Baudiot in his violoncello tutor, which appeared later than the above, makes the following remark concerning the accompaniment of recitative: “It sometimes happens that the actors linger on the scene without reciting (speaking), be it that they have forgotten the text of what they have to recite, or that for some other reason they are silent. At times their appearance on the boards is delayed. In such cases, the accompanist (i.e., the cellist) can perform short preludes and embellishments at his pleasure. But he must be modest about it, and employ his ornaments at the right moment, and always with taste.”[49]
To the art of violoncello making the same applies as to the violin. The productions of the Italian makers surpass those of all other nations. Amongst them, those manufactured by Nicholas Amati, Stradivari, and Gius. Guarneri del Gesù are most to be preferred and justly so.[50]
Stradivari and Amati made their cellos of two different sizes; the larger one was formerly called “il Basso,” while the smaller was distinguished as the Violoncello proper. The latter is the more preferable as being more manageable; in these days it is used as a valuable model.
As to the violoncello bow, which had the following form in the first half of the eighteenth century,[51] its progress went hand in hand with that of the violin bow. The improvements which were successively made on the latter were effected on the former. The greatest perfection reached by the bow was the work of a Frenchman, François Tourte. To this day he has never been excelled in this department. (See Appendix A.)
The fabrication, however, of good violin and cello bows has latterly become very general; and especially in Markneukirchen the manufacture of bows as well as instruments has received a great impulse.[52]
The
Art of Violoncello Playing
In the Eighteenth Century.
Violoncello.
In the seventeenth century the violoncello still occupied a very subordinate and modest position; during the period mentioned, with very few exceptions, it was employed only as a bass instrument in the orchestra. At the beginning of the eighteenth century, however, there was already a great change; for Mattheson says in his “Neu eröffneten Orchestre,” which appeared in 1713:—
“The PROMINENT Violoncello, the Bass Viol, and the Viola da Spalla are small bass fiddles (viols) similar to the larger ones, with five or six strings, on which can be played all kinds of quick things, variations and movements much more easily than on the larger machines” (Mattheson means the contra-basso).[53]
It is, therefore, quite conceivable that some time was necessary, before the players, who were unaccustomed to the undivided fingerboard of the cello, were sufficiently confident of a finger technique differing so completely from that of the gamba. They were at first limited to the lower part of the fingerboard, as was the case primarily with the violin.[54] The position of the thumb, by means of which the higher and highest positions on the fingerboard could alone be fixed and maintained with certainty, could hardly have been known before the beginning of the eighteenth century. The violoncello at this time, as appears from Mattheson’s account just mentioned, had sometimes a set of five or even six strings like the gamba. On the five-stringed instruments the tuning was:—
The Abbé Tardieu already referred to, who played the violoncello, according to Gerber, had the same tuning on his instrument. About the third decade of the last century, those who used five-stringed instruments gave up the highest string—(the D). From that time the four-stringed instrument with the tuning C, G, D, A came very generally into use. The latter was not altogether a novelty. Prätorius mentions it in his “Syntagma Mus.” as the “Bass Viol de Braccio.”[55]
In Germany the use of the violoncello as an orchestral instrument ensued later than in Italy, though much sooner than in France. For although it had been introduced into the Parisian Opera in 1727, by the cellist Batistin, to be mentioned later on, it had been already in use since 1680 in the Vienna Hofkapelle. The Saxon Hofkapelle at Dresden next followed by the installation of four violoncellists. Their names are Daniel Hennig, Agostino Antonio de Rossi, Jean Baptiste José du Houbondel, and Jean Prach de Tilloy.[56] As two of these players have French names, it is to be assumed that the violoncello had already found representatives in France at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
The example set by Vienna and Dresden was soon imitated also by other German Courts. The band of Duke Charles Ulrich of Holstein-Gottorp affords a case in point. As this prince, the future son-in-law of Peter the Great, found himself obliged, in 1720, to reside at the Russian Imperial Court, his private musicians followed him thither, amongst whom there was a cellist.[57]
As the gamba enjoyed a great amount of favour[58] in Germany, the introduction of the violoncello was not effected without difficulty, to which indeed the gambists, who thought their pretended rights were thereby infringed, not a little contributed. For in a paper which appeared in 1757 in the French language, “Observations sur la Musique,” &c., it is said: “La seule basse de viole a déclaré la guerre au violoncelle qui a remporté la victoire et elle a été si complète que l’on craint maintenant que la fameuse viole, l’incomparable sicilienne ne soit vendue à quelque inventaire à un prix médiocre et que quelque luthier profane ne s’avise d’en faire une enseigne.”[59]
It was not quite so bad as the last words of the announcement lead one to suppose. Even if the violoncello caused the gamba to be quite superfluous in the orchestra, the latter was cultivated as a solo instrument for some time longer, and many of the good old gambas were in course of time metamorphosed into violoncellos, and made available for further use; while the more insignificant specimens were destroyed, if they were not required for completing instrumental collections and so preserved from destruction.
The art of violoncello playing in the first stages of its development was, as regards the method of treatment, not so much favoured as violin playing. To the latter a definite direction for imitation was early given, as soon indeed as the end of the seventeenth century, by the Roman school founded by Arcangelo Corelli, which was soon followed by the foundation of the Paduan and Piedmontese schools. Violoncello playing lacked such classical parent schools. When a few prominent artists of this instrument had brought it into greater consideration, centres were formed by distinguished masters for the study of the cello, which supplied the want of proper schools, about which we shall have more to say farther on.
It is easy to understand how it followed that the violoncello was first valued in the land of its birth—that is, in Italy, not only as an orchestral instrument but also for solo playing. How this important branch of art was there developed we shall see in the next section.
I.—ITALY.
Italy has the claim of priority in violoncello as well as violin playing. It was the birthplace of the violin and of the cello, and from thence emanated the artistic executive development of both instruments. The first famous Italian cellist of whom we have any notice is—
Domenico Gabrieli, with the surname of Menghino del Violoncello, born about 1640 at Bologna, died in 1690. This artist found a sphere of work in the church of San Petronio in his native town. Then he entered the service of Cardinal Pamfili in Rome. Gabrieli was also a composer of some repute. Fétis mentions eight of his operas which were written partly for Bologna and partly for Venice. His other works consist of a “Cantata a voce sola,” in a collection of Motets, entitled “Vexillum pacis,” for alto solo and instrumental accompaniments, as well as “Baletti, gighe, correnti, e sarabande a due violini e violoncello, con basso continuo” (Op. 1). These three works, of which the last is a reprint, appeared successively in 1691, 1695, and 1703, consequently after Gabrieli’s death. He appears to have composed nothing specially for the cello.
More remarkable as a cellist must have been Attilio Ariosti, the Dominican monk, born at Bologna in 1660. Gerber at least says of him that he was one of the most excellent violoncellists of his time. But he was also a distinguished performer on the Viola d’amore. He occupied himself chiefly, however, with opera compositions, for which the Pope granted him a dispensation from the rule of his order, as without it, being a Dominican, he was forbidden to meddle with anything connected with the theatre. In 1698 Ariosti was sent for to Berlin as Kapellmeister to the Elector of Brandenberg. Thence he went in 1716 to London, where, in the proximity of Handel, he could make no way, and therefore at last returned to his fatherland. He chose Bologna as his place of residence. Like Gabrieli, he appears to have produced no independent[60] violoncello compositions.
His fellow-country man, Giovanni Battista Bononcini (Buononcini),[61] famous as an able cellist, also devoted his talent by preference to the operatic stage. He was the eldest son of the choirmaster, Giov. Maria Bononcini, at the church S. Giovanni, in Monte, at Modena, and was born in 1672, or, according to Fétis, in 1667 or 1668. At first instructed in music by his father, and then perfected by Colonna at Bologna, he betook himself, at twenty-two or twenty-three years of age, to Vienna, where he found a post as cellist in the Imperial Kapelle. Here he turned to opera, which at that time was a favourite means of entertainment for the seeing and listening public, and promised more reputation and gain than all other kinds of composition.
Fétis mentions twenty operas by Bononcini, but he doubtless wrote more. Even in his eightieth year he was occupied for the theatre in Venice. Besides, he wrote an Oratorio, “Joshua,” several orchestral pieces, masses, chamber duets, “Trattenimenti da Camera,” &c., some of which were composed before his entrance into the Vienna Hofkapelle. He also wrote “Sinfonie” for violin and violoncello as well as cello solos. Of the latter there appeared at J. Simpson’s (London) a sonata for two violoncellos in a collection of sonatas by Pasqualini, San Martino, Caporale, Spourni, and Porta. As Caporale was born in 1750 and Porta in 1758, the publication of this collection must have taken place late in the second half of the eighteenth century. The Bononcini sonata contained in it does not give a very favourable impression of this composer’s talent. The development is dry and in places very formal, even here and there somewhat incorrect. To the two figured parts are given accompanying basses, partly simple and partly contrapuntal. The interest which attaches to this composition, consisting of an Allegro, with introductory Andante, a movement marked “Grazioso,” and a “Minuet,” after which the “Grazioso” is to be repeated, rests chiefly on the light which it throws upon the technical condition of cello playing at the beginning of the eighteenth century (for doubtless the composition belongs to that period). In reference to this is to be remarked: the principal part is confined chiefly to the middle tones; the lower ones are only occasionally touched, and the compass of the higher notes reaches to the one-lined A; the thumb position does not come into use. Figure is little developed, and only modest attempts are made at playing double stoppings and chords; the notation is in tenor and bass clefs.
It is reported that during Bononcini’s residence in Paris, between 1735-1748, he composed a Motet with cello obbligato accompaniment, for the royal band there, which last he himself played at the performance of his work in the presence of the king.
Alessandro Scarlatti,[62] the founder of the Neapolitan opera school, had given an example of this use of the violoncello about twenty-five years before in one of his cantatas. Geminiani, Corelli’s pupil, related that this cello part was performed during Scarlatti’s presence in Rome, and with his assistance on the clavier, by the famous violoncellist, Franciscello (Francischello); his playing was so beautiful that Scarlatti described it as heavenly.
This event must have occurred in the year 1713, when Scarlatti was in Rome the last time. Consequently, Franciscello’s birth must be placed with all probability in the year 1692. He would have been twenty-one years of age when he played with the Neapolitan master.
Gerber says that Franciscello went from Rome to Naples in 1725. That he was actually there in the year mentioned is affirmed by Quantz, who himself heard him play. Through Franciscello’s extraordinary performances the violoncello was soon so generally accepted in Italy, that the gamba had, in 1730, almost entirely disappeared from the Italian orchestras.
In the year 1730, Franciscello was summoned to Vienna as Imperial chamber musician, a proof that his name had already penetrated beyond his country. Franz Benda, afterwards celebrated as a violinist, and founder of the Berlin violin school, heard him in the Austrian capital. Franciscello’s manner of playing so impressed him that he took him from that time as his model.
Franciscello remained, it appears, ten years in Vienna. If a notice in the “Musical Almanack for Germany, of the year 1782,” is to be credited, he had already been a member of the Imperial Court and Chamber Music Society in 1766, which is by no means beyond the bounds of possibility, though not very probable. We hold then to the assumption that he was born in 1692 so that, in 1766, he would be already seventy-four years old. It is not known where Franciscello closed his life. Tradition only says that at an advanced age he resided in Genoa, to which the supposition was attached that that city had been his birthplace. It is stated that the elder Duport, the cello virtuoso, who was born in 1741, went from Paris to visit him there.
During his long period of work at Vienna, Franciscello doubtless instructed pupils in cello playing; who they were is however, as little known as the question if or what he composed for his instrument. On both points we are no better off than concerning his somewhat older compatriot
Cervetto, called Jacopo Bassevi, who was born in 1682. Until his forty-sixth year he remained in his fatherland. Then, like so many other Italian musicians of this time, he was seized with a desire to travel, and betook himself to London. There he trafficked at first in instruments which he had brought with him from Italy; this, however, was so little remunerative that he very soon gave it up, and joined the orchestra of Drury Lane Theatre. According to Burney’s judgment, Cervetto was, for his time, a very clever violoncellist, who knew how to manipulate the fingerboard with much dexterity; but his tone must have been rough and harsh. Of his eccentricity the following anecdote is an illustration: Once when the famous Garrick was representing a drunkard and sank down senseless upon a seat, Cervetto broke upon the sudden stillness with an unseemly loud and long-drawn yawn. Garrick immediately got up, severely censuring such behaviour, upon which Cervetto pacifying him answered: “I beg your pardon, I always yawn when I am very pleased.” A few years later Cervetto became Director of Drury Lane Theatre, and thus he laid the foundation of his fortune.
Cervetto must have had a very strong constitution, for he lived to the unusual age of 101 years. His death took place on January 14, 1783. He left a fortune of £20,000 sterling, which he bequeathed to his son James, who was also a cellist; but soon after inheriting from his father he retired into private life. He, also, reached a respectable age, for as he came into the world (in London) in 1747, and died February 5, 1837, he was ninety years old. In 1783 he was performing at the Court concerts of the Queen, as well as taking part in the musical réunions in the house of Lord Abington as one of the best reputed cellists in London. Of cello compositions he published: 1. Twelve “Solos for a Violoncello, with a Thorough Bass for the Harpsichord”; this work, dedicated to the Elector Palatine of Bavaria and Jülich-Eleve-Berg, appeared at the author’s own expense, without date. 2. “Six Solos for a Violoncello, with a Thorough Bass for the Harpsichord, Opera Terza.” London. 3. “Twelve Sonatinas for a Violoncello and a Bass, Op. 4ta.” London. Fétis adds, besides, “Six solos pour la flûte” and “Six trios pour deux violons, et violoncelle,” which must have been in existence not long before the end of the last century. We shall have occasion to refer again farther on to Cervetto’s violoncello compositions.
Taking up again the chronological thread, after Cervetto the elder, the cellist Batistin, whose real name was Joh. Baptist Struck, must be mentioned. He was of German origin and was born in Florence in the second half of the seventeenth century, from thence he went to Paris at the beginning of the eighteenth century. He there entered the band of the Duke of Orleans and the opera orchestra, in which he, conjointly with the brothers Abbé (properly Philippe Pierre and Pierre de Saint-Sévin), played the cello parts. He must have performed well, since Louis XIV., in order to retain him in the French capital, gave him a liberal allowance and, in addition, a sum of 500 francs for certain theatrical compositions to be supplied by him. Besides this he wrote a long list of ballets and operas specially for Court festivities. There appeared in print, by him, during the years 1706 and 1714, in Paris, four books of “Cantatas” and a collection of airs. He does not appear to have composed for the violoncello. He died on December 9, 1755, at the scene of his work. Among the masters of the Neapolitan school, Leonardo Leo, at that time the famous opera composer, distinguished himself as a violoncellist, who was born, 1694, at S. Vito degli Schiavi, in the province of Lecco, and died at Naples in 1746. He also composed six cello concertos with quartet accompaniments, which belong to the years 1737 and 1738. The MSS. of these are in the Library of the Royal Conservatoire at Naples. It is supposed that these are the oldest of existing cello concertos.
Another Italian cellist of that time was Domenico della Bella, of whom nothing further is known than that, in 1704, he published, in Venice, Twelve Sonatas “a due violini e violoncello.”
The information is equally meagre regarding the cellist Parasisi, of whom Gerber says he was an extraordinary artist on his instrument and was with the Italian Opera orchestra at Breslau in 1727.
Concerning the Italian violoncellists Jacchini, Amadio, Vandini, Abaco, dall’Oglio, and Lanzetti, born in the second half of the seventeenth and the beginning of the eighteenth century, we know very little.
Jacchini, whose Christian name was Giuseppe, noted by Gerber as one of the first cellists of his time, was appointed to the church of S. Petronio in Bologna at the beginning of the eighteenth century. That he had distinguished himself as an artist is proved by his nomination as a member of the Bologna Philharmonic Society, a distinction which is only conferred on men of great musical reputation. Of his compositions there is a work entitled “Concerti per Camera a 3 e 4 stromenti, con violoncello obligato (Op. 4). Bologna, 1701,” to be mentioned.
Pippo Amadio, who flourished about the year 1720, was, according to Gerber’s account, a violoncellist, “whose art surpassed all, that up to his time had been produced on his instrument.”
Antonio Vandini, first violoncellist at the church of S. Antonio, Padua, seems to have been no less remarkable. The Italians called his manner of playing and his expression “parlare”—he understood how to make his instrument speak. He was on terms of such close friendship with Tartini, who as is known was engaged at the same church at Padua as solo violinist, that he accompanied him in 1723 to Prague, and remained with him for three years in the service of Count Kinski. Vandini was still living in Padua in 1770. The year of his death is unknown.
Abaco, born at Verona, according to information contained in the second year of the “Leipsic Musical Paper” (p. 345), was a prominent violoncellist, who lived in the first half of the eighteenth century. Gerber possessed a cello solo of his composition, of which he says that it appeared to have been written in the year 1748.
Giuseppe dall’Oglio, the younger brother of the famous violin player, Domenico dall’Oglio, was born about 1700 at Padua,[63] and went to St. Petersburg in 1735. There he remained in the Russian imperial service twenty-nine years, after which he returned to his native land. On his journey thither he stopped at Warsaw, on which occasion King August of Poland nominated him his agent for the Venetian Republic.
Salvatore Lanzetti, born at the beginning of the eighteenth century in Naples, was pupil of the Conservatorio there, Santa Maria di Loreto, and was during the greater part of his life in the service of the King of Sardinia. He died in Turin in 1780. In the year 1736 two volumes of violoncello sonatas appeared by him, and later also a book of instruction, the title of which Fétis gives as: “Principes du doigter pour le Violoncelle dans tous les tons.” It is somewhat differently named by Gerber: “Principes ou l’applicatur de Violoncel par tous les tons.” Lanzetti must have carried out with great skill the staccato touch both up and down the instrument.
We are somewhat better informed regarding the violoncellist Caporale. Neither the place of his home nor the year of his birth nor that of his death are, indeed, known to us, but of his life and work in England we possess some information. In 1735 he came to London and worked under Handel, who wrote for him a cello solo in the third act of his opera “Deidamia” composed in 1739.
His musical education could not have been very thorough, but he must have had certain qualifications which induced Handel to connect himself with him. Simpson’s Collection (see p. 49), published in London, contains a Cello Sonata by Caporale, which does not speak much for his talent in composition. It consists of Adagio, Allegro, and a Theme with three variations after the manner of studies. As a player Caporale was remarkable for his tone, but as regards finish he could not rival either the elder Cervetto or Pasqualini.
This last-named artist, by whom a sonata, scarcely rising above the level of Caporale, was contained in the volume already mentioned as appearing at Simpson’s, was performing in London, in 1745, as a concertist of great repute. Further information regarding him does not exist.
Greater consideration must be yielded to Carlo Ferrari, brother of the violinist Domenico Ferrari, so often referred to in the previous century. On account of an injured foot he was called “the lame.” Born at Piacenza about 1730 he betook himself to Paris in 1758 and appeared with great success in the “Concert Spirituel.” In 1765 he accepted an engagement offered to him by the Count of Parma.[64] He remained in this position until his death, which took place in 1789. It is reported of Ferrari that he was the first Italian cellist who made use of the thumb position. If this be true, France must have been beforehand in the difficult matter of the art of fingering; for the thumb position was already known in Paris, as we have seen, before 1740, consequently at a time when Ferrari was only ten or twelve years old. But if it be acknowledged that violoncello playing was cultivated much earlier in Italy than in France, and had already advanced beyond the elemental stage before it had found representatives among the French, we must be inclined to concede to the Italians the discovery of the thumb position, and indeed to the predecessors of Ferrari. It is highly probable that Franciscello and Batistin already availed themselves of its assistance for the use of the upper parts of the fingerboard. The trick must have been brought into France by the last-named artist who, as we know, settled in Paris at the beginning of the eighteenth century.
The proof that the thumb position was known in Paris before 1740 is established by the violoncello method of Michel Corrette in the year 1741, and which, as far as one can see, was the first work of instruction for the instrument in question. Considering the scarcity at that time of cello compositions this instruction book is the more important, as from it is to be determined with certainty the average standard to which violoncello playing had attained towards the middle of the previous century. This circumstance seems to justify our entering somewhat more fully into Corrette’s school.
The title is: “Méthode, théoretique et pratique, pour apprendre en peu de temps, le violoncelle ... dans sa perfection composée par Michel Corette. XXIVe Ouvrage à Paris, chez l’auteur, Me Boivin et le Sr le Clerc; à Lyon chez M. de Bretonne. Avec Privilège du Roy. MDCCXL1.”[65]
After some introductory paragraphs regarding the use of the F and C clef, in notation for violoncello music, concerning the value of notes and pauses, the formation of sharps, flats, and naturals, as well as regarding the usual marks, the various measures and syncopes, Corrette treats:
1. Of the manner of holding the violoncello; 2. Of the holding and action of the bow; 3. Of its use in the up and down strokes; 4. Of the tuning of the violoncello; 5. Of the division of the fingerboard into diatonic as well as chromatic tones; 6. Of the fingering in the lower (first) and following positions; 7. Of the way and manner of returning from the higher positions to the first; 8. Of trills and appogiaturas; 9. Of the various kinds of bow action; 10. Of double-stops and arpeggios; 11. And also of the thumb position. He also gives instruction for those who wish to go from the gamba to the violoncello, and then in conclusion gives hints for the accompaniment of singing and for instrumental solos.
It is evident that the directions of Corrette have chiefly a mere historical importance, as the technique of the violoncello, after the appearance of his method, underwent substantial changes. His explanation concerning the finger positions of that period and the thumb position which in the higher parts of the fingerboard takes the place of a moveable nut, concerning the manipulation of the bow, and the considerations to be observed in exchanging the gamba for the violoncello have a special interest for us.
With regard to the first of these four points, we remark that the finger position adopted by Corrette for the diatonic scale on all the strings was, in the first two positions, 1, 2, and 4; in the “third position,” 1, 2, 3, 4; and in the “fourth,” 1, 2, and 3; after the latter position the fourth finger was as a rule no longer needed, for which Corrette adduces as a reason that it is too short to be made use of in the higher positions of the fingerboard; in case however it should be necessary to use it, the use of the left arm would be impeded. In exceptional cases, says Corrette in another part of his school, the fourth finger could be used in the “fourth position,” without altering the thumb position, for the B flat and B on the A string, for the E flat on the D string, for the A flat on the G string, and for the D flat on the C string. The finger positions were then, in the first half and about the middle of the last century, somewhat different in the diatonic scale of the violoncello than they were later on. It is especially to be remarked that the E and the B were touched with the second finger upon the two lower strings, though the notes marked were far more convenient for the third finger, which very shortly took the place of the second.
As to the exclusion of the fourth finger, when playing with the thumb position, no proof is needed to show the reason was that it gave an awkward manner of holding the left hand. The finger positions for the chromatic scale still more widely differed from the fingering employed later, as the following scale shows—
It very nearly happened, that as early as the seventeenth century when a stringed instrument was so much desired as a standard one for the violoncello, that the violin mode of fingering was adopted for the former, which according to the foregoing remarks really was the case, with the exception of the use of the third finger. It had however been overlooked that the cello, on account of its much larger dimensions, demanded an entirely different method of fingering. The regulation of this important point, which offered peculiar difficulties, occupied cellists up to the beginning of our century. In some measure the fingering which Corrette teaches for descending intervals of a second from the higher to the lower tones is unavoidable. He gives the two following examples—
He gave the preference to the second example.
The almost total exclusion of the fourth finger caused a very great restriction in playing with the thumb position. But when Corrette wrote his work this limitation would hardly have been felt, as the higher parts of the fingerboard were little, and, only in exceptional cases, used by cello players and composers. Corrette mentions, as the highest tone, the one-lined B. Caporale and Pasqualini do not go beyond this note in their sonatas, already mentioned, excepting in one instance, when Caporale casually uses the two-lined C. It appears that, with many cellists, in place of the thumb the first finger was made use of in the higher positions as a support, for Corrette remarks concerning his method: “If the first finger is used instead of the thumb the fourth finger must necessarily be made use of; it is, however, on account of its shortness, really useless in the upper ‘positions.’” To beginners Corrette recommended the attempt then in vogue—but a little later combated by Leopold Mozart in his violin school[66]—to introduce marks on the fingerboard indicating the intervals in order to learn to play clearly in tune. For gamba players who, following the spirit of the time, gave up their instrument and turned to the violoncello, which was rapidly coming into use, this means of assistance had a certain value, accustomed as they were to the frets of the gamba fingerboard, for the finger positions of both instruments differ considerably from one another, as appears from the comparison given below by Corrette.
7. String. 6. String. 5. String. 4. String. 3. String. 2. String. 1. String.
Scale on the Cello.
C String. G String. D String. A String. Thumb-position.
The figures placed under the gamba scale relate to the frets which are to be attended to by the player, while those of the cello scale are the finger positions to be used.
The lower C, which the string itself forms on the cello, had on the gamba to be touched at the third fret; the succeeding D on the gamba was the open string, while on the cello it was to be touched with the first finger, and so on.
The four highest tones, e, f, g, a, fell in the gamba on the 2nd, 3rd, 5th, and 7th frets, whereas, according to Corrette’s account, those in the cello required the use of the thumb position. It is plain that the gamba players who took up the violoncello had to adopt an entirely different system of fingering.
To a certain extent the handling of the bow presented difficulties to those who exchanged the gamba for the violoncello. The former instrument, on account of the flatness of the bridge, did not allow of an energetic use of the bow. From the violoncello, on the contrary, a powerful tone must be brought out, which had to be learnt by gamba players. Besides, they had also to accustom themselves to other strokes of the bow for the cello. What was played by the latter instrument with a down stroke, was played by an upward one on the gamba, and the reverse.
The holding of the bow was again rather different from the present manner. Corrette gives three ways for this. According to Corrette’s testimony, the most usual way in Italy consisted in placing the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th fingers upon the rod and the thumb beneath it, so that the bow was held not exactly at the nut, but about a hand’s breadth from it, as formerly and even at the beginning of our century was done by many players. The second way of holding the bow was, the other four fingers being placed as above, to lay the thumb upon the hair. Finally, the bow was also held, so that the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th fingers were laid upon that part of the rod to which the nut is attached, while the thumb had its place beneath the nut.
Corrette does not give the preference to either of these ways of holding the bow, which in the course of the second half of the last century became more and more obsolete. He was of opinion that they were all good, but left it to each one to choose the manner in which the most power could be attained. It seems, however, noteworthy that Corrette laid it down as a rule that the middle of the bow should be used in playing, whereby its use was limited to a third of its length.
In the preface to his method Corrette speaks of several systems amongst violoncellists, but adds, the best and most generally followed was that of Bononcini, of which also the most skilful masters in Europe made use. From this remark it follows, that in the composition of his school, he took Bononcini’s manner of playing, which he was able to study, soon after the latter’s arrival in Paris, as his guide. In surveying the above principles, detailed by Corrette, regarding the technique of violoncello playing, it must be admitted that, needing improvement in almost every respect about the middle of the last century, it had not progressed, with few exceptions, beyond the elementary stages. The chamber sonatas and suites of Joh. Seb. Bach for violoncello solo, the last of which were originally composed for the Viola pomposa, cannot be cited as proofs to the contrary. In them Bach forestalled the technical capacity of his time by a decade. Although they are composed for that part of the fingerboard on which there is no question of the thumb position, yet they contain difficulties of an extraordinary kind which Bach’s contemporaries had not been able to master.[67] And even in the second half of the last century there could have been no cellist who would have been fully capable of playing them. Therefore it must be considered either, that these compositions, so remarkable of their kind, were not absolutely composed for the cello; or that the violoncello technique took another direction, which was called out by these suites of Bach.
The violoncello, like the violin, is primarily an instrument for the voice. As such it was chiefly used by the Italians, who, up to the second half of the last century, gave the impulse to stringed instrument playing. This is to be gathered from the cello pieces by Italian composers belonging to this period. As instances, next to the sonatas already mentioned, two musical pieces of the same kind may be cited, by San Martini (Giov. Battista Sammartini)[68] and Bernardo Porta.[69] Neither of these composers were violoncellists. Their sonatas are, however, adapted to the nature of the instrument for which they were composed. As compositions they are indeed of little importance, and as regards the technique, they do not rise above the measure of the modest demands which were then required.
With regard to cello technique the younger Cervetto, whose compositions have already been mentioned, p. 52, goes really farther. In them there is a greater variety in the manner of playing, in the use of double-stops and different passages derived from the scale and the chord. Such ways of playing could naturally only at first be found out and perfected in a proper manner by those who were already experienced practised players on an instrument of extreme difficulty on account of its extensions.
The cello pieces of Cervetto formed after the manner of Tartini’s violin sonatas are, as to their contents, quite antiquated, and are only interesting in a purely technical point of view. Like the compositions already considered, they occupy mostly the parts of tenor and bass. Only twice in the first Allegro of the tenth Sonata of his Op. 4 does Cervetto venture to the twice-lined E, and at the conclusion of the same piece to the twice-lined A. In both cases he has to use the treble clef, which does not appear elsewhere.
Besides Cervetto the younger, amongst Italians who cultivated cello playing must be mentioned Gasparini, Moria, Joannini di Violoncello, Zappa, Cirri, Aliprandi, Graziani, Piarelli, Spotorni I. and II., Barni, Bertoja I. and II., Lolli, Sandonati, and Shevioni. We give below the meagre information which exists regarding them.
Quirino Gasparini, a distinguished cellist, was in 1749 Kapellmeister at the Court of Turin. He remained there until 1770. As a composer, he was chiefly occupied with church music, no cello pieces are known by him.
Of Moria, the fact only is known that, in 1755, he was heard at the “Concert Spirtuel” in Paris.
Joannini di Violoncello, from the year 1759 Kapellmeister at St. Petersburg, had a great reputation in his own country as a player.
Zappa, called Francesco, according to Gerber was making a concert tour in 1781, and “enchanted his hearers in Dantsic by his soft and delightful execution.”
Giambattista Cirri, born in the first half of the eighteenth century, at Forli, lived and worked for a long time in England. On the title page of his first work, published at Verona in 1763, he called himself a “Professore di Violoncello.” Of his compositions there appeared in print seventeen different works in London, Paris, and Florence.
As a clever violoncellist, Bernardo Aliprandi, son of the opera composer, Aliprandi, born in Tuscany, was distinguished. His father was composer and Court band-conductor in Munich during the first half of the previous century; but he himself became a member of the orchestra there, where he still was in 1786. His cello pieces, of which several were published, are as obsolete as those of Cirri.
Gerber, in his dictionary, says of Graziani, that after the death of the gamba player, Louis Christian Hesse,[70] he was summoned to Potsdam to take his place as tutor to the Crown Prince of Prussia. When the French violoncellist, Duport (the elder), came to Berlin, in 1773, Graziani lost his post at Court. He died at Potsdam in 1787. The six violoncello solos, Op. 1 (printed in Berlin about the year 1780), as well as the six cello pieces brought out in Paris (Op. 2), mentioned by Gerber in his old Musical Dictionary under the name of Graziani, must have appeared in the latter years of the author’s life.
In the second half of the last century there was a violoncello virtuoso, by name Piarelli, who, about 1784, had printed in Paris six violoncello solos. This is all that is known about him.
Of the brothers Spotorni, Gerber only says that, in 1770, in Italy, “their native land, they were esteemed as violoncellists.”
A very skilful player was Camillo Barni, born on January 18, 1762, at Como. He received his first instructions in cello playing at the age of fourteen years from his grandfather, David Ronchetti. Later on, Giuseppe Gadgi, Canon of the Cathedral at Como, taught him for a few months. At the age of twenty Barni joined the opera orchestra of Milan, of which he became first violoncellist in 1791. In the year 1802 he went to reside permanently in Paris, where he appeared as solo player, and then, for several years, was an active member in the orchestra of the Italian Opera. Between 1804 and 1809 he published several duets for his own instrument and the violin. He also wrote a cello concerto.
Concerning the brothers Bertoja, Gerber only says that both were employed in Venice about 1800, as virtuosi on the violoncello, and were reputed in Italy the first masters of their instrument.
Filippo Lolli, son of the violin virtuoso, Antonio Lolli, was born at Stuttgard, in 1773; practised the cello from early youth, and at eighteen years of age made a concert tour, which led him to Berlin. Here he was heard by the King, who was so pleased with his performance that he recognised it by an honorarium of 100 louis d’or. Lolli then went to Copenhagen, and in the year 1804 played at concerts in Vienna. There is no more information about him extant.
Of Sandonati, Gerber says that he lived in Verona in 1800, and was one of the most renowned violoncellists of those times. Gerber announces the same of the Mantuan, Shevioni, who worked about the same time apparently in Verona.
While all these men were endeavouring to make an advance in violoncello playing, and especially in violoncello compositions, the Italian nation possessed in Boccherini an artist who surpassed in every direction his countrymen.
Luigi Boccherini, the son of a contra-basso player, was born on February 19, 1743, at Lucca. He there received his first musical instruction from the archbishop’s choirmaster, Vanucci. Besides the cultivation of theory, he devoted himself with peculiar zeal to cello playing, of which he was to prove a master. The very promising progress which he made decided his father to send him to Rome for the further prosecution of his studies, and where his talents attained their full development.
When Boccherini, after the course of a few years, returned to his native town, he found there Tartini’s pupil, Filippo Manfredini, his countryman, who was an excellent violinist. He soon formed an intimate friendship with him, which led to an arrangement for making a concert tour. The two artists went to Spain, afterwards to Piedmont, to Lombardy, and the South of France. The favourable reception which the friends experienced encouraged them about 1768 to proceed to Paris. In the French capital they had a splendid success. The compositions of Boccherini gained such great applause that the Parisian music publishers, La Chevardière and Venier, declared themselves ready to undertake the expense of printing all the works already heard. Notwithstanding, he received very little for his compositions, and later on he was not more fortunate.
At the persuasion of the Spanish ambassador in Paris the artists proceeded, at the end of 1768, or the beginning of the next year, to Madrid. Here Boccherini roused the special interest of the Infanta Don Luis, who named him his “Compositore e virtuoso di camera.” When this prince died, on August 7, 1785, Boccherini became Court Kapellmeister of King Charles III. of Spain, a post which he also filled under the succeeding king, Charles IV. He received a still further recognition from the King Frederick William II. of Prussia, who designated him his chamber-composer, when he, in the year 1787, dedicated a work to this art-loving monarch, who conferred on him a considerable honorarium. From that time Boccherini dedicated to him everything that he composed. We may conclude that he was adequately remunerated, for when the king died in November, 1797, and the allowance ceased, Boccherini fell into difficulties, his compositions being badly paid by the publishers. At the same time he seems to have lost his place as Kapellmeister to the King of Spain. However it was, he spent the last years of his life with his family in great need, from which death only released him on May 28, 1805.
Having in view the great quantity of his compositions, Boccherini must be distinguished as an extremely prolific composer. There are in existence 400 instrumental works by him. They consist of 20 symphonies, 125 string quintets—amongst them are 113 for two cellos, of which the first cello is more or less an obbligato—91 string quartets, and numberless trios, septets, quintets with flute or oboe, violin sonatas, as well as several vocal compositions for the church, &c. Very little has proved capable of surviving, and this little only awakens a limited interest. The cause of it seems to be in a certain simplicity which underlies all Boccherini’s music. With great cleverness of form, added to an apt and easy flow, it is certainly not wanting in originality, which has even a humorous tendency; but the manner of expression is characterised by a certain formality which gives to Boccherini’s music an antiquated air. His ideas are wanting in power of thought and depth of feeling; they rarely rise above the pleasing and agreeable.
At the beginning of the century the chamber compositions of Boccherini had an extraordinary popularity, especially amongst the dilettanti. From that time, however, they have been little played, at least in Germany. The interest in them was maintained much longer in France, where they were unusually prized, according to Fétis’s “Biographie Universelle des Musiciens.” There also they have been for some time laid on one side.
Boccherini composed six concerti specially for the violoncello. There are also extant several cello sonatas with bass by him. It is surprising that there is no mention made of them in the list of Boccherini compositions by Fétis. Six of these sonatas have been republished on the one hand by Friedrich Grützmacher, and, on the other, by Alfred Piatti, with piano accompaniment. The violoncello concerti of Boccherini, on the contrary, have fallen almost entirely into oblivion. They are only so far interesting in that by them is shown to what degree of technique cello playing was developed by this master. We must here observe that he was one of the first of the Italian school who gave decided expression to the solo and virtuoso side of his instrument. He not only made possible for cello music the higher and highest parts of the thumb position, with the exception of the complicated harmonics first discovered and made available after his time, but he also considerably extended beyond his predecessors the playing of double stops as well as the execution of passages.[71]
If in form they were somewhat superficially elaborate and worked out after the manner of studies, yet instructive material for practice of an extent and variety hitherto unknown was provided for cellists. For Italy it was a sensible loss that Boccherini spent the greater part of his life abroad, his native land was in consequence deprived of the advantage which the personal influence and example of his strikingly artistic proficiency might have gained. If he had remained there he would, doubtless, have been to his countrymen as regards cello playing what Corelli and Tartini were to Italian violin playing. But under the prevailing conditions Italy lacked a recognised musician who might have been the means of further successfully developing that branch of art. Moreover, the decided preference of the Italians for opera from the end of the last century, which prevailed to the cost of all other musical efforts, checked for a time further impulse to or demand for the cultivation of stringed instrument playing, which until then had been so successfully pursued on the Apennine Peninsula. What, however, Italy’s sons attained in the art of violoncello playing was not lost, but was further perfected by German and French masters, concerning which the following sections will give the necessary explanation.
II.—GERMANY.
The Violoncello had already found its place as an orchestral instrument about the year 1680 at Vienna, and in 1709, in the Dresden Royal orchestra, as we saw. Towards 1720 it had penetrated also into Northern Germany, since the band of the Duke of Holstein-Gottorp evidently possessed one. At the same period this stringed instrument must have been extensively used in other parts of Germany—otherwise Joh. Seb. Bach would scarcely have conceived the idea of composing for it his solo sonatas, which were already extant between the years 1717-1724. There were even at that time two German violoncellists who appeared to Gerber of sufficient importance for him to give them a place in his Dictionary of Music. Their names are: Triemer and Riedel.
Johann Sebald Triemer was born at the end of the seventeenth or the beginning of the eighteenth century, in Weimar, where he was instructed in instrumental playing by the Ducal Chamberlain and Musician, Eylenstein, and in the theory of music by Ehrbach, an old musician of Weimar. As soon as Triemer had made progress sufficient to figure as a soloist, he undertook a concert tour which led him to Hamburg, for, in 1725, he was a member of the theatre orchestra there. Two years after he went to Paris, and remained until 1729. During this time he pursued the study of composition under the direction of Boismortier.[72] He then went to the Dutch city of Alkmaar, and, later on, to Amsterdam, where he died in 1762. At Amsterdam he had six “Sonate a Violoncello solo e continuo” published.
The Silesian, Riedel, was not only a cellist, but also chief of the Fencing School at Liegnitz. He must have been a very good player for his time. About 1727 he went to St. Petersburg, and was there the instructor of the Emperor Peter II. (who, as is known, only reigned three years—1727-1730), both in cello playing and in fencing.
Riedel was also member of the Russian Court band, where he still was in 1740.
The number of German violoncello players very soon increased. Amongst them, Werner must next be mentioned, born at the beginning of the eighteenth century in Bohemia, and died in Prague, 1768. He must have been a most excellent player, since, as Gerber says, in his time no foreign cellist ventured to play in Prague. Werner was for some time established at the Crusaders’ Church, in Prague. Of his numberless concertos and solos for violoncello, none seem to have been printed.
The violoncellist, Caspar Cristelli, born in Vienna at the beginning of the eighteenth century, was, in 1757, chief composer in the service of the Archbishop of Salzburg. He specially distinguished himself as an accompanist, a talent at that time highly prized, for the cellists who accompanied the vocal recitatives played an important part. Cristelli also wrote several compositions for his instrument.
Johann Baptist Baumgärtner, born 1723, in Augsburg, died May 18, 1782, at Eichstädt, as chamber virtuoso of the Prince Bishop, was educated in Munich, and then made a concert tour through Germany, England, Holland, and Scandinavia. Besides some violoncello concertos he wrote: “Instruction de musique théoretique et pratique a l’usage de violoncelle.” This instruction book appeared in 1774 or 1777, at the Hague.
Wenzel Himmelbauer, born 1725, in Bohemia, was in Prague in 1764; went, however, to Vienna, and had a good reputation as cellist. His playing was chiefly famed for firmness of the bow stroke and quickness at sight reading. C. F. Daniel Schubart remarks of him in his “Ideen zu einer Aesthetik der Tonkunst”: “He was a sincere and a most agreeable violoncellist, without any artistic pride; a man of the most upright and amiable heart”; and he further remarks: “No one uses his bow so quietly and easily as this master. He executes the most difficult passages with the most extraordinary ease, and especially pours out his heart in the Cantabile. His sweet expression, his delightful phrasing, and, moreover, his great power in the middle tints are the wonder of all connoisseurs and hearers.” He composed little for his instrument, but this little has all the more intrinsic value.
Of Himmelbauer’s compositions there appeared at Lyons, 1776, as Op. 1, duets for flute or violin and violoncello. A few duets for two violoncellos remained unpublished. The MS. was, in 1795, in the possession of the Bohemian cellist, Emeric Patrzik, and later fell into the hands of the author of “The Art Lexicon for Bohemia,” G. J. Dlabacz.
Philipp Schindlöker must be mentioned as a noteworthy pupil of Himmelbauer’s. Born on October 25, 1753, at Mons, in Hennegau, he went very young to Vienna, whither his parents betook themselves. There he began the study of the violoncello. In 1795 he was appointed solo violoncellist at the Royal Opera House, Vienna, and three years later to the orchestra of the Cathedral, S. Stephan. In the year 1806 he received the title of Imperial Chamber Virtuoso. He died April 16, 1827. Sixteen years previously he had already retired into private life. Of his compositions only a serenade for the Violoncello and Guitar was published. The rest, consisting of a Concerto, Sonatas with bass accompaniment, and a Rondo also with bass accompaniment, remained unpublished.
His nephew, Wolfgang Schindlöker, born in 1789 at Vienna, was educated by him as a clever cellist. After he had been heard at fourteen years of age at a concert, he went in 1807 as chamber musician into the service of the Court at Würzburg. His compositions consisted of a “Grand duo” and three Duets, which were published.
Franz Joseph Weigl belonged to the best German cellists of the last century; he was the father of the opera composer, Joseph Weigl, formerly in much repute. He was born on March 19, 1740, in a Bavarian village, and through the special recommendation of Joseph Haydn was received on June 1, 1761, into the orchestra of Count Esterhazy. In 1769 he left and joined the orchestra of the Italian opera in Vienna. After three years of active work there he was appointed to the Imperial band, and made Court and Chamber musician; his death took place on January 25, 1820. Weigl composed, but if for his own instrument is unknown.
Anton Filtz, a member of the Electoral Chapel at Mannheim, was a gifted cellist and composer. He died in 1768 in early manhood, before his talent had fully developed. He left in MS. several duets and solos, as well as Concertos for the Violoncello.
Joh. Georg Schetky, born 1740, at Darmstadt, deserves special mention as a pupil of Filtz, whose instruction he enjoyed for one month, after his father, who was Secretary to the Grand Duke of Darmstadt and tenor singer at the Cathedral, had given him his first musical education. He seems to have taken up cello playing by himself at first, but his theoretical education was carried on by the Concertmaster Enderle. In the year 1761 Schetky went for six months with his father and two sisters to Hamburg. There he had the opportunity of hearing great artists, which incited him to zealous study on his instrument. On his return to Darmstadt he found a post in the orchestra there. Now and then he performed at concerts in the neighbouring towns. After the death of his parents he finally quitted Darmstadt in 1768. He visited Hamburg and then London, where the patronage of Joh. Christoph Bach was of service to him. Schetky did not however remain long in the English capital, as he received a proposal to go to Edinburgh, which he accepted. He very soon, in consequence of his marriage with a rich widow, retired into private life, being known to fame only through his compositions. These, taking no account of an important collection of various orchestral and chamber music works, consist of numberless Violoncello Concertos, Duets for Violin and Violoncello, Sonatas for Violoncello and Bass, and “Twelve Duets for two Violoncellos, with some Observations and Rules for playing that Instrument” (Op. 7). In these duets, as the title says: “Schetky had a scholastic aim in view.” Yet they can scarcely be called a violoncello school.
One of the last of Schetky’s published works is his Op. 13, which contains six Sonatas for Violoncello with unfigured bass. The compositions therein contained give a distinct idea of his fluent though superficially mechanical manner of writing. It can readily be discerned that Schetky had for the time in which he lived a remarkable technique in playing. He must have been able with ease to play at sight the first violin part in Quartets, a talent which proves at once his skill and readiness. His power and agility in bowing as well as his staccato playing in up and down strokes were famous.
According to Gerber’s account, Schetky died in Edinburgh in 1773. In Forster’s “History of the Violin” it is said, on the contrary, that his death took place only in 1824.[73]
As a “clever and solid concert player and composer for his instrument,” Markus Heinrich Graul, who was born in the first half of the last century, is mentioned by Gerber. In the year 1766 he belonged to the Royal orchestra at Berlin. He also composed pieces for the cello, but did not publish them.
His pupil, Joh. Heinrich Viktor Rose, born on December 7, 1743, at Quedlinburg, was early instructed to play on various instruments by his father, who was town musician in the above-named place. The Princess Amalie, who then filled the office of Abbess in the Quedlinburg Convent, became interested in him, and took him with her to Berlin in 1756, where he studied cello playing for some years under Graul and Mara. In 1763 he entered the service of the Prince of Anhalt-Bernberg. Four years later he relinquished that in order to travel, and accepted a place in the band of the Duke of Dessau. He did not long remain there, for in the year 1772 he accepted an offer to be organist at the place of his birth. According to Gerber’s account he possessed not only an extraordinary readiness on the violoncello, but also a most expressive, graceful rendering. Of his compositions, there were three solos with bass accompaniment published as Op. 1.
His best pupil was Friedrich Schrödel, born on February 4, 1754, in Baruth; died January 10, 1800, at Ballenstedt. Gerber calls him one of the greatest masters on the violoncello of that period, and adds that many were of opinion that he surpassed the famous Mara in precision and delicacy.
Johann Jäger must be noticed with special distinction as belonging to the German cellists of the last century. Schubart, who must have known him personally, says in his eccentric manner: “Jäger is quite original; his bowing new, unconstrained, and impetuously fiery. All masters apply the thumb to the D string, and so bring out the high passages; but Jäger departs entirely from this method—a proof that his genius has more than one way of attaining his aim. He goes with lightning dexterity up to the D and A strings in the highest parts and brings out the most delicate phrases with the greatest tenderness and sweetness.... Jäger is also a great reader, prima vista—that is, he can play from the music at sight the most difficult pieces with wonderful art.”
In regard to the Jäger Violoncello compositions, which altogether remained unpublished, Schubart remarks: “He follows no rules in composition, but is guided solely by his ear. His Concertos and Sonatas consist chiefly of original themes, which are grand, noble, adapted to the instrument, and full of difficulties. Jäger caused his pieces to be revised by good musicians, whereby they were put into correct form. At the same time it must be confessed that the superfluous boughs, the offspring often of an unbridled fancy, have not all been pruned off.”
As Jäger’s compositions are not extant there is no possibility of putting to the proof the justice of Schubart’s judgment.
We can only gather that Jäger was self-taught. He appears to have been so even as a player. There is nowhere any intimation that he had any regular instruction on the violoncello. Gerber makes only the remark that Jäger became, under the influence of the Kapellmeister at Würtemburg, “the great man” whom the world admired.
As Fétis informs us, Jäger was born on August 17, 1748, in the little town of Schlitz.[74] He was originally oboe player in the service of Holland. He cultivated at first as his favourite instrument the French horn. After he had been actively engaged at the Court of Stuttgard, the post of chamber virtuoso in the Anspach Bayreuth orchestra fell to his lot. The position left him a great deal of spare time, so that he was able to practise diligently the violoncello, and also to undertake concert tours, which led him to London in 1781.
Jäger had two sons who were educated as violoncellists under his direction. The elder, Johann Zacharias Leonhard, born 1777, at Anspach, showed an early development and was able, even at nine years of age, to execute solos with rapidity, certainty, and accuracy. In 1787 he played at the Prussian Court, and on that occasion so greatly excited the admiration of the Queen that she wished to acquire him for the Royal band in Berlin, to which, however, the father of the boy would not yield on account of his youth. The Queen, therefore, proved her interest in him by granting him a life-long pension of 100 thalers. On his return home the Margrave of Anspach appointed him his chamber musician. He did not, however, remain long in this position, and went with his father to Breslaw. There Jäger’s younger son was born, whose christian name was Ernst. He possessed even more talent than his brother, for it was not long before he overtook him in cello playing, to which the instructions he received from Bernhard Romberg greatly contributed. Until the year 1825 he lived at Breslaw, after having travelled through a great part of Germany and Hungary. Then he responded to a summons from the Bavarian Court to go as solo cellist to Munich.
Besides his two sons, Johann Jäger educated also Alexander Uber, born at Breslaw, 1783, as a capable violoncellist. His father, by profession a solicitor, was an enthusiastic lover of music, occupied his leisure hours with the composition of chamber music, and instituted weekly two concerts in his house. At one of them symphonies were produced, at the other quartets and quintets. At the beginning of our century, Carl Maria v. Weber, who began his career at the Breslaw Theatre, took part in these musical entertainments, as did also the Director of music in the University at Berne and the piano player Klingohr. The intercourse with these men was not of less importance for the musical development of young Uber than his musical life in his father’s house. At first he enjoyed the violin instruction of Jannizeck, while Schnabel conducted his theoretical studies. But he very soon took up the violoncello, for which Jäger was his teacher. In the year 1804 he undertook his first tour, but returned soon to Breslaw. In the course of time Uber filled many positions as Kapellmeister, until about 1820 he settled at Basle, where he was married. In 1823 he undertook the post of Conductor with the Count of Schönaich and Prince von Karolath, but, in the following year, death carried him off. Of his compositions for the violoncello, Uber published a Concerto (Op. 12), Variations with Quartet accompaniment (Op. 14), Six Caprices (Op. 10), and Sixteen Variations upon a German air.
During the second half of the last century the art of violoncello playing had already very extensively spread throughout Germany and had many more noteworthy representatives than in Italy and France. In the latter country the higher pursuit of music was confined chiefly to Paris, and in Italy, as we have already remarked in a previous paragraph, the opera was most decidedly in the foreground, while there was no great demand for instrumental music. On the contrary, Germany called out more instrumental vigour in order to satisfy the need of good musicians for the numberless Courts. According to Gottlieb Friedrich Krebel’s European genealogical handbook of the year 1770, there were, including the Romaic-German Emperor and the King of Prussia, over two hundred secular and spiritual princes and sovereign counts, the greater number of whom supported Kapelle (bands) or at least chamber music. These persons considered it of utmost importance to have about them not only good violin and wind instrument players, but also capable violoncellists, and consequently more talented young men devoted themselves in Germany to instrumental music, and especially to violoncello playing, than elsewhere.
We have already seen that the introduction of the Violoncello from Italy to Germany was by way of Vienna. At least, up to the present time, there are no proofs that the appreciation of this instrument and its reception into the orchestra had taken place sooner in other German places than in the Austrian capital. There was an eager demand for music from the reign of Maximilian I., to which the musical inclinations of the Imperial family contributed. Maximilian II., Ferdinand III., Leopold I., Charles VI., Francis I., and Joseph II., each in his own way, presented to the inhabitants of Vienna a good example as regarded the encouragement of music. Already several decades before the birth of the last-mentioned prince, who himself played the violoncello, this instrument had been naturalised in Vienna as an orchestral instrument. Under his reign, after the advent of Franciscello, whose performances gave an impulse to emulation, Vienna was already in possession of some remarkable solo cellists. To them belong the two Schindlökers and Joseph Weigl, who have already been mentioned, as well as Johann Hoffmann, member of the Court band, Marteau, Hauer, and Küffel;[75] somewhat later followed the cellists Cajetan, Gottlieb, Scheidl, and Hauschka.