![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
The so-called ‘Hamond’ partbooks (British Library, Add. MSS 30480-4) were copied over a period of c.40 years by multiple groups of collaborating scribes, resulting in a miscellaneous combination of service music, sacred songs, Latin motets, chansons, madrigals, an In nomine, and even Mass extracts. These partbooks are the only complete manuscript source of Protestant service music from the first decades of Elizabeth’s reign. This first holistic study of this set of partbooks re-evaluates the stages of compilation and the copying practices of the scribes to offer new interpretations of the manuscripts’ history and contexts. The article argues that the partbooks began life as a liturgical and educational collection for the training of choirboys. These partbooks therefore offer a unique insight into the repertory and practices of one Protestant institution, highlighting the continued reliance on Edwardian repertories over a decade into Elizabeth’s reign, as well as the growing availability of continental printed music. The transmission of these partbooks is then traced to a more domestic and recreational setting, exploring their relationship to the Hamond family. While Thomas Hamond of Hawkedon in Suffolk inscribed his ownership inside the covers in 1615, the re-evaluation of the compilation and history of these partbooks reveals that the books were in the possession of the Hamond family from at least the late 1580s/early 1590s. This family added new pieces, made repairs and engaged with the music copied by previous owners. Ultimately their preservation was assured by the younger Thomas Hamond’s interest in older music, and they continued to be a source of historical interest for eighteenth- and nineteenth-century music antiquarians.
Acknowledgements
Thanks are due to Magnus Williamson and Roger Bowers for comments and assistance.
Note
Sixteenth-century spelling and grammar have been modernized throughout.
Notes
1 Images of these manuscripts are available on the Digital Image Archive of Medieval Music (DIAMM): www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/1885/#/; www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/2982/#/; www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/2983/#/; www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/2984/#/; www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/2985/#/ (Accessed 20 July 2018).
2 GB-Och: Mus. 984-8; GB-Ob: MS Mus. e. 1-5; GB-Och: Mus. 979-83.
3 Ernest Brennecke, ‘The Entertainment at Elvetham, 1591’, Music in English Renaissance Drama, ed. John H. Long (Lexington, KY, 1968), 32–56 (52–5); Philip Brett, ed., Consort Songs, Musica Britannica 22 (London, 1974), 58–9, 182; Katherine Butler, Music in Elizabethan Court Politics (Woodbridge, 2015), 150–4.
4 May Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music by English Composers 1485–1610’ (D.Phil. dissertation, University of Oxford, 1977), ii, 70–85, 250–60; Warwick Edwards, ‘The Sources of Elizabethan Consort Music’ (D.Phil. dissertation, University of Cambridge, 1974), i, 121–6.
5 GB-Lbl: Add. MS 30480, fol. 89v (inside back cover); 30481, fol. 1*v (front fly leaf); 30482, fol. 1v (inside front cover); 30483, fol. 91r (inside back cover). A shorter and undated statement of ownership occurs on fol. 94v of 30841 in his italic hand. This italic is the predominant script in which he later copied his own music manuscripts: GB-Ob: Mus. f. 1-6 and 11-28.
6 30482, fol. 1v (inside back cover). Whereas the majority of the claims to ownership were written in his secretary hand, Thomas Hamond’s preamble to these signatures is in his italic hand. A partial rough draft of this witness statement appears on 30484, fol. 20v (upside down) in his secretary hand.
7 Iain Fenlon and John Milsom, ‘“Ruled Paper Imprinted”: Music Paper and Patents in Sixteenth-Century England’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 37 (1984), 139–63 (at 145–7); Katherine Butler, ‘Printed Borders for Sixteenth-Century Music or Music Paper and the Early Career of Music Printer Thomas East’, The Library, 19 (2018), 174–202.
8 See, for example, the final fleuron on the left-hand border of 30480, fol. 5v, of which a significant amount of the top half of the design is missing. This printing flaw recurs throughout all the books.
9 Although the modern rebinding is too tight to allow the collation to be seen, using a combination of the watermarks and the page forms for the printed staves I have been able to determine the likely original collation of the four initial volumes including where pages were excised during copying or have since been lost or disturbed. Diagrams are available at: https://doi.org/10.5287/bodleian:kZ8PpRey2.
10 Especially at the beginning where only 30481 has the two opening pieces complete. Today the partbooks have the following numbers of folios: 30480, 88 folios; 30481, 93 folios; 30482, 84 folios; 30483, 87 folios.
11 Although no pieces are copied across the beginning or end of the gathering comprising fols 16–23, music is copied across the end of the gathering of fols 75–82, and across ether side of bifolium 83/88.
12 The front cover consists of lections from Matins on the Feast of Saint Sylvester (21 December) while the back cover contains fragments of Saint Maximus of Turin’s ‘Homila X. De nativitate Domini V’.
13 The watermark is another single-handled pot with a crown and quatrefoil, and a central band with the initials ‘DM’. This is similar to FOL 1026 from the Gravell Watermark Archive, which was used in 1577. Though watermarks can only provide a broad indication of date, this is consistent with other evidence suggesting the manuscripts’ Elizabethan origins.
14 The textless music originally began at fol. 12r. The blank gathering (fols 8–11) was inserted in the middle to mirror the structure of the existing partbooks.
15 For a conjectural gathering diagram based on the evidence of the watermarks see: https://doi.org/10.5287/bodleian:kZ8PpRey2.
16 Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music’, ii, 250–60.
17 Edwards, ‘The Sources of Elizabethan Consort Music’, i, 121–5.
18 For a suggested analysis of the numerous individual text and notation hands in 30480-4 see: https://doi.org/10.5287/bodleian:kZ8PpRey2.
19 Pages of blank staves often remain in one or more partbooks as a clue to the original divisions.
20 For example Sheppard’s I Will Give Thanks and the start of Johnson’s Defiled is My Name in 30480; Tye’s Deliver Us Good Lord and More’s Levavi oculos in 30482.
21 Peter Le Huray, Music and the Reformation in England 1549–1660 (Cambridge, 1978), 98; Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music’, ii, 70; John Milsom, ‘Sacred Songs in the Chamber’, English Choral Practice, 1400–1650, ed. John Morehen (Cambridge, 1995), 161–91 (at 169).
22 The flame-shaped notes that creep in at the top of 30483 fol. 4r and vice versa (30481, fol. 47v) may suggest that these represent two hands of the same scribe; however, the slant on the upward stems of the round hand compared to the straight flame-shaped hand and the use of two different styles of clef may be used to argue for two scribes.
23 The little loops added to the stems on 30482, fol. 2r are later doodling.
24 The number of folios is now greater in 30480, but there are signs of disturbance at this point in the manuscript.
25 With thanks to Roger Bowers for this identification. Adams’s Venite was treated as a single four-part piece in Ralph T. Daniel and Peter Le Huray, The Sources of English Church Music, 1549–1660 (London, 1972), ii, 74.
26 The transition is seen in Taverner’s I Give Thanks in 30480 where the notation is finished in the lighter ink and Tye’s I Have Loved in 30483 where the darker ink is used for the start of the text and the lighter for the remainder of the text and the notation. The first service music in the lighter ink is Adams’s Nunc Dimittis.
27 See for example 30480, fols 19v, 44r-v, 73r–74v, 75v; 30481, fols 21v, 58v, 77r, 79v, 87v; 30482, fol. 18r; 30483, fols 21r, 74v and 75r; 30484, fol. 15v.
28 Thanks to John Bryan for sharing his thoughts on More’s Levavi after an informal performance at the Viola da Gamba Society in 2015.
29 For a conjectural gathering diagram based on the watermarks see: https://doi.org/10.5287/bodleian:kZ8PpRey2. This suggests that there may be pages missing from both the beginning and the end of this book.
30 Further evidence comes from the similarity between the hand that copies the anonymous piece at the top of fol. 20v, and that which copies Tallis’s Wipe Away in 30484. With only a small fragment of notation available it is difficult to make a comparison, especially as the Wipe Away hand is also quite inconsistent in the precise shape of its diamond noteheads, but the shared features of long tails that are clubbed when downwards, small diamond noteheads and the shape of the directs are suggestive (only the jagged longa on fol. 20r has no comparison). In this scenario the untitled piece was presumably recopied on the creation of the fifth book, but More’s Levavi was omitted for some reason (perhaps some damage had already occurred?) Mistrust Oft Times is likely to be a much later addition, using up empty space.
31 30482, fols 19v–21r; 30481, fols 62r–62v, 30482, fols 57v–59r and 30483, fols 62r–63r; 30483, fols 83r–83v: scribe 3k in https://doi.org/10.5287/bodleian:kZ8PpRey2. Possibly also seen on the top line of 30480, fol. 44v (van Wilder’s Blessed Art Thou).
32 This was also at a similar time to Tallis’s With All Our Hearts, the last of the five-part anthems.
33 Roger Bowers, ‘To Chorus from Quartet: The Performing Resource for English Church Polyphony, c. 1390–1559’, English Choral Practice, 1400–1650, ed. John Morehen (Cambridge, 1995), 1–47 (39).
34 Hannibal Hamlin, ‘Sobs for Sorrowful Souls: Versions of the Penitential Psalms for Domestic Devotion’, Private and Domestic Devotion in Early Modern Britain, ed. Jessica Martin and Alec Ryrie (Farnham, 2012), 211–36 (esp. 211, 214 and 233).
35 John Harley, Thomas Tallis (Farnham, 2015), 87.
36 Arnold Hunt, ‘The Lord’s Supper in Early Modern England’, Past and Present, 161 (1998), 39–83 (41, 45); Alec Ryrie, Being Protestant in Reformation Britain (Oxford, 2013), 217; Timothy Rosendale, Liturgy and Literature in the Making of Protestant England (Cambridge, 2007), 212.
37 Le Huray, Music and the Reformation, 3.
38 GB-Ob: Mus. Sch. e. 420-2. The Wanley partbooks are three survivors of a set of four that were copied c.1549–52 and contain service music and anthems: James Wrightson, The ‘Wanley’ Manuscripts: a Critical Commentary (London: Garland, 1989), 241–2; Le Huray, Music and the Reformation, 173.
39 On special forms of prayer see: Natalie Mears, ‘Brought to Book: Purchases of Special Forms of Prayers in English Parishes, 1558–1640’, Negotiating the Jacobean Printed Book, ed. Pete Langman (Farnham, 2011), 29–44 and ‘Special Nationwide Worship and the Book of Common Prayer in England, Wales and Ireland, 1533–1642’, Worship and the Parish Church in Early Modern Britain, ed. Alec Ryrie and Natalie Mears (Farnham, 2013), 31–72; Natalie Mears, Alasdair Raffe, Stephen Taylor and Philip Williamson, eds, National Prayers: Special Worship since the Reformation: Volume 1: Special Prayers, Fasts and Thanksgivings in the British Isles, 1533–1688, Church of England Record Society, 20 (Woodbridge, 2013). For an example of sung prayers designed for times of trouble see: John Awdelay, A Godly Ditty or Prayer to be Song unto God for the Preservation of His Church, Our Queen and Realm, Against All Traitors, Rebels, and Papistical Enemies (London, 1569?), STC 995.
40 30480, fols 27r–28r; 30481, fols 29r–30r; 30482, fols 26v–27v; 30483, fols 28v–29v.
41 30481, fol. 25r; 30482, fol. 22v; 30483, fol. 25r. For an edition see David Mateer, ed., O Praise God In His Holiness: SATB (Bangor, 2012).
42 Le Huray, Music and the Reformation, 181; Nicholas Temperley, The Music of the English Parish Church (Cambridge, 1983), 49.
43 Le Huray, Music and the Reformation, 32–3.
44 ibid., 27–8.
45 Hunt, ‘The Lord’s Supper in Early Modern England’, 41, 45.
46 A Primer or Book of Private Prayer Needful to be Used of all Faithful Christians (London, 1553), sig. [Q7]v–[Q8]r; Thomas Becon, The Pomander of Prayer (London, 1558), 63–4. Further editions were printed in 1561, 1563, 1565, c.1567, c.1570 and 1578.
47 Thomas Tallis, English Sacred Music: 1 Anthems, ed. Leonard Ellinwood, Early English Church Music, 12 (London, 1971), 40–2.
48 G. E. P. Arkwright, ‘Elizabethan Choirboy Plays and their Music’, Proceedings of the Musical Association, 40 (1913–4), 117–38; Jane Flynn, ‘The Education of Choristers in England During the Sixteenth Century’, English Choral Practice, 1400–1650, ed. John Morehen (Cambridge, 1995), 180–99 (at 191–3).
49 Jane Flynn, ‘A Reconsideration of the Mulliner Book’ (British Library Add. MS 30513): Music Education in Sixteenth-Century England’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Duke University, 1993), chap.4.
50 Flynn, ‘A Reconsideration of the Mulliner Book’, 351–82.
51 Warwick Edwards, ‘The Performance of Ensemble Music in Elizabethan England’, Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association, 97 (1970–1), 113–23 (at 119); Flynn, ‘Education of Choristers’, 196.
52 The only pieces copied in this section without a page turn in a least one part are the anonymous untitled piece (no. 70), Ami tu te plaisir, the anonymous D’ung nouveau dart, de Rore’s Quel foco, Clemens non Papa’s Or il ne m’est possible and O Lord Turn Not Away.
53 Edwards, ‘Performance of Ensemble Music’, 116–17. Thomas Morley, A Plain and Easy Introduction to Practical Music Set Down in Form of a Dialogue (London, 1597), 179.
54 See her comparative analysis of the two versions in Jane Bernstein, ‘The Chanson in England 1530–1640: A Study of Sources and Styles’ (Ph.D. dissertation, University of California at Berkeley, 1974), 268–82.
55 Elizabethan Consort Music I, ed. Paul Doe, Musica Britannica 44 (London, 1979), 78; David and Jennifer Baker, ‘A 17th-Century Dial Song’, The Musical Times, 119 (1978), 590–3 (591).
56 For example Tye’s Praise ye the Lord in 30481, fol. 25r, top line and 30483, fol. 25v, line 4, or the end of A che cerchar in 30482, fol. 86v and 30482, fol. 85v. Few appear in Phase IIIa, but one exception is the top line of 30482, fol. 20r in the middle of Whitbroke’s Magnificat, where a series of squarer notes of awkward proportions and variable sizes intervene.
57 The larger diamond noteheads attempted at the top of 82r may be further experiments in achieving a good diamond noteshape by the first scribe, or signs that several novices were having a go at the copying.
58 Notation copied onto freehand staves on the flyleaves of 30483 and the bottom of 30481, fol. 92v may also be evidence of copying practice as both appear to be by novice hands (with wobbly stems, awkward proportions, or collision between the notes), though these cannot be dated with any certainty.
59 Tye’s O God be Merciful and Tallis’s When Shall My Sorrowful Sighing Slake, and Johnson’s Defiled is My Name and Deus Misereatur.
60 James Wrightson, The ‘Wanley’ Manuscripts: A Critical Commentary (London, 1989), 241–2; Le Huray, Music and the Reformation, 173.
61 GB-Ob: MS Mus. Sch. e. 420, fols 6r–7r, 8v–9v, 89r–90r; MS Mus. Sch. e. 421, fols 5v–6r, 7v–9r, 91v–93r; MS Mus. Sch. e. 422, fols 6r–v, 8r–9r, 87r–88r. The major differences in In Judgment Lord are that 30480-3 separates each phrase with minim rests (but inserts time rather than shortening the preceding note), that the Wanley version includes a repeat of ‘thy majesty therefore I beseech thee’ that is not present in 30480-4, and the use of a one-flat key signature in 30481 that is not present in MS Mus. Sch. e. 421. The two versions of the Sheppard and the Tye have only minor differences, though both are unattributed in Wanley, but are attributed in 30480-4. In Judgment is a vernacular and metrical version of the Sarum rite responsory, Domine secundum actum, the sixth responsory at Matins in the Officium Mortuorum, as found in several Sarum primers c.1535–43: Wrightson, The ‘Wanley’ Manuscripts, 91.
62 Hollander’s Dum transisset and the anonymous Si je me plains. The latter is found in GB-Lbl: Add. MS 31390 and several of the Paston manuscripts. See ; Jane Bernstein, ‘An Index of Polyphonic Chanson in English Manuscript Sources, c.1530–1640’, Royal Musical Association Research Chronicle, 21 (1988), 21–36 (26); Annie Cœurdevey, ‘Catalogue de la Chanson Française à la Renaissance’ http://ricercar.cesr.univ-tours.fr/3-programmes/basechanson/03231-3.asp?numfiche=8180 (Accessed 20 August 2017).
63 Printed by the Gardanos in 1551, 1552, 1557, 1564, 1565, 1569, 1575, 1582 and 1590, Scotto in 1554, Rampazetto in 1563 and Angelieri in 1573.
64 30480-4 have two slight differences to all these prints: one is a pitch variant in a run of quavers, which is likely to have been a copying error. The other concerns the time signature, which is given as ‘C’ in all the editions I have seen, but consistently written as a cut-C in 30480-4.
65 Iain Fenlon, ‘An Imperial Repertory for Charles V’, Studi Musicali, 13 (1984), 221–40.
66 Martin Ham, ‘The Stonyhurst College Partbooks, The Madrigal Society, and a Diplomatic Gift to Edward VI’, Tijdschrift van de Koninklijke Vereniging voor Nederlandse Muziekgeschiedenis, 63 (2013), 3–64.
67 Andrew Ashbee, David Lasocki, Peter Holman and Fiona Kisby, eds, A Biographical Dictionary of English Court Musicians (Aldershot, 1998), i, 373–4; Nick Sandon, ed., Edward Hedley Terrenum sitiens regnum; Walter Erle Ave vulnus lateris, Renaissance Church Music 112 (n.p.: Antico Edition, 2008), ii–xi; David Pinto, ‘Walter Earle and his Successors’, Consort, 49 (1994), 13–16.
68 Ham, ‘Stonyhurst College Partbooks’, 24–45.
69 A major error in the tenor at the end of the prima pars that rendered the piece unperformable probably originated with the 30482 copyist. The final section involves two phrases that start the same but end differently and the scribe has skipped from partway through the first iteration to the middle of the second. Either performance of the piece was never attempted, or else by the time the error was realized the copyist no longer had access to the exemplar to supply the missing bars.
70 Edwards, ‘The Sources of Elizabethan Consort Music’, i, 170.
71 The other pieces copied from the same print are: Clemens non Papa’s, Advenit ignis divinus (fols17v–19r) and Hierusalem surge (fols 35v–37r), and Crecquillon’s Dum aurora finem daret (fols 1v–2r) and Quis te victorem dicat (fols 2v–4r).
72 Ashbee, Lasocki, et al., eds, Biographical Dictionary, i, 373–4; Sandon, ed., Edward Hedley Terrenum sitiens regnum, ix; David Pinto, ‘Walter Earle and his Successors’, Consort, 49 (1994), 13–16; The concordances with GB-Lbl: Add. MS 32377, which has connections to Dorset, only come later in the manuscripts’ copying history.
73 Jonathan Willis, Church Music and Protestantism in Post-Reformation England: Discourses, Sites and Identities (Farnham, 2010), 129.
74 ibid., 111–13, 130.
75 ibid., 159.
76 Le Huray, Music and the Reformation, 91 and 173–81. James Wrightson too considered the Wanley books to be of London provenance on the basis of bindings and repertory by known composers: The ‘Wanley’ Manuscripts (London, 1989), 241.
77 Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music’, ii, 251. The error derives from Le Huray, Music and the Reformation, 68 and 172. The Chapel Royal musician was in fact Edward Adams: Ashbee and Lasocki, eds, Biographical Dictionary (Aldershot, 1998), i, 6.
78 Milsom, ‘Sacred Songs in the Chamber’, 170 n. 23; Hugh Baillie, ‘Some Biographical Notes on English Church Musicians, Chiefly Working in London (1485–1560)’, RMA Research Chronicle, 2 (1962), 18–57 (36). Roger Bowers has also identified John Franclynge as a Conduct at Walworth’s College, London in 1548: C.J. Kitching, ed., London and Middlesex Chantry Certificate 1548, London Record Society, 16 (1980), 23 (no. 35, n. 1).
79 Roger Bowers, ‘Chapel and Choir, Liturgy and Music, 1444–1644’, King’s College Chapel 1515–2015: Art, Music and Religion in Cambridge, ed. Jean Michel Massing and Nicolette Zeeman (London, 2014), 259–86 (at 273 and 394, n. 85–6). Further details were kindly provided in private correspondence in November 2015.
80 Bowers, ‘Chapel and Choir’, 273–5.
81 J. J. Muskett, ed., Suffolk Manorial Families, Being the County Visitations and Other Pedigrees (Exeter, 1900), i, 251–72; John Venn and J.A. Venn, eds, Alumni Cantabrigienses: A Biographical List of all known Students, Graduates and Holders of Office at the University of Cambridge, from the Earliest Times to 1900 (New York, 2011, first published 1922), 295.
82 Muskett, ed., Suffolk Manorial Families, i, 261.
83 US-Ws: V.a.408, fols 22v–23r. The name ‘Partyne’ (and similar forms) is particularly associated with Staffordshire and Shropshire in The Oxford Dictionary of Family Names in Britain and Ireland; however, there are no other suggestions of a northern connection for these partbooks. Patrick Hanks, Richard Coates, and Peter McClure, ‘Parton’, The Oxford Dictionary of Family Names in Britain and Ireland (Oxford, 2016). www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199677764.001.0001/acref-9780199677764-e-31542 (Accessed 20 August 2017).
84 Jerry Call, Charles Hamm, and Herbert Kellman, eds, Census-Catalogue of Manuscript Sources of Polyphonic Music 1400–1550, Renaissance Manuscript Studies (Neuhausen-Stuttgart, 1979–88), iv, 123. Images and an inventory of the manuscripts are available on DIAMM: www.diamm.ac.uk/sources/1885/#/ (Accessed 20 August 2017).
85 Peter Le Huray and John Cannell, ‘Jeffries, Matthew’, Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/14228; Hugh Benham, ‘Blankes, Edward’, ibid., www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/03229; Ian Payne, ‘Mallorie’, ibid., www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/17565. (Accessed 20 August 2017).
86 M. C. Crum, ‘A Seventeenth-Century Collection of Music Belonging to Thomas Hamond, A Suffolk Landowner’, Bodleian Library Record, 6 (1957), 373–86; Craig Monson, Voices and Viols in England, 1600–1650: The Sources and the Music (Ann Arbor, MI, 1982), 77–123.
87 Monson, Voices and Viols, 79.
88 The discantus part of his Cantiones sacrae is extant in the Bodleian Library (Vet.A1.e.99) bound up with the quinta pars of the Recueil du Mellange d’Orlande de Lassus (1570). The superius parts to both sets are now in the Folger Shakespeare Library (call no: STC 23666 copy 2, bound with STC 15266) and a bassus part to the Lassus (which Greer believes may not be part of the same set, despite being owned by Hamond) survives at Boughton House, Kettering. Crum, ‘Seventeenth-Century Collection of Music’, 383 n. 5; David Greer, Manuscript Inscriptions in Early English Printed Music (Farnham, 2015), 79.
89 GB-Ob: MSS Mus. f. 7, fols 2r and 25v; Mus. f. 8, fols 3r and 22r; Mus. f. 9, fols 3r and 25r; Mus. f. 10, fols 4r and 27v.
90 Ross Duffin, ed., The Music Treatises of Thomas Ravenscroft: ‘Treatise of Practicall Musicke’ and A Briefe Discourse (Farnham, 2014), 46; Thomas Ravenscroft, A Brief Discourse of the True (But Neglected) Use of Charact’ring the Degrees (1614), n.p.
91 Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music’, ii, 253.
92 William Byrd, Consort Songs for Voice and Viols, ed. Philip Brett, Byrd Edition, 15 (London, 1970), 171. The attribution mirrors scripts found in GB-Lbl: Add. MS 47844 (see later in this article), whereas the signature does not. For connections between the signature and the underlay scripts compare, for example, the double loop of the ‘d’ on ‘died’ and the form of the ‘h’ on ‘heart’, both on fol. 60v. There are, however, still differences, most obviously in the direction of the flick used for a final ‘s’.
93 The abbreviation follows seamlessly from a designation of the number of voices and the attribution.
94 J. J. Muskett, ed., Suffolk Manorial Families, i, 261.
95 Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music’, ii, 155; Baillie, ‘Some Biographical Notes on English Church Musicians’, 38.
96 It would not be impossible for the awkwardly long-stemmed hand of the scribe for Causton’s Benedictus to have matured into the shorter stemmed diamond hand that contributed to copying Byrd’s Triumph, with which it does share several features (including small diamond noteheads with contrasting thick and thin sides and mild splaying on the stems, wavy clefs and long-tailed flats).
97 30480, fol. 1*v; 30481, fols 1*r and 94v; 30482, fol. 87r; 30483, fols 3r-v and 90r; 30484, fol. 20v (‘of Hawkedon’ in 30481, fol. 94v; 30483, fol. 3v; and 30484, fol. 20v) There are numerous scripts and several practice versions of the 1615 ownership inscription on the flyleaves, suggesting that Hamond was experimenting with different styles. It is therefore impossible to tell whether all examples of the signature are Thomas III experimenting with different styles, or whether they are the hands of multiple Thomases.
98 Ne Irascaris was printed in Byrd’s Cantiones sacrae (1589), but circulated widely in manuscript in the preceding decade. Other early concordances include the Sadler partbooks (GB-Ob: Mus. e. 1-5), the Dow partbooks (GB-Och: Mus. 984-8) and GB-Lbl: Add. MS 32377: Joseph Kerman, ‘Byrd’s Motets: Chronology and Canon’, Journal of the American Musicological Society, 14 (1961), 359–82 (362–3, 365, 369).
99 Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music’, ii, 71–2.
100 30480, fols 66r, 68v–69r; 30481, fol. 7v; 30482, fol. 60r; 30484, fol. 8r–v.
101 The external covers contain lections from the second Nocturn on Septuagesima Sunday, while the inner covers contain lections from Vespers for ferial days during Septuagesima. Capitals in blue ink and lection numbers in red ink are visible. (This is not the same breviary as used for 30484).
102 Only the opening pages and the mid-section are cut: the opening pages were perhaps copied before the decision to have double-thickness pages had been taken, the mid-section was cut to insert extra music into what had previously been a section of nine continental pieces flanked on either side by five English ones.
103 Although labelled as a contratenor partbook, it includes a range of clefs spanning C4–G2. As annotations within 47844 indicate that the repertory was sung, such a range of clefs make it unlikely to be an individual singer’s personal collection of parts, but rather a single survivor from a larger set.
104 Other evidence that suggests the book was designed for singing include the diminutive size of the notation – which seems better designed for a singer holding the book in hand than for a viol player other instrumentalist to read at a distance – and page turns that would be awkward for viol players for pieces that could have been written across a single opening if desired.
105 Hofman described 47844 as copied by one scribe with a diamond and a round hand, while Warwick Edwards’s interpretation saw two copyists, one using diamond noteheads and the other round: Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music’, ii, 261; Edwards, ‘The Sources of Elizabethan Consort Music’, i, 119.
106 Julia Craig-McFeely, ‘BL Add. 47844: A Case Study for Scribal Identification’, paper presented at the Faculty of Music, University of Oxford on 2 October 2015.
107 The outer points curve upwards in the 30480-4 diamond hand rather than the more dropping corner points of the hooked diamond noteheads in 47844. See 30481, fols 70v–72v, 30482, fol. 65v, 30483, fols 69v–70r.
108 Craig-McFeely, ‘BL Add. 47844’.
109 See also ‘NE IRAS’ on 47844, fol. 4r; 30483, fol. 70v.
110 The scribes of the incipits in 47844 sometimes appear less competent than the other decorators, with awkwardly proportioned scripts and ill-judged spacing.
111 The 47844 scribes also seem unaware of the intended effect; their attempts often turn into a series of black semi-circles that create only a limited sense of an internal, snaking, white line.
112 The solution to the function of these initial numbers was solved by Magnus Williamson at a workshop in Oxford in October 2015.
113 The suggestion that this date related to the copyist’s source was made by Hofman, ‘The Survival of Latin Sacred Music’, ii, 72–81. The identification of Porta’s pieces is found in Milsom, ‘Sacred Songs in the Chamber’, 170–1.
114 For an example in 47844 see fol. 5r and for imitations in 30480-4 see 30481, fol. 67r; 30483, fol. 64r; and 30484, fol. 9v.
115 The distorted manicula were used purely for decoration. Neither set of scribes seems aware that these were supposed to represent hands or that they could be functional.
116 On the music for Elizabeth’s visit to Elvetham in 1591 see Brennecke, ‘The Entertainment at Elvetham, 1591’, 32–56; Butler, Music in Elizabethan Court Politics, 148–57.
117 David Price, Patrons and Musicians of the English Renaissance (Cambridge, 1981), 71–83 (esp. 76). Price inaccurately conflates Edward Johnson’s participation in Elizabeth’s visit to Kenilworth and the two surviving compositions that were performed for Elizabeth at Elvetham in 1591.
118 The Honourable Entertainment Given to the Queen’s Majesty in Progress, at Elvetham in Hampshire, by the Right Honourable the Earl of Hertford. 1591 (London, 1591), sigs E1r–2v; Elizabeth Goldring et al., John Nichols’s The Progresses and Public Processions of Queen Elizabeth I: A New Edition of the Early Modern Sources (Oxford, 2015), iii, 563–95.
119 Brett, Consort Songs, 58–9, 182; Butler, Music in Elizabethan Court Politics, 150–4.
120 One is John Baldwin’s In the Merry Month of May, also from the Elvetham progress, which he copies into commonplace book GB-Lbl: r.m.24.d2, fols 171v-73r with a date of 1592. The other is Nicolas Strogers’s Mistrust Not Truth, which was copied by Robert Dow GB-Och: Mus 984–8, no. 21. Neither of these, however, is an explicit song of praise to the Queen comparable to Johnson’s pair; Baldwin’s is a three-part canzonet about the characters Phyllida and Corydon, while Strogers’s song offers moral advice on political governance. Butler, Music in Elizabethan Court Politics, 156 and 178–2.
121 It is similarly unclear when the fragments were copied onto the flyleaves of 30483 (fol. 2r) and 30481 (fol. 93r), or when the short anonymous and untitled pieces nos. 92 and 93 were written in the same partbooks (30483, fol. 89v and 30481, fol. 93r).
122 Muskett, ed., Suffolk Manorial Families, i, 258–9.
123 Later examples of his hand in the Bodleian manuscripts tend to have straighter stems, but the slight lean to right here is in keeping with GB-Lcm: MS 684 (which is even more slanted) and also the earliest example of his notation hand at the beginning of Mus. f. 7-10.
124 An inscription testifying to his ownership appears on Mus. f. 7, fol. 3r.
125 The versions copied do appear to be those from 1597, and not the later editions of 1600, 1606 and 1613. For a list of variants between the editions see John Dowland, Ayres for Four Voices, ed. David Greer, Musica Britannica, 6 (London, 2000), 206–12.
126 Clear examples include items 22–7 and 36–50 in Mus. f. 1-6.
127 The unusual placement of the Lachrimae across the bottom of an opening in 30484 indicates that it was copied after Johnson’s two songs and Tallis’s Facti sunt.
128 Edwards, ‘The Sources of Elizabethan Consort Music’, i, 125.
129 Although the zigzagged final breves are only found in 30482, the hand shares with Mus. f. 7-10’s similar composite hand () its triangular semi-minims and flame-shaped semibreves in an otherwise round hand. The directs and straight-stroked clefs are also very similar.
130 Muskett, ed., Suffolk Manorial Families, i, 259.
131 Crum, ‘A Seventeenth-Century Collection of Music’, 373, 375; A. Hyatt King, Some British Collectors of Music, c.1600–1960 (Cambridge, 1963), 10, 24; Richard Hunt, Falconer Madan, and P.D. Record, eds, A Summary Catalogue of Western Manuscripts in the Bodleian Library at Oxford which have not hitherto been Catalogued in the Quarto Series: with References to the Oriental and Other Manuscripts (Oxford, 1895–1953), iv, 1, 31–3.
132 Muskett, ed., Suffolk Manorial Families, i, 261.
133 Two digit numbers: Mus. f. 1-6 (60; [6]1; 62; 70; [illeg.]; [illeg.]); Mus. f. 11-15 (39; 43; 44; none; 24); Mus. f. 16-19 (nos. 41-2 and 50); Mus. f. 23 (67, signs of removal on Mus. f. 22 and 24); Mus. f. 25-28 (each book in two parts labelled: 7[1] and 72; 73 and 76; 74 and 75; 77 and 78). The two digit numbers are not found in Mus. f. 7-10. Four digit numbers: GB-Ob: Mus. f. 1-6 (576[?]; [none]; [5]763; 5766; 5763); Mus. f. 11-15 (5758 when present); Mus. f. 16-19 (5762 [corr. to 1], 5758; 575[?]; 5758); Mus. f. 25-28 (all 5767); Mus. f. 23 (57[. . .]). The four digit numbers are not found in Mus. f. 7-10 or 20-24, or the printed editions at GB-Ob: Vet. A1. 99.
134 Robert J. Bruce, ‘Smith, John Stafford (bap. 1750, d. 1836)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004) www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/25866; Nicholas Temperley, ‘Smith, John Stafford’, Grove Music Online www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/26008 (Accessed 20 August 2017); Francis Lee Gramenz, ‘John Stafford Smith, 1750–1836: An Early English Musicologist’ (Ph.D. dissertation, Boston University, 1987), chapter 1; Vincent Duckles, ‘Musicology’, Music in Britain: The Romantic Age 1800–1914, ed. Nicholas Temperley (London, 1981), 483–502 (493–4).
135 Elizabeth Cole, ‘Stafford Smith’s Burney’, Music and Letters, 40 (1959), 35–8 (36).
136 Gramenz, ‘John Stafford Smith’, 89–90.
137 Other textual annotations show him interpreting tricky words in the unfamiliar sixteenth-century script: 30480, fol. 41r in ink, 30481, fol. 64r and 30484, fol. 10r in pencil.
138 The unusual combination of cantatas by Benedetto Marcello followed by pieces found only in 30480-4 means that 31226 can be identified with no. 864 in an 1844 catalogue of the Islington booksellers Hamilton and Bird, which included many other items identifiable as from Smith’s library. Islington Old Book Circular No. 10, 1844 A Catalogue of a Selection of Foreign and English Literature, from the Extensive and Varied Stock Recently Purchased by Messrs. Hamilton and Bird, Booksellers and Publishers . . . it consists of a Great Variety of Works . . . and MS. Music from the Library of the late John Stafford Smith. (1844), GB-Lbl: P.R.6.a.13(1); Gramenz, ‘John Stafford Smith’, Appendix 3, 11, 47–8. Gramenz was unaware of 31226 in which scorings of these pieces follow cantatas by Benedetto Marcello, and so assumed that the entry referred to two items, the second being 30480-4.
139 Gramenz, ‘John Stafford Smith’, 60; King, Some British Collectors of Music, 43.
140 Quoted in Gramenz, ‘John Stafford Smith’, 61–2.
141 King, Some British Collectors of Music, 43, 135–6; Gramenz, ‘John Stafford Smith’, 61; Islington Old Book Circular No. 10 . . . Hamilton and Bird (1844); Catalogue of the Third Portion of the Very Extensive and Valuable Collection of Music being the Stock of Messrs. Calkin and Budd of Pall Mall . . . including a Large Collection of Curious Books and MSS. Formerly in the Library of . . . John Stafford Smith, Esq. . . . which will be Sold by Auction by Messrs Puttick and Simpson . . . on Friday, August 27 1852 and Following Day (1852), GB-Lbl: S.C.P. 27 (6); Catalogue of 1900 Engraved Music Plates . . . and a Collection of Ancient and Modern Music to which are added the Concluding Portion of the Stock of Messrs. Calkin and Budd, of Pall Mall including . . . Many Curious Books from the Library of the Late John Stafford Smith, Esq … which will be Sold by Auction by Messrs Puttick and Simpson . . . on Wednesday, August 17th, 1853 and Following Day (1853), GB-Lbl: S.C.P. 32 (9).
142 King, Some British Collectors of Music, 62–3, 97; Duckles, ‘Musicology’, 487, 495–6; R. H. Legge, ‘Rimbault, Edward Francis (1816–1876)’, rev. Richard Turbet, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, online edn, 2005) www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/23652. Accessed 20/08/2017; W.H. Husk and Nicholas Temperley, ‘Rimbault, Edward’, Grove Music Online www.oxfordmusiconline.com/subscriber/article/grove/music/23477 (Accessed 20 August 2017).
143 W. G. Hiscock, ‘Christ Church Missing Books, II: Printed Music’, Times Literary Supplement (11 Feb 1939), 96; P. M. Young: ‘The Notorious Dr Rimbault (1816–1876)’, BIOS: Journal of the British Institute of Organ Studies, 22 (1998), 126–38.
144 A. Hyatt King, ed., Catalogue of the Music Library of Edward Francis Rimbault sold at London 31 July–7 August 1877 with the Library of Dr. Rainbeau (Buren. 1975), 92. The sale also included Add. MS 31226 as item 1375 on the same day (90), when it was bought by ‘Robinson’ for two shillings.
145 King, ed., Catalogue of the Music Library of Edward Francis Rimbault, 92. James D. Brown and Stephen S. Stratton, British Musical Biography: A Dictionary of Musical Artists, Authors and Composers, Born in Britain and its Colonies (Birmingham, 1897), 105; P.R. Harris, A History of the British Museum Library (London, 1998), 337.
146 Harris, History of the British Museum Library, 439.
147 30480, fol. [90]r; 30481, fol. 94r; 30482, fol. [88]r; 30483, fol. [92]r; 30484, fol. [23]r.
148 For example GB-Ob: MS Tenbury 389 and the McGhie partbook (private collection); GB-Ob: Mus. Sch. e. 423; GB-Och: Mus. 979-83 (Baldwin Partbooks); GB-Och: Mus. 984-8 (Dow Partbooks); GB-Ob: MS Tenbury 1486 and Wilmott (private collection); and the Paston collection.
149 Robert Dow, John Sadler and John Baldwin’s sets are: GB-Och: Mus. 984-8, GB-Ob: Mus. e. 1-5 and GB-Och: Mus. 979-83. Examples of Tudor partbook miscellanies yet to receive detail, holistic studies include GB-Ckc: Rowe 316; GB-Lbl: Add. MS 22597; GB-Lbl: Add. MS 32377; GB-Lbl: Harley 7578; GB-LPro: SP1-246; GB-Ob: MS Tenbury 1464; and US-Ws: V.a.408.