The Renaissance Flutes of the Biblioteca Capitolare of Verona: The Structure of a 'Pifaro'

Author(s): Filadelfio Puglisi

Source: The Galpin Society Journal, Vol. 32 (May, 1979), pp. 24-37
Published by: Galpin Society
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/841534
Accessed: 22-06-2019 23:54 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

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

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 FILADELFIO PUGLISI

The Renaissance Flutes of t

Biblioteca Capitolare of Ve
the Structure of a 'Pifaro'

T HE Biblioteca Capitolare of Verona owns a small collection of

ancient musical instruments among which there is a group of
eight renaissance transverse flutes: six straight cylindrical one-piece
tenors and two two-piece basses, of the type illustrated by Praetorius.
Many are in quite good condition and lend themselves very well to a
study of those fine geometrical characteristics that typify this kind of
instrument. I have taken measurements of all eight, regardless of
whether they are playable or not, and give here the complete set of
dimensions together with a short description and some comments on
the technological details.
It should be pointed out that until recently the Biblioteca Capitolare
also housed the much better-known collection of instruments belong-
ing to the Accademia Filarmonica of the same city, a collection now
restored and transferred to the premises of the Accademia. The Biblio-
teca retains only the instruments belonging to the Capitolo of the
Cathedral, formerly used in the service of the Cathedral by the Scuola
degli Accoliti and the Cappella del Duomo, who were particularly
active from the 15th to the I7th centuries. Probably during the I8th
century, when they were already in disuse, they were transferred to the
Biblioteca.1 The first document mentioning a donation of musical
instruments to the Capitolo for use in the Scuola degli Accoliti and
the Cappella of the Cathedral is a will of 1631. The names of the
instruments are not given here but are specified in later inventories
(1640 and 1659) of the instruments used by the Scuola degli Accoliti,
with the note that they are those donated in 1631. Here we find the
following 'pifari' (transverse flutes):
-Due pifari grandi di busso mal all'ordine
-Cinque pifari concertati in cassa corame
-Dieci pifari concertati in cassa corame
-Cinque pifari in cassa corame,
thus twenty-two in all. Since the total donation of 1631 is of 60o instru-
ments, both string and wind, this proportion gives an idea of the

24

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
diffusion of the transverse flute in the musical scene in and around
Verona at the beginning of the I7th century. No other inventories
seem to have survived.
We cannot, of course, know if the transverse flutes that have come
down to us are those donated in 1631. However, it is reasonable to
assume that six of them belong to the beginning of the I7th century,
as will be shown later.

DESCRIPTION

The numbers in the following list are assigned by

author, since these instruments have never been inventor
shows them all. Nomenclature is the usual one (see note 2
ments in millimetres. The marks can be seen in Plate VI a
compared with those reproduced by F. von Huene in GSJ

I Tenor. Mark: crowned eagle, below mouth-hole.

overall length 629. Boxwood, no sign of varnish.
Playable condition. Lowest note d' about half a semit
modern pitch. Mouth-hole probably untouched.

2 Tenor.
632.5. Mark:
Boxwood, no\(. below
sign mouth-hole. One piece, o
of varnish.
Playable condition. Lowest note d' at about half a sem
modern pitch. Mouth-hole shows some re-undercutt
edges.

3 Tenor. Mark: (V below mouth-hole. One piece, overall length

631. Boxwood, no sign of varnish. Warped (gmm of deflection at
mid-length on a horizontal plane).
Playable condition. Lowest note d' at about half a semitone below
modern pitch. Mouth-hole probably untouched.
4 Tenor. Mark: C+RAFI and griffin, these above mouth-hole; griffin
only repeated between fingerholes 3 and 4. One piece, overall length
648. Boxwood (?), no sign of varnish, dark surface. Two spiral
grooves winding round body, made to house a repairing string.
Lowest 21 mm turned down to accept a reinforcing sleeve, now lost.
Not playable due to several long splits in lower half of body. Mouth-
hole tampered with.
5 Tenor. Mark: AA below mouth-hole. One piece, overall length
630. Maple. No sign of varnish, dark surface. Many wormholes.
Active woodworm.
Very poor playable condition. Lowest note d' (obtainable with
difficulty) at about half a semitone below modern pitch. All holes
badly tampered with.

25

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
6 Tenor. Mark: AA below mouth-hole. Identical with No. 5 but
overall length 628.

7 Bass. Mark: V( below mouth-hole. Two picces, total assembled

length 932. Boxwood (?). No sign of varnish. Socket in body rein-
forced by raised wood rings.
Unplayable due to split in socket. Mouth-hole in good condition,
except for slight re-undercutting at inside edge.
8 Bass. Mark: AA below mouth-hole, repeated below socket. Two
pieces, total assembled length 902. Maple, no sign of varnish, dark
surface. Many wormholes. Active woodworm. Tenon and socket
bear sleeves of horny, green material.
Unplayable due to splits in tenon and socket. All holes badly tampered
with.

Some of these instruments can be associated with each other through

similarities of mark, wood, craftsmanship and condition. One group
is formed by bass No. 7 with tenors 2 and 3, and a second group by
bass No. 8 with tenors 5 and 6. We say 'group' and not 'consort'
because the pitch of the basses cannot be definitely tested due to the
cracks in their sockets. An idea of the period of construction of these
two groups of flutes can be obtained from the way the sockets of the
basses are reinforced (see Plates V and VII. Bass No. 7 has a series of
raised wood rings, and No. 8 a wood ring followed by a decorative
sleeve. If these are assumed to be early 17th-century features (cf.
Praetorius, De Organographia, P1. IX), it is reasonable to think that these
two basses, together with the two pairs of associated tenors, were in the
1631 donation.
The Rafi shows an interesting peculiarity. It is clearly C. Rafi.
Moreover, between the initial and the name is inserted a small trefoil
with a stem, of the type appearing on so many renaissance instruments,
and in particular on some transverse flutes of the Accademia Filar-
monica (cf. the similar mark on Brussels No. 1066). This latter collec-
tion also owns a Rafi, but the initial is clearly a G instead of a C and
there is no trefoil (see Castellani, GSJ XXV, 1972, P1. VIII a). In both
appears a coat of arms with the griffin of Lyon. This suggests more
than one person of the same family working in the same city, or work-
shop, perhaps over a period of time.
The tenors are all in d' about a semitone below A= 440.
Undamaged instruments like Nos. I, 2 and 3 speak with great
facility. They have a two-octave compass with some unreliable higher
notes up to g"'. Tenors 5 and 6 have mouth-holes badly damaged and
sound with great difficulty. Basses cannot be played because of the
problems in the socket.
26

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 DIMENSIONS

Figs. I and 2 show where dimensions are taken and Tab

give the corresponding values. All hole distances are from
of the holes. Where ovalling has occurred, both maxim
minimum axes are given. Owing to uneveness of wood
bottom of the instruments and to nicks at the edges of
precision of longitudinal distances is to the nearest 0.5 mm.
ing external and internal diameters and hole diameters, I h
to keep to the nearest o. mm even if many times rough
wood and bad hole-rims make such accuracy unnecessary.

TENOR BASS

--
kb

t.--

7-x
k iW

3 v-rt-i,
5 g

4 g

54,

O -

FIG. I Location qof

FIG. 2 Locati
dimensions for
dimensions
tenor flutes. bass flutes.

27

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 TABLE Ia. DIMENSIONS OF TENOR FLU
Location I 2 3
in Fig.I
a overall length 629.0 632.5 63I.0
b speaking length 540.0 545-5 544.5 5
c hole I to bottom 295.0 304.0 303.5
d hole 2 to bottom 256.5 262.0 262.0
e hole 3 to bottom 219.o 226.0 226.0
f hole 4 to bottom 170.0 178.0 178.0
g hole 5 to bottom 134-5 137.5 137.5
h hole 6 to bottom 98.0 99.5 99.
i external diameters at top max 26.6 24.
min 26.6 24.2
j external diameters at mouth-hole max 26.1
mim 25-9 25.2
k external diameters at hole I max 24.7 24
min 24.7 24.3
1 external diameters at hole 6 max 24.3 24
min 24.0 24.1
Im external diameters at bottom max 24.6 23
min 24.4 23.6
n internal diameters at top max 17.7 17.
min 17.4 17.7
o internal diameters at bottom max 17.7 17
min 17.4 17.2
p plug to bottom 562.0 559.5 557.0
q plug to top 55.8 51.8 57.0
This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 TABLE Ib. DIMENSIONS OF TENOR FLUTES

I 2 3 4 5 6

Diameters flongitudinal 7.7 7.6 8.o 7.9 8.1 7.9

of mouth-hole transverse 7.9 7.9 8.2 8.5 8.3 8.3
Diameters of hole No. I 6.8 6.3 6.5 7.1 6.9 6.9
6.6 6.o 6.2 7.2 6.8 7.0
No. 2 6.5 6.1 6.3 6.6 7.0 7.0
6.3 5.9 6.1 5.8 6.8 6.9
No. 3 5.5 5.7 5.8 6.7 6.6 6.6
5.4 5.5 5-4 6.8 6.5 6.6
No. 4 6.9 6.4 6.5 6.9 7.0 7.1I
6.8 6.2 6.2 7.2 7.0 7.2
No. 5 6.5 6.4 6.4 6.8 7.I 7.I
6.5 6.o 6.2 7.4 6.9 6.8
No. 6 6.4 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.4 6.6
6.2 6.o 6.2 6.8 6.5 6.4

TABLE 2a. DIMENSIONS OF BASS FLUTES

Location 7 8
in Fig 2

a shoulder of tenon to top of head 291.0 272.0

b shoulder of tenon to mouth-hole 175.0 165.5
c overall length of body joint 641.0 630.0

d hole I to bottom of body 437.0 435.0

e hole 2 to bottom of body 394.0 388.5
f hole 3 to bottom of body 357-5 352.0
g hole 4 to bottom of body 264.0 255.o
h hole 5 to bottom of body 221.0 215.5
i hole 6 to bottom of body 186.5 184.0
j external diameter at top of head joint max 34.1 32.3
min 34.0 32.2

k external diameter at mouth-hole max 34.8 33.5

min 34.6 33.4
1 external diameter above tenon max 33.0 -
min 32-4 -
m external diameter at hole I max 32.6 32.4
min 32-5 32.4
n external diameter at hole 6 max 32.2 32.3
min 32.2 32.2

29

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 TABLE 2a (continued)

o external diameter at bottom of body max 31.6 31.2

min 31.6 31.1
p internal diameter at top of head max 23.2 22.9
min 23.0 22.3
q internal diameter at bottom of head max 22.9 22.8
min 22.8 22.4

r internal diameter at bottom of body max 22.8 22.4

min 22.5 22.2
s plug to top of head 82.5 70.5
t plug to shoulder of tenon 19o.8 188.o
u length of tenon 35.2 29.0*
v external diameter at bottom of tenon max 28.3 27.0
min 27.5 26.8
w internal diameter at top of socket max 28.8 27.2
min 28.5 26.9
x internal depth of socket** 35-4 30.0
*Somewhat unreliable: part of the tenon is prevented from en
by a decorative sleeve which could have been moved from
**Length from top rim to beginning of mitering transition t
length is b+c (equal to 816 mm for No. 7 and 795.5 for No

TABLE 2b. DIMENSIONS OF BASS FLUTES

7 8

Diameters
transverse 9.5 9.7
Diameters of hole No. I 8.0 6.8
7.6 6.8
,, No. 2 7.7 7.3
7.5 7-4
,, No. 3 5-7 5.6
5.0 6.2
,, No. 4 7.9 7.4
7.6 7.4
,, No. 5 6.I 7.6
5.8 7.7
,, No. 6* 6.4 6.2
5.8 6.1

*Slanting inside towards botto

30

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 STRUCTURAL DETAILS
Here follow some comments on the structure of these instru
stressing uniformities shared by flutes with different mar
common knowledge that the simplicity of the renaissance tran
flute is only apparent. The design is very refined, and this is eas
when the above set of data is reviewed.

External turning and wall thickness

The outsides of all instruments appear slightly conical, thicke
mouth-hole and tapering down towards the bottom. This t
serves as a careful control of wall thickness at the holes. Indee
closer examination it is only from the mouth-hole down to th
fingerhole that we find a smoothly decreasing external taperi
portions of the flutes above the mouth-hole and below the 6th
hole show less regularity. They may both flare a little as does
or more commonly taper down as does No. 2. Table 3 give
thicknesses at these two locations, calculated by taking for th
the average of all available measures, and the outside diame
average of the maximum and minimum. For instruments
same size, both absolute values and ratios are quite close. It
worthy also that this tapering exists with the same characteri
the two basses and it passes smoothly from head joint to body
the raised wood rings at the tenon-socket connection appe
independent superimposed feature to this tapering.

TABLE 3

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
crowned

wall
eagle
thickness
.\.V V

a
at mouth-hole 4.2 4.2 4.I 4.4 4.3 4.5 5-9 5.5
wall thickness
at 6th fingerhole 3.3 3.5 3.0 3.1 3.5 3.5 4.7 4.9
b

ratio a/b 1.27 1.20 1.37 1.42 1.23 1.28 1.25 1.12

Tenors Basses

31

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Bore

A check with an internal caliper was made only on tenor No. I:

internal diameters are everywhere between 17.4 and 17.7. The differ-
ence of 0.3 mm falls within estimated error of measure and wood
differential shrinkage, and bore can be considered cylindrical.4

Ratio speaking length/bore

Figures for this important acoustical data are in Table 4 below and
again show similarity between instruments of the same size. Bore
diameter was obtained as explained for Table 3.

TABLE 4

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
crowned

Speaking
eagle )VV ...(
length
Ratio
Bore 30.8 31.7 31.5 30.9 31.3 31.5 35-7 35-4
diameter

'IFenors Basses

Overall and speaking lengths

In all instruments, the distanc
is much greater than that n
suggested that it has the aesth
between the 6th fingerhole a
the flutes of the Biblioteca Cap
those two lengths. Instead, the
of which the distance betwee
remarkably constant:

TABLE 5

I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
crowned

overall eagle )(V( (V

length
Ratio p I.I6 6 I. I.6 I.i8 1.17 I.I6 I.I4 1.13
speaking
length

Tenors Basses

32

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 : : -., - : -: -- ,, - : ;.. :: : : I- , - ,-~~j~i~::: -i:, .:....-_ .. ~1B~ :~: ::i::-- -:I: iil-::::-i-::--

::::i --,.
-: :-:i :: : :: -.-.-.. i-- :
__:-i:_-

ii:,i:-: i:i:iiiiiiiii~::iii:i-ii:

:::::::-::::-:-: ::i::::':'
:::::-:: i:i: .:.:,-... -?I~ ::: ::: : -::::--? -
:i :,:,::::- -:

-I--i -I--i-ll-i:-l-: j--j

-:-:: - :: ::

: : ::::::i:liill:-:-_::--:: : ~f~j-~i - !~:~:;-il::ilil~l:~?-:-l::::::-:--;-!:r:

---:-- ---;-: -_

: :: :::i:-::--::--:i:

;?:?l~~i : -:~~t ;. i i::l~~~~ar~i

,e
~ i;.--i-:_ ,-.,,.--_ :.
:
,: - , -----..-
i;ii .,:., i::ii:-i:iiii-iii-ii

: i::i----;_ --~ I- -
::: : ,

-I--:::;:-'-i:liill--i~i~i~' :---:::::I:::?::-:!:II i~i~i~ :: - -- .. :li:::-::::~8~ I: : I::: : 1- -. i , - -. -? i::--i :i~ :: : I-i: :::i: ::::::-:I:::~s~B~:: ::: :i:i:'-~l' -i-'-il:-ll:lil-:l:--ilii!::::i--
------:: ii ..
; "i-i - i
--- :-----iir ._,
:::::i::l:-:-i!:
i~al -. ii.: I _. .
-:- i -::::::
-: -
:
. -

: : : :
:
,-i ,.. .;:-:-.: ..-.,.. ,-
- 8~
,....... ::-i::-::::--:: i:-:gl~BH~aB~-: ----:i-:::::-:i:--:?i:iii::i;s88~PS? , :,: :-::--::--:i::-:i-:i:i::i::i~!- : : -- :,,:, :i::::: ::-::::-: :: i::::: ::::':i-:-:::i:_--:i-i-:~-aBB~sl~: :::: ::,- :: --:::--i:i_

:-:-::::: ::: :-: -:-:

i - :-: 1!11-

: :-:-: . .

i: i, ,i i i -iii --,i i_::i-i_-:iiii

ii;iii~iiiliilii-iiI: ii: ---i:-;--i :I--iii- ni~i~iiiiiia:-_l::::~ iii~iii~iiiiiiii-'i:

ii ,i.:.s..s iiiiiiiibi ., I::::::?:::::I---I-
iii--iii-iiiiiii . iiiii~~ ,ii iii iii;iii ..... i _: . ..: .:':::::" 'i iiii i; i;ii iii:iii -.iiiiiiiiiii-i ii:
iiii iii i:iiiiii:i? : :::::::::::_ .:: :,:. .,. .,
:. : :, ,: :, ,
'"":':i:iiiiii-iii:iiii:iiiii:: :._?-
.:---. ,:-,
-i:i:ii:i:i -.:..:: ,..,, :--_,,::.
::::::-:::-i-_:- ,:--:,:: ,: :
n-:-:::-
::-i:--i-i---i-i-i:r :::-:-:i_:::_:-:.:i
i~-":--_:--:'-:-:-i---i-_-: ::::::-:::-::-j~~
::::::;:::::: ::::,:,:: ::: ::::-:--_-_a-: :__ :::ii:-:'::-:-::::'-
---------" ::-?---(-:-I -:-'ii-iiii-iii~iii~ii:iiiiiii:Bi.;i-ii:i-i-r:i-i:i~--ts:i
i-ii-iiiizi~iir-iii

-----:--;_----::.:-?-:-:-_--_---:--:-:: --- -::--:: _-::-::::-:-:--:::--_-:-:i--i-i--_i::--: : ::-_::- --:-:'-:--I--:-:-_-:--.:_-:-_--:--::---: ::-:::::::: :

PLATE V

The Renaissance transverseflutes of the Biblioteca Capitolare of

Left to right: instruments Nos. 1 to 8

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ii~ ~il i! iiiii : ...

i !!~~i'(i~iii i!!, i ........

PLATE VI

The Renaissance transverse flutes of t

Marks on tenor flutes: (a) No. 1, (b) No

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ... ?1 iiiiI i:~i
,~ :: `i / i~ii~~

:: '"i :-i!ii
":?-: :::-:i: .: l: i!l
ii li iiiii :

(b).

PLATE VII

The Renaissance transverse flutes of t

Tenon and socket detail of(a) ba

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Mouth-hole
This appears to be the most critical detail. Despite tampering, re-
undercutting etc., the geometry is fairly constant in the mouth-holes
of all these eight flutes. I will only try to give here a qualitative des-
cription with a few indications of actual dimensions. Nomenclature
as in Fig. 3 below.
The mouth-holes are slightly elliptical, with the major axis either
in a transverse position or rotated clockwise by an angle co for a few
degrees. Angles fo and go of the cross section are around io0 to 200
and never so slanting as not to leave a distinct rim where embouchure
finishes and bore starts. In the longitudinal section the slope do of the
top internal wall is very small, sometimes almost vertical, while the
opposite wall slope eo is much more slanting (300 would be a likely
value). Diameters of mouth-holes are all very small, and not so
scattered in range, despite all retouching and tampering.

MOUTH-HOLE

longitudinal section

ao

transverse section

FIG. 3 Notation ofcharacteristic angles ofembouchure.

Fingerholes
All fingerholes are moderately undercut. All have the vertical axis
perpendicular to the axis of the bore of the instrument except, as
expected, fingerholes 3 and 6 of the two basses, where the axis slopes
inside towards the bottom as noted in Table 2b.

33

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Plugs
These movable items are unlikely to be original. All seem to be
cork, but the dirt and dust inside the instruments prevents sure iden-
tification.

Tenon-socket connection of bass transverse flutes

The socket of No. 7 is strengthened by raised wood rings (which
apparently did not work: the top io mm has been levelled off and a
reinforcing sleeve, now lost, was put on, since remains of glue can be
seen). No. 8 has two decorative sleeves (one on the head and one on
the body) of some kind of horny green material. These sleeves are
probably original, since if they were strengthening devices added later
something stronger would have been used, perhaps metal rings. These
sleeves instead have had hardly any reinforcing value and they are
split in as many locations as the wood underneath.
I have re-drawn a section through tenon-socket in Figs. 4 and 5 in
order to show internal design. Fitting is very tight, even if the sockets
of both flutes are split, and it is improbable that there has ever been
room for thread lapping. Similar observations were made on the two
bass flutes studied by Castellani and by Halfpenny (see note 4). Both
tenons have several equidistant grooves, roughly engraved in No. 7
and barely scratched in No. 8. Mitering at bottom of tenons and
sockets is very neatly done. Probably the idea was to have the mitered

TRAVERSA 7

HEAD JOINT BODY JOINT

0 0 0 30:o 40 so mm

FIG. 4 Details of

34

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 TRAVERSA 8

HEAD JOINT BODY JOINT

o o

0 70 20 30 40 so mn

FIG. 5 Details o

tenon-bottom
of the body joi
of tuning the f
Finally, the un
the eight renai
idea of a 'trad
involved. The p
instruments w
this tradition
renaissance tra
musical aspect o

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to thank Bob Marvin for his suggestions and Marcello Caste
pointing out Ganassi's passage quoted in note 3, and Don Giuseppe Z
for allowing me to measure the instruments of the Biblioteca Capit

NOTES

I See G. Turrini, Il Patrimonio Musicale Della Biblioteca Capitolare di

dal Secolo XV al XIX, Verona, 1952. All these instruments including th
transverse flutes, were published by Turrini (with old inventories and a
graph), to whom I am indebted for these historical notes.

35

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 2 To prevent mistakes, I will give them here:
top

I horizontal

Z.

transverse

oI
bottom

3 With regard to marks on renaissance woodwinds, the English reader

should note that in Ganassi, Fontegara, we find a suggestion that, at least at
certain time, the mark was the maker's (and not that of the pitch or of the city):
'E cosi ti mostrero la via de piu maestri per li segni quali hanno differenti li
quali segni saranno dimostrati ne la figura di flauti' (6th Carta of the Forni
Reprint).
In the figure Ganassi shows recorders with marks 'A', 'B' and a trefoil. In the
English edition of Fontegara (edited by Hildemarie Peter, Berlin-Lichterfeld,
1959), the word 'maestro' (maker, craftsman) has been wrongly translated as
'player'. This old meaning of 'maestro' is still current in Italian.
4 Castellani, also Halfpenny (GS] XIII, p. 38), found an extremely small
taper in the bore of two Renaissance bass flutes. Also here, the bores of the
basses are slightly smaller at the bottom. However, considering the difficulty
of ascertaining a true design tapering (maximum and minimum diameters
should be given with their relative position to the wood grain, trying, after
making some assumptions on long-term wood shrinkage, to go back to the
original round bore) I prefer to consider the bore as designed cylindrically
until there is more evidence.

ADDENDUM ON THE RAFI MARK

Further research done in Italian collections in the year after the

was made, has brought to light two more types of RAFI marks
and symbols preceding the name RAFI are several and obviously
dynasty of makers. The coat of arms with the griffin is always pr

36

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Since these highly diversified marks might be of help in following design
variants of renaissance flutes and recorders, I give here a synoptical table of
those that have come up so far:

Speaking
length

G ? RAFI-Tenor-altus flute No. 13287 Accademia

Verona Filarmonica, 640.0

c + 1RAFI-Tenor-altus flute No. 4 Biblioteca Capitolare, 549.0

Verona

c+RAFr--Tenor-altus flute No. 2789 Museo degli Strumenti 577.0

Musicali, Rome
c.*. RnI--Tenor recorder No. 8* Accademia Filarmonica, 497.5
Bologna (not the
original
length)

C. RA.n-Basset recorder No. 9* Accademia Filarmonica, 775.0

Bologna
M * RAFI-Bass flute (in one joint) Museo degli Strumenti 860.5
No. 2788 Musicali, Rome

*Temporary inventory number, by the author.

37

This content downloaded from 181.49.80.69 on Sat, 22 Jun 2019 23:54:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms