| P I C A 2 |
HISTORICAL DOCUMENT George Groves Article on the 'Concertina' in the First Edition of A Dictionary of Music and Musicians (1878) Introductory Note by ALLAN ATLAS Published by Macmillan & Co. in four volumes over the course of eleven yearsfrom 1878 to 1889Sir George Groves A Dictionary of Music and Musicians (A.D. 1450-1889) is a landmark in English-language musical lexicography. Its main goal was, as stated in a pre-publication announcement, to correct the following situation:
As such, Grove had an agenda: to teach the public (or at least the cultivated portion thereof) about music, specifically the high-brow music that was then in the process of being canonized and that his readers would have heard in the concert hall and upper-class drawing rooms. And among the things that he thought worthwhile informing them about was the concertina. What must strike the present-day concertinist immediatelyand perhaps it would have been noticed even by contemporary readers of the Dictionaryis that Grove accounts for one type of concertina only: the English. Nowhere is there even an allusion to the existence of the Anglo or the Duet, though these would certainly have been known toif not loved and easily distinguished byGroves intelligent inquirer through their presence in such places as street corners and other venues that made up the everyday Victorian soundscape. This, of course, should not surprise us. It is simply a consequence of the English concertinas contemporary presence in the concert hall and upper-class musical circles in general (though by the late 1870s this was already on the wane), its chamber music repertory (cited in part by Grove), and Groves (and thus his Dictionarys) own prejudices and personal tastes. In other words, it was only in the form of the English that the concertina and Groves agenda could share common ground.2 Beyond that, Groves article calls for a few comments with respect to its claims about both the instrument and its repertory. (1) Grove writes that the concertina was patented by the late Sir Charles Wheatstone June 19, 1829. Now there are two patents that are pertinent to Groves claim: No. 5803 of 1829, which deals mainly with the Symphonion, but which alludes to what is at least the drawing-board state of the concertinathough without referring to it by namein its drawings of a bellows-driven instrument; and No. 10041 of 1844, which offers a full-blown description of the English concertina as it then existed. Now even if the 1844 patent is the definitive concertina patent, as Neil Wayne calls it,3 Grove was quite right in dating the original patent from 1829. For instance, when Giulio Regondi performed in Ireland in 1834-1835, The Dublin Evening Post announced his concert of 12 June 1834 as follows: Master G Regondi ... intends to give two Musical Entertainments on the Guitar and on Wheatstones Patent Concertina ....4 Likewise, when Regondi performed at Londons Haymarket on 28 June 1837, his instrument was once again described as the Patent Concertina.5 Moreover, as Stephen Chambers has pointed out, Wheatstones first real competitor, Joseph Scates, set up shop as a concertina manufacturer in his own right in 1844, that is, the very year in which the patent of 1829 would have run its fourteen-year course (and to chalk that up as sheer coincidence strains creditability).6 Finally, we may clinch the case for Grove. As Wheatstones claimed in their price list of 1848, titled The Concertina, A New Musical Instrument ...: No instruments, except those manufactured by Messrs. WHEATSTONE and Co. are constructed with the improvements for which a second Patent [my italics] was obtained by them in February, 1844 ....7 (2) Grove claims that the treble is a doubleaction instrument (producing the same note both on drawing and pressing the bellows), while tenor (about which, more presently), bass, and double bass are singleaction instruments (producing the sound by pressure only). He thus uses the single/double terminology in two different ways: first to distinguish the English treble from the Anglo, on which the buttons produce different pitches depending on the direction of the bellows, and then to identify instruments that sound only when the bellows are being pressed in. It is a confusing use of the single/doubleaction terminology, one that persists even today. (3) With his statement that the tenor concertina is a single-action instrument (that is, that it sounds only when the bellows are going in), Grove opens up a can of worm-like questions at which we can only hint here.8 For instance, the Lachenal price lists of 1859 and 1862 make it clear that Tenor or Baritone concertinas are double-action instruments.9 On the other hand, the Wheatstone sales ledger C1052 (p. 35) records the following transaction for 7 November 1860: Boucher [name of customer] ------ SH [second hand] Single Act[ion] Tenor,10 while Rock Chidley exhibited both single- and double-action tenors at the Great Exhibition of 1851.11 Thus tenors were available as both single- and double-action instruments. But what was the mid-century tenor concertina? As noted above, the Lachenal price lists refer to Tenor or Baritone (my italics), and then go on to describe Tenor or Baritone as sounding one octave lower than the treble, in which case their lowest note would be G. If, however, they shared the same range, how did they differ from one another? To add to the confusion: the Wheatstone price list of 1848 (see note 7) states that the tenor goes down only to c (an octave beneath middle C), so that it does not reach an octave below the treble (as the Lachenal advertisements claim it does), omits any reference to the baritone altogether, and says nothing about the single- or double-action question. And to further muddy the waters: although I am acquainted with a fair amount of Victorian music for baritone concertina (by Regondi and Case, among others), as I am also with the repertory for concertina ensembles (usually calling for some combination of treble(s) and baritone, with bass thrown in on occasion), I have yet to see a piece that called for tenor concertina. On the other hand, John Hill Maccanns The Concertinists Guide (1888), notes that At the Inventions Exhibition Messrs. Wheatstones Recitals ... were greatly admired, and the Quartettes ... were played on the Treble, Tenor [my italics], and Bass Concertinas ... (p. 3);12 the Lachenal sisters performed on trebles, tenor, and bass when they toured Scotland in 1865-1866;13 and William Cawdell speaks of ensembles that consisted of tenors and baritones.14 In the end, then, the term tenor may well have been applied to more than one kind of concertina, may have varied in its meaning from one manufacturer to another, and may have changed at least some of its characteristics as the second half of the century rolled along. (4) Much of the music cited by Grove was seemingly never published and is apparently lost. Thus we no longer have either Moliques concerto in D (while Regondis E-flat concerto survives only in manuscript) or the series of pieces by Silas, while Macfarrens Quintet, the two-movement Romance and Allegro agitato, reaches us only as a single-movement Romance for concertina and piano.15 Groves article on the concertina appeared in A Dictionary of Music and Musicians, vol. I/fasc. 4 (London: Macmillan, 1878), 386-87. ----------------------------------------------
NOTES 1. Preparing for Publication: the Dictionary
of Music... (London: Macmillan, March 1874); cited after Leanne Langley, Roots
of a Tradition: the First Dictionary of Music and Musicians, in George Grove, Music
and Victorian Culture, ed. Michael Musgrave (London: Palgrave/Macmillan, 2003), 169;
Langleys article provides a fascinating glimpse into the Dictionarys concept,
design, editorial processes, publication, and reception. For a well-rounded portrait of
the multi-talented Grove (1820-1900)he was an engineer, biblical scholar, long-time
editor of Macmillans Magazine, secretary of and writer of program notes for the
Crystal Palace concerts, authority on the music of Beethoven, Schubert, and Mendelssohn,
and first director of the Royal College of Musicsee the collection of articles just
cited; for a biography, see Percy Young, George Grove, 1820-1900 (London: Macmillan,
1980). Finally, the Dictionary itself went through five editions as of 1954 (with a change
of name along the way to Groves Dictionary); in 1980 the Dictionary was totally
revamped, expanded, made more global-minded, and renamed The New Grove Dictionary of Music
and Musicians, which in turn has now gone through a second, revised edition of 2001; note
that New Grove/2 is available online at <http://www.grovemusic.com>,
though a subscription is necessary. 2 Indeed, it was not until the Dictionary was
totally overhauled in 1980 as The New Grove Dictionary (see note 1) that it began to
afford proper and ample coverage to the likes of folk, popular, and non-western music
traditions (as well as to the instruments with which those musics are made). Admittedly,
my own article on the concertina in The New Grove/2, vi, 236-40, lavishes more space on
the English than it does on the Anglo and Duet combined. 3. Wayne, The Wheatstone English
Concertina, The Galpin Society Journal, xliv (1991), 120; available on line: <http://www.free-reed.co.uk/galpin/gl.htm>. 4. Cited after Tom Lawrence, Giulio Regondi
and the Concertina in Ireland, Concertina World: International Concertina
Association Newsletter, 411 (July 1998), 22; available on line: <http://www.ucd.ie/pages/99/articles/lawrence.pdf>. 5. My thanks to Alessandro Boris Amisich for
calling the announcement of this performance to my attention. Mr Amisichs article,
Where was Giulio Regondi Born?, will appear in PICA, 3 (2006). 6. Chambers, Louis Lachenal: Engineer
and Concertina Manufacturer, Pt 1, The Free-Reed Journal, 1 (1999), 13, sees
the 1844 patent largely [as] an attempt to prolong the life of [the] . . .original
Symphonium [and concertina] Patent of 1829 (p. 13); available online: <http://www.concertina.com/chambers/chambers-lachenal-part1.htm>;
the two patents are online: <http://www.concertina.com/patents/>. 7. The price list is available in Chambers,
Louis Lachenal, 16-18, the passage just cited appearing on p. 17; the
pricelist is available online: <http://www.concertina.com/pricelists/wheatstone-english/#wheatstone-pricelist-1848-C824>. 8. The brief discussion that follows owes much to a
stimulating exchange of e-mails with Stephen Chambers, Robert Gaskins, and Chris Algar
during the first days of 2005. 9. The price lists are conveniently reproduced in
facsimile in Stephen Chambers, Some Notes on Lachenal Concertina Production and
Serial Numbers, PICA, 1 (2004), 5-6; the pricelists are available online: <http://www.concertina.com/chambers/lachenal-production/>. 10. The entry lacks a serial number for the
instrument. The ledger is housed in the Wayne Archive, The Horniman Museum, London. The
complete series of nineteenth-century Wheatstone ledgers are available online: <http://www.horniman.info>. 11. See Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry
of all Nations, 1851. Official Descriptive and Illustrated Catalogue (London, 1851), 470;
for a convenient summary of all the instruments exhibited at the Exhibition, see Peter and
Ann Mactaggart, Musical Instruments in the 1851 Exhibition (Welwyn [Herts]: Mac & Me,
1986). 12. Maccanns Guide is available online: <http://www.concertina.com/maccann-duet/Maccann-Concertinists-Guide.pdf>.
13. My thanks to Robert Gaskins for this
information; Mr Gaskins is preparing his research on the sisters Scottish tour for
publication online: <http://www.concertina.com/gaskins/lachenal-sisters/>;
see also the article by Faye Debenham and Randall C. Merris
in this issue of PICA. 15. For further information on these pieces, see
Allan W. Atlas, The Wheatstone English Concertina in Victorian England (Oxford: Clarendon
Press, 1996), 58-68; available online: <http://www.questia.com>
(by subscription, though one can preview things).
|
|