Youth and experience: One of Stradivari’s earliest violins, revisited in his Golden Period

The ‘Salabue, Matsuda’ is one of the very first violins that Stradivari ever made. It is handsome, remarkably well preserved and rich in history. But the most exciting part of its story is that it has a unique and special secret: the front of the ‘Salabue’ was purposely re-made by Stradivari himself, more than fifty years later, in c. 1716, at the height of his Golden Period.

By Jason Price October 21, 2024

Prior to the 18th century, there was no real industry of violin restorers and repairers. If an instrument was damaged — such as a broken head or a crack to the front — a violin maker was more likely to replace that part than repair it. Today, modern restorers go to great lengths to preserve historical instruments, but there didn’t used to be much incentive to restore damaged instruments, especially because long-lasting restoration techniques, like patch fitting and neck grafts, had not yet been developed. This, we can imagine, is likely what happened to the ‘Salabue, Matsuda’ …

 

 

The front and back plates of the ‘Salabue’ match perfectly in terms of dimensions, curves and outline. But because Stradivari’s style of corners, edges and purfling changed so significantly over these fifty years, the edges appear much bolder and wider on the top and the corners appear finer and narrower on the back. The edges of both the back and top are original and undoubled. The consistent edge margins corroborate the conclusion that the top was made to fit the ribs.

The ‘Salabue’ was made in c. 1666 by Stradivari at the start of this career. It is one of the best preserved examples of the maker’s early work and shows the extraordinary talent and bold style of the young maker in his early twenties. The violin is comparable to  the ‘Aranyi’, the ‘Back’, the ‘Sachs’ and the ‘Canadian’. The rib outline fits on the maker’s ‘S’ mould (MS2), which Stradivari frequently used during this period of his career. But what makes this violin important is that its front was remade by Stradivari a half-century later, around 1716, at the height of his Golden Period.

The back of the ‘Salabue’ (right) twins nicely with the ‘Back’ (left) and ‘Aranyi’. All are from the period 1665-1667.

There have been countless books and articles written about Stradivari but we know surprisingly little about the early life of the world’s most famous violin maker. Where and when was he born? Who was his teacher? Who were his first clients? What we know about Stradivari begins not with his birth but in 1667, when he suddenly appears in archival records as an independent violin maker and rents a house with an attached workshop. He quickly made a name for himself and by the 1680s was already arguably the most important maker in Cremona, receiving important commissions from royalty and noble households. By the time of his Golden Period — roughly the first two decades of the 18th century — he had vanquished all competition.

The purfling on the front is considerably wider and the corners of the back are more narrow and slender.

Stradivari’s career spanned over seventy years, a phenomenal accomplishment for an artist of any age. His style changed greatly over the course of his career and although his extensive production is marked by innovation, there is a consistency of quality and character throughout. Stradivari’s early work has delicate corners, narrow edge margins, fine purfling, an amatisé arching and slender soundholes. The later instruments have a flatter arch, thicker edgework, wider purfling and sturdy, generous soundholes. There are other differences with regards to dimensions, materials and varnish but, by and large, experts can easily recognise the significant periods in his career. The front of the ‘Salabue’ is an exceptionally fine example of Stradivari’s Golden Period work. Of those that I know personally, the ‘Salabue’ reminds me of the 1716 ‘Cessole’, the 1716 ‘Medici, Tuscan’, the 1717 ‘Tyrell’, the c. 1719 ‘MacDonald’ viola.

The sound-holes of the ‘Salabue’ (right) are made in the maker’s mature style, but the original sound-holes would have looked like the ‘Back’ Stradivari of c. 1665-1670. Notice the slender stems on the ‘Back’ and the breadth, poise and sturdiness of the ‘Salabue’. Note also the narrow distance between the sound-holes and the ‘Salabue’ edge: the maker’s 1716 sound-hole was actually too wide for this model and so the sound-hole appears much closer to the edge than we would expect for Stradivari.

That the front of the ‘Salabue’ was made later than the back was apparent to its first known owner, Count Ignazio Alessandro Cozio di Salabue, from whom it takes its name. Count Cozio was the first great connoisseur and collector of Italian instruments. He lived in Piemonte from 1755 to 1840 and was deeply passionate about instruments and instrument makers. His memoirs and correspondence, which we refer to as his Carteggio, are among the earliest and most important sources of information on classical instrument makers and instruments. Cozio mentions the ‘Salabue’ in his Carteggio on 22 January 1823 in a passage discussing Stradivari’s training. Like most of Cozio’s writing, this passage meanders in a stream of consciousness and is overly formal (he refers to himself in the third person as ‘il Signor Conte’…). Here is the rough translation: “Stradivari was undoubtedly a pupil of Nicolo Amati because his instruments from the 17th century follow the Amati style and are often labeled Amati, in fact, [I] have one beautiful and well preserved violin by Stradivari from the year 1666 in [my] collection where the front was changed by Stradivari himself many years later in his later style.”[1][2]

Cozio mentions the ‘Salabue, Matsuda’ in his Carteggio on 22 January 1823 “… [I] have one beautiful and well preserved violin by Stradivari from the year 1666 in [my] collection where the front was changed by Stradivari himself many years later in his later style.”

This is particularly interesting for several reasons. First, we can use this information to map the provenance of the ‘Salabue’ over the past two centuries. Second, Cozio already confirms that the ‘Salabue’ is not a composite in the usual sense of the word: the front didn’t come from another instrument, it was deliberately and specifically made by Stradivari for this violin. And finally, although Cozio doesn’t speculate as to why the front was changed, he draws attention to the fact that it was remade in the maker’s ‘later style’.

…the ‘Salabue’ is not a composite in the usual sense of the word: the front didn’t come from another instrument, it was deliberately and specifically made by Stradivari for this violin.

The head is the typical ‘Amatise’ pattern that Stradivari used on his earliest instruments.

So far, I’ve made the assumption that the front of the ‘Salabue’ was replaced as the result of an accident. But the reasoning can be more nuanced. Over the past few weeks, I spoke with several friends who are makers and asked if they had ever remade a part of an instrument from an earlier moment in their career. All of them had, and usually it was because the instrument had suffered some damage. However, a few told me that the decision to remake that part was also influenced by the desire to revisit an earlier instrument that they weren’t entirely satisfied with.

Makers evolve stylistically over the course of their career, but they also evolve acoustically, meaning their understanding of what makes a violin sound good changes with experience and experimentation.

Makers evolve stylistically over the course of their career, but they also evolve acoustically, meaning their understanding of what makes a violin sound good changes with experience and experimentation. We know that Stradivari’s concept of instrument architecture and acoustics evolved greatly over the course of his career.  It is entirely plausible that he would try to improve an earlier work if given the chance. In other words, we shouldn’t ignore the possibility that Stradivari purposely upgraded the ‘Salabue’ with a front made in his mature style.

…we shouldn’t ignore the possibility that Stradivari purposely upgraded the ‘Salabue’ with a front made in his mature style.

A Micro CT scan allows us to detect hidden condition faults and it also provides a highly accurate rendering of the plates and rib structure without distortion. We can determine what model was used to make this violin by comparing the rib structure with other Stradivari instruments and with the Stradivari moulds in the Museo del Violino.

Throughout history there are many examples of artists revisiting works from earlier in their career and discarded the juvenilia that no longer pleased them. Francis Bacon destroyed all his earliest work; Carl Orff instructed his publishers to destroy everything he had written before Carmina Burana; Georgia O’Keeffe famously bought back and destroyed several paintings to regain control of her reputation in anticipation of her death. The list is long. It is perhaps a stretch to think that Stradivari was curating his posthumous reputation but it’s not unreasonable to think that he would correct an early work — acoustically and aesthetically — if given the opportunity.

The final point that I want to make is how much I, personally, have enjoyed getting to know this violin over the past few months that we have had in preparation for sale. Like other experts in our field, I am drawn towards instruments that are well preserved with unadulterated varnish — which the ‘Salabue’ has in abundance. I also love instruments that tell a unique story and those that connect us with history in a way that increases our understanding of the great makers of the past.

The ‘Salabue, Matsuda’ will be sold at auction in New York on November 14, 2024.

 

  1. Cozio seems to indicate that this violin was made by Stradivari in 1666 but bore an Amati label. The label currently in the ‘Salabue’ is a facsimile. It is possible that Cozio intended to say that his violin bore the “alumnus Amati” label that Cozio describes later in that same passage. The full text runs: “Il med[esi]mo A. Stradivari fu indubbitata/mente il primo scolaro del sudd[etto] celebre Nicolao Amati / sia perchè per tale si riconosce special/mente dal lavoro de’ sui Istromenti fabbricati / nel secolo decimo settimo, sia / perché in alcuni de’ primi suoi / Istromenti degli Anni 1665, e 1666 / fece prima uso de’ biglietti del suo Mae/stro come può vedersi uno / bellissimo, e ben conservato nella / collazione [sic] del predetto Sig. Conte /  al quale Istromento lo / stesso Stradivario né cangiò il / coperchio molti anni dopo / sull’ ultimo di lui stile / indi con altri biglietti si qualificò / scolaro del sudd[etto] Sig. Nicolao [sic] / Amati … “
  2. On 8 June 1816, Cozio refers to a 1665 violin with a later front by Stradivari but with a one-piece back and other details that don’t accurately match the description of this violin. In my experience, Cozio’s descriptions are often inconsistent and frequently contain errors. Although it is possible that the violin Cozio was describing is not the ‘Salabue, Matsuda’ it’s far more likely that this was a clerical error and much less likely that there were two c. 1666 violins that were “bellissimo, e ben conservato” with later Stradivari fronts.

Subscribe to the Cozio Archive

Over 12,000 instruments and bows by 3,000 different makers

Over 200,000 photographs

Certificates and other documents

Detailed provenance information

Browse the Cozio Archive


210,000+ Photographs

36,000+ Instruments & Bows

3,500+ Violin & Bow Makers

11,000+ Historical Owners

57,000+ Auction Results

14,000+ Certificates & Documents