
| Giovanni Giacomo de Antiquis, Il primo libro a due voci de diversi autori di Bari (Venice 1585) | |
31 textless duos by 18 composers from Bari: missing. For further information, see the notes below. |
– – |
|
List by composer: |
| literature | ||||
| Bornstein, Italian Duos, vol. I, p. 159; vol. II, p. 124-29. | A study of the Italian duo throughout the Renaissance and the Baroque. | |||
| notes | ||
This is a virtual – and partial – reconstruction of the missing anthology edited by Giovanni Giacomo de Antiquis, Il primo libro a due voci de diversi autori di Bari (Venice 1585). Information about it can be found in Gerber, Lexikon, I, p. 51, entry «Antiquis (Giovanni de)»: «Im Jahr 1585 das erste Buch seiner 4 stimmigen Madrigalen […] Und noch in dem nehmlichen Jahre lies er daselbst drucken: Il primo libro a 2 voci de diversi autori di Bari. Die Namen der Komponisten, den Arbeiter in diesem Werke aufgenommen hat, sind folgende: Simon de Baldis. Stefano Felis. Mutilo Estrem [Muzio Effrem]. Fabritio Facciola. Gio. de Marinis. Gio. Francesco Gliro. Gio. Battista Pace. Gio Donato de Lavopa. Gio. Pietro Gallo. Cola Maria Pizziolis. Giovanni Francesco Capoani. Cola Vincenzo Fanelli. Tarquinio Papa. Vittorio di Helia. Camillo di Helia. Gio. Francesco Palumbo. Gio. Giacomo Carducci. Gio. Vincenzo Gottiero. Oratio di Martino. Josepho di Cola Janno. Dominico dello Mansaro. Donato Antonio Zazzarino. Gio. Francesco Violanti und Pomponio Nenna.» Furthermore, Gerber gives an entry for almost every composer quoted above, citing the anthology as the only source of their compositions. Sources for this anthology are: Phalèse (1590), Lindner (1591), Gumpelzhaimer (1611) and Diversi autori (1686). In Lindner (1591), only the lower part-book - «Vox Inferior» - survives and the duos follow the rubric: «Ricercari sive fantasiae aliquot elegantes diversorum autorum»; in Gumpelzhaimer (1611) the duos follow the rubric: «Ricercari, sive Fantasiae 6. elegantes diversorum Autorum». Diversi autori (1686) is the richest and most authoritative source of de Antiquis' collection. Nevertheless, no-one had yet understood the relationship between all these source, and in fact all the modern editions took from all the sources but Diversi autori (1686). |
||