Welsh Journals

the editorial team of the Myvyrian Archaiology of Wales) and as a founding father of the modern eisteddfod movement. Nevertheless, it appears that the four pieces come from an authentic early seventeenth-century document, and that Edward Williams made every effort to copy them accurately, even though he had little knowledge of the technicalities of the notation he was reproducing. Indeed, it seems that some of the many inaccuracies in the transcription are not Williams's own. At the very least, the Iolo manuscript adds four more pieces to a unique musical tradition; but its real significance hinges on the fact that full analysis of its contents can shed light on its more famous sister, the Robert ap Huw manuscript. 2 The notation With the exception of some unintentional inaccuracies and a more extensive use of rhythmic signs, the notation of the Iolo manuscript is identical to that of the Robert ap Huw manuscript and functions in exactly the same way. Signs indicating octave levels are often miss- ing or ambiguous, but fortunately the material contains enough clues through direct and sequential repetition for a workable reconstruc- tion to be made. In general the pieces in both manuscripts consist of a series of variations (ceinciau), each of which ends with a refrain (diwedd), which may occasionally alter in accordance with the content of the preceding cainc. Some of the variations differ so slightly in content that the original intabulator developed a system of abbreviations using verbal instructions and signs such as the spiral and cross. Thus 'bis dechrau o'r groes' may be interpreted as 'repeat from the cross sign at the beginning [of the section up to the first spiral mark]'. The most commonly used instruction is 'ffordd', which implies 'continue the section as before, but using the variation technique which has just been introduced'. These conventions are not always used consistently in the Robert ap Huw manuscript: often the spiral marks are omitted, so that the instruction 'bis dechrau' ('repeat the beginning') may often refer only to that part of the section up to the first vertical line. Frequently the space Robert ap Huw left himself for these instruc- tions was so narrow that he had to split words such as 'ffordd' and 'dechrau', making them difficult to comprehend in isolation, and this may help to explain the many mistakes made by Edward Williams in copying similar instructions. There are certain orthographic idiosyncrasies in the Robert ap Huw manuscript which are clearly echoed in the Iolo manuscript.