The double keyboard concertos of Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach

Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic)

Authors Waterman, Muriel Moore, 1923-

Publisher The University of Arizona.

Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author.

Download date 25/09/2021 18:28:06

Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/318085 THE DOUBLE KEYBOARD CONCERTOS

OF CARL PHILIPP EMANUEL BACH

by

Muriel Moore Waterman

A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the

DEPARTMENT OF MUSIC

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of

MASTER OF MUSIC

In the Graduate College

THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

1 9 7 0 STATEMENT BY AUTHOR

This thesis has been submitted in partial fulfillment of re­ quirements for an advanced degree at The University of Arizona and is deposited in the University Library to be made available to borrowers under rules of the Library.

Brief quotations from this thesis are allowable without special permission, provided that accurate acknowledgment of source is made. Requests for permission for extended quotation from or reproduction of this manuscript in whole or in part may be granted by the head of the major department or the Dean of the Graduate College when in his judg­ ment the proposed use of the material is in the interests of scholar­ ship. In all other instances, however, permission must be obtained from the author.

SIGNED:

APPROVAL BY THESIS DIRECTOR

This thesis has been approved on the date shown below:

JAMES R. ANTHONY Professor of Music ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author is deeply indebted to Dr* James R. Anthony for his meticulous supervision of the research and writing which culminated in this thesis. The high standards he sets as a musicologist, acted both as guide and inspiration. She wishes to thank Dr. Edward W.

Murphy for his help with the formal analyses. The valuable suggestions and revisions which he and Dr. Samuel S. Fain offered are greatly . appreciated. TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ...... vi

LIST OF TABLES ...... „ ...... » , vii

ABSTRACT . . V ...... <>- . . . . . , . . . . viii

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION ...... , . . . . . 1

Purpose of the Study • ...... • » 1 P r o c e d u r e ...... ^ 3 Bach: A Biographical Summary 4 Bach/s Style ...... 7 The Concerto Before and During Bach’s Time . . . . 9

■II. SOURCES USED AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS ...... 15

Sources ...... 15 Catalogues of the Works of C. P» E» Bach . . . o 15 Citations in the L i t e r a t u r e ...... 19 Printed Editions . . . . * ...... e « 21 Autograph Copies and Authenticated Manuscript Copies ...... 23 Recordings...... 27 Methods of Analysis ...... 28

III. CONCERTO IN F MAJOR, WQ. 46: FIRST MOVEMENT ...... 34

Introduction ...... 34 Sound ...... 34 Instrumentation ...... 35 Texture ...... 37 Form ...... 46 First Movement ...... 46

iv V

TABLE OF CONTENTS— Continued

Chapter Page

IV* CONCERTO IN F MAJOR, WQ. 46: SECOND AND THIRD

MOVEMENTS...... 6 8

Second Movement...... * . . 6 8

Sound ...... * * . 6 8 Form ...... • , * ...... 69 Third Movement 82 S o u n d ...... * ...... 83 F o r m ...... 83

V. CONCERTO IN E-FLAT MAJOR, WQ. 47: FIRST MOVEMENT .... 92

Introduction...... 92 Sound . * 92 Form ...... # 95 First Movement ...... 97

VI. CONCERTO IN E-FLAT MAJOR, WQ. 47: SECOND AND THIRD MOVEMENTS ...... 106

/ . Second Movement 106 Sound ...... 108 Form ...... 109 Third Movement ...... 114 Sound ...... 114 Form ...... 116 Comparison and Summary ...... 121

APPENDIX A: WQ. 46, FULL SCORE EXCERPT ...... 125

APPENDIX B: WQ. 46 AND WQ. 47, BRUSSELS MSS EXCERPTS...... 152

LIST OF REFERENCES ...... 170 ■ LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure Page

lo Concerto in F Major, Wq« 46: First Movement Chart ...... 48

2o Diagram of Solo IIS Wq» 46, First Movement . . . . , o 64

3o Concerto in F Major, Wq, 46: Second Movement Chart • e o • o o 75

4* Concerto in F Major, Wq* 46: Third Movement Chart ...... * * ...... 84

5, Concerto in E-Flat Major, Wq* 47: First Movement C h a r t ...... 99

6 * Concerto in E-Flat Major, Wq. 47: Second Movement Chart ...... oooooooooooooooooo 107

7o Concerto in E-Flat Major, Wq* 47: Third Movement Chart * * ...... 115

vi LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I. Prototypes of Concerto Forms ...... 33 ABSTRACT

Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, a major composer in the pre-classic period, composed two concertos for two keyboard instruments with orchestra. These works provide insight into Bachfs musical develop­ ment, and also reveal transitional features between the form of the baroque concerto and that of the classic concerto. Both works are analyzed stylistically and formally. The F major concerto, written in

1740, is available in print only in the form of a piano reduction,

* > . dated 1914-1918. Therefore, the manuscript copy of this concerto, held in the Brussels Bibliotheque du Conservatoire Royal de Musique,

is consulted frequently and compared where possible with the printed piano reduction. The E~flat major concerto, written in 17.88, is

available in a modern full-score edition. It is found that the F major concerto, although the earlier of the two, shows vorformen of

the later classic concerto. Bach expands the baroque ritornello principle with a recapitulatory design. The E-flat major concerto, written in the last year of Bach*s life, is no longer in the mainstream,

formally, of the evolution of the classic concerto, but shows Bach1s

continuing and increasing concern with expressiveness of content. CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of the Study

The purpose.of this thesis is to analyze9 both stylistically

and formally5, the two double keyboard concertos of C* P. E» Bach. To

avoid confusion9 the name, "Bach , 11 not preceded by initials, refers in this thesis to C. P. E* Bach.

The composer is recognized by an extensive conglomeration of sources as one of the major, and more often, actually the major com- . poser of his time. William Mitchell, in his introduction to the trans­ lation of Bachls Essay on the True Art of Playing Keyboard Instruments

(1949, pe 176) lists the many countries which the Essay reached, and states that thus "the seed of the Bach influence, was widely scattered."

Charles Robert Haag, in his unpublished Ph.D. dissertation on Bach/s keyboard concertos (1956, p. 20) writes: ". . . the composer’s important position in pre-classic music makes inevitable in his work certain anticipations of the classic concerto." C. Stanford Terry, in Grove’s Dictionary of Music and Musicians (1954, p. 176) summarizes the general findings thus: "As a composer Emanuel stands out prominently in the transition generation that separates Johann

Sebastian from the full maturity of Haydn’s genius." Since Bach’s stature and influence have been documented as considerable, it was felt that a detailed analysis of his important works would be of value9 both in itself and in tracing the development of such works from the baroque to the classical periods. As I have a personal interest in works for two solo keyboard instruments, it seemed appropriate to con­ centrate on this category.

It was found (see pp. 18-19, this thesis) that while Bach had written several works for two keyboard instruments, his two concertos for two solo keyboards plus orchestra were major works in this genre, and might be significant not only in themselves but also in tracing the development of the double keyboard concerto. In the section covering "Sources," this choice is expanded upon at length. It should be noted here, however, that the first concerto, in F major, has not received anything more than a mere listing in any reference found; the second concerto, in E-flat major, while discussed as part of the ten keyboard concertos (both single and one double) of Bach1s Hamburg period, has still been given no more than a superficial treatment. In her unpublished Ph.D. dissertation on the keyboard concertos of

C. P. E. Bach, Jane R. Stevens (1965) treats the ten keyboard concertos written while Bach was in Hamburg, including some valuable findings on the E-flat major concerto, but does not present a detailed formal and stylistic analysis. Therefore, a detailed study of these two double keyboard concertos seems proper, and constitutes the subject of this

thesis. Procedure

After introductory materials including a short biographical sketch of the composers his musical style, and the concerto (particu­ larly the north German concerto) before and during Bachis time, this study proceeds to the section on sources; then follows a discussion of the details of procedure used in the formal and stylistic analysis of the concertos, the analyses themselves, and then a comparison of both concertos and a summary of their place in the development of the late baroque concerto into the classic concerto.

Because of the comparative difficulty in obtaining scores of these concertos, especially of the earlier one in F major, a schematic chart of each movement of both concertos is included in the discussion of that movement, It is hoped that the reader may avail himself of the complete scores and use them while reading this thesis. Also, because these scores are not always available, numerous musical examples are given, for the purpose of demonstrating points made in the discussion. The copyright laws were carefully checked in this connection, and the law of "Fair Use," summarized in the Lawyer*s Desk

Book (Casey 1966, pp» 443-444), amplified by opinions from experts in the field of copyright law, gives the following explanation:

1 Fair use* may be made of copyrighted material by persons other than the copyright owner. This is an exception which the courts have developed to promote scholarship and the diffusion of knowledge. What constitutes fair use has to be determined by a court, measuring the desirability of protecting a copyright owner and the desirability of facilitating research and scholar­ ship. The court looks at . . . the degree in which the use of copyrighted material may prejudice the sale, diminish the profits, or supersede the objectives of the original work. . . . The test 4

is frequently whether the use made of another copyrighted work is likely to make the second work a substitute for the original one.

Since this thesis, is not itself a copyrighted work, and since none of the musical examples are either long or complete, including those found in the appendices, legal opinion indicates that the copyright laws are in no way violated. However, for the record, credit is given to Steingraber Verlag and to Barenreiter Verlag for examples from their printed editions, and to the library of the Conservatoire royal de

Musique of Belgium for supplying examples from the MSS of both con­ certos.

Bach: A Biographical Summary

This important transitional composer in the field of keyboard music was born in 1714, the second child of Johann Sebastian Bach and his first wife, Maria Barbara. He was thirty six years old when his father died in 1750, and he himself died in 1788. He was alive during the greater part of Haydn’s lifetime (1732-1809), and his music was studied carefully by Haydn, who recognized Bach as one of the great composers of the time. Also, Bach died only three years before Mozart, who was familiar with the older composer and had great respect for him, as can be seen from the famous Mozart quotation, originally given by

Rochlitz, and requoted in the Biographisch-Bibliographisch.es Quellen-

Lexikon (Eitner 1959, p. 279). This, translated, quoted Mozart as say­ ing that "Bach is the father, we are the children. What we know of truth we have learned from him." Bach’s godfather was the celebrated Georg Philipp Telemann9 whose position as cantor in Hamburg Bach obtained upon TelemannTs death,

C, P. E. Bach began to compose at an early age, and also showed great talent as a clavier player. However, as part of a liberal education, he was sent to study law for three years at Leipzig, and then continued his studies at Frankfurt-an-der-Qder> Here, he was able to show his talent to the public, giving keyboard instruction, directing a musical academy, and conducting and composing for the public.

In 1738 Bach went to Berlin, almost receiving the opportunity to travel on the continent as the companion of a young nobleman. How­ ever, his fate was to be similar to that of his father in that he never was able to leave Germany, Before he could avail himself of this offer, he was summoned by the Prussian Crown Prince, Friedrich, who engaged him as an accompanist, Friedrich, who was an enthusiastic if not superbly gifted flautist, had gathered an outstanding group of musicians and theorists around him, including the famous•Quantz, An amusing aside on Friedrich1s performance quality, as well as an.indica­ tion of the rather poor relations between him and Bach, is given in the anecdote from Karl Geiringer (1967, pp. 339-340): "When a guest once gushingly remarked to the august player: 1What rhythm,f Bach murmured audibly, fWhat rhythms,T which certainly did not endear him to His

Prussian Majesty. Nor did the King care too much for the. progressive trends in EmanuelT s music." 6 Howevers the musical climate in Berlin was good and undoubtedly contributed to Bach/s development. Treatise writing became the fashion in Berlin at that time, as evidenced by those of Sulzer, Marpurg,

Agricola9 Kirnberger, and Quantz„ Bach himself? in 1753, wrote his

Versuch uber die wahre Art das Clavier zu spielen. It was in Berlin that he married Johanna Maria Dannemann, in 1744. This later caused some trouble in Bach1s obtaining the King1s permission to leave for

Hamburg, where he had been offered Telemann1s former post, since although Bach was not a citizen of Prussia and under Prussian control, his wife was. However, finally Friedrich gave him permission, and in .

March 1768, he went to Hamburg, where he remained for the rest of his

life. Another parallel between his life and his father1 s , the "Cantor of Leipzig," was in his Hamburg duties. He was Cantor of the Latin school, the Johanneum, and musical director of Hamburg1s five main churches. However, unlike his father, he was not obliged to teach at school. Here, he was no longer a courtier, dependent upon the King1s whim: he was a respected and well-to-do member of a prosperous com­ munity. Again, his friends were eminent writers, musicians, professors, and others of the intellectual community. As was usual for composers of that era, a great amount of Bach1s time was taken up writing

Gebrauchsmusik, and in his Autobiography, quoted from the article on his harpsichord concertos (Crickmore, July 1958, pp. 227-228) he mentions "the few pieces I wrote for my own pleasure" and "some trios, solos and concertos, that I wrote in all freedom, and for my own use."

He enjoyed a rather opulent home life, from all accounts, and produced a family of two sons and one daughter. Unfortunately? all three died without marrying, leaving no direct descendants of this line.

Bachls Style

As to his musical style, although he had been taught thoroughly by his father, and indeed acknowledged no other teacher, he preferred not to use J . S. BachVs contrapuntal style in his keyboard works, and this is seen in the two concertos analyzed. The frequently used quotation from The Present State of Music in Germany (Burney 1959, p.213) is often taken as a disparagement of the father’s style:

After this, when our conversation turned.upon learned music, he spoke irreverently of canons, which, he said, were dry and despicable pieces of pedantry, that any one might compose, who would sacrifice his time to them; but it was ever a certain proof to him, of a total want of genius, in any one that was fond of such wretched studies, and unmeaning productions.

However, other writers feel that Charles H. Burney’s conversation with

C» P. E. Bach resulted in a mistaken impression that the son thought little of the father’s music. Geiringer (1967, pp. 351-352) feels that what C. P. E. Bach really thought of his father’s music is revealed in an anonymous letter to the editor of the Allgemeine deutsche Biographie published in 1788. This letter, referred to here and in other sources as the ’’Comparison" (between J. S. Bach and

Handel), was attributed to A. F. C. Kollmann in the first edition of

The Bach Reader, but was corrected in the revised edition (David and

Mendel 1966, pp. 280-288). In this second edition, several sources, including a very thorough documentation in an article found in The

Musical Quarterly (Plamenac 1949, pp. 575-587), are surveyed and the conclusion in The Bach Reader (rev. ed.) is that C. P. E. Bach is the • probable author. Dragan Plamenac, in his article, writes:

. . . the reader, we believe, will consider it an established fact that o . o Philipp Emanuel is the true author of the Comparison, This fact . . . throws new light on the issue that seems to have become a kind of obsession to P. E. in the last years of his life: his relationship to the art of his father and to polyphonic music in general. It is significant that a few months before his death he felt the urge.to re-affirm publicly— if anonymously— and in more elaborate and emphatic terms than he had done in a private letter two years earlier, his admiration for his father’s art. . . .

Since C. P. E. Bach was a typical representative of the period of

Empfindsamkeit, or "sensitivity, 11 he was mainly concerned with music

which expressed the emotions, or "affections, 11 rather than with .form for its own sake. It would seem that this principle was fundamentally opposed to his father’s art. However, as the years went by, C. P. E.

Bach seems to have become increasingly aware, as Plamenac (1949, pp..575-587) writes, "of the relative character of the fundamental esthetic principles that had guided his own activity as a composer."

In a letter dated January 9, 1788, C. P. E. Bach reviewed Forkel’s new Allgemeine Geschichte der Musik for a Hamburg newspaper, the

Hamburger unpartheyische Correspondent. In this review, C. P. E. Bach

"affirms that harmony*— and, consequently, polyphony— is ’not by any means the Gothic and barbaric invention of m o d e m times that the philosophers without knowledge in matters of art, and principally the famous J. J. Rousseau, have so loudly declared it to be.1" This seems to indicate that C. P. E. Bach no longer felt that his new emphasis on emp finds amkeit was .superior to polyphony. Plamenac feels that, at the end of his life, this able musician, surveying his art, then wrote the "Comparison*" C» P, E. Bach?s last literary effort* as "his supreme act of faith and love for his father1s exalted art„" In this article* he extols "the work of the man who— in the terms used by P» E. himself

in his Comparison-— was 1 the deepest savant of contrapuntal arts*T yet* at the same time* ’knew how to subordinate art to beauty*’" Thus it seems that C* P„ E, Bach resolves what at the beginning of his life as a composer seemed irreconcilable* the possibility of writing with expressivity and still not casting out the older forms completely.

Although polyphonic writing appears only negligibly in both concertos under analysis * another older form* that of the baroque concerto ritornello principle* is relied upon more strongly in the later con­ certo than in the earlier* in which the vorform of the classic concerto-sonata can be perceived more clearly. When it is noted that the first concerto was written in 1740* when Bach was a young man* and that the second was written ‘in the last year of his life* his re-evaluation of esthetic and formal principles becomes even more obvious.

The Concerto Before and During Bach’s Time

When Bach began his career in Berlin in 1738* the keyboard concerto had barely begun. However* the first solo concertos appeared around 1700* gaining in popularity over the baroque concerto grosso from which they stemmed. Johann Sebastian Bach arranged several solo concertos for solo harpsichord and orchestra* and even wrote the first keyboard concerto without orchestra* the "Italian Concerto." His arrangements stemmed from the solo violin concertos of Vivaldi * who ■ 10 is credited by many sources s including the two dissertations on the keyboard concertos of C. P. E. Bach, as being the inspiration for the first solo keyboard concertos« However, this is a curious neglect of

Giuseppe Torelli, whose last publication (1709) contained six concerti gross! and six solo concert!. Also, Torelli1s Allegro movements presented the ritornello form in a concerto, in which ritornellos for full orchestra alternate with episodes for the soloist or soloists.

Vivaldi took Torelli1s form and enriched it, while Torelli was the actual innovator.

The concerto form of Torelli and Vivaldi is typical of the period in that it has only two formal requirements; three movements in the fast-slow-fast order, and the ritornello principle as the frame­ work for each movement. The opening tutti is given to the orchestra and is in the tonic key, and it returns, at least mainly, in the . closing tutti, again in the tonic. The tuttis alternate with solo sections, in which the solo consists largely of figuration and func­ tions as a modulatory part between the preceding and the following tuttis. These tutti sections, while in a variety of keys, are based on the opening tutti material, and thus the name "ritornello" is used.

The design is not a rigid form, but on the contrary, can be very flexible, since it does not depend on a rigid formula of keys and themes but rather on the contrast, in texture and in function, between tutti and solo sections. This loose form provided the basis for solo concerti for over fifty years. The recurrence of the ritornello gave unity to the movement, while the solo provided an opportunity for some ■ 11 variety and virtuosity. The solos usually did not have themes of . their own, and were mainly figural, thus avoiding a disturbance of

this overall unity. Later, however 9 developments within this form solidified the earlier ritornello form of Vivaldi into a more fixed form. In his Ph.D. dissertation on the keyboard concertos of K. P. E.

Bach, Haag (1956) writes that the later baroque concertos, from about

1745 on, show changes exemplified by those of Tartini, and give anticipations of the classic concerto. According to Haag:

Solo sections are lengthened and are less often interrupted by the tutti; contrasting ideas appear in both orchestra and clavier material; solo parts achieve greater thematic interest; traits of sonata-allegro form appear; tutti and solo sections are nearly balanced in musical importance.

Stevens (1965, pp. 4-5) adds that Tartini divided the tuttis into several sections, sometimes as many as four, and that, as a virtuoso violinist, he naturally gave the solo sections more importance, in length as. well as in thematic interest. She speculates that an absence of frequent tuttis failed to establish continuity in a move­ ment, and perhaps because of that, Tartini "used tutti material as the basis for at least part of each solo section, and later solo sections often repeated material from the first one.n Her most important observation on the difference between the concertos of

Vivaldi and those of Tartini, however, is that Tartini*s were written

in the style galant. On pages 4-5, she writes: "Instead of the

straightforward, triadic melodies of Vivaldi, there is a succession of

short, cadential phrases, often in parallel thirds, ornamented with

stepwise triplets and descending appoggiaturas; and Vivaldi*s 12 repetitive rhythms are replaced by a variety of shifting patterns, with a special emphasis on triplet and dotted rhythms*" Stevens.gives

Tartini?s concertos significance in showing the beginning of the disintegration of the baroque concerto because of the lengthening of both tuttis and solos, thus giving later composers an opportunity for development and contrast within each section, and leading the way for an increasing importance of the solo.

In Germany, composers followed these Italian models at first, and especially at the court of Friedrich, where notable musicians made trips to Italy and brought back the latest developments in the con­ certo. Probably, Bach was exposed to these influences here. Arnold

Sobering, in his introduction to Vol. XXIX-XXX of the Denkmaler deutscher Tonkunst (1957-58, p. vii) discusses German concertos of the eighteenth century, stating that most early concertos of that century were formal copies of their Italian models. After about 1720, however, he finds deviations* First, increased French influence in the use of the style galant and the French opera wind trio added to the Italian

,string quartet. And second, the difference between the concerto da camera and the concerto da chiesa, as well as that between the con­ certo grosso and the solo concerto found in the Italian models were both abolished by German composers. This mixing of characteristics began to differentiate the German concerto from the Italian models.

A concerto by Telemann (see p. 55, this thesis), is given as an example of a typical German concerto of the middle of the eighteenth century, from which style C. P. E. Bach deviated. 13

Johann Sebastian Bach was the acknowledged leader of the

north German school of the keyboard concerto9 as well as its innovator.

Sobering (1957-589 pp. viii-ix) concludes that German composers, as exemplified even this early by J. S. Bach, differed from Italian con­ certo composers in emphasizing the contrast between solo and tutti, and that they enriched the simple Italian harmonic accompaniment in solo passages by use of dense counterpoint, even in these solos.

According to Stevens (1965, pp. 8-9) . » the opposition of tutti and solo is enhanced not only by the simultaneous statement of different material in solo and tutti, but also by the rapid alterna­ tion of solo and tutti, emphasizing the contrast between the two bodies of sound. . . . This concept . « . was to play an important

role in the development of the concerto in north Germany. 11

Johann Sebastian Bach’s elevation of the keyboard from its traditional place in the basso continue to the importance of a solo instrument in a concerto began the genre of the keyboard concerto., which his son, C. P. E, Bach continued and developed. Emanuel took his father’s place as the leader of the north German school of the keyboard concerto. His early concertos (for solo keyboard instrument) are found to rely on his father’s practices. According to Haag (1956)

C. P. E. Bach used the ritornello principle as the structural basis of most movements. He also finds that the older frequent alternation of tutti and solo sections, and the transitional character of the key­ board material is also present. However, in Emanuel’s keyboard con­ certos written after about 1745, Haag finds elements of Tartini’s 14 concerto style and anticipations of the classic concerto. In C. P. E.

Bach’s last'period, the Hamburg period, Haag finds that more modifica­

tions appear 9 movements are frequently joined, and other formal innovations occur.

In concluding this introductory section, once more Stevens

(1965, pp. 14-15) writes:

His concertos 9 then, constitute Bach’s only large-scale works for keyboard instruments; they also offer a special insight into his musical development because they display the typical conflict of a new style within an old form. Further­ more, these works are of great importance for the history of the keyboard concerto during the eighteenth century. The form which Bach developed in his concertos occupies a transi­ tional position midway between the Baroque concertos of Vivaldi and Sebastian Bach and the late-eighteenth-century form found in Mozart and Beethoven. Whether or not Bach’s- concertos exerted a direct influence on these later composers— and present evidence fails to suggest that they did— their struc- * ture provides new and significant insight into the sources of the Classic concerto form. CHAPTER II

SOURCES USED AND METHODS OF ANALYSIS

Sources

The sources used in this thesis are discussed under the following headings:

1. Catalogues of the Works of C, P. E» Bach

2o Citations in the Literature

3c Printed^Editions

4*. Autograph Copies and Authenticated Manuscript Copies

5c Recordings

Naturally? several secondary sources in the literature were used, and these are mentioned where pertinent during the course of this thesis, and are cited in the List of References»

Catalogues of the Works of Co P» E* Bach

To discover which works were to be the subject of this thesis,

Alfred Wotquenne7s Thematisches verzeichnis der Werke von C» P* E,

Bach (Wotquenne 1964) was the first of the three lists to be consulted.

Under the works for two keyboards, he lists the following:

1. Wq. 46: Concerto for two harpsichords and orchestra, F major*

2* Wq. 47: Concerto for harpsichord, piano and orchestra.

E-flat major.

15 16

3o Wq« 69; Sonata for harpsichord with two manuals <> d minor

(per il Cembalo a due Tastature).

4» Wq» 109; Sonatina for two harpsichords and orchestra, D major«

5» Wq, 110: Sonatina for two harpsichords and orchestra, B-flat

major.

6 . Wq. 115: Four small Duets for two harpsichords, B-flat major,

F major, C major, and E-flat major.

The second thematic catalogue examined was contained in the

Bach-Jahrbuch articles entitled ,fP. E. Baches Musikalischer Nachlass" by Heinrich Miesner (1938).. This catalogue claims to correct certain errors in the Wotquenne Verzeichnis» A discrepancy in the listings of works for two keyboard instruments was found in the Sonatina.Wq. 110, listed by Wotquenne in the key of B-flat major and by Miesner in E major.

The third listing, found in C. H. Bitter1s book on the Bach brothers, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach und Wilhelm Friedemann Bach und deren Brtlder (1868), was not available for direct consultation, but references to it have been found in the literature.

In determining the validity of these three catalogues,

William S. Newman1s remarks from his book, The Sonata in the Classic

Era (1963, pp. 414-415) are pertinent:

Two bibliographic tools dating back to Emanuel Bach1s own time are the starting points for any full study of his music. One

of these is (to translate) the 1 Catalogue of the Musical Estate Left By the Late Capellmeister Carl Philipp Emanuel

Bach , 1 published in Hamburg in 1790 and valuable especially for the composition and revision dates of most of his instru­ mental works left in MS. The other is the careful, 17

comprehensive thematic index prepared in MS by Emanuel1s

devoted follower in Hamburg 9 J= J. H. Westphal (died in 1825 «> not in 1835), who is reported to have worked on it with Emanuel himself and whose almost complete collection of EmanuelTs music passed through Fetis to the Bibliotheque du Conservatoire royal in Brussels. . • . With only minor changes Wotquenne published this index in 1905, though apparently not in cognizance of the 1790 catalogue. Except for the MSS, Wotquenne usually gives only publication dates, which often differ considerably, in both time and order, from the composi­ tion dates.

In Newman's footnote #32, amplifying this quotation, he gives the information that the Catalogue of the Musical Estate Left by the Late

Capellmeister Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach is reprinted in full in Miesner

(1938, pp. 103-136) with the instrumental works in the first install­ ment. Newman (1963, pp. 414-415) comments on. Bitter's (1868) chronologies and overviews, saying that they are useful in giving a perspective, although they show errors and omissions.

In order of appearance, then, the catalogues of Bach's works are as follows: (1) the original catalogue, printed in 1790; (2)

Westphal's unpublished but "careful, comprehensive thematic index," prepared presumably until his death in 1825; (3) Bitter's reprints from the original catalogue, published in 1868; (4) Wotquenne's thematic index, prepared "with only minor changes" in 1905; and (5) the Miesner article on Bach's "Musicalischer Nachlass," with the original catalogue reprinted and annotated, appearing in 1938.

An interesting sidelight concerning C. P. E. Bach catalogues is found in comparing the recent article by Miriam Terry (1969, pp. 106-115) and the older book by Geiringer (1955, p. 351). Terry gives a detailed biographical study of Westphal, identifying him as 18

the man "whose extensive collection of Emanuel Bach’s editions and manuscripts forms an important part of the great private library

belonging to Fetis 5 bought by the Belgian government after the letter’s

death in 1871," Her footnote # 6 gives the further information that

this collection is now in the library of the Conservatoire royal de

Musique and the Bibliotheque royale de Belgique, On page 108 of her article, Terry writes, "We know from the catalogue of Emanuel Bach’s musical estate which was published by his widow in 1790 . . . ," and she identifies this catalogue (mentioned by Newman) as the "Verzeichnis des musikalischen Nachlasses des verstorbenen Capellmeisters Carl

Philipp Emanuel Bach," Geiringer, on page 351 of The Bach Family, states that this catalogue had been compiled for the auction held during the lifetime of his daughter, Anna Carolina Philippina, "who had been carrying on the business of supplying the works of her

father and grandfather," Thus, Terry implies that the catalogue was more directly connected with the work of Bach’s widow, whereas

Geiringer points to Bach’s daughter.

On the basis of these catalogue listings, plus an examination

of the available works themselves, it was decided that the two con­

certos were major works, and would give rise to significant analyses

and comparisons, not found in any of the references examined. The

other works for two keyboard instruments, while interesting and, in

the case of the sonatinas, significant in showing developments in

Bach’s style and in the sonata principle, are either quite short, or have been discussed at length in other sources. Neither of the two 19 concertos for two keyboards and orchestra has been given any study of note, even in the works concerned solely with the keyboard music of

C* Po E. Bach. The Concerto in F major is merely listed in all references, and the Concerto in E-flat major is listed in all references but is discussed only in the unpublished doctoral disserta­ tion by Stevens.(1965), and then very briefly*

Citations in the Literature

In alphabetical order, references to the two double concertos for solo keyboard instruments, hereafter referred to as Wq. 46 (F major) and Wq. 47 (E-flat major), begin with the article by Leon

Crickmore (1958a, pp. 227-241). On page 227, Crickmore writes:

"He also wrote fifty concertos for harpsichord and orchestra, one for two harpsichords and orchestra, and another for harpsichord, fortepiano and orchestra." He adds to this on page 229: "» . * the concertos written between 1738, when Bach went to Berlin, and 1767, when he left the service of Frederick the Great (Wq 4-40, 46); and the concertos composed at Hamburg, which include several startling experiments in form (Wq 41-5, 47)."

Geiringer (1955, p. 132), in his Anthology, lists C. P. E.

Bach’s concertos for two claviers and orchestra in F major and E-flat major (Schwartz), Leipzig, published by Steingraber, 1914-1918. In

Geiringer’s book, The Bach Family (1967, p. 364), he mentions Wq. 46

as one of the thirty-eight concertos written during Bach’s Berlin years. On page 366 of the same work he writes: 20

The result of Emanuel’s studies is noticeable in the ten

concertos for one clavier9 and one for two claviers written in Hamburg (Wq 41-46, 47). They belong to the best of the North German school produced in this sphere of music. None of them exists in a version for any other instrument, and accordingly the keyboard part is completely idiomatic.

Erwin Jacobi’s article (1959, pp. 448-489) discusses the . autograph copy of Wq. 47, and this article will be examined in detail later in this chapter.

Edouard Reeser’s book on the sons of Johann Sebastian Bach

(1949, p. 43), under his listing of editions, notes Konzerte fur zwei

Klaviere in E-flat major and F major.

Stevens (1965) refers in her dissertation on several occasions to the two double concertos under consideration. The first reference to Wq. 46 occurs on page 18, stating that one double concerto, W, 46, dating from 1740, is included in Bach’s early Berlin period. The first reference to W. 47 is found on page 234, in which she says:

. . until in 1788, the year of his death, he composed the double concerto for harpsichord and piano, W. 47."

The article by C. S. Terry in Grove’s Dictionary (1954, p. 176) notes: "The two Concertos for-two claviers are in Steingraber edn.

2145 (1740, F), 2144 (1788, E flat)."

C. S. Terry again, in Cobbett’s Cyclopedic Survey of Chamber

Music (1963, pp. 55-56) lists, under the published works by C. P. E.

Bach, SteingrMber editions 2144 and 2145 and identifies these as concertos in E-flat major and F major for two claviers and orchestra, arranged for two pianos. In corresponding with Steingraber Press, it was found that only the F major concerto was still in print. 21

In a letter from Bach to Johann Nicolaus Forkel in Gottingen, found in Piero Weiss* book. Letters of Composers Through Six Centuries

(1967, p. 106) there is a passing reference to Wq„ 46. This letter, dated December 1774, written from Hamburg, is quoted here in part:

"In addition to the enclosed Concerto in F, I have made two Sonatinas for two keyboard instruments (Fliigel)."

Bibliographies in the literature cited above, plus encyclopedia articles on C. P. E. Bach and bibliographies in those articles, such as the article and bibliography in Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart

(Schmid, 1949-51, pp. 924-942), provided valuable references for all of this section on Sources.

Printed Editions

• As has been seen in the preceding survey of references to the existence of the two double concertos, all note of printed editions gives Steingraber as the publisher. As also noted above, Geiringer

(1955, p. 132) gives the publication place as Leipzig, and the dates as

1914-1918.

An attempt to communicate directly with Steingraber Verlag was made difficult by the fact that they were no longer at the Leipzig

address:, the current address was finally located in L. B. Spiess*

.Historical Musicology (1963, p. 275). A letter 'to that address, listed

as Offenbach am Main, Auf der Reisew^eise 9, Deutschland, brought two

copies of a piano reduction of Wq. 46, but not Wq. 47. Their catalogue,

also obtained for this purpose, listed Wq. 46, still edited by 22

He Schwartz as it was in the 1914-1918 edition, but with a copyright date of 1965,

A personal sidelight on the search for printed editions of both concertos, and for a printed edition of the full score of Wq. 46, as requested in my letter, rather than the piano reduction received, involved an attempt to visit Steingraber Verlag while I was in Germany in the summer of 1969* Arriving at the Offenbach/Main address, I was . rather shaken to find that it was a residence! The words, "Steingraber

Verlag," scratched in under the name of "Herr Doktor X," gave the information that the "Frau Doktor" was Steingraber Verlag! To compli-

* cate matters further, both the Herr und Frau Doktor had left on a

three-week vacation, and the one person left in their flat was the housekeeper, who spoke only a German dialect. However, she was most helpful, and after almost an hour?s search through telephone numbers

and addresses, she found the number and address of the music jobber who took care of the business of Steingraber Verlag in the ownerfs

absence. A telephoned inquiry to this gentleman, whose address was in

Wiesbaden, brought the information that Steingraber did not publish

the full score of Wq. 46 or any score of Wq. 47, and that if I wished

anything other than the piano reduction of Wq. 46, he would send it to

me from one of the other publishers. All care was taken in giving him

the correct identification of the concerto Wq. 46. Arriving home a

few weeks later, I found a score had indeed arrived from the Wiesbaden

.music jobber. It was a concerto in F major, published in full score by

Barenreiter Verlag, of Wq..33, a single keyboard concertoI 23 Luckily9 no such difficulties occurred in locating a modern

(1958) printed edition of the full score of Wq, 47, It was listed in the Barenreiter Music Publishers catalogue, and is used in this study.

Since Wq. 46 was only available in the piano reduction edition, with certain changes made by the editor9 Heinrich Schwartz, described in this thesis under the section analyzing this concerto (see pp.

37-44), it was felt that a comparison of this edition with the MS was essential. In fact, since the MSS of both concertos were available in the library of the Royal Conservatory in Brussels, both printed editions were compared with these MSS.

Autograph Copies and Authenticated Manuscript Copies 4

All references found in the literature and in the preface to

the 1958 Barenreiter printed edition of Wq. 47, edited and annotated by Jacobi, gave the information that the only available MSS of these

concertos were those in the Brussels Conservatory Library. Unfortu­ nately, it was possible to have only a limited number of pages photocopied. A copy of the title page of Wq. 46, together with all

instrumental parts for Tutti I and part of Solo I of this concerto in

F major, as well as copies of the title page and the first page of the

first violin part of Wq. 47 comprise Appendix B.

Since the. printed edition of Wq. 46 was not modern, and in

piano reduction, a more thorough comparison of this with the MS in

Brussels was necessary. 24

Recentlys it was found in the Stevens dissertation (19659 p. 292) that the autograph MS of Wq. 46 exists in the collection of the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek in Berlin.

The 1958 edition of Wq. 47 was also carefully compared with the MS in Brussels9 and it was learned shortly that the edition was an authentic and unchanged copy, except in bringing some of the nota­ tion up to modern usage9 and in some very minor details, not affecting any thing of significance. These changes, or rather, editorial clarifications, are noted on pages 94-95 of this thesis, under the analytical discussion of Wq. 47. -

Upon returning from Brussels, further researches brought to light an article by Jacobi (19599 pp. 488-489). Until this article was read, all references, with one notable exception, agreed that the

MS of Wq. 47 in the Brussels Conservatory Library, and copied by Bach's quasi-authorized copyist, the tenor, Michel, was the only one in existence. This information resulted in the assumption that no autograph copy existed. The exception just noted was Geiringer (1967, pp. 350-351). He explains, in mentioning the auction of Bach's collection of music and pictures held during the lifetime of his daughter, Anna Carolina Philippine, that most of the collection was sold by this auction, and came through Georg Polchau, librarian of the

Berlin Singakademie, into the Prussian capital.

In his preface to the Barenreiter edition of Wq. 47, the

editor has this to say (Jacobi 1958, p. Ill): 25

The following edition is based exclusively upon the hand­ written solo and orchestral parts originating from the same period as the composer and now in the possession of the Bibliotheque du [sic] Conservatoire Royal de Musique, Brussels.

The editor wishes to thank the Library of the Brussels Royal Conservatoire for placing at his disposal a microfilm copy of this manuscript. To the best of the editor? s knowledge5 this manuscript is the only existing source of the Concerto.

According to the analysis of the Musikwissen-schaftliches Institut of Tuebingen University (Director: Prof. Walter Gerstenberg)5 the person who wrote out this copy can be * unambiguously identified as a certain Herr Michel, who worked under C. P. E. Bach in Hamburg as a tenor singer and as quasi-authorised copyist of his compositions.r The set of parts carries the signature: 1 No. 49, de Westphal, littera V, No. 5890*, who is known to have been a deep admirerand friend of C. P. E. Bachfs music. Westphal, whose father was also a musician known to have played an influencial [sic] part in the musical life of Hamburg, made a collection of nearly all of C. Po E. Bachfs published and unpublished works over the course of many years and from these compiled a thematic catalogue. After his death, this collection passed into the hands of F. J. Fetis, who later bequeathed it to,the Library of the Brussels Royal Conservatoire . . .

A recent search by the editor for the autograph manuscript yielded no success. One therefore has to accept the above- mentioned Brussels set of parts as the only authentic source of this Concerto now in existence.

The above quotation appeared in the June 1958, printed edition of the

concerto,.Wq. 47. The editor, Jacobi, in his article for Die

'Musikforschung (1959, pp. 488-489), writes that, as stated in his

preface to the new edition of the concerto, he had painstakingly

searched in several places for an autograph copy, and had come to the

conclusion that one no longer existed. He goes on to say that a few weeks after publication of the concerto, W. Gerstenberg advised him

that the supposedly destroyed autograph copy might possibly be found

in the holdings of the Berlin Sing-Akademie library. He ascertained 26 as quickly as possible that this was so, and with many apologies9 continues with a description of the autograph copy.

This copy consists of ninety-three pages of clear and "schone" manuscript, with twelve staves, in the following order: first horn, second horn, first flute, second flute, first violin, second violin, viola, harpsichord, fortepiano, and fundament. The title page reads:

"Diese Partitur ist von der eigenen Hand des Componisten." Jacobi states that G, von Dadelsen confirms his own opinion that the title page and entries are not in Bachfs.hand, but the rest of the MS is indeed the composer’s own. Jacobi writes that a comparison of the & - Brussels MS with the autograph MS shows no deviation of any practical meaning in the notation picture, as is to be expected from the reliability of the copyist, Michel. There are some ambiguities in

the phrase markings which the autograph settles, and Jacobi hopes to

include this clarification in a later edition. However, he finds

that the autograph confirms the correctness of the Brussels MS, and

of his own 1958 edition. One other difference between the printed

edition of Wq. 47 and the autograph copy exists in the order in which

the instruments are notated on the page. This will be discussed in

detail under the analysis of this concerto.

The existence and location of an autograph copy of Wq. 47,

indicated by Geiringer (1967, p. 351) as being in the Berlin Sing-

Akademie library, not discovered by Jacobi until after his modern

edition of the concerto was printed in 1958 (in spite of his extensive

research as described in the preface to the concerto), and then noted 27 in his article just discussed (19599 pp. 488-489), was evidently overlooked in the recent article by Miriam Terry (1969, p« 115)«

Terry, in discussing WestphaVs "extensive collection of Emanuel Bach • editions and manuscriptsstates:

It seems certain, however,'that at least the Emanuel Bach collection came to Brussels intact, for the thematic catalogue of the conservatory library's Bach holdings which Alfred Wotquenne published in 1905, and which he believed to represent Emanuel's complete works, agrees in every essential detail with Westphal's meticulous autograph catalogue of his own Bach holdings, completed over a hundred years before*

This lack of communication between authorities in a narrow field seems surprising.

Recordings

One recording of each concerto is currently available, and is listed both in United States and German catalogues.

The concerto in F major, Wq. 46, is recorded under the

Westminster label, in the United States. The catalogue number is

WST 17096. Oddly enough, it follows the Steingraber edition in sub­ stituting a piano for one of the two solo harpsichords, in this case, for the second harpsichord. As far as can be determined, the recording follows the Steingraber edition both in instrumentation and in the few instances of editorializing. The performers as listed are: Robert

Veyron-Lacroix, harpsichord/piano (obviously piano in this concerto, since other works appear on this recording which require his playing a harpsichord); Huguette Dreyfus, harpsichord; and the Saar Chamber

Orchestra, with Karl Ristenpart, conducting. 28

The concerto in E-flat major is an Archiv Produktion, made in

Germanyo It follows the Barenreiter edition, and lists that informa­ tion on the record cover. The catalogue number is 198175. The performers are: Li Stadelmann, harpsichord; Fritz Neumeyer, piano; and the chamber orchestra of the Schola Cantorum Basiliensis, August

Wenzinger, conducting.

Methods of Analysis

Both concertos were analyzed in considerable detail, by the same method. This method, as well as certain possible ambiguities in terminology are discussed here, to clarify the analyses.

Each concerto was treated separately, movement by movement.

Then, both concertos were compared.

The basic sources for these analyses are the printed editions and fragments of .the Brussels MSS. These sources are discussed on pages 21-27 of this thesis. Two important secondary sources are the following unpublished Ph.D. dissertations on the keyboard concertos of

Co P. E. Bach: The Keyboard Concertos of K. P. E. Bach (Haag 1956), and The Keyboard Concertos of Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach (Stevens 1965).

Although these two dissertations have been of great aid in giving a picture of the single keyboard concertos of Bach, neither is concerned with the two double concertos. Haag merely lists them and Stevens indicates the existence of the earlier Wq. 46, and gives a fragmentary discussion of the later Wq. 47.

The analysis of these concertos combines both formal.and stylistic elements. Jan La Rue!s (1962) article on style analysis 29 suggested the framework for this analysis» This framework is as follows s with small additions or deletions as the necessity arises:

I* Sound

(a) Instrumentation: selection; place in the history of all

Bach1s keyboard concertos; changes in instrumentation within the con­ certo; differences if any between the MS and the published editiono

(b) Texture; doubling; homophonic; contrapuntal; melody/ figured bass, solo/tutti; use of the two solo instruments; use of the other instruments (melody, filler, fundament, etc.); special use of instruments within tutti sections; difference in instrumentation £* between the MS and the printed edition.

(c) Dynamics: changes, sudden or gradual; varieties found

(terraced, characteristic of the baroque period; graduated, character­ istic of later periods; slurs, staccatos, etc.).

2. Form

(a) Concerto as a whole.

(b) Single movements.

(1) Large sections.

.(2) Small sections.

Where pertinent, tonal relationships within a movement, keys and key changes of the small sections, chord vocabulary, functional or non-functional progressions, sequences, modulations, harmonic rhythm,

counterpoint, and other topics were included in the framework as out­

lined above. 30

This outline was followed5 using.the schematic Figures 1, 3,

4, 5 9 6 3 and 7 of the movements as points of departure, from which a detailed analysis proceeds» These figures are grouped into sections of four lines each. The key to the symbols used follows:

Line 1. Large divisions (tutti and solo)9 including total number of

measures in each division, Vorforms of classic concerto

style (in parentheses) were found.

Line 2, Thematic ideas or phrases are referred to by letter. Capital

letters indicate predominantly solo passages 9 and small

letters denote mainly orchestral ones. Letters are sometimes

combined with numbers, . Subscript numbers indicate different

parts or phrases within a phrase group or thematic idea.

Superscript numbers indicate alteration of a previously pre­

sented phrase or phrase fragment. Superscript numbers

immediately followed by small letters indicate a slight

variant of the original variant, as and A ^ . The sign,

l,+,n joins parts of one phrase which contains more than one

motive or thematic fragment. Parentheses are used to indicate

a less important, perhaps accompanying, motive or thematic

fragment, heard during all or part of the main motivic

material, which is indicated by the letter outside the

parenthesis.

Line 3, Tonality, Capital letters indicate major keys and.small

letters indicate minor keys, A dot or a series of dots

indicate a rapid change of harmonies, such as in a 31

transitional or developmental section, in which no single

tonality is consolidated. At times a combination of key

letters and dots are used, where the harmonies which occur

during these changes are of significance.

Line 4. Measure numbers of the small sections delineated in lines

two and three are given.

The foregoing organization of Figures 1, 3, etc., is based partially on Hans Tischler* s (1966) work with the Mozart piano con­ certos.

In the above key to the schematic figures of the movement, points of terminology may create some confusion. In line 1, the baroque concerto designations of the large sections are used, with

classic concerto vorforms in parentheses, since these concertos are not yet completely divorced from that form and totally in the form of

the classic concerto-sonata. However, in the discussion of each

section, comparisons between baroque concerto and classic concerto- sonata forms were made where relevant.

Under lines 2 and 3, where phrase groups or thematic ideas

are mentioned, a clarification must be made. The term, "phrase,” is

used to represent a musical idea, complete or not, identified by a

letter of the alphabet, and separated from other musical ideas,

identified by other letters. The smaller units within a phrase will

be referred to as motives. 32

Justification for the use of the term "concerto-sonata11 is

found in the Harvard Dictionary of Music (Apel 1969 9 pp. 171-175):

The development of the classical and modern concerto5 i.e., from Mozart to the present days generally follows that of the sonata form from which it borrowed its chief features of form and style. There are, however, the following differences: . . . The first movement is written in a modified sonata form in which the exposition, instead of being repeated in full, is written out twice, for the first time in a preliminary and abbreviated form with the tonic as the main key throughout and for the orchestra only, then in its full form for the soloist and orchestra and with the proper modulation into the dominant, a form which is known as concerto-sonata form*

One last item of explanatory material is included in this

introduction to the analysis of the concertos» Since reference is

£> ■ made frequently to analogies between baroque concerto and concerto-

sonata forms, an illustration of these forms is given in Table I.

Most of the symbols used in Table I are self-explanatory or are ' -

. explained as used. However, special note is made here of the use of

the capital letters alone, such as A, B, C, and X. Each refers to a

thematic idea or a theme, with X applying only to solo figuration,

themes or thematic ideas, while A, B, and C may be used to indicate

either orchestral or solo themes. 33

TABLE I. PROTOTYPES OF CONCERTO FORMS

Concerto Concerto- Section Baroque Sonata Form (large) Concerto Form (classical)

Expo. I Tutti I A(B). . A, B, C..(themes) Expansion of a MT, tr, ST 1, single thematic ST 2, CT idea, usually. I (key)

Expo. II Solo I XI or Al(Bl) A, B, C..X Solo figurations MT, tr, ST 1, or thematic ideas ST 2, CT I-V (III) I-V (III)

Codetta Tutti II . a (b ) A(B, C.) V (III) V (III)

Development Solo II X2 (A2, B2) V (III) -- VI (IV) V (III) ;-- V?

Recapitulation Tutti III A(B, C...X) < hi H O I v> td v>

Recapitulation, cont. Solo III X3 or A3 (B3) MT, tr, ST, CT VI (IV) - I .or I I

Tutti IV A(B) (A, B, C..) Solo cadenza Coda I I CHAPTER III

CONCERTO IN F MAJOR, WQ. 46 : FIRST MOVEMENT

Introduction

The concerto designated in Wotquenne? s thematic catalogue as number 46, falls into Stevens1 (1965, p. 16) classification as a con­ certo of the first Berlin period. This period dates from 1738 to

1751, and includes twenty-five solo concertos and one double concerto«

This double concerto, written in 1740, is to be considered now. -It is expected that this concerto will show many similarities to the con­ certos for solo keyboard and orchestra of the same period. Similar­ ities and differences are noted in the following analysis.

Sound.

The discussion of Sound is subdivided into a consideration of instrumentation, texture, and dynamics.

The only printed edition available (Steingraber), makes a

curious change in the original instrumentation, by calling for a cembalo

to take the first solo part, and for a fortepiano to take the second.

The only existing recording of this concerto, to my knowledge (discussed on p e 27 of this thesis), uses this change. The MS calls for two harpsichords. It is not until the second of the two double concertos

for keyboards, Wq. 47, analyzed later, that Bach calls for a cembalo

and a fortepiano. In this case, the fortepiano is probably the

34 ■ 3 5 .

"Mozart pianoand would not cause the imbalance of a modern piano paired with a harpsichord.

Instrumentation. The instrumentation, as found on the title page of the Brussels MS (Appendix B), is listed as follows: Cembalo

Primo, Cembalo Secondo, Corno Primo, Corno Secondo, Violino Primo,

Violino Secondo, Viola, and Basso. The first striking divergence from the other keyboard concertos of the early Berlin period is, of course, the use of two harpsichords instead of one as the solo section.

The other difference is in the use of two horns in addition to the four string parts. . None of the other keyboard concertos in this * period show this instrumentation, limiting themselves to the solo instrument plus the basic string orchestra.

The Brussels MS shows that the two harpsichords are used as ' continuo instruments in the tutti sections, and of course,' as the main expositors of thematic material in the solo sections. As anticipated, both harpsichords are supplied with a figured bass in the tutti sections.

Predictably, the violins have the burden of the melody in the tutti sections, as well as in the tutti portions of the solo sections.

In the fragment of the MS copy in my possession (Appendix B), they

double each other at times, especially in the opening fanfare-like material. Often they form thirds and sixths with each other, a fore­

shadowing of later classical examples.. There are also instances of

contrary motion between the two violins, and of course other times when each has independent material, usually of a melodic character for

the first violin and an accompaniment figure in the second. 36

The thematic material, carried mainly by the violins in the

tutti sections and, naturally, by the harpsichords in the solo sections, is supported by a continue. The bass acts as part of this

continue in the tutti sections, in combination with the harpsichords which both realize a figured bass, as noted earlier. When the harpsichords desert the basso continuo in the solo sections, the bass keeps to its original character, with long periods of rest, such as

the 23-measure rest beginning with measure 70 (Appendix B) , in the

first solo section. On the basis of my fragment of the copy of the

MS, I conclude that the continuo is used in the solo groups only to support the tutti interpolations, and drops out when purely sold passages reign.

The horns and the viola are filler instruments. The horns

appear in the first and third movements only. They are given an

occasional very short motivic fragment in the tutti sections, as

shown in Example 1, below.

Example 1: Brussels MS. Corno I: Measures 5-8, First Movement.

An examination of the MS shows almost complete rhythmic doubling of

the two horn parts, often with the formation of thirds and sixths.

The first horn seems to have whatever motivic fragments are allowed

for the horns. The viola as well as the horns operates as a filler 37

voice9 sometimes doubling the motives occasionally supplying short bits of independent material, and sometimes merely providing filler,

chord tones«

In his forward to the Steingraber edition of Wq. 46, Heinrich

Schwartz cites the original instrumentation, and then explains all his changes, with the notable exception of the substitution of a

fortepiano for the second harpsichord:

Die Instrumentation, soweit man liberhaupt von einer solchen sprechen kann, erforderte ausgiebige Anderungen, da das Original ziemlich oberflachlich und bescheiden behandelt ist; ich have zwei Oboen und zwei Fagotte hinzugefllgt, die das monotone „ Kolorit aufzufrischen imstance sind, selbstverstandlich habe ich von der BacHischen Instrumentation das Wichtigste und Charakteristische beibehalten. Besonders im dritten Satze die begleitende Hornstelle (Takt 5, 6, und ahnliche), so merkwurdig sie auch erscheinen mag, glaubte ich nicht abandern zu sollen.

The instrumentation, insofar as one can speak of it as such, demands abundant changes, since the original is somewhat super­ ficially and modestly handled. I have introduced two oboes and two bassoons, to refresh the monotonous coloration, but I have retained the most important and characteristic features of Bachfs instrumentation. The accompanying horn parts (measures 5, 6, and similar ones), particularly in the third movement, make such a noteworthy appearance that I left them unchanged.

Texture. The texture of all three movements, although thin,

is almost completely homophonic. The thematic or melodic material is

set over a bass, with simple and sparse filling of the inner voices.

This texture becomes even thinner in the second movement, with the

deletion of the horn parts. In the printed edition, the strings in

the second movement are directed to use mutes. This is in accord with

other keyboard concertos by Bach in this period and therefore is

probably correct. The third movement has essentially the same texture

as the first. 38

Schwartz’ failure to mention his change in the second solo instrument has been noted above. Since the concerto was written for two solo harpsichords, and since even the Mozart fortepiano would change the sound and balance of the solo combination, the modern piano combined with the harpsichord creates an imbalance in which the harpsichord is at times completely overpowered. This change, plus

Schwartz’ addition of oboes and bassoons, coupled with the fact that only the printed piano reduction is available, has precluded any discussion of the texture as shown in the Steingraber edition. All remarks on texture, therefore, are based on the examination of the MS in Brussels, and on the photocopy fragments of that MS in my possession.

It is significant to note that both keyboard instruments are given equal importance throughout. This is not always true even in ' later concertos for two keyboards, such as large portions of Poulenc’s

Concerto for Two Pianos in d-minor. Although in many double concertos, each keyboard instrument may take the solo role in turn, while the other alternates in the role of the accompaniment, it is conceivable that the concerto might then be actually possible for only one solo keyboard, instead of two. Here, Bach has written a true double con­ certo. Not only do the two solo instruments double each other for short periods, thus enriching the texture, but at other times they play different material simultaneously, or enter into a dialogue.

None of these textures could be achieved by using one solo keyboard instrument instead of two. 39

In discussing his changes in the Steingraber edition,

Schwartz writes:

Die Behandlung der beiden Klavierstimmen ist ausserst diirftig, liber den zweistimmigen Satz geht es niemals hinaus : hier musste, urn das Werk heutigem Geschmacke geniessbar zu machen und seinen wertvollen Inhalt zu retten— besonders das Largo ist ein prachtiges Stuck edlen Ausdruckes— manche Stelle verbessert und erweitert werden. Doch bin ich hierin mit grosser Vorsicht und Pietat vorgegangen. An der harmonischen Basis und der melodischen Linie habe ich nichts geandert, notwendige Mittelstimmen erganzt, einige Verdoppelungen vorgenommen und mich bemtiht, die von Bach geradezu kummerlich, ja primitiv gefiihrte Bassstimme einigermassen zu beleben*

The treatment of both keyboard parts is extremely scanty and never departs from the two-voice movement. In order to make the work palatable to modern taste and to rescue its valuable content— the Largo, particularly, is a splendid piece of noble expressivity— certain passages must be improved and expanded. I undertook this with great caution and piety. I changed nothing of the harmonic basis and the melodic line, made necessary completions in the middle voices, undertook some doublings, and endeavored in some measure to enliven BactV s downright scanty, yes, primitively worked bass voice*

A comparison of Schwartz' changes with the Brussels MS fragment available in Appendix B shows that with the exception of occasional tessitura changes and doublings in Tutti I, the actual editorial additions of importance come in Solo I, where the middle voices are given dialogue-like motivic fragments. Example 2 compares measures

59-67 of the printed (Steingraber) edition with the same measures taken from the Brussels MS, showing some of this filling-in process in the inner voices of Solo I. As Schwartz promises in his preface, this filling-in occurs only in the middle voices, and conforms to the harmonic structure of the rest of the voices. It consists mainly of short motives or motivic fragments in triplets, sometimes ending in a

longer note, and found at various points in the measure. This filling-in is not continuous, and while it must be noted as a departure from the MS, is not a factor which changes the harmony or violates the stylistic characteristics. It does lend an added fullness in place of

Bach’s more spare texture.

One error in the printed edition is the notation of thirty- second-note motives in the first movement, the first one appearing in measure 2 of Tutti I. The five notes of the third beat are all notated as thirty-seconds, instead of as three thirty-seconds and two sixty-fourths, as is correct and as they appear in the Brussels MS.

This error is consistent throughout, and while mathematically incorrect, is probably not apparent to the ear at this fast tempo. Nevertheless, the fact that it is "Augenmusik" does not excuse the notation error.

Example 2a: Steingraber Edition. Measures 59-62, First Movement. 41

Example 2b: Brussels MS (full score copy, showing solo harpsichords— other voices are not present here). Measures 59-62, First Movement.

Another notation change, which is actually an indication of

Bach’s performance directions (1949, p. 90) is found first in measure

40. (In this reference to Bach’s treatise, the Mitchell translation has been used. All references to Mitchell’s translation of Bach’s treatise are made in the name-year method of citation of the literature, and full bibliographical information will be found in the List of References at the end of this thesis.) In measure 40, as well as in other places, the first harpsichord has an appoggiatura on the note, "E," which appears as a very small quarter-note before the following ”F" half-note in the MS (Appendix B). In the printed edition, following Bach’s performance practice and explicit directions 42 as cited above, the appoggiatura is written as a true quarter-note

"E," followed by its quarter-note "F," (Example 3).

Example 3a: Steingraber Edition: Measure 40, First Movement.

Example 3b: Brussels MS: Measure 40 (full score copy, show­ ing first harpsichord— other voices are not present here).

Another acceptable, indeed helpful, change from eighteenth- century notation to more modern notation occurs in the many triplet passages which are combined with passages in dotted eighth and sixteenth notes, as in Example 4a. 43

Example 4a: Brussels MS, Measure 61 (full score copy, showing first harpsichord).

In Bach’s own treatise (1949, p. 160) he gives a similar example with performance instructions, showing the Steingraber edition correctly notated according to Bach’s wishes (Example 4b).

Example 4b: Steingraber Edition: Measure 61, First Movement (showing first harpsichord).

The dynamic palette in the Brussels MS consists almost entirely of "P” and "F" markings. However, Bach's style, as amply documented throughout his treatise (1949, pp. 148-158) places great emphasis on expressivity, and on the performer as the purveyor of that quality.

Bach writes (1949, p. 148): 44

Good performances then, occurs when one hears all notes and their embellishments played in correct time with fitting volume produced by a touch which is related to the true content of a piece. Herein lies the rounded, pure, flowing manner of play­ ing which makes for clarity and expressiveness.

Therefore, at times sudden dynamic changes are obviously called for by the character of the music, whereas at other times terraced dynamics, crescendos and decrescendos, or dynamics allowing the melody instru­ ments to dominate are in order. Slur markings are not as frequent in the Brussels MS as in the printed edition, and are rather indefinite, again leaving slurs to the discretion of the performer and his knowledge of Bach1s style. The staccato marks in the MS are the older strokes, which might falsely indicate a very short staccato in modern notation. Bach's own performance directions (1949, p. 154) say:

"When notes are to be detached from.each other strokes or dots are placed above them. . . . Such tones are always held for a little less than half of their notated length.11 This clearly forbids the short staccato of modern interpretation. On page 156 of the above-mentioned treatise, Bach directs that notes which are marked with dots, and then slurred, are "played legato, but each tone is noticeably accented.

The term which refers to the performance of notes that are both slurred and dotted is portato." In the untranslated edition of this treatise, this portato is referred to as Das Tragen der Tone* These directions lead to several references on the staccato as used in the early classic period. An article on Mozart's articulation signs by W. C.

Gates (1969, pp. 21-22) notes: 45

There is general agreement that the vertical stroke and wedge probably cannot be differentiated, but that Mozart did intend a difference in interpretation between the stroke (or wedge) and dot. . . .. Notes with strokes are meant to be isolated from neighboring notes (though not played as a crisp staccato) and at the same time emphasized (though not necessarily with a sharp attack or accent) within the pre­ vailing dynamic level.

The dot, on the other hand, appears usually in connection with groups of notes. . . . The dot does not add weight to the note but rather lightens it; it reduces the emphasis rather than adding to it. . . . Mozart also used dots under slur markings. This combination calls for what we today refer to as a portato effect, that is, a variation of non-legato, played with a rather reserved emphasis and separation.

For a conflicting opinion, see Nathan Broder1s preface to his edition of the Mozart Sonatas and Fantasies (1960, p. xiii).

Gates' quotation, above, agrees with Bach on the performance of the stroke notation. However, although he uses the same term,

"portato," that appears in Bach's translated treatise. Gates interprets

Mozart's meaning as indicating the notes are to be played more lightly ' and non-legato, rather than "noticeably accented" and legato, as

Bach wants. Perhaps this completely opposite meaning given to the term, "portato," is an indication that the slurred dot changed its meaning from Bach's time to Mozart's, while the stroke or wedge retained its earlier meaning. A second source on the interpretation of ■

the staccato markings in the music of the classical period is Howard

Ferguson's (1964, p. 10) portion of his preface to the volume on

classical piano music and its interpretation. He writes: "Both

Haydn and the youthful Mozart were in the habit of using a stroke to indicate a normal staccato, an accent, or a combination of the two and

of reserving dots, either slurred or unslurred, for mezzo-staccatos 46 such as a group of repeated notes." However, both Gates and Ferguson agree that the stroke indicates a "normal" staccato, seemingly in agreement with Bach. This agreement on one staccato notation mark and disagreement on another (portato), from the time of Bach to that of Haydn and the young Mozart, appears to add confirmation, if it were needed, of BactV s place as a transitional composer between the baroque and the classic periods.**"

Form

The F-major concerto consists of three movements, fast-slow- fast. The first movement is the longest, the third comes next, with

240 measures as compared to 304 in the first movement. The second movement is the shortest. The key scheme of the three movements is

F-major, f-minor, F-major, in contradiction of Stevens1 (1949, p. 20) statement that "the slow movement is alwayse in a different key from that of the outer movements." However., in agreement with all sources cited, all three movements are in ritornello, or baroque concerto, form. The tempo markings for the three movements are Allegro-Largo-

Allegro assai. The meters are C, 3/4, and 3/4.

First Movement

Four sources are important in the following discussion: two doctoral dissertations on the keyboard concertos of C. P. E. Bach,

1. See page 95, this thesis, for a discussion of staccato notation in the printed edition of the double concerto in E-flat major, W q . 47. This includes a criticism of the use of strokes, carried over from the MS to the Barenreiter edition. both of which are referred to in more detail in the section on "Sources": one by Stevens (1965, pp. 32-33), and one by Haag (1956, p. 22); the introduction to Volumes XXIX-XXX of the Denkmaler Deutscher Tonkunst

(Sobering 1958, p. vii); and Arthur Hutchings' work on the baroque concerto (1961, pp. 336-347).

This movement, as is generally true of Bach's concerto first movements, "represents a cross between the ritornello principle of the baroque concerto and the sonata-allegro form of the classic period"

(Haag 1956, p. 21), It consists of four tutti sections and three solo sections, as shown on line 1 of Figure 1. Haag continues: £■ The ritornello statements of the older concerto type reappear as the main tutti sections of the classic concerto with two basic modifications: first, the two main key areas— tonic and dominant or tonic and relative major— rather than three or more tonal centers as in the baroque concerto are outlined; second, the third main tutti section, customarily initiating the recapitulation, is usually very short.

Tutti 1 is the longest of the tuttis, and Solo III.is the longest of the solos. As Haag confirms, Tutti III is the shortest of the tuttis*

The solo sections are longer than the tutti sections, leading to the deduction that at this point in the evolution of Bach's keyboard con­ certos, the solo is becoming more important than the tutti. In the following discussion, an attempt is made to show possible vorformen of the concerto-sonata sections in the tutti and solo sections: Tutti I

(Exposition I); Solo I (Exposition II); Tutti II (codetta before the

Development); Solo II (Development); Tutti III and Solo III (Recapitula­ tion); and Tutti IV (Coda). This comparison can be seen in tabular

form in Figure 1, Tutti I: 38 Mfs. (Exposition I) Solo I: 55 Mfs. (Exposition II) al a2 bl b2 a1! c b^2 a2 a12 D1 al D1 al

F F f f G.C.a.d d..F F F F F F F F

1-2 5-8 9-13 13-16 16-21 21-24 25-30 30-35 35-38 39-44 44-47 47-52 52-55

Tutti II: 32 M ’s. (Codetta)

D2 a1! D3 El E2 + A 22 al a2 bl b2 a1!

F.C.F.G. a.. . .G..C C C C C C . C c c c..a

55-68 68-69' 70-77 77-85 85-88 88-93 93-97 97- ioo ioi-:104 105-108 108-116

Solo II : 70 M ’s. (Development) a2 a12 A2 D2 al A2 D2 al D4 E1! E21 c1 a1!

C C C C C..d d d..a a.G.C.a a ..d

116-121 121-124 125-128 128-131 131-134 134-137 137-141 141-154 155-158 159-162

Tutti III: 11 M ’s. (Recapitulation) 3 1 E1! E21 a2 A2 D3 al a 2 a 1 c b12

d.g.Bb Bb d d d G.C.a.d d..F F

163-181 181-187 187-194 194-198 198-201 201-206 206-209 210-216

FIGURE 1. CONCERTO IN F MAJOR, WQ. 46: FIRST MOVEMENT CHART Solo III : 74 M's (Recapitulation , Continued)

D1 a1! D22 al D 32 bl E2 D2 a1! D2 a1! D2

F F F. .Bb Bb Bb . .g g g.c.F.Bb Bb FF • * • •

216-223 223-226 226-230 230-233 233-237 237-244 244-248 248-258 258 259-262 263 264-267

Tutti IV: 17 M's. (Coda) b12 El E2 + A 22 al a2 a12

. .F F F F F F F

268-273 273-281 281-284 284-289 289-■296 296-301 301-304

FIGURE 1, Continued In considering Tutti I, a comparison with Stevens’ (1965, pp. 21-22) description is helpful. She states:

The initial ritornellos of Bach’s fast movements are long, and usually exhibit a clearly sectionalized form. In most cases there are three principal sections: an opening phrase or group of phrases, containing the motivic material upon which most of the ritornello will be based, and ending in a half or full cadence on the tonic; a series of several short, often sequential phrases, or alternatively only one or two longer phrases, which move away from the tonic; and a closing phrase or series of phrases, strongly cadential in character.

Tutti I begins with phrase group "a" (see line 2, Figure 1). This group consists of two balanced 4-bar phrases in F-major, the first beginning with an upbeat and eliding with the beginning of the second.

They set the style galant mood of the entire movement, with the quick upward runs and the dotted rhythms in the first phrase, "al," and the triplet figures ending with trills on the quarter notes of the second phrase, "a2" (Example 5a).

Example 5a: Steingraber Edition: Measures 1-8. 51

All subsequent musical examples of this concerto are from the

Steingraber edition and therefore will not be labeled as such.

The next phrase group, "b" (Example 5b), is also in two balanced 4-bar phrases, again with the first phrase, "bl," beginning with an upbeat and eliding with the beginning of "b2." However, here the mode changes to tonic minor, the dynamics from "F" to "P," and the

Example 5b: Measures 9-16. 52 mood to empfindsamkeit, There is the beginning of canonic imitation between the outer voices in measure 9, which dissipates after one measure. Phrase "b2" ends on a half-cadence on the dominant. The next phrase, "a^l," is based on the melodic figuration and rhythms of the opening phrase, "al." However, it is modulatory, and the harmonic rhythm is rapid, changing at the rate of one chord per measure. It displays a sequential pattern, moving through a series of secondary dominant seventh chords (largely using the circle of fifths), which are not followed by their tonics except after the last chord in the series. Since this pattern recurs (see pp. 57-58, this chapter), the harmonic progression is given in Example 5c, below:

Example 5c: Measures 16-20.

- / F-major: IV^/d-minor:

The next motivic idea, "c" (Example 5d), moves from the tonic chord of d-minor to the relative major key of F.

Example 5d: Measures 21-24.

11 fly t r 7 L f :

The third phrase of Tutti I, nb^2," while remaining in the key of F- major, begins with a V/V (Gy). It includes a Vy/lV before ending in a perfect authentic cadence in measure 30. The last two phrases both 54 1 consist of repeated 2-bar motives. These three phrases5 "a I / 1 nc st!

and nb^2f1 are of varying lengths (Figure 1), breaking the symmetrical 5 balanced phrases of the first part of Tutti I. They are modulatory

and sequential9 corresponding to Stevens* above-quoted second part of

the initial ritornello.

Part three of Tutti I begins with phrase "a2/* this time

repeating the first 2-bar motive of its original appearance, and eliding

1 with its cadenza-like extension, "a 2 .11 This extension, which will be used again for the same purpose, ends Tutti I with two cadential phrases as the third part of a typical Bach initial ritornello. Also, by stating all of the orchestral thematic material (in phrases t,a,,f

"b," and ncff)5 and by remaining mainly in the tonic key of the move­ ment, Tutti I strongly suggests Exposition I of the later classical concerto.

Solo I, in common with all his solo sections, again shows Bach as a transitional composer between the earlier baroque concerto and' the later classical concerto. Haag writes: "Solo sections are lengthened and the improvisatory quality of the keyboard material in the baroque concerto is replaced by clearly defined themes, usually contrasting with one another like those of the tutti sections." Stevens finds

that: "After the initial statement of the ritornello, the role of

formal development passes largely from the tutti to the solo." She

goes on to say that the solo sections dominate the rest of the movement, both in length and in formal importance. According to my findings,

this movement is typical of the concertos for solo keyboard, instruments 1 55 discussed by both Haag and Stevens. Also according to these writerss

Bach accepted the general outlines of the Italian concerto of his time (discussed on pp. 9-13 of this thesis). There is, however, one notable exception, the active participation of the tutti in the solo sections, demonstrated immediately here in Solo I. This practice is

C. P. E. Bach*s inheritance from the concertos of Johann Sebastian

Bach, which in turn stem from the earlier Italian concertos of Vivaldi1s generation. Hutchings (1961, pp. 336-347) has a discussion of the

Italian concertos of Emanuelv s time, with musical examples from

Sammartini (1698-1675), and Locatelli (1695-1764). Sobering (1958, p. vii), in his. introduction to Volumes XXIX-XXX of the Denkmaler deutscher Tonkunst, says that the form of most German concertos of the beginning of the eighteenth century follow their Italian models, as does Emanuel* s, with the exception of the tutti interjections under discussion. The .concerto by Georg Phillipp Telemann (for solo violin, string orchestra, flutes,. oboes, trumpets and tympani, in E-major), found in the work and volume mentioned above, on pages 103-195, illustrates Schering*s statement. A comparison between Telemann1s concerto and Emanuel’s Wq. 46 reveals the earlier origin of Bach’s treatment of tutti insertions in the solo sections, with Telemann

exemplifying the later practice of eighteenth century German composers in contrast to Bach’s usage. Thus, we have,here another example of

Bach as a transitional composer. The increasing differentiation,

length and importance of the solo sections point to the future, while

the retention of the tutti interpositions in those same solo sections harks back to the earlier baroque practices of Vivaldi and J. S. Bach. 56

Solo I, instead of using material from Tutti I, begins with new material for the first solo harpsichord phrase, "Dl" in Figure 1

(see also Example 5e). This first theme for the solo instruments may be compared to the Main Theme in Exposition II of the later concerto- sonata form. The fact that it contains new material instead of repeating the tutti material is also a progressive idea. It remains in the tonic key of F-major, but consists of only one 5 1/4-bar phrase, in contrast to the symmetry of the opening phrases of Tutti I. This phrase is made up primarily of triplet figuration preceded by two F- major triads, the second embellished by - a short mordent.

Example 5e: Measures 39-44.

j w n J ^ j

The next phrase, "al," is interjected by the orchestra. Phrase

"al" is still in the tonic, and continues for 3 1/4 bars. Both phrases

are then repeated exactly, with the second harpsichord playing "Dl" in 57 the repetition. Again, the tutti material recurs frequently in solo sections. Conversely, independent solo material is rarely found in tutti sections. In bar 55, thematic material related to TtDl,lf labeled

"02,” appears. It consists of a dialogue of motives in triplet figuration, over sparse string accompaniment. At the beginning of

"D2," the first harpsichord has a 2-bar motive, completed by one of similar length by the second harpsichord, after which they both continue either in dialogue or simultaneously. Here the justification for the use of two solo harpsichords instead of one is found, since before the entrance of "D2," a single harpsichord could have handled the solo material by itself. The phrases in "D2" are not clearly articulated, as they have been up to this point. The harmonic rhythm again is rapid, harking back to phrases "a^l" and "c" of Tutti I.

After a series of cadential harmonies, in sequential figuration, a chain of dominant seventh harmonies follow, some functional and some not. An interesting feature of this chain is the upward chromatic movement of the bass line from the seventh chord to its following harmony. The harmonic sequence, beginning in measure 62, is the same as that of phrase "a 11," Tutti I (Example 5c), with the addition of the Fy harmony after the beginning Cy chord. The second difference between "a^l," Tutti I, and this -harmonic sequence in "D2" is in the

1 fact that all of the dominant seventh chords except the last in "a 1" are non-functional (that is, they are not followed by their expected

tonic chords), while in "D2," several are functional. 58" 1 Phrase "a 1" begins a 2-bar tutti interjection9 still using. dominant sevenths and ending in an imperfect authentic cadence in

C-major. Phrase "D3n now begins, with still another kind of triplet figuration, in a dialogue between the two harpsichords. Phrase nD3,n while mainly in the key of C-major, is still transitional, first because of the character of the thematic dialogue, and second because of the harmonies, especially the occurrence of the f-sharp diminished seventh chord in measure 74. This phrase ends with a perfect authentic cadence in C-major, in measure 77.

The material of phrase groups and phrases uD2,n na^l,M and nD3!! is clearly transitional in character, and could be regarded as the vorform of a transition between the later classical concerto Main

Theme and its Subordinate Theme. The use of dominant seventh harmonies in "Dln which are strongly reminiscent of those in "a^l," Tutti I, as mentioned above, is an example of Bach?s imaginative use of a similar harmonic basis to accomplish different objectives. In his first use of these harmonies, the tutti has all the material, and the passage is

used to aid in the transition from the tonic minor, f-minor, to d-minor and eventually back to the key of the movement, F-major. In Bach?s

second use of this chain of harmonies, he divides the material begun by

the solo instruments by the use of a tutti interjection, which continues

the transition begun in the tonic, F-major, and ends in the dominant,

C-major.

The second part of Solo I !s new material, "El" (Example 5f),

begins in measure 7 7 , with each harpsichord in turn taking one measure 59

Example 5f: Measures 77-78.

% c .

of the rapid figuration material. The strings accompany on the three last beats of each measure, in quarter note motives. Bach uses the baroque device of fortspinnung throughout "El," in what at first glance appears to be canonic imitation at the fifth between the two solo instruments. Actually, although each measure of figuration begun by the first harpsichord is imitated by a similar measure in the second, it is more a sequential spinning-out of a motive, rather than true continuous canonic imitation. While the whole of "El" is mainly in the key of C-major (the dominant key of the movement), this continuous figuration gives it a somewhat transitional character. Thus, while it is tempting to compare "El" to a forerunner of the classical con­ certo Subordinate Theme, the structural divisions are blurred.

The second part of the "E" material, "E2," is a 3-bar motive.

Something of the character of Bach's writing is seen in the abrupt change from the rapid figuration of "El" to the dotted note rhythm and different quality of "E2" (Example 5g). On first analysis, "E2" was

2 labeled as new material, possibly beginning the next "A 2" phrase, which together might be a pre-form of a Closing Theme in classical 60

Example 5g: Measures 85-88.

V j J J - f _ z b J - &

_ - t r v -h' j] ]. n .i- T /

f p?rr |~ f . I J I — I— I

concerto terminology. However, it also gives the feeling of a

cadential ending to the "El" material. The "+" sign, connecting "E2"

2 and the following phrase, "A 2," in Figure 1, indicates that whether

this 3-bar motive is the ending of the previous material or the

beginning of the following material, it actually is not long enough to

stand by itself. Also, by its changed character, and the abrupt

termination of the preceding figuration, it is a separate motive and 2 is extended by its following motive, "A 2." "E2" continues with

harmonies in C-major, ending in a perfect authentic cadence in that

2 2 key, and an elision with "A 2." Phrase "A 2" ends Solo I in an elision with Tutti II, completing the baroque transitional function of Solo I, . 61 from Tutti I in F-major- to Tutti II in C-major, as well as completing the vorform of the classical Exposition II of the concerto-sonata.

Tutti II begins 5 proceeds and ends mainly in the key of the dominant, C-major, with some use of its parallel and relative minors»

Tutti II resembles Tutti I» In both tuttis, the sequence of motives is the same, with the exception of the deletion in Tutti II of the 4

1 measures of motive "c,” and of the 5 measures of motive !fb 2 ,11 which follow in Tutti I, In Tutti II, at the point where motive "c" occurs in Tutti I, 3 measures of new material are inserted*

Another similarity between Tuttis I and II is that Tutti I * modulates from its tonic, F-maj or, to its relative minor, d-minor; while Tutti II modulates from its tonic, C-major, to its relative minor, a-minor* Of course, both modulations are only temporary, and both Tuttis I and II return to their original keys*

Whether Tutti II is the "ancestor” of the codetta between

Exposition II and the Development of the classical concerto-sonata, or whether it is too long for such a function, is in question*

Certainly it repeats opening material, a not uncommon procedure in a codetta* However, eight phrases, a total of 32 measures, are quite long for a true codetta* At this point, merely naming it as Tutti II in baroque concerto form suffices*

Solo II, beginning in measure 125, can be likened to a 70-bar pre-form of a classical Development section. It develops all previous material with the marked exception of the ”33” material. The main key areas are indicated on line 3, Figure 1, and the section ends in 62

d-minor, The phrases are of varying lengths s and the use of elisions

and small overlappings is prevalent here as it is in the rest of the

movements with the interesting exception of a short part in the

middle 9 between measures 155-181, where the phrases are clearly

articulated rather than elided or overlapped.

Since the thematic material and its variants, plus the keys in which it is developed, can be followed in Figure 1, this discussion will briefly outline the larger organization of Solo II. Mainly, the

"E" material from Solo I stands out as the bipartite heart of this

Development section, framed by material based on the !!AI! and nD!l

1 2 ' motives., "E ln 4* "E 1," in their first appearance, occupy measures

141-154. !!E^ln is merely the ending of the tlE^l" material, and is

labeled separately here, on the basis of a change in the accompaniment,

1 2 for purposes of comparison with its later appearance. f,E 1" + "E l"

recur in measures 163-181. In both occurrences, "E^l" consists of

2 13 measures of fast solo figuration* In the first part, "E 1" is only

1 2 1 measure long, an ending of "E 1." In the second occurrence, "E 1,"

although sequentially extended in a dialogue between the harpsichords,

is still an ending to "E^l."

The first part of this core of the Development section (measures

141-154), gives the sixteenth-note solo figuration to the second

harpsichord, with chords from the orchestra lending harmonic support.

The harmonies follow the circle of fifths, and change at the rate of

one per measure, as follows: a,d,G,C,F,b^,E,E^,a,E,A,E. The second

part (measures 163-181), gives the solo material to the first 63

harpsichord, and the harmonies for the complete section, again

following the circle of fifths, are shown here: d,G,C,F,B-flat,e^,A,

,d,A,d(D,g,C,F)e The extension by sequence of "E 2lu can be seen, beginning with the D-major harmony in parenthesis. Parts one and two

of this heart, or core area, are separated by phrase ITC 1 1" (measures

155-158) , an unchanged replica of phrase I!ct! in Tutti I, always noting

the key change from F-major to a-minor, and the instrumentation change

from tutti to second solo harpsichord. This separation is concluded by phrase na^ln (measures 159-162), which also occurs in other places

in Solo II. The introductory and concluding developmental material,

i:- framing the central bipartite core just discussed, complete Solo II

and make more concrete the analogy to a Development in the classical

concerto-sonata.

The above formal phenomenon may best be seen by means of a

diagram (Figure 2). The mosaic, primitive, block-like character of

Bach1s development technique is additional evidence of Bach’s transi­

tional place in music history.

Tutti III is the shortest of the tutti sections, consisting of

only 11 measures. It begins on an elision with the transitional

phrase, nD3,TT of the preceding Solo II, in d-minor. In comparing this

tutti to a shortened vorform of the beginning of the concerto-sonata

Recapitulation section, it will be helpful to compare the sequence of

thematic material as it is found in Tutti I, which is recapitulated

in Tutti H I . These phrases or phrase groups can be seen in Figure 1,

and for further ease of comparison, are given in Example 6 , below, 64

Introductory Part I Interlude Part II Concluding Material. Material. Based on Based on "A" and "D" "A" and "D1

FIGURE 2. DIAGRAM OF SOLO II, VJQ. 46, FIRST MOVEMENT ' 65

without the subscript or superscript numbers5 with one vital exception, to facilitate comparison.

Example 6 :

Tutti I: a b a c b a . 3 Tutti Ills a a 2 a c b

3 Phrase "a 2" in Tutti III 9 while not phrase "b11 as appears at this point in Tutti I, ends with a 2-bar extension using the rhythm from %2eM This incorporates, and at the same time compresses some­ thing of the Tutti I sequence of material. The final "a" motive does not reappear at the end of Tutti III, as it does at that point in

Tutti I, another device for shortening Tutti III. It may be argued that Tutti I begins in F-major, while Tutti III begins in the relative minor, d-minor, a major objection to naming Tutti III as the beginning of a true Recapitulation. However, with phrase "a 11" in Tutti III, which shows the same sequence of modulatory dominant seventh harmonies as it does in its first appearance at the same point in Tutti I

(Figure 1), changing in the same rapid harmonic rhythm, both Tuttis I and III temporarily go to d-minor and modulate further to end in F- major. Thus, while beginning in different but closely related keys, both tuttis, near their midpoint, use the same harmonies and rapid harmonic rhythm to modulate to the same temporary and final keys.

Solo III, the longest of the three solo sections, begins and ends in the tonic key of the movement. Since all of the material presented in Solo I, with the exception of t?D3,!! recurs in this 66

sections often in the same sequence of motives s Solo III may be said

to complete the rudimentary Recapitulation begun in Tutti III* In

StevensV (1965, p. 52) wordsi

The only reasonable explanation for these events appears to be that Bach was attempting to apply the principle of recapitula­ tion to traditional concerto form. Having carried the notion of solo repetition as far as possible, he was now attempting a joint recapitulation by both tutti and solo*

The tonality of Solo III, while beginning and ending in the tonic, F- major, wanders from time to time during the course of Solo III, although for the greater part of the section it returns to that key*

As is the usual practice with Bach (see p« 55), the solo material

is interrupted frequently by short tutti phrases.

Tutti IV, the shortest of the four tuttis, is all in the tonic key, and is completely based on phrase group "a" material* In the

printed edition, the solo instruments come in alone for the last 2 1/2 bars. This last tutti, in key, position, and material, is comparable

to a short Coda in concerto-sonata form, thus completing the analogy

drawn between baroque concerto and classical concerto-sonata forms.

Only one short note should be added regarding indicated

ornamentation * The bulk of the ornamentation consists of trills* In

the solo sections, some other ornaments are called for, such as

mordents, written-out appoggiaturas, trilled and plain turns * Bach, .

in his Essay (1949, pp. 79-136) gives the signs for these ornaments,

with explicit directions for their execution under various conditions. 67

In summation, the first movement of Wq* 46 is a good example of Bach's expansion of the ritornello principle of the baroque con­ certo with ideas which later became more precise and elaborate and eventually emerged as the classical concerto-sonata of a later period. CHAPTER IV

CONCERTO IN F MAJORs WQ. 46: . SECOND AND THIRD MOVEMENTS

Second Movement

In this short movement 9 the mood changes from the style galant to a lyric, expressiveness, typical of Bach1s empfindsamkeit« This is in accord with the mood of Bach1s other keyboard concerto slow, move­ ments» In discussing the Adagio movements of Bach* s time, Johann

Joachim Quantz (1966, p* 313), Bach1s colleague at the court of

Frederick the Great, remarks that "the Adagio furnishes more opportuni­

ties than the Allegro to excite the passions and to still them again."

Sound

In keeping with the change of mood, the instrumentation

changes also, deleting the two horns and leaving only the two solo - harpsichords plus the string quartet. The printed edition directs the

strings to use mutes throughout.

The texture otherwise is•similar to that of the first movement,

in that it is homophonic rather than contrapuntal, and of the melody/

accompaniment type.

The dynamics, in the printed edition, run from "PP" to "FF" at

the end, with many indications of crescendos and decrescendos, as well

as sudden dynamic changes. There are several markings such as

espressivo and ritard, all probably a product of the editor1s

68 69 interpretation of the Bach style. There are several articulation indications in the printed edition (Example 7). These articulation markings are undoubtedly editorial and perhaps somewhat overstated.

Example 7: Measure 23.

Form

In contrast to Stevens’ (1965, p. 101) conclusions that ’’the slow movements of Bach's concertos of the first Berlin period are in four-tutti ritornello form," this movement contains three tuttis and two solos, one less of both solo and tutti sections. Stevens continues, on pages 102-103:

As a result of this necessary brevity, the form within the tutti and solo sections is often undeveloped in comparison with the sections of a fast movement. The ritornello often consists of only a single musical period containing perhaps three or four phrases. Even when the ritornello is longer and somewhat sectionalized, it seldom displays the kind of thematic differ­ entiation normally observed in fast movements. This lack of thematic differentiation is usually carried over into the solo as well, so that the entire movement is often built upon a single four-measure phrase.

With the exception of the above-mentioned change, Stevens’ quotation might be applied to this concerto. 70

At this point, because of the difficulty of obtaining printed scores of this concerto, Example 8 is given, showing musical examples of almost all motivic material and variants used in this movement.

Example 8: Motives and Their Variants, Second Movement.

Lnrgo.U, m s ) Brsetrung dve Orcheetere: Slreicher con ■ordlnl, s i I

f 1 ? T V.-- . s f 1 1 \ t ------71

i l M

/>/> legato

esjif'ess.

y'T- F,- -!SE^EE:5EE W## express.

< 7 ^

I \ —r_— ^l_f* • ■<*•'F r i t ^ a . . v 2 2t : W-? azWd H rt): ^ >-b— |~K.j.:.^j-—

, ^ 1 T T ^ c M

# k # 72

| >>>>Orch.

espres*. 73

Solo.

Solo,

VP

Solo. U

Solo, 74

As can be seen from the schematic analysis of the movement

(Figure 3)s the first 4-measure phrase of the first tutti, phrase

"a 1 ," provides most of the material for variation and fortspinnung

2a which make up the body of the movement. The next phrase 5 "a ," as explained in the section on methods of analysis (p. 30)* uses the

superscript number " 2a," since it is not only a variant of the pre­ ceding phrase "a," but later this variant is varied yet further, as

2b indicated by the change in the superscript letter to "a .il Phrase

"b," which follows, occurs only three times in the entire movement, each time in a transitional function. Phrase "c" occurs only a few times more than phrase "balthough occasionally elements of "c" are incorporated in other material. The "D" material, which occurs in measures 82-89, is free fantasia, far enough removed from the "A" material to justify giving it a label of its own. It is for the solo instruments only, never for the tutti.

All material, except the exclusively, solo "D" phrase, is stated in Tutti I. Solo II, in which the tutti plays the same important role as it does in Solo III of the first movement, is developmental in character, and is the longest of any of the large sections. The overall key scheme of the movement is as follows:

Tutti I, f minor; Solo I, A-flat major; Tutti II and Solo II, several keys and key areas, as would be expected in development sections; and

Tutti III, f minor. As with the first movement, a vorform of classical concerto-sonata form may be seen as follows: Tutti I (Exposition I);

Solo I (Exposition II, relative major); Tutti II plus first half of Tutti I : 23 M ’s. (Exposition I) Solo I: 35 M ’s. (Exposition II) 1 2a , 1 2a 1 a a b c a + c (A3a)A4 A3a(A3b) (A3V A5b(A3c) A73 A8 (C) A9 A10

1-4 5-8 9-12 13-17 18-23 24-27 28-31 32-35 36-39 40-47 f Ab

Tutti II: 16 M ’s. (Development) Solo II (+ Tutti): 59 M ’s. 1 13 (a)AU A11(A) A12a a1 b c1 + a (A) A1 + a13 (A)A14 + a

47-51 51-55 55-59 59-62 63- 66 67-74 74-77 78-81

• •f f . Db .. Eb Ab

(Development, cont.) (Recapitulation)

D a1 A2b b c2 + c3 A7b(C) A1 A2b b (A) A11 A11 (A)

82-85 86-89 90-93 94--97 98-103 103-109 110-113 114-117 118-121 122-125 125-129

A*3. . c c f..bb Db ..f f

Tutti III: 13 M ’s. (Coda) 1 4 2 A12b a c a + c4 + C4

129-132 (Cad.) 133 134-138 139 -145

FIGURE 3. CONCERTO IN F MAJOR, WQ. 46: SECOND MOVEMENT CHART 76

Solo II (Development); Solo II, second half (Recapitulation): and

Tutti III (Coda).

The expressive content of the slow movement is in a very real sense a form-determinant. There is a greater concern with musical content than with formal design, which, particularly in the solo sections, results in a free fantasia or a fortspinnung. Typical of

Bachf s apparent aimlessness in these improvisatory passages, the occasional lack of melodic or harmonic directions seems again to be the result of placing the emphasis on musical content rather than on form. According to Stevens (1965, p. 104), "this apparent aimlessness a would appear to result from Bach!s concern not with where a passage is leading, but with what it is expressing at each movement along the way."

As can be seen in Figure 3, Tutti I states the 4-measure "a" phrase which generates the material upon which most of the movement is built. It is followed by a variant, which is itself varied later in the movement. Phrase "b" occurs next, transitional in material if not in harmony; that is, it serves merely to connect the motivic material of phrases "a" and "c." Each of these beginning phrases contains 4 measures apiece. Phrase "c" is of particular interest. First, it contains 5 measures, breaking the preceding sequence of 4-measure phrases. , More important, it is one of the rare instances in which

Bach uses a light polyphony. Three independent musical lines are used in 4 out of these 5 measures (Example 9). Also, rhythmic and melodic elements from the two upper lines are used as elements of "c" material worked into other motives or phrases later in the movement 77

(Example 8, measures 40-41, shows one such incorporation). Tutti I closes with a 6-measure cadential phrase, beginning with "a" material and ending with "c" material.

Example 9. Measures 13-17.

Solo I begins with both harpsichords sharing variants of "A" material. The first phrase is given to harpsichord I and the answer­ ing phrase to harpsichord II. At the third phrase, there is a sudden leap from f minor to its relative major, A-flat. This unprepared leap from key to key is a Bach stylistic feature and as such is noted here.

The fourth phrase begins an imitative entrance in measure 2 of harpsichord I by harpsichord II, and the dialogue continues between the two instruments, using other variants of the "A" material, for two more phrases. In the first measure of this fourth phrase

(Example 10), the "A" material in the second harpsichord uses a rhythmic figure from the second voice of the "c" material of Tutti I, a dotted quarter, followed by an eighth and a quarter. Measure 41 contains melodic material, adapted this time from the top voice of the contrapuntal "c" phrase. In measures 40-41, the "c" material is used in diminution and juxtaposed in consecutive measures rather than appearing contrapuntally in the same measure, as it does in its original presentation. Thus this phrase is principally "A" material, with elements from "C" included, as shown by placing "C" in parenthesis at this point in Figure 3. In addition to the dialogue mentioned earlier and the incorporation of other motivic elements as discussed above, a stretto is employed as another variation technique in this section. Phrase appearing in measure 47, is introduced by a 2-beat tutti fragment, using the dotted rhythm of the opening of the movement.

This A ^ variant, while still based on "A" material, is lyrical and almost has a thematic life of its own, showing Bach’s great imagination in the use of variation technique.

Example 10a: Measure 14.

Example 10b: Measures 40-41. 79 .

Tutti II and Solo II follow9 and the general observation that in this movement all tuttis are much shorter than all solos is very apparent, with 59 measures for the solo in contrast to 16 for the tutti. In agreement with Bach’s contemporary performer, composer, and theorist, Quantz (1966, pp. 313-314):

In former times the Adagio was usually set in a very dry and plain fashion that was more harmonic than melodic. The composers relinquished to the performers that which they should have done themselves, that is, make the melody sing: . . . such movements began in more recent times to be written in a more cantabile style, thus causing a good situation to emerge from a bad one. . . . This melody [of . the Adagio] must be just as moving and expressive as one with accompanying words.

Again, Quanta (1966, p. 318) makes this point: "If a solo is to do honour to its composer and to its performer, (1) the Adagio must be singing and expressive in its own right; ..." Predictably, with the majority of slow movements in this period following this approach, the solo is given added emphasis both in significance and in length.

The "developmental" element in Tutti II consists mainly of a condensed version of Tutti I, in the relative major, A-flat, returning to the tonic key of f minor by the end of the section. Phrase "a^ " is left out, and there are small changes, mainly in the endings and extensions of the other phrases, and in the last phrase, which reverses the "a"-"c" order of Tutti I, appearing as "c"-"a" in Tutti I I . ‘

Tutti II, therefore, recapitulates some of the "a," "b," and "c" material of Tutti I, and acts as a retransition.from the relative major key to the tonic key of the movement, for the entrance of Solo II.

At measure 76, and again at measures 80-81, the tutti is used to complete phrases which are mainly solo phrasese The "D" material appearing at measure 82 for the first and only time is so far removed ' from all other thematic material that it is labeled as new. The harmonies at the beginning of the phrase suggest A-flat and modulate to c minor, using the f minor harmony near the end of the phrase as the pivot chord. The bass line proceeds chromatically, reminiscent of sections of the first movement ndevelopmentM phrases. The harmonies also proceed chromatically, using the diminished chord of the preced­ ing harmony on two occasions to lead to the next, as follows: D-flat

(IV/A-flat), d°, E-flat, e°, f (pivot chord), (vi/A-flat = iv/c minor),

G, c minor.

Measures 86-110 of Solo II are in the key of c minor, the dominant minor of the movementthus making these measures still part of the ndevelopmental" part of Solo II. However, the material is almost recapitulatory even now. For 7 measures, 103-109, the material is "lifted" almost note for note from measures 40-47 of Solo I. At measure 98, as can be seen in Figure 3, the tonic key of f minor appears, with excursions into other keys before settling definitely in measure 110. Thus, measures 98-110 act as a retransition into the

"recapitulatory" part of Solo II, which begins in measure 110.

At measure 110, Solo II, previously firmly established in the tonic key of the movement, becomes the "recapitulation." The first phrases, which parallel Tutti I in phrase group content and measure length, support this view. Phrase group "c" is omitted, however, and the parallel ends at the point where the "c" material appears in

Tutti I, with variants of solo "A" material to close Solo II. 81

Again, measures 103 to the cadenza are "lifted" from the same measures 40-47 of Solo I which provided blocks of motivic material for use in the section of Solo II discussed above as "developmental,"

The fact that Solo II, from measure 110 to its ending at the cadenza is all in the tonic key of the movement, also makes this

"recapitulatory" section a baroque concerto retransition.to Tutti III,

It is striking to see the manner in which Bach gives the variation and

improvisationa1 material to the solo sections, interspersing these motives with block-like, unchanged tutti motives. This is a baroque concerto unification device, holding together a rudimentary pre- classical solo development. Here again Bach emerges as the transitional composer, using older techniques and experimenting with new ones.

At the end of Solo II, according to the editor of the printed ' edition, a cadenza is expected, and he inserts one of his own. Since it is not Baches, it is not analyzed and is indicated only as (Cad.) in Figure 3. In a footnote at this point in the Steingraber edition, the editor directs the performer, in case the cadenza is omitted, to insert the dominant seventh chord on the last quarter beat of the measure, in both harpsichords. ("Falls die Cadenz wegbleibt, ist auf das letzte Viertel der Dominantseptakkord in beiden Klavieren einzuschalten,") Since the last quarter beat of the measure is a rest, this presents no problem. However, because a copy of the MS is not available at this point in the study, the question of whether all or part of the last phrase before the occurrence of the cadenza is

Bach?s or the Steingraber editor1s cannot be answered. 82

Tutti III returns 5 its tonic key having been introduced

several measures earlier in Solo II, as indicated. It is a short,

13-measure ending to the movement. The sequence of motives as seen

in Figure 3, the position of this tutti at the end of the movement,

its length, and its key all make it an obvious Coda.

In summary, characteristics of many of Bach’s slow movements

for solo keyboard instruments of the period are exhibited here. The

sketchy analogy to the recapitulatory and/or concerto-sonata form of

the fast movements; the use of the first 4-measure phrase of Tutti I

as the generator of most of the material of the movement; the melodic a rather than contrapuntal, harmonic, or figural treatment; the large middle section of free fantasia, interspersed with block-like tutti motives which are unchanged and undeveloped in contrast to the solo

fantasia; and the significance of the solo sections in terms of

length as well as of content. The change from a four-tutti and three-

solo to a three-tutti and two-solo form is the main difference between

this second movement and the^bulk of the solo keyboard second move­

ments of this period in BactV s writing.

Third Movement

The mood now changes from the lyric feeling in the second

movement back to the style galant of the first. In fact, the third

movement surpasses the first in gaiety and is less "serious" both in

form and in character. Sound

The Brussels MS indicates the same instrumentation is used in the third movement that is used in the'first. The texture remains homophonic rather than contrapuntal, but there are instances of frag­ mentary canonic imitation, such as in the first motive (Example 11).

Example 11: Measures 1-4.

There is also a simultaneous sounding of two different motives, at times, as has occurred in the other two movements, and which can be seen in Figure 4, indicated by different motive letters joined by a

"+" symbol. The dynamics, in the printed edition, consist of the familiar alteration of "P" and "F," with one or two instances of "PP" and one "FF" at the end of the movement. There are crescendo, decrescendo, swell, expressive, grazioso, and leggiero markings, probably editorial, but in keeping with Bach’s style.

Form

Here, as in the second movement, there are two solo sections and three tutti sections. However, the total number of measures (240), Tutti I: 24 M's. (Exposition I) Solo I: 62 M's. (Exposition II) 1 a b c c A+a D ' B(a1) a1 (B) E F G

F F F. .C C d.. C C C..F

1-5 5-12 12-18 18-24 24-28 28-32 32-39 39-46 47-50 51-55 55-60

Tutti II: 23 M's. (Codetta) 1 a G a G a H a b c c

F G a c C

60-63 63-68 68-■71 71-76 76-78 79-86 86-90 90--97 97-103 103-109 .

Solo II: 108 M's. (Development and Recapitulation)

A A2 A A 2 Ala(I) B b c1 A3

C C..d d d e . § * e C -. .F . F.’.d d d. c.,Bb

109-113 113-117 117-121 121-124 124-132 132-138 138-145 145-148 148--154 ..

FIGURE 4. CONCERTO IN F MAJOR, WQ. 46: THIRD MOVEMENT CHART Solo II, cont.

D BCa1) ab (B) E . F G a G a G

Bb Bb „ .F F. .0 g..F- F Bb G C..d d

154-158 158-165 165-172 173-176 177-183 183--188 188--191 191-196 196-199 199-204

Tutti III: 24 M ’s. (Coda) 1 a H c1 a b c c d F F

204-206 207-214 • 214-216 217-221 221-228 228-230 230-240

FIGURE 4, Continued 0 0 U t 86 puts this movement midway in length between the long first movement and the short second movement.

Again, there are rudimentary foreshadowings of the sonata- allegro form, as follows: Tutti I (Exposition r); Solo I (Exposition

II); Tutti II (Codetta); Solo II (Development and Recapitulation);

Tutti III (Coda). Tutti II, in this movement, is much shorter (only

14 measures) than Tutti II in the first movement. Unlike the longer

Tutti II in the first movement, this might well be considered as the vorform of a codetta. Since this movement is shorter than the usual

Bach concerto third movement.by one tutti and one solo, it is interest- * ing to note that Solo II is used both for development and recapitula­ tion purposes. This is a compressing device, in contrast to the more typical form found in the first movement, where all of Solo II is used as a rudimentary Development, and Tutti III plus Solo. Ill as a

Recapitulation. In the third movement, even more than in the preceding two, it is clear that the emphasis is shifting from a balance between the tutti and solo sections, to very short tuttis and much longer solos. However, a regression from this can be seen in the fact that, while the solo sections are much longer than the tuttis, and while these sections not only repeat and develop tutti material as well as introduce new material, new material is mainly figuration and fortspinnung, rather than truly thematic.

Motive "a" opens Tutti I, with the horns sharing in the thematic material. As can be seen from Figure 4, it consists of three distinct motivic phrases plus a variant on the third. In contrast to the opening balanced 4-measure phrases of the other two movements, each phrase of Tutti I here is assymetrical, and no two phrases are of the same length, with the exception of phrase 11 cM and its variant

'c ." Also, the "c" motive appears to be generated by the "a" material (see Examples 12a and 12b). The whole of Tutti I is in the tonic major key of the concerto, and may be considered a believable

Exposition I.

Example 12a: Measures 1-5 (Motive "a"). Example 12b: Measures 12-21 (Motive "c"). 89

Solo I conforms to the findings stated above. Tutti material is repeateds new material is introduced, and this new material is mainly passage-work. As can be seen from Figure 4, there are two motives in which both tutti and solo play different motives simultane­ ously, as in measures 32-39, labeled B(a^). There is frequent use of the dominant key, C major, and the relative minor, as well as excur­ sions into more distant keys such as G major (measure 63), and a minor

(measure 71), the dominant and the relative minors respectively of the dominant key of the section and movement. This presents the vorform of Exposition II.

Tutti II repeats Tutti I almost exactly, in both length

(23 measures) and in sequence of motives. This is all in the dominant,

C major, which was introduced in the last phrase of the preceding

Solo I. Tutti II thus is both a baroque tutti alternating with the first solo, and a pre-classical codetta following the Exposition and introducing the Development section.

Solo II, 108 measures long, contains most of the interest of this movement. It combines a development of previously introduced material with a recapitulation of Solo I, beginning in measure 148.

The developmental portion of Solo II is approximately 40 measures long, while the recapitulatory portion is 169 measures long, both recapitulating and further developing the motives found in Solo I.

The beginning of Solo II, the "Development," brings in C major with the entrance of the "A" motive, begun by the first harpsi­ chord and finished by the tutti, repeated in the same fashion by a 90

combination of second harpsichord and tutti9 just as it appears in 2 Solo -I. This is followed by motive ,!A ,fl a variant of the first motive, but still using the tutti to complete the solo phrases. From here until the end of the section, several keys are found. At measure 124, a new solo motive, "I," is introduced as a filler in the ] a i course of " A ” ,n an inverted variant of nA „,! The nBH material appears first in a solo phrase, with slight alternations in the inner

voices, and then is followed by a "b11 tutti phrase, almost exactly repeating the original in Solo I but omitting ,!cn entirely and finishing with just the end of " c \ " The keys can be seen in Figure 4, and this first "developmental" part of Solo II ends in the relative minor of the movement.

In measure 148, the "Recapitulation" section begins. Here once more Bach shows himself the innovator, recapitulating previous material and using the same section for developmental purposes as well, as mentioned above. This early appearance of the classic period device, in which the Recapitulation is used as an opportunity for further development, may be found frequently in the concertos of

Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. In contrasting the 62 measures contain­ ing the original material to be recapitulated, and even without consulting the score or the schematic analysis in Figure 4, it is obvious from its 169-measure length that this "Recapitulation" section does more than merely recapitulate. ^

In sequence of motives this part of Solo II recapitulates all of Solo I. The keys do not correspond, and this can be seen quickly 91

in Figure 4, making it a very "non-classical11 recapitulation. However,

in mentioning the keys 9 note should be mades in both solos, of the occurrence of motive "E" (measures 47-50 in Solo I, and measures

173-176 in Solo II). In both of these appearances of motive "E," which, incidentally, appears only in these two places, Bach exploits the typical baroque harmonic device of the circle of fifths. In

Solo I, the harmonies for this 4-measure phrase (one harmony per measure), are A major, D major, G major, and C major. At the same point in Solo II, the harmonies are D major, G major, C major, and F major. Solo II deviates from the motivic sequence of Solo I only at the last, where, instead of ending with "H," it adds f,C 1 " in F major, introducing Tutti III.

Tutti III, in the tonic key of F major, duplicates Tutti I in detail, making it the archetype of a classical coda, as well as the baroque return of the original tutti in the original key. Once more,.

Bach shows himself the transitional composer, using established methods to point the way toward new forms. CHAPTER V

CONCERTO IN E-ELAT MAJOR 9 WQ. 47: FIRST MOVEMENT

Introduction

This concertos written in 1788, the year of Bach1s death, is the last of the keyboard concertos written by the composer. It is one of the eleven keyboard concertos written during Bach1s twenty years in Hamburg, and the only double keyboard concerto of his Hamburg period. *

Sound

The instrumentation shows Bach still the experimenter, combin­ ing the relatively new fortepiano with the familiar harpsichord as the two solo instruments. The orchestra has been expanded since the earlier double keyboard concerto (Wq. 46), adding two flutes to the string quartet and the two horns of the F major double concerto. In both the Brussels MS and the autograph MS, the word, "fundamentis used in this concerto, where the word, "basso," is used in the earlier concerto. As the editor explains in his preface to the Barenreiter edition (Jacobi 1958, p. IV):

The terms 1 Fundament1 and "Basso1 denote in the thorough-bass period (17th & 18th centuries) those instruments employed for

playing the bass. . . . In the present Concerto, the 1 Fundament1 should be performed by the cello, which may, if necessary, be strengthened by the double-bass according to circumstances (e.g., size of orchestra and concert room).

92 The order in which the instrumentation appears in Jacobi1s edition, reading down from the top, is as follows: Flote 1, 2; Horn in Es;

Flugel; Fortepiano; Violine 1, 2; Bratsche; Violoncello and Kontrabass.

When Jacobi compared his edition to the autograph copy found later in

Berlin, he noted in his article (Jacobi 1959, pp* 488-489) that the original order of instrumentation is: 1, Horn, 2. Horn; 1. Flute,

2* Flute; 1« Violin, 2. Violin; Viola; Harpsichord; Piano; Fundament.

As in Wq. 46, the horns are omitted in the second movement«

The texture of this concerto, in spite of the additional instruments, continues to be homophonic rather than polyphonic. This is Bach's style, as shown in the earlier concerto as well as in his other works. Jacobi, in his above-mentioned article, finds it interesting that the composer, in his ordering of the instrumentation on the page, set the Fundament apart from the other strings and placed it directly under the solo instruments, whose bass voices are,

for the most part, in unison or in octaves with it. He also notes

that the flutes and violins quite often have the same material in the

solos and always in the tuttis, and in the autograph MS the flutes

are written directly above the violins. The horns, as in the earlier

concerto, are mainly filler voices, while the flutes, violins, and

very occasionally the viola, all have thematic material. As for the

solo instruments, the placement of the harpsichord over the piano on

the score seems to indicate that Bach is still cautious in his use of

the newer instrument, and places it second. This Fortepiano is well

described by Jacobi in his preface to the printed edition (1958, p. IV) V . . : ■■ ■ . ■ ■ . ■ ■ ■ 94

1 Forte-PianoT betokens the TMozart Piano 1 as it is now

often termed, i.e., a 1 Hammerklavier1 distinguished from present- day instruments by its not having a metal frame, by being strung bichordally, with much thinner strings under a lower tension. The hammers are covered with leather instead of felt. This instrument already had foot- or knee-pedals which served to raise or shift the dampers. Its tone is very much crisper but at the same time infinitely lighter than that of the present pianoforte, with its much greater volume and depth of tone, developed during the course of the 19th century.

Nevertheless, there is a difference in timbre between the two solo instruments, and therefore differences in texture are found when one is used instead of the other, or when both are used together. The comparative importance of the two different solo keyboard instruments will be noted as found under the separate analyses of the movements.

•The dynamic palette, again like that found in Wq. 46, is striking in its frequent juxtaposition of ,!Pn and nF,l! anticipating

Beethoven. There is an occasional marking calling for "pp" or "FF," with the rest left, I believe, to the taste and sensitivity of the performer, who must always be aware of Bach1s emphasis on empfindsam- keit.

As mentioned earlier in this thesis, a photocopy of the title page and the first page of the first violin part can be seen in

Appendix B. As for the printed edition, based on the Brussels MS, and later compared by its editor with the Berlin autograph MS, it is a meticulous copy. With the exception of a blurring of articulation marks, which Jacobi writes he hopes to correct in another edition, and some changes from older to modern notation, the printed edition is true to both MSS. An article under the section entitled "Reviews of

Music" appearing in Music and Letters (Crickmore 1958b, p. 412) welcomes 95 this first modern edition of the concerto in its original form. It lauds the notes on performance and the directions given for the . execution of the ornaments contained in the preface. It takes Jacobi to task, however, for not giving a realization of the continue and for giving "no hint whether the continue is to be supplied by both the soloists simultaneously or whether each part is figured so that either player may fill out the harmony.t! The other two adverse criticisms of this edition made in the article are that the note on the term, "tasto," does not mention that at those points Bach meant the double-basses to be silent; and that Jacobi has used the wedge-r

•shaped staccato dot, open to modern misinterpretation, even though this sign does not appear in the MS (see the discussion of staccato markings on pp. 44-46 of the introduction to Wq. 46, this thesis).

In concluding this section on "Sound,IT I should like to make

clear that because of the availability of the modern printed edition, and because this edition is a clear copy of the Brussels MS, which in

turn is a correct copy of the Berlin autograph score, there were no problems caused by the score itself, such as were found in working with the earlier concerto.

Form \

Predictably, the E-flat major concerto consists of three movements, in the fast-slow-fast order. The third movement is longer

than the first in number of measures, but these measures in the third movement are shorter and the number of pages in the first movement is 96

greater than those in the third. The tempo markings 9 "Allegro di molto" for the first movement and "Presto" for the third, considered with the comparative number of pages, seem to indicate that despite the larger number of measures, the third movement is shorter in performance time and total material than the first. The second move­ ment is marked "Larghetto," and, unlike the longer second movement of

Wq. 46, merges with the third movement. The meters are C, 3/4, and 2/4, with the third movement showing the only difference from Wq. 46, whose third movement meter continues the 3/4 meter of its second movement.

The key scheme is rather startling in that, while the first and third movements are in the tonic, as is the case in Wq. 46, the second movement is neither in the tonic minor, as it is in Wq. 46, nor in the relative minor, but in the submediant major key of C! In her work on the keyboard sonatas of C. P. E. Bach, Paz Corazon G.

Canave (1956, p. 166) writes: "Bach and his contemporaries preferred the tonic or relative minor for sonatas in major keys. ..." Since the parallel between the sonata and the concerto-sonata has been discussed earlier, this seems a relevant observation on Bach's concertos as well, and reinforces this observed deviation from his usual practice regarding the key of the second movement.

All three movements are in ritornello form and show what I regard as a regression to the baroque concerto form in two major instances. First, the motivie material is greatly fragmented.

Second, the internal divisions of each movement, shown rather clearly in the outer movements of the earlier concerto in F major as possible 97 vorformen of the later sonata-allegro principle, are blurred or absent in much of this later concerto• Only in the second movement can parallels be found between the baroque ritornello form and the classic concerto-sonata elements.

First Movement

The first movement consists, as is usual with Bach, of four main tutti sections, alternating with three main solo sections. As can be seen from the schematic analysis chart of the movement, the. lengths of Tutti I and Solo I are almost equal. Tutti III is the

next in length of the tutti sections, with only 2 measures less than

Tutti I. Tuttis II and IV consist of a very few measures each. The solo sections, in contrast, begin with Solo I containing 2 more measures than Tutti I, the longest of the tutti sections, and increas­ ing in size with Solo II and again with Solo III. Here it is clear that Bach’s earlier trend toward increasing the size.of the solo sections has reached its apex, with the solos now longer than the tuttis.

■ Because of the greater fragmentation of thematic material in this later concerto than in the earlier, the schematic chart will be allowed to serve as the me as ur e-b y-me as ur e analysis, with a. discussion of only the more important points here. Also because of this fragmenta­

tion, which I believe is a return to the earlier baroque concerto principles, it is impractical to label each variant of a motive with

a superscript number. Actually, almost every recurrence of material 98 is a new variation, and therefore only the letter of the alphabet plus its subscript number, identifying the original material from which each changing motive stems, is given on the schematic analysis chart

(Figure 5) •

Again because of the more primitive nature of this concerto, three other simplifications on the chart and in this discussion are made. First, there are recurring passages, at appropriate points, which are transitional in their rapidly changing harmonies and in their figural rather than thematic character. They are all designated by the letter ntn or nT,!I without any following number, although they are not exact repetitions of the original passage. Since the character and purpose of the passage is the same, it is felt that more can be seen from labeling these passages as transitions than by attempting to describe what can better be seen by referring to the score. In the same manner, it has been found that in several places where the "b" motive and in two places where the "a" motive are expected, either by location and by previous use or by the generating material, theme substitutes occur instead. These theme substitutes are labeled "sn or !,S!I on the schematic analysis chart, followed by the original identifying letter of the theme for which they are substituting, in parenthesis. Finally, interjections of other themes into the main theme or motive are made so frequently that the practice followed in the earlier concerto, of identifying these lesser fragments by placing their letters in parenthesis following the main letter, is abandoned. Tutti I: 35 M ’s. Solo I: 37 M's. al a.2 al t bl b2 t al a2 A1 A2 A1 T

1-2 3-4 5-6- 7-14 15-18 18-21 22-28 29-30 31-36 ' 36-37 38-39 40-41 42-47

Eb ,.Bb Bb Bb.f.Eb ... Eb . . Eb ......

Tutti II: 14 M's.

+ t S(B subs. ) T Al S(A2 subs.) Al S(A2 subs.) al

+ 48-49 50-57 58-65 66-67 68—69 70-71 72-73 74-75 76-77

Bb . Bb Bb Bb g c Bb Bb Bb

Solo II: 52 M's.

al t S (B subs. ) T B2+a2 T B2+a2 A2

78-79 80-87 88-101 102-■110 , 111-116 117-125 126-129 130-139

... Bb Bb F Bb 6.0 g+Eb ... c c

FIGURE 5. CONCERTO IN E-FLAT MAJOR, WQ, 47: FIRST MOVEMENT CHART Tutti III : 33 M ’s.

al a2 al a2 t+T bl a2 b2 t

139-140 141-142 143-144 145-148 149-156 157-160 160 161-164 165-171

c . « • ... Bb Bb • « .....«* • ......

Solo III: 56 M's.

T S(Al subs.) t

172-189 180-194 194-200 201-211 212-213 214-217 218-220 221-227

... Eb Eb Bb Eb Eb..Eb .. .Eb

Tutti IV: 7 M's.

al a2 •

228-229 230-234

.Eb Bb Eb 100 FIGURE 5, Continued 101

Tutti I opens with motive ,$aln in the violins, marked "P," a departure from the usual more impressive opening of a concerto, as seen, in Wq. 46* However, 2 measures later, motivic fragment na2IT uses the full orchestra in a "F" answer to the opening 2 measures, complet­ ing the first phrase* Phrase fragment ,?aln returns in an exact repeti­ tion, followed by the first of the I!t,fT or transitional, passages.

This consists of 8 measures of violin figuration, with rapidly changing

harmonies, leading to the entrance of the second or "b11 motive, in the key of the dominant, in measure 15. Here the two flutes act as a separate solo body, presenting the !!b!I theme in thirds and sixths*

The use of tutti instrument pairs as "solo" instruments for short motives or fragments is typical of the baroque concerto. The two parts of the "b" theme, which in its more melodic material and its use of the dominant can be noted as a rudimentary "subordinate theme," are followed by 7 measures of "t" material, again in the two violins.

Tutti I ends with the return of "al" and "a2," both in the tonic key of E-flat.

Solo I begins after a perfect authentic cadence and a quarter beat rest ends Tutti I. The key is still the tonic. The succession

of motives is the same as is found in Tutti 1, including the transi­

tional passage of 8 measures, this time begun by the solo keyboards

and finished by the tutti, effecting the same transition to B-flat,

using the same harmonic and figural procedures. Before the transitional

passage, the differing timbres of the two solo instruments are exploited

by beginning a motivic fragment in the harpsichord, and repeating it 102 exactly in the piano. During the transitional passage, both solo instruments combine, but not in unison, and contrasting color is pro­ vided by the orchestral ending of this solo passage.

At measure 50, the first of the substitute themes or motives,

"S," appears, substituting for the "b" theme, which occurred at this same point and in this same dominant key in Tutti I. This thematic material is given to the piano, and is followed by a continuous triplet passage in the harpsichord, showing Bach at this point exploiting the strengths of the two instruments: the incisive rhythmic quality of the harpsichord which is employed for the triplet figuration, and the singing legato quality of the piano which presents

the theme. Another "T" passage follows, again 8 measures long, very similar to the previous "T" passages but remaining essentially in the key of'B-flat. Motive "Al" returns in the dominant, followed by

another short n S,! motive, substituting for ,!A2 . 11 A repeat of "Al," beginning in c-minor but returning to E-flat, is followed by another

theme substitute for nA2,n all in the dominant, and ending Solo I.

Here, piano and harpsichord are treated identically rather than

idiomatically, in being given identical material.

Tutti II, a short 14 measures, is an abbreviated ritornello

of Tutti I up to the transitional passage, which departs from the

dominant but returns again to end this section.

Solo II begins a free fantasia, or rudimentary "development,n with !,Sn substituting for a variant of the first nBn motive, still in 103 the dominant. These two "B" substitutes, showing the original and its only variant, are given in Examples 13a and 13b, below, showing the solo part.

Example 13a: Measures 50-53. Wq. 47, First Movement.

— FT-1 & r •y M 4^2-4=-- pi_| U—o HAt-T r I— }- r~ n. ^ j j: 1 -- - 3 3 i I A A (i J L-rf-.. . - 5f' 8 ‘ t J — 1--- - h = J L_i--- ■ J r ■ ■ r ------^ .. pi.-— i

Example 13b? Measures 88-91. Wq. 47, First Movement.

.______r W ' ,ns2, C O 21

V ■ i— p- w — 1» f f - p

-/' liJir; • •:--- — ^-- — ---

' — qO si

r .v*-#>_HrerfL-o 17 ■ 3 k M . tr .tt 4*----- ^

Its phrase fragments are frequently interrupted by very short tutti interjections of "a" material, first in the flutes, then in the violins, and finally joining the whole orchestra to finish this "S" theme with a fragment of the "a" motive.

Solo II continues in measure 102 with another "T" passage, giving all the figuration to the harpsichord, with harmonic support from the orchestra and complete silence from the piano. After motivic 104

material from !!B2 M and ,ta29,! another nTH passage occurs9 this time reversing the previous "T" by giving the piano almost exactly the same

figural material as was given the harpsichord previously, now with the harpsichord completely silent. Solo II ends with an interplay of solo and orchestral instruments, using nB2,n t,a2," and tlA2?! material, mainly in the relative minor, c-minor.

Tutti III enters, still in the key of the relative minor.

This second largest tutti section is another ritornello of Tutti I, returning from c-minor to B-flat major during the transitional passage, less than midway through Tutti III. No theme substitutes are noted here, and the order of occurrence of "a" and !!b!! material

can be seen on the analysis chart. It may be seen that the first

transitional passage uses the same harmonies and figuration as the

first "t11 passage in Tutti I. However, this time the transition is

divided between the solo instruments and the tutti, alternating

measures for a pattern of ntl! + HT . 11 The number of measures for

this passage is 8 , the same as in its first occurrence in Tutti I,

and it again effects the transition to B-flat, this time from the

relative minor rather than from the tonic, as in Tutti I. The other point of interest in this ritornello is that the second and last

transition section repeats the harmonies of the second transition

section of Tutti I, and the entire transitional figuration material is

given to the violins, an exact repetition of the same section in

Tutti I. 105

Solo III begins with the harpsichord continuing another transitional figuration pattern than that which ended Tutti III,

returning the movement to its tonic0 The harpsichord has a complete passage in this figuration, found previously in the transitional passage beginning in measure 102 of Solo II. Again, as in Solo II, this is followed by a repetition of the passage in the piano, Bach’s, characteristic long pedal, seen frequently in his concertos for solo keyboard instruments of this period, can be seen now for the first time in measures 194-200. There is a curious absence of "B" based material in Solo II’s 56 measures, Solo and tutti instruments alternate, play in unison, finish each other’s phrases, and interrupt each other. Bach is using the color resources of the orchestra and of the two different solo instruments to a greater extent in this concerto than in the earlier one. In measure 218, near the end of

Solo III, there is another ”S,” substituting for motive "Al,” and

followed by the tutti transition to Tutti IV.

Tutti IV, an extremely abbreviated ritornello or codetta, uses first ”al” and then ”a2” material, starting and ending in E-flat major, but with a brief excursion to B-flat major at the beginning of

the !Ia2 11 material.

This movement, while showing characteristics of Bach’s mature

style, while employing color resources of instruments not used in this

combination before, and while showing what later become classic period

characteristics such as short phrases, slow harmonic rhythm, and long

pedal points, seems formally to hark back to the baroque concerto more

than to foreshadow the classic period. CHAPTER VI

CONCERTO IN E-FLAT MAJOR 9 WQ. 47: SECOND AND THIRD MOVEMENTS

Second Movement

This movement 9 as is expecteds turns to the style galanto It consists of three tutti sections and two solo sections. All of the basic material is presented in Tutti I, in accord with baroque usage.

Variation techniques include greater embellishment than in the two outer movements, also as expected.

The use of the key of C-major instead of the more usual c-minor is noted on page 97, in the introduction to the analysis of this concerto,

Here is the only example found in the double keyboard con­ certos of a written-in linkage of two movements. The second movement is linked to the third movement by means of a continuation of sound, and by a transitional tutti (Tutti III) that prepares the tonic key of E-flat major, the key. of the third movement. The statement in

Crickmore's article (1958a, p, 230) that "in Wq, 47, all three move­ ments are to be played without a break;" is erroneous, according to my findings» The first and second movements are separated, both harmonically and by rests for three-quarters of the last measure of the first movement. Only the second and third movements are written to be played continuously. Tutti I: 18 M ’s. (Exposition I) Solo I: 31 M's. (Exposition II)

a b c d A 1 B1 C1 . . D 1 C2 d 1 : . .

C F «.. C C F 0 0 6 ewe oeG G . ' .

1-4 5 - 8 8-13 14—18 19—22 23—26 26—38 39—44 44—48. 49-50

Tutti II: 7 M's. Solo II: 46 M's. (Development: Recapitulation)

a . b ' . . A 2 C 3 +D 2 B C(D) a B 1 c1 d D 2

G * . 0 C F...... C G F .. C C e e ,e "

50-53 54-57 . 57-60 ,60-62 6 3 - 6 6 66-74 75-79 79-82 82-87 88—90 90—93

Tutti III: 17 M's. (Coda: Transition)

c1 D 3 (A3) >

G D G a C F . c Bb Eb

94-97 97-103 103-107 108-119 . 107

FIGURE 6 .''CONCERTO IE E-FLAT MAJOR, WQ. 47: , SECOND MOVEMENT CHART Sound

As in Wq. 46, the horns are deleted in this movement« However since the instrumentation has now been expanded to include flutes, there is a textural difference between the slow movements of both con­ certos.

The texture of this movement is also made more complex by the use of two solo keyboard instruments of differing timbres. In the first movement, the harpsichord speaks first for the solo section, later answered by the piano, which is accompanied, however, by other instruments before being given its unaccompanied solo statement in a measure 50, Now, in this second movement, the piano leads from the beginning of Solo I, in measure 19,

A last textural difference between the second movements of

Wq, 47 and the first and third movements of the same work is found in the complete absence of a figured bass. The "tasto" indication for the harpsichord and piano parts beginning in the first measure of the movement, plus the absence of figured bass markings in all parts throughout the movement, indicate the composerf s intention. The texture is similar to the other movements in being homophohic rather than contrapuntal, and of the melody/accompaniment type.

The dynamic range runs from !,PP !l to I!F,n beginning with !tPn and ending with nPP,tl alternating between beginning and end with sudden shifts between !tPM and nF,u characteristic of Bach and of the earlier concerto, Wq, 46, io9:

The articulation markings 9 as explained by the editor of the

Barenreiter edition in his later article in Die Musikforschung (Jacobi

19599 p » 489) were occasionally unclear in the MS copy by Michel.

Jacobi hopes to correct these small deviations in a later edition9 to be based on the autograph MS.

Form

In contrast to the form of the two outer movements 9 and also somewhat in contrast to the more free fantasia-like form of the second

movement of Wq. 46 9 this movement does incorporate some of the

elements of a rudimentary classic concerto. More specifically9 there

are elements of the vorformen of a "development9 11 a "recapitulation,," and a "codetta" following the "recapitulation." They will be mentioned in this discussion where found. .

As has been found in both concertos9 the tutti sections are shorter than the solo sections. Tutti I states the four thematic

elements9 "a9" "b9" "c9" and "d9" found throughout this movement.

Phrase "a" consists of 4 measures 9 in which the flutes present the

thematic material 9 mainly in thirds and sixths. This use of a pair of

tutti instruments within a tutti section to present the thematic material is typically late baroque in practice. Yet the same use of

thirds and sixths is found in early classic practice. Once more Bach

shows himself the transitional composer! The other phrase groups in

Tutti I are not equal in length9 and therefore show the Bach-like use

of the second movement to treat material in freer style 9 while

retaining the ritornello form. Phrase "b" begins, dramatically with 110 an unprepared opening in the subdominant key, made still more startling by the sudden dynamic shift from the "P" indication for phrase "a" to a "F" for the first two beats of phrase "B." The harmonic and dynamic drama is heightened still more by all instruments playing B-flat only on each of the first two beats of the phrase, after which the dynamic marking suddenly shifts again to "P," and the phrase continues in B-flat, still using mainly unisons and octaves in all instruments (Example 14).

Example 14: Measures 1-5. Wq. 47, Second Movement

Flble

tasto

a w — ft i

, /as/o

Vfolfne v

Violoncello und KonlrabaB Ill

Solo I shows the same sequence of phrase groups as Tutti I, followed by a variation and repetition of "C" and "D" material.

Although the key scheme begins in the tonic in phrase m a \" goes to the sub dominant in phrase "b \" and then touches upon several keys in phrase " c \ " as is first shown in the same phrases in Tutti I, the following phrase "D^" shows a departure from Tutti I. Here, instead of returning to the tonic, a succession of harmonies, creating a retrogression to the eventual cadence in G-maj or (which is not 2 established until 4 measures of the following phrase "C " have passed) , demonstrates an evasion of the eventual key of G major, which must be established as preparation for the opening of Tutti II in that key.

This retrogression and evasion of the cadence also includes an excursion to the flat side, with several harmonies in g-minor, during 2 almost 4 measures of the following phrase "C ." This succession of harmonies, beginning with the D-major harmony near the end of the preceding phrase "c\" in measure 37, is shown below in Example 15.

The measure numbers are given above each harmony and the phrase labels below. The chords are labeled according to their function in the key of G-major, the eventual goal (g-minor where noted).

Example 15:

M. 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

V7/V 1^ V vii7/vi vi IV 1^ V IV V IV V/V I^(g)

Phrase "C1." Phrase "D1." Phrase "C2."

M. 45 46 47

vi/g V/g (1 or I) I/G. 112

The harmony of measure 47, the last measure shown in Example 15, above, continues the ambiguity of the key by omitting the third of the g- or

G-harmony in the first half of the measure, only establishing G-major in the last half. Tutti interjections are found, but they are very short and not important thematically.

Tutti II, a very short section of less than 7 measures, enters, still in the key of the dominant. It presents phrase "a" in that key, and with the same abruptness of its first appearance in

Tutti I, returns in phrase "b" to the tonic of the movement (not to the subdominant, as in Tutti I).

Solo II, the second and last of the solo sections, is, as may be expected, the longest of all subdivisions of the movement. It is developmental in material and in keys (Figure 6). In measures 63-66, the material is loosely based upon phrase "B"; and in measures 66-74, the generative material may be seen in phrases "C" and "D." This

"development" lasts until, in measure 75, a "recapitulation" begins.

The "recapitulation" in Solo II begins in measure 75, with the sequence of "a," "b \" " c \ " and "d" phrases as main carriers of the thematic material.

What may either be termed further development or possibly the vorform of a "codetta" to the "development" section begins in measure 2 1 3 90. Phrases "D " and "C " are modulatory, and phrase "D " returns to 3 the dominant key of the movement. Phrase "D " contains some of the harmonies and a thematic variation of the "A" phrase, shown on the 3 analysis chart in parenthesis as "A ," in measures 101-103. This is not only a whimsical use of other thematic material in the extension of the cadence, but a compression of "A" into "D" material at the end of the "codetta" vorform.

Tutti III, just 1 measure shorter than Tutti I, follows. This tutti is formed by two phrases, "b" and "c," plus an extension of "c."

The key scheme shows the entire tutti operating as a transition to link the second and third movements. The first phrase, "b," is in

F-major, using the C-major (tonic of the movement) ending of Solo II as its preparation. The second phrase, "c," then proceeds to E-flat major, by means of the seventh triad of each succeeding harmony, as seen in Example 16.

Example 16;

M. 108 109 110 111 112

vii/c c vii/Bb Bb vii/Eb Eb

In summation, this movement, while comparable to the second movement of Wq. 46 in length and in the use of a rather free fantasia in the fortspinnung of the lyrical basic motives, is not similar in other characteristics. The more complex texture has already been noted, as has the linkage with the third movement, both constituting differences from the second movement of the earlier Wq. 46. The abrupt harmonic changes, the retrogression and cadential evasion noted in Example 2, and the sudden dynamic changes are typical of Bach’s empfindsamkeit, even in a style galant movement. The faint hint of a recapitulatory design, in Solo II, is the only evidence of that design in the whole of Wq. 47. 114

Third Movement

The mood of this movement is that of the style galanto With

its Presto tempo marking 9 it surpasses the first movement in gaiety and verve.

Sound

The instrumentation is that of the first movements and the figured bass markings are present now, after their conspicuous absence

in the second movement. Frequently these phrases 9 in which the solo instruments act as continue instruments, end in a "tasto" mark, indicating that ^only the single tones, doubling the thematic material

forming the phrase end, are to be played. Several "unisono11 markings are also found in motivie fragments for the solo instruments. The difference between the marks ntaston and "unisono" should be kept in mind: according to Bach* s own treatise (1949, p. 313), ?,the octave is included in the meaning of the term unison. Thus when parts progress either in real unisons or in octaves, they are said to move in unison

(all ?unisono). . « Later, Bach (1949, p. 316) explains: "In this kind of accompaniment, which is indicated by . . . tasto, . . . the

left hand alone plays the bass without octave duplication. 11

The texture is homophonic and thin, yet with interplay between the solo and tutti sections, as well as between individual instrumental sections.

The dynamics range from "PP" to nF,n never going to a full

MFF.,! The characteristic sudden 1!P!! and "F" alternations are present. Tutti I: 36 M ’s. Solo I: 92 M ’s. .... Tutti II : 16 M ’s. a B a A(a) + a C (a, A) a

Eb fib Eb Eb Bb Bb ... Bb Bb

1-36 37-53 52-56 56-68 71-128 .129-144

Solo II: 41 M ’s. Tutti III: 24 M ’s. Solo III: 93 M ’s. Tutti IV: 26 M's.

A (a) C (a,A) a B a (A) + C a(A) + C(a)

Bb. .. Bb. .g g. .Eb Eb Eb Eb

145-159' 160-185 186-209 210-226 225-302 302-315 316-320

+ a (A)

321-327 115 FIGURE 7. CONCERTO IN E-FLAT MAJOR, WQ. 47: THIRD MOVEMENT CHART 116

The ornamentation is rather sparse, compared to that of the second movement• It consists mainly of the ntrIf sign in the tutti sections, with an occasional sign for a combined short trill and turn in the solo sections. *

Form

: In this last movement of Bach 1 s last keyboard concerto, con­ sisting of the usual four tutti and three solo'sections, there is greater fragmentation of the .motivic material than in either of the first two movements„ It is reminiscent of the second movement of

Wq. 46, with the difference that here there is no hint of concerto- sonata form. Also, since this movement is longer than the second movement of Wq, 46, there is more scope for the interplay of motivic fragments.

Further, most of the material which is developed and varied throughout the movement is based on the "a" thematic phrases forming

Tutti I, a practice found in the earlier Wq. 46, and in some of Bach1s symphonies: it is, perhaps, part of the legacy which Bach bequeathed

to. Haydn. The phrases of the "a11 material are the generators of the greater part of the movement, with the exception of the two entries of the nB!f theme. This theme, only occurring twice in the movement, first to begin Solo I and then to begin Solo III, is a "block" of four phrases in the tonic. It begins each time at the start of a solo section, after a quarter rest, and is overlapped at its end in both cases by a tutti naln motive. It is particularly interesting for two reasons. First, it is never developed or varied, and could be deleted 117 without causing any break in the musical architecture. It adds nothing to the symphonic logic of the movement. However, its more melodic character contrasts with the style galant character of the "a" material. Nevertheless, it is not a true "second theme" of concerto- sonata form because it is still in the tonic key, and because of its use, or lack of use. Second, it is written both times for the piano alone, and its appearance in Solo I is the first appearance of either of the solo instruments. It may be said that at last the importance of the piano is given full recognition, and its sustaining quality is used to present, this melodic theme,

Theme "C" is a generic designation for continuous figuration passages, also found only in the solo section, and given to either or both solo instruments, It is not always the same figuration, at times incorporating parts of the "A" motive and at times being joined by or interrupted by "a" material in the.orchestra. However, it consists of predominantly sixteenth-note figuration, and occurs frequently through^ out the solo sections.

Since the movement is based mainly on variations of or parts of the "a" phrase, alternating with "C" figuration passages, Figure 7 indicates these "a" and "C" motives without variation superscript numbers, to avoid the confusion of great detail^ However, in order to show the generative material and its divisions, the following musical examples of phrases "al," "a2,""a3," "a4," "a5," "a^3," and 7 the extension of " a '3" forming all of Tutti I, are given. These

consist of measures 1-36 of the Barenreiter edition of Wq. 47, and 118

show the motives carried continuously in the first violin section.

The motives are labeled on the example of the score (Example 17),

below.

Example 17: Measures 1-36. Wq. 47, Third Movement.

, ^ ' " ' 1 * r ______

V»o1ino

A ------— — —- :~rr2zri. vioi. ;

' A t , - v ^ 4.1 -< *

- L — - — — «— . -.—.— ------\ — f -f— —r » — A- ^ T1 - i.- I 11 V> i Viol.

As can be seen in the above example, Tutti I consists of nine

balanced 4-measure phrases. A case could be made for labeling each

separately, thus obtaining "al" through na8," with an extension of

Ma8" to end the section. However, the third phrase is almost an

exact duplicate of the first ("al"); and the sixth and eighth phrases

plus the extention of phrase eight are quite clearly variants of the

third phrase ("a3").

Solo I begins in measure 37 with four melodic phrases forming

the "B" motive, still in the tonic key. Because of the interplay of

all instruments, tutti and solo, and the tutti interjections or

additions to solo material, the lines of demarcation of tutti and solo

sections are extremely blurred in this movement. However, this 119 section is considered to consist of 92 measuress ending with measure

128. Following theme TIB5n tutti instruments and harpsichord alternate with "a" and t!A ,? material. The first of the !!C,! continuous figuration passages begins in measure 71, starting in the piano and continuing in the harpsichord. Both solo instruments create a continuity, with one taking up the phrase where the other leaves off. This is accompanied by tutti interjections from various sections of the orchestra, using mainly the first four tones of t!al ,! and then completing the "al" motive and breaking the solo figuration with a longer tutti passage of

"a" material, beginning with the upbeat in measure 93. This type of tutti interjection and complete interruption of the solo figuration continues to the close of Solo I, in the dominant.

Tutti II, a very short interjection of 16 measures, remains in i the key of B-flat major, using phrases tfal,n Ma3,n t!a 4 , 11 and t!a 3."

Solo II begins in measure 145, still in the key of the dominant. Again "A" material begins in the solo instruments, with a

canonic entrance of the harpsichord 1 measure later than the piano.

The orchestra joins the solo section, still with "a" material.

Another nCn passage follows, this time more closely based on "A" motives, interrupted by fragments of "A", motives, and then returns to complete the section in the key of g-minor. ,

Tutti III again begins, in measure 186, with "a" material, and with the full orchestra plus the solo instruments joining both thematically and.harmonically. A return to the tonic key of the movement, beginning with c~minor (the subdominant of the g-minor harmony 120 beginning Tutti III), and using the circle of fifths to arrive at

B-flat major (the dominant of the key of the movement5 E-flat), is accomplished.

Solo III begins in measure 210, still in the tonic. It is the shortest of the three solos, and begins with an unaltered repeti­ tion of the "B11^ theme, in the original key. Next, "a" material alternates with another "Cn figuration passage in both solo instruments, both accompanied by and interrupted by the "a" material, as before in

Solo I.

Tutti IV, the last section of the movement, begins with the upbeat to measure 302, now followed by canonic entrances first by the solo instruments playing single tones (solo sections marked fItasto!f), and then by the first, followed by the second, violins. Here again, the section begins with "a" material, joined by the same I!A 1! material in the solo instruments, and interrupted by one passage of "C" figura­ tion in both solo instruments. This passage is doubled by the viola and bass instruments, and is accompanied by l,an motives in the flutes and violins. The movement ends with full orchestra, including both solo instruments, playing fragmented "a" motives.

Here is Bach at the culmination of his keyboard concerto writing, showing all of his previouslydeveloped compositional characteristics, but harking back formally to earlier motivic frag­ mentation, rather than anticipating the completed themes of later classic composition. The analogies which were drawn in each movement of Wq. 46 to the vorformen of later concerto-sonata components are not evident in this third movement 5 with the partial exception of the contrasting "B” material, as discussed earlier. In fact, but for a very loose comparison with a few classic concerto pre-forms found in the second movement, this whole concerto demonstrates Bach returning more decidedly to baroque form, while retaining and even emphasizing his own stylistic characteristics,

Comparison and Summary

Since details of comparison between the earlier concerto in

F major and the late concerto in E-flat major were noted in the course of the analysis of the E-flat major concerto, these will not be repeated here, A general comparison of both concertos follows.

The F major concerto, written during Bach's Berlin period, shows complete agreement with the form and style of the bulk of his keyboard concertos written during that period. Here, Bach is experimenting. The primitive developmental techniques, found through­ out the F major concerto, are still present at times in the E-flat major work. Block-like returns of entire motives or themes, rather than development of the original material, as well as the creation of new motivic ideas from arbitrary combinations of previously used material, can be found and are noted in the analysis of each concerto.

Unprepared leaps from one key to another can also be found in both concertos, but are less frequent in Wq, 47 than throughout Wq..46.

Both concertos show a trend toward change from the baroque multi­ tonalities , to a tonal duality, but again this trend, especially within 122 a movement9 is seen more consistently in the earlier concerto than in the later.

•While the E-flat major concerto is typical of the other key­ board concertos of Bachls Hamburg period in its instrumentation, the

F major concerto approaches the Hamburg period in being the only keyboard concerto of the Berlin period to add horns to the basic string orchestra! The E-flat concerto shows Bach’s continuing experimentation with textures, as shown by the expansion of. his orchestra to include flutes as well as horns now, and by his exploita­ tion of the possibilities of two keyboard instruments of differing timbres to form the solo section.

Both concertos show the expansion in length and importance of the solo sections over the tutti.sections, an innovation of Bach1s not usual in concertos by earlier composers.

The F major concerto shows the composer developing his own characteristics within the ritornello form. Still retaining this form, the composer approaches the vorformen of the later concerto-sonata.

That this was not a conscious process, but one growing out of his development as a composer, seems most likely in the light of his last keyboard concerto, the E-flat major double concerto. Bach’s reflection of the empfindsamer Stil is evident in both concertos, as shown by his characteristics of sudden dynamic changes; homophonic rather than contrapuntal writing; use of distantly related or unrelated harmonies; sections of free fantasia; mood changes within a single movement, particularly the introduction of a melodic motive or theme into a 123 lively movement; and the use of the textural possibilities of orchestral and solo instruments. However9 in the E-flat major con­ certo, again true to the characteristics of other keyboard concertos of his Hamburg period, considerations of form become secondary. Bach, particularly in this concerto, but also in other single keyboard concertos of that period, reverts to the earlier baroque ritornello principle, with only a hint of the recapitulatory form developed in his Berlin years. He is now more concerned with content than with form, it seems. Here, in his last years, Bach departs from the mainstream of musical development, particularly the development of » ■ ■ . the classic concerto and symphony. Therefore this E-flat concerto, written during.the last year of his life, testifies to his main con­

cern, that is, the content and the effect of his music, rather than

to conformity with formal considerations already laid down, or to the

development of new rules. In spite of this unconcern with the

development of a new form, the F major concerto, although coming

from his middle rather than his last period, is an example of his

approach to the later form of the classic concerto and symphony.

Here then is Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, composer of two con­

certos for two keyboard instruments and orchestra, appearing not only

as a transitional composer, but as a composer of stature in his own

right. During his fifty years of composition, he began as the son of

a famous father, and immediately after his death, was more renowned

than that father. He wrote fifty keyboard concertos during those

fifty years of composition. Bach * s keyboard concerto writing, although 124 based on the earlier Italian models of Torelli, Vivaldi, and Tartini, was not influenced by his own contemporaries.

The formal and stylistic analyses provide not only an insight into Bach's own composition characteristics and innovations, but particularly on the basis of the earlier Wq. 46, show foreshadowings of the later classic concertos.

Thus, C. P. E. Bach appears as one of the foremost composers to create a model which, further developed, refined, and organized, becomes the classic concerto.

/ APPENDIX A

WQo 469 FULL SCORE EXCERPT

This full score copy of the beginning of the first movement was made by using the Brussels MS instrumental parts for reference. It shows Tutti I and the beginning of Solo I in full score and in modern notation.

125 126

6cnr\cefto in

frlk>

I (j^Actl 6 b*

$

-AsV (l-?-¥ 5 8 ^ B a ^ o S ± ! ? t F F f g 127

% n TOT

JT 128

jSJL 129

TT'T-TTTTT

5 4 b b? 2 . * E i

¥

c b 4 a _ b I 7 'V -T-W "O E w #

t

A

-th "6r t # O' f r T 3=

P

b ^==;=zkjr=jE:]xi===::::_

A ’S f - n 3

- b t - $ s w # ill 130

n a

4 7

w

^ - 4 4 7

W I

r - - M

.*(> t r r g . IfiL § E

ir _ U r ] r>-rD.. rx>-4T^ . -#- > ^ ' r J r

I I ♦ #-

m f w * J o r * 131

■*r 132

ME

7 c 7 r *

7 7 £ 7 I y of * *

i i

5 = ■■pX- - i r - 4 I fc t i i 3 «-t i

P u p ¥ 8

- * 3 - W — b- 7 F w 133 134

£ I

■rt It r -e *-

i 1 k

♦ e £ -X- »

-V- 4---#«-- 4 #

*tv- i x v l - f H r - n f. -h- 'tV4 o n -^V a = e i s f.

'6 9

B jvr-

4 jr-M ■- 1 135 136

n 'P7 i V------—...... ■------...... - r l/aP ...... Y r 6 4 3 „ 7 > % I { - =fi . V* 1 | —t------= y -I-- ..- ^ - ^ ^ ..... F p = P V a =*.J7 _ -= : \ - f r ...... - ^ f 6 < 1 - 1 ...fi-GV. i u 4 ^ ------4 — =Sj ^ ------1---- jr -k :h J ...... F H f- ? b- 0 1 -p-=------'---- !t---- »---- 1...... r — ^ f] ; ...... " 5 - l ------—, Z| 1 1 y _ 1 v ..-.J -J------_L_i ------(A--- -*------p ------^r ■b- 4 ►_ ------h r n i ^ —— —yj-—!------f n 4 4y ^ .______ir — t------T v - f r . - p ^ P y tVjV J. ; -4------*- r 1 r. ? • A- k— ^ ------« . - — -" » ...... , i f r - 9 ■40 -^—^ ------1— -L — _ \3= = t =

•GV.-r- v----- = t = F = F ^ = t r -V -k -^ ------:---- 1----1 - -T V — i = 4 : i : j 137

=? I

I i 138 — 1$ ' t r7% f "fc ^ -i "'—* ^ . [pTffl f 1 1 - - ^ w P j n | ^ 5 5 /j^Y-i »--- 1 | ^_1..- - 4 h A -- 1-— *— 1— Ni - . T i k . i

‘ $ i i ? < $ P

rv*j f -fr-fr I -4P- P iv-

w w #

f c g

t -

$ I

I ''{ I ^ S ^ * 1 3 5 13 139 y ’ TTvV -/ ---- fo-*—- T" F „ • 1 ■ -i—±=:

* < m —" '~- •••"- ___ m.. 7 e hr" \V— ?------= - 7liJ n f e = ^ = = 'T = ■^v------■------P ?......

jP :

-Jei,—:——(tov _ ___ 7 —=---- s^-^Tirr5 w £

TIf -••• ™» V y 7 jrj- .... -.. (A__U_ f . Lt— 8

' C S v v ------_ ------J t-----——— ------u__ 140 141

TO -‘ " %' - h : ~ (Ay? .. . . .

'€v:, f v « .. - J - b j —n------i V — ■fl

it Fi M , E p £ | t t J - r . i n n 1* [ f- J:r

— V' — f C7\*. -T-um — -JLfe------L

/ , ^ ------1

— 5v------_ ^ --

Jhr-I ^ ------

j-w—^ l-=v:'--—--- -

------» v ^ ---- V

CW t- ►—XT- - —A— - = - U S ' — • 142 143

: p : jm. 144

■■■■■ ■ ... 3^| ^ -: — -•" 7; 4

----- . y - ■[ t . F = ^ = r = j ^ ' 4 t ! 4uxi?------— -— P p t i ; ^_,r>rn m M- t.mrri| rrnfP . * 4 p — T p > MIJ-h T

PV, ..:" -B-j: . "V".... _[_ . , | k --- L-J--- y-S-J^L T rr^ti^ N 1 T I | bt=t= —Ski -

-(gyt_ ..

------— ------

f e ■ -

. b : i v. . -l:: ,.-^-— ... 19 145

R F ffi # = -- — ‘W t | - - --f f-IVf

r t f .f=- A. T 4- ^ f - 1--- 5-- ^ - p-- 4— h=

v.. -+jqp\ y ^ z : - ■ 4rrftrT^H ■ 4----- #----- ~T------##:-mBIT i -f* I . i 4—^ r^rtr; T - f — y M4 = 4 = ^ = W = : f = 9

------^ -- - T J - t ------— ------: % p ---- : __ •

■ 4h jJL ------= = : 1

rQ\ - T " • - - ■■ ■ ■ -- h-- to: zo 146 m

m

$

m i $

T_ k

£ 1. i- 3 ^ 8

##

i 1

1 $

-.'7: p -H- T l k W ^ —L # i -e--- - — A ^ r i r ' k ;f * f= 4 - f — ■ — :— - 3 % q i----- v ---- fS-- 1------A — 1— n i 1 n H

I

I i 148

TWTJTa _2 l2 _ g $ l

t

i m I

? N7 E=3: i s I

XT

.a g 3E $

X T A i i i.

4 -M" 9 m

I m # p r

A v p f

■*J— 1> *= m 149

¥fl*-----

c u t 150

-y > ------#- ' f a ' - ? r J ? i i [ T .( S

1 > i» <» ■ jftf— p f— . . j f - - - H l ^ b ...... - t : . —#------•= M = J------* ----

■br A_k * 1 ■> • ■ ■ — r U , =>• L . 3 # f f T F f 5? y [ ■ :.....U L [ ^ = 5 -4-1 g - - * <4

i — r 'C A v - ^ f------f------»------f ------1' ” I —• j ------'------M V ^ ------f— i------—---- = ¥ = ------*—

- = q

f - ■:■.....-

(g V " "

^ ------— ------— f ------—

"7£\Vr ■ -----

8

. I ...... e*> ------

...... ~ i iH Z5T ...... —J 151

I w APPENDIX B

WQc 46 AND WQc 47, BRUSSELS MSS EXCERPTS

This appendix contains reductions of photocopies made in the library of the Brussels Bibliotheque du Conservatoire Royal de Musique.

Any imperfections or unclarities in the reductions are due to quality of the Brussels copy.

Page 153 shows the title page of Concerto Wq. 46, followed by the instrumental parts for the beginning of the first movement.

Page 168 shows the title page of Concerto Wq. 47, followed by the first violin part, showing the beginning measures of the first movement.

152 (itf'Crzz. V~f

^ J a m f f i b n o

L t f l W C .

0 '£/ {JjJ a Q •

<2 • . f ( 5 154

* -7iy (/srrj* Z* K ^ y i i V r t c . -at Llm T'O. 155 156

r o / i M f t d 157 158 159

2/ - ^ Q o r n o .

' ! S & --;— < n -f f y~l’T . "<^ -* * '-\« f f-f-1 »-v%.—T-;' f f-f-f-' »■ -k.v1 jar-i-•arf 'f t ! -:, O - z . j ■» f - i - j — | '. 1 ■ 1 * \ *’" ! t * ■ 1 | | 1 1 1 * ■+*? * ^ . 11 -*-

^ g g t a g j

t e t e S S t i £ £ ^T- r. . F ™ = ? A ^ t TT' t' *-l^r v t"

B 5 f a EB f -, I 0 5 E E

^ 'L%"# "i 160

■ CterW.dtfmcxr- ' ' cAUeyro.

g&rfa^agg^ p

s r. - 1 . < l V o ~ 1 - . "\ _s • p ~ T * * | J L» . &-- ^ J - : h . t ^ C g ~ j... - ] ; ^ # - h — r ■ > » )

# ^ R ^#*»F=fTTTT I ■ J . ^ 4 # # ?

m d - ' - » . y ^ 4 ; ■ZtrVrr' fe: .1 ‘. I 1 ■) fck.).:|: a A: A IS. '

h

: 'Vp*\ , • : B lilfi; 161

-jt UcgrO.

.jf.c r S f . t -4— ^

1 , T % ? - # - " 4 ,t=

ilfej; . K.-ii

« '* -,»• — - —,—**W .X 162

( f - s e

^ ■ z° "

fTT-t

— -- 3/---

1—t—> —Vr-— . ^ » i?* '* ' ^-av** — 1--- 1—— 1—-Ja" qsr $ E E - r ^ r -r - T ^ : ~o— i: -V— *' _ 1

• i f *■ ^ t . — r j- T- 1 T ^ fr = e ^ Z & z — *-z-o--- -— i—4— 1----^-- 1 _z'c_. - =f-^j _ 1 %z\%_j2_: *?■*- ' ^•■^•yx V. J ^ T** ^ • 1^7* #

2 - 3 5 E E s £ ! # ^ 7 7 163

\ : . v u a f G - [ Ubjro • 164

166 167

(^mcesfto rjtllLCj TO . 168

p4 -

'.%z' / i

' ' 'A,z.

w e t

w m i y y ' y r : v * ■' x \ »

;•] : j

?i- 169

'^rs . »' /^n .—_ • T'i T ' ,' 1 ■ efe==£E£ri:

f~^~~‘^VX'T~1~^‘r~ - W g^~^7i— n-$-~ r-n— 7$-~~\— Q ^ — ^O— ?■-•—— >—

Musical Sources

Manuscripts

Bach 9 Ce P. Eo F. dur. Concerto. Wq« 46» Library of the Brussels Royal Conservatory of Music, Number 12 of the Westphal Collection.

_____ . Eso dur.Doppel-Concert* Wq. 47. Library of the Brussels Royal Conservatory of Music. No. 49 of the Westphal Collec­ tion.

Published Editions

Bach 9 C. P. Eo Korizert in F dur filr zwei Klaviere und Or Chester. Ho Schwartz, ed. Offenbach am Main: Steingraber Press, copyright 1965.

' ' ' Doppelkonzert in Es-Dur fur Cembalo, Fortepiano und Orchester. Kassel and Basel: Barenreiter Press, 1958.

Recordings

Bach 5 C. P. E. Sons of Bach. Including C. P. E. Bach1s Concerto in F major for Harpsichord/Piano/Orchestra. Westminster 17096. Schwann Catalogue, 1968.

Doppelkonzert filr Cembalo und Hammerklavier Es-dur. Archiv 198175. Schwann Catalogue, 1968.

Literature

Apel, Willi. Harvard Dictionary of Music. 2d ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1969.

Bach, Co P. E* Essay on the True Art of Playing Keyboard Instruments. Translated and edited by William J. Mitchell. New York: Wo-W. Norton and Co., Inc., 1949.

Barford, Philipp. The Keyboard Music of C. P. E. Bach. London: Barrie and Rockliff, 1965.

170 171

Bitter 9 C. EL Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach und Wilhelm Friedemann Bach , und deren Briider. Vol. I. Berlin: W. Muller, 1968.

Broder, Nathan. Mozart Sonatas and Fantasies for the Piano. Rev. ed. Bryn Mawr: Theodore Presser Co., 1960.

Burney, Charles H. Dr. Burney * s Musical Tours in Europe. Edited by Percy Scholes. Vol. II. London: Oxford University Press, 1959.

Canave, Paz Corazon G. A Re-Evaluation of the Role Played by C. P. E . Bach in the Development of the Clavier Sonata. Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1956.

Casey-, William J . Lawyer's Desk Book. New York: Institute for Business Planning, Inc., 1966.

Crickmore, Leon. nC. P. E. Bach's Harpsichord Concertos,” Music and Letters. Vol. XXXIX. July 1958a.

■ "Bach, C. P. E., Double Concerto in Eb Major," Music.and Letters. Vol. XXXIX. October 1958b.

David, Hans T., and Arthur Mendel. The Bach Reader. Rev. ed. New.York: W. W. Norton and Co., Inc., 1966.

Eitner, Robert. Biographisch-bibliographisch.es Quellen-Lexikon. Vol. I. Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1959.

Ferguson, Howard (ed.). Style and Interpretation. Vol. III. London: Oxford University Press, 1964.

Gates, W. C. "Mozart's Articulation Signs: A Dilemma for Editors," American Music Teacher. Vol. XIX. Sept./Oct. 1969.

Geiringer, Karl. Music of the Bach Family: An Anthology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1955.

______. The Bach Family. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967,

Haag, Charles Robert. "The Keyboard Concertos of K. P. E. Bach." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. University of California at Los Angeles, 1956.

Hutchings, Arthur. The Baroque Concerto. London: Faber and Faber, 1961.

Jacobi, Erwin R. (ed.).' Doppelkonzert in Es-Dur by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach. Kassel: Barenreiter Press, 1958. 172

Jacobi 9 Erwin R. "Das Autograph von C» Phe E. Bachs Doppelkonzert in Es-dur fur Cembalo, Fortepiano und Orchester," Die Musikforschung» Vol. XII, Oct,/Dec, 1959,

La Rue? Jan, "On Style Analysis," Journal of Music Theory, Vol. VI. Spring, 1962.

Miesner, Heinrich. "P. E. Bachs Musikalisher Nachlass," Bach-Jahrbuch, Vol. XXXV. 1938.

Newman, William S. The Sonata in the Classic Era. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1963.

Nohl, Ludwig. Letters of Distinguished Musicians. Translated by Lady Wallace. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1867.

Plamenac, Dragan. "New Light on the Last Years of Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach," The Musical Quarterly. Vol. XXXV. October 1949.

Quantz, Johann Joachim. On Playing the Flute. Translated by Edward R. Reilly. New York: The Free Press, 1966.

Reeser, Edouard. The Sons of Bach. Translated by W. A. G« Doyle- Davidson, Stockholm: The Continental Book Co., 1949.

Sobering, Arnold (ed.). Denkmaler deutscher Tonkunst. Vols. XXIX-XXX. Weisbaden: Breitkopf and Hartel, 1957-58.

Schmid, Ernst Fritz. "Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach," Die MusIk in Geschichte und Gegenwart. F. Blume, ed. Vol. I. Kassel and Basel: Barenreiter Press, 1949-51.

Schwartz, Heinrich (ed.). Konzert in F dur flir zwei Klaviere und Orchester, by C. P. E. Bach. Offenbach am Main: Steingraber Press, 1965.

Spiess, L. B. Historical Musicology. Brooklyn: The Institute of Mediaeval Music, 1963.

Stevens, Jane R. "The Keyboard Concertos of Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1965.

Terry, C. Sanford. "Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach," Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians. Eric Blom, ed. 5th ed. Vol. I. London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1954.

"Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach," Cobbett?s Cyclopedic Survey of Chamber Music. C. Mason, ed. Vol. I. London: Oxford University Press, 1963. 173

Terry * Miriam* nCo P. E» Bach and J. J, H. Westphal— A Clarification," Journal of the American Musicological Society<> Vol. XXII. Spring, 1969.

Tischler, Hans. A Structural Analysis of MozartTs Piano Concertos. Brooklyn: The Institute of Mediaeval Music, Ltd. (after 1966).

Weiss, Piero (ed.). Letters of Composers Through Six Centuries. Philadelphia: Chilton Book Co., 1967.

Wotquenne, Alfred. Thematisches Verzeichnis der Werke von C. P. E . Bach. Weisbaden: Breitkopf and Hartel, 1964.