare Monteverdi, fratello di Claudio, ‘nel giorno natale della serenissima infanta Margherita’.9 Fra gli interpreti spiccano Francesco Rasi e Virginia Ramponi Andreini, detta Florinda,10 che avevano fatto parte del cast nelle precedenti stagioni di corte: lui a Firenze nell’Euridice e nel Rapimento di Cefalo, a Mantova nell’Orfeo e nella Dafne di Marco da Gagliano;11 entrambi nell’Arianna, in cui lei sosteneva il ruolo principale. Malgrado un simile esordio, il pubblico di Torino potrà assistere soltanto in seguito alla rappresentazione di qualche favola cantata di origine autoctona: fra queste L’Europa di Giovanni Antonio Bonardo di Mondovì, eseguita nel 1619 con l’intonazione ‘recitativa’ per il matrimonio di Vittorio Amedeo I, allora principe ereditario, con Cristina di Borbone;12 La caccia del 1620 su testo del marchese d’Agliè per una festa in onore della sposa francese nella vigna del cardinale Maurizio, figlio cadetto di Carlo Emanuele I;13 un’imprecisata commedia ‘in musica’ del 1623,14 attribuita dai documenti coevi sempre a d’Agliè, da 4 5

6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Vjera Katalinić, ‘Giovanni Sebenico, a pupil of Legrenzi?’, in Giovanni Legrenzi e la cappella ducale di San Marco, a cura di Francesco Passadore, Franco Rossi (Firenze: Olschki, 1994), 201–206. Ester Lebedinski, ‘“Obtained by peculiar favour, & much difficulty of the Singer”: Vincenzo Albrici and the function of Charles II’s Italian ensemble at the English Restoration court’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association 143 (2018), 325–359. Samuel Pepys, Diary [1659-1669] (Frankfurt am Mein: Outlook Verlag, 2018), 188 (28 September 1668). Compendio delle sontuose feste fatte l’anno 1608 nella città di Mantova per le reali nozze del serenissimo prencipe don Francesco Gonzaga con la serenissima infante Margherita di Savoia (Mantova: Osanna, 1608); L’Arianna (Mantova: Osanna, 1608). Alberto Basso, L’Eridano e la Dora festeggianti. Le musiche e gli spettacoli nella Torino di Antico Regime (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, 2016), 213–215. Il rapimento di Proserpina (Casale Monferrato: Goffi, 1611). A. Basso, L’Eridano e la Dora festeggianti, 206, 212. L’Euridice (Firenze: Giunti, 1600); Il rapimento di Cefalo (Firenze: Marescotti, 1600); La favola d’Orfeo (Mantova: Osanna, 1607); La Dafne (Firenze [per Mantova]: Marescotti, 1608). L’Europa (Torino: Cavalleris, 1619). Ludovico San Martino d’Agliè, ‘Alvida’ [1606], ‘La caccia’, favole pastorali inedite, a cura di Mariarosa Masoero (Firenze: Olschki, 1977). A. Basso, L’Eridano e la Dora festeggianti, 136. 220

Anna Laura Bellina: Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa

anni impegnato nell’organizzazione dei trattenimenti a corte.15 È impossibile identificare l’ultima pièce con la misteriosa Zalizura, bizzarra vicenda di una ninfa innamorata del Sole, in cui un pappagallo gorgheggia una strofetta sentenziosa in ottonari e quaternari misti. Non databile e attribuita senza fondamento a Sigismondo D’India,16 che dirigeva la cappella piemontese dal 1611, in questo periodo la Zalizura è l’unico dramma sabaudo di cui si conservi l’intonazione, sia pure mutila del terzo atto e di una parte del secondo.17 Dopo la guerra del Monferrato, conclusa nel 1631 dalla pace di Cherasco che concede ai Savoia i territori di Alba e di Trino, assegnando alla Francia la piazzaforte di Pinerolo e destinando il resto al ramo dei Gonzaga Nevers, la corte di Torino gravita nell’orbita del balletto coltivato oltralpe,18 a scapito della diffusione del dramma squisitamente italiano alla maniera di Firenze e di Mantova, accolto con cautela nel resto della penisola. Ma presto l’importazione dell’opera veneziana o asburgica accende le luci della ribalta, grazie alla famosa Finta pazza del 1641 che approda in Piemonte nel 1648 col bagaglio della compagnia di Febi Armonici.19 L’Orontea del 1656 e La Dori del 1657, entrambe di Pietro Antonio Cesti, si ascoltano cinque o sei anni dopo le prime a Innsbruck,20 come Le fortune di Rodope e Damira, composte nel 1657 da Pietro Andrea Ziani, che impiegano un lustro per attraversare l’intera pianura Padana,21 mentre lo Xerse lagunare di Francesco Cavalli ci mette più del doppio dal 1654 al 1667.22 Questo panorama accoglie Sebenico nel 1673 con una ripresa di Eliogabalo,23 intonato da Giovanni Antonio Boretti nel 1668 per il San Giovanni Crisostomo di proprietà dei fratelli Vincenzo e Giovan Carlo Grimani che mantenevano uno stretto contatto epistolare con Carlo Emanuele II, raccomandando castrati e virtuose alla sua protezione.24 15

16

17 18

19 20

21 22 23 24

Angelo Solerti, ‘Feste musicali alla corte di Savoia nella prima metà del secolo XVII’, Rivista musicale italiana 11 (1904), 675–724; Renzo De Felice, ‘Agliè, Filippo San Martino conte di’, Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 1 (1960), https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/filippo-san-martino-conte-di-aglie_(Dizionario-Biografico). Luigi Torri, ‘Il primo melodramma a Torino’, Rivista musicale italiana 26 (1919), 1–35; Eleonora Simi Bonini, ‘D’India, Sigismondo’, Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 40 (1991), https://www.treccani.it/ enciclopedia/sigismondo-d-india_(Dizionario-Biografico). L’attribuzione è contestata da Thomas Walker, ‘Apollo nelle Indie: appunti sul “primo melodramma” alla corte dei Savoia’, in Sigismondo D’India: atti del Convegno di studi su Sigismondo D’India tra Rinascimento e Barocco: Erice 3–4 agosto 1990, a cura di Maria Antonella Balsano, Giuseppe Collisani (Palermo: Flaccovio, 1993), 175–198. I-Tn, Ris. Mus., II. 5. Le accoglienze, balletto delle serenissime infante di Savoia ad onore di madama di Francia, rappresentato li 30 di gennaio 1620 (Torino: Cavalleris, 1620); Argomento e ordine del gran balletto e torneo per lo giorno natale di sua altezza serenissima, fatto quest’anno 1621 (Torino: Pizzamiglio, 1621); Relazioni delle feste principali fatte di carnevale nella corte dell’altezza serenissima di Savoia (Torino: Pizzamiglio, 1621); Descrizione del gran balletto per gl’intermedii della ‘Filli di Sciro’, rappresentata da madama serenissima applaudendo al giorno natalizio del serenissimo prencipe cardinale (Torino: s.n., 1633). La finta pazza (Venezia: Surian, 1641); (Torino: Zavatta, 1648). L’Orontea (Innsbruck: Wagner, 1656); libretto già musicato da Francesco Luccio (Venezia: Batti, 1646). Orontea regina d’Egitto (Torino: Zavatta, 1662); La schiava fortunata o vero La Dori (Innsbruck: Wagner, 1657); La Dori o vero La schiava fedele (Torino: Clanelli, 1662). Le fortune di Rodope e Damira (Venezia: Giuliani, 1657); (Torino: Zavatta, 1662). Xerse (Venezia: Leni, 1654); (Torino: Gianelli, 1667). Eliogabalo (Venezia: Nicolini, 1668); (Torino: Zappata, 1673). Mercedes Viale Ferrero, ‘Repliche a Torino di alcuni melodrammi veneziani e loro caratteristiche’, in Venezia e il melodramma nel Seicento, a cura di Maria Teresa Muraro (Firenze: Olschki, 1976), 145–172. 221

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Sempre nel 1673 L’Atalanta viene offerta a Giovanna Battista di Nemours, moglie di Carlo Emanuele II e madre di Vittorio Amedeo II, allora un bambino di sette anni che aveva appena lasciato la nursery per raggiungere la corte degli adulti. Il libretto di Bernardino Bianco, ‘segretario di stato, di finanze e de’ cerimoniali’, musicato dal ‘signor Sebenico, maestro di capella’ già perfettamente a suo agio nella nuova sede, va in scena con le decorazioni di Francesco Mauro e di Giovanni ‘suo figliuolo, veneziani, architetti e machinisti’ del duca.25 Si tratta di una festa per lo zapato, istituita alla fine del Cinquecento da Caterina Michela d’Asburgo, sposa madrilena di Carlo Emanuele I. Celebrata fino alla prima metà del XVIII secolo, la manifestazione raggiunge uno sfarzo particolare grazie all’iniziativa delle madame reali Cristina di Borbone, vedova di Vittorio Amedeo I dal 1637, e Giovanna Battista, reggente dalla morte del marito nel 1675.26 Come spiega il fantasioso Vocabolario di Pianigiani, magistrato professionista e dilettante di linguistica a tempo perso, il termine iberico zapato di origine araba, imparentato con l’italiano ciabatta, potrebbe venire dal basso latino sabaudia e connotare le calzature tipiche usate nelle Alpi occidentali.27 Un’altra etimologia cervellotica fa derivare il termine dal femminile zapata che nelle case dei poveri, chissà perché non dei ricchi, indica la rondella di pelle con cui si alza il cardine per migliorare lo scorrimento della porta, sotto la quale possono scivolare i regali a sorpresa.28 Invece la ricorrenza prende il nome, spagnolo quanto Caterina Michela, figlia di Filippo II e nipote dell’imperatore Carlo V d’Asburgo, dalla scarpa in cui si nascondevano i doni di San Nicolò, consegnati il 6 dicembre di ogni anno nella villa suburbana di Venaria. Stando al resoconto pubblicato dal ‘libraro di sua altezza’, che per combinazione si chiamava Bartolomeo Zapatta o Zappata, L’Atalanta di Sebenico offre il destro per ostentare un profluvio di effetti speciali. L’Ozio esegue una verbosa Introduzzione alla festa avanti l’apertura del teatro, descrivendo le bellezze delle donne presenti e cantando un terzetto con i ‘seguaci’, in precario equilibro ‘sopra due tartarughe’. Quando sparisce ‘l’ordegno ch’ingombra’ lo sguardo cioè ‘la tela’, Venere arriva sul carro trainato dai cigni e ‘coglie i pomi d’oro’ in una ‘boschereccia con marina’ da cui si scorge ‘l’isola di Cipro in lontananza’.29 Atalanta è corteggiata da Ippomene e da Driante, secondo Ovidio conosciuto con Meleagro durante la caccia al cinghiale caledonio, un’impresa nella quale era l’unica donna.30 Dopo aver interrogato Temide che ‘esce dal tempio’ e la esorta a evitare le nozze, la fanciulla decide di sposare colui che la vincerà nella corsa. Calando dalla nuvola in una ‘sala regia’, Venere 25 L’Atalanta (Torino: Zapatta, 1673), 73 (libretto I-Tci). Bernardino Bianco, ‘L’Atalanta. Un ignoto “zapato”

26

27 28

29 30

seicentesco’, a cura di Luciano Tamburini (Torino: Centro studi piemontesi, 1974); V. Katalinić, ‘Giovanni Sebenico’, 204. Franca Varallo, ‘Feste per la reggenza’, in Madame reali. Cultura e potere da Parigi a Torino. Cristina di Francia e Giovanna Battista di Savoia Nemours, 1619–1724, a cura di Clelia Arnaldi di Balme, Maria Paola Ruffino (Genova: Sagep, 2019), 59–66: 65. Ottorino Pianigiani, Vocabolario etimologico della lingua italiana (Roma: Società editrice Dante Alighieri di Albrighi e Segati, 1907), s.v. ciabatta. Claude François Ménestrier, Des représentations en musique anciennes et modernes (Paris: Guignard, 1681), 301–302: ‘Ce n’est pas du soulier – qui se dit zapato en langue espagnole – que ce nom est dérivé, c’est de zapata qui signifie le cuir qui se met sous le pivot des portes des pauvres gens ; et comme c’est par cet endroit que l’on fait glisser secrètement les choses que l’on veut donner sans qu’on s’en aperçoive, on a donné le nom de zapate à cet espèce de présent qui se fait avec surprise’. L’Atalanta, I, 1. Ovidio, Metamorfosi, VIII, 260–444. 222

Anna Laura Bellina: Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa

consegna le mele preziose a Ippomene che le lascerà cadere a terra, per distrarre l’amata avversaria e per guadagnare il traguardo prima di lei.31 Nella conclusione del secondo atto, una ‘machina ornata di risplendentissimi raggi’ trasporta la confidente Leucippe che porge a Giovanna Battista una coppia di specchi ovali incorniciati d’argento. Anche la protagonista, al momento lieta di aver perso la gara, nella terza parte usa il montacarichi per consegnare a madama reale i frutti che nascondono tre omaggi lussuosi negli zapatos: due braccialetti e un anello ‘d’inestimabil prezzo’, il tutto tempestato di diamanti.32 Alla fine Atalanta, pentita per il suo cedimento, inferocita e ‘sitibonda’ di ‘sangue umano’, si rifugia in un ‘antro con grotte’ dove si trasforma in leonessa33 come nelle Metamorfosi ma per motivi opposti: in Ovidio perché sorpresa da Cibele nel suo tempio ad accoppiarsi con Ippomene,34 a Torino perché nemica d’amore. Per non far mancare niente alla corte sabauda, oltre alla prosopopea dell’Ozio, agli eroi e alle divinità, cantano due interlocutori comici: il misogino Ippalo e l’anziana Panopea che vagheggia inutilmente il giovane Driante. Contribuiscono a ingarbugliare l’esile trama squinternata numerosi inserti coreografici, in cui ballano nell’ordine (o meglio, nel disordine) la Curiosità impersonata da ‘cinque [...] giovinetti’, i passeggeri scesi da un vascello che rappresentano la Libertà, gruppi di due e di sei fanciulli che interpretano il Commodo e l’Interesse, quattro ridicole vecchie, le furie Tisifone, Aletto e Megera col solito armamentario di serpenti e per ultimi dodici cavalieri.35 Insieme al ‘picciol signor [Paul] La Pierre’36 detto le Jeune, figlio dell’omonimo professionista allora ultra sessantenne, danzano i cortigiani dilettanti: funzionari, aristocratici, ragazzi di buona famiglia e paggi del sovrano o del principino che alla fine appare seduto all’interno di un sole nei panni della Verità. L’‘adorabile paraninfo’, che indossa un ‘abito bianco [...] ricamato d’argento’ e ostenta una quantità esorbitante di ‘preziosissimi diamanti’,37 si esibisce in un fuori programma davanti al nobile pubblico, forse imitando Luigi XIV che aveva acquisito il soprannome di roi Soleil nel 1653, sostenendo il ruolo di Apollon nel Ballet royal de la Nuict.38 Benché non si sappia nulla della partitura perduta, il libretto informa che i personaggi eseguono ‘canzoni’ e ‘canzonette’ cioè arie, a volte con l’intercalare scritto esplicitamente, intonando brevi strofe composte da versi talora sdruccioli: quinari, senari, settenari, ottonari, decasillabi e di rado novenari, insoliti e peregrini, riservati ad Atalanta in due occasioni.39 Corredano l’opera i brani strumentali, elencati con cura nella stampa e affidati al consort savoiardo ricco di fiati: l’ouverture dopo il prologo, un ensemble di piccole cornamuse francesi chiamate ‘musette’, per terminare il primo atto, un ‘armonioso concerto’ che accompagna il volo di Leucippe, una ‘sinfonia di tutti i stromenti [...] esprimente orrore e spavento’ con ‘fragor de’ tuoni’ e ‘balenar de’ lampi’ quando appaiono le furie, un ‘rimbombo di trombe’ per il saggetto coreografico di Vittorio Amedeo. Fra i violinisti 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39

Rispettivamente L’Atalanta, I, 4–5. II, 4. L’Atalanta, III, 1. L’Atalanta, III, 6. Ovidio, Metamorfosi, X, 560-707. Rispettivamente L’Atalanta, I, 1. I, 6. II, 3. II, 6. III, 2. III, 7. L’Atalanta, 14. L’Atalanta, 73. [Isaac de Benserade], Ballet royal de la Nuict (Paris: Ballard, 1653) (musica di Jean de Cambefort e altri). L’Atalanta, I, 2. III, 1. 223

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

sedevano Paolo Canavasso e i fratelli Somis (Matteo Giacinto, Giovanni Battista e Annibale), membri delle rinomate dinastie che fornivano i musici da camera al sovrano.40 Va da sé che un simile spettacolo, sia pure allestito in un periodo di grande circolazione operistica, non venne mai replicato perché l’occasione particolare, la lungaggine del recitativo, la cifra encomiastica locale e la complessità dell’orchestra lo rendevano inadatto a qualunque ripresa. Qualche anno dopo la messinscena dell’Atalanta, il conte parigino Jacques d’Alibert, che organizza la stagione di carnevale a Torino nel 1677–1678, cerca di avviare una produzione stabile a pagamento ma non riesce nell’impresa e torna a Roma da dov’era venuto. Solo nel 1680, per il fidanzamento effimero del quattordicenne Vittorio Amedeo II con la cuginetta Isabella Luisa di Braganza, infanta del Portogallo, si allestisce un teatro nel palazzo di San Giovanni,41 chiamato ‘Regio’ come l’attuale che venne commissionato più avanti a Filippo Juvarra dal medesimo sovrano ma inaugurato nel 1740 dal successore Carlo Emanuele III, dopo la morte del progettista. Del resto, secondo una satira intitolata La Ramira e rimasta non a caso manoscritta,42 non si conclude nemmeno il matrimonio, voluto dall’invadente madama reale e osteggiato con tutte le sue forze dal giovane duca. Sono destinati quindi alla vecchia sala di corte per il carnevale del 1688 Gli amori delusi da Amore,43 con la traduzione francese stampata a pagina dispari e definita una ‘tragédie en musique’ che non si può cantare perché in prosa. Forse è troppo azzardata l’ipotesi che l’edizione bilingue rappresenti un omaggio ad Anna Maria di Borbone Orléans, con cui il Savoia si era finalmente sposato nel 1684. Stesso tipografo, stesso mito di Dafne e testo italiano quasi uguale per il ‘melodrama’ dal titolo Amore vendicato.44 Anche gli imprimatur dei due libretti riportano la medesima data, ‘octavo [die] kalendas februarii 1688’ ovvero il 25 gennaio, sempre con la firma di Giuseppe Maria Revelli,45 al quale un autorevole repertorio attribuisce la paternità dei versi:46 una scappatella inverosimile e troppo frivola per un delegato del Sant’Uffizio. Inoltre uno studio poderoso afferma, omettendo però la fonte, che Revelli sarebbe un medico pagato duecento lire ‘per conto stampa dell’opera’47 ovvero un improbabile omonimo del censore che avrebbe ricevuto un anticipo sulle spese della pubblicazione. Le redazioni sabaude, che naturalmente disattendono l’unità d’azione, concordano nell’ironico avvertimento A chi legge, nell’elenco di danze, macchine, cori e nella presenza di ruoli comici: il valletto Garbo e un ‘pastor sciocco che serve d’intramezzo e dà occasione ad un ballo di satiri’.48 40 A. Basso, L’Eridano e la Dora festeggianti, 335–341. 41 Luciano Tamburini, ‘L’architettura dalle origini al 1936’, in Storia del teatro Regio di Torino, a cura di A.

Basso, vol. 4 (Torino: Cassa di Risparmio di Torino, 1983), 1–6.

42 La Ramira, I-Tr, mss. vari, I, 59; M. Viale Ferrero, ‘La Ramira, un dramma a chiave e le sue scene’, in Arte

43 44 45 46 47 48

in Europa. Scritti di storia dell’arte in onore di Edoardo Arslan, a cura di Giudo Mansuelli (Milano: Artipo, 1966), 727–736; A. Basso, L’Eridano e la Dora festeggianti, 357, 368 (attribuisce La Ramira a Sebenico ma con qualche dubbio e senza alcun fondamento). Gli amori delusi da Amore / Les amours trompez par l’Amour (Torino: Colonna, 1688); corago.unibo.it/ esemplare/7AE0001422/DPC0000680; www.urfm.braidense.it/rd/02258.pdf. Amore vendicato (Torino: Colonna, 1688) (libretto I-Rsc, US-Cu). Gli amori delusi da Amore, 120 n. n. Amore vendicato, retro del frontespizio. Cfr. corago.unibo.it, s.v. A. Basso, L’Eridano e la Dora festeggianti, 379, 382–383. Gli amori delusi da Amore, 6; Amore vendicato, 21. 224

Anna Laura Bellina: Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa

Sono vagamente analoghe perfino le incisioni, quella elegante che correda Gli amori delusi col trionfo di Apollo sul carro del sole (Figura 1), attribuita allo scenografo Ippolito Mazarino,49 e quella di Amore vendicato, più naïve ma altrettanto eloquente, disegnata dall’architetto Iacopo Maggi e incisa da Georges Tasnière, che rappresenta la ninfa nell’atto di mutarsi in alloro sotto gli occhi del dio stupefatto, dei genitori e di Eros che vola compiaciuto a sinistra della quadriga (Figura 2).

Fig. 1. [Ippolito Mazarino], antiporta, Gli amori delusi da Amore (Torino: Colonna, 1688), Milano, Biblioteca Nazionale Braidense, Racc.dramm.2258 49 M. Viale Ferrero, ‘Tra Venezia e Torino. L’opera in viaggio’, in La barca sublime. Palcoscenico regale sull’ac-

qua, a cura di Elisabetta Ballaira, Silvia Ghisotti, Angela Griseri (Torino: Silvana Editoriale, 2012), 35–41. 225

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Fig. 2. Iacopo Maggi, Georges Tasnière, antiporta, Amore vendicato (Torino: Colonna, 1688), Chicago, University of Chicago Library, PQ4561.A52 1688

In entrambi i casi la fabula, già sceneggiata da Rinuccini a Firenze e ripresa a Mantova nel 1608, narra la passione concepita da Apollo, solare dio della melica greca e corifeo delle muse, per la ritrosa naiade che si trasforma nella pianta destinata a incoronare le glorie del connubio secolare fra suoni e parole. Presso i Medici e i Gonzaga, le radici metamorfiche del nuovo genere, quasi a indicare la meraviglia della poesia trasfigurata in canto, erano svelate nel prologo della Dafne da Ovidio in persona,50 al quale s’ispirano direttamente o meno Gli amori d’Apollo e di Dafne di Giovanni Francesco Busenello per Cavalli, dati a Venezia nel 165651 e a quanto sembra mai ripresi a Torino. Siccome i librettisti si prendevano di rado la briga di leggere i classici ma li orecchiavano citandoli per darsi un tono erudito e per invocarne l’auctoritas, il poeta dei testi piemontesi contamina due tradizioni. Infatti la protagonista è figlia di Peneo, secondo la versione delle Metamorfosi,52 e non del 50 La Dafne, 3 n.n. 51 Gli amori d’Apollo e di Dafne (Venezia: Giuliani, 1656). 52 Ovidio, Metamorfosi, I, 452–567. 226

Anna Laura Bellina: Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa

fiume Ladone come vuole Pausania che concede un maggior risalto a Leucippo,53 l’altro spasimante della fanciulla. In ogni caso l’intonazione, spesso attribuita a Sebenico,54 si deve a Giovanni Carisio detto l’Orbino che la terminò qualche mese prima di morire.55 Al contrario è proprio ‘don Giovanni Sebenico, maestro di capella di sua altezza’, che per la vecchia sala intona Leonida in Sparta nel 1689,56 seguito nel 1690 dagli anonimi Gemelli rivali ‘dell’a. d’A.’, secondo quanto recita il frontespizio sibillino della stampa. Nell’esemplare di quest’ultimo libretto conservato a Modena, una mano coeva ha scritto una sintetica noterella, affermando che i due testi sono dello stesso poeta.57 Da qui deriva l’attribuzione di entrambe le pièces, per la verità un po’ temeraria, al bergamasco Pietro d’Averara,58 in effetti ‘a.’ come abate attivo a Torino nel 1689.59 Ma nella premessa Al lettore, l’artefice di Leonida si dichiara del tutto inesperto: ‘Per servire al genio di chi commanda, eccomi quel che non sono e forzato a comparire quel che mai fui, cioè divenuto autore d’un drama, senza sapere tampoco che si sia teatro’.60 In realtà d’Averara aveva già debuttato a Venezia,61 per poi confezionare una trentina di opere, spesso destinate al Regio di Milano e dedicate ai grandi di Spagna che allora governavano la città. Tratta da un’‘istoria riferita da Plutarco’,62 stravolta ma identificabile con la biografia di Agide IV nelle Vite parallele,63 l’opera sabauda narra le avventure di Leonida II, detronizzato dal genero progressista Cleombroto nel 242 e restaurato nel 241 a.C. In una macchina a forma di nuvola, Pallade e il Fato cantano il prologo, mentre svolazzano i geni della Vendetta e danzano le Virtù, in numero di otto anziché sette, per ovvie ragioni di simmetria. Lo spettacolo prevede quattro balli, undici mutazioni e dodici personaggi: cinque di rango sovrano (compreso il title role), una confidente, due damigelle semiserie e due grandi del regno, oltre ai caratteri comici ossia la governante Galba e il ‘servo faceto’ Baffo.64 Anche se la partitura è perduta, il libretto segnala una mezza dozzina di duetti, qualche recitativo patetico della prima donna sola sul palco, en travesti ‘sotto nome d’Oreste’,65 e un paio di arie in media per ogni scena, di sortita o di mezzo o d’entrata, col da capo stampato esplicitamente nel novanta per cento dei casi.

53 Pausania, Descrizione della Grecia, VIII, 20, 2–4. 54 A. Zanini, ‘Sebenico, Giovanni Domenico’; L. Županović, ‘Sebenico, Giovanni’; corago.unibo.it. 55 M. Viale Ferrero, ‘Repliche a Torino’, 154; Guy Borligueux, ‘Carisio, Giovanni’, Grove Music Online

(2001), s.v., https://doi.org/10.1093/gmo/9781561592630.article.04931.

56 Leonida in Sparta (Torino: Zappata, 1689), 7; corago.unibo.it/esemplare/7AE0002049/DPC0000724. 57 I gemelli rivali (Torino: Paulino, 1690) (libretto I-MOe, retro del frontespizio: ‘Nel 1689 questo poeta

scrisse il Leonida in Sparta’).

58 Cfr. per esempio Marie Thérèse Bouquet, Musique et musiciens à Turin de 1648 à 1775 (Torino: Accademia

59 60 61 62 63 64

65

delle Scienze, 1968), 89. Invece Drammaturgia di Lione Allacci (Venezia: Pasquali, 1755), s.v. I gemelli rivali: ‘Poesia d’incerto autore’. Ivi, s.v. Leonida in Sparta [Poesia] d’incerto autore’. Cfr. Silvio re degli Albani (Torino: Zappata, 1689) (esplicitamente attribuito a d’Averara). Al lettore, in Leonida in Sparta, 3. L’amante fortunato per forza (Venezia: Nicolini, 1684); Publio Elio Pertinace (Venezia: Nicolini 1684). Argomento, in Leonida in Sparta, 4. Plutarco, Le vite parallele, XIX, Agide e Cleomene / Tiberio e Caio Gracco, 10–17. Leonida in Sparta, 6; A. Basso, L’Eridano e la Dora festeggianti, 393 (afferma che il libretto riporta i nomi di altri operatori, fra cui gli scenografi veneziani Gaspare e Domenico Mauro; ma in realtà nella stampa non c’è traccia dell’informazione). Leonida in Sparta, I, 12. 227

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

A differenza dell’Atalanta, l’intricata vicenda politica e sentimentale somiglia molto ai drammi veneziani coevi, dei quali adotta i topoi presi in giro da Benedetto Marcello nel Teatro alla moda del 1720:66 per esempio la lettera che aumenta la confusione del plot, la damigella Eurilla che si fa una bella dormita davanti al pubblico, il tiranno Cleombroto che esegue due strofe di quinari sdruccioli ‘incatenato’ nella solita prigione,67 il canonico happy end con tre matrimoni e col ricongiungimento dell’usurpatore alla sposa fedele che aveva tradito.68 Leonida reprime la rivolta della plebe, perdona tutti a differenza di quanto accade nella fonte classica, torna al suo posto e pronuncia la morale della favola: Sogli eccelsi e vasti imperi cieca sorte ha sotto il piè. Ma del ciel gli alti pensieri serban sempre il trono al re. (III, 20)

Mentre i Savoia erano alle prese con la guerra del sale e con le ventennali sommosse di Mondovì, che avrebbero stroncato volentieri imitando il sovrano di Sparta, la repubblica oligarchica di Venezia accolse un adattamento di Leonida nella sala dei Grimani a San Giovanni e Paolo nel 1692, col titolo nuovo L’oppresso sollevato.69 Siccome il compositore lascia il Piemonte nel 1690 e torna a Cividale il 30 giugno del 1692,70 il suo intervento diretto non è provato né dai tempi del trasferimento in Friuli, anteriore alla ripresa che avviene circa sei mesi dopo durante la stagione invernale,71 né dalla stampa del rifacimento che non fa cenno all’attribuzione delle modifiche.72 La premessa indirizzata al Benignissimo lettore dichiara soltanto che il dramma, ‘già in Torino diversamente rappresentato’ con la ‘vaga musica’ di ‘Sebenico, maestro di capella dell’invitto regnante di Savoia’, ‘per necessità dell’uso’ locale è stato ‘negli accidenti e nella sostanza rifformato’ da un ‘secondo’ poeta che ha lavorato per cambiarlo più di quanto non avrebbe faticato a inventarlo di sana 66 Benedetto Marcello, Il teatro alla moda, a cura di Michele Geremia, Marco Bizzarini (Treviso: Diastema,

67 68 69

70 71

72

2015), 15: ‘Gli accidenti dell’opera saranno prigionie, stili, veleni, lettere, caccie d’orsi e di tori, terremoti, saette, sagrifizi, saldi, pazzie, ecc., imperciocché da tali impensate cose il popolo resta oltremodo commosso; e se mai si potesse introdurre una scena nella quale alcuni degli attori si mettessero a sedere e altri a dormire in un bosco o giardino, nel qual tempo gli venisse insidiata la vita e si risvegliassero (il che mai non s’è veduto sul teatro italiano), ciò sarebbe un toccare l’estremo della meraviglia’. Angela Romagnoli, ‘Fra catene, fra stili e fra veleni...’, ossia della scena di prigione nell’opera italiana (1690– 1724) (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, 1995). Rispettivamente Leonida in Sparta, II, 10. II, 11–12. III, 19–20. L’oppresso sollevato (Venezia: Albrizzi, 1692) (vari esemplari on line fra cui bildsuche.digitale-sammlungen. de/index.html?c=viewer&bandnummer=bsb00048567&pimage=13&v=100&nav=&l=it; rist. anastatica: London: Forgotten books, 2018). A. Zanini, ‘Sebenico, Giovanni Domenico’: ‘Il 30 giugno 1692 [...] venne eletto per acclamazione dai canonici [a Cividale]’. Antonio Groppo, Catalogo purgatissimo di tutti li drammi per musica recitatisi ne’ teatri di Venezia dall’anno 1637 sin oggi [1767] da Antonio Groppo accresciuto di tutti li scenarii, varie edizioni, aggiunte a drammi e intermedii (Venezia: 1741 [ma 1767]), ms., I-Vnm, cod. it., VII, 2326 (= 8263), 124–125: ‘Anno 1692 d’inverno [...]. Oppresso sollevato [...], poesia d’incerto’. Cfr. invece Francesco Saverio Quadrio, Della storia e della ragione d’ogni poesia (Milano: Agnelli, 1744), III, 2. 516: ‘Sebenico [mai nominato prima], veneto [...] fece la musica a un [...] dramma d’incerto [librettista] che porta per titolo L’oppresso sollevato’. Drammaturgia, cit., s.v. L’oppresso sollevato: ‘Poesia d’incerto autore; musica di don Giovanni Sebenico’. A. Zanini, ‘Sebenico, Giovanni Domenico’: ‘[L’elezione a Cividale] non gli impedì di adattare Leonida in Sparta ad un nuovo dramma per musica, L’oppresso sollevato’. 228

Anna Laura Bellina: Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa

pianta: ‘Li versi del primo auttore saranno segnati così: ” [con apici doppi]; li alterati con un punto, li aggiunti senza segno alcuno e li aggiunti ma per ora [ossia durante la recita] ommessi [saranno evidenziati con due lineette]: - -’.73 Un Argomento, così scritto dal primo auttore, ossia dal librettista della redazione piemontese ma in realtà un po’ tagliato, precede il testo dell’opera,74 pasticciato da una selva di trattini, di punti e e di virgolette a margine. Non a caso l’antiporta della stampa, impressa da Girolamo Albrizzi e distribuita da Francesco Nicolini nella sua bottega della Spadaria, a pochi passi da piazza San Marco, reca un’incisione del veronese Alessandro Dalla Via che rappresenta il crollo di un edificio classico, sovrastato da un cartiglio col motto ‘ut erigam’ (Figura 3). Anche se a quanto pare si tratta del labile tempio della Fortuna,75 evidentemente era necessario distruggere l’antico per costruire qualcosa di moderno e per adattarlo alle scene lagunari, grazie alla collaborazione di un poeta e di un musicista dei quali non si conosce l’identità.

Fig. 3. Alessandro Dalla Via, antiporta, L’oppresso sollevato (Venezia: Albrizzi, 1692), Roma, Deutsches Historisches Institut, Rar. Libr. Ven. 287/293#290. 73 L’oppresso sollevato, 7–8. 74 L’oppresso sollevato, 9–10. 75 Vanessa Donaggio, ‘Alessandro Dalla Via: Un contributo all’arte incisoria veneta tra XVII e XVIII secolo’,

AFAT, arte in Friuli, arte a Trieste 36 (2017), 47–131: 98. 229

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Dato che viene cancellato il prologo macchinoso con la reggia di Pallade, le mutazioni calano a dieci, mentre i balli piemontesi diminuiscono da quattro a due, sistemati fra un atto e l’altro come d’uso nei teatri veneziani. Rispetto all’originale del 1689, diviso in tre parti per un totale di sessantadue scene, la nuova redazione ne ha quindici in meno. Il revisore taglia i personaggi da dodici a otto, mantenendo ovviamente il title role, tre coppie e un solo comico cioè il ‘servo faceto’ che acquista il nome esplicito di Buffo. Se l’impianto è più o meno lo stesso, in buona misura le parole sono diverse, con i medesimi topoi rimescolati: è Cleonice, vestita da uomo anche al San Giovanni e Paolo, che scrive una lettera al padre, poi finita nelle mani del fratello;76 è Cleombroto che si addormenta al posto di Eurilla;77 è Leonida che soffre ‘incatenato’ al pari del genero;78 ed è la principessa Solanice che spedisce una seconda missiva intercettata da Meraspe.79 Forse non è un caso che l’editore Albrizzi rivolga una dedica melensa a Giorgio Guglielmo di Braunschweig Lüneburg del ramo di Celle,80 così chiamato dal castello nella Bassa Sassonia dove la dinastia possedeva una residenza fino al 1705. La casata era ‘benemerita’ della ‘serenissima patria’81 perché il duca forniva i mercenari per la guerra di Morea, allora in corso, ed era lo zio nonché il suocero dell’elettore Giorgio di Hannover, poi re d’Inghilterra, che nel 1683 aveva partecipato alla battaglia di Vienna contro i turchi. Nel 1684 Venezia aderiva alla Santa Lega insieme a Vittorio Amedeo II che, oltre a combattere la minaccia ottomana, manteneva un’orchestra nutrita e variegata, al punto da prestare quattro oboisti a Vincenzo Grimani per farli suonare nella recita dell’Oppresso,82 in un’occasione insolita perché stavolta la pièce transita a rovescio da Torino al teatro lagunare di San Giovanni e Paolo. Se il dramma viene scorciato eliminando episodi e personaggi coi relativi pezzi chiusi, in compenso il cuore dello spettacolo è occupato dall’aggiunta della Serenata, una specie di breve intermedio nell’opera, in cui le tre sirene figlie di Acheloo, sedute sopra ‘un gran mostro marino’, si esibiscono vicino all’acqua dolce anziché salata ovvero in un ‘giardino delizioso’ sulla riva del fiume Eurota che bagna la regione di Laconia. Partenope, accompagnata da Leucasia, Ligia, ‘glauchi e tritoni’, canta per dilettare Solanice invece che per sedurre l’astuto, curioso e indomabile Ulisse.83 Beninteso il librettista non si esprime sull’esito infausto della leggenda che Omero tace e che Licofrone di Calcide racconta nel suo poema del V secolo a.C.: poiché l’eroe non aveva ceduto alla fascinazione, le sorelle si sarebbero suicidate fra le onde che avrebbero trasportato le loro spoglie sulle coste della Campania, della Puglia e della Calabria.84 L’anonimo revisore non si fa scappare né il mito marittimo né l’assonanza fra il nome di Leonida e il leone marciano della repubblica, alludendo nel nuovo finale all’egemonia sul 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

L’oppresso sollevato, I, 8. II, 13. L’oppresso sollevato, I, 12–13. L’oppresso sollevato, II, 5; III, 17. L’oppresso sollevato, III, 9. L’oppresso sollevato, frontespizio: ‘Consagrato all’altezza serenissima del duca Giorgio di Zell [Celle], Bronsvich Lonemburg’. L’oppresso sollevato, 4. M. Viale Ferrero, ‘Repliche a Torino’, 156. L’oppresso sollevato, II, 1–2. Licofrone, L’Alessandra, 712–737. 230

Anna Laura Bellina: Giovanni Sebenico o Ivan Šibenčanin? Andata e ritorno dalla Serenissima all’Europa

Peloponneso, esercitata da Sparta soprattutto dal 520 a.C., ai tempi di Cleomene Agiade e quindi oltre un secolo prima della ribellione di Cleombroto narrata nel libretto. Però le recenti vittorie della Serenissima, che stava riprendendo terreno e conquistando la penisola greca durante la guerra di Morea, bastano e avanzano per giustificare l’anacronismo: Viva eterna l’alma degna di Leonida agl’onori e nel nome suo s’adori il leon ch’invitto regna or di Sparta a l’ampia riva. Viva, viva. (III, 18)

Benché a quanto pare abbia musicato per intero due opere sole, di cui una dimenticata subito e una riveduta per l’importante sala dei Grimani,85 Sebenico transita in Europa da sud a nord e da ovest a est, come altri più autorevoli e più prolifici di lui, frequentando con successo i territori veneziani e l’Inghilterra degli Stuart, intonando L’Atalanta francoispano-piemontese e Leonida in Sparta, esportato dalla corte dei Savoia al mercato lagunare che lo riprende con le opportune modifiche. Tornato sotto l’egida della Serenissima, nel 1695 il compositore accetta la carica di pievano nella natia Corbolone ma è a Cividale che muore il 29 settembre del 1705, lasciando ai posteri una parte della sua produzione sacra.86

85 Claudio Sartori, I libretti italiani a stampa dalle origini al 1800 (Cuneo: Bertola e Locatelli, 1990–1994)

attribuisce a Sebenico solamente L’Atalanta, Leonida in Sparta e L’oppresso sollevato.

86 Dedit abyssus vocem suam, A, T, B, bc (mottetto), e Laudate pueri dominum, B, bc (mottetto), GB-Y (ed.

Zagreb: MIC, 2008). Messa chiamata ‘L’imitazione zoccolantissima’ (per i frati minori francescani), coro (2 S, 2 B), bc, I-CF. Responsorio di Sant’Antonio di Padova (Si quaeris miracula), S, 2 vl, bc, I-CF; ed. in Iz baroka u romantiku [From Baroque to Romanticism], a cura di L. Županović, Spomenici hrvatske glazbene prošlosti, vol. 9 (Zagreb: Društvo muzičkih radnika Hrvatske Croatia concert, 1978). Lauda Ierusalem Dominum (salmo 147), 5 V, archi, I-CF; ed. in Iz renesanse u barok [From Renaissance to Baroque], a cura di L. Županović, Spomenici hrvatske glazbene prošlosti, vol. 2 (Zagreb: Društvo hrvatskih skladatelja, 1971). O dolor, o maeror, A, T, B, bc, CZ-KRa (RISM: databile al 1675–1699). Le ricerche sull’attività profana di Sebenico, effettuate nel RISM, in F-Pn, in GB-Lbl e in I-Tn, non hanno dato alcun esito. 231

Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones (1620) and historically informed performances in Croatian festivals from 1980s to 2010s Dario Poljak Academy of Music, University of Zagreb, Croatia

Dragan Plamenac and the lost collection It is not possible to point exactly to the date when historically informed performance practices became common in Europe or outside of it. Nevertheless, common ground can be found on the question of when did such performances of pieces written before roughly 1800 start becoming rather common. Early music pioneers such as Nikolaus Harnoncourt or Gustav Leonhardt started changing the view on music from the Renaissance, Baroque and even Classical period. Besides bringing a new perspective to canonical works (such as Bach’s Brandenburg Concertos or Vivaldi’s concerti), historically informed performance practice has become a way through which new, earlier, never-performed repertoire could be brought to light. Ivan Lukačić, however, was not one of those composers who was first presented through a historically informed performance, but rather through a traditional one.1 After discovering partbooks in the former Prussian State Library in Berlin, Croatian musicologist Dragan Plamenac published an article in Obzor in 1934 titled ‘The Unknown Croatian Musician of the Early Baroque.’2 In that article he presented the only known collection by Ivan Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones, to a wider audience. Since he already had a vast knowledge regarding transcribing early music from his studies (his PhD was concerned with motets and chansons by Johannes Ockeghem),3 he transcribed a selection from Sacrae cantiones for a concert at the Croatian Music Institute called Iz hrvatske muzičke prošlosti4 (From the Croatian Musical Past, 19 December 1935). Plamenac had a double role as a conductor and continuo player (on the piano), besides 1 2 3 4

Since HIP in the modern sense of the syntagm became common after the 1950s. Dragan Plamenac, ‘Nepoznat hrvatski muzičar ranoga baroka’ [The Unknown Croatian Musician of the Early Baroque], Obzor 75/293 (1934), 6. D. Plamenac, Johannes Ockeghem als Motetten- und Chansonkomponist: nebst einleitender Bibliographie seines Gesamtwerkes (doctoral dissertation, Universität Wien, 1924). Besides his notable transcription of Lukačić’s motets, Dragan Plamenac was a keen music paleographer who transcribed many works by Johannes Ockeghem. His critical editions show that he was familiar with the most-up-to-date trends in music paleography. His edition of Lukačić’s motets casts a different light on his paleographical work: he demonstrated that he is also up-to-date on performance practice. Cf. Johannes Ockeghem, Messen I–VIII, ed. D. Plamenac (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel Musikverlag, 1927); J. Ockeghem, Johannes Ockeghem Collected Works (New York: Columbia University Press, 1947); J. Ockeghem, Motets and Chansons, ed. D. Plamenac with Richard Wexler (Boston: American Musicological Society, E. C. Schirmer, 1992). 233

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

being the author of the programme notes for the booklet of the concert.5 Thus, that concert was the start of the modern reception of Lukačić’s works.

Fig. 1. I. Lukačić, Sicut cedrus, excerpt from the microfilm containing Dragan Plamenac’s transcription of Sacrae cantiones kept at the Division for the History of Croatian Music of the Institute for the History of Croatian Literature, Theater and Music in Zagreb, Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts. 5

Cf. Ennio Stipčević, Ivan Lukačić (Zagreb: MIC, 2007), 131. 234

Dario Poljak: Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones (1620) and historically informed performances in Croatian festivals

Fig. 2. I. Lukačić, Osculetur me, excerpt from the microfilm containing Dragan Plamenac’s transcription of Sacrae cantiones.

Prior to that concert, in the same year, the Croatian Music Institute published Plamenac’s transcription of selected pieces from Sacrae cantiones.6 It is a performance edition, which he noted himself, saying that he is preparing ‘a complete critical edition of the whole col6

Ivan Lukačić, Odabrani moteti [Selected Motets], ed. Dragan Plamenac (Zagreb: HGZ, 1935; 2nd edn. 1975). 235

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

lection’, adding that it will be ‘completely faithful to the original, without the continuo realisation and additions necessary for interpretation.’7 After World War II, the only known collection of partbooks of Sacrae cantiones went missing, and the only sources, according to Stipčević,8 for Lukačić’s work were the transcriptions made by Plamenac. He prepared in manuscript a complete transcription of the collection, which was microfilmed and sent to the Music Department of the Yugoslavian Academy of Arts and Sciences (nowadays the Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences – HAZU). Therefore, the editions of Lukačić’s music that were made after World War II are based mostly on Plamenac’s microfilmed work, which is confirmed by Josip Andreis, in his foreword to the edition of sixteen motets he published in 1970.9 But it remains to be researched how exactly Josip Andreis did this, since Plamenac did not write the lyrics of many motets in the microfilmed version, as can be seen in Figures 1 and 2. It was not until 1983 that original partbooks were re-discovered by Ennio Stipčević in the Jagiellonian Library in Krakow. Three years later he published the first critical edition of the complete collection for Edizioni Messagero from Padua.10 After that, the collection was only brought out in a facsimile edition by the Information Centre from Zagreb (MIC) in 1998. Selecting the recordings This paper will focus on selected live recordings of Lukačić’s music that can be found in the archives of Croatian Radiotelevision (HRT) and try to show what they tell us about the relationship of Lukačić’s work and historically informed performance in the second half of the 20th Century in Croatia. There are several reasons why this research is focused on radio recordings, the main one being that these recordings were made live. The recording process for albums (such as CDs) is often complicated, involving different approaches to editing the recording itself – for example, an artist can record the first part of the composition, then the second, and afterwards they are ‘glued’ together in the studio in order to achieve a perfect continuity of performance. On the other hand, live concert recordings made by the radio present a continuous performance of selected pieces that have not been tampered with in the studio in the same was as with studio recordings. Editing a live concert recording made especially for the radio consists mostly of fixing the volumes of certain microphones and the overall sound, rather than fixing mistakes that were made by the players, since often nothing more is recorded than the concert itself. ‘Edits and patching are regarded by many classical performers as “cheats.” Their preference is for performance to unfold in real time rather than resulting from an accreative process in the recording studio where tracks are layered one over the other.’11 7 8 9

Ibid. E. Stipčević, Ivan Lukačić, 135–36. Ivan Lukačić, Šesnaest moteta iz zbirke ‘Sacrae cnationes’ (1620), ed. Josip Andreis (Zagreb: Izdanja Muzikološkog zavoda Muzičke akademije, 1970). 10 Ivan Lukačić, Sacrae cantiones, Venezia, 1620, mottetti a 1 – 5 voci, Introduction, transcription, and realisation of basso continuo by Ennio Stipčević, ed. Ludovico Bertazzo, CMF 1 (Padova: Messaggero, 1986). 11 Donald Grieg, ‘Performing for (and Against) the Microphone’, in The Cambridge Companion to Recorded 236

Dario Poljak: Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones (1620) and historically informed performances in Croatian festivals

For this research, I have decided to focus on various live performances that can be found in the rich archives of Croatian Radiotelevision. Since there are many recordings in the archives, just searching for the name of Ivan Lukačić in the internal database gives results for around 90 recordings by various performers, ranging from recordings of children’s and amateur choirs to professional recordings made specifically for the Radio (such as recordings by the Croatian Radiotelevision Choir). The selection of recordings in this research is based on live recordings made at various festivals in Croatia. Each one of these recordings is made in a different decade, ranging from the 1980s to the 2010s. The reason why the research is starting with the 1980s lies in the fact that during that decade historically informed performance practice gained full momentum within the world of discography and was recognized by scholars.12 The most important fact about these recordings is that Lukačić’s works could be presented in different ways within a singular approach. The recordings selected for this occasion were of live performances at festivals in Croatia: – – – – –

1980, Ansambl Renesans, Osorske glazbene večeri [Osor Musical Evenings] 1986, Universitas studiorum Zagrabiensis, Muzičke večeri u Donatu [Musical Evenings at St Donatus] 1990, Zadarski Madrigalisti, Muzičke večeri u Donatu [Musical Evenigns at St Donatus] 1991, Cappella Ragusina, Dubrovačke ljetne igre [Dubrovnik Summer Festival] 2013, Ansambl Antiphonus, Varaždinske barokne večeri [Varaždin Baroque Evenings]

The structure and contents of the Sacrae cantiones collection do not imply in any way that the compositions form a cycle or that they should be performed successively. The lack of such unification between compositions could be one of the reasons why no live recordings could be found in the archives of Croatian Radiotelevision that feature a complete performance of Sacrae cantiones, even after the publication of E. Stipčević’s edition in 1986. The festival recordings analysed here feature Lukačić’s works not as a central part, but rather as a piece of a mosaic in a diverse programme. Ensemble Renesans (1980) The 1980 recording of ensemble Renesans from Belgrade (the capital of today’s Republic of Serbia) was made on 10 August 1980. It is a recording of a performance at the Osor Musical Evenings summer festival which featured music by Croatian composers of the 16th and 17th centuries as well as sacred music by Serbian composers from the 15th century. The diverse program showcases compositions by Andrea Antico da Montona, Franciscus Bossinensis, Andrea Patricio, Julije Skjavetić, Marco Antonio Romano, Tomaso Cecchini, Ivan Lukačić, Kir Stefan Srbin, Nikola Srbin and Isaija Srbin, with a second part of the concert dedicated to ‘old custom songs and dances of Serbia’13 (lasting for approximately 31 minutes). Ensemble Renesans is an ensemble that performed Music, eds. Nicholas Cook, Eric Clarke, Daniel Leech-Wilkinson, John Rink (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 16–29, doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CCOL9780521865821. 12 Cf. Bernard D. Sherman, Inside Early Music (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 198. 13 According to the programme notes. For further information about the festival, see Dodi Komanov, Arkadija hrvatske glazbe: 30 godina festivala Osorske glazbene večeri [Arcadia of Croatian Music: 30 Years of Osor Musical Evenings] (Zagreb: Osorske glazbene večeri, 2006). 237

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

in a historically informed manner, underlined not only by its approach to the style of performing music but also by the use of period instruments.14 In this concert, two motets by Lukačić were chosen, Cantabo Domino and Orantibus in loco isto. Thanks to the detailed programme booklet, we also have information about the editions used, which is in this case an unpublished edition by Milo Asić. Two singers, soprano Mira Savić and mezzosoprano Ilona Kantor, are accompanied by viola da gamba, lute and organ. The recording unfolds a performance that is in line with pioneering attempts to perform early music in general. The performance of the continuo part is rather simple: while the organ plays simple chords with occasional improvisations that form parallel thirds with the voice in Cantabo Domino, the lute plays an occasional 4–3 suspension in the final cadences, often doubling the voice by doing the same. But such doubling can ‘spoil all the beauty’, as noted by Andreas Werckmeister in his Die nothwendigsten Anmerckungen und Regeln wie der Bassus continuus oder General-Bass wol könne tractiert warden (1698), who suggests that playing the same dissonances which appear in the vocal line is not desirable.15 The relation between duple and triple time in these cases is represented by an approach which sees triple time as almost twice as fast as duple time, which is not uncommon even around 30 to 40 years later. ‘Critics of the “slow” triple time justify changing the implied proportional relationships arguing that, by 1610, the mensural system of notation was beginning to break down. […] The theorists often give vague or contradictory information on the matter and much of the debate depends on what unit of time is taken as the basis of tactus’,16 notes Jonathan P. Wainwright when writing on a Lukačić’s contemporary Claudio Monteverdi and his Vespers. Such an approach showcases a usual historically informed performance that is in line with similar performances of 17th century music around 1980. Universitas studiorum Zagrabiensis (1986) An early music ensemble was founded by students at the University of Zagreb Academy of Music. The concert at the 1986 Muzičke večeri u sv. Donatu featured mostly Croatian17 music of the Renaissance and Baroque periods composed by Julije Skjavetić, Vinko Jelić, Franciscus Bossinensis, Andrea Antico da Montona, Ivan Lukačić and Tomaso Cecchini. The most peculiar thing about this concert is the fact that, although it featured music from the Renaissance and early Baroque, the piece that was chosen for the opening of the concert is Sanctus from Zadar that was at the time mis-dated to the 12th century, 14 The use of the term period instrument in the context of historically informed performances in this case

encompasses all the kinds of instruments (originals or replicas) that were used around time of the creation of a piece that is performed. 15 See also Roland Jackson, ‘It Can “Spoil All the Beauty”: The Duplicating of Solo Dissonances in Seventeenth-Century Thorough-bass Accompaniment’, Performance Practice Review 11/1–2 (2006), 4–5. 16 Jonathan P. Wainwright, ‘Case Study: Monteverdi, Vespers (1610)’, in The Cambridge History of Musical Performance, eds. Colin Lawson, Robin Stowell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 448–470: 468. 17 It is difficult to speak about the nationality of the musicians that were present in Croatia during the 16th and 17th centuries, but those who had at least some connection with Croatian lands of the period are here considered as part of the Croatian music heritage. Cf. E. Stipčević: Hrvatska glazba [Croatian Music] (Zagreb: Školska knjiga, 1997). 238

Dario Poljak: Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones (1620) and historically informed performances in Croatian festivals

which was corrected18 years later to the 13th century. Lukačić is represented by three motets, Cantabo Domino, Orantibus in loco isto and Cantate Domino, all sung by soprano Darija Hreljanović. Her way of singing is not heavily influenced by classical operatic technique, she seems to be restraining from heavy vibrato. The basso continuo part is represented by viola da gamba and spinet, both playing in all of the mentioned motetes. The realization of continuo, however, is not improvised by the continuo player who played the exactly written out continuo part by Dragan Plamenac from his 1935 edition. The use of arpeggio is reserved solely for the final chords in the cadences, and an ornate trill was added by the spinet player at the penultimate beat of every motet, which was then closed by a long arpeggio of the final chord. Orantibus in loco isto and Cantate Domino are both twopart motets in which the soprano was not joined by a second voice. That part was played by the recorder in a static manner that was appropriate to the way of playing demonstrated by other instrumentalists. Historically informed performance practice in the case of this recording was observed from a distance, i. e. solely through the use of instruments (although the spinet is a revival type of instrument). Zadar Madrigalists (1990) Just as Ensemble Renesans liked (and still does) to perform music in costumes that reflect the era from which they are performing, so did ensemble Zadar Madriglists (Zadarski madrigalisti) in a concert performed in 1990 at the Muzičke večeri u sv. Donatu.19 The programme consisted of various composers of the 16th and 17th centuries, such as Heinrich Isaac, Henry VIII, Thomas Morley, Andrea Antico da Montona, as well as Tomaso Cecchini and Ivan Lukačić. Here again, just as with the concert of the Universitas studiorum Zagrabiensis, the programme starts with the 13th century Sanctus from Zadar. Although this was an amateur ensemble, it did engage in performing in a historically informed manner, which is witnessed by the use of period instruments. However, the harpsichord used was a revival type of instrument,20 a type that could still be heard in early music performances in Croatia which were presented in traditional manner. In performing Cantabo Domino, again, just as in the performance of Univeristas studiorum Zagrabiensis, the harpsichord player is relying on the continuo part realised by Dragan Plamenac in his 1935 edition. Here again the arpeggios are reserved solely for the cadences. The vocal part is performed without vibrato, just as with all the parts in the performance of Canite et psallite which is sung by one or a few voices per part. Harpsichord is accompanying both soli and tutti with an added 16’ stop, but even with such a robust sound that requires quite some energy in playing with all the stops on the harpsichord, there seem to be significantly more embellishments in its realization than in Cantabo Domino. 18

Cf. Hana Breko Kustura, ‘The Tradition of Liturgical Polyphony on the Eastern Adriatic Coast’, in Renaissance Music in the Slavic World, eds. Marco Guerrieri, Vasco Zara (Turnhout: Brepols, 2019), 25–39. 19 The festival has slightly changed its name through the years. In 1990 the name was Muzičke večeri u Sv. Donatu, or in English, Donat Musical Evenings. Today, the name of the festival is Glazbene večeri u Sv. Donatu, or in English, Musical Evening at St Donatus. 20 A kind of harpsichord that was not made as a copy of a certain historical instrument, but rather built according to new principles introduced in the 20th century. Among the builders of such instruments after World War II were Pleyel and Neupert, the latter being the most popular in Croatia. 239

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Cappella Ragusina (1991) In the year 1991 the early music ensemble Cappella Ragusina performed a concert which was clearly divided into two parts by the programme; the first part was dedicated to music from Croatian sources, while the second was from other parts of Europe. The ‘Croatian’ part included songs from the collection Cithara octochorda, a Glagolitic chant as well as other sacred songs from the Pauline Songbook (Pavlinska pjesmarica), a song by Atanazije Grgičević Jurjević and a traditional kolenda of Moravian Croats from 1582. The last piece of this part of the programme was Ivan Lukačić’s Cantabo Domino. In this performance, a baritone is accompanied by lute and viola da gamba. He is also joined by lira da braccio as well as recorder, who are improvising their lines, creating a richer accompaniment for this monodic motet. This recording marks the last one for a long while that will feature a historically informed performance of Lukačić’s music and which is preserved in the archives of the HRT. Antiphonus ensemble (2013) Before the second decade of the 21st century, various early music ensembles sprung up here and there in Croatia, but during the 2010s quite a few early music groups were simultaneously active in Croatia (Croatian Baroque Ensemble, Ensemble Responsorium and Camerata Garestin, just to name a few). Among them is the vocal ensemble Antiphonus led by conductor Tomislav Fačini, who performed as group leader and (solo) singer of the ensemble. On 30 September 2013, Antiphonus performed at the Varaždin Baroque Evenings, one of the longest standing festivals in Croatia that has always been dedicated to baroque music, although never exclusively to historically informed performances. The performance in question tends to be historically informed, at least in the number of singers and instrumentalists present at the performance, as well as in the musical approach to questions such as how to perform early 17th century monody when it appears in the solo parts of the motet Quam pulchra es. Just as the Zadar Madrigalists performed a programme consisting of pieces from the Middle Ages, Renaissance and Baroque periods, so did the Antiphonus ensemble. Their performance consists of pieces by Filip Vranjanin, Claudio Monteverdi and Ivan Lukačić, as well as the medieval play Tractus Stellae preserved in a pontifical MR165 from the Metropolitan Library of Zagreb (the so-called Agenda pontificalis).21 The approach of the conductor (who is also a singer here) in the case of Lukačić’s works seems to be much different when compared to earlier festival recordings, especially those made before the 1990s. The motets are sung by ten singers (three sopranos, three altos, two tenors and two bases), and accompanied mostly by arciliuto. Panis angelicus, in a rather slow tempo, is accompanied by cello (a modern instrument, rather than a period one with gut strings), organ and lute, with violin and cornetto joining colla parte with the singers. The same kind of accompaniment is present in Canite et psallite, with an introduction given by cornetto, harpsichord and lute, in which the cornetto is playing the very beginning of the motet, i. e. the part that a tenor solo sings with continuo before the other voices join in (bars 1–2). Afterwards, the cello joins in playing continuo even with the solo parts. Although the approach of the conductor gives the impression that he is 21

Cf. E. Stipčević, Hrvatska glazba [Croatian Music], 29. 240

Dario Poljak: Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones (1620) and historically informed performances in Croatian festivals

knowledgeable with the trends22 in performing early Baroque music, the overall sound of the ensemble (both singers and instrumentalists) does not seem to be far from the amateurish performances of ensembles mentioned in the analysis of earlier recordings. That is not so surprising since the ensemble comes from Croatia where no institutionalized education for early music has yet been founded. Conclusion Live recordings from Croatian festivals show an interesting trend when it comes to performing Lukačić’s works. First of all, his collection was never featured in a festival concert in its entirety. It was always part of a programme in which it was necessary to showcase only Croatian music from the early 17th century (Ensemble Renesans, Universitas studiorum Zagrabiensis), or to represent Croatian music in a broader context, featured among different contemporary compositions from other parts of Europe (Zadar Madrigalists, Cappella Ragusina, Antiphonus ensemble). Nevertheless, in each of these recordings, the approach was somewhat influenced by historically informed performance practice, be that through the use of specific instruments or the way the singers performed. The performance style of ensembles before the 1990s can be seen as pioneering when it comes to historically informed performances of early music in Croatia in general. However, when we put those recordings in the context of recordings of early 17th century music from the 1980s and 1990s that were being produced around the world at the time,23 a striking difference can be seen in the use of different instruments that were not present even in much more recent festival recordings from Croatia. How should Lukačić’s collection be performed? There is no singular nor exact answer to this question. But one way of considering it could be the fact that these motets are not exclusively liturgical music, but rather devotional.24 The only preserved source of Sacrae cantiones does not tell us anything about the continuo part besides the generic name of the printed part, labelled ‘Organo’. The use of instruments other than the organ in the continuo part is completely justified, especially when it comes to combinations with theorbo and harpsichord, but even a harp could be added. After all, Agostino Agazzari, in his Del Sonare Sopra’l Bassso (published in 1607), describes ‘tutti li stromenti e dell’uso loro nel conserto’,25 and in his instructions we can clearly find justifications for the use of different continuo instruments in Sacrae cantiones. Since we are not sure what the exact intention of the composer for the place or time of performance of his motets was, we can only guess if he meant it for the performing forces of the Split Cathedral of his time, or perhaps he had no specific ensemble in mind. Therefore, as is the case with Monteverdi’s Vespers described by Jonathan P. Wainwright, a ‘small-scale approach is the most 22 If by trends we consider the artistic approach to 17th century music featured on recordings of, e. g. Chris-

tina Pluhar and her ensemble L’Arpeggiata, or the early operas conducted by René Jacobs.

23 Just to mention a cycle of Monteverdi’s operas by Nikolaus Harnoncourt or his Vespro by John Eliot

Gardiner.

24 Cf. Robert L. Kendrick, ‘Devotion, Piety and Commemoration: Sacred Songs and Oratorios’, in The

Cambridge History of Seventeenth-century Music, eds. Tim Carter, John Butt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 324–377. 25 Agostino Agazzari, Del sonare sopra’l basso con tutti li stromenti (Siena: Domenico Falcini, 1607). 241

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

historically accurate’,26 since it is difficult to find proof of large-scale performing forces in early 17th century Split. Questions of performing pitch remains a matter of speculation since no organ was preserved in Split Cathedral from the 17th century or earlier which could be used as an indication. Historically informed performances of Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones seems to become standard when it comes to presenting his works at Croatian festivals. Through this performance style, Croatian audiences are being made aware of the position of Lukačić within early music. The question remains of whether Lukačić is one of the rare Croatian composers whose compositions can be used for representing Croatian early music within a broader context of international composers, or perhaps performers are using such programmes to research different ways of interpreting Lukačić’s music. Nevertheles, at least Lukačić’s Sacre cantiones are presented in concert performances in this way, which is definitely a realisation of the plan of the author of the first modern edition of Sacrae cantiones, be it Dragan Plamenac who published it partially, or Ennio Stipčević who presented the first complete critical edition of Lukačić’s, in many ways, most valuable music.

26 J. P. Wainwright, ‘Case Ctudy: Monteverdi, Vespers (1610)’, 462. 242

The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers Tomislav Bužić University of Music and Performing Arts (KUG), Graz, Austria

The contemporary reception of Ivan Lukačić’s works in Croatia began relatively late, but if we compare it with, for example, Antonio Vivaldi’s situation,1 we can see that rediscovery of Lukačić’s early baroque motets corresponds to similar tendencies in other European cultures. By performing selected motets from Lukačić in 1935 at the concert titled From Croatian Music History [Iz hrvatske muzičke prošlosti] at the Croatian Music Institute [Hrvatski glazbeni zavod] in Zagreb, Dragan Plamenac started a fire that is still glowing, while multiple audio recordings and score editions from the second half of the 20th century unmistakably outline the position Ivan Lukačić holds in the narrative of the Croatian music historiography.2 Although the number of composers from the first half of the 17th century that can be related to Croatian national culture is not that small compared to earlier or later periods, Lukačić’s position can hardly be questioned or overcome. This privileged position was also felt by Croatian composers of the second half of the 20th century and they responded in a way that we will try to elucidate in the further course of the text. The symphonic meditation Ioannis Lucacich de Sebenico in memoriam (1969) by Milo Cipra, Omaggio a Lukačić (Quam pulchra es) (1972) for mixed choir, electric organ and percussion by Igor Kuljerić and Cantate Domino (Hommage a Ivan Lukačić) (2007) for mixed choir by Davorin Kempf, together form a stock of works by Croatian contemporary composers which can extend our view of Lukačić, but also are a good reason to look at the Croatian music of the second half of the 20th century, as well as the phenomenon of hommage as a unifying factor for all three selected compositions. 1. Historic and aesthetic positioning Probably the only strong unifying factor between Milo Cipra (1906–1985), Igor Kuljerić (1938–2006) and Davorin Kempf (1947–2022) is our chosen topic of the reception of Lukačić’s work. Cipra was born at the beginning of the 20th century and started composing during the interwar period when the national-folkloristic idiom was a leading trend, but on the other hand Cipra was noticeably adaptive, almost like his more exposed colleague 1

2

For the discovery of Vivaldi in Italy in the 1930s, see the chapter ‘The Fascist Cultural Nationalism of the Vivaldi Revival’ in Catharine E. Paul, Fascist Directive: Ezra Pound and Italian Cultural Nationalism (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2016), 159–198. On the reception history of Sacrae cantiones, see Ennio Stipčević, Ivan Lukačić (Zagreb: MIC, 2007), 124–142. 243

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Boris Papandopulo (1906–1991). When in the 1960s the avant-garde trend was rising in Croatia, Cipra was open to it, although he never left his aspiration towards traditionally pleasant sounds and extended tonality. During the 1960s, Igor Kuljerić also entered the stage by bursting on to the scene of the Music Biennale Zagreb, but he was an ardent supporter just for a few years, until the period around 1972, when he stepped back. Two extensive quotes from Kuljerić will serve to shed light on this period: If we accept the avant-garde of the 1950s and 1960s as an inevitable part of the cycle of music history, then we must admit that transplantation of that avant-garde from its historical centers to our small scale and peripheral musical area had a great many fatal consequences. The still fragile and difficult-to-establish musical professionalism at once conflicts with the belligerent denial of tradition and every form of inherited knowledge.3 If it was not for that avant-garde arch, we would be poorer today by some important experiences, perhaps lacking the possibility of a more tolerant attitude towards the work of art. To me today [1986], my avant-garde experience allows me to learn about the variety of spaces in which sound and musical thought can act; it enables me to be curious even about things that are fundamentally foreign to my understanding of art and creative energy.4

The accepted story, such as Kuljerić’s, goes like this: In the first half of twentieth century, Croatian composers were in some kind of isolation from European contemporary music and the mainstream composers were attached to late romanticism and folklore, so when Milko Kelemen and his associates in 1961 organized the first Zagreb Biennale for Contemporary Music some of the composers for the first time came in direct contact with the music of Boulez, Cage, Kagel and other prominent avant-garde composers. Indeed, ‘part of its [Biennale] mission was to set Yugoslav modernisms in an international context, very much in the manner of the Warsaw Autumn festival. As in Warsaw, moreover, the festival could be at once a source of national pride and a symbol of cosmopolitanism, though it was less successful in promoting native composers than its Polish counterpart’.5 If we look just a bit further, Davorin Kempf belongs to the first ‘after-Biennale’ generation of composers. When he finished his studies with Stjepan Šulek in 1973 at the Zagreb Music Academy, the shock that the first Music Biennale Zagreb caused was neutralized. Nikša Gligo noted that for another leading figure of the 1970s: ‘Back in 1972, Stanko Horvat, having distanced himself from the avant-garde, joined “a part of the solid infantry which follows the avantgarde and explores the conquered ground”, and then validates this ground as an artistic, human, and psychological fact. Of course, this artistic, human, and psychological segment championed by Horvat draws specifically on tradition, but at the same time constitutes a very significant element of his interpretation of this tradition, thus turning it into an integral part of his subjective compositional habitus.’6 This concept actually originates from Stjepan Šulek, leading professor of composition at the Zagreb 3

4 5 6

Erika Krpan (ed.), Igor Kuljerić. Koncert u povodu primanja u redovito članstvo HAZU [Igor Kuljerić, Concert on the Occasion of Acceptance as a Full Member of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts], concert booklet (Zagreb: HDS, Cantus, 2005), 8. E. Krpan, Igor Kuljerić. Koncert u povodu [Igor Kuljerić, Concert on the Occasion], 9. Jim Samson, Music in the Balkans (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 482. Nikša Gligo, Liner notes written for the CD Stanko Horvat: Music for Strings (Zagreb: Cantus, HDS, HRT, CD, 98905201912, 2004). 244

Tomislav Bužić: The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers

Music Academy from 1947–1975. We could say, using Morgan’s words, that ‘[i]nstead of searching out new possibilities, [Croatian] composers became interested in finding ways to incorporate what was already available into a more consistent and directly communicative musical language.’7 To summarize it slightly differently, Cipra’s and Kuljerić’s compositions were created in a short period from the late 1960s and early 1970s, when the leading music institutions were still greatly supporting (financially and ideologically) so-called ‘avant-garde’ music. As in many other peripheral musical cultures, Croatian composers became fascinated with the New Music wave from the major Western music centers, so they wanted to try something virtually similar by themselves. At the beginning of the 1970s, after the intensive period of propagated avant-garde, composers started to rethink their positions. Until the 1980s, most of the composers soothed their dissonant aspirations and adopted a position that advocates mostly traditional notions of music, but with a contemporary music flavor. This position was precisely clarified in an interview with Stanko Horvat8 and analyzed by Nikša Gligo in article ‘The Phenomenon of the “Comeback” as a State of Compositional Mind in the New Croatian Music at the Moment’.9 Since Nikša Gligo was an ideological leader of the desired ‘Croatian New Music’, and Stanko Horvat was one of the most politically powerful composers at the time, their positions can be viewed as valuable historical indicators. At this point, we can take a closer look to our first work influenced by Lukačić: Davorin Kempf ’s choral works Cantate Domino (Hommage à Ivan Lukačić) from 2007.10 By the first decade of the 21st century, most of the turmoil of the avant-garde had subsided. Davorin Kempf of course was part of the above-mentioned situation in the 1970s and 1980s, but as a member of the younger generation he was far less directly involved. In his initial work after finishing his composition studies with Stjepan Šulek in 1973, Kempf tried out the possibilities of the then-fashionable electronic music (for example in Interferences, for organ and electronics [1977] or Pyramids, an electroacoustic work [1984]), however, shortly thereafter he developed his own personal style, interweaving classical roots and the idea of beauty with more modern pianistic and orchestral writing. In an interview Kempf stated that he is ‘against an institutionalized avant-garde and that contemporary classical music has the right to sound harmonious.’11 Elsewhere he added: ‘The aspiration for beauty is also incorporated into my musical poetics. Beauty, of course, has multiple faces and cannot be determined unambiguously, but without its surroundings, music as art 7

Robert P. Morgan, Twentieth-Century Music: A History of Musical Style in Modern Europe and America (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1991), 482. 8 Stanko Horvat, Eva Sedak, ‘Ispitivati osvojeni teren. Stanko Horvat u razgovoru s Evom Sedak’ [Exploration of the Mastered Field: Stanko Horvat Interviewed by Eva Sedak], in Novi zvuk [New Sound], ed. Petar Selem (Zagreb: MH, 1972), 303–309. 9 N. Gligo, ‘Fenomen “povratka” kao stanje skladateljske svijesti u aktualnom trenutku hrvatske Nove glazbe’ [The Phenomenon of the ‘Comeback’ as a State of Compositional Mind in the New Croatian Music at the Moment], Muzička kultura 4/1–3 (1986), 4–10. 10 Cantate Domino (Hommage a Ivan Lukačić) premiered in 2011 by the Croatian Radiotelevision Choir under Tonči Bilić at the concert Musica Nova, held on February 22nd at Mimara Museum, Zagreb. Another important date is November 1st, 2012 when Cantate Domino (Hommage à Ivan Lukačić) was performed in Bruges, Belgium, during the ISCM World Music Days. 11 Davorin Kempf, ‘Protiv sam institucionalizirane avangarde, ozbiljna glazba smije zvučati skladno’, Nacional 15 December 2017, https://www.nacional.hr/interview-davorin-kempf-protiv-sam-institucionalizirane-avangarde-ozbiljna-glazba-smije-zvucati-skladno/, accessed 20 November 2019. 245

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

is unimaginable to me.’12 In Cantate Domino (Hommage à Ivan Lukačić) this aspiration for beauty is openly expressed, but Lukačić’s sonic world is not directly invoked. Kempf studied Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones, he even presented selected motets from Lukačić’s Sacrae cantiones collection in the USA (Highlights of Old Croatian Music, University of Iowa School of Music, 1991), Canada (Dostignuća stare hrvatske glazbe, Hrvatska zajednica u Torontu, 1991) and Austria (Die Höhpunkte der kroatischen Musik in Zusammenhang mit den wichtigsten Richtungen der westeuropäische Musik, Hochschule für Musik, Graz, 1994), therefore it is logical to expect at least some quotations. However, quite the opposite is true, since in Kempf ’s Hommage à Ivan Lukačić we can not find any. In his choral writing we can trace some similarities which are not necessary influenced merely by Lukačić’s own motet Cantate Domino for two tenors and basso continuo. Kempf stated that he copied the text straight from Lukačić’s example, together with the three-part structure,13 but other structural elements can not be connected solely with Lukačić. What brings us back to early baroque choral pieces are the frequent ornaments inside and outside the cadences and polyphonic structuring. On the other side, nonfunctional uses of triads and dissonant parallelisms are strong enough to distract us from any easy recognition of a baroque influence. Probably without the title we would never guess that Kempf ’s work is a tribute to Lukačić. We should also keep in mind that other Kempf hommages, and there are many of them,14 do not overtly signal their background influence as in usual postmodern compositions. Kempf ’s style is quite modernistic in the early 20th century sense, when composers where trying to further enrich the already saturated tonal language, while at the same time were striving not to abandon one’s own, heavily acquired, language. In the following section we will discuss how Kuljerić, and partially Cipra, approached the hommage with a more postmodern understanding. 2. Postmodern Intertextuality When we look upon today’s postmodernism it is ‘fully institutionalized, it has its canonized texts, its anthologies, primers and readers, its dictionaries.’15 But the greatest doubt — whether we consider postmodernism a movement, a way of thinking or a stylistic period — is still a subject of most debates. We could agree that ‘one way of marking the break between the periods and of dating the emergence of postmodernism is precisely to be found there: in the moment (the early 1960s, one would think) in which the position of high modernism and its dominant aesthetics become established in the academy and are henceforth felt to be academic by a whole new generation of poets, painters and musicians.’16 In music, postmodernism is often mixed with antimodernism, 12 13

14 15 16

Bosiljka Perić Kempf, Davorin Kempf. Autorski koncert u povodu 70. rođendana, HAZU [Davorin Kempf, Concert on the Occasion of the Composer’s 70th Birthday], concert booklet (Zagreb: Cantus, HDS, 2017), 26. The text of Psalm 96 (95) does not contain any peculiarities or supplements in Lukačić’s case. The therepart structure in which the first verse is repeated at the end was common in late Renaissance and early Baroque music. Davorin Kempf wrote hommages to Bach, Haydn, Bartók, Scriabin, and thus is comparable to Hungarian composer György Kurtág who has became famous for his numerous hommages. Linda Hutcheon, The Politics of Postmodernism (London: Routledge-Taylor & Francis, 2004), 165. Frederic Jameson, ‘Postmodernism and Consumer Society’, in The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture, ed. Hal Foster (Port Townsend: Bay Press, 1983), 111–125: 124. 246

Tomislav Bužić: The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers

which was popular in 1970s. This can be easily resolved if we agree with Kramer who said: [...] one other thing that distinguishes antimodernism from postmodernism is the attitude toward the notion of musical unity, cherished by traditionally minded composers as well as by critics, theorists, and analysts. For both antimodernists and modernists, unity is a prerequisite for musical sense; for some postmodernists, unity is an option. [...] As such, it is necessarily demoted from its previous position of universality. It is no longer a master narrative of musical structure. Many postmodern composers have accordingly embraced conflict and contradiction and have at times eschewed consistency and unity.17

Even earlier, in the early 1990s, Hermann Danuser made the distinction between two kinds of postmodernism: postmodernism as antimodernism and postmodernism as the modernism of today,18 and for Kramer, the ideal of unity is a very important mark of traditionalism,19 although the concept of unity can be questioned in many ways.20 Their views on the concept of unity can be seen as one of the most important differences between Cipra’s and Kuljerić’s reception of Lukačić’s motet Quam pulchra es. Let us first look at Cipra’s work. The symphonic meditation Ioannis Lucacich de Sebenico in memoriam21 is scored for a standard symphonic orchestra with added xylophone, gong and piano, and it premiered in Zagreb in 1969. It is the first part of a symphonic triptych dedicated to three Dalmatian cities: Šibenik, Split and Dubrovnik. The second one is titled Aspalathos-son et lumiere (1974) and the third one is Jur ta je dubrava tvrdja u mramoru [Still in that Dubrava, a Fort in Marble] (1976).22 In memoriam is divided into four, rather short, sequences: I. Intrada, II. First episode, III. Second episode, IV. Finale. The work was probably never performed again after its premiere in 1969, but, as with the most of Cipra’s works, there is a recording saved in the Croatian Radiotelevision archive. According to this recording, together with original manuscript from Cipra’s private inheritance,23 it was possible to gain an insight into how the composer approached Lukačić’s motet. Josip Andreis divided Cipra’s opus into the three stages and in the last group, which largely covers the period of the 1960s, there are no longer any national features, Andreis claimed. Of course, we must be aware that In memoriam was not yet performed when Andreis published his article.24 What he added is more important for our discussion: ‘But this group [the last 17 Jonathan D. Kramer, ‘The Nature and Origins of Musical Postmodernism’, in Postmodern music/Thought, 18

19

20 21 22 23 24

eds. Judy Lochhead, Joseph Auner (New York: Routledge, 2002), 13–26: 15. Hermann Danuser, ‘Postmodernes Musikdenken – Lösung oder Flucht?, in Neue Musik im politischem Wandel, Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Neue Musik und Musikerziehung Darmstadt 32 (Mainz: Schott, 1991), 56–66. Jonathan D. Kramer, ‘Beyond Unity: Toward an Understanding of Musical Postmodernism’, in Concert Music, Rock, and Jazz Since 1945: Essays and Analytical Studies, eds. Elizabeth West Marvin, Richard Hermann (Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 1995), 11–33. Fred Everett Maus, ‘Concepts of Musical Unity’, in Rethinking Music, eds. Nicholas Cook, Mark Everist (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 171–192. The title will be abbreviated to In memoriam in the following text. The title is borrowed from a poem by Džore Držić, a Dubrovnik fifteenth-century Petrarchan poet. I owe special thanks to the legal heir of Cipra’s opus, Katarina Cipra, who was very kind to share the original manuscript with me. Josip Andreis, ‘Umjetnički put Mila Cipre’ [The Artistic Path of Milo Cipra], Rad JAZU 351 (1969), 325–450. 247

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

one] should further be divided into two sections. In the first there are frequent influences from the neo-Baroque... In the second section Cipra, to an increasingly great degree, uses the expressive devices of the European avant-garde.’25 Because Lukačić was a starting point for Cipra’s work, we would expect Neo-baroque features to be predominant, but there are none, while expressive devices of the European avant-garde are timidly present. The overall sound came closest to Debussy, who was already recognized as an important influence for Cipra.26 The central point of reference, as we mentioned before, was Lukačić’s motet Quam pulchra es; in fact just the first choral ritornello (see example 1). This five bar phrase functions like a musical emblem for Lukačić’s entire collection because Quam pulchra es is the most performed motet from Sacrae cantiones. Besides, it is also commonly used as a showpiece in Croatian schools for music education purposes. At the beginning of the 1970s, Lukačić’s Quam pulchra es was surely not used in such a broad manner, but it was regularly performed and, in the words of his ex-students, it was a favorite piece of Lovro Županović’s (1925-2004), who, from the 1960s, spent a lot of energy promoting Croatian early music. According to all of this we can conclude that Cipra most certainly counted on a positive recognition of Lukačić’s famous melody by his audience. Mus. ex. 1. Choral ritornello from Lukačić’s most famous motet Quam pulchra es.

Quam pulchra es

The highest voice melody from Lukačić’s motet is quoted five times. For the first time in the final bars of first movement in wind section, then in flutes and violas at the end of the second movement, and finally three times in the last movement: by three horns at the rehearsal number 14 of the original manuscript, by solo timpani at the end of rehearsal number 21, and as a main theme for the closing fugal episode. As we can see Lukačić’s quote functions mainly as a ‘recall motive’ at the end of the movements, as well as a solemn theme in the finale. Such a way of structuring closely resembles a 19th century 25 J. Andreis, ‘Umjetnički put Mila Cipre’ [The Artistic Path of Milo Cipra], 333. Translation quoted from

Dalibor Davidović, ‘Signs... Fragments... Some Observations on the Music of Milo Cipra (1906-1985)’, IRASM 32/1 (2001), 93–132: 103. These two bibliographical units are still the most extensive works and practically inevitable in dealing with Cipra’s music. 26 D. Davidović, ‘Signs... Fragments...’, 122–123. 248

Tomislav Bužić: The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers

practice of composing festive pieces, and its concept of unity is only to a certain extent disrupted. What we miss in Cipra’s In memoriam are specific intertextual procedures which separated the works of the 1970s from the mere academic eclecticism of previous periods, and pushed them towards postmodern aesthetics. Since intertextual theory is still not widely known in music studies, we will stop for a moment in order to give a few introductory notes to this interesting field. Intertextuality as a field emerged during the late 1960s when Julia Kristeva connected Ferdinand de Saussure’s semiotic theory with Mikhail Bakhtin’s theory of dialogism, but it was Roland Barthes who contributed most to the widespread usage of the new term and corresponding theories. Jacques Derrida should be also mentioned because in his book Of Grammatology some aspects of intertextuality were announced and surely mediated Kristeva’s reading of Bakhtin. Bakhtin first introduced the idea that ‘any text is constructed as a mosaic of quotations; any text is the absorption and transformation of another’,27 and from Barthes’s theory we can understand that a ‘text is not a unified, isolated object that gives a singular meaning, but an element open to various interpretations.’28 In the theory of intertextuality, ‘meaning becomes something which exists between a text and all the other texts to which it refers and relates, moving out from the independent text into a network of textual relations.’29 Finally, ‘the interest aroused by intertextuality reflects a widespread tendency in literary and cultural studies to move away from the inherited notion of the text — or the work of art — as a unitary, self-contained and, in a strong sense, autonomous and original object, toward a view that emphasizes the relational nature of all cultural productions’.30 Although in music studies, literary critic Harold Bloom and his book The Anxiety of Influence were accepted on a broader scale,31 the work of Gérard Genette offers a more differentiated theory of intertextual relationships, and it was from the beginning designed to be a great aid in practical analysis. Instead of intertextuality, Genette uses the umbrella term transtextuality. In his widely discussed book Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree (1982), he developed a highly elaborated taxonomy with five categories of transtextuality, namely intertextuality, paratextuality, metatextuality, architextuality, and hypertextuality, Unlike Barthes, who advocated for open and uncertain meaning, Genette ‘employ[s] intertextuality theory to argue for critical certainty, or at least for the possibility of saying definite, stable and incontrovertible things about literary texts.’32 Intertextuality in Genette’s narrow sense refers to a relationship between two texts created by their actual co-presence, and it is narrowed down just to quotation, plagiarism, and allusion. The metatextual category ‘is that of the commentary proper, discussion, or 27 Julia Kristeva, ‘Word, Dialog and Novel’, in The Kristeva Reader, ed. Toril Moi (New York: Columbia

28 29 30

31

32

University Press, 1986), 34–61: 37. We will use the word text in its broader sense; in the sense that covers any item of observation, not just literary texts. Voicu Mihnea Simandan, The Matrix and the Alice Books (Lulu Books, 2010), 25. Graham Allen, Intertextuality (London: Routledge, 2000), 1. Paulo F. de Castro, ‘La musique au second degré: on Gérard Genette’s Theory of Transtextuality and its Musical Relevance’, in Music, Analysis, Experience: New Perspectives in Musical Semiotics, eds. Costantino Maeder, Mark Reybrouck (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2015), 83–96: 83. Joseph N. Straus, Remaking the Past: Musical Modernism and the Influence of the Tonal Tradition (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991); Kevin Korsyn, ‘Towards a New Poetics of Musical Influence’, Music Analysis 10/1–2 (1991), 3–72. G. Allen, Intertextuality, 4. 249

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

criticism, that it to say, of all kinds of text “about” other texts’.33 Architextuality is ‘the most abstract and implicit of the transcendent categories, the relationship of inclusion linking each text to the various kinds of discourse of which it is a representative’34 and ‘the realm of those overarching categories governing a reader’s expectations: types and topics of discourse, modes of enunciation, canonic genres, etc.’35 Paratexts are liminal devices and conventions, both within and outside a text, that mediate between text, author and reader: titles, forewords and publishers’ backing materials [such as titles, headings, prefaces, acknowledgements, footnotes, illustrations] form part of a text’s private and public history.36 In Genette’s words, hypertextuality ‘refers to any relationship uniting a text B (which I shall call the hypertext) to an earlier text A (I shall, of course, call it the hypotext), upon which it is grafted in a manner that is not that of commentary’.37 A hypertext derives from a hypotext through a process of transformation, but a hypertext does not necessarily have to (explicitly or implicitly) ‘identify’ its hypotext. The burden of the presence of old music on the concert stages of the 20th century and the formation of at least an apparent canon of classical music, necessarily provoked creative reactions from the composers. ‘Any new work [at the beginning of 20th century] was, on the one hand, treated with reference to hallowed canonical standards and, on the other hand, defended by the composing profession as a moral good to which the public had to pay allegiance’.38 Intertextual structuring is of course also part of earlier periods, such as early musical borrowing39 or quotations that Mozart chose for Don Giovanni’s last supper which consists of melodies quoted from three contemporaneous opere buffe: Vincente Martin y Soler’s Una cos a rara (1786), Giuseppe Sarti’s Fra i due litiganti il terzo gode (1782), and Mozart’s own The Marriage of Figaro (1786).40 In the second half of the 20th century, the situation was much different because heterogeneous or polystylistic aesthetics were raised to the level of primary artistic value. In contemporary music, there were two equally important reasons for even a humble quotation technique: 1) negative reason; the composers are motivated by derisive intentions, or merely ridiculing, ludic ones. Their idea is to belittle, to parody (even to disparage) something they want to question, some principle or value; to deny something, to present it in a grotesque, ludicrous light, like the Tristan motive in Debussy’s Golliwog’s Cakewalk from Children’s […] 2) Positive reason. Here the composer tries to pay tribute, approve of, mark his solidarity with, another work or composer (with a title that may begin Hommage à…). He wishes to join some trend, some school, some tradition. He wants to endorse some value, to ennoble it, or merely to recall or record it.41 33 P. F. de Castro, ‘La musique au second degré’, 85. 34 Gérard Genette, Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree, Channa Newman, Claude Doubinsky (trans.)

(Lincoln NE and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1997).

35 P. F. de Castro: ‘La musique au second degré’, 85. 36 See G. Genette, Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation, Jane E. Lewin (trans.) (Lincoln, NE, London: Uni-

versity of Nebraska Press, 1997).

37 G. Genette, Palimpsests, 5. 38 William Weber, ‘Consequences of Canon: The Institutionalization of Enmity between Contemporary and

Classical Music’, Common Knowledge 9/1 (2003), 78–99: 79.

39 Honey Meconi (ed.), Early Musical Borrowing (New York: Routledge, Common Knowledge, 2004). 40 Nicholas Junkai Chong, ‘Music for the Last Supper: The Dramatic Significance of Mozart’s Musical Quo-

tations in the Tafelmusik of Don Giovanni’, Current Muscology 92 (2011), 7–52.

41 Krystyna Tarnawska-Kaczorowska, ‘Musica Quotation an Outline of the Problem’, Contemporary Music

Review 17/3 (1998), 69–90: 80.

250

Tomislav Bužić: The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers

Both Cipra and Kempf have not departed from the positive reason, while Igor Kuljerić’s approach might be closer to the ‘negative’ reason, or better called the playful reason that attracted prominent postmodernists. Kuljerić’s Omaggio a Lukačić (Quam pulchra es) was created in 1972, and the first version premiered in the same year at the Dubrovnik Summer Festival.42 The second version for mixed choir, percussion and keyboards was presented in 1973 at the Music Biennale Zagreb. There are at least two versions of graphical scores that were used for the mostly improvisatory sequences. In the words of Kuljerić himself, the work was created in direct collaboration with its intended performers: ‘A series of rehearsals of the RTZ choir [Croatian Radiotelevision Choir]43 or various smaller ensembles have left “unrecorded” sequences of happy moments that gave meaningful experiences to the given improvisational elements bounded by the given “rules of the game”!’44 As in Cipra’s case, Lukačić’s famous motet was a point of reference. Lukačić’s motet Quam pulchra es ‘in this composition was used as an “objet sonore” in the conception of the beginning of the composition, and is further developed in following sections. In doing so, it sought to have a deeper relationship and connection with one’s own creative origins.’45 As Kuljerić intended, in the first few minutes we can hear all the voices from Lukačić’s four-part ritornello (see mus. example 1), rhythmically and temporally freely distributed,46 and the sound fabric that emerges essentially moves away from Lukačić’s spiritualized progression. Instead of a thorough analysis, let’s look in detail at rehearsal letter F, in which we can show the most of the processes found in the other parts (see fig. 1). The instrument parts are usually playing prolonged sound blocks which act as the background scene for vocal interruptions. In the case of the rehearsal letter F, we can find open vocals in sopranos and altos, individual words from Songs of songs (chapter 4) which were selected for their sonority, not necessarily because of their semantic meaning, just as with other unpoetic words used in the same box, and, in the last part, different Quam invocations.

42 In 1976 Kuljerić adapted two of Lukačić’s motets for wind quintet, while in the work entitled Chaconne for

43 44 45

46

percussion quartet (1990) or Barrochiana for marimba and strings (1993, rev. 2000) we can track a similar early music influence. Conductor from 1968 to 2005. Igor Kuljerić, ‘Svako traženje je škola’, Muzika (1974), quoted from E. Krpan, Igor Kuljerić. Koncert u povodu [Igor Kuljerić, Concert on the Occasion], 15. Quoted from the booklet of the CD Hrvatska glazba na Riva dei Schiavoni [Croatian Music at the Riva dei Schiavoni], Croatian Radiotelevision Choir, cond. by Tonći Bilić (HRT, Cantus d.o.o., CD, 98905200302, 2012). In this analysis both existing graphical scores and recordings were used simultaneously (four sources in total: 2 recordings plus 2 interdependent scores). 251

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Fig. 1. Kuljerić’s Omaggio a Lukačić (Quam pulchra es), rehearsal letter F (undated score, probably from 1972)(private collection).47

The work as a whole sounds at the same time honorary and ghostly. And it is exactly this multilayered stratification that separates Kuljerić’s homage from Cipra’s and Kempf ’s. Kuljerić’s modern choral writing sounds uniform, but the technique itself is postmodernly conceived through improvisation, multidimensionality, and positively directed parody. On the other hand, Omaggio a Lukačić (Quam pulchra es) represents a turning point for Kuljerić. He states: Namely, what disappointed me with that avant-garde was any absence of individuality and affiliation to a locality, so I became a dissident very early, in the sense that I was doing some things while seeking loyalty to my origins and roots as an impulse towards my musical desires. Thus, the first piece on that path was Omaggio a Lukačić (Quam pulchra es), which, despite radical avant-garde technological procedures, still gave a certain color of the Dalmatian environment.48

Kuljerić’s renewed sensibility for tradition leads us immediately to the last section.

47 Published with permission of Ivana Kuljerić Bilić, the composer’s daughter who was also very kind to share

other archival materials with me.

48 Igor Kuljerić, Višnja Požgaj, ‘Tragom glazbenih korijena’ [Tracing Musical Roots], Vjesnik, 11 February

2001.

252

Tomislav Bužić: The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers

3. Croatian national music heritage and the problems of tradition Concerning Croatian music history, not a single composition from the earlier periods has a continuous performance history as with, for example Handel’s oratorios in England or Beethoven’s symphonies in German speaking countries. The earliest canonic works might be songs from the voluminous printed song-book Cithara octochorda (Vienna, 1701; 1723; Zagreb, 1757) or patriotic choirs by mid-19th century composers (for example Još Hrvatska ni propala by Ferdo Livadić or Prosto zrakom ptica leti by Vatroslav Lisinski), but both examples are, before all, part of specific genres (Church music and patriotic songs). In the narrow classical sense, some of Ivan Zajc’s (1832–1914) works can be considered as the first nationally oriented canonical works. Thanks to extensive research by the first Croatian music historian Franjo Kuhač at the end of the 19th century, then by early music specialist Dragan Plamenac in the inter-war period, and especially after World War II by founders of Croatian musicology such as Josip Andreis, Lovro Županović and others, Croatian early music history was gradually revealed. The last group strongly promoted Croatian music from earlier periods, so composers started to feel a specific kind of artificial historical continuity that was produced by revivalistic aspirations. Along with three selected compositions, Cipra, Kuljerić and Kempf produced another work which may be related to notions of national heritage. Nikša Gligo mentioned that one of the constants in Kuljerić’s work is ‘the exploration of Croatian musical heritage with the aim to reinterpret its features within a contemporary context.’49 This distinctive layer of composing activity is reflected in Kuljerić’s search for national musical roots (Glagolitism) and leaning on the Croatian artistic heritage (Renaissance poetry and Baroque music). Apart from Quam pulchra es, there are other compositions like More [Sea] for female choir, Song for string quartet, Križu daj nam ti milosti [Cross Give us Grace] for male choir using the verses of an old-church dramatic play of the life of St. Cyprian and Justine, Kanconijer [Song Book] for voices and instruments based on texts by Hanibal Lucić, Ivan Bunić Vučić and anonymous poets from the Nikša Ranjina collection, and finally Hrvatski glagoljaški rekvijem [Croatian Glagolitic Requiem] for soloists, choir and orchestra based on the old Croatian Glagolitic text of the Catholic Mass. Along the same line, Cipra adapted two songs from Petar Hektorović’s Ribanje i ribarsko prigovaranje [Fishing and Fishermen’s Conversations], the third movement from Kantata o čovjeku [The Cantata of Man] is based on texts by Šiško Menčetić, and the third part of Triptihon Jur ta je dubrava tvrdja u mramoru [Still in that Dubrava, a Fort in Marble] uses text from Pohvala gradu Dubrovniku [Praise to the City of Dubrovnik] by Džore Držić. Davorin Kempf wrote Zovješe zora dan [The Dawn Called the Day, 1999] for mixed choir using the verses of Šiško Menčetić, Tre sguardi sul duomo di Osor [Three Views of Osor Cathedral, 2007] for piano, and Svet [Sanctus, 2011] for mixed choir using the text from Cithara Octochorda in which all textual peculiarities have been preserved. Kuljerić again was the most eloquent of the three. He proudly emphasized his identity: ‘I am Mediterranean, and my roots are Slavic. I was always impressed by the cultural richness of our Dalmatian cities’,50 and viewed tradition as the constant return of the 49 N. Gligo, ‘Croatian Contemporary Music: An Insight’, World New Music Magazine 15 (2005), 35–51: 44. 50 I. Kuljerić, Marija Barbieri, ‘Ova sredina oprašta sve osim uspjeha’ [This Environment Forgives Everything

but Success], (izvorni tekst Koncert u povodu primanja u redovito članstvo HAZU), Vijenac 269 (2004) http:// www.matica.hr/vijenac/269/ova-sredina-oprasta-sve-osim-uspjeha-10336/, accessed 20 November 2019. 253

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

same: ‘Verdi did not invent opera, but he articulated old things in a new way. His famous saying is: ‘torniamo all’antico, sarà il progresso’ (sic!) [Let us go back to the past; it will be a step forward]. The whole history of art is a return of the same, just in a different way.’51 Kuljerić’s thinking actually mirrors a specific kind of historicist method which covers a lot of 20th century music, which counted on the accumulation of classical work inside the museum. Peter Burkholder said that: [...] each work in the historicist mainstream is a reflection or refraction of the entire tradition and of certain pieces from it, growing from the composer’s own familiarity with that tradition and depending for its comprehension on the ability of the audience to sense the musical connections being made. This is music which is inconceivable except in the context of the other works in the museum.52

The notion of the ‘national’ in Croatian contemporary music history is not something buried in the 19th century. The period after the First World War was marked by national (folkloristic) tendencies (Jakov Gotovac, Krešimir Baranović), the 1950s polemic about the international classical style (Stjepan Šulek) was a distinguished creative impulse, in the late 1960s and 1970s the Croatian Spring has aroused new national interest, and of course the period of the Croatian War of Independence in the 1990s become the last 20th century station for increased national feelings. As we can see, in almost every other decade there were some artistic reactions to this intensified national discourse. Perhaps it is overstated to talk about the notion of the national as the main creative generator of 20th century Croatian music, but in our case, it is necessary to include it in the discussion. As we have listed before, Cipra, Kuljerić and Kempf in their oeuvres have numerous titles that are connected to Croatian national heritage. *** Among the three works discussed above, Kuljerić’s Quam pulchra es is the only one to survive in the Croatian contemporary music repertoire. In the case of modern choral writing, only Marko Ruždjak’s (1946–2012) work Ubu (1985) enjoys a reputation equal to Kuljerić’s work. It is more or less regularly performed, the first recording was published three times (1972, 1975, 1976)53 and there is a new one from 2012.54 In the case of the two remaining pieces, Cipra’s In memoriam is buried in archival dust and, as far I know, was never performed again after Cipra passed away. On the other hand, Kempf ’s Cantate Domino has a promising starting position because it was selected for an important contemporary music 51

The same quote from Verdi was used by Frano Parać (1948), an influential Croatian composer of the next generation. See Zorana Baltić, ‘Frano Parać, Uspostaviti kontakt s tradicijom’ [Frano Parać, Making Contact with Tradition], Od – do (Zagreb, 1982), 9. 52 J. Peter Burkholder, ‘Museum Pieces: The Historicist Mainstream in Music of the Last Hundred Years’, The Journal of Musicology 2/2 (1983), 115–134: 131. 53 I. Kuljerić, Igor Kuljerić: Works By Yugoslav Composers (Zagreb: MIC, Radio-television Zagreb, audio cassette for internal use, late 1970s); Muzički Biennale Zagreb 1961.–1975. (Zagreb: MIC, Jugoton, LP, LSY61197, 1975); I. Kuljerić, Igor Kuljerić, Contemporary Croatian Composers Series (Zagreb: MIC, Jugoton, LP, LSY-61250, 1976). 54 Hrvatska glazba na Riva dei Schiavoni [Croatian Music at the Riva dei Schiavoni]. 254

Tomislav Bužić: The reception of Ivan Lukačić’s motets by Croatian 20th and 21st century composers

festival (ISCM World Music Days 2012) and in 2014 the academic choir Palma from the Basilica of the Heart of Jesus (Zagreb) received a Croatian Music Society award for best performance for Kempf ’s Cantate Domino at the 12th Competition of Croatian choirs in Zagreb. However, not enough time has passed in order to see its broader reception and the performing potential of this piece. At the end it must be mentioned that other Croatian contemporary composers were at some point inspired by Croatian early music. Nikša Njirić (1927–2016) wrote Hommage a Sorkočević (1978) for guitar trio, just like Boris Papandopulo, who wrote Hommage a Sorkočević (1985), for symphonic orchestra55 while Anđelko Klobučar (1931–2016), in his solo organ work Hommage a Cecchini (1976), chose Lukačić’s early 17th-century contemporary Tomaso Cecchini.56 In this light, my contribution appears only as a partially raised topic which should certainly be more widely explored in the future.

55

Luka Sorkočević (Luca Sorgo) was an 18th-century composer and the author of the first Croatian symphonies. 56 Anđelko Klobučar, Skladbe za orgulje [Organ Works], Pavao Mašić (Croatia records, 2 CDs, CD 6065271, 2014); Nikša Njirić, Hommage à Sorkočević, for Three Guitars (Zagreb: Cantus, 2016); Boris Papandopulo, Hommage à Sorkočević (Zagreb: Cantus, 2009). 255

Bibliography

Entries from standard dictionaries available online are not listed separately in the bibliography. Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani (Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana); on Treccani, [Enciclopedia online] (https://www.treccani.it/, https://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/elenco-opere/Dizionario_Biografico). Hrvatski biografski leksikon (Croatian Biographic Lexicon), eds. Trpimir Macan, Nikša Lučić (Zagreb: Leksikografski zavod Miroslav Krleža, 1983–); Hrvatski biografski leksikon online (https://www.lzmk.hr/, https://hbl.lzmk.hr/) Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 2nd edn. (MGG2), ed. Ludwig Finscher, (Kassel: Bärenreiter; Stuttgart: Metzler, 1994–2008); MGG Online (https://www.mgg-online.com/). The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2nd edn. (NGroveD), ed. Stanley Sadie (London: Macmillan, 2001); Grove Music Online (https://www.oxfordmusiconline.com/grovemusic). Nuovo Liruti, Dizionario biografico dei friulani, 3 vols. (Udine: Forum editrice universitaria udinese), vol. 1: Il medioevo, ed. Cesare Scalon (2006); vol. 2: L’età veneta, eds. Cesare Scalon, Claudio Griggio, Ugo Rozzo (2009); vol. 3: L’età contemporanea, eds. Cesare Scalon, Claudio Griggio, Giuseppe Bergamini (2011); Dizionario biografico dei friulani, Nuovo Liruti on line (www.dizionariobiograficodeifriulani.it). Treccani, [Enciclopedia online] (Istituto della Enciclopedia Italiana); (https://www.treccani.it/, https://www. treccani.it/enciclopedia/). Agazzari, Agostino, Del sonare sopra’l basso con tutti li stromenti (Siena: Domenico Falcini, 1607). Aguzzi-Barbagli, Danilo, Della poetica edizione critica, 3 vols. (Firenze: Istituto Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento, 1969–1971). ——, ‘Francesco Patrizi e l’umanesimo musicale del Cinquecento’, in L’umanesimo in Istria, Atti del Convegno internazionale di studio, Venezia, 30–31 Marzo–1 Aprile 1981, eds. Vittore Branca, Sante Graciotti (Firenze: Olschki, 1983), 63–90. Alberti, Juraj (Giorgio), Dialogo per imparare con brevità à Cantar Canto figurato (Venetia: Appresso Antonio Turrino, 1619). Allacci, Leone, Drammaturgia di Lione Allacci (Venezia: Pasquali, 1755). Allen, Graham, Intertextuality (London: Routledge, 2000). Allsop, Peter, Cavalier Giovanni Battista Buonamente: Franciscan Violinist (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005). ——, The Italian ‘Trio’ Sonata: from its Origins until Corelli (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992). Andreis, Josip, ‘Albertijev “Dijalog” o 350 – godišnjici objavljivanja’ [Alberti’s Dialogo – 350th Anniversary of Publishing], Arti musices 1 (1969), 91–105. ——, ‘Umjetnički put Mila Cipre’ [The Artistic Path of Milo Cipra], Rad JAZU 351 (1969), 325–450. Antiphonale monasticum (Solesmes: Abbaye de Saint-Pierre, 1995). Aristotle, Problems, ed. and trans. Robert Mayhew, David C. Mirhady, 2 vols. (Cambridge, MA, 1961, 1965). Artusi, Giovanni Maria, L’Artusi overo delle imperfettioni della moderna musica [Artusi: On the Imperfections of Modern Music] (1603; facs. edn. Bologna: Forni Editore, 1970). 257

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Ballarin, Sergio, I Ballarin di Murano (Venezia/Mestre: Stamperia Cetid, 2006). Baltić, Zorana, ‘Frano Parać, Uspostaviti kontakt s tradicijom’ [Frano Parać, Making Contact with Tradition], Od – do (Zagreb, 1982), 9. Banchieri, Adriano, Cartella musicale nel canto figurato, fermo, et contrapunto (Venetia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1614). ——, Cartella overo regole utilissime à quelli che desiderano imparare il canto figurato (Venetia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1601). ——, La cartellina musicale che in documenti facili ridotti dall’antico allo istile moderno introduce i principianti à sicuro posesso del canto figurato (Venetia: Giacomo Vincenti, 1615). Barker, Andrew (ed.), Greek Musical Writings: II, Harmonic and Acoustic Theory, 2 vols. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984–1989). Baroncini, Rodolfo, ‘Alessandro Gatti, poeta ed erudito veneziano della fine del Cinquecento: due testi in latino per Croce e Giovanni Gabrieli’, Recercare 22, 1–2 (2010), 51–80. ——, ‘Monteverdi a Venezia: l’azione in città’, in Monteverdi a San Marco. Venezia 1613–1643, eds. R. Baroncini, Marco Di Pasquale (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, 2020), 155–183. ——, ‘Monteverdi in Venice: new documents and perspectives’, Early Music 45/3 (2017), 365–376. ——, ‘Scelte e idiomi strumentali nell’‘Orfeo’ e in altri luoghi monteverdiani’, in Claudio Monteverdi. Studi e prospettive, eds. R. Baroncini, Paola Besutti, Teresa Gialdroni (Firenze: Olschki, 1998), 289–332. Barré, Henri, Prières anciennes de l’Occident à la Mère du Sauveur (Paris: Lethielleux, 1963). Barth, Hans, Osterie. Guida spirituale delle osterie italiane da Verona a Capri (Roma: Le Monier, 1910), 52–53. Basso, Alberto, L’Eridano e la Dora festeggianti. Le musiche e gli spettacoli nella Torino di Antico Regime (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, 2016). Berglund, Lars, ‘Transferring the Gabrielis to the North. On the Reception of Andrea and Giovanni Gabrieli in Seventeenth-Century Scandinavia’, Musica Iagellonica 8 (2017), 139–156. Bianco, Aurelio, ‘Nach englischer und frantzösichert Art’. Vie et oeuvre de Carlo Farina (Turnhout: Brepols, 2010). Bianco, Aurelio, Corswarem, Emilie, Vendrix, Philippe, ‘Gilles Hayne, Biagio Marini et le duc de Neuburg’, Studi Musicali 36/2 (2007), 363–441. Bianco, Aurelio, Dieci, Sara, Biagio Marini. Madrigali et Symfonie (Turnhout: Brepols, 2014). Bianco, Bernardino, ‘L’Atalanta. Un ignoto “zapato” seicentesco’, ed. Luciano Tamburini (Torino: Centro studi piemontesi, 1974). Bianconi, Lorenzo, Il Seicento (Torino: EDT, 1991). Boethius, Fundamentals of Music I.12, trans. with intro. and notes Calvin M. Bower, ed. Claude V. Palisca (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989). Bolzoni, Lina, ‘La “Poetica” del Patrizi e la cultura Veneta del primo cinquecento’, in L’umanesimo in Istria, Atti del Convegno internazionale di studio, Venezia, 30–31 Marzo–1 Aprile 1981, eds. Vittore Branca, Sante Graciotti (Firenze: Olschki, 1983), 19–36. ——, L’universo dei poemi possibili: Studi su Francesco Patrizi da Cherso (Roma: Bulzoni, 1980). Bondioli, Mauro, Nicolardi, Maringela, Radić Rossi, Irena, ‘Alvise Papali “conduttor” della galea da mercanzia per la scala di Spalato (1592–1596)’, in Pomorski Split do početka XX. stoljeća [Maritime Split until the Beginning of the 20th Century], (Split: Književni krug, 2019), 193–212. Bottrigari, Ercole, Il Patricio: overo de tetracordi armonici di Aristosseno; parere, et vera dimostratione [Patrizi: On the Harmonic Tetrachords of Aristoxenus; Appearance and True Demonstration] (Bologna, 1593; facs. edn. Bologna: Forni Editore, 1985). Bouquet, Marie Thérèse, Musique et musiciens à Turin de 1648 à 1775 (Torino: Accademia delle Scienze, 1968). Bracewell, Catherine Wendy, The Uskoks of Senj. Piracy, Banditry and Holy War in the Sixteenth-Century Adriatic (Ithaca, London: Cornell University Press, 1992). Bradley, John William, The Life and Works of Giorgio Giulio Clovio, Miniaturist, with Notices of his Contemporaries, and of the Art of Book Decoration in the Sixteenth Century (London: B. Quaritch, 1891). Braun, Werner, Britannia abundans. Deutsch-englische Musikbeziehungen zur Shakespearezeit (Tutzing: Schneider, 1977). 258

Bibliography

Breko Kustura, Hana, ‘Svjedočanstvo ritmiziranog korala (cantus fractusa) iz Samostana sv. Frane na Obali u Splitu: kantual Giuseppea d’Andrija iz 1707. godine’ [Testimony of cantus fractus from the Franciscan Monastery in Split: Chant Book by Giuseppe d’Andri from 1707], Bašćinski glasi 13 (2017–2018), 5–20. ——, ‘The Tradition of Liturgical Polyphony on the Eastern Adriatic Coast’, in Renaissance Music in the Slavic World, eds. Marco Gurrieri, Vasco Zara (Turnhout: Brepols, 2019), 25–39. Breviarium romanum. Editio princeps (1568), anastatic edn., eds. Manlio Sodi, Achille Maria Triacca (Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1999). Brewer, Charles E., The Instrumental Music of Schmeltzer, Biber, Muffat and their Contemporaries (Burlington: Ashgate, 2011). Brickman, Benjamin, An Introduction to Francesco Patrizi’s ‘Nova de universis philosophia’ (Ph.D. Diss., New York, Columbia University, 1941). Bujić, Bojan, ‘Cecchinijeve mise iz godine 1617 [Cecchini’s masses from 1617]’, Arti musices 1 (1969), 105–114. Burkholder, J. Peter, ‘Museum Pieces: The Historicist Mainstream in Music of the Last Hundred Years’, The Journal of Musicology 2/2 (1983), 115–134. Buzov, Snježana, ‘Vlach Villages, Pastures and Chiftliks: The Landscape of the Ottoman Borderlands in the 16th and 17th Centuries’, in Triplex Confinium (1500–1800): Ekohistorija, eds. Drago Roksandić et al. (Split: Književni krug, Zagreb: Zavod za hrvatsku povijest Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, 2003), 227–242. Callegari, Chiara, ‘Andrea Schiavone e l’incisione: dal pregiudizio alla modernità’, in Splendori del Rinascimento tra Parmigianino, Tintoretto e Tiziano, eds. Enrico Maria Dal Pozzolo, Lionello Puppi (Venezia: Museo Correr, 2015), 67–76. Callegari, Chiara, Mancini, Vincenzo (eds.), Andrea Schiavone. Pittura, incisione, disegno nella Venezia del Cinquecento, Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Venezia, 31 marzo – 2 aprile 2016 (Venezia: Fondazione Giorgio Cini, 2018). Callot, Jacques, Les misères et les malheurs de la guerre représentés par Jacques Callot noble lorrain (Paris: Israël Henriet, 1633). Calvillo, Elena, Imitation and Invention in the Service of Rome: Giulio Clovio’s Works for Cardinals Marino Grimani and Alessandro Farnese (doctoral dissertation, Baltimore-Maryland: John Hopkins University, 2003). ——, ‘Romanità and Grazia: Giulio Clovio’s Pauline Frontispieces for Marino Grimani’, The Art Bulletin 82/2 (2000), 280–297. Capriotti, Giuseppe, Coltrinari, Francesca, Gudelj, Jasenka (eds.), Visualizing Past in a Foreign Country: Schiavoni/Illyrian Confraternities and Colleges in Early Modern Italy in comparative perspective, Il capitale culturale, Supplementi 7 (2018). Castro, Paulo F. de, ‘La musique au second degré: on Gérard Genette’s Theory of Transtextuality and its Musical Relevance’, in Music, Analysis, Experience: New Perspectives in Musical Semiotics, eds. Costantino Maeder, Mark Reybrouck (Leuven: Leuven University Press, 2015), 83–96. Catalano, Alessandro, ‘L’arrivo di Francesco Sbarra in Europa centrale e la mediazione del Cardinale Ernst Adalbert von Harrach’, in Theater am Hof und für das Volk. Beiträge zur vergleichenden Theater- und Kulturgeschichte. Festschrift für Otto G. Schindler, ed. Brigitte Marschall, Maske und Kothurn 48/1–4 (2002), 203–213. ——, La Boemia e la riconquista delle coscienze. Ernst Adalbert von Harrach e la Controriforma in Europa centrale (1620–1667) (Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 2005). Cavallini, Ivano, ‘The “Other” Coastal Area of Venice: Musical Ties with Istria and Dalmatia’, in A Companion to Music in Seventeenth-Century Venice, ed. Katelijne Schiltz (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2019), 493–535. Chong, Nicholas Junkai, ‘Music for the Last Supper: The Dramatic Significance of Mozart’s Musical Quotations in the Tafelmusik of Don Giovanni’, Current Muscology 92 (2011), 7–52. Cionini Visani, Maria, Julije Klović [Giulio Clovio] (Zagreb: Nakladni zavod Matice hrvatske, 1977). ——, ‘Un itinerario nel manierismo italiano, Giulio Clovio’, Arte Veneta 25 (1971), 119–144. Civra, Ferruccio, Heinrich Schütz (Palermo: L’Epos, 2004). Colussi, Franco, ‘Tracce di musica policorale in alcuni centri del Friuli storico tra Cinque e seicento’, in La musica policorale in Italia e nell’Europa centro-orientale fra Cinque e Seicento, eds. Aleksandra Patalas, Marina Toffetti (Venezia: Fondazione Ugo e Olga Levi, 2012), 101–158. 259

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Comparin, Chiara, ‘Antonio Gualtieri, Amorosi diletti a tre voci (Venezia, 1608)’, Musica e Figura 4 (2017), 99–123. ——, Antonio Gualtieri (Monselice, 1574–1661). Opere sacre e profane (doctoral dissertation, Università degli Studi di Padova, 2015). ——, ‘Il secondo libro de mottetti a una e due voci di Antonio Gualtieri e il Parnassus Musicus Ferdinandaeus’, De musica disserenda 13/1 (2017), 169–189. ——, ‘Mapping the Presence of Paduan Repertoire in European Anthologies in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century’, Musicologica Brunensia 53/2 (2018), 25–40. Copenhaver, Brian P., Schmitt, Charles B., Renaissance Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992). Cortelazzo, Manlio, ‘Il linguaggio schiavonesco nel Cinquecento veneziano’, Atti dell’Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere e Arti, Classe di scienze morali, lettere ed arti 130 (1971–1972), 113–160. Cosenza, Mario Emilio, Biographical and Bibliographical Dictionary of the Italian Humanists and of the World of Classical Scholarship in Italy, 1300–1800 (IH, Boston: G. K. Hall, 1962), 2, 1962, 2634–2639. Cuthbert, Michael Scott, Ariza, Christopher, ‘music21: A Toolkit for Computer-Aided Musicology and Symbolic Music Data’, in 11th International Society for Music Information Retrieval Conference (ISMIR 2010), August 9–13, 2010, Utrecht, Netherlands, eds. J. Stephen Downie, Remco C. Veltkamp, 637–642, http://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/84963, accessed 15 November 2019. Časoslov Farnese s minijaturama Julija Klovića [The Farnese Book of Hours with Miniatures by Giulio Clovio]. Full facsimile edition of the original MS M.69 owned by Pierpont Morgan Library, New York. Comments: Wiliam M. Voelkle and Ivan Golub, foreword Miroslav Begović (Zagreb: HAZU, Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 2001). Čičin Šain, Ćiro, ‘Pisma Marka Kavanjina splitskog trgovca iz prve polovine XVII. stoljeća’ [Letters by Marko Kavanjin, Split merchant from the first half of the 17th century], Starine 49 (1959), 105–226. Čolak, Nikola, Hrvatski pomorski regesti (Regesti marittimi croati), vols. I–II (Padova: Centro di Studi Storici Croati – Venezia: 1985, 1993), vol. III, ed. Zrinka Podhraški Čizmek (Split: History Department of the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences in Split, 2008. Čoralić, Lovorka, ‘Ballarini – istaknuta obitelj muranskih staklara dalmatinskoga podrijetla’ [The Ballarini – a prominent family of Murano glassmakers of Dalmatian descent], Građa i prilozi za povijest Dalmacije 13 (1997), 113–144. ——, Barani u Mlecima. Povijest jedne hrvatske iseljeničke zajednice [Bar people in Venice. History of a Croatian émigré community] (Zagreb: Dom i svijet, Hrvatsko građansko društvo Crne Gore, 2006). ——, ‘Croatian Migrations in the Italian Coastal Area in the Late Middle Ages and at the Beginning of the Early Modern Age’, Études Balkaniques 46/1–2 (2010), 223–248. ——, ‘Doseljenici iz Požege u Veneciji u XV. i XVI. stoljeću’ [Immigrants from Požega in Venice in the 15th and 16th centuries], Osječki zbornik 21 (1991), 87–98. ——, ‘Dubrovčani u Veneciji od XIII. do XVIII. stoljeća’ [Dubrovnik people in Venice from the 13th to the 18th century], Dubrovnik Annals 32 (1994), 15–57. ——, ‘Giudecca, Murano, Chioggia ... Hrvati na otocima mletačke lagune’ [Giudecca, Murano Chioggia … Croats on the Islands of the Venetian Lagoon], Povijesni prilozi 21/23 (2002), 117–144. ——, ‘Hrvati i mletački Arsenal’ [Croats and the Venetian Arsenal], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 39 (1997), 167–181. ——, Hrvatska / Italija. Stoljetne veze: povijest, književnost i likovne umjetnosti / Croazia / Italia. I rapporti nei secoli: storia, letteratura, arti figurative (Edizione bilingue), ed. Natka Badurina, in Most / The Bridge. A Journal of Croatian Literature (Zagreb: Društvo hrvatskih književnika, 1997), chapter: ‘Povijest’ [History], 9–88; in Croatian with a version in Italian: ‘Storia’, 245–332; bibliography: 503–508). ——, ‘Hrvatski barkarioli i gondolijeri u Mlecima tijekom prošlosti’ [Croatian Barcaroli and Gondoliers in Venice in the Past], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 41 (1999), 27–50. ——, Hrvatski prinosi mletačkoj kulturi: Odabrane teme [Croatian Contributions to Venetian Culture: Selected Topics] (Zagreb: Dom i svijet, 2003). ——, ‘Hvarani u Mlecima (XV.–XVIII. stoljeće)’ [Hvar People in Venice (15th to 18th century], Rasprave iz hrvatske kulturne prošlosti 2 (2002), 211–282.

260

Bibliography

——, ‘Iseljenici iz grada Kotora u Mlecima (XV.–XVIII. st.)’ [Emigrants from the city of Kotor in Venice (15th to 18th c.)], Povijesni prilozi 17/17 (1998), 133–155. ——, ‘Istrani u Mlecima, XV-XVIII st.’ [Istrians in Venice, 15th to 18th c.], Vjesnik Istarskog arhiva 4–5 (1994– 1995), 15–30. ——, ‘Iz pomorske prošlosti istočnoga Jadrana: tragovima hrvatskih kapetana i paruna brodova u Mlecima’ [From the maritime past of the Eastern Adriatic: traces of Croatian Captains and Ship-Owners in Venice], Zbornik Odsjeka za povijesne znanosti Zavoda za povijesne i društvene znanosti HAZU u Zagrebu 19 (2001), 143–182. ——, ‘Iz prošlosti Paštrovića’ [From the past of Paštrovići], Historijski zbornik 49 (1996), 137-159. ——, ‘Iz prošlosti Prčanja u XVII. st. (admiral Bokeljske mornarice – Tripun Luković)’ [From the Past of Prčanj in the 17th century (admiral of the Boka Marine- Tripun Luković], in Spomenica Ljube Bobana 1933.–1994. [Festschift for Ljubo Boban 1933–1994], eds. Ivo Goldstein, Mira Kolar-Dimitrijević, Marijan Maticka (Zagreb: Zavod za hrvatsku povijest Filozofskog fakulteta Sveučilišta u Zagrebu, 1996), 95–103. ——, ‘Kardinal Bessarion i Hrvati’ [Cardinal Bessarion and the Croats], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 40 (1998), 143–160. ——, ‘La Scuola Dalmata dei SS. Giorgio e Trifone nei testamenti degli immigrati dalla sponda orientale dell’Adriatico’, Scuola Dalmata 27 (1994), 13–26. ——, ‘Letters and Communications of the Rectors of Budva, Bar and Ulcinj as a Source for the Diplomatic and Political History of Venetian Albania in the Sixteenth Century’, Études Balkaniques 45/3 (2009), 89–108. ——, ‘Papa Aleksandar VI. i hrvatska Bratovština sv. Jurja i Tripuna u Mlecima’ [Pope Alexander VI and the Croatian Confraternity of St George and St Tryphon in Venice], Croatica christiana periodica 14/46 (2000), 21–28. ——, ‘Peraštani u Mlecima (15.–18. stoljeće)’ [People from Perast in Venice (15th to 18th c.], in Stjepanu Antoljaku u čast (zbornik) [A Miscealany in honour of Stjepan Antoljak], ed. Josip Kolanović (Zagreb: Hrvatski državni arhiv, 2003), 199–210. ——, ‘Prilog poznavanju prisutnosti i djelovanja hrvatskih trgovaca u Mlecima (15.–18. stoljeće)’ [Contribution to the knowledge of the presence and activity of Croatian Merchants in Venice (15th to 18th century], Povijesni prilozi 21/22 (2002), 41–73. ——, ‘Prilozi poznavanju prisutnosti i djelovanja doseljenika iz Bosne u Veneciji od XIV. do XVII. stoljeća’ [Contributions to knowledge on the presence and activity of immigrants from Bosnia in Venice from the 14th to the 17th century], Historijski zbornik 46/1 (1993), 31–60. ——, ‘Rabljani u Mlecima (od srednjega vijeka do kraja 18. stoljeća)’ [Rab People in Venice (from the Middle Ages to the end of the 18th c.], in Rapski zbornik II. [A Rab Miscellany], eds. Josip Andrić, Robert Lončarić (Rab: MH, 2012), 43–55. ——, ‘The Ragusans in Venice from the Thirteenth to the Eighteenth Century’, Dubrovnik Annals 3 (1999), 13–40. ——, ‘Relazioni culturali e artistiche tra le due sponde dell’Adriatico: i vetrai dalmati sull’isola di Murano’, Istorijski zapisi 89/3–4 (2016), 241–254. ——, ‘Senjani u Veneciji od 15. do 18. stoljeća’ [Senj People in Venice from the 15th to the 18th c.], Senjski zbornik 20 (1993), 79–102. ——, ‘Splićani u Veneciji od XIV. do XVIII. stoljeća’ [Split People in Venice from the 14th to the 18th century], in Zbornik radova posvećenih sedamdesetogodišnjici života Danice Božić-Bužančić [A Miscellany of Papers dedicated to the Seventieth Birthday of Danica Božić-Bužančić], ed. Nataša Bajić-Žarko, Građa i prilozi za povijest Dalmacije 12 (1996), 109–156. ——, ‘Sulla scia delle prime testimonianze delle migrazioni croate a Venezia (dall’XI all’inizio del XV secolo)’, Review of Croatian History 13 (2017), 7–27. ——, ‘Sulle tracce degli immigrati croati sull’isola veneta della Giudecca (dal ‘400 al ‘600)’, in Književnost, umjetnost, kultura između dviju obala Jadrana i dalje od mora IV. / Letteratura, arte, cultura tra le due sponde dell’Adriatico ed oltre IV, eds. Nedjeljka Balić Nižić, Luciana Borsetto, Andrijana Jusup Magazin (Zadar: Sveučilište u Zadru, 2016), 513–526. ——, Šibenčani u Mlecima [Šibenik People in Venice] (Šibenik: Juraj Šižgorić, 2003). ——, ‘Trogirani u Veneciji od XIV. do XVIII. stoljeća’ [Trogir People in Venice from the 14th to the 18th c.], Vartal. Časopis za kulturu III/1–2 (1994), 51–90. 261

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

——, U gradu svetoga Marka: Povijest hrvatske zajednice u Mlecima [In the City of St Mark: the History of the Croatian Community in Venice] (Zagreb: Golden Marketing, 2001). ——, ‘Zadrani u Veneciji od XIV. do XVIII. stoljeća’ [Zadar People in Venice from the 14th to the 18th century], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 35 (1993), 63–119. ——, Venecija. Kraljica mora s lagunarnih sprudova: Povijest Mletačke Republike [Venice. Queen of the Sea from Lagoon Shoals: The History of the Venetian Republic] (Samobor: Meridijani, 2004). ——, ‘Zagrepčani u Veneciji u XV. i XVI. stoljeću’ [Zagreb People in Venice in the 15th and 16th century], Iz starog i novog Zagreba 7 (1996), 19–34. Čoralić, Lovorka, Katušić, Maja, ‘Dalmatinci najviši časnici mletačkih prekomorskih postrojbi u 18. stoljeću’ [Dalmatians – The Highest Officers of the Venetian Overseas Units in the 18th Century], in Dalmacija u prostoru i vremenu, Što Dalmacija jest, a što nije? [Dalmatia in Space and Time - What Dalmatia Is and Isn’t?], Proceedings from Scientific Conference, Zadar, 14–16 June 2012, eds. Lena Mirošević, Vera Graovac Matassi (Zadar: Sveučilište u Zadru, 2014), 99–129. ——, ‘Migrations and permeations between two shores of the Adriatic: The Examples of Zadar, Kotor and Venice (17th and 18th Century)’, in Music Migrations in the Early Modern Age: People, Markets, Patterns, Styles, ed. Vjera Katalinić (Zagreb: Hrvatsko muzikološko društvo, 2016), 33–47. Damschroder, David, Williams, David Russell, Music Theory from Zarlino to Schenker: A Bibliography and Guide, Harmonologia, no. 4 (Stuyvesant, NY: Pendragon Press, 1991). Daniel, Hermann Adalbert, Thesaurus Hymnologicus, vol. 1 (Lipsia: J. T. Loeschke, 1855; anastatic edn. Hildesheim, New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 1973). Danuser, Hermann, ‘Postmodernes Musikdenken – Lösung oder Flucht?, in Neue Musik im politischem Wandel, Veröffentlichungen des Instituts für Neue Musik und Musikerziehung Darmstadt 32 (Mainz: Schott, 1991), 56–66. Davidović, Dalibor, ‘Signs... Fragments... Some Observations on the Music of Milo Cipra (1906-1985)’, IRASM 32/1 (2001), 93–132. Difnik, Franjo, Povijest Kandijskog rata u Dalmaciji [The History of the Candian War in Dalmatia] (Split: Književni krug, 1986). Dominis, Marcus Antonius de, A Manifestation of the Motives, ed. Vesna Tudjina-Gamulin (Zagreb: Croatian P.E.N. Centre, 1997). Donaggio, Vanessa, ‘Alessandro Dalla Via: Un contributo all’arte incisoria veneta tra XVII e XVIII secolo’, AFAT, arte in Friuli, arte a Trieste 36 (2017), 47–131. Eitner, Robert, Biographisch-bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten christlicher Zeitrechnung bis Mitte des neunzehnten Jahrhunderts, 11 vols. (Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1959–1960). ——, ‘Lucacih (Johann)’, in Bibliographie der Musik-Sammelwerke des XVI. und XVII. Jahrhunderts (Berlin: Leo Liepmannssohn, 1877), 683. ——, ‘Lucacih, Giovanni’, Biographisch-Bibliographisches Quellen-Lexikon der Musiker und Musikgelehrten, vol. 6 (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Haertel, 1902), 234. Eudes, Jean, Oeuvres complètes, 9 vols. (Paris: Beauchesne, 1905–1909). Fabris, Dinko, Andrea Falconieri Napoletano. Un liutista-compositore del Seicento (Roma: Torre d’Orfeo, 1987). Fechner, Manfred, ‘Bemerkungen zu Carlo Farina und seiner Instrumentalmusik’, Schütz-Jahrbuch 18 (1996), 109–122. Fend, Michael, ‘The Changing Functions of Senso and Ragione in Italian Music Theory of the Late Sixteenth Century’, in The Second Sense: Studies in Hearing and Musical Judgement from Antiquity to the Seventeenth Century, eds. Charles Burnett, M. Fend, Penelope Gouk (London: The Warburg Institute, University of London, 1991), 199–221. Fétis, François-Joseph, ‘Lucacih (Jean)’, Biographie universelle des musiciens et bibligraphie générale de la musique, vol. 5 (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1863; 2nd edn. 1867), 359. Fromson, Michele, ‘A Conjunction of Rhetoric and Music: Structural Modelling in the Italian CounterReformation Motet’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association 117/ 2 (1992), 208–246. Fujinaga, Ichiro, Weiss, Susan Forscher, ‘Music’, in A Companion to Digital Humanities, eds. Susan Schreibman, Ray Siemens, John Unsworth (Oxford: Blackwell, 2004). 262

Bibliography

Galilei, Vincenzo, Dialogue on Ancient and Modern Music, ed., trans. and intro. Claude V. Palisca (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2003), lxi, 229–244 (original source: V. Galilei, Dialogo della Musica Antica et delle Moderna (Florence, 1581; facs. repr. New York: Broude Brothers, 1967)). Gambassi, Osvaldo, Pueri cantores nelle cattedrali d’Italia tra Medioevo e età moderna. Le scuole eugeniane, scuole di canto annesse alle cappelle musicali (Firenze: Olschki, 1997). Garbelotto, Antonio, Un vescovo musicista a Padova nel 500: Marco Cornaro (Padova: Società Cooperativa Tipografica, 1954). Genette, Gérard, Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree, Channa Newman, Claude Doubinsky (trans.) (Lincoln NE, London: University of Nebraska Press, 1997). ——, Paratexts: Thresholds of Interpretation, Jane E. Lewin (trans.) (Lincoln, NE, London: University of Nebraska Press, 1997). ——, Seuils (Paris: Seuil, 1989). Gerbert, Martin (ed.), Scriptores ecclesiastici de musica sacra potissimum, 3 vols. ([Sankt Blasien]: Typis San-Blasianis, 1784). Gligo, Nikša, ‘Croatian Contemporary Music: An Insight’, World New Music Magazine 15 (2005), 35–51. ——, ‘Fenomen “povratka” kao stanje skladateljske svijesti u aktualnom trenutku hrvatske Nove glazbe’ [The Phenomenon of the ‘Comeback’ as a State of Compositional Mind in the New Croatian Music at the Moment], Muzička kultura 4/1–3 (1986), 4–10. ——, Liner notes written for the CD Stanko Horvat: Music for Strings (Zagreb: Cantus, HDS, HRT, CD, 98905201912, 2004). Gliubich, Simeone (Šime Ljubić), Dizionario biografico degli uomini illustri della Dalmazia (Vienna: Rod. Lechner, Zara: Battara e Abelich, 1856; repr. Bologna: Forni, 1974). Glixon, Jonathan, Honoring God and the City. Music at the Venetian Confraternities, 1260–1807 (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003). ——, ‘Reconstructing the Musical Establishment of Santa Maria dei Frari, Venice’, in Barocco Padano e musici francescani: L’apporto dei maestri conventuali, Atti del XVI Convegno internazionale sul barocco padano (secoli XVII-XVIII), Padova, 1-3 luglio 2013, Barocco Padano 8 (Padova: Centro Studi Antoniani, 2014), eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan (Padova: Centro studi antoniani, 2014), 79–98. Gramigna, Silvia, Perissa, Annalisa, Scuole grandi e piccole a Venezia tra arte e storia. Confraternite di mestieri e devozione in sei itinerari (Venezia: Grafiche 2am, 2008). Grieg, Donald, ‘Performing for (and against) the microphone’, The Cambridge Companion to Recorded Music, eds. Nicholas Cook, Eric Clarke, Daniel Leech-Wilkinson, John Rink (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), 16–29. Grimmelshausen, Hans Jakob Christoffel von, Der abenteuerliche Simplicissimus (Monpelgart: Johann Fillion, 1669; recte Nürenberg, 1668). Groppo, Antonio, Catalogo purgatissimo di tutti li drammi per musica recitatisi ne’ teatri di Venezia dall’anno 1637 sin oggi [1767] da Antonio Groppo accresciuto di tutti li scenarii, varie edizioni, aggiunte a drammi e intermedii (Venezia: 1741 [ma 1767]). Grubišić, Slavo, Šibenik kroz stoljeća [Šibenik through the Centuries] (Šibenik: Muzej grada Šibenika, 1974). Guarini, Giovanni Battista, Della gierarchia overo del sacro regno di Maria vergine, madre di Dio e reina del cielo (Venezia: Evangelista Denchino e Gio. Battista Pulciani, 1609). Hammond, Susan Lewis, Editing Music in Early Modern Germany (London, New York: Routledge, 2016). Hathaway, Baxter, The Age of Criticism: The Late Renaissance in Italy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1962). ——, Marvels and Commonplaces: Renaissance Literary Criticism (New York: Random House, 1986), 431–436. Hayburn, Robert F., Papal Legislation on Sacred Music: 95 A.D. to 1977 A.D. (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1979). Höfler, Janez, ‘Dvije zbirke skladbi Tome Cecchinija’ [Two Collections by Tomaso Cecchini], Sv. Cecilija 40/2 (1970), 44–45. Holjevac, Robert, Markantun de Dominis (1560.–1624.): život i djelovanje u povijesnom i teološkom kontekstu [life and work in the historical and theological context] (Ph.D. Diss., Zagreb: Filozofski fakultet, 2010). Holman, Peter, Dowland: Lachrimae (1604) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999). ——, Four and Twenty Fiddlers: the Violin at the English Court, 1540–1690 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993). 263

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Horvat (Horvatova), Marija, Andrija Medulić (Zagreb: Hrv. pedagoško-književni zbor, 1915). Horvat, Stanko, Sedak, Eva, ‘Ispitivati osvojeni teren. Stanko Horvat u razgovoru s Evom Sedak’ [Exploration of the Mastered Field: Stanko Horvat Interviewed by Eva Sedak], in Novi zvuk [New Sound], ed. Petar Selem (Zagreb: MH, 1972), 303–309. Houle, George, Meter in Music, 1600–1800: Performance, Perception, and Notation (Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1987). Huber, Calvin, The Life and Music of William Brade, 2 voll. (Ph.D. Diss., University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1965). Hutcheon, Linda, The Politics of Postmodernism (London: Routledge-Taylor & Francis, 2004). Imhaus, Brunehilde, Le minoranze orientali a Venezia 1300–1510 (Roma: Il Veltro Editrice, 1997). Indice delle opere di musca degli editori veneziani: Alessandro Vincenti (Bologna: Forni, 1978) (Bibliotheca Musica Bononiensis, sez. 1, 52). Jackson, Roland, ‘It Can “spoil all the beauty”: The Duplicating of Solo Dissonances in Seventeenth-Century Thorough-bass Accompaniment’, Performance Practice Review 11/1–2 (2006), 4–5. Jacobs, Emil, ‘Francesco Patrizi und seine Sammlung griechischer Handschriften in der Bibliothek des Escorial’, Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen XXV (1908), 19–47. Jameson, Frederic, ‘Postmodernism and Consumer Society’, in The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Postmodern Culture, ed. Hal Foster (Port Townsend: Bay Press, 1983), 111–125. Jan, Karl von (ed.), Musici Scriptores Graeci: Aristoteles, Euclides, Nicomachus, Bacchius, Gaudentius, Alypius et melodiarum veterum quidquid exstat (1899; reprinted Stuttgart: Teubner, 1995). Jelić, Roman, Stanovništvo Zadra 1608. godine [The inhabitants of Zadar: Year 1608] (Zadar: by author, 1985). Jovanović, Neven, ‘Antiturcica iterata. Ponovni pogled na renesansnu hrvatsku protutursku književnost’ [Antiturcica iterata: Another Look at Croatian Anti-Turkish Writings during the Renaissance], Colloquia Maruliana 25 (2016), 101–148. Juran, Kristijan, ‘Morlaci u Šibeniku između Ciparskoga i Kandijskog rata (1570. – 1645.)’ [Morlacs in Šibenik between the Cyprian and Canduan Wars], Povijesni prilozi 49 (2015), 163–210. Kainulainen, Jaska, Paolo Sarpi: A Servant of God and State (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2014). Kalinayová, Jana, Hudobné inventáre a repertoár viachlasnej hudby na Slovensku v 16.–17. storoči (Bratislava: Slovenské národné múzeum – Hudobné múzeum, 1994); German edn., ed. Karol Tauber, Musikinventare und das Repertoire der Mehrstimmigen Musik in der Slowakei im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert (Bratislava: Slowakisches Nationalmuseum, Musikmuseum, 1995). Kalogjera, Niko, ‘Povjesne crtice o glazbenim prilikama splitske stolne crkve [Historical sketches about musical conditions of the Split cathedral]’, Sv. Cecilija 18/3–5 (1924), 89–90, 126–128, 160–163. Karaman, Ljubo, O djelovanju domaće sredine u umjetnosti hrvatskih krajeva [On Impact of Local Environment in the Art of Croatian Regions] (Zagreb: MH, 1963). Katalinić, Vjera, ‘Giovanni Sebenico, a pupil of Legrenzi?’, in Giovanni Legrenzi e la cappella ducale di San Marco, eds. Francesco Passadore, Franco Rossi (Firenze: Olschki, 1994), 201–206. Kempf, Davorin, ‘Protiv sam institucionalizirane avangarde, ozbiljna glazba smije zvučati skladno’, Nacional 15 December 2017, https://www.nacional.hr/interview-davorin-kempf-protiv-sam-institucionalizirane-avangarde-ozbiljna-glazba-smije-zvucati-skladno/, accessed 20 November 2019. Kendrick, Robert L., ‘Devotion, piety and commemoration: sacred songs and oratorios’, in The Cambridge History of Seventeenth-century music, eds. Tim Carter, John Butt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005). ——, The sounds of Milan 1585–1650 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). Kobuch, Agatha, ‘Neue Aspekte zur Biographie von Heinrich Schütz und zur Geschichte der Dresdner Hofkapelle’, in Heinrich Schütz im Spannungsfeld seines und unseres Jahrhunderts, vol. 1, ed. Wolfram Steude (Leipzig: Peters, 1987). Kolanović, Josip, Šibenik u kasnome srednjem vijeku [Šibenik in the Late Medieval Age] (Zagreb: Školska knjiga, 1995). Komanov, Dodi, Arkadija hrvatske glazbe: 30 godina festivala Osorske glazbene večeri [The Arcadia of Croatian Music. Thirty Years of Osor Musical Evenings] (Zagreb: Osorske glazbene večeri, 2006). 264

Bibliography

Konfic, Lucija, ‘Skladbe Ivana Lukačića u kontekstu onodobnih glazbenih antologija – pogled iz perspektive digitalne muzikologije’, in Između srednje Europe i Mediterana: glazba, književnost i izvedbene umjetnosti / Bertween Central Europe and the Mediterranean: Music, Literature and the Performing Arts, eds. Ivana Tomić Ferić, Antonela Marić (Split: Sveučilište u Splitu, Umjetnička akademija, Filozofski fakultet, 2021), 259–277. Korsyn, Kevin, ‘Towards a New Poetics of Musical Influence’, Music Analysis 10/1–2 (1991), 3–72. Kos, Koraljka, ‘Vertonungen lateinischer Texte von Schütz und Lukačić. Vergleichende Analyse / Schützove i Lukačićeve skladbe na latinske tekstove. Usporedbena analiza’, in The Musical Baroque, Western Slavs, and the Spirit of the European Cultural Communion: Proceedings of the International Musicological Symposium held in Zagreb, Croatia, on October 12–14, 1989 / Glazbeni barok i zapadni Slaveni u kontekstu europskog kulturnog zajedništva: Radovi sa znanstvenog skupa održanog u Zagrebu 12–14. 10. 1989, ed. Stanislav Tuksar (Zagreb: HMD, HAZU, 1993), 45–61; 197–213. Kramer, Jonathan D., ‘Beyond Unity: Toward an Understanding of Musical Postmodernism’, in Concert Music, Rock, and Jazz Since 1945: Essays and Analytical Studies, eds. Elizabeth West Marvin, Richard Hermann (Rochester: University of Rochester Press, 1995), 11–33. ——, ‘The Nature and Origins of Musical Postmodernism’, in Postmodern music/Thought, eds. Judy Lochhead, Joseph Auner (New York: Routledge, 2002), 13–26. Krekić, Bariša, ‘Mlečani u Dubrovniku i Dubrovčani u Mlecima kao vlasnici nekretnina u XIV. stoljeću’ [Venetians in Dubrovnik and Dubrovnik People in Venice as Owners of Real Properties in the 14th century], Anali Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Dubrovniku 28 (1990), 7–40. Kristeller, Paul O., Eight Philosophers of the Italian Renaissance (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1964). Kristeva, Julia, ‘Word, Dialog and Novel’, in The Kristeva Reader, ed. Toril Moi (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), 34–61. Krpan, Erika (ed.), Igor Kuljerić. Koncert u povodu primanja u redovito članstvo HAZU [Igor Kuljerić, Concert on the Occasion of Acceptance as a Full Member of the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts], concert booklet (Zagreb: HDS, Cantus, 2005). Krückmann, Peter Olaf, Federico Bencovich, 1677–1753 (Hildesheim: Olms, 1988). Kukuljević Sakcinski, Ivan, Bibliografia hrvatska [Croatian Bibliography] (Zagreb: Dragutin Albrecht, 1860; [Appendix, 1863]). ——, Jure Glović, prozvan Julijo Klovio, hrvatski sitnoslikar [J. Glović, Called J. Klovio, the Croatian Miniaturist] (Zagreb: MH, 1878). ——, Slovnik umjetnikah jugoslavenskih [Dictionary of South Slav Artists] (Zagreb: Tiskara Ljudevita Gaja 1858). Kuljerić, Igor, Barbieri, Marija, ‘Ova sredina oprašta sve osim uspjeha’ [This Environment Forgives Everything but Success], Vijenac 269 (2004), http://www.matica.hr/vijenac/269/ova-sredina-oprastasve-osim-uspjeha-10336/, accessed 20 November 2019. Kuljerić, Igor, Požgaj, Višnja, ‘Tragom glazbenih korijena’ [Tracing Musical Roots], Vjesnik, 11 February 2001. Kurtzman, Jeffrey, Schnoebelen, Anne, ‘A Catalogue of Mass, Office and Holy Week Music Printed in Italy: 1516–1770’, JSCM Instrumenta 2 (2014), http://sscm-jscm.org/instrumenta/vol-2/, accessed 27 December 2019. Lebedinski, Ester, ‘“Obtained by peculiar favour, & much difficulty of the Singer”: Vincenzo Albrici and the function of Charles II’s Italian ensemble at the English Restoration court’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association 143 (2018), 325–359. Leemans, Annemie, ‘Tra storia e leggenda, Indagini sul network artistico tra Sofonisba Anguissola, Giulio Clovio e Levina Teerlinc’, Intrecci d’arte 3 (2014), 35–55. Lenneberg, Hans (ed.), The Dissemination of Music: Studies in the History of Music Publishing (London, New York: Routledge, 1994; eBook 2013). Lenneberg, Hans, On the Publishing and Dissemination of Music 1500–1850 (Hillsdale: Pendragon Press, 2003). Liber Hymnarius (Solesmes: Abbaye Saint-Pierre, 1983). Lovato, Antonio, ‘Il vescovo di Padova Marco II Cornaro (1557–1625) e il theatrum sacrum per il carnevale spirituale’, Musica e Figura 4 (2017), 71–97. ——, ‘La musica sacra nell’attività pastorale del vescovo di Padova Marco Corner (1557–1625)’, Studia patavina 34 (1987), 29–50. 265

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

——, ‘Musica e liturgia nella collegiata di S. Giustina’, in Monselice nei secoli, ed. Antonio Rigon (Treviso: Canova, 2009), 231–249. ——, ‘Teoria e didattica del canto piano’, in Musica e liturgia nella riforma tridentina, Trento: Castello del Buonconsiglio, 23 settembre – 26 novembre 1995, eds. Danilo Curti, Marco Gozzi (Trento: Provincia autonoma di Trento, 1995), 57–67. ——, ‘Venedig. Neue Impulse für die Kirchenmusik an San Marco im Cinquecento’, in Zentren der Kirchenmusik, eds. Matthias Schneider, Beate Bugenhagen, Enzyklopädie der Kirchenmusik, vol. 2 (Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 2001), 106–127. Luković, Niko, ‘Bratovština bokeljskih pomoraca sv. Đorđa i Tripuna u Mlecima’ [The Confraternity of Boka Mariners of St George and St Tryphon in Venice], Godišnjak Pomorskog muzeja u Kotoru 6 (1957), 33–43. Macan Lukavečki, Valerija, ‘Evanđelistar Grimani (Evangeliarium)’, in Julije Klović, najveći minijaturist renesanse, ed. Jasminka Poklečki Stošić, 94–99. ——, Hrvatski velikan Juraj Julije Klović [The Great Croatian Man Juraj Julije Klović] (Vinkovci: Privlačica, 2019). ——, ‘Julije Klović, umjetnik iz Vinodola u europskom humanizmu’ [Giulio Clovio, The Artist from Vinodol in European Humanism], Riječki teološki časopis 52/2 (2018), 223–242. ——, ‘Lekcionar Towneley / Lekcionar Farnese’, in Julije Klović, najveći minijaturist renesanse, ed. Jasminka Poklečki Stošić, 107–114. Macan, Valerija, Giorgio Giulio Clovio, ovvero l’ultima stagione dell’arte della miniatura (doctoral dissertation, Pontificia Università Gregoriana, Roma: Facoltà di Storia e dei Beni culturali di Chiesa, 2010). Maračić, Ljudevit Anton (ed.), Lukačić, Zbornik radova znanstvenog skupa održanog u povodu 400. obljetnice rođenja Ivana Marka Lukačića [Atti del convegno, tenuto nel 400.o anniversario dalla nascita di Ivan Marko Lukačić], (Zagreb, Provincijalat franjevaca konventualaca, 1987). ——, Provincijski povijesni arhiv. Arhivsko gradivo povijesnog dijela Provincijskog arhiva (1559. – 1827.) [L’archivio storico della Provincia], II volumi (Zagreb: Hrvatska provincija sv. Jeronima franjevaca konventualaca, 2015), vol. I: Popis i opis materijala [Indice e descrizione di fonti]; vol. II: Izbor i obrada materijala [Scelta e analisi del materiale]. Maračić, Ljudevit Anton, Stipčević, Ennio, Gabriello Puliti (ca. 1580–1642/3): francescano, compositore, ‘Accademico armonico detto l’Allegro’ (Rovigno: Centro di ricerche storiche, 2021). Marani, Alberto, Atti pastorali di Minuccio Minucci, arcivescovo di Zara (1596–1604) (Roma: Storia e Letteratura, 1970). Marcello, Benedetto, Il teatro alla moda, eds. Michele Geremia, Marco Bizzarini (Treviso: Diastema, 2015). Mastrosanti, Marcello, Il 1500 ad Ancona. Rapporti con Fiume, Istria, Dalmazia attraverso i documenti (Ancona: Poligrafica Bellomo, 2011). Mathiesen, Thomas J., Apollo’s Lyre: Greek Music and Music Theory in Antiquity and the Middle Ages (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1999). Matthysz, Paulus,’T Uitnement Kabinet, Eerste deel (Amsterdam: autore, s.d. [1646]; repr. c. 1655). Maus, Fred Everett, ‘Concepts of Musical Unity’, in Rethinking Music, eds. Nicholas Cook, Mark Everist (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 171–192. Mayhew, Tea, Dalmatia between Ottoman and Venetian Rule: Contado di Zara, 1645–1718 (Roma: Viella, 2008). Meconi, Honey (ed.), Early Musical Borrowing (New York: Routledge, Common Knowledge, 2004). Ménestrier, Claude François, Des représentations en musique anciennes et modernes (Paris: Guignard, 1681). Meyer, Ernst, ‘Concerted Instrumental Music’, in The New Oxford History of Music, vol. IV, The Age of Humanism (1540–1630), ed. Gerald Abraham (Oxford – New York: Oxford University Press, 1968), 550–601 (Italian edn., ed. Francesco Bussi, ‘La musica strumentale “concertata”’, in L’età del Rinascimento 1540–1630 (Milano: Feltrinelli, 1978), 3rd edn., vol. IV (II), 640–642). ——, Die mehrstimmige Spielmusik des 17. Jahrhunderts in Nord- und Mitteleuropa. Mit einem Verzeichnis der deutschen Kammer- und Orchestermusikwerke des 17. Jahrhunderts (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1934). ——, Early English Chamber Music (London: Lawrence & Wishart, 1946; new edn., ed. Diana Poulton, Boston: Marion Boyars, 1982). Migne, Jacques Paul (ed.), Patrologia Latina, vol. 158 (Parigi: Garnier, 1853), vol. 39 (Paris: apud Garnier fratres, 1865). 266

Bibliography

Miklaušić-Ćeran, Snježana, ‘Glazba u Katedrali sv. Jakova u Šibeniku početkom druge polovine 19. stoljeća’ [Music in the Šibenik Cathedral of St Jacob], in Glazbe Jadrana – identitet, utjecaji i tradicije [Music of the Adriatic – Identity, Influences and Traditions], eds. Ivana Paula Gortan-Carlin, Branko Radić (Novigrad: Katedra Čakavskog sabora za glazbu, 2019), 27–74. Milošević, Maja, ‘The inventory of music material from the Hvar Chapter in 1646 and 1647’, in Studies on the reception of Italian music in central-eastern Europe in the 16th and 17th century, ed. Marina Toffetti (Kraków: Musica Jagellonica, 2018), 85–118. Mischiati, Oscar, Indici, cataloghi e avvisi degli editori musicali italiani dal 1591 al 1798 (Firenze: Olschki, 1984) Missale Romanum. Editio princeps (1570), anastatic edn., eds. Manlio Sodi, Achille Maria Triacca (Città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1998). Mitić, Ilija, ‘Prilog proučavanju odnosa Dubrovnika i Venecije u XVII i XVIII stoljeću’ [Contribution to the study of Dubrovnik – Venetian relations in the 17th and 18th century], Anali Historijskog instituta JAZU u Dubrovniku 13–14 (1976), 117–141. Monaco, Angelo Maria, ‘Schiavone pittore e incisore. Topoi consolidati e fortuna critica tra Sei e Settecento’, in Andrea Schiavone. Pittura, incisione, disegno nella Venezia del Cinquecento, Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Venezia, 31 marzo – 2 aprile 2016, eds. Chiara Callegari, Vincenzo Mancini, (Venezia: Fondazione Giorgio Cini, 2018), 81–93. Mone, Franz Joseph, Hymni latini medii aevi, vol. 1 (Friburgi Brisgoviae: Herder, 1853; anastatic edn. Bologna: Forni editore, 1969). Morelli, Arnaldo, ‘La musica a S. Girolamo dei Croati. Note d’archivio’, in Chiesa Sistina, ed. Ratko Perić, Collectanea Croatico-Hieronymiana de Urbe 3, vol. II (Roma: Pontificio Collegio Croato di San Girolamo, 1990), 121–132. Morelli, Jacopo (ed.), Aristidis oratio adversus Leptinem, Libanii declamatio pro Socrate, Aristoxeni rhythmicorum elementorum fragmenta (Venezia: Carolus Palesius, 1785). Morgan, Robert P., Twentieth-Century Music: A History of Musical Style in Modern Europe and America (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 1991). Moroni, Gaetano, Dizionario di erudizione storico-ecclesiastica da S. Pietro sino ai nostri giorni, vol. XIV (Venezia: tip. Emiliana, 1842). Moyer, Ann E., Musica Scientia: Musical Scholarship in the Italian Renaissance (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992). Mrkonjić, Tomislav, ‘Lukačićev boravak u Rimu’ [Il soggiorno di Lukačić a Roma], in Lukačić, Zbornik radova, ed. Ljudevit Maračić, 63–79. Muccillo, Maria, ‘La Biblioteca Greca di Francesco Patrizi’, Bibliothecae selectae: da Cusano a Leopardi, ed. Eugenio Canone (Firenze: Olschki, 1993), 73–118. Müller, Erich H., Heinrich Schütz. Gesammelte Briefe und Schriften (Regensburg: Gustav Bosse, 1931). Müller, Josef, Die musikalischen Schätze der Königlichen- und Universitäts-Bibliothek zu Königsberg in Preußen (Hildesheim, New York: Olms, 1971). Nemčić Gostovinski, Antun, Putositnice [Itineraries], ed. Ivo Zalar (Zagreb: Nart-trgovina, 1996). Neralić, Jadranka, ‘Slike iz svakodnevnoga života u Šibeniku prema vizitaciji apostolskoga vizitatora Agostina Valiera 1579. godine’ [Everyday life in Šibenik according to the apostolic visitator Agostino Valier from 1579], in Faust Vrančić i njegovo doba [Faust Vrančić and His Time], eds. Marijana Borić, Zrinka Blažević, Bojan Marotti (Prvić Luka: Memorijalni centar ‘Faust Vrančić’, 2018), 187–218. Nerici, Luigi, Storia della musica in Lucca (Lucca: Giusti, 1879; facs. edn., Bologna: Forni, 1969). Novak, Grga (ed.), Mletačka uputstva i izvještaji / Commissiones et relationes Venetae, vol. 4 (Zagreb: JAZU, 1964), vol. 5 (Zagreb: JAZU, 1966). ——, Povijest Splita [The History of Split], 3 vols. (Split: MH, vol. 1, 1957; vol. 2, 1961; vol. 3, 1965; 2nd edn., 4 vols., Split: Književni krug, Čakavski sabor, 1978). ——, ‘Šibenik u razdoblju mletačke vladavine 1412.–1797. godine’ [Šibenik in the Period of the Venetian Government 1412–1727], in Šibenik: spomen zbornik o 900. obljetnici [Šibenik: Miscellanea on the Nineth Centenary], ed. Slavo Grubišić (Šibenik: Muzej grada Šibenika, 1976), 134–288. Novak, Slobodan Prosperov, Slaveni u Renesansi [Slavs in the Renaissance] (Zagreb: MH, 2009). O’Loughlin, Niall, ‘A note on Lukačić’, The Musical Times 114/1563 (1973), 479–480. 267

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Ongaro, Giulia M., ‘Venetian Printed Anthologies of Music in the 1560s and the Role of the Editor’, in The Dissemination of Music. Studies in the History of Music Publishing, ed. Hans Lenneberg (London, New York: Routledge, 1994; eBook 2013), 43–69. O’Regan, Noel, ‘The Church Triumphant: music in the liturgy’, in The Cambridge History of SeventeenthCentury Music, eds. Tim Carter, John Butt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 283–323. Orlando, Ermanno, Migrazioni mediterranee: Migranti, minoranze e matrimoni a Venezia nel basso medioevo (Bologna: Il Mulino, 2014). Ortalli, Francesca, ‘Per salute delle anime e delli corpi’. Scuole piccole a Venezia nel tardo Medioevo (Venezia: Marsilio editore, 2001). Paci, Renzo, ‘La scala di Spalato e la politica veneziana in Adriatico’, Quaderni storici 5/13 (1) (1970), 48–105. Padoan, Maurizio, ‘La musica al Santo di Padova (1580–1650). Dinamiche finanziarie, organici e compiete quaresimali’, in Barocco Padano e musici francescani. L’apporto dei maestri conventuali. Atti del XVI Convegno internazionale sul barocco padano (secoli XVII–XVIII), Padova, 1–3 luglio 2013, eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan, Barocco Padano 8 (Padova: Centro Studi Antoniani, 2014), 17–78. Palisca, Claude V., ‘The Alterati of Florence, Pioneers in the Theory of Dramatic music’, in New Looks at Italian Opera: Essays in Honor of Donald G. Grout, ed. William W. Austin (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1968), 9–38. ——, Humanism in Italian Renaissance Musical Thought (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1985). ——, Studies in the History of Italian Music and Music Theory (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994). Palluchini, Rodolfo, Perocco, Guido, I teleri di Carpaccio nella Scuola di San Giorgio degli Schiavoni (Milano: Rizzoli, 1961). Parisi, Susan, Ducal Patronage of Music in Mantua, 1587–1627: An Archival Study, 2 vols. (Ph.D. Diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1989). Parker, Geoffrey, The Thirty Years’ War (London – New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1984); Italian edn., La Guerra dei Trent’anni (Milano: Vita e Pensiero, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, 1994). Passadore, Francesco, ‘I musicisti del Santo e il mottetto a voce sola nel primo Seicento’, Il Santo. Rivista antoniana di storia dottrina arte, serie II, XXXII/2–3 (1992), 163–182. ——, Musica e musicisti a Rovigo tra Rinascimento e Barocco (Rovigo: Minelliana, 1987). Patrizi, Francesco, Della poetica, la deca istoriale (Ferrara: Baldini, 1586). ——, Lettere ed opuscoli inediti, ed. Danilo Aguzzi-Barbagli (Firenze: Istituto Nazionale di Studi sul Rinascimento, 1975). ——, Nova de Universis Philosophia (Ferrara, Mammarelli, 1591; reprinted with variants in Venice, by Meietti, retrodated to 1593, and in London in 1611). Paul, Catharine E., Fascist Directive: Ezra Pound and Italian Cultural Nationalism (Liverpool: Liverpool University Press, 2016). Pederin, Ivan, Mletačka uprava, privreda i politika u Dalmaciji (1409–1797) [The Venetian Government, Economy and Politics in Dalmatia] (Dubrovnik: MH, 1990). Pelc, Milan (ed.), Klovićev zbornik, minijatura – crtež – grafika 1450.–1700. [Klović’s Proceedings: miniature – drawing – graphics], Scientific Conference Proceedings on the occasion of the 500th anniversary of the birth of Giorgio Giulio Clovio, Zagreb, 22–24 October 1998 (Zagreb: HAZU, Institut za povijest umjetnosti, 2001). Pelc, Milan, Fontes Clovianae. Julije Klović u dokumentima svoga doba [Fontes Clovianae. Giulio Clovio in the Documents of His Time] (Zagreb: MH, 1998). ——, Julije Klović u grafici [Giulio Clovio in prints] (Zagreb: HAZU, 1998). ——, Natale Bonifacio (Zagreb: Institut za povijest umjetnosti, Šibenik: Gradska knjižnica ‘Juraj Šižgorić’, 1997). ——, Život i djelo šibenskog bakroresca Martina Rote Kolunića [The Life and Work of Šibenik Engraver Martino Rota Kolunić] (Zagreb: NSK, Šibenik: Gradska knjižnica ‘Juraj Šižgorić’, 1997). Pelicelli, Nestore, ‘Musicisti in Parma nel sec. XVII. – La Cappella della Steccata – Musicisti della Cappella corale della Steccata nel sec. XVII’, Note d’archivio per la storia musicale 9/3–4 (1932), 217–246. Pepys, Samuel, Diary [1659-1669] (Frankfurt am Mein: Outlook Verlag, 2018). Perić Kempf, Bosiljka, Davorin Kempf. Autorski koncert u povodu 70. rođendana, HAZU [Davorin Kempf, Concert on the Occasion of the Composer’s 70th Birthday], concert booklet (Zagreb: Cantus, HDS, 2017). 268

Bibliography

Perlini, Silvio, Elementi di Retorica musicale (Milano: Ricordi, 2002). Perocco, Guido, Carpaccio nella Scuola di San Giorgio degli Schiavoni (Venezia: Scuola Dalmata, 1964). ——, I teleri di Carpaccio nella Scuola di San Giorgio degli Schiavoni (Milano: Rizzoli, 1961). Petešić, Ćiril ‘Nekoliko priloga poznavanju naše starije muzičke prošlosti’ [Alcuni contributti sulla conoscenza della nostra musica antica], Rad JAZU 337 (1965), 199–219. Pianigiani, Ottorino, Vocabolario etimologico della lingua italiana (Roma: Società editrice Dante Alighieri di Albrighi e Segati, 1907). Picinelli, Filippo, Ateneo dei letterati milanesi (Milano: Francesco Vigone, 1670). Plamenac, Dragan, Glazba 16. i 17. stoljeća u Dalmaciji. Osam studija [Music of the 16th and 17th Centuries in Dalmatia. Eight studies], ed. Ennio Stipčević (Zagreb: MIC, Split: Književni krug, 1988). ——, Johannes Ockeghem als Motetten- und Chansonkomponist: nebst einleitender Bibliographie seines Gesamtwerkes (doctoral dissertation, Universität Wien, 1924). ——, ‘Music of the 16th and the 17th Centuries in Dalmatia’, in Papers Read at the International Congress of Musicology Held at New York, September 11th to 16th, 1939, eds. Arthur Mendel, Gustave Reese, Gilbert Chase (New York: Music Educators’ National Conference, AMS, 1944), 21–51. ——, ‘Nepoznat hrvatski muzičar ranoga baroka’ [The Unknown Croatian Musician of the Early Baroque], Obzor, 75/293 (1934), 6. ——, Predgovor / Introduction / Zur Einführung, in Ivan Lukačić, Odabrani moteti (1620) [Selected Motets], ed. D. Plamenac (Zagreb: Hrvatski glazbeni zavod, 1935; 2nd edn. 1975), 3–16. ——, ‘Toma Cecchini, kapelnik stolnih crkava u Splitu i Hvaru u prvoj polovici XVII stoljeća: bio-bibliografska studija’ [Tomaso Cecchini, chapel master of the cathedrals of Split and Hvar in the first half of the 17th century: a bio-bibliographical study], Rad Jugoslavenske akademije znanosti i umjetnosti 262 (1938), 77–125 (the same in D. Plamenac, Glazba 16. i 17. stoljeća u Dalmaciji. Osam studija, 27–111). ——, ‘Tragom Ivana Lukačića i nekih njegovih suvremenika’ [On the Trail of Ivan Lukačić and Some of His Contemporaries], Rad JAZU 351 (1968), 63–90 (the same in D. Plamenac, Glazba 16. i 17. stoljeća u Dalmaciji. Osam studija, 159–189). Pöhlmann, Egert, Denkmäler altgriechischer Musik: Sammlung, Übertragung und Erläuterung aller Fragmente und Fälschungen (Nürnberg: Hans Carl, 1970). Poklečki Stošić, Jasminka (ed.), Julije Klović, najveći minijaturist renesanse / Giulio Clovio – The Greatest Miniaturist of the Renaissance, Exhibition Catalogue (Zagreb: Galerija Klovićevi dvori, 2012). Porot, Bertrand, ‘Ville réelle, ville imaginée dans les pièces de clavecin de François Couperin’, in Mélodies urbaines. La musique dans les villes d’Europe (XVIe – XIXe siècles), eds. Laure Gauthier, Mélanie Traversier (Paris: PUPS, 2008), 255–283. Praetorius, Michael, Syntagma musicum [...] tomus tertius (Wolfenbüttel: Elias Holwein, 1619). Praga, Giuseppe, ‘Dalla patria e del casato di Andrea Meldola’, Atti e memorie della società e patria dalmata (1930), 84–85. Price, Curtis (ed.), The Early Baroque Era. From the Late 16th Century to the 1660s (London: Macmillan Press, 1993). Prijatelj Pavičić, Ivana, ‘Dioklecijanova palača i Schiavoni u talijanskoj umjetnosti XV – XVIII. st.’, in Hrvatska / Italija. Stoljetne veze: povijest, književnost, likovne umjetnosti / Croazia / Italia. I rapporti nei secoli: storia, letteratura, arti figurative (Edizione bilingue), Most: Biblioteka Relations, ed. Natka Badurina (Zagreb: Društvo hrvatskih književnika, 1997), 211–226. ——, Julije Klović, Ikonografske studije (Zagreb: MH, 1999). ——, ‘Plemić među slikarima i slikar plemstva galantnog doba: Federiko Benković’ [Nobleman Among Painters and a Painter of the Nobility Gallant Era: Federico Benković], in Ljudi 18. stoljeća na hrvatskom prostoru. Od plemića i crkvenih dostojanstvenika do težaka i ribara [Men of the Eighteenth Century from the Croatian Area: From Noblemen and Prelates to Tenant-Peasants and Fishermen], eds. Lovorka Čoralić et al. (Zagreb: Hrvatski institut za povijest, 2016), 566–577. ——, Schiavoni. Umjetnici, nacija, ideologija [Schiavoni. Artists, Nation, Ideology] (Zagreb: Jesenski i Turk, 2018). Prijatelj, Kruno, Andrija Medulić Schiavone (Zagreb: JAZU, 1952). ——, Federiko Benković (Zagreb: JAZU, 1952). 269

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

——, ‘Jedan dalmatinski učenik Tiepola’ [One Dalmatian Student of Tiepolo’s), Mogućnosti 3 (1971), 328–330. ——, ‘Likovni umjetnici “Schiavoni” iz Dalmacije u 15. stoljeću’ [Fine Artists from Dalmatia Called “Schiavoni” in the 15th Century], Mogućnosti 38 (1991), 260–269. ——, ‘Za Michelangela Schiavona’ [For Michelangelo Schiavone], Radovi Instituta za povijest umjetnosti 18 (1994), 61–65. Prins, Jacomien, Echoes of an Invisible World: Marsilio Ficino and Francesco Patrizi on Cosmic Order and Music Theory (Leiden: Brill, 2014). Privitera, Massimo, Arcangelo Corelli (Palermo: L’Epos, 2000). Pseudo-Johannis Philoponi, Expositiones in omnes XIV Aristotelis Libros methaphysicos, ‘Typographus ad Lectores’, Francesco Patrizi (trans.) (Ferrara, 1583), [s.p]. Quadrio, Francesco Saverio, Della storia e della ragione d’ogni poesia, vol. 3 (Milano: Agnelli, 1744). Quaranta, Elena, Oltre San Marco. Organizzazione e prassi della musica nelle chiese di Venezia nel Rinascimento (Firenze: Olschki, 1998). Quazza, Romolo, La guerra per la successione di Mantova e del Monferrato, 1628-1631, vol. 1 (Mantova: Mondovi, 1926). Raukar, Tomislav, ‘Venecija i ekonomski razvoj Dalmacije u XV i XVI stoljeću’ [Venice and the Economic Development of Dalmatia during the 15th and 16th Centuries], Radovi Instituta za hrvatsku povijest 10 (1977), 203–225. ——, Zadar u XV stoljeću. Ekonomski razvoj i društveni odnosi [Zadar in the 15th Century: Economic Development and Social Relationships] (Zagreb: Sveučilište; Cantar za povijesne znanosti, 1977). Rauschning, Hermann, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig. Von den Anfängen bis zur Auflösung der Kirchenkapellen, Quellen und Darstellungen zur Geschichte Westpreußens 15 (Danzig/Gdańsk: Rosenberg, 1931). Richardson, Francis L., Andrea Schiavone, Oxford Studies in the History of Art and Architecture (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1980). Ridolfi, Carlo, Le maraviglie dell’arte ovvero, Le vite degli illustri pittori Veneti e dello Stato (Venezia: Giovanni Battista Segua, 1648). Rismondo, Paolo A., ‘“Frutti nati all’ombre”. Giovanni Battista e Paolo Piazza. Diplomazia, politica, spionaggio e musica a Venezia nel Seicento’, Studi Secenteschi 60 (2019), 61–126. Riva, Bonvesin de la, Vita Scholastica, ed. Ezio Franceschini, Testi e documenti di storia e di letteratura latina medioevale 5 (Padova: Gregoriana, 1943). Robertson, Michael, Consort Suites and Dance Music by Town Musicians in German-Speaking Europe, 1648– 1700 (Burlington: Ashgate, 2016). ——, The Courtly Consort Suite in German-Speaking Europe, 1650–1706 (Burlington: Ashgate, 2009). Roche, Jerome, ‘Music at S. Maria Maggiore, Bergamo, 1614–1643’, Music and letters 47/4 (1966), 296–312. Romagnoli, Angela, ‘Fra catene, fra stili e fra veleni...’, ossia della scena di prigione nell’opera italiana (1690– 1724) (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, 1995). Rose, Stephen, ‘The Mechanisms of the Music Trade in Central Germany, 1600–40’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association, 130/1 (2005), 1–37. ——, ‘Music in the Market-Place’, in The Cambridge History of Seventeenth Century Music, eds. Tim Carter, John Butt (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 55–87. Rostirolla, Giancarlo, ‘Alcune note sulla professione di cantore e di cantante nella Roma del Sei e Settecento’, in Roma moderna e contemporanea 4/1 (1996), 37–74. Roščić, Nikola Mate, ‘Redovnički lik Ivana Marka Lukačića u svjetlu novih podataka’ [Il profilo religioso di Ivan Marko Lukačić alla luce di dati recenti], in Lukačić, Zbornik radova, ed. Ljudevit Maračić, 50–62. Sacchi, Henri, La Guerre de Trente Ans (Paris: L’Armattan, 1991; new edn., 3 vols, 2003). Samson, Jim, Music in the Balkans (Leiden: Brill, 2013). Sartori, Antonio, Archivio Sartori. Documenti di storia e arte francescana, III/2, Evoluzione del francescanesimo nelle tre Venezia – Monasteri contrade località – Abitanti di Padova medioevale, ed. Giovanni Luisetto (Padova: Biblioteca Antoniana, Basilica del Santo, 1988). Sartori, Claudio, I libretti italiani a stampa dalle origini al 1800 (Cuneo: Bertola e Locatelli, 1990–1994). 270

Bibliography

Scattolin, Pierpaolo, ‘La cappella musicale del duomo di Montagnana (1592–1682). Profilo storico’, Rassegna Veneta di Studi Musicali 15–16 (1999/2000), 287–374. Schaal, Richard, Die Kataloge des Augsburger Musikalien-Händlers Kaspar Flurschütz 1613–1628, Quellenkataloge zur Musikgeschichte Heraus-gegeben von Richard Schaal (Wilhelmshaven: Heinrichshofen’s Verlag, 1974). Schmitt, Oliver Jens, ‘Das Venezianische Südosteuropa als Kommunikationsraum (ca. 1400–ca. 1600)’, in Balcani occidentali, Adriatico e Venezia fra XIII e XVIII secolo / Der westliche Balkan, der Adriaraum und Vendig (13.–18. Jahrhundert), eds. Gherardo Ortalli, O. J. Schmitt, Schriften der Balkankommission, vol. 50 (Vienna: VÖAW, 2009), 13–18. Schneider, Heinrich, ‘Die Politik des Kölner Kurfürsten Ferdinand (1577–1650) im Dreißigjährigen Krieg’, in Zur Geschichte und Kunst im Erzbistum Köln. Festschrift für Wilhelm Neuss, ed. Robert Haass, Studien zur Kölner Kirchengeschichte 5 (1960), 117–137. Schubert, Peter, Modal Counterpoint, Renaissance Style (New York: Oxford University Press, 2nd edn. 2008). Sedláček, August, ‘Ze Švamberka’, in Ottův Slovník Naučný (Praha: J. Otto, 1888–1909), vol. 24 (1906), 848-853; Seifert, Herbert, ‘Die Musiker der beiden Kaiserinnen Eleonora Gonzaga’, in Festschrift Othmar Wessely zum 60. Geburtstag, eds. Manfred Angerer et al. (Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1982), 527–554. Sherman, Bernard D., Inside Early Music (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997). Signorotto, Gianvittorio, ‘Il rientro dei Gesuiti a Venezia: la trattativa (1606-1657)’, in I gesuiti e Venezia: momenti e problemi di storia veneziana della Compagnia di Gesù, ed. Mario Zanardi (Venezia, Padova: Giunta regionale del Veneto, Gregoriana edn., 1994), 385–419. Simandan, Voicu Mihnea, The Matrix and the Alice Books (Lulu Books, 2010). Solerti, Angelo, ‘Autobiografia di Francesco Patricio (1529–1597)’, Archivio storico per Trieste, l’Istria, e il Tretino 3 (1884–6), 275-81. ——, ‘Feste musicali alla corte di Savoia nella prima metà del secolo XVII’, Rivista musicale italiana 11 (1904), 675–724. Steude, Wolfram, ‘Heinrich Schütz und die erste deutsche Oper’, in Von Isaac bis Bach. Studien zur älteren deutschen Musikgeschichte. Festschrift Martin Just zum 60. Geburtstag, eds. Frank Heidlberger, Wolfgang Osthoff, Reinhard Wiesend (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1991), 169–179. ——, ‘Zum gegenwärtigen Stand der Schütz-Biographik’, Schütz-Jahrbuch 12 (1990), 7–30. Stipčević, Aleksandar, ‘Circolazione dei libri tra le Marche e la Dalmazia nel ’500 e ’600’, in Marche e Dalmazia tra Umanesimo e Barocco, eds. Sante Graciotti, Marina Massa, Giovanna Pirani (Reggio Emilia: Diabasis, 1993), 197–203. Stipčević, Ennio, Francesco Sponga-Usper [In Croatian and English] (Zagreb: MIC, 2008). ——, Hrvatska glazba. Povijest hrvatske glazbe do 20. stoljeća [Croatian Music. History of Croatian Music until the 20th Century] (Zagreb: Školska knjiga, 1997). ——, Ivan Lukačić [In Croatian and English] (Zagreb: MIC, 2007). ——, ‘Komparativne zagonetke u vezi sa Sacrae cantiones Ivana Lukačića Šibenčanina’ [Comparative Puzzles Regarding the Sacrae cantiones by Ivan Lukačić of Šibenik], Sveta Cecilija 53/1 (1983), 2–3. ——, Musica Incognita: Ivan Lukačić i njegovo doba [Musica Incognita: Ivan Lukačić and His Time] (Šibenik: Gradska knjižnica ‘Juraj Šižgorić’, 1998). ——, ‘Musica moderna and Local Tradition. The Case of Tomaso Cecchini Veronese in Dalmatia’, in Italian Music in Central-Eastern Europe Around Mikołaj Zieleński’s Offertoria and Communiones (1611), eds. Tomasz Jeż, Barbara Przybyszewska-Jarmińska, Marina Toffetti (Venezia: Edizioni Fondazione Levi, 2015), 325–347. ——, Renaissance Music and Culture in Croatia (Turnhout: Brepols, 2016). ——, ‘The Small-Scale Motet in Dalmatia in the First Half of the Seventeenth Century’, Musicologica Istropolitana 12 (2017), 103–118. ——, ‘The Social and Historical Status of Music and Musicians in Croatia in the Early Baroque’, IRASM 18/1 (1987), 3–17. ——, Tomaso Cecchini [in Croatian and English] (Zagreb: MIC, 2015). Straus, Joseph N., Remaking the Past: Musical Modernism and the Influence of the Tonal Tradition (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991). 271

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Strika, Zvjezdan, ‘“Catalogus episcoporum et archiepiscoporum urbis Jadertinae” arhiđakona Valerija Pontea’ [‘Catalogus episcoporum et archiepiscoporum urbis Jadertinae’ of the Archidiaconus Valerio Ponte], Radovi Zavoda za povijesne znanosti HAZU u Zadru 48 (2006), 81–185. Szombara, Justyna, ‘Music by Andrea and Giovanni Gabrieli in the Library of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Gdańsk’, Musica Iagellonica 8 (2017), 117–137. Šabanović, Hazim, Bosanski pašaluk [Bosnian paschilic] (Sarajevo: Svjetlost, 1982). Šitina, Ana, ‘Opus Bernardina Ricciardija na istočnoj jadranskoj obali’ [Bernardino Ricciardi’s Oeuvre on the Eastern Adriatic], Ars Adriatica 7 (2017): 195–212. Tamburini, Luciano, ‘L’architettura dalle origini al 1936’, in Storia del teatro Regio di Torino, ed. Alberto Basso, vol. 4 (Torino: Cassa di Risparmio di Torino, 1983), 1–6. Tarnawska-Kaczorowska, Krystyna, ‘Musica Quotation an Outline of the Problem’, Contemporary Music Review 17/3 (1998), 69–90. Taschetti, Gabriele, ‘L’ op. 14 di Tomaso Cecchini (1619) tra Dalmazia veneziana e Ungheria reale’, in Između Srednje Europe i Mediterana: glazba, književnost i izvedbene umjetnosti / Between Central Europe and the Mediterranean: Music, Literature and the Performing Arts, eds. Ivana Tomić Ferić, Antonela Marić (Split: Umjetnička akademija u Splitu, Filozofski fakultet u Splitu 2021), 103–118. ——, ‘Marcantonio De Dominis: a Patron manqué for Tomaso Cecchini?’, in Music Patronage in Italy, ed. Galliano Ciliberti, Studies on Italian Music History 15 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2021), 147–164. ——, Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica (Venezia, 1619) di Tomaso Cecchini. Edizione critica e analisi (MA dissertation, Università degli Studi di Padova, 2019). Tassini, Giuseppe, Feste, spettacoli divertimenti e piaceri degli antichi Veneziani (Venezia: Filippi editore, 1961), 9–13. Testa, Luca, Fondazione e primo sviluppo del Seminario romano, 1565–1608 (Roma: Pontificia università gregoriana, 2002) (Tesi Gregoriana, Ser. Storia ecclesiastica 4), 135–137. Tibaldi, Rodobaldo, ‘Strumenti e forme strumentali nel mottetto italiano del primo Seicento: alcune riflessioni’, in Barocco Padano 6. Atti del Convegno Atti del XIV Convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII, Brescia, 16–18 luglio 2007, eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2010), 7–96. Toffetti, Marina, Introduzione alla filologia musicale (Lucca: Libreria Musicale Italiana, Roma: Società Editrice di Musicologia, in print). ——, ‘Restoring a Masterpiece. Some Remarks on the Reconstruction of the Missing Part in Girolamo Frescobaldi’s Liber secundus diversarum modulationum (Rome, 1627)’, Musica Iagellonica 7 (2013), 5–24. Tomić, Radoslav, ‘Dva priloga za baroknu umjetnost u Boki kotorskoj’ [Two Contributions to the Baroque Art in Boka kotorska], Radovi Instituta za povijest umjetnosti 34 (2010), 117–120. Torelli, Daniele, ‘“Cantores inchoent sequentem Antiphonam”. Canto piano e canto figurato nella liturgia quotidiana tra Cinque e Seicento’, in Barocco Padano 6, atti del XIV convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII, Brescia, 16–18 luglio 2007, eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2010), 219–249. Torri, Luigi, ‘Il primo melodramma a Torino’, Rivista musicale italiana 26 (1919), 1–35. Tuksar, Stanislav, ‘Franjo Petris: On Deciphering old Greek Music Notation’, in Croatian Renaissance Music Theorists, trans. Sonja Bašić (Zagreb: Music Information Centre, 1980), 79–104. ——, ‘Misao o glazbi u autora podrijetlom iz hrvatskih povijesnih zemalja u tiskom objavljenim djelima 16. i 17. stoljeća’ [Thoughts on Music by the Authors that Come from Croatian Lands], Filozofska istraživanja 36/2 (2016), 273–287. ——, ‘Music, Reformation and Catholic Renewal in Early 17th-Century Dalmatia’, in Barocco Padano 7. Atti del XV Convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII. Milano, 14–16 luglio 2009, eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2012), 401–412. ——, ‘The Composers of Lombardy and the Po Valley and the Preserved repertories of the 17th and 18thCentury Split cappella musicale’, in Barocco Padano 3. Atti dell’XI Convegno internazionale sulla musica italiana nei secoli XVII–XVIII. Brescia, 16–18 luglio 2001, eds. Alberto Colzani, Andrea Luppi, Maurizio Padoan (Como: A.M.I.S., 2004), 184–185. Vanin, Barbara, Eleuteri, Paolo, Le mariegole della Biblioteca del Museo Correr (Venezia: Marsilio editore, 2010). 272

Bibliography

Varallo, Franca, ‘Feste per la reggenza’, in Madame reali. Cultura e potere da Parigi a Torino. Cristina di Francia e Giovanna Battista di Savoia Nemours, 1619–1724, eds. Clelia Arnaldi di Balme, Maria Paola Ruffino (Genova: Sagep, 2019), 59–66. Vasari, Giorgio, Le vite dei più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architetti, ed. Maurizio Marini (Introduction) (Roma: Grandi Tascabili Economici Newton, 2004; facs. of the 1568 edn.). Vasoli, Cesare, Francesco Patrizi da Cherso (Roma: Bulzoni Editore, 1989). Velimirović, Miloš, ‘Giovanni Sebenico (Prispevek k biografiji) / Giovanni Sebenico (Contributions to the biography)’, Muzikološki zbornik 1 (1965), 49–58. Verrati, Giovanni Maria, Il Verrato insegna con nova e brevissima inventione facile per imparare per tutte le chiave, à leggere le notte, cantare & portar la batuda, con cinque sole regole in Dialogo, ciove Maestro, & Discepolo (Venetia: Bartholomeo Magni, 1623). Viale Ferrero, Mercedes, ‘La Ramira, un dramma a chiave e le sue scene’, in Arte in Europa. Scritti di storia dell’arte in onore di Edoardo Arslan, ed. Giudo Mansuelli (Milano: Artipo, 1966), 727–736. ——, ‘Repliche a Torino di alcuni melodrammi veneziani e loro caratteristiche’, in Venezia e il melodramma nel Seicento, ed. Maria Teresa Muraro (Firenze: Olschki, 1976), 145–172. ——, ‘Tra Venezia e Torino: L’opera in viaggio’, in La barca sublime. Palcoscenico regale sull’acqua, eds. Elisabetta Ballaira, Silvia Ghisotti, Angela Griseri (Torino: Silvana Editoriale, 2012), 35–41. Vicentino, Nicola, L’antica musica ridotta alla moderna prattica (Roma: Antonio Barre, 1555). Vincent, Philip, The Lamentations of Germany (London: E. G[riffin] (John Rothwell), 1638). Vio, Gastone, Le Scuole piccole nella Venezia dei Dogi. Note d’archivio per la storia delle confraternite veneziane (Vicenza: Angelo Colla editore, 2004). Vrandečić, Josip, Borba za Jadran u ranom novom vijeku: Mletačko-osmanski ratovi u venecijanskoj nuncijaturi [Battle for the Adriatic in early modern times: The Venetian-Osmanlic wars during the Venetian nunciature] (Split: Filozofski fakultet, 2013). ——, ‘Has an Ottoman Combatant any Chance to Win the Love of the Daughter of the Rector of the Dalmatian Town Zadar?’, Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru 34/21 (1994/95), 163–184. ——, ‘Islam Immediately beyond the Dalmatian Coast: The Three Reasons for Venetian Success’, in Balcani occidentali, Adriatico e Venezia fra XIII e XVIII secolo / Der westliche Balkan, der Adriaraum und Vendig (13.–18. Jahrhundert), eds. Gherardo Ortalli, Oliver Jens Schmitt, Schriften der Balkankommission, vol. 50 (Vienna: VÖAW, 2009), 287–308. ——, ‘The Military Revolution in Sixteenth and Seventeenth-Century Dalmatia’, in Melikov zbornik, eds. Rajko Bratož et al. (Ljubljana: Založba ZRC, 2001), 289–310. ——, ‘Pogled zadarskog nadbiskupa Minuccija na islamski svijet u njegovome gradu’ [The View of the Zadar Archbishop Minucci on the Islamic Word in His Town], Forum Bosnae 66/14 (2007), 185–200. ——, Zadarski nadbiskup Minuccio Minucci i njegova jadranska misija [Zadar archbishop Minuccio Minucci and his Adriatic mission] (Zagreb: Leykam international, Split: Filozofski fakultet, 2017). Vrandečić, Josip, Bertoša, Miroslav, Dalmacija, Dubrovnik i Istra u ranom novom vijeku [Dalmatia, Dubrovnik and Istria in the Early Modern Age] (Zagreb: Leykam, 2007), Wainwright, Jonathan P., ‘Case study: Monteverdi, Vespers (1610)’, in The Cambridge History of Musical Performance, eds. Colin Lawson, Robin Stowell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), 448–470. Walker, Thomas, ‘Apollo nelle Indie: appunti sul “primo melodramma” alla corte dei Savoia’, in Sigismondo D’India: atti del Convegno di studi su Sigismondo D’India tra Rinascimento e Barocco: Erice 3–4 agosto 1990, eds. Maria Antonella Balsano, Giuseppe Collisani (Palermo: Flaccovio, 1993), 175–198. Watanabe-O’Kelly, Helen, Court Culture in Dresden. From Renaissance to Baroque (Houndmills – New York: Palgrave, 2002). Weber, William, ‘Consequences of Canon: The Institutionalization of Enmity between Contemporary and Classical Music’, Common Knowledge 9/1 (2003), 78–99. Weiler, Klaus, ‘Musiker am kurkölnischen Hofe des 17. Jahrhunderts’, in Festschrift Karl Gustav Fellerer zum 60. Geburtstag, eds. Herbert Drux, Klaus Wolfgang Niemöller, Walter Thoene, Studien zur Musikgeschichte des Rheinlandes II, 52 (Köln: Arno Volk, 1962), 285–307. Weinberg, Bernard, A History of Literary Criticism in the Italian Renaissance, 2 vols. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 2: 765–786, 1024–25. 273

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Whittaker, Adam, ‘Signposting mutation in some fourteenth- and fifteenth-century music theory treatises’, Plainsong & Medieval Music 26/1 (2017), 37–61. Wilkinson, Christopher, ‘Gabriele Fattorini: Rival of Viadana’, Music & Letters 65/4 (1984), 329–336. Zanini, Alba, ‘La cappella musicale del duomo di Cividale nell’età barocca’, in Ecco mormorar l’onde. La musica nel Barocco, eds. Carlo de Incontrera, A. Zanini (Monfalcone: Teatro di Monfalcone, 1995), 285–314. Zaninović, Marin, ‘Zapisi o Hvaru i Veneciji’ [Writings about Hvar and Venice], Hvarski zbornik 4 (1976), 197–202. Zannini, Andrea, Venezia città aperta: Gli stranieri e la Serenissima XIV–XVIII secc. (Venezia: Marcianum Press, 2009). Zarlino, Gioseffo, Le istitutioni harmoniche (Venezia: [Pietro da Fino], 1558). Zorzi, Elio, Osterie Veneziane (Venezia: Filippi editore, 1967). Županović, Lovro, ‘Četiri moteta Ivana Lukačića. Iz zbirke Promptuarium musicum Johanna Donfrida’ [Four Motets by Ivan Lukačić. From the Collection Promptuarium musicum by Johann Donfrid], Zvuk 91 (1969), 32–37. ——, ‘Mjesto i značenje Ivana Marka Lukačića u hrvatskoj i inozemnoj glazbi njegova vremena i danas’ [The Significance and Place of Ivan Marko Lukačić in Croatian and Foreign Music of His Time and Today], in Lukačić, Zbornik radova, ed. Ljudevit Maračić, 134–152. ——, ‘Umjetnost Ivana Lukačića Šibenčanina’ [The art of Ivan Lukačić of Šibenik], Radovi JAZU-u Zadru 13–14 (1967), 377–400;

274

Modern music editions (selection)

Cecchini, Tomaso, Psalmi, missa, et alia cantica quinque vocibus (1619), ed. Gabriele Taschetti, Opera omnia, vol. 6 (Zagreb: Vatroslav Lisinski Concert Hall, MIC, 2019). Finetti, Giacomo, Concerti a quattro voci con il basso per l’organo (1612), ed. Ivana Jurenec, Opera Omnia, vol. IV, CMF 25/4 (Padova: Centro studi Antoniani, 2019). ——, Concerti Ecclesiastici (1621). Motets for Two, Three or Four Voices and Basso Continuo, ed. Janet E. Hunt, hhttp://www.huntmusic.us/music-of-giacomo-finetti, accessed 11 December 2021. ——, Corona Mariae a quattro voci, Venezia 1622, eds. Tomislav Bužić, Dario Poljak, Opera omnia, vol. IX, CMF 25/9 (Padova: Centro studi Antoniani, 2019). ——, Sacrae cantiones a 2 voci e b.c. – Venezia, 1620, ed. Tea Kulaš, Opera omnia, vol. V, CMF 25/5 (Padova: Centro Studi Antoniani, 2019). Gabrieli, Andrea, Opera, XI. Concerti di Andrea, et di Gio: Gabrieli organisti della Sereniss. Sig. di Venetia Continenti musica di chiesa, madrigali, et altro, per voci et stromenti musicali; à 6. 7. 8. 10. 12. et 16. […] Libro 1. et 2.: Venezia, Angelo Gardano 1587, ed. David Bryant, 2 vols., Edizione Nazionale delle opere di Andrea Gabrieli, 11.i–ii (Milano: Ricordi, 1989). Gabrieli, Giovanni, Opera omnia, 6 vols., ed. Denis Arnold, Corpus Mensurabilis Musicae 12a (Roma: American Institute of Musicology, 1956–1969). Gualtieri, Antonio, Motecta octonis vocibus (1604); Il secondo libro de mottetti, a una e due voci (1612); Motetti a una, doi, tre et quatro voci (1630); Amorosi diletti a tre voci (1608), in Chiara Comparin, Antonio Gualtieri (Monselice, 1574–1661). Opere sacre e profane (doctoral dissertation, Università degli Studi di Padova, 2015), 417–712. Lukačić, Ivan (Ioannis Lvcacih de Sebenico), Sacrae Cantiones Singulis Binis Ternis Quaternis Quinisque vocibus Concinendae (Venetiis: sub signo Gardani, 1620; anastatic edn., ed. Ennio Stipčević, Zagreb: MIC, Šibenik: Gradska knjižnica ‘Juraj Šižgorić’, 1998). ——, Četiri moteta iz zbirke Sacrae cantiones (Venecija, 1620) [Four motets from Sacrae cantiones], ed. Lovro Županović, Zvuk 91 (1969), mus. supplement, 1–16. ——, Odabrani moteti [Selected motets], ed. Dragan Plamenac (Zagreb: HGZ, 1935; 2nd ed. 1975). ——, Sacrae cantiones, Venezia, 1620, mottetti a 1 – 5 voci, Introduction, transcription, and realisation of basso continuo by Ennio Stipčević, ed. Ludovico Bertazzo, CMF 1 (Padova: Messaggero, 1986). ——, Šesnaest moteta iz zbirke ‘Sacrae cnationes’ (1620) [Sixteen motets], ed. Josip Andreis (Zagreb: Muzikološki zavod Muzičke akademije, 1970). Monteverdi, Claudio, Missa da capella a sei. Vespro della beata Vergine, ed. Antonio Delfino, Opera omnia, vol. IX (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio Monteverdi, 2005). ——, Sacrae Cantiunculae, Madrigali Spirituali a quattro, Canzonette a tre voci, ed. Anthony Pryer, Opera omnia, vol. XVI (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio Monteverdi, 2012). ——, Selva morale e spirituale, 2 vols., ed. Denis Stevens, Opera omnia, vol. XV (Cremona: Fondazione Claudio Monteverdi, 1998). ——, Tutte le opere, vol. 16/2, ed. Gian Francesco Malipiero (Vienna, Universal Edition, 1942). Ockeghem, Johannes, Johannes Ockeghem Collected Works (New York: Columbia Univeristy Press, 1947). 275

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

——, Messen I–VIII, hrsg. ed Dragan Plamenac (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel Musikverlag, 1927). ——, Motets and Chansons, ed. D. Plamenac, Richard Wexler (Boston: American Musicological Society, E. C. Schirmer, 1992). Palestrina, Giovanni Pierluigi da, Le opere complete, V. Il libro primo dei mottetti a 5, 6 e 7 voci secondo la ristampa del 1600, ed. Raffaele Casimiri (Roma: Edizione fratelli Scalera, 1939). Schütz, Heinrich, Da pacem, Domine, in diebus nostris, SWV 465, ed. Werner Bittinger, Neue SchützAusgabe, vol. 38 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1971), 75–103. Šibenčanin, Ivan (Sebenico, Giovanni), Laudate pueri; Dedit abyssus (dva moteta), revised by students of musicology at Music academy of Zagreb, eds. Ivan Živanović, Davor Merkaš (Zagreb: MIC, 2008). ——, Lauda Ierusalem Dominum (salmo 147), in Iz renesanse u barok [From Renaissance to Baroque], ed. Lovro Županović, Spomenici hrvatske glazbene prošlosti [Monuments de la musique croate antique], vol. 2 (Zagreb: Društvo hrvatskih skladatelja, 1971). ——, Responsorio di Sant’Antonio di Padova (Si quaeris miracula), in Iz baroka u romantiku [From Baroque to Romanticism], ed. L. Županović, Spomenici hrvatske glazbene prošlosti [Monuments de la musique croate antique], vol. 9 (Zagreb: Društvo muzičkih radnika Hrvatske Croatia concert, 1978). Viadana, Ludovico da, Cento concerti ecclesiastici, ed. Claudio Gallico (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1964).

276

Index nominum

A

Ariza, Christopher 103 Arnold, Denis 161, 169 Arrigoni, Vicenzo 31 Arslan, Wart 61 Artusi, Giovanni Maria 216 Asić, Milo 238 Asola, Giovanni Matteo 157, 170 Atanagi, Dionisio 52 Augubio, family 33 Augustine of Hippo, Saint 131 Auner, Joseph 247 Austin, William W. 208 Avella, Giovanni D’ 130 Averara, Pietro d’ 227

Aaron [Aron], Pietro 130 Abraham, Gerald 192 Agazzari, Agostino 94, 97, 98, 241 Agliè, Ludovico San Martino d’ 220, 221 Aglione, Alessandro 97 Aguzzi-Barbagli, Danilo 203–205, 211, 212 Aichinger, Gregor 94, 97, 98 Aichmiller, Johann 94, 97, 98 Alberti, Juraj [Giorgio] 18, 121–133 Alberti, Matej [Mattheo] 123 Albinus [Albino] 206 Albrizzi, Girolamo 229, 230 Alfonso II d’Este [Duke of Ferrara] 205 Alibert, Jacques d’ 224 Allacci, Leone 227 Allegretti, Antonio 52 Allegri, Gregorio 94 Allen, Graham 249 Allsop, Peter 178, 181, 191 Altenburg, Michael 190 Alypius [Alypios] 205–209, 214 Amadino, Ricciardo 17 Amon, Blasius [Ammon, Blasius] 97 Andrea da Modena 130 Andreis, Josip 92, 122, 123, 126, 130, 236, 247, 248, 253 Andreucci, Marzio 79 Andrić, Josip 40 Anerio, Giovanni Francesco 97 Angerer, Manfred 183 Anguissola, Sofonisba 53, 54 Anna Maria di Borbone Orléans 224 Anselm of Aosta, Saint 160, 171 Antico, Andrea da Montona [Andrija Motovunjanin] 237–239 Antonelli, Abondio 88, 97 Anjou [Angevin] 24 Aristides Quintilianus 210–212, 214 Aristotle [Aristotele] 126, 128, 131, 209, 213, 215 Aristoxenus 205, 209–212, 214–216

B Baccinetti, Giovanni Battista 94, 97, 98 Bach, Johann Sebastian 233, 246 Badurina, Natka 37, 51 Baffo, Ludovico 85 Bajić-Žarko, Nataša 40 Bakhtin, Mikhail 249 Balbi, Luigi [Aloysius] 97, 174 Balić Nižić, Nedjeljka 43 Ballaira, Elisabetta 225 Ballarin, family 48 Ballarin, Juraj (Giorgio) 44 Ballarin, Sergio 44 Ballioni, H. [Baglioni, Girolamo] 97 Ballis, Oliviero 157 Balme, Clelia Arnaldi di 222 Balsano, Maria Antonella 221 Baltić, Zorana 254 Banchieri, Adriano 94, 97, 98, 131, 132 Baraković, Juraj 24, 31 Baranović, Krešimir 254 Barbarino, Bartolomeo 174 Barbieri, Marija 253 Bardi, Giovanni 208 Barker, Andrew 205, 210, 211, 214 Baroncini, Rodolfo 150, 155, 177, 178, 181 277

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Bondioli, Mauro 34 Bondumerius, Leonardo 35 Bonifacio [Bonifačić], Natale 26, 59 Borboni [Borbone], Nicolò 88 Borchgrevinck, M[elchior] 188 Boretti, Giovanni Antonio 221 Borgo, Domenico 94 Borić, Marijana 25 Borlasca, Bernardino 94 Borligueux, Guy 227 Borromeo, Carlo 32 Borromeo, Federico 213 Borsaro, Arcangelo 94, 97 Borsetto, Luciana 43 Bossinensis, Franciscus [Bosanac, Franjo] 237, 238 Bottrigari, Ercole 216 Boulez, Pierre 244 Bouquet, Marie Thérèse 227 Bower, Calvin M. 206 Bracewell, Catherine Wendy 28, 84, 85 Brade, William 188, 193, 194, 200 Bradley, John William 52 Branca, Vittore 204, 205 Bratož, Rajko 26 Braun, Werner 188, 191, 193 Breko Kustura, Hana 124, 239 Brewer, Charles E. 192 Brickman, Benjamin 204 Brigid of Sweden, Saint 161 Brunelli, Antonio 94 Bryant, David 169 Budinić, Šime 24 Bugenhagen, Beate 155 Bujić, Bojan 79, 147 Bunić Vučić, Ivan 253 Buonamente, Giovanni Battista 178, 181, 185, 190 Burkholder, J. Peter 254 Burlini, Antonio 97 Burnett, Charles 214 Burogna, Nicola 68, 69 Busenello, Giovanni Francesco 226 Bussi, Francesco 192 Bussoni, Arcangelo 94 Butt, John 95, 138, 241 Buzov, Snježana 27 Bužić, Tomislav 16, 81, 95, 103, 243

Baronius, Cesare 32 Barré, Henri 160 Barthes, Roland 249 Barth, Hans 45 Bartók, Béla 246 Bassano, Giovanni 161 Basso, Alberto 158, 220, 224, 227 Bastia, Bernardo 72 Bastia da Muggia, Bernardo 71, 72 Bašić, Sonja 207 Battista, Giovanni 83 Beethoven, Ludwig van 253 Begović, Miroslav 54 Bélis, Annie 214 Bellarmino, Roberto 32 Belli, Giulio 97, 171 Bellina, Anna Laura 18, 219 Bemelberg-Hohenburg, Konrad XII von 93 Bendinelli, Agostino 94 Benković [Bencovich], Federiko [Federico] 52, 60, 61, 63 Benković, family 61 Benković, Leopoldo 60 Benn, Johann 97 Benserade, Isaac de 223 Benthon, William 188 Berglund, Lars 95 Bernardi, Stefano 94, 97, 98 Bernard, Saint 161 Bertalotti, Angelo Michele 130 Bertazzo, Ludovico 162, 236 Bertoni, Jacob 153 Bertoša, Miroslav 25, 27, 31 Besca da Traù, Girolamo 75 Bessarion, Cardinal 46 Besutti, Paola 178 Bianchi, Andrea 94 Bianco, Aurelio 17, 177, 181 Bianco, Bernardino 222 Bianconi, Lorenzo 95 Bigliore, conte 87 Bilić, Ivana Kuljerić 252 Bilić, Tonči 245, 251 Binago, Benedetto 97 Bismantova, Bartolomeo 130 Bittinger, Werner 179 Bizzarini, Marco 228 Blankenburg, Walter 94 Blažeković, Zdravko 80 Blažević, Zrinka 25 Bleyer, Nikolaus 195 Bloom, Harold 249 Boethius 206, 209, 212, 213 Bolzoni, Lina 205 Bonardo, Giovanni Antonio 220

C Caccini, Giulio 155 Cage, John 244 Callegari, Chiara 51, 56, 57 Callot, Jacques 195 Calvillo, Elena 54 Cambefort, Jean de 223 Cambi, family 33 278

Index nominum

Camozzi, Francesco 59 Campeggio, Lorenzo 53 Canavasso, Paolo 224 Canone, Eugenio 203 Capello, Giovanni Francesco 94, 97, 98, 150 Capich de Andreis, Giovanni 74 Capogrosso, Antonio 33 Capogrosso, family 34 Capogrosso, Jacob 34 Cappelli, Bartolomeo 170 Capriccio, Giorgio 97 Capriotti, Giuseppe 81 Cardillo, Jacopo Antonio 170 Carisio, Giovanni [l’Orbino] 227 Carlo Emanuele I di Savoia [Charles Emmanuel I, Duke of Savoy] 220, 222 Carlo Emanuele II di Savoia [Charles Emmanuel II, Duke of Savoy] 221, 222 Carlo Emanuele III di Savoia [Charles Emmanuel III of Sardinia] 224 Carlo II Stuart [Charles II of England] 220 Carlo V d’Asburgo [Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor] 222 Caroubel, Pierre Francisque 193 Carpaccio, Vittore 47 Carter, Tim 95, 101, 138, 206, 241 Carubelli, Pietro Francesco 193 Casimiri, Raffaele 161 Castelli, Francesco 180 Castro, Paulo F. de 249, 250 Catalani, Ottavio 88 Catalano, Massimo 184, 185 Caterina di Braganza [Catherine of Braganza] 220 Caterina Michela d’Asburgo [Catalina Micaela of Spain] 222 Cavalliere, Giovanni Filippo 130 Cavalli, Francesco 221, 226 Cavallini, Ivano 80 Cazzati, Maurizio 170 Cecchini, Tomaso 14, 15, 17, 79, 92, 94–96, 103, 135– 154, 237–239, 255 Cenzi, Giacomo 52 Cesare, Giovanni Martino 94, 97, 98 Cesena, Giovanni Battista 94 Cesti, Pietro Antonio 221 Charles of Austria, Bishop 29 Chase, Gilbert 81 Chilese, Giovanni 183 Chong, Nicholas Junkai 250 Christenius, Johann 192 Cifra, Antonio 94, 97, 98, 104–107 Cignani, Carlo 61 Ciliberti, Galliano 135 Cionini Visani, Maria 54 Cipra, Katarina 247 Cipra, Milo 243–249, 251–254

Civalelli, Frano 27 Civita, Giacomo de 97 Civra, Ferruccio 179 Clarke, Eric 237 Claudio de Montetorto 70 Clement VIII, Pope 32 Cliseo da Montelbotto [Montalboddo], Giulio 81 Clovio, Giulio. See Klović, Julije Cocciola, Giovani Battista 97 Collisani, Giuseppe 221 Colombani, Orazio 157 Coltrinari, Francesca 81 Colussi, Franco 157, 158 Colzani, Alberto 86, 133, 135, 148, 153, 156, 170 Comparin, Chiara 17, 95, 96, 155, 158, 174 Contarini, Alessandro 52 Contarini, Domenico II 219 Contarini, Giorgio 203 Contarini, Tommaso 82, 83 Cook, Nicholas 237, 247 Copenhaver, Brian P. 203 Cornaro, Marco II [Cornelio, Marco] 157 Cornero, Almoro 31 Corswarem, Emilie 181 Cortelazzo, Manlio 79 Cosenza, Mario Emilio 203 Costantini, Alessandro 88 Couperin, Louis 192 Crespi, Giuseppe Maria 61 Cristiano IV di Danimarca [Christian IV of Denmark] 180 Cristina di Borbone [di Francia], [Christine of France] 220, 222 Crivelli, Ludovico[?] 94 Croce, Giovanni 94, 97, 98, 150, 157 Crotti, Arcangelo 94 Crovato, family 45 Curti, Danilo 164 Curzola, Lazaro da 49 Cuthbert, Michael Scott 103

Č Čelebija, Emin Jafar 30 Čičin Šain, Ćiro 34 Čolak, Nikola 42 Čoralić, Lovorka 14, 37–44, 46, 47, 61, 80

Ć Ćulinović [Čulinović], Juraj. See Schiavone, Giorgio

D Dalla Via, Alessandro 229 Dalmata, Giovanni [Ioannes, Johannes]. See Duknović, Ivan Dal Pozzolo, Enrico Maria 57 Damasceni, Ioan 94 279

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Damschroder, David 131 Daniel, Hermann Adalbert 160 Danuser, Hermann 247 Davidović, Dalibor 248 Debussy, Claude 248, 250 De Felice, Renzo 221 Degenfeld, Christopher Martin 35 Delfino, Antonio 170 Della Gatta, Marco 130 Demantius, Johannes Christoph 192 Derrida, Jacques 249 Detrico, Ivan 27 Detrico, Lombardin 27 Detrico, Nikola 27 Dieci, Sara 181 Diettrich, Eva 183 Difnik, Franjo (Divnić, Frane) 35 D’India, Sigismondo 98, 221 Dixon, Graham 88 Dixon, John 188 Doimus [Domnius], Saint 33 Dolfin, Nicolo 35 Dolfino, Vettor 28 Dominis, Marcantonio [Markantun] de 17, 33, 124, 135 Donaggio, Vanessa 229 Donà, Leonardo 32 Donato, Baldissera 150 Donfrid [Donfried], Johann [Johannes] 91, 99, 107, 113, 169 Doubinsky, Claude 250 Dowland, John 188, 189, 194, 196 Downie, J. Stephen 103 Drasa da Cherso, Jacopo 70–72, 76 Drux, Herbert 180 Držić, Džore 247, 253 Duknović, Ivan [Dalmata, Giovanni] 51 Dürer, Albrecht 54, 59

Farnese, Alessandro 53, 54 Farnese, Ottavio 53 Fattorini, Gabriele 94, 97, 98, 140, 147 Fechner, Manfred 178, 179 Federico V del Palatinato [Frederick V of the Palatinate] 184 Feltrio, Federico 126 Fend, Michael 214 Ferchio, Matteo. See Frkić, Matija Ferdinando di Baviera [Ferdinand of Bavaria] 180 Ferdinando II d’Asburgo [Ferdinand II, Holy Roman Emperor] 178, 183, 184 Ferdinando III d’Asburgo [Ferdinand III, Holy Roman Emperor] 183 Ferrari, Giacomo Filippo 183 Ferrari, Massimo 170 Ferraro, Ottavio 130 Fétis, François-Joseph 15 Filippo II di Spagna, [Philip II of Spain] 222 Filliberi, Orazio 171 Finetti, Giacomo 16, 85–88, 91, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 100–104, 107 Fisković, Igor 51 Flego, Višnja 51, 52 Flood, Valentin 182, 188 Fluhrschütz, Kaspar 136 Foissen, Robert 188 Fontana, Domenico 59 Förster, Kaspar (il Vecchio) 182 Foscarini, Jacob 30 Foscolo, Leonardo 35, 36 Fossa, Johannes de 94, 96–98 Foster, Hal 247 Franceschini, Ezio 160 Francesco da Lussino 73 Francesco da Santacroce 57 Francesco I d’Este, [Duke of Modena] 181 Franchi, Saverio 123 Francis II, King of France 28 Franck, Melchior 185 Freddi, Amadio 174 Freedman, Richard 143 Frezza Dalle Grotte, Giuseppe 130 Frkić, Matija [Ferchio, Matteo] 67, 75, 76 Fromson, Michele 102 Fujinaga, Ichiro 91 Füllsack, Zacharias 186–188, 191

E Eitner, Robert 15, 158 Eleuteri, Paolo 46 Emeraud, Antoine 193 Engelmann, Georg 187 Erbach, Christian 94, 97, 98 Eudes, Giovanni 161 Eudes, Jean 161 Everist, Mark 247

G

F

Gabrieli, Andrea 80, 95, 156, 157, 169 Gabrieli, Giovanni 95, 156, 157, 161, 169 Gagliano, Marco da 220 Galilei, Vincenzo 206–209, 216 Gallerano, Leandro 170, 174 Gallico, Claudio 169

Fabris, Dinko 181 Fačini, Tomislav 240 Falconieri, Andrea 181 Farina, Carlo 17, 177–197, 199–202 Farina, Luigi 177, 178 280

Index nominum

Grimani, Domenico 53 Grimani, Giovan Carlo 221 Grimani, Marcantonio 57 Grimani, Marino 53, 54 Grimani, Vincenzo 221, 230 Grimmelshausen, Hans Jakob Christoffel von 195 Griseri, Angela 225 Groppo, Antonio 228 Grubišić, Slavo 24 Gualtieri, Alessandro 94 Gualtieri, Antonio 155–174 Guarini, Giovanni Battista 161 Gudelj, Jasenka 81 Guerrero, Francisco 161 Guerrieri, Marco 239 Guido of Arezzo 127

Galli, Sisto 94 Gallo, Vincenzo 97 Gambassi, Osvaldo 164 Garbelotto, Antonio 157 Gardiner, John Eliot 241 Garzoni, Marino 34 Gatti, Alessandro 150, 151 Gauthier, Laure 192 Geisenhof, Johann 97 Genette, Gérard 126, 249, 250 Gerbert, Martin 121 Geremia, Michele 228 Gertrude of Helfta, Saint 161 Ghisotti, Silvia 225 Ghizzolo, Giovanni 94, 157 Gialdroni, Teresa 178 Giobatta da Bitonto 71 Giorgio di Hannover [George I of Great Britain] 230 Giorgio Guglielmo di Braunschweig Lüneburg [George William, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg] 230 Giorgio II d’Assia-Darmstadt [George II of HesseDarmstadt] 184 Giorgi Zantino, Simone de 82 Giotto 56 Giovanna Battista di Savoia Nemours [Marie Jeanne Baptiste of Savoy-Nemours] 222, 223 Giovanni Giorgio I di Sassonia [John George I, Elector of Saxony] 178, 179, 182, 183 Girolamo dai Libri 53 Girolamo da Treviso 57 Giustinian, Leonardo 85 Gligo, Nikša 244, 245, 253 Gliubich, Simeone. See Ljubić, Šime Glixon, Jonathan 86, 87 Goldstein, Ivo 40 Golub, Ivan 54 Gonzaga, Eleonora 178, 183, 184 Gonzaga, family 177, 180 Gonzaga, Francesco IV 220 Gonzaga, Vincenzo II 180 Gortan-Carlin, Ivana Paula 104 Gotovac, Jakov 254 Gouk, Penelope 214 Gozzi, Marco 164 Graciotti, Sante 81, 204, 205 Gramigna, Silvia 46 Grandi, Alessandro 85, 97, 170, 174 Grani, Alvise 97, 158 Graovac Matassi, Vera 61 Greco, El (Dominikos Teotokopulos) 53, 59 Greepe, Bendict 188 Gregorio XIII, papa [Gregory XIII, Pope] 82 Gregory I, Pope 160 Grieg, Donald 236 Griggio, Claudio 158

H Haas, Gerlinde 183 Haaß, Robert 180 Hammerschmidt, Andreas 186, 194 Hammond, Susan Lewis 93 Handel [Händel], George Frideric 253 Harding, J. 188 Harnoncourt, Nikolaus 233, 241 Harrach, Ernst Adalbert von 178, 184 Harrach, Karl von 184 Harrach, Leonard Ulrich von 184 Harten, Christa 183 Hassler, Hans Leo 94, 96–98, 185 Hathaway, Baxter 204 Haussmann, Valentin 185, 187, 191, 192, 194 Hayburn, Robert F. 124 Haydn, Joseph 246 Hedgemann, Franciscus 188 Heidlberger, Frank 179 Hektorović, Petar 253 Henry VIII, King of England 239 Hermann, Richard 247 Hettrick, William E. 94 Hildebrand, Christian 186–188, 191 Hoenzollern, Magdalena Sybilla di 184 Höfler, Janez 136, 142, 146, 147 Holanda, Francisco de 52 Holborne, A[ntony] 188 Holman, Peter 188, 191 Holzner, Anton 97 Holjevac, Robert 33 Hörner, Stephan 94 Horvat (Horvatova), Marija 56 Horvat, Stanko 244, 245 Houle, George 129 Hreljanović, Darija 239 Huber, Calvin 188 Hunt, Janet E. 98 281

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Hutcheon, Linda 246

Kir Stefan Srbin [the Serb] 237 Kirwan, A. Lindsey 94 Klobučar, Anđelko 255 Klović, Julije [Clovio, Giulio] 51–55, 59 Knešaurek Carić, Jelena 18, 121 Kobuch, Agatha 178 Kolanović, Josip 31, 40 Kolar-Dimitrijević, Mira 40 Komanov, Dodi 237 Konfic, Davor 103 Konfic, Lucija 17, 91 Korsyn, Kevin 249 Kos, Koraljka 92 Kramer, Jonathan D. 247 Krekić, Bariša 41 Kristeller, Paul O. 203 Kristeva, Julia 249 Krpan, Erika 244, 251 Krückmann, Peter Olaf 61 Krumper, Guilielmo [Wilhelm] 94, 97 Kuhač, Franjo 253 Kukuljević Sakcinski, Ivan 15, 52 Kulaš, Tea 98 Kuljerić, Igor 243–247, 251–254 Kurelić, Robert 51 Kurtág, György 246 Kurtzman, Jeffrey 98

I Ibrahim Pasha 35 Imhaus, Brunehilde 38 Incontrera, Carlo de 219 Ioannes [Giovanni] de Sebenico. See  Lukačić, Ivan (Marko) Isaac, Heinrich 239 Isabella Luisa di Braganza [Isabel Luísa of Portugal] 224 Isaija Srbin [Isaiah the Serb] 237

J Jackson, Roland 238 Jacobs, Emil 203, 204, 207 Jacobs, René 241 James I, King of England 33 Jameson, Frederic 246 Jan, Karl von 206 Jelić [Jelicich, Jelich], Vinko [Vincenz] 15, 80, 92, 97, 100, 238 Jelić, Roman 25 Jetta da Sebenico, Lorenzo 69 Jeż, Tomasz 153 Johnson, Edward 188, 191 Jordan, Jack 188 Josquin Desprez 160 Jovanović, Neven 23 Juraj Dalmatinac 26 Juran, Kristijan 24, 30 Jurenec, Ivana 95, 103 Juricich [Juričić], Maddalena [Magdalena] 70 Juricich [Juričić], Nicodemo [Nikodem] 67–70 Jurjević (Grgičević), Atanazije [Georgiceus, Athanasius] 240 Jusup Magazin, Andrijana 43 Juvarra, Filippo 224

L Lagkhner, David 97 Lambardi, Girolamo 157 Lambranzi, Gregorio 50 Landi, Stefano 157 Lanfranco, Giovanni Maria 130 La Pierre, [Paul], [le Jeune] 223 Lappi, Pietro 150, 157 Lasso, Orlando di 94, 97, 98 Lasso, Rudolph di 94, 97, 98 Laurana, Francesco. See Vranjanin, Franjo Laurana, Luciano. See Vranjanin, Lucijan Lawson, Colin 238 Lebedinski, Ester 220 Leech-Wilkinson, Daniel 237 Leemans, Annemie 54 Legrenzi, Giovanni 219, 220 Leimberer, Alexander 97 Lemes, Andrea 94 Lenneberg, Hans 93, 96 Leon da Cherso, Marco 67, 73 Leonhardt, Gustav 233 Leoni, Leone 94, 97, 98 Leonini, Angelo 46 Lester, Joel 131 Leva, Bentivoglio 94 Lewin, Jane E. 250

K Kagel, Mauricio 244 Kainulainen, Jaska 32 Kalinayová, Jana 190, 191 Kalogjera, Niko 153 Kantor, Ilona 238 Karaman, Ljubo 121 Katalinić, Vjera 37, 220, 222 Katušić, Maja 37, 61 Kavanjin, family 34 Kavanjin, Marko 34 Keifferer, Christian 94 Kelemen, Milko 244 Kempf, Bosiljka Perić 246 Kempf, Davorin 243–246, 251–255 Kendrick, Robert L. 138, 241 282

Index nominum

Lionnet, Jean 81, 85 Lisinski, Vatroslav 253 Livadić, Ferdo 253 Lochhead, Judy 247 Lončarić, Robert 40 Loredan, Alvise 34 Loth, Urban 94, 97, 98 Louis II of Hungary 53 Lovato, Antonio 155, 157, 158, 164 Lucacich, Giovanni Matteo 67, 74, 76 Lucacich [Lucacih], Giovanni Marco [Ioannis]. See Lukačić, Ivan (Marko) Luccio, Francesco 221 Lucić, Hanibal 25, 253 Lučić, Christopher 24 Luetkeman, Paul 190 Luigi XIV di Francia [Louis XIV] 223 Luisetto, Giovanni 86 Lukačić, Ivan Marko 13–21, 23–26, 29, 31–33, 36, 37, 47, 48, 52, 60, 65–76, 79, 81, 82, 84–86, 88, 91, 92, 94, 95, 97–108, 135, 136, 141, 142, 144, 151, 161, 162, 164, 166, 172, 177, 219, 233–243, 245–248, 251, 252, 255 Luković, Niko 46 Luppi, Andrea 86, 133, 135, 148, 153, 156, 170 Lurano, Filippo di [Vranjanin, Filip] 240

Marschall, Brigitte 184 Maršić, professor 45 Marulić, Marko 23 Marvin, Elizabeth West 247 Masoero, Mariarosa 220 Massa, Marina 81 Mastrosanti, Marcello 81 Mašić, Pavao 255 Mathiesen, Thomas J. 206, 207, 210 Maticka, Marijan 40 Matthysz, Paulus 189 Maurizio da Monte Missone 69 Maurizio di Savoia, Cardinal 220 Mauro, Domenico 227 Mauro, Francesco 222 Mauro, Gaspare 227 Mauro, Giovanni 222 Maus, Fred Everett 247 Mayhew, Robert 213 Mayhew, Tea 35 Mazarino, Ippolito 225 Mazzola, Francesco 57 McMaster, Graham 48 Meconi, Honey 250 Medici, family 53 Medulić, Andrija. See Schiavone, Andrea Mehmed Pasha Tekeli 35 Mei, Girolamo 208 Meldola, Andriolo 56 Meldola, Bira 56 Meldola [Meldolla], Andrea. See Schiavone, Andrea Meldola, Rocco (Roko) 56 Meldola, Sebastiano 56 Meldola, Simone (Šimun) 56 Meldola, Stana 56 Menčetić, Šiško 253 Mendel, Arthur 81 Ménestrier, Claude François 222 Mercker, Matthias 185 Merula, Tarquinio 174 Merulo, Claudio 157 Messner, Gerald Florian 183 Meštrović, Ivan 56 Meyer, Ernst 185, 188, 191, 192, 195 Meyer, Michael 182, 193 Mezzogorri, Giovanni Nicolò 94, 97, 98 Michaeli [Micheli], Romano 123, 124 Michael, Samuel 191 Michelangelo Buonarroti 53, 59 Miche[le], padre Zoccolante 183 Migne, Jacques Paul 160 Miklaušić-Ćeran, Snježana 104 Milošević, Maja 137, 149 Minucci, Minuccio 29, 30 Mirhady, David C. 213

LJ Ljubić, Šime [Gliubich, Simeone] 15

M Macan Lukavečki, Valerija 52, 54 Maeder, Costantino 249 Maerker, Matthäus 187 Maggi, Iacopo 225, 226 Magni, Bartolomeo 132 Malipiero, Gian Francesco 169 Mammarelli, Domenico 203 Mancini, Vincenzo 51, 56 Mandušić, Vuk 36 Mansuelli, Giudo 224 Maračić, Ljudevit Anton 14, 16, 65, 66, 68, 92 Marais, Marin 192 Marani, Alberto 29 Marcello, Benedetto 228 Marcello, Nicolò 76, 79, 81 Marchesi, Berardo 94 Marelli da Arbe, Simone 67, 68, 70–72, 75, 76 Margherita di Savoia [Margaret of Savoy, Vicereine of Portugal] 220 Marić, Antonela 91, 136 Marini, Biagio 181, 185 Marini, Maurizio 52 Maroević, Tonko 52 Marotti, Bojan 25 283

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Mirošević, Lena 61 Mischiati, Oscar 137 Misercich, Simone 75 Miserocca, Sebastiano [Miseroca, Bastiano] 97 Mislich, Antonio 67 Mislich, Pietro 67 Mitić, Ilija 41 Moi, Toril 249 Molin, Filippo 82 Molino, Antonio (Burchiello) 45 Monaco, Angelo Maria 56 Mone, Franz Joseph 160 Mons, Thomas 188 Montanari, Giovanni Battista 123 Montesardo, H. [Montersardo, Girolamo] 98 Monteverdi, Claudio 98, 161, 166, 169, 172–175, 220, 238, 240, 241 Monteverdi, Giulio Cesare 220 Morabito, Fulvia 86, 87 Morales, Cristobal 170 Morche, Gunther 86, 87, 158 Morell, David 188 Morelli, Arnaldo 79, 81, 85, 88 Morelli, Jacopo 210 Morell, John 188 Morgan, Robert P. 245 Morley, Thomas 191, 239 Moro, Nicolò 87 Moroni, Gaetano 80 Mortaro, Antonio 94, 97, 98, 101–103, 107, 157 Moyer, Ann E. 204, 216 Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus 250 Mrkonjić, Tomislav 65 Mrnavić, Ivan Tomko 26 Muccillo, Maria 203–206, 210, 213, 214 Müller, Erich H. 178–180 Müller, Josef 158 Muraro, Maria Teresa 221 Myers, Patricia Ann 88 Myners, John 188

Nicolini, Francesco 229 Niemöller, Klaus Wolfgang 180 Nikola Srbin [the Serb] 237 Nodari, Giovanni Paolo 94 Novak, Grga 24, 26, 28, 30, 31, 33, 34 Novak, Slobodan Prosperov 13

NJ Njirić, Nikša 255

O Occhi, Bartolomeo 39 Ockeghem, Johannes 15, 233 O’Loughlin, Niall 89 Ongaro, Giulia M. 93 Opitz, Martin 179 O’Regan, Noel 138, 148 O’Reilly, Charles 188 Orlando, Ermanno 38 Orseolo, Pietro III 44 Ortalli, Francesca 46 Ortalli, Gherardo 23, 27 Osthoff, Wolfgang 179 Otto, Valerius 193 Ovidio [Ovid] 222, 223, 226

P Pace, Pietro 98 Pace, Vincenzo 97 Paci, Renzo 81, 85 Padoan, Maurizio 86, 133, 135, 148, 153, 156, 170 Padovano, Domenico 159 Palestrina, Giovanni Pierluigi da 123, 156, 157, 160, 170 Palisca, Claude V. 204, 206, 207, 208, 214 Pallavicino, Sforza 28 Palluchini, Rodolfo 46 Palma, Micheli 183 Panetta, Vincent J. 94 Panfido, Isabella 53 Papandopulo, Boris 244, 255 Parać, Frano 254 Parisi, Susan 177 Parker, Geoffrey 195 Parmigianino 57, 59 Pasquale, Marco Di 155 Passadore, Francesco 158, 174, 220 Pass, Walter 183 Patalas, Aleksandra 157 Patricio, Andrea [Patricij, Andrija] 15, 237 Patrizi, Francesco [Patricius, Franciscus; Frane Petrić] 17, 18, 203–217 Paul, Catharine E. 243 Paul III, Pope 53 Paul V, Pope 32 Pausania [Pausanias] 227

N Naldi, Hortensio 94 Nanino, Giovanni Battista 88 Nanino, Giovanni Maria 123 Nasi, Joseph 34 Nembri, Damian [Damjan] 48 Nembri, Giovanni Andrea [Ivan Andrija] 137 Nemčić Gostovinski, Antun 56 Neralić, Jadranka 25, 26 Nerici, Luigi 181 Neri, Filippo 32 Neubauer, Johann 194 Newman, Channa 250 Nicolardi, Maringela 34, 258 284

Index nominum

Prijatelj Pavičić, Ivana 14, 51, 52, 54, 56–58, 61 Prins, Jacomien 18, 203, 204, 215 Privitera, Massimo 185 Pryer, Anthony 161 Przybyszewska-Jarmińska, Barbara 153 Psellus, Michael 210, 214 Pseudo-Johannis Philoponi 203 Puliti, Gabriello 14, 68, 75, 79, 92, 142 Puppi, Lionello 57 Purcell, Henry 191 Pythagoras 214, 215

Pauser, Johann 98 Pederin, Ivan 23, 32 Pelc, Milan 51–53, 59 Pelicarić, Neven 122 Pelicelli, Nestore 181 Pellegrini, Giovanni 69, 72 Pepys, Samuel 220 Perić, Ratko 81, 90 Perissa, Annalisa 46 Perlini, Silvio 163 Pernestain, Balthassar 183 Perocco, Guido 46 Pesaro, Carlo 86 Petešić, Ćiril 65 Petrucci, Ottaviano 160 Peuerl, Paul 194 Pfendner, Heinrich 94, 97, 98 Philips, Peter 188, 191 Pianigiani, Ottorino 222 Piazza, Paolo 83, 87 Piccini, Giuseppe 57 Picerli, Silverio 130 Picinelli, Filippo 189 Pinckler, Elias 179 Pinelli 205 Pirani, Giovanna 81 Pironti, Alberto 123 Pius V, pope 59 Plamenac, Dragan [Siebenschein, Karl] 15, 16, 65, 76, 81, 89, 92, 153, 233–236, 239, 242, 243, 253 Plato 131, 204, 210 Plautz, Gabriel 94 Pluhar, Christina 241 Plutarco [Plutarch] 227 Podhraški Čizmek, Zrinka 42 Pöhlmann, Egert 207 Poklečki Stošić, Jasminka 52–54 Politeo, family 122 Poljak, Dario 16, 95, 103, 233 Ponte, Jacopo di (di Bassano) 59 Ponzoni, Matteo [Ponzoni Pončun, Matej] 17, 33, 48 Ponzoni, Sforza 17, 33, 35 Pordenon, Marc’Antonio 157 Porot, Bertrand 192 Porphyry 205, 206 Porta, Costanzo 170 Posarich, Biagio 71 Posarich da Cherso, Biagio 68, 75 Posch, Isaac 94 Poulton, Diana 188 Požgaj, Višnja 252 Praetorius, Michael 98, 149, 187, 188, 193, 194, 200, 201 Praga, Giuseppe 56 Price, Curtis 95 Prijatelj, Kruno 51, 52, 57, 61, 62

Q Quadrio, Francesco Saverio 228 Quaranta, Elena 155 Quazza, Romolo 178, 180

R Racholdinger, Elias [Racholdinger, Helia] 98 Radić, Antonio 45 Radić, Branko 104 Ramponi Andreini, Virginia 220 Ranjina, Nikša 253 Rasi, Francesco 220 Raukar, Tomislav 23 Rauschning, Hermann 181, 182, 193 Recuperci, Camillo 81 Reese, Gustave 81 Regnard, J. [Regnart, Jacob] 98 Reininger, Johann 91, 93, 95, 107, 109 Revelli, Giuseppe Maria 224 Reybrouck, Mark 249 Richardson, Francis L. 51 Ridolfi, Carlo 56, 57 Riedel, Johann 94 Rigon, Antonio 158 Rinaldi, Bonaventura 68, 69, 70 Rink, John 237 Rinuccini, Ottavio 226 Rismondo, Paolo Alberto 16, 79, 80, 83, 84, 86, 88, 89 Riva, Bonvesin de la 160 Rivander, Paul 194 Robertson, Michael 196 Roche, Elizabeth 158 Roche, Jerome 87, 88, 96, 101, 156, 158 Rodrigo, Daniel 34 Rognoni, Riccardo 189 Roksandić, Drago 27 Romagnoli, Angela 228 Roman, Giulio 53 Romano, Marcantonio 17, 141, 153, 237 Rosaccio, Giuseppe 77 Rose, Stephen 95, 96 Rossi, Franco 220 Rossi, Irena Radić 34 285

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Rossi, Salomone 177, 186, 187 Rostirolla, Giancarlo 88 Roščić, Nikola Mate 65 Rota (Kolunić), Martino [Martin] 59, 60 Rovere, Federico Feltrio della 126 Rovetta, Giovanni 170, 174 Rowe, Walter 188 Rozzo, Ugo 158 Rubini, Giovanni Battista 177, 178 Rubini, Orazio 177, 178 Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor 29, 158 Ruffino, Maria Paola 222 Ruffo, Vincenzo 170 Ruždjak, Marko 254

Schönborn, Franz Lothar von 61 Schönborn, Friedrich Carl von 61 Schop, Johan 189 Schreibman, Susan 92 Schubert, Peter 144 Schultz, Jacobus 187, 188 Schütz, Heinrich 92, 178–180, 182, 183, 195 Schwanberg, Anna Eusebia 184 Schwanberg, Johann Wilhelm von [Švamberka, Jan Vilém ze] 184 Scriabin, Alexander Nikolaevich 246 Sebenico, Giovanni [Šibenčanin, Ivan] 18, 219–222, 224, 227, 228, 231 Sedak, Eva 245 Sedláček, August 184 Seifert, Herbert 183 Selem, Petar 245 Selim II, Sultan 34 Serra, Michelangelo 94 Severi, Francesco 88 Sherman, Bernard D. 237 Siefert, Paul 182 Siemens, Ray 92 Signorotto, Gianvittorio 83 Simandan, Voicu Mihnea 249 Simi Bonini, Eleonora 221 Simonich da Sebenico, Francesco 75 Simpson, Thomas 188, 194, 200 Sixtus V, Pope 59, 161 Skjavetić, Julije [Schiavetto [Schiavetti], Giulio] 15, 237, 238 Skopinić 45 Sodi, Manlio 171 Sofia Eleonora di Sassonia [Sophia Eleonore of Saxony] 179 Sola da Pirano, Nicola 67 Solerti, Angelo 203, 221 Soler, Vincente Martin y 250 Soliman, Giovanni Francesco [Ivan Franjo] 62 Somis, Annibale 224 Somis, Giovanni Battista 224 Somis, Matteo Giacinto 224 Sommer, Johann 188, 191 Soriano, Francesco 123 Sorić, Stipan 36 Sorkočević [Sorgo], Luka [Luca] 255 Spinelli, J. N. [Spinello, Giovanni Nicolo] 98 Stanleys, John 188 Stefano da Lissa 69 Steude, Wolfram 178, 179, 182 Stevens, Denis 174 Stipčević, Aleksandar 81 Stipčević, Ennio 13, 14, 15, 65, 68, 79–81, 88, 91–93, 95, 122, 135, 136, 142, 149, 153, 162, 234, 236–238, 240, 242, 243

S Sacchi, Henri 179, 180 Samson, Jim 244 Sances [Sancies, Sanci, Sanes, Sanchez], Giovanni Felice 88 Sandam, Henry 188 Sanmicheli, Giangirolamo 27 Sanudo, Marin 24 Sarpi, Paolo 28, 32 Sarti, Giuseppe 250 Sartori, Antonio 86, 87 Sartori, Claudio 231 Sätzl, Christoph 94, 97, 98 Saussure, Ferdinand de 249 Savić, Mira 238 Sbarra, Francesco 184 Scaletta, Orazio 98 Scalon, Cesare 158 Scattolin, Pierpaolo 170, 171 Schaal, Richard 136 Scheidt, Samuel 185, 194 Schein, Johann Hermann 185, 187, 191, 194, 195 Schiavone, Andrea [Meldola, Andrea; Medulić, Andrija] 51, 52, 56–59 Schiavone, Felice 62 Schiavone, Giorgio 51 Schiavone, Giorgio [Ćulinović [Čulinović], Juraj] 51 Schiavone, Michele (Michelangelo) (Chiogiotto) 62 Schiavone [Schiavoni], Giovanni 62 Schiavone [Schiavoni], Natale 62 Schiavoni, Felice 62 Schiltz, Katelijne 80 Schmelzer, Johann Heinrich 192 Schmitt, Charles B. 203 Schmitt, Oliver Jens 23, 27 Schneider, Arthur 56 Schneider, Heinrich 180 Schneider, Matthias 155 Schnizer, Zacharia 96 Schnoebelen, Anne 98 286

Index nominum

U

Stivori, Francesco 171 Stopper, Melchior 98 Stowell, Robin 238 Straus, Joseph N. 249 Strika, Zvjezdan 32 Strisevio [Strisoevich, Strisenio], Francesco (Francesco da Sebenico) 84–86 Strisoevich, Francesco 85 Strogers, Nicholas 191 Stuart de Rothesay, Charles 54 Suleiman I (the Magnificent) 27, 28 Sussich, Giovanni Matteo 72–74 Szombara, Justyna 95

Uccellini, Marco 186 Uffereri, J. D. [Giovanni Damasceni] 97 Unsworth, John 92 Ursini, Lucio 94, 98 Usper Sponga, Francesco 17, 48, 80, 177 Usper Sponga, Gabriele 177

V Valaresso, Paolo 46 Valerio, F. 59 Valier, Pietro 25 Valinea, Martio 123, 124 Vanin, Barbara 46 Varallo, Franca 222 Varchi, Benedetto 52 Vasari, Giorgio 52, 56 Vasoli, Cesare 203 Vecchi, Orazio (Tiberio) 94, 98 Velimirović, Miloš 219 Veltkamp, Remco C. 103 Vendrix, Philippe 143, 181 Verdi, Giuseppe 254 Verrati, Giovanni Maria 130, 132 Viadana, Bernardo 98 Viadana, Giacomo Moro da 97 Viadana [Grossi da Viadana], Lodovico 94, 97, 98, 150, 155–157, 169, 170, 174 Viale Ferrero, Mercedes 221, 224, 225, 227, 230 Vicentino, Nicola 163 Victoria, Thomás Luis de 161 Victorinus, Georg 94 Vidaković, Albe 92 Vidić, Ivan 14 Vierdanck, Johann 186, 187 Vignutius, Ioannes Dominicus 126 Vincenti, Alessandro 17, 137 Vincenti, Giacomo 17 Vincent, Philip 195 Vintz, Georg 192 Vio, Gastone 46 Vittoria, Alessandro 57 Vittorio Amedeo I di Savoia [Victor Amadeus I, Duke of Savoy] 220, 222 Vittorio Amedeo II di Savoia [Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia] 222, 224, 230 Vitturi, Venetian fleet commander 24 Vivaldi, Antonio 233, 243 Voelkle, Wiliam M. 54 Vrančić, Antun 26 Vrančić, Faust 26 Vrandečić, Josip 14, 23, 25–31, 35 Vranjanin, Filip. See Lurano, Filippo di Vranjanin, Franjo 51

Š Šabanović, Hazim 27 Šarić, Davor 14 Šibenčanin, Ivan. See Sebenico, Giovanni Šitina, Ana 56 Šižgorić, Juraj 23, 26 Šulek, Stjepan 244, 245, 254 Švamberka, Jan Vilém ze. See  Schwanberg, Johann Wilhelm von

T Tamburini, Luciano 222, 224 Tarnawska-Kaczorowska, Krystyna 250 Taschetti, Gabriele 17, 96, 135, 136, 147 Tasnière, Georges 225, 226 Tassini, Giuseppe 44, 45 Tauber, Karol 190 Taverner, John 191 Tavilić [Tavelić], Nicola [Nikola] 76 Tavola, Antonio dalla 171 Teerlinc, Levina 54 Testa, Luca 80 Thoene, Walter 180 Thomasso d’Almissa, Pietro 79 Tibaldi, Rodobaldo 170, 171 Tiepolo, Giovanni Battista 61, 62 Timms, Colin 88 Tintoretto (Jacopo Robusti) 57, 59 Tiziano Vecelli 53, 56, 59 Toffetti, Marina 137, 143, 153, 157 Tomasi, Blasio 98 Tomić Ferić, Ivana 91, 136 Tomić, Radoslav 62 Torelli, Daniele 133, 148 Torri, Luigi 221 Traversier, Mélanie 192 Triacca, Achille Maria 171 Tudjina-Gamulin, Vesna 33 Tuksar, Stanislav 92, 122, 124, 135, 153, 207 Turino, Antonio 122 287

Companion to Ivan Lukačić

Vranjanin, Lucijan 51 Vučić, Rudolf 14

Zalar, Ivo 56 Zanardi, Mario 83 Zane, Andrea 71 Zanetti, Gasparo 189 Zan, Giovanni de 47 Zanini, Alba 219, 227, 228 Zaninović, Marin 43 Zannini, Andrea 38 Zapatta [Zappata], Bartolomeo 222 Zara, Vasco 239 Zarlino, Gioseffo 131, 152, 163 Zeri, Federico 53 Ziani, Pietro Andrea 221 Zoranić, Petar 24 Zorzi, Elio 45 Zuccari, Federico 59 Zuccari, Taddeo 59 Zucchini, Gregorio 94

W Waidmann, Adam 98 Wainwright, Jonathan P. 238, 241, 242 Waldstein, Adam von 184 Walker, Thomas 221 Wallenstein, Albrecht Wenzel Eusebius von 184 Watanabe-O’Kelly, Helen 179 Weber, William 250 Webster, Maurice 188 Weiler, Klaus 180 Weinberg, Bernard 204 Weiss, Susan Forscher 92 Werckmeister, Andreas 238 Wexler, Richard 233 Whittaker, Adam 127, 128 Widman, B. 94 Wiesend, Reinhard 179 Wilkinson, Christopher 147 Williams, David Russell 131

Ž Županović, Lovro 92, 95, 107, 219, 227, 231, 248, 253

Z Zaccariis, Zaccaria de 74, 75 Zajc, Ivan 253

288