146

A VIOLIN BYJACOBUS STAINER

1679

Roger Hargrave examines the construction and workmanshipof this violin,

which still retains its original undisturbed baroque neck.

Roger Hargrave se penche sur la construction et lafacon d'un violon Jacobus Stainer, 1679, qui conserveson manche baroque original encore intact.

Roger Hargrave untersucht den Bau and dieMachart einer Violine von Jacobus Stainer, 1679,deren ursprünglicher barocker Hals unversehrterhalten ist.

Jacobus Stainer is one of the very few non-Italian violin makers whose life and work havebeen seriously researched.

There have been a number of important publi-cations, most of which have drawn upon thescholarly research work of the late ProfessorDr. Walter Senn. However, in spite ofSenn's magnificent efforts, several im-portant questions remain unanswered,the exact dates of Stainer's birth anddeath, whether he used both written andprinted labels, and undoubtedly the mostcontroversial of all: where did Stainerlearn his trade?

Stainer was certainly not self taught,the diversity and quality of the in-struments which he produced pointto an extremely thorough apprentice-ship. It is also very unlikely that he re-ceived only a rudimentary training andafterwards improved himself through con-tact with great instruments. Once again, the sophis-tication, even of his early works speaks against sucha conclusion.

It is hardly possible that Stainer learned his tradein Austria, where at that time there was no one with

the necessary experience.

Earlier Füssen in the Allgäu might have been a con-sideration, however, the ravages of the thirty yearswar had left Füssen bereft of skilled instrument mak-

ers, most of whom had found refuge in Italy andin particular in Venice, Rome and Padua.

Experts seem to agree that Stainer learnedhis trade in Italy. And although this agree-

ment mostly rests on analogies of Stainer'swork, it is also known (from his writings) that hewas familiar with the language. Furthermore,there are several oral traditions relating to an

Italian apprenticeship. As might be expectedhowever these oral traditions are contra-

dictory, on the one hand saying thatStainer worked in Venice and on theother that he worked in Cremona.

Although Senn seems to have beenconvinced that Stainer . . . "was in fact ap-

prenticed to a German violin maker resi-dent in Italy" (The New Grove dictionary,

W. Senns) . . . he offers no hard evidencefor this statement.

If Stainer had been apprenticed to aGerman violin maker the likelihood isthat this would have been in Venice. At

various times thirty four makers fromFüssen alone are known to have lived and

worked in Venice and there were certainly makersfrom the Füssen region working in Venice at the timein which Stainer would have served an apprentice-ship, c.1630 to 38. These makers would have includedMatteo and Georgius Sellos and Martino Kaiser. Mag-nus Tiefenbrucker II, often thought to have been a

147

possible teacher, was already dead at thistime. Petro Vinercati who has also beenconsidered as a possible teacher of Stainer,was probably of Italian origin, but he wasalmost certainly not established before1638. At later dates there are several docu-mented trips made by Stainer to Venice.These prove that Stainer had connectionswith the city, however, there is also ampledocumentary evidence for similar trips toSalzburg, München, Innsbruck, Bozen andseveral other important centres.

There are those who point out that a Ve-netian apprenticeship is apparent in theconstruction and style of Stainer's instru-ments, saying in essence that . . . 'Stainer'stechnique and style clearly show that helearned the basics of his craftsmanship notfrom an Italian, but from a German violinmaker, more than likely a refugee fromFüssen living in Venice.' (Jacobus Stainerand 18th century violin masters W. Stennpresented by Jacques Francais).

I personally find this argument to bevery weak. Whilst it may be accepted thatStainer learned musical instrument mak-ing in Venice and from a German, he couldnot have learned violin making specifically,since there were no violin makers of notein Venice at that time. Matteo Goffriller,who was the first important violin makerto work in Venice only arrived there tobegin working for Martin Kaiser about twoyears after Stainer's death. In all honesty itis difficult to associate any contemporaryVenetian instrument maker with the stylewhich Stainer so rapidly developed and ina field of instrument making which was in-disputably Cremonese in origin.

For what my own opinion might beworth, the style, method and above all thevarnish of Stainer point most definitely to-wards Cremona.

'Cremona, the undisputed centre of vio-lin making, is one of the few Italian citiesupon which the Füssen School did not leaveits mark. Amongst the early lute makersthere is not one solitary Füssen maker tobe found and even in the first years of thedevelopment of the violin (mid 16th) theCremonese makers were a group which

Above: Diagram of Corner Block. Below: X Ray showing position of nail inthe neck of the violin.

148

kept very much to themselves. Only in the middle ofthe 17th century, the time of the exodus in the North,do we find several German apprentices in the work-shop of Nicolo Amati.' (Die Lauten and Geigenmacherdes Füssener Landes, by Friedrich Hofmeister,my translation).

At the time of Stainer's supposed appren-ticeship only Nicolo Amati could have been re-garded as a possible teacher for Stainer inCremona. Hieronymus Amati I having died ofthe Plague in 1630. Certainly the similarity be-tween some of Stainer's instruments andthose of the Amati, are so strikingly obviousthat it is difficult to imagine any other pos-sible source for Stainer's inspiration.The Brescian School was so totally dif-ferent as to defy comparison, but itcan be noted in passing that Magginihad also died in the plague of the1630's which wiped out all violin mak-ers of note, the sole exception beingNicolo Amati. Quite apart from cer-tain structural comparisons whichcan be made, between Stainer'swork and that of the CremoneseSchool, few violin makers ever suc-ceeded in producing instrumentsof such aesthetic beauty. The su-perb curving lines, the sculpturaldepth and the delicate craftsman-ship of Stainer's instruments are the epitome of thebaroque. I would maintain that in this respect aloneStainer at his best comes closer than any other clas-sical maker to the Amati ideal.

There is, however, no mention of Stainer's namein the Cremona archives and so, once again, we cando little more than speculate.

Whoever it was that taught Stainer initially, it isabundantly clear that by the 18th century his ownworks had become the dominant influence upon Eu-ropean violin making. The only major exceptionsbeing Brecia and Cremona. By the latter half of the17th century, in his own lifetime, Stainer's reputationhad reached remarkable heights. Around 1658 he waseven supplying instruments to the Spanish court. Forthe next 150 years Stainer's instruments were con-sidered the non plus ultra.

`Literary sources confirm the high esteem inwhich his instruments were held, even in compari-son with those of the Cremona masters. Hawkins forexample wrote: "The violins of Cremona are ex-

ceeded only by those of Stainer . . . whose instru-ments are remarkable for a full and piercing tone."The Encyclopedia methodique states that: "the vio-lins with the greatest reputation are those of Jacob

Stainer" and Stainer heads a list of distin-guished makers compiled by FrancescoGaleazzi.' (Taken from the New Grove dic-tionary and including quotations from:Hawkins H., Encyclopedia methodique: artset métiers mécaniques IV Paris 1785).

`How much Stainer was favoured abovehis competitors may also be seen from theprices their instruments commanded: inItaly a Stainer violin brought 100 Gigliati,a Stradivari 10 14 Gigliati (1776); in Londona Stainer brought £136 1/2 in 1791, aStradivarius £14 in 1775.' (Jakob Stainer,Leben and Werk des Tiroler Meisters 16171683 by Senn and Roy).

It was the changes in musical tastes,technique and technology, towards theend of the 18th and into the 19th cen-tury, which were mainly responsible forStainer's fall from grace. The works ofStradivari and Guarneri were some-what better suited to these changes.

It is sometimes difficult to under-stand why the eclipse of Stainer's starwas so total, especially since his in-

struments would have been the first choice of con-temporary musicians. Perhaps the baroque revivalwill help to revitalise interest in this much underval-ued master violin maker. I sincerely hope so. This1679 violin by Jacob Stainer is one of the few Classi-cal violins which have never been converted to mod-ern playing specifications. No similar violin is knownto exist from the `accepted' Cremonese school. Re-markably after over 300 years this instrument still re-tains its unaltered original neck fingerboard andbassbar.

Perhaps even more remarkable is that a second vi-olin dated 1668 in almost the same state of preserva-tion was sold at Sothebies, London, in November1988. The similarity of the fingerboards left me withlittle doubt that both were.from the same hand andthat in both cases the wear was comparable and con-sistent with that of the accompanying instrument. (Itis always possible that these boards are replace-ments, but I consider this very unlikely and in anycase they would certainly be very early replace-ments). I was pleased to hear that the 1668 Stainer

149

has found a permanent home at the Shrine to MusicMuseum in the U.S.A.

The 1679 Stainer illustrated here was made at thetime when Stainer was beginning to suffer from whatappears to have been attacks of manic depression orsome similar mental disorder. On this particular in-strument however there are no signs of any deterio-ration in Stainer's craftsmanship as a result of hisillness. The work is quite beautiful and very clean.

Before I continue with the description of this in-strument, I must point out that because of the natureof Stainer's work, it will be difficult to avoid constantcomparisons with Cremonese works. However, weshould not necessarily see these comparisons as at-tempts to forge crude links between Stainer and Cre-mona. The simple truth is that Stainer was influencedby the Amatis, even if he was not directly taught bythem.

Stainer is often associated with lion heads, butthese are very much the exception rather than therule. They belong to the South German tradition andthey are one of the features which link Stainer to aGerman master and the city of Venice. Such lionheads were not exclusive to Stainer and it does notseem unreasonable to assume that these heads(carved from pear wood) were simply ordered from askilful woodcarver, for which the Tirol is justly fa-mous. But then, who am I to take away credit fromsuch a master as Stainer?

The material for this `normal' scroll type head, incommon with most classical heads, is quite plain, ob-viously for ease of carving. What little figure there is,is similar to that of the back. Slightly more unusual isthe rate of growth. On both the head and the back theyear rings, though barely visible, are quite wide (5 to6 mm).

Even at this late stage in Stainer's development thehead of this instrument has many features which re-semble the Amati school. However, the downwardcurve of the upper pegbox line, as viewed from theside, begins its quite pronounced turn into the scrollat a point just above the A and D pegs. On an Amatihead this change in the curves begins fractionallylater. This feature is common to most of Stainer'sheads so that whilst the outlines are often decep-tively Amatis the pegbox scroll relationship has alittle more swing. The fairly open throat and its ac-companying chamfer reaches back slightly as it joinsthe underside of the head, helping to accentuate theflow of the pegbox into the first turns.

If we compare this feature with those Stradivarianheads illustrated in previous STRAD posters we cansee that in contrast Stradivari's narrower throatsmake a small tight curl upwards at the end.

Still looking from the side, it is apparent that theturns of the scroll itself are very similar in size andform to an Amati head. Only the finishing of the eyehas an extra quarter of a turn. This extra turn is notalways found on Stainer's works, sometimes foundon Amati's instruments, but almost always found ex-aggerated on Stainer's copies. With or without thisextra turn the eyes of Stainer's scrolls usually havethe look of an inverted comma. Although this commais also a regular feature of Amati heads the final turninto the eye is usually more open in the case ofStainer.

On this instrument the flat cut to the volutes, asthe pegbox sides turn into the scroll, resemble thework of Andrea Amati or Francesco Ruggeri. How-ever, I think that it is fair to say that Stainer's headsare usually cut with a little more definition into thefirst turn. Coming out of the second turn and run-ning in towards the eyes of the volutes more typicallyincrease in depth quite markedly and certainly farmore than we would expect to see on a Stradivariscroll.

Viewed from the back the pegbox has a long taper,perhaps a fraction more extreme than an Amati.There is no sign of that extra width to the back of thebox opposite the throat which we associate with thelater Cremonese school, particularly Stradivari.

The flutings have a rounded finish which is welldefined but not deep, especially over the top andfront of the head. The chin is beautifully rounded offat the end without any no hint of the squareness,which again, characterises so many of Stainer's copy-ists. At the chin the flutings are filled with sealingwax bearing an unknown seal. (Possibly a family crestor a customs seal). Under the front of the head thecentral spine between the flutings fades quickly awayso that the two flutes blend to become one largecurve above the throat. This is also very much anAmati school feature and it is particularly associatedwith Francesco Ruggeri and Andrea Amati. There are,however, no signs of ascribe line, or compass pricks,on the central spine, which are often characteristicof the Cremonese school. I cannot recall seeing suchmarks on any other Stainer head.

The whole head is extremely clean with delicatelyworked chamfers. The only signs of tool marks are a

150

few fine traces of the gouge, on thevertical surfaces of the scroll bosses

and there are certainly less of thesethan we would see even

on a Stradivari.

From the front thehead is again very Cre-

monese in style. Thepegbox walls are gen-

erously thick andonly Stainer's usualnarrowness of thebox at the A pegend deviates fromthe Cremoneseideal.

It can be seenthat the walls of the pegbox have been thinned outas they approach the nut. This is to allow the E and Gstrings easier access to the box. This feature seemsto be original, but it may be .a later alteration.

The outline of this instrument is only one step re-moved from the Amati concept. The curves are gen-erally broad and open, especially the C'bout curvesand there is that distinctive Amatese flatness acrossthe top and bottom blocks. The archings are veryreminiscent of the Brothers Amati, in their wellscooped edges, although this particular arching ismuch flatter across the top than any Amati archingwould be. This flatness gives the arching that char-acteristic boxy Figure of Eight fullness which is usu-ally regarded as Stainer's trademark.

I have seen instruments by Stainer, where thearchings, the outlines and the purfling of the backs somuch resemble the work of Amati that it is only anextremely clever eye that can distinguish them be-fore the belly has been seen.

This particular two piece back is cut on the quar-ter and has a med to tight figure. The growth struc-ture as I mentioned before, is quite wide. Stainer useda variety of maple backs. His two piece backs areoften joined in the Amati style with the flame con-tinuing across the centre joint in the same direction.Stainer also used one piece backs cut on the quarter,the slab and sometimes even the half slab. Only rarelycan the flame or figure be described as wide.

Stainer is often associated with the use of bird'seye maple, which although more frequently usedthan the lion heads was also the exception ratherthan the rule. His use of bird's eye maple most defin-

tely distances him from the Cremonese position. Icannot recall the use of bird's eye maple by any mem-ber of the `accepted' Cremonese school. (Josef FilusAndrea Guarneri did make a number of instrumentson which the flame of the back has the appearanceof having a very small amount of bird's eye cut on thequarter. Normal bird's eye is cut on the slab).

On the back of this example, the purfling is beau-tiful, with slender mitres which stand up even to mi-croscope scrutiny. There are no stings, but the mitresseem to move just a little off centre pointing veryslightly inwards. The blacks of the purfling are veryintense and relatively fine.

The whites of the purfling do not have the usualCremonese appearance of fine longitudinal splits. In-stead they have very tiny brown flecks. Of the Cre-monese makers only Francesco Ruggeri regularlyused similar white wood for his purfling. Ruggeri hasseveral other features in common with Stainer. Wehave already touched upon the finishing of the cen-tral spine between the volutes under the head. An-other practice common to both makers was the factthat they did not use the tiny wooden locating pins,that is to say those pins which pass through the backsand bellies and into the top and bottom blocks, usu-ally on the centre line and close to the purfling. I donot know of any other Classical Cremonese makerwho did not use these pins.

Very unlike the Cremonese school is the treatmentof the edgework on the underside of the plates. Onthis instrument the rounding off is extremely evenwith no sign of the knife cut chamfer, which usuallyremains to be seen on all clean Cremonese instru-ments. This cleanly rounded underside to the edge-work seems to have been a regular working practiceof Stainer's. The upper edgework is, however, fin-ished in the Cremonese style. Sometimes Stainer'sedgework is even more deeply worked than this ex-ample with tighter curves and with thepurfling set closer to the outside edge.On these instruments the highestpoint of the edge seems to lie abouthalfway between the purfling andthe outside curling. Onthis violin there is verylittle ware to the backedges and it is quiteclear that the highestpoint of the edge liesmuch further out. Iwould estimate

151

that it was originally at least two thirds of the dis-tance from the purfling to the outside. Understand-ably the corners are slightly more worn than theedges. They are typically quite short, but they arewell balanced and finished with just the suggestionof a hook to give them more definition. This subtlehook is often seen on Cremonese instruments and itwas even exaggerated on occasions by (among oth-ers) G. B. Rogeri and Guarneri Del Gesu. There is a def-inite increase in the thicknessing of the corners andof the edges in the centre bouts. (See measurements).

Before leaving the back I should mention the but-ton. In spite of its being slightly elongated, it is alsoCremonese in shape and form, tapering slightly andincreasing in thickness away from the edge.

The ribs, of a similar figure to the back, are cut onthe slab. Slab ribs were fairly common onearly classical works, but in later timesthey were largely dropped in favour ofmore stable quarter sawn ribs. As would beexpected, the top rib is of one piece. It runsthrough the joint between the neck and theupper block thus helping to avoid the risk ofthe block splitting as in this case the singlenail was being hammered home. The bottomrib is of two pieces, but Stainer also used onepiece bottom ribs.

When this instrument was opened it waspossible to see that the ends of the centrebout ribs had been thinned to about 0.5mmor less as they ran over the corner blocksout towards the mitre.

Since the rib corners were relativelystubby and void of any extreme curves, itmay have been possible with such a trick tohave bent the ribs without the use of heat. I have seensimilar treatment to the ribs of Del Gesu's instru-ments. Del Gesu also used short rib corners and opencentre bouts.

We now turn to the belly. Two pieces of even,straight grained pine, of medium growth wideningslightly in the flanks. It is the type of wood whichStradivari seemed to prefer in his late period. Stainersometimes used belly wood of extremely fine growth,of a type seldom seen in Cremona and which we nor-mally associate with the Mittenwald School. Hereagain the edgework is in a very good state of preser-vation with only the corners and the chin area show-ing any real signs of wear and tear. An interestingfeature of this belly is that the purfling runs through

underneath the fingerboard. This feature can also beseen on the Messiah Stradivari, where the modernneck has not been let in as deeply as would normallybe the case. This would seem to contradict Sacconi,who suggests that the belly was glued on with thehelp of wedges placed under the fingerboard. If suchwere indeed the case then the purfling could nothave been inserted after the soundbox was closed asSacconi also suggests, since the fingerboards wouldhave been in the way.

It can also be noted that the scoop of the belly runsright to the outside edge underneath the finger-board.

The soundholes sit on a short stop, in this case 191mm and 192mm. For this reason the bottom circlesof the soundholes also sit high in relation to the

lower curve of the centre bouts. This shortstop was frequently copied, but it was not

a feature of the Cremonese school gener-ally. Only Del Gesu in the early 1730s experi-

mented with this idea. Normally Cremoneselower circles lay below the line of the centrebout purfling.

The top and bottom circles are clearlydrilled. Although the right hand lower cir-cle is slightly oval crossways, this is due tothe process of joining the circle to themain body of the soundhole. It is a featureoften noted on Stainer's works. On the out-side of some instruments, running aroundthe upper soundhole circle, are tiny pinpricks, probably left over from the mark-ing out process. These are similar to themarkings which can be found around theeyes of Guadagnini family scrolls, though

not as crude.

For those modern makers who do not drill theirsoundhole circles, this example shows how easy it isto create finely pointed wings without any risk of thetip breaking off during the cutting process. Even DelGesu at his wildest was capable of creating flimsypointed soundhole wings simply because he drilledhis circles first. Unlike the circles, the main bodies ofthe soundholes are not cut at right angles to the sur-face of the arching in the normal Cremonese style.They seem instead to be cut on the same verticalplane as the ribs, so that when viewed from the frontneither side of the soundhole body can be seen indepth. The soundhole nicks are quite large and rem-iniscent of Nicolo Amati at the time when he was re-verting to his grandfather's style of nick cutting.

152

The nicks on these soundholes are not cut verti-cally, through to the inside of the plate. Instead theyclosed up slightly towards the inside.

The lower wings of the soundholes have no flut-ings, they are simply an integral part of the archingflow. In contrast, Stradivari's soundhole flutes defi-nitely change the direction of the arching flow.

The soundhole wings themselves curve tightlyround towards the circles. If you can imagine thesewings tapering slightly towards the ends, rather thanremaining almost parallel, you will end up withsomething very much like a Brothers or an early Ni-colo Amati soundhole. As is usual for Stainer, how-ever, the main body of the soundhole is slightlystraighter and stiffer than an Amati soundholeshould be.

As I have previously pointed out the arching has aslight Figure of Eight character, with a deep scooparound the edges and a flattish top. Because of thesharp rise in the arch from the scoop and the result-ing tight curve onto the flat top, the upper outsidecurves of the soundholes droop considerably, whenthe instrument is viewed from the side. This droop iscommon to many of Stainer's works and it is a fea-ture which is often exaggerated to the point of cari-cature by his copyists. In contrast, the more curvingsoundholes of the Amatis and Stradivari, lift theupper section of the soundhole bodies so that theyappear to lie parallel to the line of the belly edge andribs.

As can be expected on all classical instruments, theinside work is sound but not fussy. On the inside ofthe ribs there are no traces of a tooth plane iron, such

as occasionally decorates the works ofother classical craftsmen, includ-

ing some Cremonese makers.From the size and shape of theblocks we can summarise thatthe rib structure was con-

structed around an inside moldsimilar in function and form to those

which survive in the Stradivari mu-seum. The corner blocks are " fairly wide and are made of pine.Occasionally these blocks weremade of walnut,

but pine was the usual ma-terial. Stainer seems to havetaken pains to ensure that theyear rings of these pine corner

blocks ran parallel to the centre joint. See diagram ofcorner block. I have not seen very many Stainer vio-lins from the inside, however, this feature did repeatitself in every case. The centre bout linings are letdeeply and squarely into the corner blocks. Wherethe linings were let into the corner blocks in Mitten-wald and other areas outside of the Cremonesesphere they were often only let in with a shallowpoint cut by a knife. This practice of Stainer's is oneof the principle constructional features of his workwhich strongly indicates a Cremonese apprentice-ship. The linings are about the same height as thoseof Nicolo Amati (approx. 7mm). They are slightly an-gular in section being finished with a large chamferwhich has been softened at the edges. The materialfor the linings, distinctly Stainer, is walnut wood. KarlRoy points out that walnut trees are still common inthe area around Absam. (Jacob Stainer, Leben andWerk des Tiroler Meisters).

The two end blocks are half round and very sub-stantial. Again they are of pine and in each case theyear rings run parallel to the rib. Understandably theneck block is considerably thicker than the end pinblock. It has a single nail passing through its centreand into the neck root. From Stradivari's relics weknow that he was a belt and braces man. He usedthree nails for violin necks and five for celli. So littleis known about the nailing methods of other classicalmakers that it is not possible to make comparisons.

The original bassbar is still in place. It lies almostparallel to the centre joint. (It actually seems to bevery slightly closer to the centre line at the end pinend). It is shorter, thinner and lower than a modernbar (see measurements). The bar is not tapered in itswidth like almost all the other baroque bassbars Ihave seen, including those of Northern Europe. Hereagain, however, there is too little available informa-tion to make accurate comparisons.

From the thicknessing charts we can see thatStainer's, in common with most classical makers, wasnot as accurate as modern makers would try to be.We can, however, distinguish certain patterns to histhicknessing technique.

From the available belly measurements, it can beseen that a band of strength runs through the middlesection of the plate, having its greatest thickness inthe region between the soundholes. The areas be-neath the deep outside scooping of the arching arecorrespondingly thinner than the rest of the plate.

The more comprehensive back measurements are

153

very similar in concept to many Cremonese plates. Ithas a clearly defined central thickness radiating out-wards. Like the belly, only the weakness around theedges, which again conforms to the deep archingscoop, does not correspond with the works of Stradi-vari and Guarneri Del Gesu. I suspect that this is themain feature which gives Stainer violins their dis-tinctive sweet sound, but which robs them of thepower of a Guarneri or a Stradivari. Scooping in itselfmay not be a bad thing. Some Carlo Bergonzi violinsfor example are quite well scooped. What is probablymore important is the thicknessing at this point.

In previous articles I have mentioned the singlewooden pin which is set into the backs of instru-ments of the Guarneri family and several other Cre-monese makers. (See the 'Kreisler' Del Gesu posterMay 1988 THE

STRAD).

There is no sign of such a pin having been used byStradivari and its use in Cremona was certainly notuniversal. The reason or reasons for this pin havebeen a source of increasing speculation since this `se-cret' information became more general knowledge afew years ago.*

Although not filled with a wooden pin in the man-ner of the Guarneri family, many of Stainer's instru-ments do seem to have had a diagram. These holesare clearly visible through the parchment strip whichis glued onto the back along the centre joint. Suchstrips of Velum seem to have been regularly used byStainer. Presumably they are there to support thecentre joint. The reason for the pins and or conicalholes remains a mystery and in this particular casethey do not seem to be directly related to any thick-nessing system. I have never seen another Stainerwith more than one such `hole', however, a 1679Stainer which was recently opened in the workshopsof Hieronymus Kösler in Stuttgart had five similarholes.

Any classical violin in original baroque condition isa great rarity. There are no known violins from theCremonese school in such an original state. Even thegreat 'Salabue' Stradivari 1716, also known as 'LeMessie', has a new neck, fingerboard and bassbar.

Whilst I personally believe that Stainer did learnhis trade in Cremona, even if he did not, his work wasclearly highly influenced by the Cremonese schooland we can take it for granted that not only were thebodies and heads of this instruments made in theCremonese style, the fixtures and fitting would also

have been very similar.

The length of the neck and fingerboard may havebeen slightly different from that of the Cremonese asa result of Stainer's short stop, although throughoutthe classical period string lengths and neck lengthsseem to have varied considerably. I can only offer afew alternatives here. The fingerboard of the `Lady

Blunt' Stradivari, 1721, is considerably shorter. Thenut to table length is 120mm. The total fingerboardlength is 213mm. A J. B. Guadagnini board from 1757has a nut and table length of 127mm with an overalllength of 237mm. In both these cases the finger-boards have an ebony or some stained hard wood ve-neer on the top surface only.

An instrument more closely related in time to theStainer is the large Andrea Guarneri Viola of 1664.The fingerboard has been tampered with (a wedgehas been placed beneath it), but I think that other-wise it can be considered original. The measurementscannot, of course, be compared, but it is interestingto note that it too has black veneers on both the topand the sides. (This viola is in the Shrine to Musicmuseum. See also the notes on varnish in this arti-cle).

The fingerboard of the 1668 Stainer which has al-ready been referred to is also surfaced with black ve-

154

neers on both the top and the sides. (I did not takenote of the measurements for this instruments). Alsoin the Shrine Museum is a large viola by Stainer. It is446mm long and supposedly dates from 1665. It toohas a baroque style neck and fingerboard, these arehowever the result of a re conversion. Very much thesame story applies to the three large violas in theAshmolian museum. These violas are by AndreaAmata 1574, Gaspara da Salo Brecia, late 16th centuryand Hieronymus and Antonius Amati, 1592. All threeof these instruments have what are probably origi-nal tailpieces. The Gasparo viola is also said to haveits original board, but I cannot verify this. The pointabout all of these viola, is that the fingerboards andtailpieces are of figured maple, inlaid with a diamondcriss cross pattern of black and white purfling strips.The use of such inlays seems to have become thestandard on modern baroque instruments. HoweverI believe that this kind of work was a feature only tobe found on the very early instruments. The practicemay have been superceded by the advent of thewound string. This development began in the secondhalf of the 17th century. Quite obviously metal woundstrings would have worn an inlaid maple fingerboardfar more quickly than one faced with a hardwood ve-neer such as ebony. Furthermore, a veneer could bemore easily replaced after wear. Even when Stradi-vari inlaid his fingerboards he was basically using asingle (ebony?) veneer.

The fingerboard illustrated here has remarkablethick (ebony?) veneers about 1.7 to 2mm. These arelaid over a slab cut board which does not appear to beof maple. Of the few surviving boards which I haveseen, most are roughly gouged and rasped under-neath. In contrast, this board is extremely clean. It isonly slightly hollowed underneath and the V shapedcut out runs squarely through from one side to theother. The shape, form and cleanliness closely matchthat of the (considerably shorter) 1721 `Lady Blunt'Stradivari board.

The top curve of the board is very flat and it has atiny saw or file cut in the centre at the end (see draw-ing). This "notch" is about the size which a stringwould fit into. I have no ideas about its originality oruse.

Unfortunately the tailpiece is not original. Neitheris the lower nut or saddle. There is one peg whichwas with the instrument. It is made of ebony and hasa large ivory ball (2.5mm) on the head. Its originalityis questioned by some authorities mainly on thegrounds that it is made of ebony(?). I am not certain

about when and how ebony first arrived in SouthernEurope, but I suspect that it was available before1679. The present pegs are copies of the single sur-viving peg.

I have left until last the question of Stainer's var-nish. In the final analysis it is the quality of the var-nish which makes or breaks the product.

Usually it is the varnish on Stainer violins which,at a glance, distinguished them from those of hiscopyists, placing him firmly in the ranks of the Cre-monese masters and in particular alongside theAmati family. The varnish on this instrument is, how-ever, a little unusual. It is of an orange brown colourand has been extremely thinly applied. It is presentin large amounts and it is in a very pure state ofpreservation. But it is not what most people wouldconsider a classical varnish.

The process of polishing varnish lifts the refrac-tive index, effectively making it more transparent. Italso raises the intensity of colour. Too much polish-ing breaks down the surface texture and creates aglassy coating, which reflects the light almost beforeit has had the time to penetrate down to the wood.Unfortunately, the vast majority of classical instru-ments have been overpolished, usually with a thicklayer of shellac. Simply because pure unpolished in-struments are so extremely rare, they are often notrecognised by the inexperienced eye. This is one rea-son why the 'Salabue' Stradivari, 1716, better knownas 'Le Messie' is often denounced. The Stainer violinillustrated here falls into this category.

Although it takes a practised eye to appreciate thefull beauty of this mercifully unpolished varnish, itis certainly worth making the effort. In fact it isworth making the effort to see as many examples aspossible of such varnishes. The largest collections ofsuch varnishes are to be found in the following mu-seums:

•The Shrine to Music Museum, Vermillion, South

Dakota, USA.

•The Paris Conservatoire, Paris, France.

•The Ashmolian Museum, Oxford, England.

155

Bibliography:

1.Jacob Stainer, by Walter Senn.

University Press Wagner, Innsbruck, 1951.

2.Jacob Stainer, by Walter Senn and Karl Roy.,Verlag E. Bochinsky, 1986.

3.Jacobus Stainer and 18th Violin Masters,

by Jacques Francais. (Austrian Institute).4.Jacob Stainer and Seine Zeit, ex catalogue.

Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum, Innsbruck.5.Jacob Stainer and seine Zeit.

Bericht fiber die J. S. Tagung, Innsbruck 1983, Walter Salmen.

6.The New Grove Dictionary of Musical Instruments,approx. 1984.

7.Die Lauten and Geigenmacher des Missener Landes

by Fredrich Hofmeister, 1978.

Photographs: Michael FrankeResearch Assistance: MicheleAshley

Roger Hargrave and THE STRAD wishes to thankKarl Roy and the Publisher 'Verlag' E. Bochinsky, forpermission to reproduce the thicknessing chartswhich appear on this poster. They are taken from thebook 'Jakob Stainer Leben and Werk des Tiroler Meis-ters 1617 1683' by Senn Roy. Also the owner of thisviolin, Master Violin Maker Michael Franke of Wies-baden, West Germany.

156

157

158