Violin Forum/Message Board

MANFIO · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 2:06 pm Post subject:

Yes, send me a message to

lmanfio@gmail.com
_________________
www.manfio.com

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7875988@N02/with/464604020/

JWH · Member Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 72

"For reference, here's the best-preserved, most original Stradivari violin in existence:"

We think...........Provenance................Antonio Stradivari.........Paolo Stradivari...........Cozio..............Tarsio..................Vuillaume.......Hills

Paolo and Tarsio......dodgy reputations. Tarsio, itinerant dealer who kept no records

Vuilluame........suspicious copiest

Legend has it that Antonio held onto his 1716 masterpiece because he deemed it too perfect to sell. Wasn't in his character not to sell. Had far more commissions than he could fill.
Known for his superb selection of woods, yet this instrument has to the upper right of the fingerboard a sap pocket.

OK, Mr. Beare. we'll take your word for it.

Jeffrey Holmes · Member Joined: 03 Apr 2007 Posts: 90 Location: Ann Arbor

JWH; Where did that all come from?? Do you have a problem with the Messiah, Charles, the Hills, the many other experts who have examined the fiddle, or all of the above?
_________________
Jeffrey

http://holmesviolins.com

Michael Darnton · Posted: Mon Mar 24, 2008 7:50 pm Post subject:

Interesting train of "logic": "Because I don't like the people who handled this dollar bill, it's a fake." I hope you're not involved in any branch of the sciences, JWH.

JWH · Member Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 72

Hi Jeffery:

I only accept the notion that the Messiah may have been Stradivari's but surrounded by great controversy, there's a question mark in my head about it's authenticity. I am not an expert as is Charles Beare but I don't like it's history. I don't like the path it supposedly took down through time. I have doubts about it's beginnings only because Stradivari didn't have reason to hold onto it for 21 years until his death when he was not a player and couldn't keep up with his commissions. Legend is that since he was such a perfectionist that this one instrument represented perfection in his mind and he couldn't part with it, but it is not a perfect instrument. That is to say, for one example, as I noted, there is a sap pocket on the upper right side of the top near the fingerboard. That is not perfection and since Antonio had the money to buy the finest wood, how does that square with his reputation?
Assuming the foregoing is false and the instrument was made by him and left to his youngest son, Paolo, then you have to have confidence in the story of how it indeed made it into the hands of the Hills. Paolo gave Cozio di Salabue a dozen or so instruments which by signed affidavit on the part of Paolo stated that those were his dad's, the Messiah being included. Cozio was known to be very reputable but it's from there into Tarsio's hands and later with Vuilluame that raise doubts in my mind and others.
Tarsio wandered around northern Italy picking up old fiddles and was known to be of somewhat shady character. He kept no records (hardly a recipe for accurate tranferral) on what he bought or what he sold, but we know that from his hands, or more correctly, from his estate that Vuillaume buys the instrument and from there one can draw conclusions based on Vuillaume experiences surrounding the instrument.

In other words, I don't believe the Messiah has a clean provenance record, but that isn't to say that it is what it is.... You can take all the dendrology study out of the question and still have enough evidence to point toward a hazy, uncertain past. Even today, we rely on expertise that is associated with current ownership.

If the opportunity arose, would I buy the instrument off an auction block as the true Messiah for $10 million, if I had the money and the obsession to have the 'finest' Stradivari instrument? No, too controversial and too many questions.

Jeffrey Holmes · Member Joined: 03 Apr 2007 Posts: 90 Location: Ann Arbor

JWH · Member Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 72

"Interesting train of "logic": "Because I don't like the people who handled this dollar bill, it's a fake." I hope you're not involved in any branch of the sciences, JWH"

Now, come on, Michael, you know that's a bad analogy and the reason it is, is that the Messiah was known to be in the hands of a counterfeiter. We hardly know if any given bill has been.

Do you like this analogy? The Messiah belongs to Stradivari because of consensus and expert opinion, in the same way, that Christ is the Son of God in the western world because there's a consensus that he is and was among believers and expert theologians.

To show you how well Vuilluame copied other's work, Paganini came to him one day at his Paris workshop and dropped off his Guarnari IICanone. During the time he was gone and finally returned for his instrument, Vuilluame made two copies of it and Paganini could not tell among the three which was his original.

Hey, Iam not going to upset people who want to believe. Beliefs are important. Questioning authority is also.

JWH · Member Joined: 26 Mar 2007 Posts: 72

I think some of you think I am out to terrorize other people's belief system and I am not. I just think there has been room for error with this particular instrument and one should question it's authenticity.

I have great respect for Charles Beare and his work. I think he's the last great icon left in his field, but can't one question one person's expertise against another? Could Vuilluame's expertise fool that of a Charles Beare? Is it possible or should we not entertain such thoughts?

MANFIO · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 1:46 pm Post subject:

Vuillaume never made something like the Messiah, all Vuillaumes have a Vuillaume look and style, he would not be considered a good copyst (blind copyst) by today's standarts, but I may be wrong.

I saw the Messiah under the sun light in Oxford, that's a great Strad, it may look strange for many people who expects allways to see a Strad with dilapidated varnish. Alard's Del Gesù is another violin in a perfect state of preservation and it looks like a new violin too.
_________________
www.manfio.com

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7875988@N02/with/464604020/

Shirley · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:44 pm Post subject:

I find all these comments so interesting!

This is a link to some photos of the c. 1790 Pique viola in question - I tried to have our son (the photog) show those areas of the instrument that might be of most interest:

http://www.gibsonplace.com/Violapics.htm

Thanks again for the information posted here!

Shirley

MANFIO · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 4:35 pm Post subject:

Nice instrument! What's the size? It seems to be small, less than 40 cms. long.
_________________
www.manfio.com

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7875988@N02/with/464604020/

Michael Darnton · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:33 pm Post subject:

Shirley, what you have is very well preserved, not over-polished as I had suspected. One reason it looks so good is because that type of varnish is more durable than many others, and it's hard to abuse, too, since it doesn't dissolve easily in solvents. That type of instrument has a much better chance of surviving fresh for 200 years than others would.

The reason the part under the chinrest is messed up is because chinrests weren't invented until a bit later, so this viola spend a fair amount of time with someone's chin (and maybe a beard, too) scrubbing on it.

Shirley · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:37 pm Post subject:

Manfio - you have a good eye - with nothing to compare the size to, how did you know?

I had meant to include the measurements in my post, but forgot -

Body length: 15 3/8"
Over all, from top of scroll: about 26" long
Upper bout: 7 3/16"
Lower bout: 9 1/16"
center bout: 5"

Its ribs are not high, either, but I don't have that measurement right here.

The back is a beautiful one-piece, that doesn't show up too well in the photos. (Done for me very quickly last night.)

It shur sounds purty, though!

Any further thoughts on the older-looking wood under the shoulder rest?

Thanks for looking, and commenting! I really value your opinions and musings.

Shirley

Shirley · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 5:42 pm Post subject:

Michael - thank you so much for your reply! You and Manfio are my "experts." My husband will be very pleased with himself that he figured out why it is so scudsy under the chin rest.

Very interesting about the type of varnish. This whole thread has been a marvelous learning experience!

Shirley

MANFIO · Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2008 6:18 pm Post subject:

It seems there is a letter betwen Piquet and Lupot about oil varnish, one asking oil varnish to the other, but I may be wrong.
_________________
www.manfio.com

http://www.flickr.com/photos/7875988@N02/with/464604020/