Ack. This whole discussion was a mistake on my part. Sorry.
First of all, the website should have been
(note the 'u' in uwaterloo).
And either a) it's been fixed since I first sent out this note, or b) I
misread it and started the discussion on HITW based on my own mistake.
Either way, it does indeed say Playford 2, 1698 on that site now.
Still, it does seem a treasure trove.
Thanks to all.
Stewart, Sara wrote:
> Purcell's hornpipe is the same tune and was written in the 1690s.
> I believe I have a copy of Playford 1 if you would like to see it.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CalontirDance@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:CalontirDance@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Christian M. Cepel
> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 4:47 PM
> To: CalontirDance@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [CalontirDance] Website with lots of well engraved music.
> So does this guy have it wrong? His site says Hole in the Wall -
> Playford 1 - 1651?
> Could he be instead referring to Purcell's "Hornpipe" which the music
> from Lilies XIV Ball states it's a 6/8 variant of? This guy's is in
> 3/4, but looks very similar from a quick glance.
> On the top of that same Lilies Ball page it does say Playford(1698).
> How should I resolve the discrepancy?
> I guess that I just hate that one of the few songs I know how to play
> and play well, and enjoy playing and ornamenting is out on its
> collective ear, with a bootprint on to boot.
> //Philippe Sebastian LeLutre
> Stewart, Sara wrote:
>>I am sorry I meant the music for Hole in the Wall was composed in
>>Good questions though
>>[mailto:CalontirDance@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Stewart, Sara
>>Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 4:34 PM
>>Subject: RE: [CalontirDance] Website with lots of well engraved music.
>>The dance for Hole in the Wall is from 1698 which I believe is
>>Playford 3. We tend to try and do dances from Playford 1 (1651) The
>>music was composed in 1695.
>>Sellinger's Round by the way is from Playford 2. I do not know about
>>trenchmore, but all the other's you listed are Playford 1, I think.
>>I would not agree that Scotland the Brave is still hugged close.
>>[mailto:CalontirDance@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Christian M. Cepel
>>Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 4:30 PM
>>Subject: [CalontirDance] Website with lots of well engraved music.
>>I expect folks already know of this, but if not, it seems a treasure
>>trove to me. Looks to be notated in Finale to me.
>>This leads me to a question I've been having for a while. Why has
>>such a wonderful (if overly requested) tune such as Hole in the Wall
>>been ostracized so horribly, when other tunes from the same Playford
>>Dances and Ballads ~ 1651 are fair game... I.e., Heart's Ease, Black
>>nag, Jenny Pluck Pears, Nonesuch, Parson's Farewell (I think),
>>Gathering Peascods (I think), Rufty Tufty, Sellenger's Round,
>>Trenchmore to name all the ones I recognize from that list.
>>Is it because there are earlier sources for all these works other than
>>Hole in the Wall, than the 1651 Playford?
>>I don't understand.
>>I also don't understand why Scotland the Brave, a slightly campy tune
>>from 1891-5 is still hugged close while Hole in the Wall is beaten off
>>with a stick and the dogs are set on it.
>>Thanks for any elucidation!
Christian Marcus Cepel | And the wrens have returned &
icq:12384980 | are nesting; In the hollow of
371 Crown Point, Columbia, MO | that oak where his heart once
65203-2202 573.999.2370 | had been; And he lifts up his
Computer Support Specialist, Sr. | arms in a blessing; For being
University of Missouri - Columbia | born again. --Rich Mullins