Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 3 Feb 2016 20:16:40 +1100 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi Anne,
Well, thinking about this, the octave span of Ruckers’s instruments in 1640 was generally 6.5 inches. The octave span of a modern piano is 6.5 inches. So, from this, one cannot deduce anything about hand sizes, except, possibly, to say they may have been similar to today. The French having 6 3/8 inch octave span does not mean they had smaller hands. So I tend to think the subject is not actually amenable to research of any kind, unless there are anatomical surveys of skeletal hand sizes in Europe of over the centuries, and even then there would be huge variation for sure. I suppose you could look at iconographical evidence, possibly. Some things, we just can’t know.
Not harpsichord, but Alfred Cortot had small hands, and had to rethink his technique because of it. I remember he talks about this in Rational Principles of Piano Technique. I imagine lurking in the texts and treatises of the 17-18c there are discussions about hand size also.
Andrew
On 3 February 2016 at 02:39:20, Anne Acker ([log in to unmask]) wrote:
Which brings us to my question... has anybody looked at the issue of the probable size of the hands and fingers of the performers from the harpsichord era and how that might relate to fingering choices?
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Note: opinions expressed on HPSCHD-L are those of the individual con-
tributors and not necessarily those of the list owners nor of the Uni-
versity of Iowa. For a brief summary of list commands, send mail to
[log in to unmask] saying HELP .
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
|
|
|