HIDDEN TREASURES

Pietro Guarneri of Mantua was an undisputed master luthier, even though very few examples of his work remain. Andrea Zanrè examines three ‘violettas’ that until now have been overlooked

The original top of a 1690 viol by Pietro Guarneri, later cut into a guitar shape and converted into a viola d’amore

JAN RÖHRMANN

For 380 years, the northern Italian city of Mantua was ruled uninterruptedly by the House of Gonzaga. The family tree includes many illustrious names, but that of its tenth and final duke, Ferdinando Carlo, was hardly one of them. He is remembered, however, for having been the employer and mentor of one of the greatest violin makers in history: Pietro Guarneri, son of Andrea, also known as Pietro of Mantua.

Born in 1652, the duke was nearly an exact contemporary of the luthier, who was born in Cremona in 1655 and whose personality is often defined in contrast with that of his younger brother Giuseppe, called ‘filius Andreae’ to differentiate him from his own son Bartolomeo Giuseppe, universally known as ‘del Gesù’.

The older Giuseppe spent his whole life in Cremona and never abandoned the workshop founded by his father, whom he faithfully assisted at the bench until his death in 1698; in the three successive wills Andrea left behind, he never forgot to mention this, nor the completely opposite attitude for which he could never forgive his first-born son Pietro.

Pietro’s self-assured personality thus stands in sharp contrast with the rest of the family he left behind in Cremona. Only recent research conducted by Philip J. Kass has clarified that Pietro moved, together with his newly married wife Caterina Susagni, from Cremona to Mantua either in late 1679 or early 1680, while Antonio Stradivari was rapidly confirming his reputation as the foremost violin maker in Italy and Europe.

We do not know whether Pietro would have had an informal invitation to play in one of Mantua’s ducal ensembles, as his formal appointment only started in 1685, but it is quite likely.

Pietro definitely appears to have been a shrewd, resourceful character as a young man, which would not fit with a decision to move his family without solid prospects. In fact, not long after arriving in Mantua, in 1682 he acquired a monopoly on strings for the entire duchy, although this privilege would only become effective ten years later. He subsequently obtained two patenti (court appointments) in 1685 and 1690, which allowed him to carry not only his tools but also a weapon (presumably a sword), as well as a passport bestowed by the duke that would allow him to travel ‘abroad’, i.e. outside the duchy.

Before becoming a part of the Austrian Empire in 1708, Mantua was an independent duchy and thus an entirely different state from Cremona, which then fell under the jurisdiction of Milan. The loss of its independence was the result of Ferdinando Carlo’s alliance with the French during the War of the Spanish Succession, a move he paid for with an accusation of felony and a forced exile to the Republic of Venice. Even before that, the duke had been absent from Mantua for long periods, during which he preferred to attend the theatrical stages of less provincial towns such as Rome, Naples and Venice.

Given these absences, Pietro Guarneri appears to have been more a protegé of Ferdinando’s first wife, Anna Isabella, who was the daughter of the duke of Guastalla, another independent territory before the couple got married. The duchess herself acted as regent during her husband’s long and frequent sojourns. Sadly, Pietro’s own wife died in 1693, while his second marriage was to a lady from a prominent Guastalla family: Lucia Guidi Burani.

PIETRO GUARNERI APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN MORE A PROTEGÉ OF FERDINANDO’S FIRST WIFE, ANNA ISABELLA

The 1685 document confirming Pietro Guarneri’s formal appointment to the court

Ferdinando Carlo, tenth duke of the Gonzaga dynasty, appointed Pietro Guarneri to play in his court orchestra in 1685

IMAGES COURTESY ANDREA ZANRÈ

The ducal decrees mentioned Pietro’s talents as a luthier, and his finest decorated instruments with the fleur-de-lis at the corners, or the ivory and black mastic inlays mimicking Stradivari, date mostly from the 1680s and 90s. However, the nature of his services was mainly to play in the court’s orchestra: Pietro was a virtuoso violinist and he also played an instrument described as a ‘violetta’, which will be the main subject of this article.

Today, Pietro’s instruments are exceedingly rare, with around fifty violins (of which about a third were still listed in his workshop inventory when he died in 1720) and perhaps only one cello, but he also dealt in bows, strings and instruments made by other makers. In addition to these, the Hills cited in their monumental work The violin-makers of the Guarneri family ‘several five-string viols (one of which made in 1689 we possess)’ which Pietro made and were possibly the type of instrument referred to as a ‘violetta’.

The original look, tuning and precise way of performing on these viols all remain partially to be clarified. The violetta had many features in common with the gamba family: the plates ended flush with the ribs, with no protruding edges; the backs were flat, without arching, and formed an angle at the upper bout where the ribs started to slope quickly towards the neck root.

Pietro, of course, was entirely aware of the modern developments in the contralto viola, a field in which his father Andrea had been one of the leading innovators. Pietro’s own hand is very clearly detectable in one of the finest 17th-century Cremonese violas: the 1676 ‘Conte Vitale’, signed by his father but unmistakably displaying the talents of his 21-year-old son.

After moving to Mantua, however, Pietro abandoned viola making entirely, and his lack of interest was later imitated by his successors, Antonio Zanotti and Camillo Camilli. This perhaps shows that the intermediate range of the string section was undergoing a process of evolution, and instruments recalling the viol family were still accepted, and even favoured, in Mantuan orchestras.

However, when these particular violettas fell into oblivion, they became easy victims of alterations that now conceal their original appearance. A similar fate was reserved for some rare instruments by Antonio Stradivari that were also designed as cornerless, guitar- or pear-shaped small viols, usually bearing a decorative shield as a substitute for the more usual scroll. The addition of corners, and sometimes of volutes too, transformed these into violins or modern violas, whose proportions are very unusual in many respects, such as the wide spacing between the f-holes, designed to accommodate a bridge for six strings.

During our ten years of trips researching Mantuan instruments with Philip Kass and photographer Jan Röhrmann, we have encountered three of these viols by Pietro Guarneri. One lacked the original top; the second lacked the scroll, having been converted into a viola d’amore with seven played and six sympathetic strings; the third that was brought to our attention is currently under restoration and has been made available for this article by Hieronymus Köstler and his assistant Bruno Rebolledo. Interestingly, all three violettas have been made using the same maple log for their flat backs, with a characteristic knot-figuration in the centre and two added wings on both sides of the lower bouts.

The label of the instrument shown on page 66 has a handwritten date of 1698

THE ORIGINAL LOOK, TUNING AND PR ECISE WAY OF PERFORMING ON THESE VIOLS ALL REMAIN PA RTI A LLY TO BE CLARIFIED

SCROLL PHOTO JAN RÖHRMANN. LABEL PHOTO BRUNO REBOLLEDO/COURTESY HIERONYMUS KÖSTLER

The first viol bears an original label of 1689, is currently housed at the museum of Yale University and was documented by Andrew Dipper in relatively recent times. Dipper also pointed out that the top was a later replacement, which was confirmed by a dendrochronological test we conducted with Peter Ratcliff that dated the last ring of the spruce to 1848. The top, however, is a fine copy of a now-lost original, presumably made in 19th-century France. The rest of the instrument is quite pristine and the back still displays its uncut pearshaped outline, whereas the two other violettas seem to have been reduced to a round guitar shape on their upper bouts. Even in their original shape they would have been smaller than the Yale viol, which has a substantial body length of 457mm, not including the button. The ribs of the largest viol are quite tall: 82mm at the bottom-block, sloping to 47mm at the neck root. This is the feature that again mostly reminds us of the viola da gamba family; however the viol currently bears five strings and the neck has no frets, so its set-up can be considered transitional from the viola da gamba to the viola da braccio families.

The scroll (left) is unmistakably the work of Pietro, whose strong, muscular yet refined approach is clearly displayed in the carving of the volute, covered by his typical toolmarks; Pietro used a flat gouge that left facet marks on the vertical walls, while minute grooves remain visible across the spiral fluting. There are tracing dots (found on several Cremonese instruments) on the front and back of the pegbox, one of which is characteristically level with the lower end of the volute; a second dot is located lower down at the widest part of the pegbox, just above a later addition at the chin. This alteration to the pegbox shape prevents us from stating what was the original stringing of the instrument, but its unaltered section allows us to say that it certainly bore more than four strings.

If the Yale viol is roughly the size of a tenor viola, the other two instruments were probably closer to a contralto size. The one dated 1690 and transformed into a viola d’amore currently has a back length of just 390mm, but the width of the C-bouts (162mm) leads us to exclude the possibility that its original outline matched that of the Yale viol, whose middle bouts are over 10mm wider. The ribs were reduced in height, but they still measure over 53mm at the bottom-block and over 41mm at the neck; this is very clear when comparing them with the larger instrument, which bears a pin in the centre of the C-bouts. The pin is equally present on the viola d’amore but, instead of being at the midpoint of the rib height, it is noticeably closer to the back, showing the ribs were mostly reduced from that side.

Luckily, this time the original top has been preserved, and it allows us to admire its full round arching and Pietro’s characteristic f-hole design, which ends in large, rounded upper and lower eyes and minute wings. The nicks are finely cut and carefully rounded in the Amati style. The refinement of their workmanship makes a nice contrast with the wide positioning of the f-holes themselves, which stand very close to the outline to accommodate the extra string (or strings).

The back of the 1689 viol housed at Yale University is still in its original pear-shape form. The scroll shows Pietro Guarneri’s characteristic toolmarks.

Scroll of the 1689 viol

PHOTOS JAN RÖHRMANN

Here again, the handling of tools shows a craftsman gifted with a self-assured and tasteful approach, one who didn’t need to spend too much time finishing the surfaces that he could shape so effortlessly with his carving tools. Arguably, Pietro can be numbered among the very few makers whose work leaves nothing to be desired even when compared with the refined and immaculately flowing technique of his predecessor Nicolò Amati or his contemporary Antonio Stradivari.

The purfling is beautifully though expeditiously inlaid, with the three strips of almost the same thickness, also in the Amati manner, and a very richly stained ‘black’. At some point on the upper bouts, above the bend, the material and consistency of the purfling vary considerably, so we can surmise the whole section was changed in shape and repurfled at a later stage; exactly the same situation can be observed on the top as well.

Our third specimen, the instrument currently under restoration, bears an original label of 1698 and, like the previous example, was cut at the upper bouts, reduced to a guitar-shaped viola and equipped with four strings and a later scroll. The back is unusual in that, in addition to the horizontal bend at the upper bouts, typical of gambas, there was another on the lower bouts, symmetrical to the one at the top.

Presumably this was a later addition; both the bends were straightened at a subsequent stage, when the height of the ribs was also reduced quite dramatically, to about 32mm, to form a flat gluing surface. The f-holes are very consistent in model and execution with the ones on the ‘viola d’amore’, and are perhaps just more delicate, with marginally smaller holes and less widely opened stems. Their very distant positioning again leaves little doubt that the instrument was designed to be mounted with more than four strings. One particularly interesting feature of our third viol is that the top still bears a very old or perhaps even original bass-bar: unsurprisingly, this is very short and not very tall, measuring just 267mm by 7.5mm (with a thickness of about 6.7 mm).

In some cases, instruments that fell into disuse have an advantage over a large majority of classical instruments: they have been saved the continual cleaning and polishing that has affected the varnish so much. The cruelty with which our third violetta was reduced to an unusual viola also implies a good share of naivety which likely characterised the sadistic repairman who undertook the task; this in turn implies that he didn’t bother or perhaps simply couldn’t embark in much varnish retouching after the ‘surgery’, leaving on the original sections of the plates’ plentiful, undisturbed original varnish. This all made the viol under restoration a perfect candidate for taking minute varnish samples and studying Pietro Guarneri’s finishing techniques.

The location of the sample was chosen carefully under UV light on the top, back and ribs, to make sure that all-original materials were chosen for analysis. The size of the samples was kept as small as possible, and in fact each one is negligible if compared to the size of any of the numerous dents caused by the use of the instrument.

The four samples thus obtained have been entrusted to the team directed by Marco Malagodi at the Arvedi Laboratory of Non-Invasive Diagnostics. The team has established an analysis protocol that is so far only partially complete. As is well known, organic and inorganic components of classical varnishes can be analysed non-invasively by studying their behaviour when subjected to peculiar radiations, such as infrared or X-ray, respectively. Additional analysis can be conducted on small samples taken from the varnished surface, which usually helps in clarifying further the finishing methods and materials.

At the present stage of research, microscopic images of the samples have been taken under UV light to highlight their stratigraphy (the precise order and composition of the individual layers applied one after the other). The first cell rows show evidence of a compression process, possibly mechanical; this might have been caused by a finishing technique such us the use of scrapers, by burnishing tools, and by abrasives that have a burnishing effect such as horsetail. The wood has also partially absorbed the substances that were applied to it, which can be differentiated by UV light into four distinct layers, the last of which is probably posthumous: maybe a more recent coat of French polish. The first layer, which gives a whitish hue under fluorescence, is rather thick and apparently separated from the orange layer on top of it by a very thin film of a different material. The layer fluorescing orange seems to have darker red particles embedded within it. A preliminary spectroscopic investigation of the samples suggests the presence of linseed oil mixed with natural resins (such as colophony or sandarac) and of animal or casein glue spread on the wood as a filler. Further analysis is required to understand the elemental and molecular composition of each individual layer, and to establish precisely which organic and inorganic compounds were used.

The 1698 viol still bears an old and possibly original bass-bar

The 1690 viol, converted into a viola d’amore, has had its ribs lowered. The pin at the waist (below), which used to be in the centre of the rib height, shows the extent of the reduction.

VIOL PHOTOS JAN RÖHRMANN. BOTTOM PHOTO BRUNO REBOLLEDO/COURTESY HIERONYMUS KÖSTLER

The locations of the varnish samples on the top and back of the 1698 viol were chosen with the aid of UV light (top left) to make sure that original material is analysed. The tiniest samples are sufficient for this type of study; they are later embedded in a special resin and prepared to examine their stratigraphy, i.e. the succession of the ground and subsequent varnish coats

LEFT IMAGES BRUNO REBOLLEDO/COURTESY HIERONYMUS K ÖSTLER. RIGHT IMAGE ARVEDI LABORATORY

The composition of these layers is currently being analysed at Cremona’s Arvedi Laboratory.

In the case of Pietro Guarneri, new questions will have to be answered with respect to the availability of materials and their supply in a city different from Cremona. In fact, despite the distance from Mantua to Pietro Guarneri’s birth town being only about 35 miles, travelling between the two cities would probably have implied a whole-day trip in those days and, being two separate states, it would have presumably required customs clearance and a passport – which Pietro Guarneri had certainly been granted after 1690, as we have already seen.

THE FIRST CELL ROWS SHOW EVIDENCE OF A COMPR ESSION PROCESS THAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN CAUSED BY A FINISHING TECHNIQUE

Experts believe that the origins of classical varnishes were common and local, in the sense that apothecaries would specialise in preparing such products and violin makers would source what they needed from them, introducing small variations in the application techniques, the colouring or pigmentation of their personal varnishes. What we see on Pietro Guarneri’s instruments is often indistinguishable from Cremonese contemporary recipes; after the first instruments, made with a lightly coloured, amber varnish, Pietro started to produce instruments covered with a flamboyant, intense red varnish. This formula quite closely resembles the look introduced in Cremona by Antonio Stradivari after c.1685, and apparently similar materials were available to Pietro Guarneri’s brother Giuseppe, who also produced red-coloured varnishes from the turn of the century. The small quantity of varnish necessary to finish such a limited production as the one that characterised Pietro’s career might in fact have been purchased in Cremona, presumably at the very same source as his brother, and perhaps the same as their main competitor too. Future studies will be possibly able to clarify this.

Thinking of the violin makers who later worked in Mantua, little can be stated about Antonio Zanotti’s varnish, because of the paucity of his instruments, while Camillo Camilli used a very different recipe, a thick coat of rather resistant materials that is quite different from the delicate texture of Cremonese formulas. What is certain is that Pietro Guarneri’s varnish disappeared from Mantua at the same time as the luthier who was using it, in March 1720, nevertheless leaving several of his instruments in town to inspire with their models and refined craftsmanship the future generations of local makers.

The three volumes of the new work about Mantua, Liuteria Mantovana, by Philip J. Kass and Andrea Zanrè, with photographs by Jan Röhrmann, is expected to be published in late 2023