(It., Sp., Ger., Eng.; Eng., Fr., Ger. Fantasie; Fr., Ger. Phantasie; Fr. fantaisie, fantasye, phantaisie; Eng., Ger. Phantasia; Ger. Fantasey; Eng. fancie, fancy, fansye, fantasy, fantazia, fantazie, fantazy, phansie, phantasy, phantazia).
A term adopted in the Renaissance for an instrumental composition whose form and invention spring ‘solely from the fantasy and skill of the author who created it’ (Luis de Milán, 1535–6). From the 16th century to the 19th the fantasia tended to retain this subjective licence, and its formal and stylistic characteristics may consequently vary widely from free, improvisatory types to strictly contrapuntal and more or less standard sectional forms.
CHRISTOPHER D.S. FIELD (1), E. EUGENE HELM (2), WILLIAM DRABKIN/R (3)
In the general senses of ‘imagination’, ‘product of the imagination’, ‘caprice’, derivatives of the Greek ‘phantasia’ were current in the principal European languages by the late Middle Ages. The term was used as a title in German keyboard manuscripts before 1520, and in printed tablatures originating as far apart as Valencia, Milan, Nuremberg and perhaps Lyons by 1536. Its earliest appearances in a musical context focus on the imaginative musical ‘idea’, however, rather than on a particular compositional genre. A three-part, imitative, textless composition by Josquin is headed ‘Ile fantazies de Joskin’ (I-Rc 2856, c1480–85; ed. in New Josquin Edition, 27.15), but it is doubtful whether this title had generic significance; more probably it was intended to emphasize the ‘freely invented’ (rather than borrowed) nature of the motivic material. Similarly a letter written by the Ferrarese agent Gian to Ercole d'Este on 2 September 1502 refers to Isaac's four-part instrumental piece La mi la sol la sol la mi (ed. in DTÖ, xxviii, Jg.xiv/1, 1907/R) as ‘uno moteto sopra una fantasia’: here it is clearly the eight-note soggetto ostinato that is signified by the term ‘fantasia’.
When Hermann Finck (1556) referred to ‘the requirements of Master Mensura, Master Taktus, Master Tonus and especially Master Bona fantasia’, he meant to stress the importance of musical imagination. The sense of ‘the play of imaginative invention’ underlies the word's use as a title in the 16th century, notably by lute or vihuela improvvisatori such as Francesco Canova da Milano and Luis de Milán. Elsewhere it may signify actual improvisation on an instrument, as when Bermudo and Santa María wrote of the art of ‘tañer fantesia’.
From the outset, the term was used interchangeably with other generic names like recercar and Preambel. With Francesco da Milano there is little or no distinction between ‘fantasia’ and ‘recercar’; the same piece often bears different labels in different sources, and both words may even be found in combination (as when Pontus de Tyard describes Francesco sitting down with his lute ‘à rechercher une fantaisie’). But ‘fantasia’ seems to have been the more colloquial name: Bottrigari (1594) spoke of a ricercare from Padovano's Primo libro as ‘a certain “fantasia” (as the instrumentalists say) of his’. Classification of the fantasia as a kind of prelude occurred especially in Germany and the Netherlands, from the Preambeln of Neusidler and Gerle to Praetorius (who described it under a heading, ‘Of Preludes in their own right’). The word was equated at different times with tentos (Milán), voluntary (Byrd sources, Mace), automaton, which means much the same (Phalèse), capriccio (Lindner, Praetorius, Froberger sources), canzon (Terzi, Banchieri), or fuga (Banchieri, Hagius, Scheidt, Froberger sources). In Spain, the technical benefit of fantasias for ‘exercising the hands’ was frequently emphasized.
An essential of the fantasia is its freedom from words. The musician was free ‘to employ whatever inspiration comes to him, without expressing the passion of any text’ (MersenneHU, 1636–7); where voices were used, as by the vihuelists Diego Pisador and Esteban Daza or in ensemble fantasias ‘for singing and playing’, it was to sol-fa. Point-of-imitation technique (a development of vocal polyphony) appeared early, however, and not only in ensemble fantasies: the illusion of the solo lutenist spinning a web of imitative counterpoint had already been created by Marco Dall’Aquila, Francesco da Milano (who fused imitation with virtuoso instrumental style; see ex.1), Luys de Narváez (whose fantasias approach the style of motet transcriptions) and, most completely, by Valentin Bakfark. Tomás de Santa María (1565) stressed the importance of counterpoint in ‘fantasia-playing’; Zarlino (3/1573, iii, chap. 26), writing of point-of-imitation technique, remarked: ‘Such a manner of composing is demanded by the practitioners in composing from fantasy’ (‘comporre di fantasia’). By the late 16th century in Italy the fantasia (along with the ricercare) had become a touchstone of contrapuntal skill; free from words, a series of fugal sections might be given unity by recurrence of a subject, or an entire movement be fashioned from a single subject or theme-complex; themes were modified by inversion, augmentation and rhythmic transformation. A similarly exhaustive approach to the treatment of subjects was adopted by Sweelinck and other northern European organists.
In England, emphasis was rather on diversity of material. According to Morley (1597, p.162) monothematic fantasias were seldom essayed except ‘to see what may be done upon a point’ or ‘to shew the diversitie of sundrie mens vaines upon one subject’. He insisted, however, on unity of mode, which was often made explicit in continental sources by designations such as ‘Fantasia del primer tono’. His description of the ‘fantasie’ (ibid., p.181), borrowed by Praetorius (PraetoriusSM) and echoed by Simpson (A Compendium of Practical Musick, 1667), characterizes this ‘chiefest kind of musicke which is made without a dittie’ as
when a musician taketh a point at his pleasure, and wresteth and turneth it as he list, making either much or little of it as shall seeme best in his own conceit. In this may more art be showne then in any other musicke, because the composer is tide to nothing but that he may adde, deminish, and alter at his pleasure … . Other thinges you may use at your pleasure, as bindings with discordes, quicke motions, slow motions, proportions, and what you list. Likewise, this kind of musick is with them who practise instruments of parts in greatest use, but for voices it is but sildome used.
A widespread type of the 16th and early 17th centuries is the ‘parody’ fantasia. This took as its starting-point material from a polyphonic model (motet, mass, chanson, madrigal or even another fantasia), often appearing in the source with an intabulation of the model itself. Early examples are those of Francesco da Milano, Enriquez de Valderrábano and G.P. Paladino; Claudius Sebastiani (1563) taught that student instrumentalists should practise decorating the end of a song or motet with ‘a fantasia gathered from the said song’. The name ‘fantasia’ was also occasionally given to pieces treating a sacred or secular melody in cantus-firmus or paraphrase technique (Rocco Rodio, Eustache Du Caurroy, Paul Luetkeman, Mathias Reymann, Scheidt, Steigleder), but most of the 17th-century German chorale settings now classified as ‘Choralfantasien’ were not so called in the sources (see Chorale fantasia.
The following discussion of the fantasia in the 16th and 17th centuries is organized by performing medium (lute, keyboard, consort) in each of the major European centres of composition.
The term lent itself especially aptly to the imaginative, seemingly spontaneous creations of the early 16th-century lutenists. Pontus de Tyard (1555, p.114) told of a banquet at Milan
where, among other rare pleasures got together for the satisfaction of these select people, was Francesco di Milan, a man regarded as having attained the ultimate perfection (if such be possible) in fine lute playing. The tables being cleared, he chose one, and, as if trying his tuning, sat down at the end of it to seek out a fantaisie. No sooner had he excited the air with three strokes than conversation which had started up among the guests was silenced; and, having constrained them to face where he sat, he continued with such ravishing skill that little by little, making the strings languish under his fingers with his divine touch, he transported all who were listening into so blandishing a melancholy that … they were left deprived of every sense apart from hearing.
The first Italian publication actually to designate compositions fantasia (rather than recercar) appeared in Milan in 1536, with examples by Dall’Aquila (GMB, 94), Francesco da Milano, Alberto da Ripa (who reappeared at the French court as Albert de Rippe) and the Milanese lutenists Albutio and Borrono. Over 40 pieces by the ‘divine’ Francesco are termed ‘fantasia’ in their primary sources (HPM, iii–iv, 1970). These integrate point-of-imitation technique with often brilliant idiomatic play (inspired by the sound and feel of the lute). They include one explicit example of a parody fantasia, which appears as a companion-piece to an intabulation of its model (Richafort's De mon triste et desplaisir).
The fame of Francesco da Milano's fantasias is shown by imitations such as those of the Spaniard Valderrábano, and by widespread reprints and manuscripts. In the 50 years after his death, lute fantasias were published by Borrono; Francesco da Milano's pupil Fiorentino Perino; the Paduan priest Melchiore de Barberiis, whose Contina (1549) includes a fantasia on Verdelot's Se mai provasti, fantasias calling for different tunings, another which leaves upper parts to be added, another for two lutes at the octave, and four trim, non-imitative fantasias for seven-course guitar; Giulio Abondante, who on one title-page (1548) referred to recercari di fantasia; the Flemish-born Ioanne Matelart, who also provided five of Francesco da Milano's fantasias with second lute parts; Antonio di Becchi; Vincenzo Galilei, whose Fronimo (1568) includes eight fantasias, two being parodies on madrigals of Rore and Striggio; G.C. Barbetta; and Giacomo Gorzanis. Paolo Virchi's Tabolatura (1574) has fantasias for cittern; Besard published fantasias by Lorenzini and Fabrizio Dentice.
At the end of the century there are the lutebooks of G.A. Terzi and Simone Molinaro. Terzi's second book (1599/R) contains fantasias ‘in modo di Canzon Francese’ by himself, Francesco Guami (a transcription of an ensemble canzona), Giovanni Gabrieli, and Gabrieli’s colleague Vincenzo Bellavere; a transcription of a canzona a 4 by Florentio Maschera called Canzon la Vilachiara, over fantasia; and finally a ‘canzona or fantasia’ by Terzi for four lutes. Molinaro's first book (1599/R) includes 15 fantasias by Molinaro himself, 25 by his uncle G.B. Della Gostena (maestro di cappella at Genoa Cathedral), and one sopra ‘Susane un jour’ by Giulio Severino, which freely recomposes Lassus's chanson as a longer instrumental piece. Several of Molinaro's fantasias are on a single subject; diminution and inversion are used. The 12th, a monothematic fantasia whose subject is finally converted to triple time, is remarkable for its complete flatward orbit of the circle of fifths.
Ricercares were prominent in printed Italian keyboard music from 1523 onwards, but fantasias were comparatively rare. Two different types of fantasia are found in Neapolitan prints of 1575–6: three of the fantasie sopra varii canti fermi in Rodio's Libro di ricercate are woven around hymn or antiphon chants, a fourth around the melody La Spagna; the fantasia in Antonio Valente's Intavolatura de cimbalo (ed. C. Jacobs, 1973), on the other hand, is freely composed in two halves, expressive dissonance complementing toccata-like brilliance. A solitary, posthumously published Fantasia allegra (so called after the spirited treatment of its two points) represents the Venetian master of the ricercare, Andrea Gabrieli (ed. P. Pidoux, 1952, pp.3–5), although the improvising of a fantasia (‘sonar di fantasia’) in four-part counterpoint on a subject taken at random from the opening of a mass or motet was one of the tests for prospective organists of S Marco. Giovanni Gabrieli's Fantasia quarti toni might be considered as a written example of such a piece (ed. S. Dalla Libera, 1957).
Frescobaldi's first keyboard publication, his Fantasie a quattro (1608, coinciding with his election to S Pietro), consists of contrapuntal studies as disciplined as any ricercare (ed. P. Pidoux, 1950); indeed, the Ricercari of 1615 are altogether more diverse in construction. There are three sopra un soggetto, followed by three each on two, three and four subjects. The first three exemplify the technique of thematic variation that Frescobaldi was to develop further in his canzonas: sections are based on successive transformations of the subject, which is distorted rhythmically, inflected melodically, reshaped in triple time, fragmented, inverted. In the polythematic fantasias, the different subjects are treated not one by one, but in combination. The 11th, for example, opens with a section in which the four subjects are heard interlocked in various contrapuntal permutations; next comes a section based on new, livelier versions of the four themes; finally, each subject in turn is presented by a different voice as a cantus firmus, while all four subjects play about it. After Frescobaldi the fantasia almost disappeared from Italian keyboard music: Banchieri's Organo suonarino (3/1622) includes two-part fantasias for the instruction of the ‘budding organist’, and by Bernardo Pasquini there is part of a monothematic fantasia in the Frescobaldi tradition (CEKM, v/1, 1964), but these are rare examples.
The term ‘fantasia’ was not applied only to instrumental solos in the mid-16th century. When the ricercares of Musica nova (RISM 154022) were reprinted in France, they were called ‘phantaisies’; in Italy, too, they may have been familiarly referred to as ‘fantasie’, just as one of Padovano's Ricercari (1556) was called ‘fantasia’ by Bottrigari. Such interchangeability of terms is confirmed by other sources; for instance, Antonio Gardane’s Fantasie recercari contrapunti (1551) has no piece actually entitled ‘fantasia’. The first printed partbooks to admit the name are the Fantasie et recerchari a tre (1549) of Giuliano Tiburtino and Willaert. Tiburtino's pieces are labelled with the solmization syllables of their incipits, except for one (which unlike the rest is not based on a single subject) headed ‘fantasia’. Like Giovanni Bassano's Fantasie a tre (1585) they are ‘for singing and playing on instruments of any kind’.
Any study of the fantasia’s development in Italy in the 1550s and 60s needs to take into account four masterly four-part examples by ‘Giaches’, which have been variously attributed to Giaches de Wert (MacClintock, 1966) and Jacques Brunel. One is found in a keyboard intabulation by Antonio de Cabezón (see Pinto, 1994), so the latter attribution is perhaps the more likely. All four fantasias show a tendency to build from a small number of themes, using contrapuntal devices and thematic variation. Sometimes a subject undergoes hexachordal inversion; one fantasia is an extended treatment of a single subject. Bassano, in his 20 fantasias (composed perhaps for Count Bevilacqua's accademia at Verona) generally followed a clear-cut first section with new material, working sometimes with one, sometimes two points at a time; even when inversion is used, or themes recur, lightness of touch remains paramount (seven ed. in HM, xvi, 1958).
The term ‘ricercari’ heads the consort collections of Andrea Gabrieli, Luzzaschi, Francesco Stivori and others, but a few ‘fantasias’ were printed in miscellanies. Ludovico Agostini's Il nuovo echo (1583) has a five-part one ‘in imitation of’ Alessandro Striggio's S'ogni mio ben havete – a rare instance of a parody fantasia for ensemble; Orazio Vecchi's Selva di varia ricreatione (1590) includes a four-part fantasia, a tour de force of composition sopra un soggetto, whose crotchet subject is inverted, augmented into minims, into semibreves, into breves, syncopated into alternate minims and crotchets, converted into triple time, and again augmented; Giovanni Cavaccio's Musica (1597) begins and ends with fantasie (La Bertani, La Gastolda). Banchieri also left ensemble fantasias, chiefly in his Fantasie overo canzoni alla francese (1603). In these 21 pieces a 4 ‘for organ and other musical instruments’ a new clarity of structure is evident; one, styled fantasia in echo, has a central, chordal echo section, followed by a repeat of the triple-time opening section and a duple-time coda. Two more fantasias form an ‘adjunct’ to his Moderna armonia (1612); in one the instruments are disposed ‘a due Chori’.
Fantasias for instrumental ensembles continued occasionally to appear in Italy until the middle of the 17th century. The sacred Concerti of Francesco Milleville (1617) end with a fantasia alla francesca ‘for instruments of every kind’ with organ continuo; in Valerio Bona’s Litanie della Madonna (1619) there is also one. Fantasie were published by Gabriello Puliti (1624) for violin or cornett and continuo; by Bartolomé de Selma y Salaverde (1638) for bass instrument and continuo; and by Andrea Falconieri (1650/R) for two violins, bass and continuo.
Milán's El maestro (1536/R; ed. C. Jacobs, 1971), the earliest of the printed vihuela books, includes 40 fantasias, reflecting Italian influence (as do his pavans and sonnets). The more elaborate of them combine imitation, light motivic counterpoint, plain and embellished chordal writing, runs and triple-time sections; several fall into a category that Milán called fantasias de tentos, designed to ‘try the vihuela’ and consisting of consonancias (chordal passages, to be played broadly) intermingled with redobles (running passages, to be played quickly). This is courtly music, but presented with didactic intent; Milán progressed from simple to more advanced pieces, providing notes on mode and tempo, as ‘a master would with a pupil’.
A similar instructional approach is found in other Spanish fantasias. One book of Narváez's Libros del Delphin (1538) is devoted to ‘fantasias in various modes which are not so hard to play as those of the first book’ (MME, iii, 1945/R). As might be expected from a transcriber of Josquin and Gombert, Narváez's fantasias make wider use of imitation than Milán's, and less of chordal and scalic writing. There are points of structural interest, such as recurrence of an initial subject or repetition of a concluding passage. Mudarra, too, occasionally based a fantasia on one theme, denoted in solmization syllables; his Tres libros (1546) include 23 fantasias for vihuela and four for guitar (MME, vii, 1949), some being described as ‘easy’ or ‘to exercise the hands’. Particularly interesting is a burlesque fantasia for vihuela ‘which imitates the harp in the style of Ludovico’ (a reference to a former harpist to King Ferdinand II of Aragon). Several fantasias in the second book are preceded by a short tiento.
Valderrábano's Silva de Sirenas (1547) devoted one book to fantasias, beginning with those of the ‘first grade’ of difficulty (MME, xxii–xxiii, 1965). Valderrábano distinguished between free (‘sueltas’) and parody (‘acomposturadas’) fantasias; about half the 33 pieces belong to the latter type. They include one ‘imitating in some passages’ extracts from Gombert’s motet Aspice Domine, another ‘imitating from the middle onwards’ the Benedictus of Mouton's Mass Tua est potentia. There are also fantasias modelled upon other fantasias, such as one ‘imitating another by Francesco da Milano’ (‘contrahecha a otra de Francisco milanes’).
Pisador's Libro de música (1552) includes, besides two fantasias ‘for beginners’, 24 ‘fantasias in all the modes upon points of imitation, of three and four parts’. A curious feature of the first 12 is the depicting in red of notes to be sung, with solmization syllables printed underneath; Pisador suggested that this use of the voice ‘will be a very agreeable thing for the person who plays and sings them’. Fantasias are prominent in Fuenllana's Orphénica lyra (1554; ed. C. Jacobs, 1979). In one section, transcriptions from Morales's masses are each followed by a related fantasia, designed so as to ‘satisfy the ear and improve the hands’ of beginners unready to master the transcriptions. In another, intabulations of motets by ‘famous authors’ are similarly paired with fantasias, graded as ‘difficult’ or ‘easy’ and intended to be ‘of benefit for exercising the hands and playing with a good air’. The final section has fantasias for five-course vihuela and four-course guitar as well as for the six-course instrument. The last vihuela book of the century, Daza's El Parnasso (1576; RRMR, liv, 1982), also devotes a section to fantasias, some of which contain ‘passages for exercising the hands’. Like Pisador, Daza allowed for vocal participation by the player: one part is picked out ‘with little dots, so that those who wish can sing it’.
The term ‘tiento’ (rather than fantasia) was preferred by such Spanish organists as Cabezón and Pedro Vila; but Venegas de Henestrosa's Libro de cifra nueva (1557) includes keyboard fantasias adapted from the vihuela books of Narváez, Mudarra and Valderrábano (MME, ii, 1944). In 1565 Tomás de Santa María published his treatise Arte de tañer fantasia (‘the art of fantasia playing, on keyboard, vihuela, or any instrument’); it deals with various matters relating to instrumental improvisation, including imitative counterpoint, from which ‘may be drawn great fruit and profit for the fantasia’. In Trattado de glosas (1553) Diego Ortiz distinguished three manners of improvising on the viol with harpsichord accompaniment:
The first is fantasia; the second, upon a cantus firmus; the third, upon some composition. I cannot give an example of fantasia, since each plays it in his own style, but I shall say what is requisite in playing it. The fantasia that the harpsichord plays should be well-ordered chords, and the viol should enter with elegant passages …. Some points of imitation may be played, one player waiting on the other in the way that polyphony is sung.
The lute fantasia was transplanted to France in the second quarter of the 16th century, particularly through Alberto da Ripa (Albert de Rippe), who went from Italy to the court of François I. None of his work was printed in France during his life; but between 1552 and 1558 some 20 of his fantasies for lute, and two for guitar, were published in Paris (CM, Corpus des luthistes français, 1972). Earlier, fantasias had been published at Lyons by the Venetian Bianchini (Blanchin) and the Milanese Paladino (Paladin). Paladin's Premier livre (1553, 2/1560) includes ten, four being parodies upon madrigals (Arcadelt) or motets (Claudin de Sermisy, Jacotin).
The first French composers to publish fantasias were Ripa's pupil Guillaume Morlaye, in tablatures for lute and guitar (1550–58; CM, Corpus des luthistes français, 1980); Grégoire Brayssing, whose guitar book (1553) includes six, one being headed ‘des Grues’; Julien Belin (1556); and Adrian Le Roy, in lute and guitar books of 1551. Le Roy's two lute fantasies (CM, Corpus des luthistes français, 1960) are exuberant pieces, in which passages of imitative texture give way to runs and style brisé. Later in the century, the fantasia was cultivated by Jakub Reys (Jacques le Polonois), lutenist to the French court, and some native composers. Antoine Francisque's Le trésor d’Orphée (1600) has two fantaisies, rather like elaborate préludes. J.-B. Besard's Thesaurus harmonicus (1603), which devotes its liber secundus to fantasias, includes examples by the Frenchmen Edinthon (CM, Corpus des luthistes français, 1974) and Bocquet, as well as by masters such as Lorenzini, Bakfark, Długoraj, Dowland and Reys; but Besard's own contributions to the genre are confined to a Lachrimae fantasia in pavane form (evidently inspired by Dowland) and diminutiones upon this and a Długoraj fantasia (CM, Corpus des luthistes français, 1969). The fantaisie for lute fell out of use in 17th-century France; there is one example in Denis Gaultier's Livre de tablature.
According to descriptions, Brayssingar's Tablature d'épinette (1536) included fantasias; and fantasies were listed on the title-page of another Tabulature d'espinette published at Lyons in 1560; both works are lost. There survives a Fantasie sus orgue ou espinette of Costeley (F-Pn fr.9152); and a four-part parody fantasia on Rore's Ancor che col partire by Henri III's organist Nicolas de La Grotte (A-Wn 10110) is probably intended for keyboard. It is clear that fantasias printed in early 17th-century partbooks might also be played at the keyboard (Guillet spoke of aiding ‘those learning the organ’). The fantaisie of the Notre-Dame organist Racquet (ed. F. Raugel, Les maîtres français de l'orgue, Paris, 1951), which treats its subject sectionally in the manner of Sweelinck, and the recently discovered organ fantasias of Louis Couperin (ed. G. Oldham, forthcoming) are the chief survivors of what was evidently an ecclesiastical repertory of some splendour. Of Couperin's organ pieces 26 are entitled ‘fantaisie’. A few have a soloistic bass line for trompette or cromorne, but most (such as the Fantaisie sur la Tierce du Grand Clavier avec le Tremblant lent) are fugues; there is also a Duretez fantaisie (fantasia di durezze) dated 1650, full of searching suspended discords.
The extant repertory for ensemble is more substantial. In Musique de joye, Moderne's collection for singing or ‘playing on spinets, violins or flutes’, the phrase ‘Phantaisies Instrumentales’ was given to a group of recercari by Willaert, Julio Segni and others, drawn mainly from Musica nova (RISM 154022; MRM, i, 1964). The name ‘fantasies’ is also given to Lassus's textless two-part Cantiones in the Paris edition of 1578. Fantasias from the late 16th and early 17th centuries include three by Claude Le Jeune (two in four parts, and one in five that parodies Josquin's Benedicta es); these were printed posthumously in his second book of Meslanges (1612). The fantasias of Du Caurroy, another member of the chambre du roi, also appeared posthumously in partbook format (1610, ed. P. Pidoux, 1975); of the 42 pieces, in three to six parts, just under half are based on a freely invented subject. 15 (styled ‘Fantasie sur … ’) have a cantus firmus (generally a liturgical chant, but occasionally a French psalm or popular tune), with points of imitation derived from the given melody; those on Coeco clauditur and Alloquio privatur form a pair, and there is a suite of five fantasies (starting in three parts and ending in five) on Une jeune fillette. Seven (styled ‘Fantasie à l’imitation de … ’) treat a liturgical melody in paraphrase fashion. One derives its subject matter from the rising and falling hexachord. Also in 1610 appeared a set of 24 Fantaisies by Charles Guillet ‘in four parts, set out according to the order of the 12 modes’, each based on a principal subject (MMBel, iv, 1938); despite their didactic air, Baron de Surgères is said to have listened to them enthusiastically. Mauduit is stated by Mersenne to have written fantasias, but none survives. Evidence suggests that such fantasias as these may have been performed by viols with keyboard accompaniment.
Mersenne (MersenneHU) quoted a short phantasie for ‘les Cornets’ and another (more properly a pavane) for ‘les Violons’ by Henri Le Jeune, and a four-part Fantaisie en faveur de la quarte of De Cousu, as well as an English example from Alfonso Ferrabosco (ii). In general the ensemble fantasias of the mid-17th century tend to shun severity and take on the melodiousness of the court air. Etienne Moulinié’s fifth book of Airs de cour (1639) includes three four-part fantaisies for viols; Nicolas Métru’s 36 Fantaisies à deux parties, pour les violles (1642) are marked by dancing counterpoint, generally ending with a reprise of the opening strain. By Louis Couperin there survive two fantaisies a 5 for a consort of shawms (‘sur le Jeu des Haubois’) dating from 1654, and two more, presumably for viols, composed in 1654–5 (G. Oldham, 1960); there are also keyboard scores for two courtly Fantaisies pour les violes by him (in F-Pc Rés. Vm7 674–5, ed. D. Moroney, 1985). The polyphonic fantasia was largely forgotten in France by the end of the 17th century, but the name survived to describe pieces in which ‘the composer does not tie himself to a fixed scheme, or a particular kind of metre’ (Brossard, 1705). Examples (including a canonic Fantaisie en echo) occur in Marin Marais' Pièces à 1 & 2 violes (1686; ed. J. Hsu, 1980).
The contribution of Phalèse's firm at Leuven and Antwerp to the publishing of lute fantasias began in 1545 and continued with a series of anthologies that, drawing on other publications, included examples by Francesco da Milano, Narváez, Valderrábano, Ripa, Brayssing, Kargel, Bakfark and others; cittern fantasias first appeared in 1568. Phalèse also published the work of the Flemish lutenist Adriaenssen, whose Pratum musicum (1584) and its sequel (1592) open with fantasias; in these there is generally a fugal first section, leading to ebullient, improvisatory lute writing (MMBel, x, 1966). An idiosyncrasy of Phalèse's title-pages is the use of the Greek word automaton (from automatos, ‘spontaneous’), as in the phrase ‘automata, quae Fantasiae dicuntur’ (Hortus musarum, 1552) or ‘automata quae Fantasiae, vel Praeludia nuncupantur’ (Theatrum musicum, 1571). Fantasias are found in Joachim van den Hove's Florida (1601), in the Thysius Lutebook (NL-Lt 1666) and in Nicolas Vallet’s Le secret des muses (1615, 1616); one of Vallet's is on a chromatic subject (La mendiante fantasye), another uses thematic variation (CM, Corpus des luthistes français, 1970).
The composition of keyboard fantasias on a principal, unifying subject was nowhere pursued with such vigour and variety as in the Netherlands. Peter Philips arrived there from England in 1588; his stylistic proximity in later work to Sweelinck is shown by a fantasia (MB, lxxv, 1999, no.13) that treats its subject in diminution and augmentation. Sweelinck's own fantasias (Opera omnia, i/1, 1968) belong to three main types. The first is the ostinato fantasia, in which a subject is constantly reiterated against figuration of increasing brilliancy. The second (occasionally found also under the name ricercar) may be illustrated by his Fantasia chromatica. The chromatic theme is treated fugally, with first one counter-subject, then another; in the next process it is augmented, surrounded by new points of imitation and then accompanied by running semiquavers (coupled with anticipations of the theme's diminished form); in the last, it is given in diminution, first with running counterpoint, then in stretto, and finally in double diminution over a pedal. In another fantasia of this type (Opera omnia, i/1, no.3) a subject is presented together with its inversion, and both forms are subsequently treated in augmentation and diminution. The third type is the Fantasia auff die Manier von ein Echo, in which lighter, more madrigalian counterpoint is succeeded by passages of echoed phrases (exploiting contrasts of octave or manual) and toccata-like display.
Of Musick design'd for Instruments … the chief and most excellent, for Art and Contrivance, are Fancies, of 6, 5, 4, and 3 parts, intended commonly for Viols. In this sort of Musick the Composer (being not limitted to words) doth imploy all his Art and Invention solely about the bringing in and carrying on of … Fuges, according to the Order and Method formerly shewed. When he has tryed all the several wayes which he thinks fit to be used therein; he takes some other point, and does the like with it: or else, for variety, introduces some Chromatick Notes, with Bindings and Intermixtures of Discords; or, falls into some lighter Humour like a Madrigal, or what else his own fancy shall lead him to: but still concluding with something which hath Art and excellency in it.
A four-part fantasia by Coprario (MB, ix, no.20; ed. R. Charteris, 1991, pp.105–11) may serve as a typical example: a spacious imitative opening section, leading into a second section on a livelier point, a short grave episode, the entry of another new point, and a concluding ‘double fuge’. Triple-time interludes quite often occur in fantasias in a lighter vein, especially trios, but without any attempt to relate sections by thematic transformation. Gibbons, in his fantasias with a ‘double basse’ viol (MB, xlviii, 1982, nos.16–19 and 24–5), followed Byrd in introducing passages suggestive of dance or popular song.
Coprario’s fantasia-suites for violins, bass viol and organ are one example of how instrumentation may affect fantasia structure and style (see Fantasia-suite); his fantasias for two bass viols and organ, which are as much airs as fantasias, are another (MB, ix, nos.100–01; RRMBE, xli, 1982). Jenkins’s fantasias for two trebles and bass exhibit lively, violinistic points and corant-like triplas; those for one treble and two basses exploit the range and agility of the ‘division’ viol, whose virtuoso capabilities are tested to the utmost in his fantasia-suites for the same instruments and in Christopher Simpson’s Monthes and Seasons. In The Division-Viol (2/1667), Simpson described such fancies as ‘beginning commonly with some Fuge, and then falling into Points of Division; answering one another; sometimes two against one, and sometimes all engaged at once in a contest of Division: But (after all) ending commonly in grave and harmonious Musick’. Simpson's naming of fantasias after the months of the year may be compared with Michael East's use of emblematic Latin mottoes, or the names of the nine Muses, for his printed fantasias of 1610 (EM, xxxiA, 1962) and 1638.
Characteristically, the fantasias of Beethoven both maintain and break with tradition. The Fantasia of 1809 for piano (op.77) is in a single movement and has contrasts of tempo and figuration (ex.2) that are clearly in the empfindsamer Stil of C.P.E. Bach. On the other hand, in the two sonatas ‘quasi una fantasia’ (op.27) the term is associated for the first time with the idea of large-scale unification of multi-movement works. In op.27 no.1 traditional forms are ignored to some extent, and there is some attempt to de-emphasize the boundaries between movements; in op.27 no.2 (the ‘Moonlight’ Sonata) an initial slow movement in sonata form takes the place of a sonata-allegro movement and a slow movement (which would be the normal sequence of movements at the beginning of a sonata), and the indication ‘attacca’ is used for the first time to join two ‘independent’ sonata movements to each other. It was in the Fantasia for piano, chorus and orchestra op.80 (1808), however, that Beethoven broke most strikingly with tradition by introducing a chorus into a form that had been instrumentally conceived for some 300 years.
Schumann’s Fantasia in C op.17 (1836–8, originally designated grosse
Sonate), on the other hand, is divided into three movements. In both outer
movements, however, the initial modulation is to the subdominant, rather than
the dominant, thus contradicting an important principle of sonata-movement
construction. The work’s ‘slow-movement section’, in C minor and marked ‘im
Legendenton’, appears in the middle of the first movement, interrupting the
first attempt at a recapitulation in the movement; a second attempt is delayed
until after the end of this section and requires an initial expansion in E
major–C minor to make a
smooth connection with it. The middle movement, too, uses the subdominant as
its contrasting key centre, though this is entirely in line with its march-like
character and its probable model, the second movement of Beethoven’s op.101.
The freedom of Schumann’s form also enabled him to use transitional thematic
materials in both outer movements that are similar to each other though by no
means identical (ex.3).
To Schumann is also owed the Fantasiestück and, with such pieces, the creation of an instrumental equivalent of the song cycle, in whose development he also played a prominent role; the individual pieces in works such as the Phantasiestücke (originally called Phantasien) op.12 and Kreisleriana op.16, though coherent musical structures in themselves, are nevertheless better understood in the context of the entire work, and in this respect more so than their early 19th-century antecedents, Beethoven’s sets of bagatelles opp.119 and 126, Schubert’s Moments musicaux and impromptus and Mendelssohn’s Lieder ohne Worte. Brahms’s late sets of piano pieces, of which op.116 is entitled Fantasien, take Schumann’s Phantasiestücke as their starting-point, though the cyclical element is not as strong in Brahms’s pieces.
See also Phantasy.
MersenneHU
PraetoriusSM
L. de Milán: El maestro (Valencia, 1536/R); ed. C. Jacobs (University Park, PA, 1971)
D. Ortiz: Trattado de glosas (Rome, 1553); ed. Max Schneider (Kassel, 1967)
M. de Fuenllana: Orphénica lyra (Seville, 1554); ed. C. Jacobs (London, 1979)
J. Bermudo: Declaración de instrumentos musicales (Osuna, 1555/R)
P. de Tyard: Solitaire second, ou Prose de la musique (Lyons, 1555)
H. Finck: Practica musica (Wittenberg, 1556, enlarged 2/1556/R)
G. Zarlino: Le istitutioni harmoniche (Venice, 1558/R, 3/1573/R; Eng. trans. of pt iii, 1968/R, as The Art of Counterpoint; Eng. trans. of pt iv, 1983, as On the Modes)
C. Sebastiani: Bellum musicale (Strasbourg, 1563)
T. de Santa María: Arte de tañer fantasia (Valladolid, 1565/R)
E. Bottrigari: Il desiderio (Venice, 1594/R)
T. Morley: A Plaine and Easie Introduction to Practicall Musicke (London, 1597/R); ed. R.A. Harman (London, 1952, 2/1963)
C. Simpson: The Division-Violist (London, 1659/R, 2/1665/R as Chelys: minuritionum artificio exornata/The Division-Viol, 3/1712)
C. Simpson: The Principles of Practical Musick (London, 1665, enlarged 2/1667 as A Compendium of Practical Musick); ed. P.J. Lord (Oxford, 1970)
T. Mace: Musick's Monument (London, 1676/R)
S. de Brossard: Dictionaire de musique (Paris, 1703/R, 2/1705/R, 3/c1708/R); ed. and trans. A. Gruber (Henryville, PA, 1982)
C.P.E. Bach: Versuch über die wahre Art das Clavier zu spielen, i (Berlin, 1753, 2/1787); ii (Berlin, 1762/R, 2/1797); Eng. trans. of both ( 1949)
A.F.C. Kollmann: An Essay on Musical Harmony (London, 1796)
J. Wilson, ed.: Roger North on Music (London, 1959)
MeyerECM
MGG2 (T. Schipperges, D. Teepe)
H. Schenker: ‘Die Kunst der Improvisation’, Das Meisterwerk in der Musik, i (Vienna, 1925), 9–40
M. Reimann: ‘Zur Deutung des Begriffs “Fantasia”’, AMw, x (1953), 253–74
H.H. Eggebrecht: Studien zur musikalischen Terminologie (Mainz, 1955, 2/1968)
G.G. Butler: ‘The Fantasia as Musical Image’, MQ, lx (1974), 602–15
ApelG
BrownI
DoddI
MeyerMS
ReeseMMR
O. Deffner: Über die Entwicklung der Fantasie für Tasteninstrumente bis J.P. Sweelinck (Kiel, 1928)
M. Lefkowitz: The English Fantasia for Viols (thesis, U. of Southern California, 1951)
W. Coates: ‘English Two-Part Viol Music, 1590–1640’, ML, xxxiii (1952), 141–50
H.H. Eggebrecht: ‘Terminus “Ricercar”’, AMw, ix (1952), 137–47
J.M. Ward: ‘The Use of Borrowed Material in 16th-Century Instrumental Music’, JAMS, v (1952), 88–98
J.M. Ward: The Vihuela de Mano and its Music (1536–1576) (diss., New York U., 1953)
D. Launay: ‘La fantaisie en France jusqu’au milieu du XVIIe siècle’, La musique instrumentale de la Renaissance: Paris 1954, 327–39
R.M. Murphy: Fantasia and Ricercare in the Sixteenth Century (diss., Yale U., 1954)
T. Dart: ‘Jacobean Consort Music’, PRMA, lxxxi (1954–5), 63–75
P. Evans: ‘Seventeenth-Century Chamber Music Manuscripts at Durham’, ML, xxxvi (1955), 205–23
C. Arnold and M. Johnson: ‘The English Fantasy Suite’, PRMA, lxxxii (1955–6), 1–14
R.M. Murphy: ‘Fantaisie et recercare dans les premières tablatures de luth du XVIe siècle’, Le luth et sa musique: Neuilly-sur-Seine 1957, 127–42
A. Cohen: The Evolution of the Fantasia and Works in Related Styles in the Seventeenth-Century Instrumental Ensemble Music of France and the Low Countries (diss., New York U., 1959)
E.F. Nelson: An Introductory Study of the English Three-Part String Fancy (diss., Cornell U., 1960)
G. Oldham: ‘Louis Couperin: a New Source of French Keyboard Music of the mid-17th Century’, RMFC, i (1960), 51–9
J.M. Richards: A Study of Music for Bass Viol Written in England in the Seventeenth Century (diss., U. of Oxford, 1961)
H.C. Slim: The Keyboard Ricercar and Fantasia in Italy, c1500–1550 (diss., Harvard U., 1961)
A. Cohen: ‘A Study of Instrumental Ensemble Practice in 17th-Century France’, GSJ, xv (1962), 3–17
A. Cohen: ‘The Fantaisie for Instrumental Ensemble in 17th-Century France’, MQ, xlviii (1962), 234–43
R.S. Douglass: The Keyboard Ricercar in the Baroque Era (diss., North Texas State U., 1963)
W.E. Hultberg: Sancta Maria's ‘Libro llamado Arte de tañer fantasia’: a Critical Evaluation (diss., U. of Southern California, 1965)
J. Ward: ‘Parody Technique in 16th-Century Instrumental Music’, The Commonwealth of Music, in Honor of Curt Sachs, ed. G. Reese and R. Brandel (New York, 1965), 202–28
G.L. Zwicky: The Imitative Organ Fantasia in the Seventeenth Century (DMA diss., U. of Illinois, 1965)
C. MacClintock: ‘The “Giaches Fantasias” in MS Chigi Q VIII 206: a Problem in Identification’, JAMX, xix (1966), 370–82
W. Apel: ‘Solo Instrumental Music’, The Age of Humanism, 1540–1630, NOHM, iv (1968), 602–708
W. Breig: ‘Die Lübbenauer Tabulaturen Lynar A1 un A2: eine quellenkundliche Studie’, AMw, xxv (1968), 96–117, 223–36
E.E. Lowinsky: ‘Echoes of Adrian Willaert's Chromatic “Duo” in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century Compositions’, Studies in Music History: Essays for Oliver Strunk, ed. H. Powers (Princeton, NJ, 1968), 183–238; rev. in E.E. Lowinsky: Music in the Culture of the Renaissance, ed. B.J. Blackburn (Chicago, 1989), ii, 699–729
E.H. Meyer: ‘Concerted Instrumental Music’, The Age of Humanism, 1540–1630, NOHM, iv (1968), 550–601
F. Baines: ‘Fantasias for the Great Double Base’, Chelys, ii (1970), 37–8
C.D.S. Field: The English Consort Suite of the Seventeenth Century (diss., U. of Oxford, 1970)
D. Kämper: Studien zur instrumentalen Ensemblemusik des 16. Jahrhunderts in Italien, AnMc, no.10 (1970)
J.T. Johnson: The English Fantasia-Suite, ca. 1620–1660 (diss., U. of California, Berkeley, 1971)
J. Caldwell: English Keyboard Music before the Nineteenth Century (Oxford, 1973)
W. Kirkendale: ‘Ciceronians versus Aristotelians on the Ricercar as Exordium, from Bembo to Bach’, JAMS, xxxii (1979), 1–44
D. Pinto: ‘The Fantasy Manner: the Seventeenth-Century Context’, Chelys, x (1981), 17–28
J. Griffiths: The Vihuela Fantasia: a Comparative Study of Forms and Styles (diss., Monash U., 1983)
J.-M. Vaccaro: ‘La fantaisie chez les luthistes français au XVIe siècle’, AnM, xxxviii (1983), 139–45
J.M. Meadors: Italian Lute Fantasias and Ricercars Printed in the Second Half of the Sixteenth Century (Ann Arbor, 1984)
A.J. Ness: ‘The Siena Lute Book and its Arrangements of Vocal and Instrumental Part-Music’, Lute Symposium: Utrecht 1986, 30–49
J. Wess: ‘Musica transalpina, Parody, and the Emerging Jacobean Viol Fantasia’, Chelys, xv (1986), 3–25
A. Newcomb: ‘The Anonymous Ricercars of the Bourdeney Codex’, Frescobaldi Studies, ed. A. Silbiger (Durham, NC, 1987), 97–123
G. Strahle: Fantasy and Music in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-Century England (diss., U. of Adelaide, 1987); abstract in Chelys, xvii (1988), 28–32
A. Edler: ‘Fantasie and Choralfantasie: on the Problematic Nature of a Genre of Seventeenth-Century Organ Music’, Organ Yearbook, xix (1988), 53–66
D. Teepe: Die Entwicklung der Fantasie für Tasteninstrumente im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert: gattungsgeschichtliche Studie (Kassel, 1990)
R. Rasch: ‘The Konyncklycke fantasien Printed in Amsterdam in 1648: English Viol Consort Music in an Anglo-Spanish-Dutch Political Context’, A Viola da Gamba Miscellany: Utrecht 1991, 55–73
A. Ashbee: The Harmonions Musick of John Jenkins, i: The Fantasias for Viols (Surbiton, 1992)
D.N. Bertenshaw: The Influence of the Late 16th-Century Italian Polyphonic Madrigal on the English Viol Consort Fantasy (diss., U. of Leicester, 1992)
C.D.S. Field: ‘Consort Music I: up to 1660’, The Blackwell History of Music in Britain, iii: The Seventeenth Century, ed. I. Spink (Oxford, 1992), 197–244
M. Spring: ‘Solo Music for Tablature Instruments’, ibid., 367–405
M. Tilmouth and C.D.S. Field: ‘Consort Music II: from 1660’, ibid., 245–81
D. Pinto: ‘Further on a Fantasia by “Giaches”’, ML, lxxv (1994), 659–60
K. Elcombe: ‘Keyboard Music’, The Blackwell History of Music in Britain, ii: The Sixteenth Century, ed. R. Bray (Oxford, 1995), 210–62
J. Harper: ‘Ensemble and Lute Music’, ibid., 263–322
D. Pinto: For the Violls: the Consort and Dance Music of William Lawes (London, 1995)
W. Syre: ‘Die norddeutsche Choralphantasie: ein gattungsgeschichtliches Phantom?’, Musik und Kirche, lxv (1995), 84–7
A. Ashbee and P. Holman, eds.: John Jenkins and his Time: Studies in English Consort Music (Oxford, 1996)
A. Ashbee: ‘The Late Fantasias of John Jenkins’, Chelys, xxv (1996–7), 53–64
M. Spring: ‘The English Lute “Fantasia Style” and the Music of Cuthbert Hely’, Chelys, xxv (1996–7), 65–77
R. Thompson: ‘The Sources of Purcell’s Fantasias’, Chelys, xxv (1996–7), 88–96
R. Bellingham: ‘Alfonso Ferrabosco II: the Art of the Fantasia’, Chelys, xxvi (1998), 1–25
D. Bertenshaw: ‘Madrigals and Madrigalian Fantasies: the Five-Part Consort Music of John Coprario and Thomas Lupo’, Chelys, xxvi (1998), 26–51
V. Brookes: ‘The Four-Part Fantasias of John Ward: One Composer or Two?’, Chelys, xxvi (1998), 52–68
C. Cunningham: ‘Variety and Unity in the Fantasias of John Coprario’, Chelys, xxvi (1998), 69–77
R.S. Douglass: The Keyboard Ricercar in the Baroque Era (diss., North Texas State U., 1963)
H.R. Chase: German, Italian, and Dutch Fugal Precursors of the Fugues in the ‘Well-Tempered Clavier’, I, 1600–1722 (diss., Indiana U., 1970)
J. Caldwell: English Keyboard Music before the Nineteenth Century (Oxford, 1973)
P. Schleuning: Die freie Fantasie: ein Beitrag zur Erforschung der klassischen Klaviermusik (Göppingen, 1973)
W. Kirkendale: ‘Ciceronians versus Aristotelians on the Ricercar as Exordium, from Bembo to Bach’, JAMS, xxxii (1979), 1–44
H. Steger: ‘Gedanken über den Fantasie-Begriff in der Musik des 18. and 19. Jahrhunderts’, Gedenkschrift Hermann Beck, ed. H. Dechant and W. Sieber (Laaber, 1982), 143–50
C.R. Suttoni: Piano and Opera: a Study of the Piano Fantasias Written on Opera Themes in the Romantic Era (diss., New York U., 1973)
J. Parker: The Clavier Fantasy from Mozart to Liszt: a Study in Style and Content (diss., Stanford U., 1974)
H. Steger: ‘Gedanken über den Fantasie-Begriff in der Musik des 18. und 19. Jahrhunderts’, Gedenkschrift Hermann Beck, ed. H. Dechant and W. Sieber (Laaber, 1982), 143–50
G. Fydich: Fantasien für Klavier nach 1800 (diss., U. of Frankfurt, 1991)
For further bibliography see entries on individual composers.