Virdung's Keyboard Illustrations

Author(s): Jacob Eisenberg

Source: The Galpin Society Journal, Vol. 15 (Mar., 1962), pp. 82-88
Published by: Galpin Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/842043
Accessed: 28/10/2008 21:21

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=gal.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Galpin Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Galpin Society
Journal.

http://www.jstor.org
 JACOB EISENBERG

Virdung's Keyboard Illustrations

T HE first work given to music instruments was Musica Getutscht
done in ISII by SebastianVirdung, Priest of Amberg. He occu-
pied IIo pages to tell his story in Student-Teacherdialogue form and
illustratedhis exposition through the use of many woodcuts showing
outline appearancesof instrumentshe knew. Of the woodcuts, those
delineating keyed string-instruments, compose the subject of this
paper. Virdung labelled them 'Clavicordifi, Virginal, Clavicimbali'
and 'Claviciteriu' respectively. Are two of these illustrationsplagued
by an engraver'serror, or did Virdung mean them to be as they are?
As woodcuts, they are rather primitive by present day standards.
Apparently, Virdung ignored the fact that the engraver erred in
setting some extreme keys outside the reach of stringsthey were meant
to serve, as he did several other discrepancies.In the matter of details,
they leave much to be desired.They give no clue to the mechanicsof
their inner structure-a detail he accepted as obvious to his contem-
porary readers, who could examine the instruments in the flesh, as
it were.
Said Virdung:
I will not describehow the 'Clavicordium'and otherinstruments
aremade,thatconcernsarchitecture or pertainsto theprovinceof the
joiner's(cabinetmaker's)work ratherthanto thatof music.
The first of his keyboard string-instruments,he labelled 'Clavicordii'
(Fig. i). It sported seven strings, all of equal length and all tuned in
unison. These seven served 38 keys-23 white diatonics and I5 black
chromatics grouped in two's and three's, from left to right, in the
order of
I, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 2.

In describingthe key-string relationship,Virdung said:

I cannottell the numberof stringsit musthave,but as the instru-
ment ('Clavicordiui')
comesfromthe 'monocordum'... the number
of stringsmakesno difference.The fact is ... they areall of equal
lengthandareall of likepitch-no one stringbeinghigheror lower
pitchedthanany other... Theremustnecessarily be morethanone
string becauseon one alone a playercannotsound a consonance
the keys, 24 were white diatonicsand I6 black chromaticsgrouped in
two's and three's, from left to right, in the order of
I, 3, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2.

1Birginal

FIG. 2-'Virginal'

Claticimal[i
FIG. 3--'Clavicimbalu'

Because the string arrangementsof the 'Virginal' and 'Clavicimbali'

were in orders reversed to each other, writers, to the present day,
considered the 'Clavicimbaliu'illustrationan engraver'serror.
The fourth keyed string-instrumenthe called 'Clavidteriu' (Fig. 4).
Virdung compared it with the 'Virginal'. Yet, because of its manner
of stringing, it might have been, rather, an upright 'Clavicimbalii'.
Its delineation, like that of the 'Clavicimbalui',showed its shortest
(highest pitched) strings to have been at the left.
On the other hand, like both 'Clavicordiu' and 'Virginal', it was
served by 38 keys-23 white diatonicsand 15 black chromaticswhich,
84
 cCuicitcfl

.W-

FIG. 4-'Claviciteriu

like them, were grouped in two's and three's, from left to right, in
the order of
I, 2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 2.
Concerning the 'Claviciteriu',Virdung said:
It is like a 'Virginale'but has stringsof sheepgutas well as quills
which pluck its stringsin harp fashion.It is newly inventedand
I haveseenonly one of them.
That Virdung considered them four distinct instrumentsis plain and
decisive. Said he:
At firstbecomethoroughlyacquainted with the'Clavicordii'.After
that, master the lute-and after that, the flute. You will discover
thatwhatyou havelearnedin masteringthe 'Clavicordiu' will stand
in good steadin learningto playthe organ,the 'Clavizymel' (perhaps
for 'Clavicymbel'),the 'Virginal'andallotherkeyboardinstruments.
Here he plainly disassociatedthe 'Virginal' from the 'Clavicimbali'
which, this time, was spelled 'Clavizymel'. However it was spelled,
none can say squarely that Virdung meant it to be 'Virginal'.
That two spellings, 'ClavicimBala'and 'Clavizymel', appear is not
singular to the printer's setting of Virdung's work. We find 'Clavi-
cordiui,'Clavicordio', 'Clavicordium', 'Clavicordu' and 'Clanicordu'.
There is 'Virginal' and 'Virginale', also 'Monocordo', 'Monocordum'
and 'Monocordi' as well as 'Organu', 'Orgel' and 'Orgeln' as there
are any number of other words set to more than one form of spelling.
In any case, it appearscertain, Virdung meant the 'Virginal'and the
85
'Clavicimbali' to be recognized as differentinstruments.He had them
pictured differently-and he named them differently. The 'Virginal'
had 38 keys and strings respectively; while the 'Clavicimbali' had
40 of each. The bass of the 'Virginal' was at the left; while the
'Clavicimbalu'had its bass at the right.
This latter variance between both instrumentsleads to but a single
conclusion: one was fashioned and tuned in accord with progressive
efforts of his day-the order of moder usage; the other was fashioned
and tuned to satisfydeterminedpuristsof that era-those who followed
classicalancientGreecewhose double-tetrachordtone-nameswere read
downwardin the scale as
A, G, F, E, D, C, B, A.
To be sure, Virdung described the ancient Greek diatesseron-the
interval of a perfectfourth.Said Virdung:
WhenGuidoAretinuswroteon the subjectof the 'monocordo'he
treatedthe diatonicgenusalone.Therefore,the 'Clavicordio'for a
long time hadno morethan20 keys.
Actually, Guido accounted for 22 tones (Fig. 5)-the equivalent
to 20 white diatonic keys and 2 B-flats. The B-flats were alternatives
and remained uncounted because, when they were employed, the
B-naturalswere out of use. Furtheron, Virdung said:

But as otherscamelater,they founda more subtledevice.They

read'Boetium'andafterhim dividedthe 'monocordum' accordingto
the chromaticgenus of which 'Boetius'spokein the 2Ist Chapter
of the FirstBook of his De Musica.(Boethius)pointedout that a
Diatesseronwas composedof two whole tones (steps)and a small
semitone(half-step).

Then, continued Virdung:

Name the lowest key, or the highest,of the diatesseron
interval
of your choice,thencountfrom the lowestto the highest-or from
the highestto the lowest-but alwayscount4 keys for one interval
of thefourth.

Thus, while Virdung gave every indication that he was in sympathy

-with advancing progress which fostered the upwardscale order as
A, B, C, D, E, F, G, A,
he also considered his contemporary purists who espoused the ways
of classicalancientswhose downwardorder of double-tetrachordscale-
tones was as
A, G, F, E, D, C, B, A.
86
 FIG. 5-Guidonian 22-tone Keyboard

As he said, he was asked to write a History-and he did-for people

he knew and about instrumentsthey played (as of the year isII).
Yet, it is not entirely simple to determine 'Which was meant to
be What'.The string-orderof Virdung's 'Virginal' is definitely suited
to the modem order.That of the 'Clavicimbali' bespeaksthe downward
scale order of the ancients-BUT, of the key-ordersin all the Virdung
illustrations including those of the organ-of them all, none agree
with the key-order as shown in Fig. 6 in which Virdung distinctly
names each key, with its lowest pitched tones at the left in the modem
manner. No engraver'serror can be claimed here.
If anything were wrong concerning the 'Clavicimbalu' and the
'Claviciteriu' woodcuts (Figs. 3 and 4), their correction might have
been expected in Luscinius's Musurgiaof I526. Instead, they were

_
1fl lte Q!f5alo
IClbf tfla

FIG. 6-Virdung's keyboardtoneorder

permitted to stand. Luscinius,however, did make some changes in his

employment of Virdung'swoodcuts (or duplicatesthereof):he changed
the names of the instruments either in their respective spellings or
in entirety.
87
 Virdung's Clavicord was delineated with 'Clavicordiu' as a title
appearing close by. Lusciniusspelled it Clavicordium.Virdung's 'Vir-
ginal' was spelled Virginaleby Luscinius. Virdung's 'Clavicimbalii'
was renamed Clavicitheriumby Luscinius; while Virdung's 'Clavici-
terii' was renamed Clavicimbalum by Luscnius.
In short, Virdung-or his printer-employed the abbreviatedLatin
forms while Lusciniusadhered to their spellingsin full, as he reversed
Virdung's instrument labels affixed to 'Clavicmbali' and 'Clavici-
teriu'.
Sir John Hawkins employed the Luscinius work as his source
material and credited it as having been the first work written on the
subject. Writing in his GeneralHistory of the Scienceand Practiceof
Music (London, I776) he included Virdung's 'Clavicordiu'. 'Virginal',
'Clavicimbali' and 'Claviciteriu' exactly as they appeared in the
Virdung work but, as may be expected, he repeatedthe names applied
to them by Lusciniusand in the process of his exposition based upon
the Luscinius work plus other source materials he propagated and
compounded Luscinius'sconfusion of instrumentnames.
Hawkins made no mention of the reversal in the stringing orders
between Figs. 2 and 3 but called them both 'spinnets'. Of Virdung's
'Claviciteriu'(Fig. 4) which, like Luscinius,he called 'Clavicimbalum',
Hawkins said:
The 'Clavicimbalum', next in positionto it (Fig. 4), is no other
than the 'Harpsichord','Clavicimbalum' being the common Latin
name for that instrument;the stringsare here representedin a
perpendicular situation;and there is good reasonto supposethat
the 'harpsichord' was originallyso constructed,notwithstanding
that the upright'harpsichord'has of late been obtrudedupon the
worldas a modeminvention.
Hawkins's efforts were taken up by Edward F. Rimbault who
apparently employed the former's Historyas source material for his
own The Pianoforte,Its Originand Construction (London, i86o). In the
process, Rimbault set out to improve upon his mentor by including
a representationof Virdung's 'Claviciteriui'-but with an improve-
ment: he reversed its string arrangement.He set the long strings at
the left and the shorter treble strings at the right in the modernly
approved manner.
Thereafter, it was not unusual to read about an engraver'serror
perpetratedin Virdung's Musica Getutschtand permitted to stand in
the Lusciniusrendition twenty-five years later.

88