TY - JOUR
AU - Mackey,, Shem
AB - Abstract The ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, so called because of the map of Paris that comprises part of the incredible marquetry on the back, has long had a question mark over its origins. There are connections to one of France’s most famous luthiers, Jean-Baptiste Vuillaume, and other French musical notaries of the 17th and 18th centuries. The instrument has been attributed to the Füssen-born maker Gaspard Duiffoprugcar and was once thought to have been made in the 16th century. However, it is now widely and correctly considered to be a product of the late 17th century. The shape and construction details of this viol place it firmly in the second half of the 1600s and within the French/English style of making. The instrument has undergone a number of substantial adjustments since its original incarnation and the identity of the original maker has consequently been obscured. These later adjustments and their origins are not the main subject of this article, but their nature and quality do make them deserving of study. Is it now possible to prove who really did make this viol? This article presents the evidence that reveals that this instrument displays many characteristics that are typical of the workmanship of the French maker Michel Collichon, who worked in Paris between c.1683 and 1693. For many years the ‘Plan de Paris’ bass viol (illus.1) was considered to be the jewel in the crown of the collection of the Musical Instrument Museum (MIM) in Brussels. This famous viol was exhibited as part of the Exposition de l’art ancient during the Paris Exposition of 1878 and the Exposition retrospective d’art industriel in 1888. More recently it was the centrepiece at an exhibition of the Brussels musical instruments at the Hotel Sully, Paris in 1969;1 the exquisite marquetry on the back featured on the front cover of the exhibition programme. However, in the years since then, its origins have been called into question, with many observers disregarding it as merely an assemblage of disparate parts. 1 Open in new tabDownload slide The ‘Plan de Paris’ viol (©MIM Brussels) 1 Open in new tabDownload slide The ‘Plan de Paris’ viol (©MIM Brussels) According to J. P. H. Coutagne (1846–95),2 the earliest recorded owner of the viol was Jean-Baptiste Bonaventure Roquefort (1777–1834), the writer and philologist who first made mention of the viol in a short article in 1812.3 From Roquefort it found its way to Jean Marie Raoul (1766–1837),4 a cellist with a particular interest in the bass viol, who in turn passed it into the hands of J. B. Vuillaume (1798–1875).5 Raoul’s desire to have a viol made according to the principles of the famous maker Gaspar Duiffoprugcar (aka Tieffenbrucker, and various other French spellings) may have lain behind his acquisition. Until relatively recently this viol was thought to be the work of Duiffoprugcar, an instrument-maker originally from Füssen but who settled in Lyon in the mid 16th century. Through Duiffoprugcar it was subsequently linked in the literature to King François I, and the catalogue for the Paris Exposition of 1878 states that the instrument was specifically made for the chapel and chamber of François I, a story now discredited for lack of supporting evidence. In 1889 the instrument was acquired from M. Depret of Nice for the collection at the Brussels Conservatoire by the first curator of the museum, Victor Mahillon, and given the number 1427 in the museum inventory. At that time, it fetched a premium price of 3,800 Belgian francs. General description The instrument does not have a label, but there is a handwritten inscription in pencil inside the back written and signed ‘1830 J. B. Vuillaume’ (illus.26). The inscription is illegible in places but according to the Hotel Sully exhibition catalogue it reads as follows: Cette Viole da Gambe faite par Duiffoprugcar à Paris en 1515 a appartenu à François premier. Par la Dre de Chox de Fayolle. 1830 (Signature of J. B. Vuillaume) Stylistically, the body shape in particular is reminiscent of many English and French viols from the late 17th century. It is my contention that most of this instrument shows many characteristics that are typical of the workmanship of the French maker Michel Collichon, who worked in Paris between c.1683 and 1693 (Table 1). Table 1 Extant viols of Michel Collichon Instrument Year Present Location Bass viol 1683 Musée de la Musique, Paris Pardessus 1686 Private collection (Asheville, NC)6 Bass viol 1687 Castello Sforzesco, Milan Bass viol 1688 Private collection (Laveno-Mombello) Bass viol 1689 Stadtbücherei, Bochum Treble viol / Pardessus 169? Private collection (Basel) Pardessus 1690 Germanische National Museum, Nuremberg Bass viol 1691 Private collection (Zurich) Bass viol 1693 Musée d’art et d’histoire, Geneva Instrument Year Present Location Bass viol 1683 Musée de la Musique, Paris Pardessus 1686 Private collection (Asheville, NC)6 Bass viol 1687 Castello Sforzesco, Milan Bass viol 1688 Private collection (Laveno-Mombello) Bass viol 1689 Stadtbücherei, Bochum Treble viol / Pardessus 169? Private collection (Basel) Pardessus 1690 Germanische National Museum, Nuremberg Bass viol 1691 Private collection (Zurich) Bass viol 1693 Musée d’art et d’histoire, Geneva Open in new tab Table 1 Extant viols of Michel Collichon Instrument Year Present Location Bass viol 1683 Musée de la Musique, Paris Pardessus 1686 Private collection (Asheville, NC)6 Bass viol 1687 Castello Sforzesco, Milan Bass viol 1688 Private collection (Laveno-Mombello) Bass viol 1689 Stadtbücherei, Bochum Treble viol / Pardessus 169? Private collection (Basel) Pardessus 1690 Germanische National Museum, Nuremberg Bass viol 1691 Private collection (Zurich) Bass viol 1693 Musée d’art et d’histoire, Geneva Instrument Year Present Location Bass viol 1683 Musée de la Musique, Paris Pardessus 1686 Private collection (Asheville, NC)6 Bass viol 1687 Castello Sforzesco, Milan Bass viol 1688 Private collection (Laveno-Mombello) Bass viol 1689 Stadtbücherei, Bochum Treble viol / Pardessus 169? Private collection (Basel) Pardessus 1690 Germanische National Museum, Nuremberg Bass viol 1691 Private collection (Zurich) Bass viol 1693 Musée d’art et d’histoire, Geneva Open in new tab The instrument is, without question, a composite, but there is evidence of a genuine core construct, and even within the added components there is evidence of the work of Collichon himself. The flamboyance of the additions and adjustments makes it exceptional, but the fundamental original instrument is equally important. The front is not part of the original construction, nor is the composite pegbox and head. The tailpiece and bridge are also later replacements. The remaining parts—neck, ribs, back, fingerboard and hook bar—all seem to be from the same hand, and will be considered individually and compared to extant instruments to support the hypothesis that the maker was Collichon. Soundboard The spruce soundboard, as it is now, is made of six longitudinal pieces, with a seventh inserted by the hook bar (illus.2). There are asymmetrical ‘wings’ to the extremities of both upper and lower bouts, and two inserts in the centre of the instrument tapering towards the neck and running the full length of the instrument. The two outer pieces are similar to those seen in fronts created using multiple bent staves.7 There is a considerable amount of full-edge replacement, especially in the C-bouts, which is not unusual in old instruments, and normally the result of repair and restoration work. There are very obvious signs that suggest the soundholes were originally a different shape. Both soundhole areas show the kind of infill typical of instruments in which F-holes have been recut as C-holes (illus.3). There is a single 1.5mm line of solid ebony unevenly distanced from the edge. There is also an ebony slip inserted at the top edge between the front and neck. The front is heavily reinforced inside. The bass bar is aligned as ‘normal’, i.e. passing beneath the bridge foot and angled just a few degrees off the centre line. 2 Open in new tabDownload slide The composite front 2 Open in new tabDownload slide The composite front 3 Open in new tabDownload slide Soundhole with infill 3 Open in new tabDownload slide Soundhole with infill The rather crude painting on the front includes scenes of chinoiserie, with pagodas, birds, carnations, branches, leaves and flying insects that appear to be edged in black with traces of a green and red coloured infill that has faded over time to a dull brown.8 Head, pegbox The head and pegbox is a composite structure, probably taken from another instrument of narrower dimensions and tailored to fit the wider neck of this viol. To accomplish this, the pegbox has been partly cut along its length and a wedge of approximately 10mm inserted to match the overall width to that of the neck. This wedge is then incorporated into an extraordinarily complex joint of many parts where the pegbox meets the neck (illus.4). 4 Open in new tabDownload slide Neck to pegbox joint 4 Open in new tabDownload slide Neck to pegbox joint The interior of the pegbox has been carved out to widen and deepen the opening further. Most of the border to the edge carving has been lost to this widening, and at one point the carving to the floor has slightly penetrated the back. This edge carving is bordered by the string cutaways, which would suggest that they are part of the original concept. The interior has been reinforced by the addition of substantial facings on both sides. These have been added to support the repair of a very obvious break across the middle through the second pegholes (illus.5). The pegbox was originally made to house five pegs (illus.7), three of which have been used in the present configuration, and the remaining two plugged with ebony. The five holes are placed within a pre-planned carved design, but there are a further two plugged holes higher up the pegbox that are not part of this arrangement and which seem to have been drilled into the body of the carving later. Rather oddly, they appear to be positioned where they would not emerge within the open pegbox. The general layout and design of this pegbox would suggest that it may have originally belonged to a five-string viol. 5 Open in new tabDownload slide Internal reinforcement 5 Open in new tabDownload slide Internal reinforcement The exterior is heavily decorated with exquisitely fine carvings. The main figure on the back is that of a satyr playing panpipes (illus.6). He almost fills the entire length of the back, but above him there is a rather beautiful (female?) face. The remaining pegbox sides have carvings of twining vines, bunches of grapes and vine leaves with various creatures and objects lurking within, including two snails, two crows (one pecking at a serpent), a grasshopper, a lizard stalking a bee, two lions, an eagle and five woodwind instruments. 6 Open in new tabDownload slide Carved pegbox 6 Open in new tabDownload slide Carved pegbox The head is shaped like that of a goat, with rather unsettling glass eyes that have been inserted through a large cavity cut beneath the chin and then subsequently plugged. The head is a separate piece of wood, in fact a different piece of maple, from the pegbox (illus.7) and is connected with a mortise and tenon joint that is just visible at the upper end of the pegbox interior. 7 Open in new tabDownload slide Original peg positions, separate head 7 Open in new tabDownload slide Original peg positions, separate head Back The back of this viol (illus.8) is covered in marquetry, the quality and precision of which is exceptional. The bottom half shows a map of Paris and the upper half depicts the evangelist Luke, accompanied by his ox and surrounded by angels. The edge is decorated with flowers and heraldic motifs. Both J. M. Raoul and Victor Mahillon suggested that the map resembled that of a now-lost tapestry that once hung in the town hall in Paris,9 but there is a much closer resemblance to a map by the Basel cartographer, Sebastian Münster (1488–1552) representing Paris in 1530 (illus.9). The detail on this map is very similar to that reproduced on the viol. 8 Open in new tabDownload slide Back (©MIM Brussels) 8 Open in new tabDownload slide Back (©MIM Brussels) 9 Open in new tabDownload slide Sebastian Münster, map of Paris, 1530 (Lebrecht Music & Arts, Alamy Stock Photo) 9 Open in new tabDownload slide Sebastian Münster, map of Paris, 1530 (Lebrecht Music & Arts, Alamy Stock Photo) Similarly, the figure of St Luke on the viol replicates, in reverse, an engraving of 1518 by the Italian engraver Agostino Veneziano (1490–1540) after a painting by the artist Giulio Romano (1499–1546) (illus.10). There can be little doubt that this engraving was the model for the marquetry. 10 Open in new tabDownload slide Agostino Veneziano, St Luke, engraving, 1518 (Artokoloro Quint Lox Limited, Alamy Stock Photo) 10 Open in new tabDownload slide Agostino Veneziano, St Luke, engraving, 1518 (Artokoloro Quint Lox Limited, Alamy Stock Photo) There are two other viols with similar decorative marquetry to this instrument, both—intriguingly—attributed to Duiffoprugcar. The first of these is in a collection in The Hague and is a much smaller instrument.10 On the back (illus.11) it has a representation of another of the four evangelists, St Matthew, also based on an engraving by Agostino Veneziano (illus.12); the floral and added heraldic elements are similar to those on the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol. This instrument has an unusual carved head (illus.13), again not unlike that on the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, and the marquetry on the fingerboard is also similar in style to that on the tailpiece of the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol (illus.14).11 11 Open in new tabDownload slide The Hague viol, back (photo: Hubert de Launay) 11 Open in new tabDownload slide The Hague viol, back (photo: Hubert de Launay) 12 Open in new tabDownload slide Agostino Veneziano, St Matthew, engraving, c.1518–20 (Age fotostock, Alamy Stock Photo) 12 Open in new tabDownload slide Agostino Veneziano, St Matthew, engraving, c.1518–20 (Age fotostock, Alamy Stock Photo) 13 Open in new tabDownload slide The Hague viol, head (photo: Hubert de Launay) 13 Open in new tabDownload slide The Hague viol, head (photo: Hubert de Launay) 14 Open in new tabDownload slide The Hague viol, fingerboard (photo: Hubert de Launay) 14 Open in new tabDownload slide The Hague viol, fingerboard (photo: Hubert de Launay) The third decorated viol is in a private collection. It, too, has a completely decorated back depicting a seated bearded figure (illus.15). The upper part of the back is covered in floral decoration in a style similar to that of the other two instruments; the blazonry around the edges is identical; and the carved head is also rather strange and reminiscent of those of the other two viols (illus.16). 15 Open in new tabDownload slide Decorated viol (private collection, Paris), back (photo: Roger Rose) 15 Open in new tabDownload slide Decorated viol (private collection, Paris), back (photo: Roger Rose) 16 Open in new tabDownload slide Decorated viol (private collection, Paris), head (photo: Roger Rose) 16 Open in new tabDownload slide Decorated viol (private collection, Paris), head (photo: Roger Rose) Despite the very obvious differences in their body shapes, the odd head carvings and decorated backs suggest that all three instruments may have been part of a single decorative enterprise. What remains of the ‘Collichon’ viol? The original components of the instrument comprise the neck, fingerboard, fingerboard wedge, back, rib structure, hook bar and all internal reinforcements (illus.17). 17 Open in new tabDownload slide The core 17 Open in new tabDownload slide The core Neck and upper block The maple neck and upper block are cut from a single piece of wood. This feature—the integral neck and block—is typical of the work of Michel Collichon, as witnessed by those of his instruments that still retain the neck and/or top block. There is a very visible joint on the heel of the neck of the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol where a separate piece of wood has been added. This joint appears on many of Collichon’s viols, including those of 1683,12 1687 and 1689 (illus.18a–d), and on the remaining portion of the upper block of the 1691 instrument (illus.20c).13 18 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, neck joint; (b) Collichon viol (1683), neck joint; (c) Collichon viol (1687), neck joint; (d) Collichon viol (1689), neck joint 18 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, neck joint; (b) Collichon viol (1683), neck joint; (c) Collichon viol (1687), neck joint; (d) Collichon viol (1689), neck joint The appearance of this joint on so many of his viols would suggest that Collichon sourced the wood for these necks as square billets of just under three Paris inches.14 This dimension is not deep enough to include the lower portion of the heel and, more importantly, the plunging inner block. It was then necessary to cut a section of wood from the block and transfer it to where it was needed to complete the full depth of heel and block (illus.19). 19 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) Neck with added piece at the heel; (b) cutting from the wood block 19 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) Neck with added piece at the heel; (b) cutting from the wood block From the inside, the neck/upper block curves away from the soundboard to the back in the manner of a ‘pointed toe’. This design is commonly known as a ‘slipper heel’ (see illus.19) on account of its similarity to a slippered foot. The manner in which the block is shaped, with sweeping transverse cuts, features on many of Collichon’s viols and would appear to be unique to him. Upper blocks cut in this way are found on the 1683, 1691 and 1693 viols (illus.20a–d). 20 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, upper block; (b) Collichon viol (1683), upper block; (c) Collichon viol (1691), upper block (photo: John Topham); (d) Collichon viol (1693), upper block 20 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, upper block; (b) Collichon viol (1683), upper block; (c) Collichon viol (1691), upper block (photo: John Topham); (d) Collichon viol (1693), upper block The shaping of the heel is also typical of Collichon (illus.21a–b). The ‘buttresses’ of the heel rise in a straight line with only a hint of a curve as the line passes onto the fingerboard. 21 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, heel shape; (b) Collichon viol (1689), heel shape 21 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, heel shape; (b) Collichon viol (1689), heel shape The bevelling of the end of the neck from soundboard to fingerboard is also evident and, though not unique to Collichon, is a common feature of his viols (illus.22a–b).15 22 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, neck ‘wedge’ and bevel; (b) Collichon viol (1693), bevelling on the neck 22 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, neck ‘wedge’ and bevel; (b) Collichon viol (1693), bevelling on the neck Between the neck and fingerboard, a wedge of wood is clearly visible (see illus.22a), as if added later to raise the fingerboard to its present height. The ‘wedge’ seems to break the line of the vertical bevel and, on closer inspection, it is obvious that this is in fact the remnants of the original fingerboard, cut and trimmed to provide a platform for the wider added fingerboard. The bevel can be seen just catching the ‘wedge’ as it would the original fingerboard (illus.23), a feature visible on the same view of the 1693 viol (illus.22b). The rough gouging to the end of this ‘wedge’ (illus.23) supports the theory that this is indeed the original fingerboard that has been cut and pared level with the end of the neck. The upper nut sits on top of the ‘wedge’ and indicates that the string length was previously marginally longer. 23 Open in new tabDownload slide Wedge (original fingerboard) and bevel 23 Open in new tabDownload slide Wedge (original fingerboard) and bevel Fingerboard The fingerboard (illus.24a) is most likely not original to the instrument, but it does show characteristics of Collichon’s work. When compared to the fingerboard on the 1693 viol (illus.24b) there are clear similarities. 24 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, fingerboard; (b) Collichon viol (1693), fingerboard 24 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, fingerboard; (b) Collichon viol (1693), fingerboard Both have been arched underneath in precisely the same fashion and have the same characteristic gouge marks. The arching continues through the length of the fingerboard with a narrow jointing platform retained on both sides. The ‘Plan de Paris’ fingerboard is composite, made from two pieces of different wood glued longitudinally: maple on the bass side with a narrow piece of what appears to be walnut on the treble side. The 1693 fingerboard is similarly constructed using two longitudinal pieces of unmatched wood. The combination of these unique characteristics makes it highly probable that the ‘Plan de Paris’ fingerboard was made by Collichon. The present set-up of this viol, and in particular the high fingerboard projection, is typical of a French seven-string viol. Jean Rousseau, in his Traité de la viole (1687), describes how the French began to alter the neck angle to increase the bridge height and thereby increase the downward pressure of the strings, making the instrument louder.16 As shown in illustrations 22a and 23, this viol was first made with a fingerboard with a lower projection (similar to that on the Collichon viol of 1683),17 and the subsequently added replacement fingerboard has produced a higher projection, resulting in an increase in bridge height to a level we would expect to see on a French seven-string viol. Ribs and interior The ribs are constructed from mildly figured maple. The wood in the C-bout and upper-bout ribs has been reversed. There are some cracks on the extremes of the curves on the top and bottom bouts that have been reinforced on the inside. The ribs were finished using a plane with a toothed blade, the interior surface retaining the tell-tale scoring, again a feature not unique to Collichon, but visible on many of his viols (illus.25d). The rib to back joint is reinforced with linen; the latter is not original. In places the linen is missing. The rib corner joints are reinforced with parchment showing black and red coloured script, similar to the parchment reinforcements used on the corner and rib joints on the 1686 pardessus, and the 1687 and the 1691 viols (illus.25a–d). 25 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, parchment corner reinforcement; (b) Collichon viol (1686), parchment reinforcement (photo: John Pringle); (c) Collichon viol (1687), parchment corner reinforcement; (d) Collichon viol (1693), corner reinforcement with parchment and toothed plane marks 25 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, parchment corner reinforcement; (b) Collichon viol (1686), parchment reinforcement (photo: John Pringle); (c) Collichon viol (1687), parchment corner reinforcement; (d) Collichon viol (1693), corner reinforcement with parchment and toothed plane marks Internally the instrument is in good original condition. The back seems to be made from three pieces of what looks like walnut (illus.26), though it is difficult to make a firm identification as the interior is dusty and discoloured. The use of different woods for the ribs and back is also typical of Michel Collichon. There is a pencilled note on the back inside, as mentioned above, with the signature ‘J. B. Vuillaume’. 26 Open in new tabDownload slide Interior of the back, showing wood and pencilled note 26 Open in new tabDownload slide Interior of the back, showing wood and pencilled note Oddly, there are no internal reinforcements on the back joints. The joint on the treble side is visibly open on the inside, particularly in the proximity of the soundpost plate. There is obvious cracking externally through the marquetry in the same position. The soundpost plate is made from spruce and is typical of the style of Collichon in its bevelling, position and width. The sides are bevelled and the ends are unusually tightly butted against the ribs on the centre and lower bouts. It measures 61mm in width and approximately 4mm thick, which equates with the dimensions of the plates in both the 1683 and 1693 instruments. The break is reinforced by two shaped cleats. The linen reinforcement between these cleats is probably later. The type of cleating used in this reinforcement can also be seen on the 1683 and 1689 viols (illus.27a–b). To my knowledge this technique is unique to viols made by Collichon. 27 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, reinforcing cleat on the break; (b) Collichon viol (1683), reinforcement cleats 27 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, reinforcing cleat on the break; (b) Collichon viol (1683), reinforcement cleats Hook bar The hook bar is an area where makers tend to repeat the same pattern. In this case, the hook bar is again typical of the work of Michel Collichon. The profile cut, the bevelling on the crown, the taper to the back and the overall dimensions mirror those of the hook bars on both the 1683 and the 1693 viols (illus.28a–c). In this case, the hook bar has been made from an unidentified reddish-brown hardwood that has been stained black. The texture and colour of the underlying wood is visible where the black stain on the bar has worn. This corresponds in both colour and texture with the bar on the 1693 viol, where the same red hardwood can be seen through worn black stain. 28 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, hook bar; (b) Collichon viol (1683), hook bar; (c) Collichon viol (1693), hook bar 28 Open in new tabDownload slide (a) ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, hook bar; (b) Collichon viol (1683), hook bar; (c) Collichon viol (1693), hook bar Michel Collichon Little is known about Michel Collichon’s life, with just two surviving documents relating directly to him: both date from the year 1682, and both contain his signature.18 There are only nine extant Collichon instruments, all dating between 1683 and 1693; eight have handwritten labels, though these are not all in the same hand, use different spelling, and none is similar to the handwriting of his documented signature. His father Nicolas Collichon, on the other hand, is much better documented and through him we can get a picture of the life of his son, Michel. Nicolas started his apprenticeship with Edmond Hotman, an instrument-maker on the Pont St Michel, at the age of 17 in 1628. He became prosperous, owning many properties in and around Paris, including a shop/workshop on the Pont St Michel. The building on the Pont St Michel seems to have been popular with prominent musicians of the time, and the surrounding area was home to a community of makers and players. As well as Hotman and Nicolas Collichon, the maker Noël Alliamet was also to be found on the bridge, the musician De Machy lived in nearby Rue Neuve-des-Fossez, and there are references to Jean Dubuisson and Jean Rousseau living on the premises with Collichon at various times.19 No instruments attributed to Nicolas are known to have survived, and he died sometime between 1690 and 1695. He had five children with his wife Marguerite Lucas, the second of them, Michel, was born around 1641. The earliest surviving instrument by Michel is dated 1683, and Corinne Vaast suggests 1695 as the latest possible date for his death.20 There are no records of an apprenticeship, and Thomas Mace surmises that the ‘unaccounted’ 20 years of Michel’s adulthood leading up to 1683 may have been spent working for his father.21 While this is an obvious scenario, there are many aspects of Michel’s work that point towards him having had wider influences, in particular his adoption of the English system of bent-stave construction for making soundboards and the subsequent linen reinforcement.22 Conclusion There is no doubt that the greater portion of this viol was made by Michel Collichon. Many of his idiosyncratic methods are featured in this viol, providing incontrovertible proof. Its basic dimensions place it closest in size to the 1687 and 1688 instruments, and in fact it is a good match to these two, though there is no firm evidence to indicate more precisely where this viol lies within his output (see Table 2). Of his surviving instruments, six are basses with seven strings, two are pardessus de viole and one is a treble. It is quite likely that the ‘Plan de Paris’ was also made as a seven-string viol, based on the width of the upper block. In three of the basses the bodies (including the soundboard) are made entirely from a central American hardwood, cedrela odorata;23 of the remaining three, one has ribs and a back of an extremely wild piece of wood that could almost be described as burr-wood, a second has ribs of cherry and a back of walnut, and the third has both ribs and back of walnut. One pardessus has ribs and back of ‘burr-wood’, the other pardessus has ribs and back of ash, and the treble has ribs and back of wild service wood. The ‘Plan de Paris’ viol has maple ribs and neck and a walnut back. The necks on many of these viols, where original, are also made of wild service wood or walnut. Fingerboards are made from wild service wood, larch and cedrela. The bass bar on the 1693 viol is made of cedrela, as are the bottom blocks of both the 1693 and 1691 instruments. The wide range of woods used in these viols suggest a maker with an individual approach to his craft who was not bound by the usual choices of makers of this period. By the latter part of the 17th century, the fashion had shifted and makers were increasingly using maple for back, neck, ribs and fingerboard, and spruce for the soundboard. Collichon’s use of a hardwood for the soundboard is unusual, and I have only seen it in one other bass viol by another maker. What could be described as the apparent randomness and odd choices of woods used within his viols is unique to Collichon. His method of jointing the wood on the heel and the use of a ‘slipper’ heel are methods more usually associated with guitar-making and are not seen in any other viols. His bass bars slope at an angle unknown in other viols, parallel to the instrument’s extreme edges. Intriguingly, the inlaid solid line of ebony on the front on the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol is also very typical of his work. Table 2 Dimensions of surviving viols by Michel Collichon 1683 1686 1687 1688 1689 169- 1690 1691 1693 ‘Plan de Paris’ (date unknown) Size Bass Pardessus Bass Bass Bass Treble/ Pardessus Pardessus Bass Bass Bass Strings 7 6 7 7 7 6 6 7 7 7 Body length 668 332? 676 674 700 346 315 708 699 680 Max width top bout 311 160 314 310 325 169 153 337 325 311 Min width C-bout 234 112 225 225 238 116 106 243 245 223 Max width lower bout 384 195 370 373 400 204 187 412 400 380 Length of fingerboard 457 472 465 154 135 319 476 1683 1686 1687 1688 1689 169- 1690 1691 1693 ‘Plan de Paris’ (date unknown) Size Bass Pardessus Bass Bass Bass Treble/ Pardessus Pardessus Bass Bass Bass Strings 7 6 7 7 7 6 6 7 7 7 Body length 668 332? 676 674 700 346 315 708 699 680 Max width top bout 311 160 314 310 325 169 153 337 325 311 Min width C-bout 234 112 225 225 238 116 106 243 245 223 Max width lower bout 384 195 370 373 400 204 187 412 400 380 Length of fingerboard 457 472 465 154 135 319 476 Open in new tab Table 2 Dimensions of surviving viols by Michel Collichon 1683 1686 1687 1688 1689 169- 1690 1691 1693 ‘Plan de Paris’ (date unknown) Size Bass Pardessus Bass Bass Bass Treble/ Pardessus Pardessus Bass Bass Bass Strings 7 6 7 7 7 6 6 7 7 7 Body length 668 332? 676 674 700 346 315 708 699 680 Max width top bout 311 160 314 310 325 169 153 337 325 311 Min width C-bout 234 112 225 225 238 116 106 243 245 223 Max width lower bout 384 195 370 373 400 204 187 412 400 380 Length of fingerboard 457 472 465 154 135 319 476 1683 1686 1687 1688 1689 169- 1690 1691 1693 ‘Plan de Paris’ (date unknown) Size Bass Pardessus Bass Bass Bass Treble/ Pardessus Pardessus Bass Bass Bass Strings 7 6 7 7 7 6 6 7 7 7 Body length 668 332? 676 674 700 346 315 708 699 680 Max width top bout 311 160 314 310 325 169 153 337 325 311 Min width C-bout 234 112 225 225 238 116 106 243 245 223 Max width lower bout 384 195 370 373 400 204 187 412 400 380 Length of fingerboard 457 472 465 154 135 319 476 Open in new tab There is an obvious connection between the three decorated viols (see illuss.8, 11 and 15): the similarity of the marquetry and carvings might suggest a similar origin. However, the same cannot be said of the instruments themselves. The viol in The Hague is considered by Karel Moens to be a later construct: a fake with parts derived from larger earlier instruments.24 The third decorated viol has a different outline to the ‘Plan de Paris’ instrument, with very open C-bouts and flattened sides, and clearly belongs to a different, possibly earlier, viol-making tradition. Its decoration does not feature an evangelist theme (or at least not obviously so). Is it likely that all three were acquired and/or constructed with a view to creating a set of instruments united through decoration, using them as a canvas? Is it also possible that there were more instruments similarly decorated, but now lost? If indeed the evangelists were the intended theme then there might also have been viols depicting St John with an eagle and St Mark with a lion. It is not possible to determine precisely when the marquetry and carving were added to the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol, but a broad window of time can be deduced. The present fingerboard, which is almost certainly the work of Michel Collichon, would have to predate his death around 1695; the instrument itself is closest in size and construction to the viols of 1687–8. The viol is next mentioned in Roquefort’s article of 1812, by which time the marquetry and the other adjustments were clearly in place, creating a timespan of at least 117 years during which the work was undertaken. But who was responsible for the marquetry and added parts? That question cannot be answered at present, but the evidence described here, which strongly suggests that Collichon himself adapted the instrument by the addition of a new fingerboard, shows that the maker was sometimes involved in conversion work on his own instruments. Furthermore, Thomas Mace has discussed evidence suggesting that Collichon carried out conversion work on the Henry Jaye viol of 1624 in the Musée de la Musique.25 The work on the neck of that viol is cleverly executed, in particular the use of a wooden wedge driven into the pegbox to widen it, just as on the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol. There is no evidence that this method was unique to Collichon, but the similarity in execution is striking. The orientation of the bass bar is also typical of his work. The question of why the marquetry was added cannot be answered. There may have been a demand for obscure objects, and with its false attribution to Duiffoprugcar and subsequent link to François I, this viol would have been viewed as an attractive ‘antique’. The 19th century certainly produced a large number of objects that were ‘created’ to supply a burgeoning market in ancient artefacts. It is also impossible to say whether the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol was ever a functional instrument in its current form. While there are bridge foot markings on the soundboard these may have occurred during its previous incarnation, and the reworking of the neck has removed any sign of wear. Whatever impulse created this composite, it is a beautiful object and has quite rightly been a source of great pride for the Musical Instrument Museum in Brussels. Of late it has suffered the ignominy of being relegated to the status of an oddity—a mere collection of parts. It is not difficult to reduce objects that were once held in great esteem to a lowly status, but it is far more difficult to prove attribution, to rebuild and restore their greatness. However, this viol can now be considered alongside the other great viols of Michel Collichon and find pride of place once more in the Brussels collection. Shem Mackey has been making musical instruments for over 20 years. He trained at the London College of Furniture, specializing in early bowed instruments. He is a founder member of the British Violin Making Association and founder editor of its newsletter. His research into instrument construction has been published in The Strad and various publications of the BVMA and Viola da Gamba Society. He is much sought after as a maker and teacher, and has built instruments for many prominent performers throughout the world. Footnotes 1 M. Le Moël, ‘Note concernant la décoration d’une basse de viole exposée par le Musée Instrumental de Bruxelles en l’Hötel Sully à Paris, 1969’, in Instruments de musique des XVIe et XVIIe siècles, catalogue de l’exposition du Musée Instrumental de Bruxelles en l’Hôtel de Sully, Paris, juin 1969 (Paris, 1969), pp.60–64. 2 J. P. H. Coutagne, Gaspard Duiffoproucart et les luthiers lyonnais du XVIe siècle; étude historique, accompagnée de pièces justificatives et d’un portrait en héliogravure (Paris, 1893), pp.37–40. 3 J. B. Roquefort, ‘Gaspard Duiffoprugcar’, Biographie universelle, ancienne et moderne, ed. L. G. Michaud, xii (Paris, 1814), pp.191–2. 4 J. M. Raoul, ‘Notice sur l’heptacorde’, in Revue musicale, i/2 (1828), pp.56–61. 5 S. Milliot, Histoire de la lutherie parisienne du XVIIIe siècle à 1960. Tome III: Jean-Baptiste Vuillaume et sa famille: Nicolas, Nicolas-François et Sebastien Vuillaume, les amis de la musique (Spa, 2006), ii, p.293. 6 T. F. Mace, ‘Michel Collichon and the origins of the Pardessus de Viole’, Journal of the Viola da Gamba Society of America, xlvii (2012), pp.42–83, at p.71. 7 D. M. Kessler, ‘Viol construction in 17th-century England: an alternative way of making fronts’, Early Music, x (1982), pp.340–45. 8 In the 17th century there developed a ‘fashion’ for Japanese lacquer work. Trade bans virtually closed the country to Western trade while limited shipping curtailed the supply of original oriental pieces. This led to the development of local imitations to cater to the demand for lacquered and painted pieces, which in turn led to the publication of ‘treatises’ on japanning and lacquer work. Many included Chinese inspired designs as an appendix to the text which contained scenes of Chinese buildings, trees, birds, insects, etc. France was a leader in locally inspired chinoiserie but there were also publications in England such as John Stalker and George Palmer’s Treatise of Japaning and Varnishing (1688). This treatise contains many designs very similar to those on the soundboard of the ‘Plan de Paris’ viol. 9 Raoul, ‘Notice sur l’heptacorde’, p.57; V. C. Mahillon, Catalogue descriptif et analytique du Musée Instrumental (historique et technique) du Conservatoire Royal de Musique de Bruxelles (Ghent, 1900), iii, pp.47–9. 10 Small bass viol attributed to Gaspar Tieffenbrucker, Lyon. The Hague, Gemeentemuseum, inv.1937-0011. It belonged to the English collector George Donaldson until 1909; H. R. Hawels, Old Violins (Edinburgh, 1910), plate and p.287. 11 K. Moens, ‘Vuillaume and the first violin makers’, in Violins Vuillaume, Cité de la Musique (Paris, 1998), pp.130–39. 12 S. Mackey, ‘Michel Collichon, the seven-string viol and a question of wood’, Early Music, xli (2013), pp.439–45. 13 D. M. Kessler, ‘A seven-string bass viol by Michel Collichon’, Chelys: Journal of the Viola da Gamba Society, xix (1990), pp.55–62. 14 The Paris inch at this time measured 27mm. The average height of this joint on Collichon viols is approximately 70mm, which equates to the width of wood necessary for a seven-string viol neck. 15 T. Muthesius, ‘Michel Collichon, facteur de violes parisien’, Musique, Images, Instruments, ccxix/2 (1996), pp.40–52. The bevelling from soundboard to fingerboard can be seen on the Meares viol of 1660 (once the property of Dietrich Kessler and now in the collection of the Royal College of Music, London). 16 Jean Rousseau, Traité de la Viole (Paris, 1687), p.22. 17 The earliest known Collichon viol of 1683, in the Museé de la Musique, shows a lower fingerboard projection, more akin to that of an English viol of that period. 18 C. Vaast, ‘Michel Collichon, repères biographiques’, Musique, Images, Instruments, ccxix/2 (1996), pp.53–7. 19 G. J. Kinney (trans.), ‘Writings on the viol by Dubuisson, De Machy, Roland Marais and Etienne Loulié’, Journal of Viola da Gamba Society of America, xiii (1976), pp.17–18; F. Lesure, ‘Une querelle sur le jeu de la viole en 1688: J. Rousseau contre Demachy’, Revue de Musicologie, xlvi/122 (December 1960), p.187. 20 Vaast, ‘Michel Collichon, repères biographiques’, p.56. 21 Mace, ‘Michel Collichon and the origins of the Pardessus de Viole’. 22 Kessler, ‘Viol construction in 17th-century England’. 23 Mackey, ‘Michel Collichon, the seven-string viol and a question of wood’. 24 Moens, ‘Vuillaume and the first violin makers’, p.133. 25 Mace, ‘Michel Collichon and the origins of the Pardessus de Viole’, p.71. © The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)
TI - The ‘Plan de Paris’: who made this viol?
JF - Early Music
DO - 10.1093/em/caz077
DA - 2019-12-31
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/the-plan-de-paris-who-made-this-viol-JDBVYHNWKq
SP - 1
VL - Advance Article
IS - 
DP - DeepDyve
ER -