When I first received Peter Holman's book about the history of the viol in Britain, I questioned the premise of a study that covers such a wide span: what did Purcell's viol fantazias have to do with the Dolmetsch family? It turns out that the viol has always had some kind of association with Britain, allowing the author to trace the development of the instrument from one generation to the next. The result is an elegant and well-structured piece of research that is satisfying to read and will no doubt prove invaluable for future researchers interested in the wide range of music and musicians that Holman discusses. As with any work that amasses such an impressive body of historical evidence, there are inevitably points of interpretation that invite contention; some of these are raised in the course of the present review.
The book begins a little before the time of Purcell, during the golden age of the viol consort; many modern-day viol players (hereafter violists) will recognize the names of these composers – John Coprario, Orlando Gibbons, William Lawes, John Jenkins – from their consort sessions. Holman discusses these composers and their works in their proper historical contexts, drawing upon research by other scholars as well as his own previous book Four and Twenty Fiddlers: The Violin at the English Court, 1540–1690 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993). He then proceeds to discuss violists of post-Restoration England, including ‘Visitors and Immigrants’ (13), providing brief surveys of their works. These surveys, while helpful to readers unfamiliar with this little-known repertory, at times seem overly descriptive: labelling compositions ‘short-winded’, ‘unpretentious’ or ‘unadventurous’ does not provide for a greater understanding of these works; instead, it creates a yardstick for comparison based on a modern stylistic preconceptions.
Holman then examines the change of the viol's role from consort instrument to a solo and continuo instrument; he produces evidence of the French practice of using a continuo viol as part of the petit choeur, like those used at the time in the Paris Opéra. Though the author admits there is little evidence for this in Restoration England, he makes the likely assumption that such a practice would be compatible with the French-style dramatic works of English composers of the mid- to late seventeenth century. This French influence does not, however, extend to the author's discussion of the mysterious ‘Large Bass Instrument’ (43) that is required to reach the low A1s in certain English compositions from around 1700. Despite being the lowest string on the French seven-string bass viol, this instrument is not considered a likely candidate, largely because it is not mentioned by James Talbot in his manuscript (1690). The author names the German violone with five or six strings as the more likely instrument, even though these instruments are provided with tunings by Talbot that extend to G1 or below. This assertion would benefit from a more rigorous explanation: why are the lowest notes of these musical works consistently A1 (and not lower) and why is the Talbot manuscript truly reliable in this matter?
The discussion then leads to violists of the eighteenth century, both professional and amateur. With regards to the amateurs, the author claims that most players ‘were members of the professions: clergy, doctors and lawyers’ (61). While Holman does discuss evidence of players who belonged to these professions, it can be argued that much of this information is available to us because of the record-keeping efforts of the respective institutions to which these players belonged. For this reason, it would be prudent to avoid making any kind of generalization about amateur violists of this time.
Holman names two Italian cellists as possible professional viol players: Nicola Haym and François Goodsens. Nevertheless, as he acknowledges, all the evidence he provides for Haym and Goodsens as musicians points to the fact that they were cellists, except for a few references to the ‘bass viol’, which is hardly solid evidence considering the inconsistent use of the term during the period; the term could have simply been used to refer to the cello or a cello-like instrument such as the bass violin. Holman confronts this issue deftly (54–56), bringing clarity to the problems of nomenclature of bass string instruments at the time.
Given the due caution exercised elsewhere, it seems surprising the Holman entertains the notion of Filipo Amadei as a potential violist. The evidence he unearths, that of transport costs for a ‘Base viol’ while in Paris, en route from Rome to London, relies on the improbability of Amadei's purchase of a violoncello in Paris in spite of his access to superior Italian instruments. In any case, although the French were well known for their viols, they were also performing on basses de violon, which were used and presumably made in France until at least the second decade of the eighteenth century.
The author then discusses the attraction of players and makers towards unconventional instruments in the mid-eighteenth century, a phenomenon he describes as a ‘Cult of Exotic Instruments’ (135). How this relates directly to the viol is difficult to understand at first because, as Holman shows, the instrument had always been in use in Britain: indeed, given the strong tradition of viol-making in Britain ‘up to about 1720’ and evidence of a professional violist in the 1730s (Saint-Hélène; see 131), this treatment of the issue was initially surprising. However, his concentration on instrument maker Frederick Hintz, who made a variety of these ‘exotic’ instruments, including viols and cellos, clarifies the issue: Hintz's instruments really belong to a different tradition of viol making, that of the heavier and more cello-like German tradition. As Holman convincingly demonstrates, the rise in interest in such musical instruments also coincided with the arrival of prominent German musicians in London. This in turn seems to have prolonged the cultivation of the viol in England significantly, as seen in the activities of the violist Carl Friedrich Abel in London in the 1760s and the English amateur players who were associated with him.
Holman then focuses on violists of the later eighteenth century, with a deservedly large emphasis on Abel. This discussion naturally proceeds to Thomas Gainsborough and aristocrat musicians of the time. The mention of harpsichord composer Elisabetta de Gambarini as a potential violist is slightly puzzling, as this assertion seems to be based entirely on the presence of a viol on the frontispiece of Gambarini's publication (this portrait appears in the book, but the viol – if it is truly a viol – is difficult to make out). However, the author also admits that the appearance of the instrument may have been simply a pun on her name (Gambarini/gamba).
The remainder of the book traces evidence of the viol up to the late nineteenth century, with the beginnings of the early-music revival resulting from the efforts of musicians such as François-Joseph Fétis, Nicholas Bochsa, Walter Petit and Arnold Dolmetsch. Despite the subtitle of the book, Holman actually concentrates on the period between Purcell and Dolmetsch, rather than including their significance to the viol's history. A slightly expanded remit would have permitted him to include influential figures such as Nathalie Dolmestch (the daughter of Arnold), a prominent violist who also produced numerous publications and was one of the founding members of the Viola da Gamba Society of Great Britain. Indeed, her name is conspicuously absent; surely she deserves at least a mention alongside the twentieth-century scholar-performers who appear towards the end?
The book would have benefitted from more thorough proofreading; there are some surprising typos and omissions that would be obvious to most readers. Fortunately, these errors do not detract from the overall outstanding research that this book offers. Life after Death is a valuable reference book that I will no doubt consult again and again.
