Relegation,Diminution,and Reclamation: The Misnaming of Sarah Anna Glover (1786–1867)

Abstract

The contribution of Sarah Anna Glover (1786–1867), the only woman solely responsible for a complete and successful class music pedagogy, is today widely appreciated. Such recognition has not always been the case. Situated within the appropriation and gradual diminution of her contribution, this article explores the misnaming of Glover in authoritative texts. Over time and in many cultures, the personal or first name of a woman is often lost, with a concomitant loss of identity and recognition. Using dogged pursuit, occasional happenstance, and some imagination, it is possible to unfold how Sarah became “Elizabeth” in some circles. This pursuit begins in the present, moving back through time to locate foundational mistakes. Recognising the contribution of music education pioneers is important, particularly those who made remarkable contributions but who were at times relegated to obscurity. This research is an example of revisionist historical research that identifies and reclaims identity.

Introduction

Sarah Anna Glover (1786–1867) was the only woman to have been solely responsible for a comprehensive and effective music education class pedagogy. Her innovative and meticulously planned approach with all necessary pedagogical materials was established both in and beyond her home in Norwich (Norfolk, UK). In 1841, her work was appropriated by John Curwen (1816–1880) to become the foundation of the global Tonic Sol-fa method. During Glover’s lifetime, relations between her and Curwen were respectful with him frequently giving Glover credit as the “progenitrix” of the method. In accord with social mores, in all public and locatable private spheres, Curwen addressed Glover as Miss Glover. ¹ After Curwen’s death, Glover’s recognition dwindled, to the extent that her name (and thus in part her identity) was lost or re-invented. This discussion explores the devolution of representation and respect accorded to Glover as epitomised in the replacement of her first name in several authoritative texts.

A personal name is important, particularly for women who, at various times and in various cultures, have had their personal names suppressed or overwritten by custom. The family names of women are generally those of their father or husband and change with circumstances. In some ways, the first name(s) of a woman is hers alone (although bestowed by family). Names are very important to woman, signifying self and relationships to others. For women who write and publish, the choice of authorial name is influenced by many considerations, but the choice should be that of the woman concerned. A name should not be expunged or changed. Foster argues that it is impossible to understand the “personal and cultural work performed by publication and attribution . . . without considering . . . the changing nature of a writer’s proprietary interest in his or her personal name.” ² Consideration of Foucault’s question, “What is an author?,” evokes all stages in the existence of a text, from composition, through publication, ultimately to reception, and how it is mentioned. This is true, not just for the work itself but for its creator. The text still exists after it has left the hands of its creator. While asserting that his intention was otherwise, Foucault stated that he had at times “employed the names of authors in a naive and often crude fashion.” ³ Crude usage of a name to the point of erasure can be driven by various motives or just plain carelessness. As will be unfolded in this case, it can be argued that giving Glover the wrong name was more than naivety, rather it was part of a consistent valorisation of the work of Curwen. Glover was collateral damage. Foucault deems it to be an ethical principle that we should answer Beckett’s question, “What matter who’s speaking[?].” ⁴ Although Beckett eschewed both narrative and contextualising frames, he continued, “there’s going to be a story, someone’s going to try and tell a story.” ⁵ This is what revisionist historians do. ⁶

During Glover’s lifetime, John Curwen was carefully respectful although he often misrepresented her thoughts about what he had done. Glover vacillated about whether she was accepting and grateful of Curwen’s appropriation, modification, and expansion of her method, or just angry and unhappy. ⁷ After Curwen’s death in 1880, fulsome tributes to his endeavours were offered. In 1882, Memorials of John Curwen was compiled by his son, John Spencer Curwen (1847–1916). In this publication were testimonials and extensive quotes from correspondence between Glover and Curwen. Included was a resolution of sympathy on her death that was passed in 1867 at the Christmas convention of Tonic Sol-fa teachers. The resolution stated:

We recognise . . . in the late Miss Sarah Ann [sic] Glover the founder of our Sol-fa notation, and in Miss Christiana Glover, her sister, the constant companion and sharer of her labours, and we hereby charge ourselves to promote the spread of music among the people for the same high purposes and the same unselfish spirit which our founder always manifested. ⁸

The use of Glover’s first names was unusual and actually incorrect according to contemporary mores around addressing women. ⁹ The eldest daughter in a family was always just named as Miss, no first names required. The subsequent daughters were given their first names, so referring to Miss Christiana Glover in this way is correct. Elsewhere in the Memorials of John Curwen, Glover was either referred to as Miss Glover or her name was added to her verbatim letters, which she signed, “S. A. Glover.” ¹⁰ While Curwen lived or was remembered by those who knew him well, Glover’s name was given correctly. After Glover died, her memory dwindled and gradually, her name and pretty much everything about her was altered, reduced, or omitted. While Glover was alive and subsequently, while Curwen was alive, Glover was assiduously called Miss Glover. As Glover was the eldest of four sisters, the appellation Miss Glover was strictly correct as the eldest daughter did not use her first name although subsequent daughters did, but leaving out her personal details allowed others to misinterpret or re-interpret, or just plain get it wrong. ¹¹ To be fair, Glover did not want her personal details shared and was modest in receipt of acclamation. Glover signed all her letters regarding music teaching and learning to Curwen (and others) S. A. Glover.

I have long been fascinated by Glover’s mis-naming. Her name was definitely Sarah Anna Glover according to her death Certificate and will. ¹² In the tradition of Slonimsky ¹³ and others of his ilk, I delight in lexicographical correction and untangling subsequent confabulations. On a deeper note, I am driven by a revisionist perspective to set the record straight and give credit where it was due. I also observe that in past practice, it seems that women have frequently been mis-written and erased from the historical record. The impetus for this unfolding began when a chance inquiry reached me asking why Sarah Anna Glover was known as Elizabeth Glover in the USA. This set me on a hunt to understand the history of this mistake. My wide-ranging and sometimes dogged pursuit of this history exemplifies what Gordon Cox calls “the unpredictability of the research process, and the conjunction of happenstance and assiduity that . . . characterises and enriches such work.” ¹⁴ As I have done elsewhere, I begin with the most recent evidence and then walk backwards where evidence and links become less easily found. ¹⁵

Most Recent Misnaming

I begin with a late twentieth century moment, one of the most recent examples of when Sarah Anna Glover was given the wrong first name, Elizabeth. In 1999, in the second edition of their authoritative book A History of American Music Education, Michael Mark and Charles Gary refer to the Tonic Sol-fa System as developed by Elizabeth Glover and later improved by John Curwen. It is correctly stated that “historical evidence indicates that he [Curwen] simply appropriated Glover’s work and represented it as his own.” ¹⁶ This statement was unchanged from the first edition published in 1992. ¹⁷ In both iterations, Mark and Gary identified the source of their information as an article by Peggy D. Bennett entitled “Sarah Glover: A Forgotten Pioneer in Music Education” published in the Journal of Research in Music Education. ¹⁸ Mark and Gary must have been aware of the title of Bennett’s cited article, which correctly used “Sarah” but for some reason they overlooked this evidence and persisted with the name Elizabeth. ¹⁹

Bennett relied heavily on The Land Without Music by seminal English historian of music education Bernarr Rainbow who, in 1967, introduced Glover as “Miss Sarah Glover, eldest daughter of the rector ²⁰ of St Lawrence’s Church, Norwich.” ²¹ Mark and Gary were aware of Rainbow’s landmark text, identifying it as a secondary source reported by Efland concerning Pestalozzi, ²² but they made no direct citation to Rainbow’s work. Bennett’s other references either named Glover correctly or did not mention her at all. Contemporaneous with Bennett’s publication was A History of Music Education in the United States by James A. Keene. Keene referred to the Tonic Sol-fa System as “a system which was used in England and started by Eliza Glover and ‘perfected’ by John Curwen.” ²³ It is not clear why Keene chose to shorten the incorrect “Elizabeth” to the even more incorrect and somewhat familiar “Eliza.” Keene himself was citing a much earlier text published in 1928 by Edward Bailey Birge entitled History of Public Schools in the United States. Birge stated that, “Tonic Sol-fa began to be used in England about 1840. Started by Elizabeth Glover, it was perfected by John Curwen and became the accepted method of primary music education in the British Schools.” ²⁴ Mark and Gary cite Birge. ²⁵ Birge appears to be the source for the later misnaming of Glover by Keene, and later Mark and Gary. Both Rainbow and Bennett correctly give her first name as Sarah. At this point in the inquiry, it seemed that this misnaming had occurred only in the United States of America.

Birge’s Sources

Birge cited sources and references sparsely throughout his text and included a short bibliography which names forty-six publications, not in alphabetical order, and some without indication of publisher or date. ²⁶ Of these, fifteen could be quickly discounted as dealing solely with pedagogical and school related matters. Of the remaining number, four were Proceedings from the Music Supervisor’s National Convention which presented overviews of current school music practices in the USA. A diligent search for the remaining potentially pertinent books was undertaken. ²⁷ Several retrospective and autobiographical books about music performance made no mention of music pedagogies per se. ²⁸ A few texts did mention Tonic Sol-fa but only glancingly. For example, in History of American Music by Louis C. Elson Tonic Sol-fa was mentioned as a simplified notation of use in choral singing. ²⁹ All locatable sources were searched and not one mentioned Glover. There were other contemporary sources that Birge may not have mentioned, so I widened the search of American literature.

Although not listed by Birge, there were several extensive contemporary reports of music education in America issued by the United States Bureau of Education. For example, in 1908 Music Education in the United States. Schools and Departments of Music by Arthur L. Manchester includes a historical overview that focuses on the establishment of educational institutions. ³⁰ In 1914, Music in the Public Schools by Will Earhart reported “a great diversity of theory and practice in public-school music teaching.” ³¹ This diversity included the use of syllables in sight reading but these were either “neutral” syllables like la or loo, or the use of numbers. There was no mention of sol-fa in either text, but the purpose of this current research was not to trace the presence (or otherwise) of sol-fa pedagogies and notations, rather it was to find where Glover, the originator of what came to be known as Tonic Sol-fa was identified and described.

The search then turned to the journals listed by Birge. ³² There were seven journals, sometimes just listed for one year, sometimes for the full run of publication to that date. These would have provided a wide range of sources for Birge, but they contained no reference to Glover. For example, in 1895, the Connecticut Quarterly included a series of articles about music in New England up to the end of the eighteenth century. Another example, Dwight’s Musical Journal, was published between 1852 and 1881. Dwight’s journal focused on bringing “news of the European musical scene to American readers and to blend it with considerable coverage of the growing musical activities in the United States.” ³³

Searching these references proved fruitless, but it seems that Birge was reading journals. This is the point at which historical conjecture enters. He might have been expected to have been reading the well-known American The Music Quarterly which was founded in 1915. ³⁴ It appears that Birge was not attending to articles about the English Tonic Sol-fa system, let alone Glover but such articles did exist. In 1918 Clement Antrobus Harris published an article in The Musical Quarterly, in which was written:

The English tonic-so-fa [sic] system owes its modern form to . . . a Daughter of Miriam. ³⁵ It is the only great musical movement inaugurated by one of the gentler sex. About 1812 Sarah Ann [sic] Glover, daughter of a clergyman living at Norwich, England, tried to teach a lad . . . Norwich Sol-fa Ladder . . . “Manual of the Norwich Sol-fa System” (1845) . . . John Curwen . . . became an ardent disciple of Miss Glover. ³⁶

It seems that within the date range of sources mentioned by Birge, contemporary American journals did occasionally mention Glover and named her as Sarah Ann [sic]. At that time journals often reprinted articles from other journals without little modification. Accordingly, the search was widened to include other journals locatable in the USA that focused on music teaching and learning. For example, there is no evidence that Birge read The Scottish Musical Magazine ³⁷ but that does not mean that articles in that journal might not have been known in America, as issues are held in the Library of Congress. In March 1921, James A. Hope published a scathing article about the decline of Tonic Sol-fa in The Scottish Musical Magazine. He stated that,

The system [Tonic Sol-fa], however, was not his invention but that of Miss Elizabeth Glover, the daughter of a Norwich clergyman, born in 1812 and died in 1867. She had tried to teach Sunday School children to sing, but found it impossible in the ordinary way. She must have been singularly deficient in musical education or intelligence. ³⁸

Of course, this statement by Lt. Col. James Arthur Hope (1865–1925) ³⁹ is wrong in virtually every aspect except her family name, her provenance as the daughter of a Norwich clergyman, and the year of her death. ⁴⁰ The story of trying to teach Sunday School children and failing is actually Curwen’s account of his own beginnings. ⁴¹ Hope might have been mis-quoting Harris’s article, which referred to that story but correctly positioned it as Curwen’s experience. ⁴² Hope’s vituperative article did not pass unremarked. There was a response in the organ of the Tonic Sol-fa confederacy, the internationally circulated Musical News and Herald, which was reprinted exactly as it appeared in The Scottish Musical Magazine in May 1921. ⁴³ The response was by a well-regarded Tonic Sol-faist John Graham who accused Hope of “reckless inaccuracy” and of being “hopelessly astray.” Unfortunately, Graham repeats the incorrect name, “Elizabeth,” but otherwise corrects every other incorrect statement, noting that “Col. Hope’s opposition to Tonic Sol-fa has outrun his discretion.” ⁴⁴ Predictably, Hope replied to the rejoinder in the next issue and after a little more back and forth, the correspondence ceased. To that date, Glover had been named Elizabeth in at least two widely distributed journals with international circulations. Birge might have seen the series of exchanges between Hope, Graham and others, or a reprinting of the fallacious assertions. However, there is no evidence that Birge did, but it appears that the wrong name was already circulating both in England and the USA.

There were Tonic Sol-faists active in the music education in the USA in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. ⁴⁵ For example, Luther Whiting Mason (1818–1896) used tonic sol-fa in his approach. Mason visited England in 1874 to study Curwen’s Tonic Sol-fa system. ⁴⁶ This was only seven years after Glover’s death and before Curwen’s in 1880, so it can be presumed that both Curwen and Mason would have used the appellation “Miss Glover.” Mason had established a cordial relationship with Curwen who was always punctilious in referring to Glover as “Miss Glover.” He never used her first name or names. Howe recounts that “Mason owned several books by Curwen, including an autographed copy of the Standard Course. Curwen’s Tonic Sol-fa, inspired by Sarah Glover’s Norwich Sol-fa, was a moveable do system.” ⁴⁷ So, it can be presumed that Mason would never have used Glover’s first name if he named her at all. Mason was not the only American music educator to be well-acquainted with the Tonic Sol-fa system. In 1885, the minutes of the Tonic Sol-fa College in London mentions the steady progression of the method in the USA and Canada supported by “The Tonic Sol-fa Advocate, published in New York, and edited by our friend Mr. Theo. F. Seward, pursues its way vigorously in battling for the right.” ⁴⁸ In 1888, Theodore F. Seward (1835–1902) published Revolution in Music-Teaching. A Treatise on The Tonic Sol-fa System, in which he stated that

Mr Curwen did not invent the notation upon which the system is based. It was a lady, Miss Sarah Glover, of Norwich, England, who first hit upon the idea of using the initials of the musical syllables as a notation, and thus escaping the mass of technicalities which belong to the staff notation and to instrumental music, but are only a hindrance to the singer. Mr. Curwen adopted Miss Glover’s device and gradually shaped it into the perfect system which it has now become. ⁴⁹

The American Tonic Sol-fa Association and College was founded in 1889 and affiliated with the Tonic Sol-fa College of London. Seward was a major figure in music education, publishing the US version of The Tonic Sol-fa Music Reader first in 1880. ⁵⁰ Seward and Unseld only recognised Curwen and did not mention Glover at all. There was considerable traffic between music educators on either side of the Atlantic. There would have been an appetite for articles about this new method in a range of popular journals intended for teachers. In those days, whole articles were republished in multiple outlets. Both Mason and Seward were seminal figures in the development of music education in America, and both correctly used Glover’s name. It seems that American Tonic Sol-faists were not responsible for the use of “Elizabeth” instead of “Sarah.” Thus, Birge, who was presumably familiar with texts from this time, had little excuse for the mis-appellation that became enshrined in later American texts. Having reached a dead end, a surprising co-incidence led the search in a different direction.

Looking Further Afield

Having found no “smoking gun,” no particular person, or place in contemporaneous British or American sources, a different approach was taken. In searching through online archival collections for where the name Elizabeth Glover might be found, I located a single unexpected example in a regional newspaper in Queensland, Australia. ⁵¹ This find led to a new search trajectory. In 1888, in an article “Musical Echoes” in The Queenslander, the author “Euterpe” spoke about Elizabeth Glover. ⁵² Of course, it might just have been an error. Mistakes were common in contemporaneous journals. ⁵³ The author of the article was Walter Horatio Wilson (1839–1902) ⁵⁴ who had taken over reporting duties during the absence of the regular correspondent, Richard Thomas Jefferies (1841–1920). ⁵⁵ “Musical Echoes” was a regular feature in the newspaper at this time, reporting various musical items of possible interest about performances, performers, and music education. One article described the recent introduction of Tonic Sol-fa to Queensland, offering background about the method and its genesis:

It was about the year 1850 when the late John Curwen . . . determined to devote his life to the diffusion of a better knowledge of vocal music among the people . . . Mr. Curwen was not the author of the method, as some imagine. He himself referred to Miss Elizabeth Glover as its originator. ⁵⁶

Wilson mentioned the work of a local teacher, Mr. Arthur Kaye of Fortitude Valley. ⁵⁷ It is unlikely that Tonic Sol-fa teacher Kaye would have misnamed Glover. The article that mentioned “Elizabeth Glover” was not the first of the Musical Echoes to mention Tonic Sol-fa. A year earlier in 1887, a brief account of Tonic Sol-fa ascribed to “R. B. Litchfield, an eminent Tonic Sol-faist” was included. ⁵⁸ In the same article, unrelated information was sourced from the English Daily Telegraph. Thus, it seemed that Wilson was probably quoting another source. ⁵⁹

Richard Buckley Litchfield (1832–1903) and Grove’s Dictionary of Music and Musicians

By 1859, Litchfield was the principal of the Working Men’s College in London, which was an early example of an adult education institution established in 1854. In 1859, Litchfield invited Rev. John Curwen to speak at the annual General Meeting. The outcome was that a vocal music class was established “to be taught on the Tonic Sol-Fa method.” ⁶⁰ Litchfield was an enthusiastic supporter of the Tonic Sol-fa method and knew Curwen personally. In all his publications and in the reports of his presentations, Curwen only ever called Glover, Miss Glover. Litchfield was quoted in The Teacher’s Manual of the Sol-fa Method, which has an engraved image of Miss Glover opposite the title page. ⁶¹ It can be assumed that, as a proponent of the approach, Litchfield would have attended classes, taught classes, and been familiar with the literature.

Several years later, Litchfield was to become a contributor to the first edition of George Grove’s A Dictionary of Music and Musicians (henceforth referred to as the Dictionary), which was issued in four volumes between 1879 and1889. ⁶² Grove was an early supporter of Professor F. D. Maurice who founded the Working Men’s College (WMC) in 1854. In 1853, Grove (then secretary to the Crystal Palace Company) gave a talk on “Mechanical Principles Exemplified in Common Things” at the WMC. ⁶³ Litchfield was also one of the founders of the WMC. It would be more than likely that Groves became acquainted with Litchfield, given that they shared a passion for music. ⁶⁴ Grove did not maintain his association with the College but the connection had been made. ⁶⁵

Litchfield, an enthusiastic musician, critic, and Tonic Solfa-ist, was the author of the entry in the Dictionary on Tonic Sol-fa published in 1889. ⁶⁶ The passage quoted in the Queenslander two years earlier in 1887 was taken verbatim from Litchfield’s as yet unpublished entry. ⁶⁷ In the Dictionary, Litchfield explained the method in some detail and then turned to its origins. Its “great success” was due to the “energy and enthusiasm of Mr. John Curwen.” Litchfield expounded that

His [Curwen’s] system grew out of his adoption of a plan of Sol-faing from a modulator with a letter notation, which was being used with success, for teaching children some forty years ago, by a benevolent lady living at Norwich. He always spoke of this lady, Miss Elizabeth Glover (d. 1867), as the originator of the method. Her rough idea developed under his hand into a complete method of teaching. ⁶⁸

The Dictionary was published in both London and New York. Birge does not mention it by name, but it is very likely that he consulted it as necessary. It may be that this is where Birge found the name “Elizabeth” but may have interpreted the phrase “her rough idea” to imply that her contribution was small.

For Birge (and most other people), the Dictionary would have been an authoritative text. It appears that the erroneous material about Elizabeth Glover only appeared in the first edition of the Dictionary. The first edition of A Dictionary of Music and Musicians was twice reprinted, then revised five times by three different editors, before the New Grove’s Dictionary of Music and Musicians was issued in 1980. ⁶⁹ By the second edition, the erroneous statement in the entry on Tonic Sol-fa had been edited out, ⁷⁰ and an additional entry had appeared for Sarah Ann [sic] Glover, presumably written by the editor, as there was no author ascription. The entry stated:

Glover, Sarah Ann [sic], daughter of a clergyman in Norwich, was born there in 1785 [sic], and died in Malvern, October 20, 1867. As far as any individual can be credited with the invention of such a system as the Tonic Sol-fa notation, Miss Glover must be regarded as its inventor. Her Manual of the Norwich Sol-Fa System was published in 1845, but about four years before that Mr. John Curwen discovered the practical excellence of her system, and after various modifications and improvements, devoted himself to its promulgation. In 1850 Miss Glover published a Manual containing the Development of the Tetrachordal System. ⁷¹

This source gave more credit to Glover but still contained errors and understatements. The third edition of the Dictionary was published in 1927 and retained the same entries on Curwen, Glover, and Tonic Sol-fa as in the second edition. ⁷² The next edition did not occur until 1954–too late for Birge, but well in time for subsequent researchers. In the fifth edition, musicologist Harold Watkins Shaw rewrote the entries for Curwen, Glover, and Tonic Sol-fa. Shaw added mention of Glover in the entry for Curwen:

. . . it was at a conference of Sunday school teachers held at Hull in 1841 that he was commissioned to make inquiry into the best and simplest way of teaching to sing by note, and this led to the practical adoption of Sarah Anna Glover’s system. ⁷³

The entry for Glover had also been revised:

Glover, Sarah Anna (b. Norwich, 13 Nov. 1786; d. Malvern, 20 Oct. 1867). English musical educationist. She was a daughter of the Rev. Edward Glover and began to experiment with the musical education of children in 1812, helped by her sister Christiana. In 1835 she published a ‘Scheme for Rendering Psalmody Congregational’; this was followed by the ‘Manual of the Norwich Sol-fa System’ (1845) and the ‘Manual containing a development of the Tetrachordal System, designed to facilitate the acquisition of music, by a return to first principles’ (1850). Her methods, notably the use of the initial letters of the ancient sol-fa syllables as a simple introductory [italics in original] notation for singing, and of a pictorial chart called the “Norwich Sol-fa Ladder”, contained some seeds of the more penetrating and fully developed teaching of John Curwen, who always generously acknowledged his debt to her. A picture of Miss Glover, holding up her “Ladder of Tune” and pointing to the notes upon it, now hangs in the Curwen Memorial College. ⁷⁴

By the time that Birge was writing, Grove’s Dictionary of Music and Musicians had corrected the misnaming in the first edition. Subsequent editions named “Glover, Sarah Ann” [sic] or “Sarah Anna,” and increasingly acknowledged her authorship. The question remains why the misnomer from the first edition was repeated by Birge.

Grove’s Dictionary of Music and Musicians was not the only reference work in circulation. In 1886, James D. Brown published Biographical Dictionary of Musicians: With a Bibliography of English Writings on Music. ⁷⁵ In this much shorter work (one volume, 637 pages), Brown included entries on “Foreign musicians” connected with Britain, acknowledging the contribution of American authorities. There is an entry for Glover (Sarah A.) who “invented the Tonic Sol-fa system of musical notation, which the Rev. John Curwen afterwards modified and changed till its present form was reached.” Credit was given for the “commencement of the system now so universally known in Britain” and her works were cited. ⁷⁶ Even if this British work (available in America) was unknown to Birge, the American publication, Baker’s Biographical Dictionary of Musicians, was published first in 1900 and revised in 1919. ⁷⁷ This reference text also includes an entry on “Glover, Sarah Ann” [sic] that repeats the information in Brown’s earlier work. ⁷⁸ There were sources available that Birge could have checked.

Pre-publication of Litchfield’s Entry in A Dictionary of Music and Musicians

It may be that the answer to my initial search as to where the name “Elizabeth” first appeared is solved, however other questions arose in the course of this inquiry. The first is why did Litchfield make this mistake? He says that Curwen spoke of “this lady” but in no writing by Curwen, his disciples, and his descendants, was Glover named as anything other than Miss Glover. ⁷⁹ The second question is why did Litchfield’s entry in the Dictionary (1889) appear in an Australian regional newspaper two years in advance of its publication? At this point historical conjecture is again necessary. As Tosh points out, “any attempt to reconstruct the past presupposes an exercise of imagination, because the past is never completely captured in the documents which it left behind.” ⁸⁰

In The Queenslander, Wilson (“Euterpe”), was reporting news gleaned from other sources. Wilson was born in Wales and migrated to Australia in 1835, moving to Brisbane (Queensland, Australia) in 1865. He was a solicitor and politician. In 1880, Wilson was in London where he studied harmony and composition at Trinity College. He returned to Brisbane in 1881, becoming active in the musical life of the city. ⁸¹ On March 16, 1880, Curwen’s son, John Spencer Curwen (1847–1916), delivered a lecture at Trinity College on:

The Adaptability of Tonic Sol-fa to the Study of Harmony. The lecturer explained the method by which Tonic Sol-faists classified concords and discords with their respective inversion and illustrated the manner in which Sol-fa teachers trained the ear, as well as the eye and memory, by calling upon a student of the College (who had received a previous training in Sol-fa) to take down on paper the four parts of a chant played over to him for the first time. ⁸²

John Spencer Curwen had been increasingly undertaking the active work of the Tonic Solfa College. John Curwen died the next month on May 26. I searched subsequent 1880 issues of The Journal of Trinity College and found no further mention of Curwen, Wilson or Litchfield. ⁸³ Despite the lack of reportage in the College journal, it is easy to surmise that, in 1880, there would have been interest and discussion of the Tonic Solfa method at Trinity College, which Wilson might well have been privy to. There would have been considerable coverage and conversation about Curwen and Tonic Sol-fa at that time. The Tonic Sol-fa College held regular courses for teachers. ⁸⁴ It may have been that Wilson attended such a course. There were also extensive published public testimonials to the work of Curwen. ⁸⁵

It is not a stretch to suggest that Wilson might have followed up this introduction to the method by attending other lectures offered by the Tonic Sol-fa College. At such events, Wilson would have introduced himself (or been introduced by others) to members of the Tonic Sol-fa confraternity, one of whom might have been Litchfield. Correspondences might have continued. Admittedly, there are a number of “might haves” in these sentences, but it is well within the bounds of the exercise of historical imagination demanded by the sometimes incomplete and often sketchy evidence left in surviving documents. ⁸⁶ As stated, George Grove began preparing A Dictionary of Music and Musicians in 1873. Grove knew Litchfield and may have already invited him to contribute entries. In fact, it seems that draft entries were circulated before publication. The editor of the Musical Herald and Tonic Sol-fa Reporter wrote about the Appendix to the first edition of A Dictionary of Music and Musicians, which included articles on people and subjects that were forgotten in the first edition, or have come to prominence since it appeared. Among these is a notice of the late John Curwen, who was one of those omitted, written by Mr. R. B. Litchfield. “To the best of our recollection, however, only about a third of the articles that we saw in proof some time ago have found its way into the dictionary.” ⁸⁷ Litchfield and others may have shared forthcoming entries with colleagues including the visitor from the colonies, possibly via an ongoing correspondence. The explanation still does not account for Litchfield’s misnomer “Elizabeth,” but it might be a possible explanation how it came to be published in Australia two years in advance.

Contemporary Knowledge of Glover and Tonic Sol-fa in Australia

After returning to Australia, Wilson remained a strong advocate for Tonic Solfa in Queensland schools. ⁸⁸ He had become a member of the upper house of Queensland government, the nominated (not elected) Legislative Council, in 1885 and remained so until his death in 1902. He held various responsibilities, amongst which was a special inquiry into singing in elementary schools, which was reported in the English, The School Music Review:

We are glad to learn that, as a result of a special enquiry made in this country by Mr. W. Horatio Wilson, the Queensland Government have adopted a scheme to encourage systematic instruction in singing in their elementary schools. The music syllabuses of the London and Bradford Boards are given in full for the guidance of the Queensland teachers, and strong arguments for the use of the Tonic Sol-fa Notation are quoted in the memorandum issued by the Department of Public Instruction. ⁸⁹

It appears that intelligence was shared, between Britain and the Australian colonies. ⁹⁰

Interest in the Tonic Sol-fa method continued in the Australian colonies. In 1887, Australian advocate for the method, Dr Samuel McBurney (1847–1909), toured the eastern colonies including Queensland, which led to the establishment of a local Queensland Tonic Sol-fa Association. ⁹¹ McBurney often spoke on the Tonic Sol-fa method and frequently mentioned Miss Glover. He never gave her a first name. For example, in 1887, in Hobart (Tasmania, Australia), he “gave a brief resumé of the program of the Tonic Sol-fa from its inception by Miss Glover and its adaptation by John Curwen.” ⁹² He repeated this lecture/demonstration wherever he was given the opportunity. In 1887, he was lecturing in Brisbane on “Church Music” but finished with an exposition of the method. ⁹³

The original “Euterpe,” Jefferies, remained in correspondence with Wilson, writing in support of Tonic Sol-fa: “I am glad to see that you are advocating for tonic sol-fa for State schools.” ⁹⁴ Wilson commented that this was a sign of breaking down the last barrier, coming as it did from “so hard and fast an old notationist.” ⁹⁵ Wilson continued advocating for the efficacity of the Tonic Sol-fa method and emphasising its use in exploring the harmonic structure, which was the topic of John Spencer Curwen’s lecture at Trinity College in 1880, suggesting that Wilson was in the audience. Wilson was familiar with the Dictionary, replying to a correspondent about a different matter that he was “surprised to find that Grove’s Dictionary does not contain this heading.” ⁹⁶

Discussion

My initial question was why was Sarah Anna Glover called Elizabeth (or Eliza) Glover in authoritative American texts? It seems that Litchfield’s mistake in the first edition of the influential and theoretically definitive Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians was the lynch pin for the misnaming that became established fact in American scholarly texts, probably through his entry. This book was probably the source for Birge in 1928, although two subsequent editions of the Dictionary in 1904–1910 and 1927 had correctly named Glover and given her credit as the originator of what became known as Tonic Sol-fa. There is no connection between the misnaming by Wilson in Queensland, Australia, in the 1880s and Birge in America in the 1920s. Despite extensive searching of the twenty-three years between Litchfield and Birge, the name “Elizabeth” occurs nowhere else. ⁹⁷ In this hiatus, all publications by members of the Tonic Sol-fa orthodoxy that discuss the origins of the method referred to Miss Glover or very rarely Miss Sarah Glover. For example, in 1909, William Robert Phillips published A Dictionary of the Tonic Sol-fa System, which addressed the origins of the method, giving full credit to Miss Sarah Glover and explaining her invention and its evolution. ⁹⁸ In 1919, Clement Atrobus Harris included Miss Glover by name in The Story of British Music. ⁹⁹

Birge’s error seems to have stemmed from Litchfield (as it occurs nowhere else). The mistake persisted in the face of extensive contradictory evidence available to both men in their respective times. For some reason, the mistake was perpetuated in American texts on music education. Admittedly, the Tonic Sol-fa system never rose to ascendancy in the USA as it did across the British Empire, its colonial territories, and the later British Commonwealth. ¹⁰⁰ The system did however gain global presence via its adoption in “modified form by Zoltán Kodály for use in Hungarian schools.” ¹⁰¹ Interestingly, there was one other twentieth century example of when Glover’s name went askew. In 1933, a published doctoral thesis by Käte Mollowitz, Ueber die Musikerziehung bei Ann Glover und John Curwen. Eine pädagogisch-psychologische Würdigung und Kritik (About Music Education with Ann Glover and John Curwen. An educational-psychological appreciation and criticism), ¹⁰² only uses a version of Glover’s middle name until the final section Nachwort (Epilogue). It is unlikely that this text was available to mid-twentieth century scholars in America, which is a loss as it is a thorough and detailed discussion of the work of Glover, Curwen, and contemporaries. Mollowitz appears to have undertaken research in London for two months in 1932 and extensively cites works by Glover, Curwen, J. Spencer Curwen, and others, with a reliance on materials included in the Tonic Sol-fa Reporter. Mollowitz lists three works by Sarah Ann [sic] Glover in her Literaturangabe (bibliographical references) ¹⁰³ and also references a reprint of Grove’s Dictionary from 1929. In Nachwort (Epilogue) Mollowitz mentions a series of essays on the history of the Tonic Sol-fa movement by Alma Brauer published in the German Mitteilungen des Tonika-Do-Bundes (Notices of the Tonika-Do Association) February to May 1933 that were published after Mollowitz completed her thesis. These essays concern “S. Glover,” “John Curwen” and “On the History of Solmization” and provide selected passages from the works of the educators mentioned as translations, often without commentary. The section “S. Glover” contains a translation of Ann [sic] Glover’s report on her method from 1844. ¹⁰⁴ Despite correctly naming “S. Glover” in the Epilogue, it seems that Mollowitz did not recognise the incorrect name used elsewhere in their text. ¹⁰⁵

As Edward Hallett Carr asserted, historical research is “a continuous process of interaction between the historian and his facts, an unending dialogue between the past and the present.” ¹⁰⁶ I admit a partisanship in this historical conversation. Sarah Anna Glover invented what would become the Tonic Sol-fa method. She disapproved of the use of the word “Tonic” but ultimately acquiesced—or gave up resisting—the adaptation of her work. Admittedly, without Curwen’s acumen and tireless endeavour, the Tonic Sol-fa method would not have become a global phenomenon in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and subsequently as the basis for the Kodály method. My concern is about the giving of due respect and acknowledgement to a remarkable woman. By gradually rewriting history and suppressing her name and contribution, Glover became lost in the history of music education. When she did appear, in some places, her name was wrong, and the details of her life’s work often correct. In following these trails of evidence, there have been gaps and educated guesses. As Lyanda Haupt states, “We follow the trail with whatever bread crumbs we can gather.” ¹⁰⁷ For historians of this period, this pursuit relies almost entirely on the existence of documentary evidence. Often the record is tantalisingly haphazard, with little primary data, thus narratives rely on published texts such as journals and books. This omits the personal, making it impossible to understand why mistakes were made and perpetuated.

More recently, there has been far greater recognition of Glover’s important contribution to music education, ¹⁰⁸ and of the contributions of women to music education with more general and individual articles adding to the historical record. ¹⁰⁹ This work is important as it is imperative that credit is given where credit is due. ¹¹⁰ It is hoped that this article will give impetus to others, noting that the further we delve into the historical record, we find less documentary evidence, particularly for women. As argued, there is a point where informed guesses must be made sometimes based on circumstantial evidence. This is the case in this discussion as some information is recorded in great detail. Tonic Sol-faists were prolific, leaving extensive materials, but other matters are just not there. The historian then has the task of suggesting what is most likely to have occurred. This is the case here. It is clear that Glover was incorrectly called Elizabeth by Litchfield in the Dictionary, which seems to have been the source of the misnaming. But how these errors came to be perpetuated and transmitted is more conjectural. This trail has been long and sometimes torturous to follow. The question remains – does it matter? The answer is a resounding affirmative, particularly for those who are less noticed or included in the historical record. In this case, Sarah Anna Glover has been restored to her rightful place in the history of music education but there are many others who need to be seen, known, and included.