The English Spinet with Particular Reference to the Schools of Keene and Hitchcock
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The English Spinet with particular reference to The Schools of Keene and Hitchcock A Dissertation Submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy by Peter Geoffrey Mole MA MPhil The University of Edinburgh 2009 i For my mother - 90 not out and still at the crease iii Abstract Organological inspections of a representative sample of English spinets made during the period 1680-1740 have been performed. The sample includes instruments made by Stephen Keene and his co-workers, by the Hitchcock family firm, and by selected other makers. Analysis of the Keene instruments allows them to be classified into four groups reflecting their development in size and compass over time. In contrast, little development is discernible in spinets from the Hitchcock workshop: rather, the instruments can be seen to have existed as two basic models – a mitred tail model and a serpentine tail one. Some variations and hybrids are recognisable in both models. The commonly held view that the spinet was merely a cheap and compact substitute for the harpsichord, even during the late-Stuart and early-Georgian period, is refuted by reference to archival and iconographic evidence of the status in society of those who bought the instruments. iv Table of Contents Title Page Dedication i Declaration ii Abstract iii Table of Contents iv Acknowledgements xii 1. Introduction 1. The Research 1 2. The Research Methodology 4 3. Conventions 7 4. The Argument 9 5. The Literature 11 6. The Structure of the Dissertation 12 7. Published Material 16 2. Late-Stuart England 1. Introduction 19 a. The Economy & Immigrant Workers 21 b. Politics and Religion 24 c. The Influence of the Royal Court 25 d. The Great Fire of 1666 28 2. Education, Apprenticeship and the Craft Companies 30 a. Education 31 b. Apprenticeship 32 c. The Joiners and Haberdashers Companies 34 d. Business Activities 37 3. Summary 41 3. The Spinet in Late-Stuart and Early-Georgian England 1. The Origins of the Design 43 2. The Spinet in English Musical Culture 54 v a. Spinet and Harpsichord Ownership 54 b. Early Owners 57 c. Music. Music Publishing, and Keyboard Players 65 3. Summary 72 4. The School of Keene 1. Introduction 74 2. Stephen Keene 75 3. Edward Blunt 82 4. Thomas Barton 86 5. Charles Brackley 88 6. The Keene Workshop 89 7. Keene’s Competitors 93 a. Charles Haward 93 b. John Player 95 c. Benjamin Sison 97 d. Benjamin Slade 98 e. Keene’s Former Apprentices 99 8. Summary 100 5. Spinets from the School of Keene 1. Introduction 103 2. The ‘Standard’ Instruments 112 a. The Keene spinet of 1707 112 b. Other Standard Instruments 121 c. The Standard Instruments – General Characteristics 124 3. The Early Instruments 129 a. The Keene spinet at the Royal College of Music 129 b. The Keene spinet at Hall i’ th’ Wood, Bolton 139 c. The Early Spinets – General Characteristics 150 vi 4. The Transitional Instruments 152 a. The Keene spinet of 1711 152 b. Other Transitional Instruments 160 5. The Five-Octave Spinets 163 6. Summary, and the Proposed Classification 169 6. The School of Hitchcock 1. Introduction 173 2. The Hitchcock Family 175 a. Thomas Hitchcock the Elder 178 b. ‘Thomas Hitchcock Free 1701’ 184 c. Thomas Hitchcock the Younger 187 d. John Hitchcock 189 3. The Hitchcock Workshop 192 a. Establishment 192 b. Hitchcock Workers 194 4. Summary 205 7. Spinets from the School of Hitchcock 1. Introduction 207 2. Production from the Hitchcock Workshop 207 a. Hitchcock Inscriptions 212 b. The Serial Number/Date Correlation 215 3. The Two Models of Hitchcock Spinet 223 a. Plan Form 223 b. Veneering 226 c. Stands 231 d. The Mitred-Tail Model 235 e. The Serpentine-Tail Model 242 4. Model Development 248 a. Case Size 248 b. Special Decorative Features 251 c. Special Features affecting Musical Performance 254 vii 5. The Influence of Slade 260 6. The Hitchcocks’ Competitors 262 7. Summary 264 8. Design Features 1. Introduction 266 2. Case Size and Plan Form 267 3. The Register 277 4. Compass 280 a. Pre-1710 Spinets 283 b. Transitional Spinets (1711-1718) 286 c. Post-1720 Spinets 287 d. Compass and Published Music 290 5. Pitch 294 6. Stringing 301 a. The String-Band and Case Design 301 b. Scaling and Design Note 304 c. Stringing Material 307 d. Plucking Point 309 7. Summary 311 9. Decoration 1. Introduction 314 2. Raw Materials 314 a. Walnut 315 b. Ebony 316 c. Brass 317 d. Ivory 319 3. Veneers and Marquetry Cartouches 320 4. Brass Furniture 332 5. Keyboards 341 a. Late-Stuart Spinets 341 b. Early-Georgian Spinets 346 6. Stands 349 viii 7. Summary 354 10. Conclusions and Suggestions for Further Research 1. Introduction and Re-capitulation of the Objectives 357 2. The Spinet’s Place in English Musical Culture 359 3. Organological Characterisation and Comparison 365 a. The School of Keene 365 b. The Development of Spinets from the School of Keene 367 c. The School of Hitchcock 371 d. The Hitchcocks’ Two Models 374 4. Design and Decoration in Context 377 5. Methodological Conclusions 380 6. Further Research 381 ix Volume II Appendix 1 1. The Parts of an English Spinet 383 2. Details of the Research Methodology 388 Appendix 2 Apprenticeship Relationships of Spinet Makers 392 Appendix 3 The John Player chinoiserie-painted spinet 393 Appendix 4 The Grant of Probate to the Will of Stephen Keene 394 Transcript of the Grant 395 The Family Tree of the Keenes 397 Images of the Records relating to Stephen Keene 398 The Anonymous Seventeenth-Century Spinet at the Royal Northern College of Music 399 The Slade Spinet at the Red Lodge Museum, Bristol 406 The Slade Spinet at the Bate Collection, University of Oxford 411 The Slade Spinet sold at Bonhams 417 The Slade Spinet sold at Christies 419 Appendix 5 The 1700 Keene Spinet at Colonial Williamsburg 420 The Undated Keene & Blunt Spinet privately owned in Lancaster 427 The 1703 Edward Blunt Spinet 431 The 1704 Keene Spinet at the University of Edinburgh 432 The Keene Spinet at the Cantos Musical Foundation, Calgary, Alberta 441 The Keene Spinet at the Musical Instrument Museum, Phoenix, Arizona 443 x The Keene & Brackley Spinet 448 The Charles Brackley Spinet privately owned in Philadelphia 457 The 1724 Thomas Barton Spinet 463 The Anonymous 1708 Spinet at the Royal College of Music 466 Appendix 6 Images of the Records of the Joiners and Haberdashers Companies 472 Appendix 7 1. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 471 473 2. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1007 478 3. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1075 481 4. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1143 482 5. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1193 484 6. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1228 486 7. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1243 488 8. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1287 492 9. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1289 494 10. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1335 495 11. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1396 501 12. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1460 505 13. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1518 507 14. John Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1520 509 15. Thomas Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1547 512 16. John Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1570 514 17. John Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1630 516 18. John Hitchcock Spinet Serial No. 1676 517 19. The John Hitchcock Spinet at the Musikhistorisk Museum Copenhagen 523 20. The John Hitchcock Spinet at Yale University 525 xi Appendix Eight 1. The John Player Spinet at York Castle 527 2. The John Player Spinet at Sizergh Castle 534 Extracts from the Long Forms Keene Spinets - Case Measurements LFSKHW, LFSKRCM, LFK&Bl and LFSK1700CW 536 LFSK1704, LFSK1707, LFSK1711 and LFK&Br 537 Keene Spinets - Keyboard and Stringing LFSKHW 538 LFSKRCM 539 LFSK1700CW 540 LFSK1704 541 LFSK1707 542 LFSK1711 543 LFK&Br 544 Hitchcock Spinets - Case Measurements LFTH471, LFTH616, LF1241 and LF1243 545 LFTH1335 and LFJH1676 546 Hitchcock Spinets - Keyboards and Stringing LFTH471 547 LFTH616 548 LFTH1241 549 LFTH1243 550 LFTH1335 551 LFJH1676 552 Accession Numbers of Museum Spinets 553 Bibliography 554 xii Acknowledgements The author wishes to thank all those who have helped him during this research project. Foremost of these are Dr Darryl Martin who has supervised this research. He has responded promptly to any queries, has made comments on portions of early draft texts and has read this dissertation with a critical eye. Dr John Kitchen has given musicological input on many occasions and just as importantly, has given encouragement. Thirdly is of course Maureen Mole, who has been involved in this project from its inception to finality: she has had to temper criticism with tact and praise with circumspection. The support, enthusiasm and knowledge of these three persons have been indispensable. There are many others who have helped. These include, but are not confined to, Emily Azis, Peter Bavington, Peter Barnes, Sheila Barnes, Wendy Barnes, Ture Bergstrom, Colin Booth, Susana Caldeira, Michael Fleming, Miles Hellon, Graham Gadd, Andrew Garrett, David Hitchin, Andy Lamb, David Law, Olaf Kirsch, Darcy Kuronen, Sarah Maultby, Denis McCaldin, Jesse Moffatt, Stephen Morris, Charles Mould, Jenny Nex, Chris Nobbs, Nick Orman, Sandra Penketh, John Raymond, Albert Rice, Malcolm Rose, Daniel Smith, Eleanor Smith, Paul Simmonds, Philip Scott, Tim Thorpe, Graham Wells, The Rt. Hon. The Baroness Willoughby de Eresby, John Watson, Lance Whitehead, John Weston, Anna Wright and Paula Woods. I am most grateful to them for allowing me to use their time, knowledge and experience. Chapter One - 1 Chapter One - Introduction 1. The Research The research reported in this dissertation is primarily an organological study of the English spinet.