Just more on this. I’m engraving it. So I can’t copy from B&H due to copyright. And neither do I want to. I don’t have any of the MSS and there is no autograph. So I am using the Roger. It’s interesting that there are two B&H editions and both omit this sign with no comment. So maybe its not in any other MS. That may mean that it’s only in the Roger. Perhaps the 1710 Roger is unreliable. Yes, there are a few mistakes in it, but so there are in many many editions. As far as I know the extant MSS are not accessible online. If they are, let me know.
As it happens, there are no other ornament signs in that piece at all.
Sadly Dorico 5 does not allow me to do the very neat 1710 style Roger rests, which I really like. At least not without a great deal of trouble.
Correct Dennis. As i suggested in a past post, the parenthesis normally implied a coulè or passing note, as clearly explained in the d’Anglebert’s Table of 1689. (In it, he employed a different sign for the plain arpeggio, the slash on the stem, which in later times was abandoned in favour of the undulating vertical trait).
1 Like
Should members finally run out of steam on this absorbing detail, I propose we discuss how many angels can dance on the head of a pin!
David
1 Like
These soft metal plates were “punched” by tapping with little dies or punches shaped like musical symbols. Note, for example, that the staff braces and clefs are absolutely identical, not possible with engraving or etching. So I humbly hypothesize that the engraver (puncher?) grabbed what looked to be an “arpeggio punch” and picked up a small brace punch by mistake. Anyone who has set type will know how easyily such a mistake can happen. The other keyboard collection by Roger on IMSLP has no arpeggios, like the remainder of the print being discussed, so it may be that arpeggio punches were not very common in the Roger workshop.
1 Like
The real question, of course, is whether angels are corporeal or
non-corporeal. N.B. This is not a change of topic. (grin-emoji)
cheers,
S
1 Like
Maybe it would help to know if angels only quiver on the last chord of the dance, or do they sometimes quiver on important chords in the middle of the dance, and if so, how do they notate it?
…or perhaps on the shorter chords they only do a semiquiver?
I already mentioned that myself, if you may have missed it!
“How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?” (alternatively “How many angels can stand on the point of a pin?”)[1] is a phrase that, when used in modern contexts, can be used as a metaphor for wasting time debating topics of no practical value, or on questions whose answers hold no intellectual consequence, while more urgent concerns accumulate.[1][2]
The phrase was originally used in a theological context by 17th century Protestants to mock medieval scholastics such as Duns Scotus[3] and Thomas Aquinas.[4] Whether medieval scholastics really discussed the topic is, however, a matter of debate. The suggestion is possibly an Early Modern invention, intended to discredit scholastic philosophy.[5]
The phrase has also been associated with the fall of Constantinople, with the assertion that scholars debated the topic while Turks besieged the city.[2][6] In Italian,[7] French,[8] Spanish and Portuguese, the conundrum of useless scholarly debates is linked to a similar question of whether angels are sexless or have a sex.[6] In Polish, instead of angels the question is about devils.
I’m officially changing to devils.
While here, my OP is of practical value as I am engraving the piece and I need to know what to do, either add some sign or omit it or just deal with it in a footnote at the back, as per B&H et al. It’s not a large matter, but it does have a practical aspect. If I were just playing the piece I wouldn’t give a hoot.
1 Like