Quantz and the Sonata in E♭ Major for Flute and Cembalo, BWV1031

Author(s): Jeanne Swack

Source: Early Music , Feb., 1995, Vol. 23, No. 1, Flute Issue (Feb., 1995), pp. 31-53
Published by: Oxford University Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3137802

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Early Music

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Jeanne Swack

Quantz and the Sonata in E? major for

flute and cembalo, BWV1o31

Of all the chamber works attributed to Johann Sebastian Bach, the

Sonata in Eb major for transverse flute and obbligato cembalo,
swvlo31, presents one of the most perplexing enigmas. The style of the
work has led a number of scholars to question its authenticity, and the
piece has been excluded from the volume of the Neue Bach-Ausgabe
my4F
containing Bach's chamber works with flute.' Robert Marshall, on
the other hand, has supported the work's authenticity, citing its two
allegedly independent (albeit late) attributions to Johann Sebastian
Bach by C. P. E. Bach and Christian Friedrich Penzel.2 Marshall con-
tends that the galant style of the work points to a date of composition in
the 1730s, a time when Bach seems to have been especially fascinated
with the 'modern' style, particularly with that associated with the Dres-
den court.3 Marshall's speculations were evidently the grounds for the
work's acceptance into the work-list of the article on Johann Sebastian
Bach in The new Grove Bach family, where the piece is catalogued
1-0 A4 ?o L
among the works of unquestioned authenticity.4
But new evidence, in the form of a sonata from the Dresden court,
1 Johann Joachim Quantz, a portrait not only raises once again the question of authorship, but also estab-
of c.1736 attributed to Johann Fried- lishes that swvio31 is based on a previously unrecognized model. The
rich Gerhard (c.1695-1748) (Schloss model, another sonata in Eb, an unusual and difficult key for a one-
Ermitage, Bayreuth) keyed flute,5 is a work by Johann Joachim Quantz, who served from 1718
to 1741 at first as oboist, then as flautist, at the Dresden court.6 The
sonata has received the number QV2:18 in Horst Augsbach's thematic
catalogue of Quantz's trios and unaccompanied works. Sources exist
for the piece both as a sonata for flute and obbligato cembalo and as a
trio sonata for flute, violin and continuo.7
The marked stylistic, thematic and structural affinities between
the two sonatas suggest two main possibilities: either that Quantz
composed both pieces, modelling one closely upon the other, or that
BWV1i31 is the work of a second composer, most likely J. S. Bach, who
based his work on Quantz's. Since Bwvio31 is a much more complex
and extensive work, it seems reasonable to assume that QV2:18 is the
earlier of the two and that Bwvlo31 takes it as its starting point.8
Jeanne Swack is Assistant Professor of If Quantz is indeed the composer of Bwvio31, then Bach may
Musicology at the University of
have heard the piece in Dresden and copied it out for his own use,
Wisconsin-Madison and a performer on
perhaps for performance by the collegium musicum. One hardly needs
the Baroque traverso. Her research
centres on the music of Bach and to be reminded of Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach's letter to Forkel of 13
Telemann. January 1775, in which he remarks on his father's deep admiration for

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 31

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 could have provided him with the opportunity to ex-
, ?cttu .... c'rrvftir amine works by the resident musicians, whose offi-
cial performance activities were at a standstill be-
64-.. a' ,l , /.- -2 cause of the Landestrauer for August the Strong."o
The similarities between QV2:18 and Bwvio31 ex-

., . . . .. . .......A. .a
tend far beyond the use of the same key and a con-
trapuntally uncomplicated style. Both sonatas are
S .
laid out in three movements: an opening fast move-
Oc Ube
2mrI
O-
".:v,- ,. '. "T
. ..I"' :' ment in common time with a ritornello structure, a
minor-mode siciliano, and a concluding bipartite
At% ,
fast movement in 3/8. All three pairs of correspond-
" , - 'T .
POO& N
ing movements in turn show similarities in con-
struction, thematic material, rhythm and roles as-
"N'
~L sumed by the instruments. These similarities are
especially striking in the outer movements. In most
cases they are sufficiently unusual or individual that
. All ",- 0, it is highly unlikely that the similarity is coincidental.
Further, the flute parts in both pieces have an oddly
circumscribed top range: Bwvio31 never surpasses
(, , d"', and reaches even this pitch only twice, once in
each of the first two movements. Otherwise c'" is the
highest pitch employed." Such a limitation of range
is to be found in none of Bach's securely attributed
flute works, even taking into account the probability
that some of these were transposed. The range of the
flute part in QV2:18 is also strangely limited, only
once exceeding c"' (a dV" in the second movement).
While some of Quantz's trios include notes up to e"',
2 Quantz, Sonata in E6, QV2:18, first page for
or rarelyf#"', oftheflute part
flute, most also show a similarly
in the hand of Dresden Copyist A limited
(Dresden, Sachsische
range. Neither of the two flute parts in the
Landesbibliothek, Mus.2470-Q-21) Trio Sonata in D major, QV2:10, for example, exceeds
c#"'. The range of the flute part in BWV1031 is much
the up-to-date composers of the Dresden
more typical of Quantz's court
Dresden works than it is of
Kapelle: Bach's parts for the transverse flute.

In his last years he esteemed highly: Fux, Caldara, Hindel,
Kayser, Hasse, both Grauns, Telemann, Zelenka, Benda,
and in general everything that was worthy of esteem in Berlin
and Dresden. Except for the first four, he knew the rest
personally.9
Sebastian Bach was certainly aware of the latest
styles at the electoral court. Although Emanuel Bach
does not mention Quantz by name, his instrumental
music was frequently performed by the Kapellen in
both Dresden and, in the last decade of J. S. Bach's
life, Berlin. J. S. Bach's stay in Dresden in June-July
1733, during which he presented to the court the
Kyrie and Gloria of the Mass in B minor, BWV232,
The most formally individual movement in each
sonata is the first, and it is here that the 'model'
explanation is the most compelling. The first move-
ments are based on a concerto structure, in which
the keyboard instrument (or violin, depending on
the scoring of QV2:18) represents the orchestral tutti.
While the use of a ritornello is, of course, the deter-
mining feature of the sonata in the concerted
manner, its formal working-out in the two opening
movements is quite idiosyncratic. A summary of
the structure of the two movements is provided in
table 1, which should prove helpful in the following
discussion.

32 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Table 1 Summary of the structure of the first movements of Qv2:18 and BWV1031

Key Bars Length Comments

(bars)

Ritornello 1
QV2:18 E 1-11 11 Ritornello in cembalo or violin, motive a
BwvIo31 Eb 1-8 8 Ritornello in cembalo, motive a
Solo 1

QV2:18 E--B 11, last quaver - 21, bt. 1 9 + 1 beat(+Mottos in flute

quaver upbeat) separated
cembalo or violinby motive a in

BwvIo31 E--B6 9-26, bt. 1 17 + 1 beat Mottos in flute separated by motive

cembalo; motto shortened a
andinvaried
second time, modulates to dominant

Ritornello 2
QV2:18 B6 21-6 (+ quaver upbeat) 6 Ritornello in cembalo or violin
BwvIo31 B6 26-31 6 Ritornello in cembalo
Solo 2

QV2:18 EB-c-tag to E6 27-41 (+ quaver upbeat; 14 Mottos in flute separated by motive a in

end overlaps with cembalo or violin
beginning of Rit. 3)
Bwv1031 B-E-c-tag to EB 32-53 bt. 1 21 Mottos in flute separated b
cembalo, but with shift of tonal level

Ritornello 3 complex
QV2:18 E 41 (+ 3 semiquavers 24 Begins cembalo or violin solo, opening
anacrusis) - 64 of initial ritornello; connects to variant of
first 'solo' beginning with opening motto:
bars 49-54 are variant of bars 12-16, plus
one added bar. Concludes with trio version
of end of first ritornello. Last 7 bars are a
modified echo.

Bwv1o31 E6 53-71 19 Begins cembalo solo, opening of initial

ritornello; connects to variant of first 'solo'
beginning after motto: bars 56-68, bt. I are
variant of bars 15-26, bt. 1, plus one added
bar. Concludes with trio version of end of
first ritornello (original form).

Each movement has three ritornellos in the same BWV1i31. The beginning of each solo includes a
succession of keys, with modulatory 'solo' sections double statement of a motto separated by a snippet
connecting them. Ex.1 shows the opening ritornellos of the ritornello. Both sonatas employ the same mo-
and the beginning of the first solo sections of each tive for this brief ritornello segment. But Bwv1o31
movement."' The ritornellos themselves share a mu- departs from the model here. Instead of a literal rep-
sical motive (labelled a in the example), which is, in- etition as in QV2:18, the motto is significantly altered,
deed, the principal ritornello motive in Bwvio31. effecting a move to the dominant. Each sonata con-
Note also the similarity of the motives over the dom- tinues with a restatement of the ritornello motive,
inant pedal in bar 7 in QV2:18 and bars 5-6 of against which the flute plays simple counterpoint.

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 33

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Ex.i (a) Bwv10o31/i, bars 1-15
Allegro moderato
Ritornello 1
Flute -

Cembalo

7 'solo'

"--_Ritornello fragment

34 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

13

34 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 (b) QV2:18/i, bars 1-14

Vivace
Ritornello 1
Flute

ViolinO

B.C.

12 'solo' Ritornello
1 .-- fragment ,-

12 ' -- I" IF IF" F"i F . . I F NAL opCFBRAY1953

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUA RY 1995 35

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Ex.2 (a) BWV1o31/i, bars 25-6; (b) Qv2:18/i, bars 20-21
(a)

(a) Ritornello 2 (b) Ritornello 2

(r
o oJ
!" I !

The opening solo

returning as it does to the tonic nearly
which A repetition ofrhyth
the the motto at the same
not the initial iteration would have been
particularly
The dull at best.
shift in ton
motto poses
Because the motto is tonallya stable, p
t
strongest depar
possibilities for its repetition, if a mo
movement
occur: either the ofmotto itselfBw
must be
sitional dilemm
altered, permitting modulation but w
rather awkward
motto identity, or the fragment of ri
chose separates the
the two statements of the
shift o m
the motto-thre
modified. In the latter case, the motto
QV2:18. enter
Theat the new pitch level. In the first
mott
poser chose the first option, also deci
only the first half of the motto. This
The Viola
tains only the general shape of the fi
d
of Great
motive. It would be hard
Br
to recognize it
in association with
ation of the motto at all, were it not fo
Yorktions Early
set up by the allusion to the Devis
is retrospect an
hosting by the analogous
inter passage at
of the second solo section, where the
The Fantasia
tion of the motto also occurs at a differ
from than theAlfons
motto itself. In the opening of
to Henry Pu
the varied repetition of the motto begi
and quickly modulates to the domina
Alcuin College, U
some of the weakest melodic writing
Friday 7th July -
point in the movement (in bars 12-13)
The aim of the con
Had the composer chosen the second
instrument maker
important field of English music. Live musical lowing the keyboard interlude to mod
performance will be provided by the resident consort, The solo section would have certainly begu
Rose Consort of Viols. Delegates will be entitled to a fully, but would have caused a proble
discount on other events sponsored by the York Early
Music Festival. dancy in the second solo section: the
have been stated twice in the dominan
For application form, or details of membership, contact:
etition of the opening motto and at th
The Administrator, VdGS, 56 Hunters Way,
Dringhouses, York Yo2 2JJ, England
the second solo. It was probably for th
tel. (o904) 706959 the composer devised the makeshift
the repetition of the opening motto.

36 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Ex.3 (a) Bswvo31/i, bars 48-53; (b) QV2:18/i, bars 38-41

(a) I

51 Ritornello 3
L I I I P " II II 11

(b)
Ritornello 3
IVI I opI" iF i F[ i I I

I
have chosen to
cases
dwell
theupon
second
this
s
itshows a composer grappling
the double wi
motto.
bly engenderedtonic, while in Bw
by attempting
while the
at the same dominant
time is f
expanding
rial. It is hard to imagine
then thaton
embarks a c
skill of J. S. Bach would
nung, not wit
ending hav
more elegant than that presented
BWV1o31 proves t
it is equally venturous
difficult in the
to imagine m
Ba
ble counterpoint is evident
followed in bythis a br
less rigorous Quantz,
of the on tonic, the other with
(ex.3).
have accepted such a solution.
Both second ritornellos are
The third and final ritornello is, of course, in in th
the tonic. However, neither
expected key. It is especially striki movement ends with a
ritornellos are simple
six restatement of the ritornello;
bars instead both
long in e
the two opening close with
onesa ritornello complex
are including
not a 'solo' of e

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 37

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Ex.4 (a) BWVlO31/i, bars 69-71; (b) QV2:18/i, bars 62-4
(a)

( i -
(b)

A:,
-' ,-06r
l I I iL. /
-P6 - di o F "
IF /1--op- , " V6i

interjection. As table i shows, the structural proce-

similar, although this may be attributed to the use of
common
dure at work in the final sections is nearly opening motives within the siciliano
identical,
despite the differences in surface detail. After
movement three
type. However, although the right-hand
(Bwvio31) or four (QV2:18) bars, the flute
part enters with
in Bwvio31 progresses in a nearly unbroken ac-
an accompanimental figure over the ritornello
companimental pattern in semiquavers over a sim-
theme in the keyboard (or violin). Following three in QV2:18 features imitation be-
ple bass, the siciliano
bars of accompaniment, in both sonatas tween
thethe violinbe-
flute and flute, with the occasional
comes an equal partner with the keyboard. participation of the basso continuo, and goes be-
Quantz
presents a modified version of the firstyond Bwvio31
section of inthe its modish allusions to the 'mixed
first 'solo' theme (motto, restatementtaste',
and as sequential
manifest, for example, in the copious tihrces
extension with one added bar), which he then
coulhes. con-
The model relationship here seems to consist
nects to a trio version of the end of theatopening
best in theritor-
choice of movement type and opening
nello. BWV1i31 omits the opening motto motives.fromCertainly
the the siciliano is a ubiquitous
first solo, but then presents a clever movement
variant of typethe in the trio and solo sonata of the
rest of the first solo section (bars 56-8 are
1730s,a and
variant
seems to ofhave been especially favoured in
bars 15-17; bar 59 is an added bar; bars sonatas in thefirst
6o-68, concerted manner.
The similarities
beat, are a variant of bars 18-26, first beat), closing between the respective third
with a brief passage in imitation andmovements,
parallel like those between the first movements,
3rds,
which, as I shall later show, refers to
arethe probable
too striking to be considered mere coincidence,
although
original version of the end of the first there is little exact duplication of material.
ritornello.
Quantz's movement ends with a long Ex.5 shows the opening bars of both movements.
written-out
echo. The final cadences are again Each
quite is asimilar
bipartite movement in 3/8. Each begins
(ex.4). with a bar of cembalo (or violin) solo before the flute
The second movement in both works is a siciliano enters, and in each the flute plays in parallel 3rds
in a minor mode-G minor in BWVio31 and C minor with the right hand of the cembalo in bar 2. Note,
in QV2:18. The opening rhythmic gestures are quite too, that each cembalo (or violin) theme is made up

38 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Ex.5 (a) Bwv1031/iii, bars 1-5; (b) QV2:18/iii, bars 1-5

(a) Allegro

(b)
Allegro

of two repeating two-bar units, although in QV2:18
the first bar serves as an anacrusis to the two two-bar
units in bars 2-5.
Later in the first half Quantz introduces a motive
which resembles more strongly the opening motive
of BWV1i31 (ex.6). Both movements include passages
in which steady semiquavers in the right hand are
accompanied by broken chords in quavers in the
flute (compare Bwvlo31/iii, bars 23-8; Qv2:18/iii, bars
21-8). In general, the semiquaver passagework shows
sonata, is, however, more extended and thematically
complex.
The return to the opening theme in the second
half of each movement is approached with a cadence
in G minor (ex.7). The basses in the cadential bars
are identical (compare QV2:18, bar 57; BWVio31, bar
99). In keeping with the greater richness of BWV1031
is the doubling of this bass link in ioths in the flute,
while the bass has the motive alone in QV2:18. The
final sections of both movements feature a tonic

a number of similarities (e.g. QV2:18, bar 22, and pedal point in the flute.
BWV1i31, bars 33 and 35). The third movement In summary, the outer movements of Bwv1o31
in Bwv1o31, like the first movement in the same derive their structure and some melodic material

Ex.6 QV2:18/iii, bars 13-16

.. . . . . . I I A I I ' I I
',boom-

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 39

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Ex.7 (a) BWV1O31/iii, bars 96-iol; (b) QV2:18/iii, bars 54-9
(a)

v I oIf f- 1 0 -4.
II
f!
P-1 J j EL
_] J .I 1 Jj 1w r 4
-"Fb -- _I -J-m

op L i JiZ
(b)

\-,:, V' I II l AL--I-h

A ."L "
, I1
I I-L
I .-Ii
- ,I Il
rpm VI F I Fmy.FI
iP YI
2 II "I F - I

from the corresponding

fourth beats of bar 8 movements
is merely a repetition of the first in QV
second movement half
of of theBwvio31, on
bar, with the opening ioth altered the oth
to a 3rd
borrows only the so that the scale can drop into thetype
movement lower octave. Itand
is sha
opening motive possible that
from the original version presented this fig-
QV2:18.
If we accept ure once, insteadrelationship
the model of twice, and in semiquavers in- for t
pieces, the question stead of demisemiquavers.'5 Such awhether
remains diminution was a the
scoring of Bwv1o31 typical
was method ofthe
embellishingtransmitted
such a passage.'16 One v
flute and keyboard should or probably extend this hypothesisit,
whether backwardlike
to QV2
as a trio sonata and was later transcribed into the the demisemiquaver scale on beat 2 of bar 7, which
present scoring. Here some details in the ranges andmay have originally comprised a simple downward
voice leading point to the probable priority of a ver-arpeggiation of the dominant seventh (exactly like
sion for flute, violin, and basso continuo for that in bar 7 of QV2:18), which Bach filled in with
Bwv1o31. passing notes in the process of arranging the piece.
The range of the right-hand part in Bwvio31 is en- This posited version is presented in ex.8. This solu-
tirely within the compass of the violin except for one tion has the advantage of matching the figuration in
bar: bar 8 of the first movement, where the part de- the right hand of the cembalo (or violin) at the con-
scends to f in a flourish of demisemiquaver scales. clusion of the movement (bars 69-70). The figura-
But let us consider the possibility that this idiomatic tion at the end of the movement would thus recall
display of keyboard bravura was only added when the end of the ritornello, serving as a substitute for
the part was transcribed for keyboard. The bar is the otherwise missing conclusion of the final ritor-
harmonically quite superfluous and can be easily nello. Moreover, this relationship strengthens the
omitted, but it is more probable that the original connection to the model sonata, QV2:18, since the
violin ritornello also extended through bar 8. As it first movement of that sonata also closes with a trio
appears in Bwv1031, the music of the third and version of the end of the opening ritornello.

40 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Table 2 Sources of Quantz, Trio Sonata in Eb major, QV2:18*

Signature Copyist Scoring Format Provenance

London, BL, R.M.21.d.7 Quantz flute, violin, b.c. parts Dresden

Dresden, Dlb, Mus. 2470-Q-21 flute, violin: A (Grundig?); flute, viol
b.c.: D (Kremmler? or
Morgenstern?); additional
performance indications:
Pisendel

Berlin, DS, M.Th. 179 J. J. F. Lindner flute, cembalo parts Berlin

Breitkopf Catalogue, 1763, flute, cembalo unknown
Pt. 4, p.13 (Leipzig?)
Solfeggi pour La Fluite T
l'einseignement. Par Monsr. Quantz from fl. & vln. parts,
(DK: Kk, Mu. 6210.2528, Giedde Collection mvts. 1 & 3, in Eb
I.16); 'di Quanz. Divertimento a 5.' & G major

* Hugo Ruf lists an additional surviving source for the piece, a version for flute and ha
Portugal. Ruf, 'Vorwort' to Johann Joachim Quantz: Triosonate Es-Dur, Hortus Musicus 235

Several contemporary examples ish

of in bars 7-8
trios thatmay be seen as another attempt to
sur-
make thetrio
vive both in settings for a conventional right-hand part more idiomatic for the
and for
cembalo.'7
solo plus obbligato keyboard attest that in tran-
scribing the second solo line for the keyboard the
figuration was sometimes alteredThat tothere
make is a close
it relationship
more between Bwvio31
idiomatic. Telemann's Six concerts et six suites and QV2:18 is incontrovertible. Let us now turn
to The
(Hamburg, 1734) may be taken as a case in point. a closer examination of the sources and attribu-
first six pieces in the set, sonatas similarly in thetions
con-for these works. While an exact date for QV2:18
certed manner, are scored alternatively for flute,cannot
vio- be established, the sources indicate that it
lin and basso continuo, or flute and obbligato was
cem-copied around 1730-35. Table 2 summarizes the
balo. The right hand part of the cembalo in the for QV2:18. Quantz's original composing
sources
obbligato version, however, is not identical withscore
the for this work, like most of his composing
scores
violin part, but rather represents a transformation of from the Dresden period, does not survive.
the basic musical materials of the violin part into
An an
autograph set of parts is, however, preserved in a
idiomatic cembalo part. The demisemiquaver flour-
set of four Dresden trios by Quantz in the Royal

Ex.8 Bwvio31/i, hypothetical bars 7-9

[Allegro moderato]

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 41

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Music Collection of the British Library (R.M. eagle watermark for Copyist D) as in the E& sonata.
21.d.7).18 As might be expected, this copy is clean and These are the only Quantz trios whose copying was
calligraphic and is almost devoid of corrections. divided between these two scribes. Further, the two
More important for the purposes of dating is an ad- pieces appear together as a set in Breitkopf's cata-
ditional copy in the hands of Dresden copyists A logue of 1763, scored for flute and obbligato cem-
(flute and violin parts) and D (basso continuo) in balo,24 and for the same scoring in a set of Quantz
the Sachsische Landesbibliothek, Dresden (Mus. trios in the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, to be dis-
2470-Q-21). Ortrun Landmann has identified Copy- cussed below. The third piece is the Trio Sonata in D
ist A as the Hofnotist Johann Gottfried Grundig, who major, QV2:9, which survives in an autograph com-
may have been active as early as c. 1725 at the Dresden posing score, complete with copious formative cor-
court, and who was certainly employed there by rections,25 and in a set of parts copied by copyist A in
1733.'1 The handwriting in the flute and violin parts the same stage in the evolution of his hand as in his
corresponds to the 'early' stage of his script, suggest- copies of the sonatas in Eb major and G minor.26 It is
ing that the work was copied around 1730. The iden- probable from the dating of the copying hands that
tity of Copyist D is still uncertain. He may be Johann the three sonatas in concerto form were composed
George Kremmler, as Landmann has suggested, who within a relatively short span of time.27
seems to have begun copying around the same time A further source for QV2:18, scored for flute and
as Copyist A.2? Manfred Fechner, on the other hand, obbligato cembalo, was prepared later in Berlin,
has suggested that Copyist D is not Kremmler, and most likely under Quantz's supervision. The manu-
has tentatively identified him as Johann Gottlieb script Berlin, DS, M.Th.179, is part of a set of five
Morgenstern, violist at the Dresden court from 1722 Quantz trios rescored for flute and obbligato cem-
until at least the late 1750s. 21 In any case, the bass part balo in the Thulemeier Collection; the set, as I have
likewise represents an early stage in the evolution of already mentioned, also includes the G minor sonata
the copyist's hand, that is, c.1730-35. All parts bear QV2:35.28 The copyist of all the manuscripts in the set
additional markings by the Konzertmeister Johann was probably Johann Joseph Friedrich Lindner,
Georg Pisendel. Pisendel's nephew and a student of Quantz in
But when could Quantz have composed the piece? Berlin.29 While these manuscripts suggest that
Quantz was in Italy from 1724 to 1726 and in London Quantz's trios were likely to have been played as ob-
and Paris in 1726-7, and the possibility that he com- bligato sonatas in Berlin, or at least that this scoring
posed the work during his travels cannot be ex- probably had Quantz's blessing there, this does not
cluded. Of Quantz's approximately 45 trio sonatas, mean that the obbligato scoring was eschewed in
all of which date from his employment at the Dres- Dresden.30 Indeed, the autograph score to the E
den court, three works, including the Sonata in Eb, minor sonata QV2:21, also composed in Dresden,3'
have their first fast movements in the form of an Ital- indicates that the work could be performed either as
ian concerto. While of course this itself does not a trio sonata for flute, violin and bass or as a sonata
point to an Italian origin,22 it does suggest that
for flute and obbligato cembalo.32
Quantz's interest in the subgenres of Sonate aufCon- The dating of Bwvio31 is even less certain. Cer-
certenart or concerto a' tre (the works could certainly
tainly the style of the piece does not suggest a dating
be classified as either) was rather limited, and the before the 1730s. Table 3 lists the principal sources
sources bear this out. One of the other two pieces,for a the work. The earliest extant source cannot date
trio sonata in G minor (QV2:35), is frequently trans- from any earlier than the late 1740s. If the piece is by
mitted with the Eb sonata. It too survives in a set of Quantz, then Bach's copy probably dated from the
1730s, when Quantz was still in residence in Dresden,
parts copied by Dresden Copyists A (flute and vio-
lin) and D (basso continuo) with additions bybut it is also plausible that it was copied in the 1740s.
If Quantz is indeed the composer, then his departure
Pisendel.23 The stage of the handwriting is identical
for Berlin in 1741 must serve as a terminus ante quem
with that in the Eb sonata, and each scribe copied on
the same paper types (no watermark for Copyist A, for its composition, since he does not seem to have

42 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Table 3 Principal sources of BWV1031

Signature Copyist(s) Date Attribution Comments

SPK, Mus. ms. Hauptkopist H; tempo 1748-9 J. S. B. (Hauptkopist H) Attribu
Bach, P 649 indication to first mvt.: J. S. Bach (C. P. E. Bach) from ma
J. C. Bach(?); wrapper: probably added in Hamburg,
C. P. E. Bach hence 1768 or later.

SPK, Mus. ms. C. F. Penzel (title page & proba

Bach, P 1056 mvts. 2 & 3); Anonymous c.1
(1st mvt.)

composed trio sonatas after that date. If Bach is the Bach's Magnificat, he copied solely for the senior
composer, then the work could date from either the Bach.39 Thus, P 649 must have originated in Leipzig.
1730s or 40s. Emanuel Bach added the wrapper in Berlin or, more
likely, Hamburg, expanding Hauptkopist H's attri-
At this point a reconsideration of the attributions
of Bwvio31 is in order. One of Marshall's chiefbution logically to 'J. S. Bach'.4? If it was indeed J. C.
Bach who added the tempo marking to the first
arguments for his support of the authenticity of
movement, then he must have done so either in
Bwvxo31 is the apparent independence of the two
Leipzig, shortly before his father's death, or between
principal sources.33 But neither the attributions nor
his arrival in Berlin in 1750 and his departure to Italy
the readings in the two sources, as Diirr points out
in his critical edition, are truly independent, but in 1755.41

rather probably go back to the same parent manu-Christian Friedrich Penzel copied the second and
script.34 third movements and the title-page for the second
Let us first consider C. P. E. Bach's attribution. principal source, Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preufgis-
The principal copyist of the manuscript Berlin, cher Kulturbesitz, Mus. ms. Bach P 1056 (Sonata / a /
Staatsbibliothek Preufgischer Kulturbesitz, Mus. ms. Flauto travers. / ed / Cembalo obligato / di / I./S.
Bach P 649, the earliest known source for the work, Bach / Poss. Penzel). The first movement is in the
is known in the Bach literature variously as Anon. 4 hand of an unidentified copyist.42 This copyist also
or Hauptkopist H.35 He is responsible for the copy- indicated an attribution to 'J. S. Bach' at the top of
ing of the sonata, the attribution 'di J. S. B.' at the top the first movement, presumably under Penzel's di-
of the first page,36 and all the instrument and tempo rection. The Penzel copy is clearly the later of the two
indications except for the marking 'Allegro moder- principal sources. The year in which Penzel became
ato' on the first movement, which was added in an- a student at the Thomasschule in Leipzig had until
other hand, probably that of Johann Christian recently been accepted as 1750 or 1751, with the year
Bach.37 C. P. E. Bach added the wrapper, with its in- of his leaving the school firmly established as 1756.
scription 'Es dur / Trio/ fuirs obligato clavier und Most recently, Karen Lehmann has challenged the
die flote / von J. S. Bach.' As Joshua Rifkin has date of his matriculation, providing evidence that
shown, C. P. E. Bach seems to have based his attribu- Penzel entered the Thomasschule in 1749, at the age
tion on that of Hauptkopist H, rather than attribut- of 12.43 While the copy cannot date from as early as
ing the work himself to his father.38 1749, the earlier date gives slightly more credence to
As Rifkin has further pointed out, the copying ac- Penzel's ascription, since he would have been a stu-
tivities of Hauptkopist H, who once was considered dent in Leipzig while Bach was still alive.44 The
to have worked for C. P. E. Bach in Berlin as well as unidentified second copyist may have also been a
for both J. S. Bach and C. P. E. Bach in Leipzig, can- fellow student at the Thomasschule. In 1755 Penzel
not be traced to Berlin. With the exception of some had contact with Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, then
ripieno parts of Leipzig provenance for C. P. E. in Halle. If the exemplar from which he copied

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 43

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 consistent with other appearances of the same pas-
c/'ona4-a
sage. I need not repeat Dtirr's list; the interested
reader can easily compare the two sources with the
commentary he provides.48
The divergent readings between the two manu-
scripts, 'Trennfehler', as Dtirr calls them, are typical
i rrbr- W
of copying errors: accidentals read as notes, missing
bars, notes on the wrong line or space, notes erro-
A fA 4 neously copied into the wrong part and then crossed
out, etc. They are certainly more typical of different
.arlo FO- Ftm
scribes' reading of the same source than of their
=ai
reading of different sources. Taken as a whole, it
seems likely that Hauptkopist H, Penzel and Penzel's
N oi

10i'm low-

anonymous colleague were copying from the same

manuscript.49
What might this lost exemplar have been? First,
d7T
Rw
it may have been Bach's autograph copy, lacking
attribution, of Bwv1o31, a sonata by Quantz. Sec-
ond,it may have been a copy not in Bach's hand but
attributing the work to him. The sonata in this case
could have been a work of either composer. Finally,
the lost exemplar may have been Bach's own score
of a newly composed piece based on Quantz's
model. The existence of two attributed copies
3 Quantz, Sonata in
derived from the lost exemplar E6,
strongly suggests QV
violin part (London, British
that the missing manuscript attributed the piece to
J. S. Bach.
BWVio31 came
It is clear, at any rate, from
that Bach was familiar with tha
inherited by
Quantz's W.
sonatas in concerto form, andF. that they Bac
copied the probably served as models for
piece aboutother works besides th
is consistent
Bwv1031, if itwith
is an authentic work. In thisPenze
regard,
though Marshall
it is also necessary to consider briefly
argues the relation- t
it probablyship of Bwvio31 and Quantz's sonatas in concerto
stemmed fro
Bach, must form to be two other sonatas with attributions to J. S.
independe
owned C. by
Bach. The first
P. is a workE.
of indisputable
Bach,4
authentic-
tenable ity, the Sonata in A majorof
light in for flute and furth
cembalo,
that Hauptkopist
Bwv10o32, whose autograph copying H score can bemus
fore the death of
securely dated to 1736.50 J.
The similarity in the shape S. B
could thenof thehave been
opening eight-bar ritornellos in the first p
Nachlaf3 movements of Bwvio31 went
which and Bwvio32 is probably to W
Several not coincidental, nor is
shared the opening gambit in both
copying e
sources works of having the keyboard
further state the first ritor-
suggest t
mon nello alone,
parent nor the recall of the opening theme in
manuscript.
commentary
the right handto his
of the keyboard editi
in the ilth bar of
rors that these two sources have in common under each work.5' Aside from the obvious rhythmic simi-
the rubric 'Bindefehler'. These include notes whichlarity between the head motives of both ritornellos,
the rhythms of the Fortspinnung sections of the
either clearly do not make harmonic sense or are in-

44 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
respective ritornellos are also strikingly similar: points of intersection between it and the three
both feature an alternation of semiquavers and sonatas under consideration, QV2:18, QV2:35 and
ornamental demisemiquavers over quavers in the Bwvio31. First, the choice of key for the middle
bass (see BWVio31/i, bar 4; Bwvio32/i, bars 3-4). The movement of BWV102o-E6 major instead of the
syncopated motive in the opening solo (bars 9-1o, more common B6 major, D minor, or C minor-
13-14) is also clearly related to the pedal motive may derive from the use of the same key for the mid-
(given in ex.1) in both BWV1o31 and QV2:18. The dle movement of QV2:35. BWV1020 is structured with
opening statement of the ritornello without the the same succession of movement types as Bwvio31
'solo' instrument is common to all three of and QV2:18.53 And BWV1020, of course, also employs
Quantz's sonatas in the concerted manner. Theusual opening strategy of having the open-
Quantz's
similarities extend to the third movements as well. ing ritornello played without the 'solo' instrument.
For example, the motive presented in two-part imi-The ritornello structure of the first movement is
tation in bars 78ff. in Bwvio31/iii bears a strong identical with that in the two Eb sonatas, and
resemblance to a passage treating a similar motive BWV1020 also employs a double motto. The treat-
in three-part imitation in Bwvlo32/iii at bars 52ff. ment of the motto seems to take both Eb sonatas as
and in subsequent passages. If BWV1o31 is by its point of departure: the motto in the opening solo
Quantz, then it probably served as a model for is repeated at the same pitch level as in QV2:18, and its
Bwvio32 and can therefore be dated to before 1736. repetition at the beginning of the second solo in-
If, on the other hand, Bwvio31 is an authentic workcludes the shift in key as it does in the analogous
of Bach, then its chronological priority with respectplace in BWV1o31 as a way of returning to the tonic.54
to BWV1032 remains uncertain. The ultimate stylis-The early return to the tonic, which in this case has
tic model for both pieces, in either case, wouldthe effect of making the final ritornello sound par-
remain QV2:18. ticularly redundant, may have been based on the
The second work, the Sonata for violin and cem- similar early returns in Bwv1031 and QV2:18, and pos-
balo in G minor, BWV1O2O, is more problematic, sibly QV2:35 as well.55
since the question of its authorship has never been There are, however, no 18th-century attributions
settled, although it bears two 18th-century attribu- of BWV102O either to J. S. Bach specifically or to
tions to C. P. E. Bach. Diirr rightly points to the Quantz. The Breitkopf catalogue of 1763 attributes it
marked stylistic affinities between BWV1O2O and to C. P. E. Bach on the page preceding the listing of
Bwvlo31, echoing opinions dating as early as SpittaQV2:18 and QV2:35. Clearly, Breitkopf had all three
and Wilhelm Rust that the two pieces must be theworks in his possession at the same time.56 The earli-
work of a single composer.52 Let us begin by consid-est known manuscript of BWV1020, at one time
ering the likelihood that BWV1O2O, too, is indebted to owned by the Thomascantor Johann Gottfried
Quantz for a number of its stylistic and formal de-Schicht (1753-1823), attributes it merely to 'Sige
tails. Here we must also take into account the com- Bach',57 while the second important source, in the
panion piece to Qv2:18, the Trio Sonata in G minor, hand of C. P. E. Bach's Hamburg copyist Michel,
QV2:35. Since both QV2:18 and QV2:35 seem to havealso attributes it to 'Sig. C. P. E. Bach.'58 According to
been transmitted consistently as a pair in the 18thYoshitake Kobayashi, Schicht's manuscript may
century, it is likely that J. S. Bach knew both works. Ifhave come from Breitkopf.59 One can only speculate
J. S. Bach is the composer of both Bwvio31 andas to whether Breitkopf had acquired his source for
BWV1020, then he may have composed them as a pairBWV102O together with his copies of QV2:18 and
in imitation of the two sonatas by Quantz. NeitherQV2:35. If this were the case, then Breitkopfs copies
can Quantz be ruled out on stylistic grounds as the of the two Quantz sonatas may have been local
composer of Bwv1o20, since it fits his style just ascopies originating in Leipzig and could well have
well as swvio31. once belonged to J. S. Bach.6? While the authority of
While space does not permit a full discussion of Michel's attribution is certainly strong, it is possible
BWV1020 here, I would like to suggest a few common that it was based on that in the Breitkopf catalogue.

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 45

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 14

tzs ~z ? .

04.r

4 Frederick the Great playing the flute: engraving by Peter Haas (1754-1804)

Although Michel worked closely with in C. Hamburg.

P. E. BachBreitkopf, whose attributions are any-
in Hamburg, he probably continued copyingthing but infallible, gains credence in this case
after
the latter's death, and could have been through
unsure the
about
corroboration by a copyist closely asso-
the attribution.6' ciated with C. P. E. Bach, and Kobayashi's specula-
The authorship of the work thus remains
tions that the two copies probably stem indepen-
dently from
unclear. If indeed both Bwvio31 and Bswvo2O are C. P. E. Bach's lost autograph seems
works by the same composer, then we reasonable,62
are left with although it must be pointed out that
the work to
J. S. Bach and Quantz. C. P. E. Bach is unlikely hasbeno counterpart in any of C. P. E.
Bach's known
the composer of Bwvio31, since he accepted Haupt- trios,63 and that it is not listed in the
catalogue
kopist H's attribution to J. S. Bach when he madeof C. P. E. Bach's estate.64
the wrapper. Even taking into account theIf, aspassing
is likely, Bwvio31 and BWV1020 are not by the
of many years between the compositionsame composer, then they could stand in a similar
of Bswvo31
and C. P. E. Bach's addition of the wrapper, relationship toit
one another as Qv2:18 and BWV1O31, if
seems improbable that he would notBWV1O31 have recog-
is by J. S. Bach. The style and formal proce-
nized his own work. But Michel's attribution of dures in the two Eb sonatas are identical, yet they
BWV1020 to C. P. E. Bach must certainly be taken could possibly be the work of two different com-
posers, with one emulating the other. Similarly,
seriously, since he was C. P. E. Bach's chief copyist

46 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
BWV1020 could be a work by C. P. E. Bach composed
in imitation not only of Bwv1031, but also of QV2:18
and Qv2:35.
W e are now in a position to speculate on the
circumstances of the composition of Bwv1031.
While the evidence at hand does not permit a firm
conclusion regarding the actual composer, several
possible interpretations suggest themselves.
First, Quantz himself may be the author of
Bwv1o31. The style of the work closely matches his
other Dresden trios. Perhaps a desire to try his hand
at writing a more extensive piece in the same vein
as QV2:18, which, judging from the number and
chronological breadth of the sources, seems to have
been a successful piece, led him to model the new
work upon it, in the process enlarging it and greatly
enriching its thematic material while maintaining its
formal outlines, style, melodic contour and, espe-
cially in the first movement, small-scale structure.
J. S. Bach, hearing or examining the piece in Dres-
den, possibly during his stay in 1733, may have
copied it out, perhaps intending it for use with
the Leipzig collegium. He could, of course, have tran-
scribed the piece immediately as an obbligato sonata
at the same time that he copied it out. Hauptkopist
H and Penzel, seeing a sonata in Bach's hand, then
mistakenly attributed it to him. Bach could also have
had someone else copy the piece, or someone else
may have copied it from his autograph, mistakenly
attributing it to him. The last possibility could ex-
plain how the lost exemplar could have come to at-
tribute the piece to Bach.
A second possibility is that J. S. Bach may have
heard QV2:18 in Dresden and, perhaps out of admi-
ration for the progressive style of the piece, decided
to compose a piece closely modelled upon it. The
scoring of the piece was most likely the same as
Quantz's: flute, violin, and basso continuo. Bach
then arranged the piece for flute and obbligato cem-
balo, making some changes in the first movement
to render the right-hand part more idiomatic. The
piece, according to this scenario, would still remain
stylistically anomalous. It has none of the formal
complexity, especially involving the blurring of the
distinction between ritornello and 'solo' material,
that marks Bach's secure examples of sonatas in the
This content downloaded from
109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
concerted manner. Nor does it show his customary
brilliance of invention or his usual playing with the
genre expectations of the Vivaldian concerto within
the context of the sonata. The piece lacks the obses-
sive contrapuntal and thematic working-out of the
two securely attributed sonatas for flute and obbli-
gato cembalo, the Sonata in B minor, Bwvlo30, and
the Sonata in A major, Bwv1032.65 Bach may have
wanted to show that he too could compose in the
up-to-date style of the Dresden court. Extending
this hypothesis, it is possible that Bach composed
this piece expressly to flatter the Dresden court
musicians. Hauptkopist H and Penzel then took
their attribution directly from Bach's autograph or
another copy made from it. While the technique in
Bwv1031 is at times uncharacteristically weak, the
two principal sources stem from Bach's circle in
Leipzig, while there are no sources for the work of
Dresden or Berlin provenance.
If Bwv1o31 is an authentic work of Bach, then
its dating remains a problem. The years 1748-9,
the probable period during which Hauptkopist H
copied the work, are, after all, its only real terminus
ante quem.66 For this reason we cannot exclude the
possibility that Bach composed it in conjunction
with his visit to the Berlin court in 1747, during
which he must have met or renewed his acquain-
tance with Quantz and could have heard or seen
QV2:18.67
If the work is, indeed, by Bach, then only the
model theory comes close to explaining its anom-
alous style. The following of the model is unusually
slavish; Bach would have had to suppress his
contrapuntal instincts to a degree not present in
his other obbligato or trio sonatas of the 1730s and
40s, despite their frequent surface obeisance to cur-
rent musical fashion. Although there is no doubt
that Bwv1o31 is musically more sophisticated than
QV2:18 it is probably not beyond the scope of
Quantz's technique and invention, nor beyond the
technique of other German composers who wrote
pieces with a similar structure. It is certainly too
early to dismiss Bwvlo31 as an authentic work, but
equally too early to accept it unconditionally. At
present we know far too little of the works of Bach's
contemporaries to render a final judgement on
swvio31.
EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 47
 A shorter version of this paper was pre-
(cross-fingered chromatic pitches
sented at the National Meeting of the being softer than non-cross-fingered
American Musicological Society in pitches). For this reason, pieces with
**1 Chicago on 9 November 1991. I would three or more flats, with the exception
like to thank the Deutscher Akademis-
of C minor, are extremely uncommon
cher Austauschdienst (DAAD) and the for the transverse flute. Telemann, for
Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation example, included no sonatas in E? in
EUROPEAN COMMUNITY for generous research grants for the sum-
any of his collections intended for
transverse flute. Even the Fantasias for
mer of 199o which enabled me to exam-
BAROQUE ORCHESTRA
ine sources for these works, and Joshua
unaccompanied flute of 1733, a collec-
ORCHESTRAL Rijkin, Alfred Diirr, David Rosen, tion arranged in order of ascending
Thomas Christensen, David Schulen- tonic, include no pieces with more
COURSES berg, Lawrence Earp, Ardal Powell, and
than two flats in the key signature.
ABBAYE DES PRI9MONTRe1S David Crookfor reading drafts of the Quantz, on the other hand, seems to
PONT-A-MOUSSON article andfor their many helpful com-have been adept at playing in remoter
flat keys: his Dresden trios include one
ments. Since the completion of this art-
FRANCE
icle in February 1991 Siegbert Rampe further
has work in E (QV2:17) and even
reached some of the same conclusions one in F minor (QV2:25). He suggests
29 April - 2 May concerning the relationship ofBwv10o31that 'Pieces set in very difficult keys
& 2 - 5 May 1995and Quantz's Trio Sonata in Eb major,must be played only before listeners
QV2:18. See S. Rampe, 'Bach, Quantz who understand the instrument, and
Applications are invited und das Musicalische Opfer', Concerto,
are able to grasp the difficulty of these
from talented young lxxxiv (1993), pp.15-23. keys on it; they must not be played
EU players of baroque before everyone. You cannot produce
instruments (strings, brilliant and pleasing things with good
oboes, bassoon and 1 The work will be included in a forth-
intonation in every key, as most ama-
continuo) who wish to be coming volume devoted to sonatas teurs demand.' Quantz, Versuch einer
considered for selection of doubtful authenticity (Serie VI, Anweisung, die Flote traversiere zu Spie-
for the 1995 ECBO. Band 4). len (Berlin, 1752), p.170; trans. E. Reilly
Courses offer the unique 2 See R. Marshall, 'J. S. Bach's compo- as On playing the flute (New York,
opportunity to work with: sitions for solo flute', Journal of the 3/1985), p.200. None of Bach's secure
chamber works with flute, with the
American Musicological Society, xxxii
Roy Goodman exception of the C minor trio sonata
director/violin (1979), pp.471-2 (reprinted in Marshall,
from the Musical offering, includes flats
The music of lohann Sebastian Bach: the
Monica Huggett sources, the style, the significance (New
in the key signature.
Andrew Manze York, 1989), pp.201-25); and 'Bach the 6 Quantz studied the transverse flute
Jan Schlapp progressive: observations on his later with Buffardin for four months in 1719.
violin/viola works', Musical quarterly, lxii (1976), His transition to the flute as his prin-
PP-313-57. cipal instrument was gradual, but
Jaap ter Linden seems to have been complete by the
Love Persson 3 Marshall, 'J. S. Bach's compositions
for solo flute', p.473. end of his travels to Italy, France and
cello/double bass
England in 1724-7. He was appointed
4 C. Wolff et al., The new Grove Bach
Anthony Robson flautist to the Dresden court Kapelle in
oboe family (New York and London, 1983), March 1728. See Quantz, 'Lebenslauf',
p.212. In the earlier version of the in F. W. Marpurg, Historisch-Kritische
Marc Vallon
work-list presented in 'Bach, Johann Beytriige zur Aufnahme der Musik
bassoon
Sebastian', New Grove, the work had (Berlin, 1754-60; R/Hildesheim, 1970),
Lars Ulrik Mortensen been listed among the chamber works i, pp.2o8-45.
keyboard continuo of doubtful authenticity. Christoph
Wolff describes it in the text of the 7 H. Augsbach, Johann Joachim
Quantz: Thematisches Verzeichnis der
Information: ECBO Grove article as 'doubtful' (New Grove,
musikalischen Werke, Werkgruppen QV2
Hordley, Wootton i, p.816), but includes it in the list of
Woodstock, OX20 1EP, UK authentic works in his 'Bach's Leipzig und QV3 (Dresden, 1984), p.11.
Tel (01993) 812111 chamber music', Early music, xiii 8 Although it seems unlikely, one can-
Fax (01993) 812911 (1985), p.169. not, of course, exclude completely the
(International +44 1993) possibility that QV2:18 may be a simpli-
5 Since the basic key of the transverse
ECBO is sponsored by fication of Bwvlo31, given the trend
flute is D major, the further a tonality
Panasonic Europe Ltd towards simplification at the time.
is from that key the more difficult it is
to play in tune, and the softer it sounds 9 H. T. David and A. Mendel, The

48 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Bach reader (New York, 1972), P.279.
io Bach's visit to Dresden in Septem-
ber 1731, during which he probably
attended the first performance of
Hasse's Cleofide (13 September) and
definitely presented an organ recital at
the Sophienkirche (14 September), may
have given him an earlier opportunity
to meet Quantz. Quantz was present at
the recital, and must have taken part in
the performance of Cleofide. See
Fremdschriftliche und gedruckte Doku-
mente zur Lebensgeschichte Johann
Sebastian Bachs 1685-1750, ed. W. Neu-
mann and H.-J. Schulze, Bach-Doku-
mente, ii (Kassel, 1969), pp.213-14, for
an account of the concert, at which 'all
the court musicians and virtuosi' were
present. C. P. E. Bach, writing in 1786, with different notated rhythms occurs
testifies to the presence of Quantz,
Faustina Bordoni and Hasse at the
recital, although he estimates the year
to have been '1728 or 1729'. See Doku- formed on the violin. At the same
mente zum Nachwirken Johann Sebast-
ian Bachs 1750-18oo, ed. H.-J. Schulze,
Bach-Dokumente, iii (Leipzig, 1972), considered there to be a problem in his
p.418. August the Strong died on 1 Feb-exemplar at this point and provided a
ruary 1733. The Landestrauer extended
from Estomihi (15 February in 1733) to
the fourth Sunday after Trinity, in that
year 2 July. See Bach-Dokumente, ii, matic to the violin than the cembalo.
pp.237-8; and H.-J. Schulze, commen- The thin texture of the sonata as a
tary to Johann Sebastian Bach. Missa
h-Moll BWV2321. Faksimile nach dem
Originalstimmensatz der Saichsischen
Landesbibliothek Dresden (Neuhausen-
Stuttgart, 1983), p.6; and J. Rifkin,
review of same, Notes, xliv (1988),
pp.791-6. The exact dates of Bach's
visit have never been determined.
11 Hans Eppstein calls attention to this 19 O. Landmann, Die Telemann-
anomaly in Studien iiber i. S. Bachs
Sonaten fiir ein Melodieinstrument und
obligates Cembalo (Uppsala, 1966),
p.180.
12 All my transcriptions of QV2:18 are
taken from the autograph parts in the
British Library, to be discussed subse-
quently. This source is unfigured.
13 Indeed, Eppstein cites the 'empti-
ness' of this passage as evidence against
Bach's authorship. See H. Eppstein,
'Zur Problematik von Johann Sebast-
ian Bachs Fliotensonaten', Bach-
Jahrbuch, lxvii (1981), p.85.
14 QV2:18 begins this section with a
statement of the double motto and
109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
interlude in C minor.
15 I am grateful to Joshua Rifkin for
this elegant solution.
16 Telemann, for example, employs
Cambridge
Music Shop
this sort of embellishment in the Con-
tinuation des sonates methodiques
(Hamburg, 1732). See, for example, the
third sonata in this collection (in E All Saints Passage
major), first movement, bar 22.
Cambridge CB2 3LT
17 The second movement of Bwvio31 Tel: 0223 351786
may provide further evidence that the
right hand of the keyboard part was
originally played by a violin. In bar 5 in MAIL ORDER
source A both the right and left hand
parts have the same pitch, g, a semi- SPECIALISTS
quaver in the right hand and a crotchet
in the left hand. Such a pitch doubling
ALL PUBLISHERS
infrequently in Bach's two-part writing WORKS REPRESENTED
for harpsichord, but makes perfect
sense were the right-hand part per-
k-403A
point Source B has a Bb in the right
hand instead of a G. Most likely Penzel
plausible correction. Certainly the
right-hand part of this movement, with
Biirenreiter
its wide chord spacing, is more idio-
Chester Music
Dover Publications
whole would, of course, be mitigated
by a continuo realization were the
piece performed as a trio sonata. Wilhelm Hansen
18 An additional set of five Quantz
trios in the hands of Dresden copyists
Novello
is catalogued under the signature R.M.
21.b.7. Oxford University Press
Quellen der Sdichsischen Landesbiblio-
Schotts
thek (Dresden, 1983), p.145.
Union Musical
20 Landmann, Die Telemann-Quellen
der Sichsischen Landesbibliothek, Ediciones
pp.145-6, and 0. Landmann, 'Die
Telemann-Quellen der Sichsischen
mxir
Landesbibliothek: Anmerkungen
zum Gesamtbestand und zu einigen
speziellen Fragen', Die Bedeutung
Georg Philipp Telemannsfiir die Ent-
wicklung der europaiischen Musikkultur
im 18. lahrhundert, Bericht iber die WHERE THE
Internationale Wissenschaftliche Kon-
ferenz ankit~lich der Georg-Philipp-
CUSTOMER
Telemann-Ehrung der DDR, Magde-
CALLS THE TUNE
burg, 12. bis 18. Mirz 1981 (Magdeburg,
1983), ii, p.65.
EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 49
This content downloaded from
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 21 See M. Fechner, 'Notwendige corroborating the identification of this
Bemerkungen zu einigen Dresdner
In Trondheim, Norway Telemann-Quellen und deren
copyist. J. J. F. Lindner is ,ot to be
confused with Johann Jacob Lindner, a
July 19 - July 27, 1995 Schreibern', Georg Philipp Telemann:
copyist at the Dresden court.
THE RINGVE MUSEUM Werkiiberlieferung, Editions- und Inter-
30 One further source provides evid-
ACADEMY pretationsfragen, Bericht uber die Inter-
nationale Wissenschaftliche Konferenz ence that the work was also arranged as
THE XVIII a divertimento for a larger scoring in
anlailich der 9. Telemann-Festtage der
INTERNATIONAL Berlin. Excerpts from the outer move-
DDR, Magdeburg, 12. bis 14. Miirz, 1987
ments appear both in the original key
SUMMER COURSE (Cologne, 1991), i, pp.87-92. Fechner
and transposed to G major in Solfeggi
dates the 'early stage' of Copyist D's
3'
hand to c.1735. pour La Fllite Traversidre avec l'ein-
seignement. Par Monsr. Quantz (DK:
22 Similar works by other composers Kk, Mu. 6210.2528, Giedde Collection
associated with the Dresden court sur- 1.16), where they bear the heading 'di
vive, and are discussed in J. Swack, 'On Quanz. Divertimento a 5.' Excerpts
the origins of the Sonate auf Concerten- from the companion sonata in G
Early Music art', Journal of the American Musicolog- minor, Qv2:35 also appear (as 'Trio di
Performance Practice ical Society, xlvi (1993), PP-369-414. Quanz') in the Solfeggi. Winfried
Master Classes Michel and Hermien Teske, the editors
23 Dresden, Sachsische Landesbiblio-
and Ensemble Playing of the modern edition of the Solfeggi,
thek, Mus. 2470-Q-33.
suggest that the volume comprises
24 See The Breitkopf thematic cata- exercises that Quantz wrote out for
Faculty: logue: the six parts and sixteen supple-
Frederick the Great, probably over a
ments, 1762-1787, ed. B. S. Brook (New period of more than a dozen years, and
York, 1966), p.127. that the notebook was begun c.1729,
Ian Partridge when Quantz first began instructing
voice 25 Dresden, Sachsische Landesbiblio-
Frederick on the flute, and finished
thek, Mus. 2470-Q-14. The D major
around 1742, when Quantz was regu-
trio is stylistically and structurally close
Mary Collins to Qv2:18 and 2:35, consisting of an
larly present in Berlin. See Solfeggi Pour
renaissance/baroque dance opening fast movement with a ritor- La Flute Traversiere avec l'enseignement,
nello structure, a siciliano, and a con- Par Mons." Quantz, ed. W. Michel and
Marion Verbruggen cluding movement in binary form. As H. Teske (Winterthur, 1978), pp.ii-iii.
recorder in the other two sonatas, the flute is The sonata excerpts appear on PP.74-5
in their edition. Horst Augsbach, on
silent during the opening ritornello,
and there is an immediate return to the the other hand, provides convincing
Ku Ebbinge tonic after the second ritornello. evidence that the Solfeggi manuscript
baroque oboe dates from between 1775 and 1782 in
26 Dresden, Sichsische Landesbiblio- Berlin, originating probably with a stu-
thek, Mus. 2470-Q-15. dent of Quantz's pupil Augustin Neuff.
Catherine Mackintosh Quantz's hand, according to Augsbach,
27 Judging from the surviving Dresden
baroque violin sources, Quantz generally gave his
does not appear in the manuscript. See
Augsbach, Johann Joachim Quantz:
composing scores to Grundig or
Thematisches Verzeichnis, pp.v-vi. Per-
Rolf Lislevand Kremmler (Morgenstern?), who then
haps Quantz made an arrangement of
lute/baroque guitar produced parts. Pisendel would then
the piece with added (filler?) parts, or
check them, adding further dynamic
the copyist of the Solfeggi had made his
and articulation markings. Quantz
Laurence Dreyfus himself copied few parts for his own
own arrangement of the piece.
viola da gamba/baroque cello works.
31 Dresden, Sachsische Landesbiblio-
thek, Mus. 2470-Q-28.
Ketil Haugsand 28 There were originally six pieces in
the set; however, the sixth, a transcrip- 32 Compare the facsimile edition cited
harpsichord
tion of the Trio in E minor, QV2:20 above. The score in question is a calli-
For further details: (M.Th.I83), was destroyed during graphic copying score.
World War II.
THE ST.OLAV FESTIVAL 33 Marshall, 'J. S. Bach's compositions
P.B. 2045, 29 See H. Augsbach, preface to the for solo flute', p.472.
facsimile edition of Johann Joachim
N-7001 Trondheim, Norway
Tel. (47) 73 50 97 97 Quantz: Sonate E-moll ftir Flote und 34 A. Dtirr, Sonate C-dur fir Flbte
Fax. (47) 73 50 38 66 obligates Cembalo (Leipzig, 1982), P.7. und Basso continuo swv1033, Sonaten
I am grateful to Manfred Fechner for Es-dur, g-moll fir Flite und obligates

50 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Cembalo BwVIo31, 1020, iiberliefert als therefore August 1748. On p.69 he

Cambridge
Werke Johann Sebastian Bachs, Biren- dates the copying of Bwvio31 to
reiter 4418 (1975), 'Kritischer Bericht', between August 1748 and October 1749.
p.39; and Marshall, 'J. S. Bach's
compositions for solo flute', p.472:
36 The attribution 'di J. S. B.' is in a
lighter ink than the rest of the manu-
Early Music
'Now the E6 Sonata is ascribed to J. S.
Bach not only by Emanuel but also by
script and it is not altogether certain Summer Schools
that it is in the hand of Hauptkopist H.
Penzel, whose connections with the
It may indeed be in his hand, but Expert tuition, professional concerts,
Bach sources seem to derive primarily excellent cuisine, congenial company,
added later, or he may have simply
from Wilhelm Friedemann, not in the tranquil and atmospheric setting
had less ink on the quill.
Emanuel Bach. In any case, Penzel's of an historic Cambridge college.
copy is demonstrably independent of 37 I am thankful to Joshua Rifkin for
Emanuel's. Therefore, it seems likely this provisional identification. 29 July - 5 August 1995
that the two attributions to Sebastian
38 Rifkin, '... Wobey aber die Sing-
are likewise independent. This, in fact,
stimmen hinlanglich besetzt seyn SIRINU
is the crux of the external argument for
mtissen ...', pp.16o-61, n.12. Jon Banks, Matthew Spring,
BWV1031; for both Penzel and C. P. E.
Henry Stobart, Sara Stowe
Bach have attributed to J. S. Bach else- 39 Rifkin, '... Wobey aber die Sing-
Ensembles of voices and Renaissance
where compositions whose authentic- stimmen hinlanglich besetzt seyn
instruments, working towards a dramatic
ity is highly questionable, if not alto- muissen ...', p.158, n.8. As Rifkin has feast of music from Renaissance Europe
suggested to me, the Leipzig perfor- and rural South America.
gether without credibility: in Penzel's
case the Christmas cantata Uns ist ein mance of the Magnificat may have Renaissance Music from
Kind geboren, BwV142; in the case of been under J. S. Bach's direction.
Emanuel the Suite in A major for
Europe & the New World
40 The title-page is ascribed to C. P. E.
violin and harpsichord obbligato,
Bach's 'late' script in Dadelsen, 6-13 August 1995
BwV1025.' In his reply to my paper at
Bemerkungen zur Handschrift Johann
the 1991 National Meeting of the Amer- Sebastian Bachs, seiner Familie und THE HILLIARD
ican Musicological Society Marshall
asserted that he merely wanted to show
seines Kreises (Trossingen, 1957), p.26.
ENSEMBLE
that one of the principal sources was 41 As Rifkin shows ('... Wobey aber
David James, Rogers Covey-Crump,
not copied from the other. die Singstimmen hinlinglich besetzt John Potter, Gordon Jones
seyn muissen ...', p.159), Hauptkopist
with Linda Hirst, Richard Wistreich,
35 See A. Dirr, Zur Chronologie der H and a second copyist, probably J. C.
composer-in-residence Piers
Leipziger Vokalwerke J. S. Bachs (Kassel, Bach, collaborated on the copying of Hellawell and other guests.
2/1976), p.149; G. von Dadelsen, a ripieno tenor part to C. P. E. Bach's
Intensive coaching on old and new music
Beitrige zur Chronologie der Werke Magnificat. Rifkin dates this part to for professional, aspiring professional or
Johann Sebastian Bachs, Ttibinger 1750. Hans-Joachim Schulze has shown advanced amateur vocal ensembles
Bach-Studien, iv-v (Trossingen, 1958), that J. C. Bach probably did not depart (individual singers may also apply).
p.112; P. Kast, Die Bach-Handschriften from Berlin until early 1755, not 1754 as Hilliard Summer Festival
der Berliner Staatsbibliothek, Ttibinger had been previously thought. See H.-J.
Bach-Studien, ii-iii (Trossingen, 1958), Schulze, 'Wann begann die "italien-
13-19 August 1995
p.138. For a discussion of the dating of ische Reise" der jtingsten Bach-Sohne?'
several sources copied by this scribe, Bach-Jahrbuch, lxix (1983), pp.119-22. THE PARLEY OF
including parts to the Magnificat,
H772/wq215 of C. P. E. Bach, see J.
42 The first movement in Penzel's INSTRUMENTS
copy, like that of Hauptkopist H, bears
Rifkin, '... Wobey aber die Singstim- Peter Holman (continuo), Judy Tarling (violins),
no tempo marking. One must assume Alison Crum (viols), Bruce Haynes (woodwind)
men hinlinglich besetzt seyn mtissen
.: Zum Credo der h-Moll Messe in that Sebastian Bach's examplar likewise Baroque string ensembles (viol, violin,
had no tempo marking over the first viola, cello, bass) with wind soloists
der Auffiihrung Carl Philipp Emanuel (Baroque recorder, flute, oboe, bassoon),
movement and that J. C. Bach merely
Bachs', Basler Jahrbuch fhr historische lute/theorbo and harpsichord. Focus on
added what he thought was a reason- English music including Boyce & Purcell.
Musikpraxis, ix (1985), pp.158-60. The
able tempo indication.
most recent discussion of the dating of
the sources copied by Hauptkopist H is 43 See K. Lehmann, 'Neues zur
Baroque Orchestra &
in Y. Kobayashi, 'Zur Chronologie der Vorgeschichte der Bach-Sammlung
Chamber Music
Spitwerke J. S. Bachs', Bach-Jahrbuch, Franz Hausers: Dokumente zum Enquiries are invited from individual players and
lxxiv (1988), p.33. Kobayashi suggests Uberlieferungskreis C. F. Penzel- singers, and vocal and instrumental ensembles of
J. G. Schuster aus dem Zeitraum good amateur or professional standard.
that Hauptkopist H's copy of swvio31
dates at the earliest from around the 1801-1833', Beitriige zur Bachforschung, Selene Mills * CEMSS e Trinity Hall
same time as his copy for Bach of the vi (1988), pp.69-70. As Lehmann Cambridge CB2 1TJ * UK
score to Handel's Brockes-Passion, Telephone / fax +44 1223 354096
points out (p.70), it is uncertain

EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 51

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mof:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 whether Penzel became a student of ship. U. Leisinger and P. Wollny,
University of Edinburgh Bach's directly upon his entry into '"Altes Zeug von mir": Carl Philipp
the Thomasschule. Penzel remained Emanuel Bachs kompositorisches
in Leipzig as a theology student until Schaffen vor 1740', Bach-Jahrbuch,
RUSSELL 1761. See R. Jones, 'Penzel, Christian lxxix (1993), pp.192-6, argues against
COLLECTION Friedrich', New Grove. Emanuel Bach's authorship on both
source-critical and stylistic grounds.
44 Penzel's earliest dated copies of
WORKSHOP PLANS Bach's works date from 1753. See 53 Qv2:35 also includes the same
PHOTOGRAPHS Lehmann, 'Neues zur Vorgeschichte movement types for the first and third
POSTCARDS der Bach-Sammlung Franz Hausers', movements, but has a cantabile in 3/4
P.71. instead of a siciliano as its second
RECORDINGS
movement.
of 45 Penzel's copy of BWvio31 is ascribed
the date 1755 in Y. Kobayashi, Franz 54 The second ritornello is in BE
EARLY KEYBOARD
Hauser und seine Bach-Handschriften- major, and the solo motto and cem-
INSTRUMENTS sammlung (diss., U. of G6ttingen, balo interlude (bars 58-63, first beat)
1973), p.389. On Penzel's role in the are in that key. The cembalo interlude,
also available preservation of Bach's works see unlike that in Bwvio31, does not
Schulze, Studien zur Bach- Oberliefer- modulate, but the repetition of the
CATALOGUE ung im 18. Jahrhundert (Leipzig, 1984), motto simply drops a 3rd to the tonic
pp.22, 93-4; and Kobayashi, Franz G minor and is followed, as in both
BRIEF GUIDE
Hauser, pp.o106-12. BWV1i31 and QV2:18, by the head
motive of the ritornello.
FREE LISTS FROM 46 See Kobayashi, Franz Hauser,
Publications Officer PP-174-9. 55 QV2:35/i returns to the tonic at the
St. Cecilia's Hall 47 See Marshall, 'J. S. Bach's composi- second ritornello, although the context
Cowgate tions for solo flute', P-472. is different from that in QV2:18 and
Edinburgh EHI 1LJ BWV1031. The return to the tonic at
48 For example, both sources share a
or immediately following the second
striking dissonance on the first beat of
ritornello seems to have been 'standard
bar 53 of the third movement that is
operating procedure' in Quantz's
wholly inconsistent with the way the
sonata movements in concerto form,
passage appears anywhere else in the
movement. since it occurs in all three surviving
IL BEL DANZARE works. A second similarity concerns
49 Diirr, 'Kritischer Bericht', p.39,
a brief passage in the siciliano move-
arrives at the same conclusion. ments of BWV1020 and Qv2:18. Both
Dances of Europe circa 1500
50 See H.-J. Schulze, Foreword to movements include a passage in which
Johann Sebastian Bach: Konzert c-Moll a stepwise descent in the flute compris-
ftir zwei Cembali und Streichorchester ing a chain of suspensions hovers over
Bwvlo62, Sonate A-Dur fiir Flote und quaver motion in the right hand of the
keyboard (or violin). Both of these pas-
HENGRAVE HALL Cembalo Bwv1032, Faksimile der auto-
graphen Partitur (Leipzig, 1979), sages occur at the same point in their
BURY ST EDMUNDS p.17-18; and Marshall, 'J. S. Bach's respective movements, following the
arrival at the dominant and the restate-
SUFFOLK compositions for solo flute', p.487.
ment of the opening material in the
21-28 JULY 1994 51 1 am thankful to Joshua Rifkin for new key. While this material is not
suggesting the relationship between the unique, its presence in analogous pas-
openings of Bwvio31 and Bwvio32. sages in two sonatas whose first move-
52 Durr, Foreword, p.ii. See also ments are related is probably not co-
incidental.
U. Siegele, Kompositionsweise und
For details send s.a.e. to
Bearbeitungstechnik in der Instru-
28th D.H.D.S. Summer School mentalmusik Johann Sebastian Bachs 56 BWV1020 is listed on p.12 of part 4
of the catalogue of 1763, while the two
Redmire, Ardley End, Hatfield (Neuhausen-Stuttgart, 1975), P.45. Two Quantz pieces are listed on p.13. See
further discussions of BWV1io2 have
Heath, Bishop's Stortford, Herts Breitkopf thematic catalogue, pp.126-7.
CM22 7AL appeared since the acceptance of this
article. L. E. Miller, 'C. P. E. Bach's 57 Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preutischer
sonatas for solo flute', lournal of musi- Kulturbesitz, Mus. ms. Bach P O1059
Reg. Charity No. 270896 cology, xi (1993), pp.231-4, also reviews (Diirr's Source A), in the hand of an
the sources for the piece and comes to unknown copyist of the second half
no conclusion concerning its author- of the 18th century. Schicht's name

52 EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995

This content downloaded from

109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
appears on the manuscript as the
owner. See Dairr, 'Kritischer Bericht',
p.40.
58 Vienna, Gesellschaft der Musik-
freunde, XI 36271.
59 Y. Kobayashi, 'Neuerkenntnisse
zu einigen Bach-Quellen an Hand
schriftlicher Untersuchung', Bach-
Jahrbuch, lxiv (1978), PP-52-3.
6o The six initial parts of the Cata-
logue contain numerous works of both
Quantz and C. P. E. Bach, including
trios. Still, the close juxtaposition of
three works which are related to one
another is striking. For a further dis-
cussion of the Leipzig origin of some
of Breitkopf's sources see A. G16ckner,
'Handschriftliche Musikalien aus den
Nachlissen von Carl Gotthelf Gerlach
und Gottlob Harrer in den Verlags-
angeboten des Hauses Breitkopf
1761-1769', Bach-Jahrbuch, lxx (1984),
pp.107-16.
61 According to Eugene Helm, Michel
probably produced additional copies
after C. P. E. Bach's death in order
to oblige requests to C. P. E. Bach's
Pierre
Etcheg yen
BAROQUE FLUTES
MAKER
Historical Wind
Instruments
After
Museum Originals
Please request my catalogue
Pierre ETCHEGOYEN
La Croix-Rouge
19150 Lagarde-Enval
France
Tel. (01.033) 55.27.17.82
109.164.255.121 on Mon, 04 Oct 2021 15:25:00 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
widow for copies of her late husband's 67 While Bwv10o31 bears little stylistic
works. See E. Helm, Thematic catalogue resemblance to the trio sonata from the
of the works of Carl Philipp Emanuel
Bach (New Haven, CT, 1989), p.xxiii.
62 Kobayashi, 'Neuerkenntnisse zu
einigen Bach-Quellen', p.53.
63 C. P. E. Bach employs a ritornello
structure in the first movement of the
Sonata in B minor for violin and cem-
balo, H512/wq76. The work, however,
dates from 1763 and is composed in a
much later style than BwvIo2o.
64 See The catalog of Carl Philipp
Emanuel Bach's estate: a facsimile of the
edition by Schniebes, Hamburg, 1790,
ed. R. Wade (New York, 1981).
65 For a similar conclusion see
Eppstein, Studien, p.180.
66 There are no grounds to accept
Marshall's thesis ('J. S. Bach's composi- initial motive. Thus, the opening
tions for solo flute', p.473) that the
work must have been composed before ject, is not dependent on the a priori
C. P. E. Bach's departure from Leipzig working out against the Thema regium.
in 1734, a date that is carried over in the
work-list in The new Grove Bach family,
p.212.
BRESCIA
EARLY ORGAN
AND HARPSICHORD
COURSES
July 18-22
BRETT LEIGHTON
German music
July 20-26
DESMOND HUNTER
English music
July 24-28
CHRISTOPHER STEMBRIDGE
Italian & Spanish music
Scuola Diocesana di Musica
S. Cecilia
Via Bollani, 20
25123 BRESCIA - Italy
Fax (+ 39) 30 371 2227
EARLY MUSIC FEBRUARY 1995 53
This content downloaded from
Musical offering, BwvIo79, a work asso-
ciated with the 1747 visit, or the Sonata
for flute and continuo in E major,
Bwvio35, which may have been associ-
ated with that visit, one cannot over-
look the similarity between the open-
ing flute 'solo' theme of the first
movement in QV2:18 and the beginning
of the fugal theme of the second move-
ment of the Musical offering trio. This
is especially evident when the 'solo'
theme appears in C minor in bars
30-31. If this is indeed more than mere
coincidence, then the fugal theme
could be understood as a subtle
homage to Quantz. Although the fugal
theme must fit contrapuntally against
the Thema regium, which serves as its
countersubject later in the movement,
the Thema regium only enters after this
motive, unlike the rest of the fugal sub-
New from STIMU
(Foundation for Historical
Performance Practice)
Aspects of the Historical Harp
Proceedings of the International Historical
Harp Symposium Utrecht 1992
(Martin van Schaik, ed.)
Articles by Cristina Bordas, Silke Leopold,
Joan Rimmer, and others.
ISBN 90-72786-05-X.
FORTHCOMING:
The Recorder in the 17th Century
Proceedings of the International Recorder
Symposium Utrecht 1993
(David Lasocki, ed.)
Articles by B arhold Kuijken, David Lasocki,
Thiemo Wind, and others.
STIMU
Postbox 565
NL-3500 AN Utrecht
The Netherlands
tel +31-30-362250 I
fax +31-30-322798