Mudarra I

Mud&II&,S
1"I'!-;-,_-
Harp Fantasia:
,1__iQ i
I11SIOI'V 8110 AH2\1VS1S
J
It is the Fantasia que contrahaz
e
la harpa en la manera
de Ludovicv [Fantasia that imitata the harp in the style
of Ludovico] that has secured the vihuelist Alonso
Mudarra a place among those renaissance musicians
whose music is frequently performed today. First
published in his Tres Libros de Musica en Cfrus para
Vzhuela (Seville: ]uan de Leon, 1546), both the novelty
of sormd and the ingenuity of conception have guaran-
teed Mudarras fantasia a lasting attraction among
vihuelists, lutenists and guitarists. Many guitar
transcriptions have been published and, apart from in-
dividuality of ngering, most agree with the modica-
tions to the original tablature that appear in Emilio
Pujols standard critical edition of Mudarras Tres I ibros
. A facsimile of the original edition is also currently
available The purpose of this article is to
demonstrate the uniqueness of the Fantusx
a
que con-
trahaz
e
Ia harpa among fantasias for the vihuela: it is the
earliest known set of variations on the I-`oliu, written by
Mudarra to emulate a renowned harpist of a previous
generation. The work thus contains a second layer of
information based on Mudarras perceptions of solo
instrumental improvisation of an earlier age. My inten-
tion here, however, is not principally to provide an
historical discourse, but rather to expose a set of his-
torical and analytical facts that might stimulate per-
formers towards a style of interpretation based on a
new vision of the work, one which challenges various
accepted notions.
The fame that this fantasia enjoys are due above
all to its novel harplike sound effects. Of the 219
fantasia
s
that survive for the vihuela, it is the only one
that makes use of special idiomatic effects, imitating
on one stringed instrument sounds belonging to
another. Instead of relying on imitative counterpoint,
the usual staple ingredient of the fantasia, here we nd
arpeggios, embellished and syncopated passages, as
well as various kinds of chromaticism and dissonance.
These are the ingredients from which the harp effect is
created. Mudarra was also obviously aware of the
novelty of his work. This must have been his reason
for adding at the beginning of the work the comment
that it es difu:H hasta ser entendhi
a
[it is difcult until it is
understood] and, from bar 125 of the original tabla-
ture, that Desd
e
aqui fasta acerc
a
del nal ay Algunas fal-
sas taniendos
e
bien no parece
n
mal [from here almost to
the end are several dissonances which, when played
well, do not sound bad]. These effects are well known
to all that have played or heard the work.
What has been overshadowed by the special harp
effects of the work is its relationship to the melodic-
J
By john Grifths
harmonic scheme that a few decades later came to be
known as the folia. As the following analysis reveals,
the fantasia comprises three variations on the folia.
Consistent with the general characteristics of vihuela
fantasias, Mudarras work reveals a rational scheme of
balanced formal architecture, the typical symmetry of
all renaissance art. At the same time it possesse
s
an ex-
traordinarily dynamic forward motion that enables it
to develop with uidity and brilliance. It epitomizes
the union of static architectural design and dynamic
movement through time.
The discovery of this hitherto undisclosed formal
contruction invites an historical explanation, and leads
to questions concerning performance and interpreta-
tion. That in 1546 Mudarra published a solo in-
strumental work based on the folza is in itself of
signicance It must not be mere coincidence that
Mudarra chose to use the fclia in a fantasia that was
conceived as a tribute to a famous musician of the pre-
vious century. He must have had some notion of how
players of an older generation improvised, and used
this as the basis of his composition.
The identity of the Ludovico to whom the "Harp
Fantasia" is dedicated cannot be established with ab-
solute certainty, although all evidence points to a
minstrel employed by Ferdinand the Catholic who
reigned jointly with Isabel of Castille from 1469 to
1502. According to documents gathered by the
nineteenth
century
music historian Barbieri and cited
by Pujol in his study on Mudarra, a musician named
"Ludovico el del Arpa" was employed at that court. It
appears that this harpist was of extraordinary skill and
repute, and that he became something of a legendary
gure. He is probably the same harpist that the
theorist ]uan Bermudo mentions in his Declaracicm de
de instrumentos musicales, (Ossuna, 1555). According to
Bermudo, "Dizen que el nombrado Ludovico quarzd
o
venia
a clausular, pemiend
o
el dedo debax
o
de Ia cuerda, la semi-
tonaua, y hazia clausula de sust1entad0
".
[lt is said that
the renowned Ludovico, when he came to make a
cadence, put tris nger beneath the string to [raise it] a
sernitone, thus making a leading
tone
cadence. lt is
precisely the imitation of these cadences that gives
Mudarras fantasia it character and individuality. We
may suppose, on this basis, that Mudarra wrote his
fantasia as a homage to this already legendary harpist,
using the devices for which Ludovico was famous as
the basis of his sound effects. He must have chosen to
cast the piece in variation form knowing it to have
been the musical style that, to musicians of the last

third of the fteenth century, enjoyed a high status
equivalent to the imitative fantasia of his own time.
Mudarra thus transmits to us information of great his-
torical signicance. Not only does he imitate the sound
of Ludovicos sharpened cadences, but he also trans-
rnits a knowledge of the style and structure of pieces
created by late sixteenth-century solo instrumentalists
about whose irnprovisatory practices scarcely any
other documentation remains.
Even though the earliest piece named folia dates
from 1593, it is evident that the harmonic progression
that it denes had already evolved by 15()0
,
and that
during the sixteenth century, it was widely used/ for
variation writing under various names. 'I'lre
evidence suggested by Mudarras fantasia is that a
tradition of improvising on set harmonic schemes in-
cluding the jblra had already evolved during the f-
teenth century. This is signicantly earlier than the
French and Italian dances found in early sixteenth-cen-
tury printed lute books, and more so than the earliest
diferencia
s
[variations] published in Narvaezs vihuela
book of 1538.
ANALYSIS
The Fantasia que amtrahaz
e
la harpa is composed as
three continuous fvlia variations, both in its melody
and harmony. The rst variation takes up 95 of the 157
bars of tablature that comprise the work.
The remaining 62 bars divide into two variations
of almost equal length. The opening of the original
tablature is shown in Example 1.
Example 1. Mudarra, Tres libros de musica, fcls
13,130.
Example 1.
}>!.IBRO.Ie1Z FOLXIII.
ln I "_ I E,-9
- .-.-
.
.62
x TATA.; sx, A-L3 .
Z1 . ; "* -:g]g-z=3Zs
`iZ!%sa
rmi T- i**
@m`
;;..c;T:e...J:.. #XCR~
"=
-_.T-T1 _.Li.n_____.
1
T
_&_;;
1_.,_T
- ....
#1 .4: _
None of the three variations presents the folia for-
mula identically, nor does any conform to the folra for-
mula that becarne stabilized in the seventeenth
century. The fvlia formula in its evolved form is com-
pared with the three variants used by Mudarra in Ex-
ample 2. Instead of the E minor chord that begins the
evolved folia, Mudarra substitutes an A major chord,
lowering the bass a fth and the melodic note a third.
This is not surprising as the rst chord of the folia
was the last to stabilize during its gradual historical
development. The versions of Valderrabano and
Pisador, for example, use the typical sixteenth-century
procedure of commencing on the second chord of the A
progression, omitting the opening E minor altogether.
In Mudarras work however, the use of the A major
chord permits the variations to proceed continuously
with no cadential interruption. The work is thus able
to develop not only with uidity, but also with an in-
sistent forward thrust. The melodic alteration of the
scheme also gives it a more regular linear curve, rising
rn` I Y,
Example 2. Melodic-harmonic formulae
Aa LL- 4 ..t AL:- -.a.;..I.. I ......-A - 1..-..:- WI -AJ..-
At the end or tms 31tlCl
!,
1 present a transcription
of the Fantasia que contrahaz
e
la harpa that shows the
structure of the composition more clearly than those
intended primarily for performance. By reducing the
rhytlunic values of the original tablature to one
quarter their length, both formal structure and rhyth-
mic subtlety are shown with rnaximurn clarity. Thus,
one crotchet of the transcription represents one bar of
the original tablature. Barlines appear in the transcrip-
tion only to mark important musical divisions; they do
not denote metre. Double bars divide the variations.
The bar numbering accords with the number of
crotchets in the transcription, that is, with the bars of
the original tablature.
In the original tablature, errors occur in two places
and both concern rhythmic notation. Firstly, the bar-
line Sevaratinz bars 58 and 59 was omitted together
T j T _ _21T
i"1",,
_.T
l. . I
T; ?[jj*fTj -
_`f2r!jf' q I |_|**
.7T4\.1 frit T.
..H.T
_"
kl-l_; .;j"if;.% _' F.,
0-e -;';-e -P- -}_e
_LI l __._ L
*;1C;i,;'F;
\;;;Ejg@
__\._|;; ;t.4L;..._ mm *
L I T T ________. .
&;e%j;24_-
lab-
e2-
3=
l3-}c
$
_;
_. T . QL ,4
+

+. *1-
H.Z
A 3
i. -sale)?-
+*-$@5-
v

w
r
me- Y-: Z
with the minima that should be above the rst gure of
bar 59. Secondly, in the penultimate bar, there is a
[= crotchet
]
gure that shoul
d
be a fus
a
[=
quaver]. These errors are not substantial, and are
transcribed correctly in all editions I have seen
.
AG] Mudarra

Example 2.
.u.........rL.
. l 7 V35; Ill!
.-_Z I
I _|
xl
0 _ U V

0
'G
inn.
v `U
ID')
Y.-|_R_\! \$I_I|
rljrh {. (
/n_I I_
J
.Lli_
S 6
-
' 0

/
mam. I
I.-I-P- l \
. (\ iI 1\
hn_I I_
\
)
.0.]..
S U' "
*r;;_s /
mlm. mhm L5. ..
$
m
" E
/
Example 3.
/
/
/
/
X <BL...
_
i T2
-;

_|;_} _.L
Hof
/
/
'iz f`
I
I
"|t
{ I |/ A I
T T / / n
1 Y1 lll1Y
.1j| *L!!\
T'r_II] Z_ I
\!'_Q$_Y__
n \
qlll
I
I
_Lrr|
ft\\ TT
1 I`.!
I

I _
\\$ r
K \
T
ll I1 Im;
YK1 - LYI.||
._l t\
h_IIrl_ IlI1I\I\ Q
1'_- _ 11 mY'
TTT
I Hnwnvnr. in all thou.: ndil-inn:
=TrT
inrlu ud inn lpa nin": nr-GI-}, rrvvvcvcn, un an urcvt: c\nuU1l, lllllulllllg {Up! S CI'l`IZl
cal edition, other corrections are made that have no
justication. The common correction that converts bar
91 into two bars appears incorrect. The brusqueness of
its original form appears intentional: it is the sign that
Mudarra gives to announce the join of the rst two
variations, the retum to the point of departure.
Furthemrore, the additional bar destroys the perfect
symmetry of the rst variation with its two halvm of
48 bars each. The alteration has been widely accepted
because it maintains the consistency of the arpeggio
gure established early in the piece, although in terms
of the present analysis it eradicates a special signal
that Mudarra is trying to convey, one that can be jus-
tied in terms of the fantasia's internal symmetry. The
other frequent and unnecessary correction is to the
bass in bars 115 and 117. Once again, these bars have
been altered by modern editors to provide textural
consistency throughout the sequence that at
this point. 'I`he syncopated bass in the original,
however, represents the composer s resolution of a
technical problem. Mudarra appears to have chosen to
syncopate the bass in order to avoid the awkwardness
for the right hand that results on the vihuela if textural
consistency is strictly maintained. The solution he
chose does not dstroy the balance of the passage, if
anything it enhances the syncopation of the middle
voice. The tablature with both literal and Pujol's "cor-
rected" transcriptions are shown in Example 3.
Example 3. Transcription variants.
The rst variation of 95 bars is composed sym-
metrically, arriving at its climax exactly at its mid
point at bar 48 on the G major chord, with the melodic
b in the upper voice. Due apparently to the length of
this variation, Mudarra extends the normal range of
_ _______I
j %`**?-
, u6' { H? 1
I
.' I I I I
I
1 , '
infmgmrnmmi-slam;-mn-1-rsn
.Z I_ I_1_Z I$IHZ_-I
wm it mi ini my mi 1:1
u | /I'-
I
/`''L""
|
: TT
I
Q
T
LL';
(Lid1_\H-KKK!_\Zi-(\I\
.-1-_I_-I-C_I_-_-I
In- _ U Yu l}_ H ;_1'
T3'- I
the melodic scheme by a third, from g to b. The
melodic-harmonic scheme is also varied in both halves
to control the impetus with which the work unfolds,
distorting the harrnonic-melodic symmetry yet main-
taining them in equal periods of time. In the rst half,
Mudarra adds one chord (E minor) between the fourth
and fth chords of the formula (bars 4447). He arrives
I
T
21
j AG]
nr
I
at this point with the melody having risen by step
from the initial c# up to g. To arrive at his rst climax,
the upper voice skips a third to arrive at b at bar 48, a
foreshortening that gives strong impetus to the works
forward momentum. For the descent in the second half
of the variation, Mudarra maintains the hamronic
progression of the folia scheme, but elaborates the
melodic skeleton with the pair of descending thirds
above the D major and E minor chords between bars
55 and 71. (Refer to Example 2.) In this way the im-
petus acquired in the rst half of the variation is dis-
sipated gradually but without losing the worlls
rhythmic momentum. /
Within the rst variation, the melodic skeleton is
elaborated by three gures. The rst is the three-
note
gure that opens the work, the lled falling third that
terminates on the main note of the melodic skeleton.
E
xa
m
pl
e
4.
_
U ,
_
_
sonority of the harp. Many guitar transcriptions carry
the same idea even further through the use of more
elaborate left-hand ngerings. In these redobles
,
groups
of three notes are used within duple metre, adding a
further dimension to the effect. Whether these are per-
formed according to their melodic pattern or with ac-
cents to maintain strict metre is a matter for individual
choice, and neither interpretation can be preferred on
historical grounds. The assymmetrical option deserve
s
consideration as the resultant 3+3+2 pattern attains
considuable structural signicance in the later varia-
tions.
Example 4 shows how the rst variation is
elaborated through the use of the three elements
described. Repetitlions are omitted.
Example 4. Variation 1, schematic reduction
I- \ Y 7
lm, (Z
T
WT (zo
him hlv L -.
I" .1 ilh. .L [mj r
Tl] l I
.43-

(SI
T
L

-
L*
\
wi
all/I

(42
)
jjQ_L;_
\IY- m-
@
!]/\
nl} '':" '9 `W7

JESS];
O

(cr)
J A

YF
T
II DYi I '
1 A
"
S ` [ l I
(M
T
w (#6
)*
<
<
>>
(az
)
l
1(lih1Ll l.lI_iKLlI I
I\ 1 _I "
lIQHI_ 1Z A
, , - . - . -. - su rvu ! a Illllnrll El, _.,.. .1. - r-|:- -|- 1 Ia -I..- .-...-.;.1.... TL- G.-L -..&bi4` i nvealnnabnvu in nnhurn Il in Ii}. I
This cell emphasizes the folia melody. lt also provides
the germ for further melodic development within the
work, introducing interplay between the notes of the
melodic skeleton and those a third higher. Example 4
shows the use of this cell in the rst variation. The
other two gures are those which imitate the harp: the
arpeggios whose notes are marked in the tablature
with a circumex to show that they should be sus-
tained, and the extended redoble
s
[gurations] that
parody Ludovicos talent for chromatic alteration of
cadences. The purpose of these redobl
e
passages is to
direct the music to each subsequent note of the folia
formula, while the arpeggios reinforce the harmonic
scheme and maintain rhythmic continuity. In the
redoble
s,
Mudarra places the note d# on the second
string with e being the open rst so that both sound
concurrently in order to reproduce something of the
l ne rrrst varrauon rs exploratory rn nature. rt rs ut-
tle more than the folia sequence set out in somewhat ir-
regularly over a ninety-ve bar period. Each melodic
note is reinforced by a short melodic cell and by har-
monic arpeggiation, and short connecting phrases lace
these together.
This is in keeping with the work's origin as im-
provised music. Rather than the usual modem inter-
pretation of this fantasia with dance-like rhythmic
strictnss, there is considerable scope to treat the open-
ing with more freedom as if it were, in fact, being im-
provised. Each new chord can be treated as if it were a
goal, and thus suitably stressed, but the joumey be-
tween each "goal" can be treated more exibly in order
to create the irnprovisatory effect. Later in the fantasia
,
rhythmic insistence is more crucial.
I }
AG] Mudarra
The second variation possesse
s
the same sym-
metry as the rst. Its rst part, bars 95 to 110, reiterates
a new melodic phrase four tima as an ascending se-
quence that follows the stepwise ascent of the folia
melody. This gure elaborates on the interplay of
thirds that occurs in the rst variation. lt at the
lowest ebb of the work's inner drama, following the
forty-seven bar descent from the rst climax point, but
rises quickly to a second peak at bar 111. The second
half of this variation, bars 111 to 124, sustains the force
of the climax. It presents the folia melody and bass in
skeletal form, modied only in the penultimate chord
where the nomral bass note of e is replaced by a c. The
strength and dynamism of the passage is created by
the rhythm of the inner voice whose semiquavers are
grouped 3+3+2 against the strict duple metre of the
other parts. As this climax is achieved more rapidly, it
appears to have greater force than the preceding one.
However, in view of this climax occurring in the mid-
dle of a variation, there seems to be no justication for
the change in tempo made at this point by many per-
formers. The need to slow down from bar 111 can be
obviated by an interpretation of the rst variation ac-
cording to the criteria set out above. Slowing the
tempo at this point obscures the listener' s perception
of the work's form: it does nothing to enhance the
music.
Even though words are frequently an inadequate
means of describing musical phenomena, Mudarras
Fantasia que contrahaz
e
la harpa can readily be described
and understood due to the great clarity of its construc-
tion. It is a famous and mttraordinary work that, inde-
pendent of its artistry, reveals various important
aspects of the early history of instrumental music. As
the oldest conserved folia, it combines variation form
with the typical structural balance of the fantasia
genre, as well as informing us of the nature of solo in-
strumental improvisation some half century earlier
than its own publication date. In addition, it is a mar-
vellous work to play, and one which provides the lis-
tener with ample reward.
Footnotes:
This study is based on my article "La 'Fantasia
que contrahaze la harpa de Alonso Mudarra; estudio
historico-analitico" published in Revista de Musicologia,
X (1986), 2940
,
but substantially modied here.
Alonso Mudarra, Tres Iibros de musica en cifras
para vihuela, ed. Emilio Pujol, Monurnentos de la
Musica Espanola, VH, (Barcelona: Instituto Espanol de
Musicologia, 1949, rpt. 1984).
Monaco: Editions Chanterelle, 1980.
The syncopated gure introduced in the second
variation, reminiscent of the opening "harp cadence"
(bars 913)
,
is transferred into the upper voice for the
third variation, and continues the work's dynamism.
In this variation, the folia scheme is treated with
greater freedom. The ascending half of the formula is
reduced to two chords: A major from bars 125 to 134,
and B minor in bars 135 -142. While the treble part
reiterates the 3+3+2 rhythmic gure, using the inter-
play of thirds for its melodic substance, the bass rises a
fth by step from a to e, and this is then repeated in
syncopated and diminished form. The same process is
repeate
d
a tone higher on the B minor chord, although
the syncopation of the shorter bass repetition is
smoothed out. It is this passage that provoked Mudar-
ra to add the cautionary remark about dissonances.
The conict between d# in the upper part and d
natural in the bass, as well as the accented fourths,
sevenths and ninths, does more than add dissonance,
it creates a temporary sense of bitonality. This passage
is the most dramatic representation of the legendary
cadences for which Ludovico was famed, and creates a
wonderful effect on the vihuela or guitar.
Preparation for the nal cadence is achieved by
the addition of two chords in the second half of the
variation. As well as retarding the work's accumulated
impetus, these extra chords balance the simplication
of the chordal pattern in the rst half. This last section
begins at bar 143 with further reiterations of the 3+3+2
syncopation accompanied by the regular harmonies of
the folia, which are converted into redobles from bar
I i`i.{.{{r;{rtr
$I.'r6tr
aaem.
Mudarra also used the opening progression of
the folia as the harmonic basis for the second part of his
Fantasia del quurto tono for guitar (No. 12), albeit in a
more abstract form. See lohn Grifths "I`he Vihuela
Fantasia: a Comparative Study of Fomrs and Styles"
(Diss., Monash, 1983), pp. 200204.
Mudarra, Tres libros de musica, op. cit. pp. 64-
66. Pujol does not give the exact source of his
reference, and I have not been able to locate it among
the archive of Barbieri documents in the Biblioteca
Nacional in Madrid.
Fol. 110.
The earliest use of the term occurs in the Ramil-
lete de ares manuscript, Madrid Bibl. Nac. MS 6(X)1
.
Concerning other early folias, several songs from the
fteenth-century Cancionero del Palacio are derived
from it, as are several instrumental pieces of the six-
teenth century published in the vihuela books of
Valderrabano (1547) and Pisador (1552) under the
nne of Pavana
.
Luis de Narvaez, Los seys libros del Delphin, (Val-
ladolid, 1538).
The transcription and analytical commentary
use E-tuning to make it conform with modern guitar
pitch tuning. G-tuning renders the most satisfactory
transcription in terms of renaissance tonality.
I
_A.li.._
FANTASIA OUE CONTRAHAZE LA HARPA
721 ll'7. 1 gm
Alonso Mudarra
Transcription: John Grifths
I
I
'- I-I| 1A|\]*_1!lZPI
aII*_!l'II YI lll] L-. Ll- L! B- I
In IIIJ- *!_llILY!
V-; :
x '
)
14
S3';
be
II
JEL-lm
Til
ml-
FSI
=:.
==I
l=HEF=E=I
FF=EFE=I
I
I
`1.1Q!; ( l . ' ' '
a. I|I
I_ {j |
\17_JX_ I

26 I E
Ajm
vi

.I=H!??=l.E?E

LIE- I
|

Il1_{ YQI U
7_ 1

3 -
1
....
3*.1
@1 ll].1 .-r.
EF I
'i Z
r#j 2
I
7___
J
4
-
3
1r.I
IDI
h I"""1I
I
J
.II .I- JQ
ID
lf
EJ_ ..- / II H Q I _ _nj aa I
'1.1.
rj lK'W Y __.l1'Y
ln_ja Y .
7_;1Z Qj (t_Zi Q
Y'TITT*T*
Allsl

@-1-
it"?
.I7ir EFI I
'Y.j.! I l f
r*1 1
l
1| -_
g gl
`!
D

IiY"1DI *zIP|`
HEI yEF`.-hmmm _ I
I
'Y: jl;J 1111Yi*ji?;1I|lPH I
_ 1-[X1};-YU! [Zh-
In_j _ }AI1r
Y1 1_

Copyright 1989 John Griiths
78 \_
+
. . I I5 rn- ;:
`Y.HZf Z I-? l__1Tl
1 L4I I'! Ll
I..jl'Zl* 'Kl__1l_ l[..
\V1! _ _
I I I5
rn: - `~ rl `rsl l . -1 hu.? _' 1 Ihm
Y.1|$ Y I [Y.|Z_l;(II|KFI I 71111 KIZFLHIKYI Lll TIT';}
.ZjI I_I1II .l PI V1LlI L.
ll_II'1 KQIPI I_IH\K.lI _I
\V_1I1;Yj'

" T'? {NIF? F
103 E E 1107 Q E Q
tt.
;
;
Illr, , , -
I
ml R
-jHI*':dFIH'T*1
K.] LLQYI L .l YI _I-i A.QZ_HIj_Z1I1_(__I
.1 !$ 1'_-P'!P'KYI-P';F'_I
I.._ $\ [.!'I L] Ll lll All All
\!V_

11
5
11
9
12
3
I . JZ-mmm - mmm., -_..- I-.....
1.121Ij_L2i1j;_IZl-__1""Ili-_1**IIir:
.1 Z11K11ZZ!11IYl$_1_H1-$_1_1IIZb.
I.. YI YI Tl il il YIY'l$FKP1?'l1F'$F'1II.lL;
\!! IKIW Aj Al Ll'! L1 Ll'I1Q';?'$ Xl
r
z"-
A ggies;. sggrggssess. assess
.
isms;-,

- - -_ - - _ *
. . _ -I-rn nl-n nl-n II.-rn ..F.rr .FIF..
$.1) 1 A.; L4 L:r L; 5; Arr A.; LJ Arr LK Liwmlnmsmm-nm- *-1
.mm. m:nnm tnmmrn
I..ma1Y1 u:rtmm*s.rrmrm.r|
\l7_2*_I% 1 Yl'Qs.m;'r\.j mn
{ I
147 _ 151
I- " l`I:=` -
y . -1 I _: *71. -' -2;..
n.m:m. mm mm ru$__.._Y$irmm......mm;ri 1
.1m;n ;m.4r PKXKZQ-1}:I!1YZYYU nzrmm
I._JI__ li r_m_ m_n:m1_ nmtrmumm
Wim L mm 71.1 ml mmm-'-..m
7 ' ..4}
H9 ____ 15
7 1 . _ .- :- [Z22: i
$.m.r m :r_-1 mm 1m1l
mama mm:m;amr ;
1..mn. -1 m;mm
wm
U