The Elizabethans seem as reluctant to commit themselves to a definition of music as modern-day commentators are. It was only in the most recent edition of the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (2001) that ‘music’ appeared as a dictionary term. Previous editions, like many specialist music dictionaries, had not thought it necessary to include it ‘on the assumption that no definition is needed, or perhaps because none would be totally satisfactory’ (vol. 17, p. 431). New Grove distinguished between language dictionary definitions of ‘music’ and the place the term has in musicology. Language dictionaries concentrate on either a broad-ranging definition, attempting ‘to specify all salient traits of music’ using ‘Western music in the fine art tradition’ as the basic model, ‘seeing music principally as a series of sounds and . . . compositions’ (vol. 17, p. 426). Musical activity was seen primarily as composition whose art lay in ‘combining sounds’. Musicology has sought to locate music in composition, performance and cultural contexts. Its meaning has changed, developed, varied from age to age and from country to country. Musicologists have provided ‘a bewildering set of definitions’ (vol. 17, p. 431).
For the Elizabethans, music was either a performing art, or composition, or a philosophical concept, or all three. In his laudatory verse, ‘In Musicam Thomae Tallisii, et Guiliemi Birdi’ in Cantiones . . . Sacrae (1575), Richard Mulcaster, for example, alludes to all three elements whilst defending the pedagogical qualities of music. He refers to the power of music and its basis in mathematical science in his opening words: ‘Quanti sit precii res Musica, quamque regendis / Insanis animi motibus apta, docent . . .’ (‘How precious a thing is Music, and how appropriate for governing the mad passions of the mind, is revealed by those who teach that numbers are the foundation of everything having form, and that music is formed from these’, The Byrd Edition, 1977, vol. 1, p. xxvi, ed. Craig Monson). He reminds his reader that for a healthy and sound human ‘exercise should maintain the body and sober music govern the mind’. The Queen herself, he continues, not only takes pleasure in hearing music, she also delights in practising music – ‘she sings and plays excellently’. He rejoices in the fact the English composers, namely Tallis and Byrd, may now rival the distinguished composers of ‘other nations’ and that their reputation will spread abroad.
Shakespeare’s use of music depends on the contemporary signification of music, the Elizabethan understanding of trumpet signals, different meanings of bells ringing, knowledge of the Orpheus myth, the opposition between stringed instruments and pipes, ‘haut’ versus ‘bas’ and many other symbolic musics. Where appropriate, discussion of the Elizabethan usage of a musical term is dealt with under that term. For wider ranging accounts of music in Elizabethan England, see David Wulstan’s Tudor Music (1985), Iain Fenlon (ed.), The Renaissance (1989), David Price’s Patrons and Musicians of the English Renaissance (1981), Bruce Pattison’s Music and Poetry of the English Renaissance (2nd edn, 1970), Peter Holman’s Four and Twenty Fiddlers (1993) and Walter Woodfill’s Musicians in English Society (1953, reprint 1969).
Music in Shakespeare: A Dictionary includes terms which an Elizabethan and Jacobean commentator would quickly recognize. Many are unique to the Elizabethan age and are no longer in use as musical terms. Others, such as ‘ordnance’, ‘noise’, ‘thunder’, might puzzle some because they do not appear to be connected with music. But the dictionary aims to include any term which could have a musical meaning or relevance in the broadest sense of the word, either created sound or ‘the combination of sounds’ relating to the human world, which includes, for example, the songs of birds. It is not restricted to terms of Western art music. If it were, ‘trumpet’, ‘horn’, ‘drum’ and many other musical instruments which were not art-music instruments until the seventeenth century would be excluded. On the other hand, this is not a dictionary of vocal songs, ballads, instrumental music or other music that is intended to be performed in the plays. Where the name of a ballad (e.g. ‘Greensleeves’) is found as a term, it is there because it occurs in the body of the text of a play and has symbolic reference.
Each entry is divided into three sections. The first (A) explains the meaning of the term in music; the second (B) discusses its signification in specific Shakespeare locations; the third (C) offers selected bibliographical references. The entries are not intended to be comprehensive. Some terms occur only once in the Shakespeare canon in a musical sense (e.g. ‘degree’, ‘pavan’); others are numerous (‘music’ is found in 143 instances) and for reasons of space every occurrence could not be cited. Cross references are in bold and are identified only the first time they occur in an entry.
The music definitions are concise. For fuller, more detailed and widerranging musical analyses of terms the reader is advised to consult the New Grove Dictionary of Music (2001). Other, very useful, smaller compendiums are Anthony Baines, The Oxford Companion to Musical Instruments (1992), Alison Latham (ed.), The Oxford Companion to Music (2002).
Quotations from Shakespeare’s plays are from The Riverside Shakespeare (2nd edn, 1997). When specific editions have been consulted on Early English Books Online (for instance when editions of the same play contain different sound and music stage directions), quotations are in the original spelling.
This dictionary, which started life as an Athlone Press commission, has been a long time in the making. A large number of people have been involved at various stages. We would like to acknowledge a debt to the late F. W. Sternfeld, the late Graham Midgley, Melvin Bird, Cedric Brown, John Caldwell, Christopher Cipkin, Ross Duffin, Lesley Dunn, Bryan Gooch, Christopher Hardman, Ian Harwood, Elizabeth Heale, Oliver Hemming, Peter Holman, Ralph Houlbrooke, Ron Knowles, John Morehen, Richard Rastall, Paul Rhys, Jamie Savan, Susan Weiss and Julia Wood. The generous input by our consultants, Andrew Gurr and David Lindley, has been especially significant and appreciated. The help, encouragement and expert advice given by our general editor, Sandra Clark, has been invaluable. A generous research project grant by the Leverhulme Trust, commencing in 2001, enabled us to bring the work on music in Shakespeare to its conclusion. We should also like to thank the University of Reading for a small start-up grant from the Research Endowment Trust Fund.