For Good Friday we are about to sing Crux fidelis<\/i> by the person I shall call – following the convention used for Classical authors – Pseudo-King John IV of Portugal. This work obviously fooled the musical world for a while, but its suspicious lack of provenance and anachronistic features (see John Rutter’s edition) point to a 19th-century composer who never got any credit for it.<\/p>\n
I’ve recently been considering another work that seems to be at least partly fake. The Erleigh Cantors have occasionally performed a Magnificat in faux-bordon ‘from Robert Fayrfax’ setting on the First Tone’ (which is otherwise unknown), paired with a Nunc ‘by an unknown Edwardine composer from a Chapel Royal Choir Book of 1547’. They were published as Novello’s Parish Choir Book series no. 1062. The editor, Royle Shore, has added a couple of bars of solo descant to the Gloria of each canticle.<\/p>\n
I consulted an expert on the revival of Tudor music, and it seems most likely that the Magnificat has some basis somewhere in Fayrfax, such as a few bars extracted from another composition and repeated to make the composed part of the setting. Royle Shore was a solicitor and not a very expert editor, but he wanted to get Church of England parish choirs singing Tudor repertoire.<\/p>\n
They’re pleasant enough canticles, though I have never come across any other choir performing them or seen them in a Cathedral choir library. I have to say that I still have my doubts about that Nunc, and suspect Royle Shore of having slipped in one of his own compositions.<\/p>\n
As to the ethics of forging a musical composition, the more marginal to musical history the composition would be if genuine, the less it matters. King John IV is famous as a king rather than as a composer, so while his name lends royal glamour to the composition, Crux fidelis<\/i> is not being attached to an established body of work. Tweaking Fayrfax rather drastically (if that’s what’s been done) is a rather different matter and I wish Royle Shore had been more open about exactly what he did. <\/p>\n
I doubt though that Royle Shore made much money from his fake Fayrfax and possibly forged Nunc; and Pseudo-King John (if such a person existed) insinuated their composition into an anthology, so little extra profit there either. Just the satisfaction that their compositions were in print, and perhaps a little glow of smugness at having fooled the musical public. When all’s said and done, Crux Fidelis<\/i> has survived in the repertory because people enjoy performing and listening to it.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
For Good Friday we are about to sing Crux fidelis by the person I shall call – following the convention used for Classical authors – Pseudo-King John IV of Portugal. This work obviously fooled the musical world for a while, … Continue reading