Sandra Tuppen Purcell in the Eighteenth Century: Music for The

Sandra Tuppen Purcell in the eighteenth century: music for the ‘Quality, Gentry, and others’ This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Early Music following peer review. The version of record, Sandra Tuppen; Purcell in the 18th century: music for the ‘Quality, Gentry, and others’, Early Music, Volume 43, Issue 2, 1 May 2015, Pages 233–245, is available online at https://academic.oup.com/em/article/43/2/233/398873. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/em/cav012. Abstract Henry Purcell was the only composer of his generation to be honoured with performances of his music at both the Academy of Ancient Music and Concerts of Ancient Music in the 18th century. Both organisations also programmed 18th-century music for The Tempest believing it to be by Purcell. Excerpts from Purcell’s theatre works were performed at the Noblemen and Gentlemen’s Catch Club too, where the Earl of Sandwich and Sir Watkin Williams Wynn introduced much of the Purcell repertoire; Sandwich was also a key figure in the promotion of Purcell’s music at the Concerts of Ancient Music. Although the Academy of Ancient Music’s instrumental parts for King Arthur do not exhibit as many signs of modernisation as do their manuscripts of Dido and Aeneas, some amendments to the musical text are found there, as well as in the Catch Club’s manuscripts of Purcell’s music. Purcell’s works were generally well received by the press, and newspaper reviews provide evidence of concerts of his music taking inspiration – and sometimes performers – from the Concerts of Ancient Music. The misattributed Tempest was seemingly one of the most popular ‘Purcell’ works with late 18th-century audiences; it entered the canon and remained there until Margaret Laurie made a conclusive case against its being by Purcell and suggested John Weldon as the likely composer. Dr. Laurie has also removed 18th-century accretions from the score of King Arthur, and we are now seeing an end to the perpetuation of 18th-century tastes and prejudices in editions of Purcell’s music. _______________________________________________________________________ Introduction The role that 18th-century musical organisations played in the dissemination and performance of Henry Purcell’s music has not hitherto been investigated fully. Yet the activities of 18th-century music antiquarians profoundly influenced thinking about Purcell right through to the middle of the 20th century, and the programming choices of a few key individuals helped propel certain works into the musical canon. In this article I examine the performance history of Purcell’s music in the late 18th century through the activities of three rather different London-based bodies: an antiquarian society, an aristocratic music club and a public concert-giving organisation. They were not the only bodies performing Purcell’s music (a few of his songs were still heard in public concerts, and certain anthems remained a staple of cathedral choirs), but they were at the forefront of a revival of interest in Purcell’s music in the late 18th century, and a clear path can be traced between these three organisations, and thence to performances elsewhere in London and the provinces. The Academy of Ancient Music The organisation founded in 1726 as the Academy of Vocal Music was directed by Johann Christoph Pepusch from the early 1730s to his death in 1752, and under his leadership changed its name to the Academy of Ancient Music.1 This society of professional musicians and gentlemen amateurs met to perform and listen to 16th- and 17th-century music, though it also included contemporary music in its repertoire.2 In 1761, the Academy published a booklet entitled The words of such pieces as are most usually performed by the Academy of Ancient Music. It contains texts for just three of Purcell’s dramatic works (King Arthur, The Indian Queen and Oedipus3) and two anthems, ‘O give thanks unto the Lord’ and ‘O God, thou art my God’. Also attributed to Purcell are Macbeth (by Richard Leveridge) and The Tempest. Margaret Laurie has demonstrated that Purcell almost certainly wrote only the song ‘Dear pretty youth’ for The Tempest, and she has made a persuasive case for John Weldon being the composer of the remainder of the music that became associated with Purcell’s name in the 18th century.4 She notes the existence of a manuscript dating from about 1750, in which the whole work is attributed – seemingly for the first time – to Purcell.5 In whatever way the attribution error originated, the Tempest music was being performed at the Academy’s concerts, with Purcell’s name attached to all of the music, no later than 1761 (the date of the Academy wordbook). Although only these few works by or attributed to Purcell were included in the Academy wordbook, several of them are substantial pieces. In fact, all the large-scale works included therein are attributed to either Handel or Purcell, suggesting that Purcell's reputation was still strong enough in the 1760s for him to take the main billing on a concert programme. These were not mere excerpts: the King Arthur entry in the wordbook contains the words for all the sung portions of the work, apart from ‘Your hay it is mow’d’ and the last two verses of ‘Come, if you dare’.6 Similarly, the text for The Indian Queen contains all the sung elements of that work apart from the final masque, for which Daniel Purcell composed the music. King Arthur had been performed by the Academy as early as the 1740s,7 and the sacrifice music from Act V of The Indian Queen in 1746.8 The Academy seemingly first performed Purcell’s Te Deum in 1768,9 and in 1774 it gave what was probably its first performance of Dido and Aeneas.10 Tim Eggington notes that, in 1784, when the Academy was transformed from a private society into a subscription concert series, there was a move towards a lighter type of programme, with short arias replacing lengthy choral works.11 In 1786 someone evidently thought that the Academy was no longer according Purcell’s music the attention it deserved. The following letter was printed in The general advertiser on 17 March of that year: From my infernal abode, March 13. To the Managers of the Academy of Ancient Music at Freemason’s Hall. Gentlemen, Were it not that a nocturnal apparition might be the means of terrifying your fair and innocent wives, and as we spirits affect not the broad and open daylight, I have commissioned a Printer’s Devil to demand of you, why my compositions have been so utterly neglected this season? If I obtain not due redress, and that too speedily, depend on it, you will not find me when you arrive in those regions so disposed to harmony as I was upon earth. Yours, as you behove, The Ghost of Purcell A year later, Purcell’s earthly advocates might have felt better satisfied with the attention he was receiving from the Academy. It gave another performance of Dido and Aeneas, and on 10 February 1787 The gazetteer and new daily advertiser was able to print the following report: The Academy of Ancient Music gave their fifth Concert on Thursday last. The select parts of the Masque in King Arthur displayed the noble simplicity of Purcel’s music. The beauty, the taste, and expression of his melodies can only be equalled by the richness and the fine effect of his harmony. That the Academy held Purcell’s music in higher regard than that of his English contemporaries can be seen by the absence of any of their works from the 1761 wordbook. It includes more works by or attributed to Palestrina than by any other composer excepting Handel, with 17 pieces bearing his name. It also includes the works of other Italians of the 16th and 17th centuries, among them Marenzio and Stradella, and of English composers from the late 16th and early 17th centuries, including Byrd and Gibbons. Works by later English composers, including Croft and Boyce, are also present, but music of other Restoration composers is notable by its absence. The wordbook contains no works of Locke or Blow, nor of any of Purcell’s lesser contemporaries. The Noblemen and Gentlemen’s Catch Club The Noblemen and Gentlemen’s Catch Club was founded in 1761 to encourage the composition and appreciation of glees, catches and canons.12 Its members held meetings in a tavern, where they enjoyed evenings of singing, dining and drinking. The presidency of the club was rotated among its members, with a new president being elected for each meeting; the club also elected professional musicians as ‘privileged members’. The Catch Club offered prizes for the composition of new glees and catches, but also performed a substantial amount of older music, as its archive shows.13 Its manuscript scores, which were copied by its secretary Thomas Warren, reveal not only what was in the club’s repertoire, but also the name of the member who first brought a particular piece to a meeting or selected it for revival (Table 1). Table 1. Catches by and attributed to Purcell in the repertoire of the Noblemen and Gentlemen’s Catch Club, late 18th century. Title Introduced by Revived by ‘Here’s that will challenge all John Montagu, 4th Earl of - the Fair’ Sandwich ‘I gave her cakes and I gave Thomas Warren Lancelot Brown junior (1781) her ale’ and Richard Gamon (1781) ‘Jack thou’rt a toper’ (catch Thomas Arne George Venables-Vernon, 2nd in Bonduca) Baron Vernon (1780) ‘Now we are met and Jonathan Battishill - humours agree’ ‘Once, twice, thrice I Julia Colonel Windus Wills Hill, Earl of Hillsborough tried’ (1781) ‘Sir Walter enjoying his Sandwich Gamon (1781)

Load more