Introduction
Sources
Instrumentation
Interpretation
Endnotes

Zelenka's six Trio Sonatas (Z181) are amongst the most extraordinary chamber music works of the 18th-century, and are undoubtedly the most challenging pieces written for Baroque double reed instruments. More than any contemporary works, they struggle from their trio-sonata strait-jacket. Sonata V is a hybrid trio sonata-triple concerto modeled on the Italian three-movement plan, complete with tutti ritornelli and solo passages in the opening movement. All the sonatas are "larger than life" and display the virtuosity of composer and performer alike. Despite the larger number of his sacred and instrumental works composed for the court of the Saxon Electors and Polish Kings in Dresden where he was employed as bassist and composer, Zelenka's music has only recently attracted the interest of the 20th century musicians and public.[1] During his lifetime, his work was appreciated only by a select audience (including Telemann and J.S. Bach). This was due in part to the Electors' restrictions on the printing of works by musicians in their employ. Although he was given the title of Kirchenkomponist in 1735 (a year before J.S. Bach received the same title), his requests for reimbursement for expenses in court activities remained ignored.[2] A definitive biography is yet to be published and many lacunae exist in our understanding of the life and character of this fascinating musician.[3]

Sources[4]

An autograph score of all six sonatas, and partially autographic parts for Sonatas II, IV and V, are held in the Sächsische Landesbibliothek, Dresden (Mus 2358/Q/1 and Mus 2358/Q/3).[5] All the performance material for Sonata II, except the "Violone ò Basso Continuo" part, are in the hand of an anonymous copyist - probably Troyer.[6] Because the basso continuo does not appear in the score, a copyist could not have been assigned the task of reproducing it, so Zelenka created the part by simplifying the bassoon line. As an example of the technique of reducing a bass line for continuo and violone, this source is most informative. It goes beyond the recommendations of Corrette found in his Méthodes pour apprendre à jouër de la ContraBass à 3. à 4. et à 5. cordes ... [7] or those in Quantz's Versuch.[8]

All the parts of Sonata IV were copied by Zelenka. Possibly because the performers considered the original too strenuous, bars 83-131 in the 2nd movement and 145-179 in the 4th were later deleted from the parts. Pages 4, 5 and 6 of the Ist oboe part and 3 -6 of the bassoon part were recopied with the cuts in the same hand as the parts of Sonata II, while the 2nd oboe and "Violone ò Tiorba" parts were amended by blank paper being stuck over the suppressed sections. In the case of Sonata V, all performance material is in the hand of the copyist but for the figures in the continuo part which Zelenka added.

Schoenbaum, who was the first to draw attention to the Sonatas in this century, hypothesized that they may have been written for Charles VI's coronation festivities in Prague, 1723.[9] This was disputed by Unverricht, who believed the trios dated from the period 1714 to 1716 (based on an examination of the watermarks - indicating that the paper was made in Prague between 1714 and 1717) - details in the calligraphy which he argued were characteristic of Zelenka's hand up to when he wrote the score of the Offeratorium de Beata Virgine Maria inscribed "Wien, 1716".[10] This evidence has in turn been called into question and a date of c.1721-22 proposed by Wolfgang Reich.[11] The Trios may still have been intended for performance at Prague: perhaps members of the group of 20 musicians who accompanied Charles from Vienna[12]or players from Prague were involved in the Trios' first performance(s). It is equally likely that Zelenka wrote the Trios with his colleagues from the circle of leading Dresden musicians in mind. They too would have been present at the Prague festivities.[13] Francois La Riche, one of the most famous oboists of his day, was employed at the Saxon court from c.1700. An interval entertainment at the Lincoln's Inn Fields Theatre on 22 September, 1700 was advertised as being given

... by the famous Mons. Li Rich [sic], lately arrived from the court of Poland, being the only and last time of performing the said entertainment, or any other, by reason of his sudden return to the said kingdom.[14]

La Riche had presumably won fame on his previous sojourn in England when he worked for James II and William III. As well as being the highest paid instrumentalist in Dresden in 1719,[15] he appears to have worked at other courts, including Berlin and Vienna.[16] The last reference to him in extant Dresden court records dates from 1733, but how much of his time before this was spent as a court musician is not known.[17] La Riche's association with the Trios is therefore difficult to substantiate, particularly as it is likely that he would have taken part in performances only on appropriately auspicious occasions. A more confident suggestion is that La Riche's pupil, Johann Christian Richter (1689-1744) may have taken part in performances of the Trios. Richter was employed in Dresden from 1709 to 1744. Along with La Riche, he was one of the four dedicatees of Telemann's Petite Musique de Chambre of 1716[18] - an account of his notoriety as an oboist. His name appears against oboe and chalumeau solos in Zelenka's orchestral parts. It is also likely that Vivaldi wrote his Oboe Sonata (RV 53) and C major Concerto (RV 447) for him.

If one of these players were not involved, it would be mere speculation as to who from the court did play. No less uncertain is it to say that either Volumier, or Pisendel, who succeeded him as Konzertmeister, was the violinist.

The names of the bassoonists Johann Gottfried Böhme and Jean Cadet appear in Dresden court orchestra lists from the 2nd decade of the 18th-century. Cadet's presence can be traced back to 1711 when he was principal; Böhme's name first appears in payment lists of 1717. They vied for the best job until the late 1730's (when Cadet apparently retired or died). Regretfully it is not possible to say more than that it is possible that one of these two played Zelenka's Trios.

As for continuo players, it would seem likely that Sylvius Leopold Weiss played the theorbo and the composer the violone.

From the number of corrections and changes made in the score, it would appear that Zelenka was composing as he wrote. An example is the reshaping to which the first theme of IV/2 was subjected: the interpolated diminutions became ingredients of this melody whenever it recurred. (see fig. 1)[19] On the other hand, at least one movement was lifted from from an earlier work. VI/3 is a remodeling of the Andante from Capriccio No. 4 (dated "Wien 20, Oktober, 1718"). Zelenka made some minor changes and transposed it all down a tone. Starting in bar 14, he mistakenly copied bars 13-17 of the bass-line at the higher pitch. The transposition is corrected on the staff below.

Unverricht was of the opinion that the performance material is a more reliable source of the composer's intentions than the score.[20] In fact Zelenka went on revising the music after the parts were copied.[21] That he retained the unabridged versions of IV/2 and 4 in the score suggests that he viewed the shortened form in the revised parts as a compromise. Nor do the parts always contain more performance instructions: either the copyist omitted all dynamics from the parts of Sonata II, or they too were added later to the score. Conversely, the articulation at IV/4,67,2nd is explained more clearly by the notation in the parts (see fig. 2a.b).

Generally, all details from the score were copied unquestioningly into the parts, resulting in many duplications of obvious oversights - by Zelenka as well as the copyist. It is, consequently, necessary to take heed of the score as much as the parts.

Instrumentation...

The instruments listed in the scores of sonatas I and II are "Hautbois" and "Basson", for Sonata III, "Violino", "Hautbois" and "Basson". The next sonata bears the title Num:4 a 2 Hautbois et dui Bassi obligati. Apparently Zelenka had initially decided to write this sonata for violin, oboe and two "bassoni". This instrumentation appears on an empty set of staves on the page preceeding Sonata IV. Although not marked, the instrumentation of the remaining sonatas is assumed to be the same as for Sonata IV.

Instrumental indications vary slightly in the parts. The title pages of the parts of II and IV list

The same instruments are prescribed on the parts themselves, but the continuo part of IV is labeled "Violone o Tiorba". Those for Sonata V indicate the same as for IV but there remains no title page.

Only the two oboe and the bassoon parts are given in the score of Sonatas I,II,III and the first two movements of IV but there is an extra continuo part for Sonata IL This suggests that Zelenka decided a bass part could be constructed by simplifying the bassoon line in those sonatas without the fourth part notated in the score: if not at the sonatas' conception, when the music was being prepared for performance. Thus, the description con dui bassi obligati would be fitting for the whole set. This argument is strengthened by the fact that the bass of Sonata II contains less melodic interest and is less soloistic than that of the Trio/Quartets IV-VI. From IV/3, the four parts appear in the score, but the basso continuo remains a simplification of the bassoon line apart from sections where the texture is thinned by dropping the continuo, occasional four-part contrapuntal passages, and where the continuo provides independent harmonic support to a bassoon solo.

Zelenka used the full range of the 2/3-keyed oboe of the early 18th-century as given by the majority of contemporary fingering charts: viz. c'-d"" with all intervening chromatic notes, including c#' which was difficult to play as it required half-closing the C key and/or embouchure adjustment. It is listed in only 7 of the 26 fingering charts collated in Bruce Haynes' "Oboe Fingering Charts 1695-1816".[22] The most interesting for us is the fingering chart found in James Talbot's papers which was supplied along with the measurements of his oboe and reeds by "Mr La Riche" while he was working in England in the last years of the 17th-century.[23] His connection with Dresden has already been noted. The fingering for c#' given by Talbot is the same as for c natural' (all holes closed): the pitch was adjusted by blowing harder.[24] Zelenka wrote this note only twice in the Trios. The passage at VI/3,16.2nd is particularly difficult because the d b ' is followed by an e b ', necessitating sliding the 4th finger RH from the C to Eb key.

The same difficulties are not present in the version of this movement one tone higher in the Capriccio IV. The other c#' is at III/2,73,2nd.

The upper limit of the range of the oboe is never exceeded,[25] but one low B occurs. This is at the end of a long solo passage for the 1st oboe in I/2.

In the autograph, it can be seen that the b replaces a scratched-out e", so the b was no mistake. How was it played? The only author to include this note in a fingering chart, thus showing that it was known to players of 2/3-keyed oboes, was Minguet y Yrol .[26] Unfortunately, he does not give clear instructions on how the note was played apart from indicating that the low C fingering was used. It may have been "lipped down", or "faked" by blocking the holes on the bell (if seated, the player can do this with his knees).

Also Zelenka exercised wisdom in choosing tonalities and note combinations appropriate to the oboe. Like other Baroque wind instruments, the early 18th-century oboe was suited to a limited number of keys in which performance was both technically fluent and in which intonation problems were minimized. Composers preferred writing for the oboe in keys with up to three flats. Because of the predominance of forked fingerings which had to be "lipped down" to sound in tune, a darker tone-colour resulted than in keys with sharps.[27] All of Zelenka's Trios have flat key-signatures: I:F; II:gmin; III:Bb; IV:gmin; V:F; VI:cmin. The combination bb'-a' is particularly difficult on the Baroque oboe because it requires the synchronization of two adjacent fingers of the left hand - one opening, the other closing a hole. The result of repeated oscillation between these two notes can be "messy". Zelenka usually avoided this: a notable exception is the tour de force for Ist oboe in V/3.

The bassoon part is confined to the range Bb-g'. Like the oboe, more than one note was available when all the holes of the instrument were blocked. The basic pitch was Bb., but it could be lipped up or down to give A- or B-natural[28] Only Bb appears in the Trios.

One of the criticisms of Zelenka's Trios is that they are extremely strenuous for wind players: their seemingly endless sequences and interlocking phrases provide little opportunity for breathing. In fact, Zelenka did concede to this necessity of wind technique.[29] In IV/3, halts of half a bar's duration occur in the bassoon part in an otherwise uninterrupted flow of arpeggios (bars 7, 23 and 27). As they do not coincide with any cadences or cessations in the other parts, they appear to have been included solely for the purpose of allowing the player to breathe (see fig.6).

Probably the most difficult passage for the bassoonist is V/3,179f. Zelenka offered two alternatives for bars 184-187, written on the empty oboe staves in the score (fig.7).

The prescribed continuo group is "violone o tiorba". Many Italian chamber works, of the second half of the 17th- and early 18th-century indicate this combination in conjunction with an organ:[30] a precedent of considerable importance in Dresden, the "Florence of the Elbe". If Zelenka expected a keyboard player to read from the continuo part, it is strange that it is marked "violone o tiorba", and not "violone o tiorba o organo" for example.[31] Nor was it customary for the keyboard player to use the score, particularly where it is unfigured, does not contain cuts, indications of where the continuo group is to drop out or simplify the bass line, and uncorrected wrong notes (see particularly the nonsensical harmony at 1/2,39). The authentic instrumentation casts a very different light on the balance of the ensemble. Perhaps because of difficulties balancing the lute against the other instruments, it is usually replaced by a harpsichord in modern performances.

To decide which of the numerous string bass instruments called "violone" Zelenka wrote for in the Trios, the question of whether it sounded at 8' or 16' pitch must be answered. Zelenka carefully avoided notes lower than C in the continuo line. An example: at the end of the descending scale in V/3,187, the continuo jumps a 7th to B b. In the first version, the bassoon plays a D below this B b, resulting in a 6/3 chord. This anomaly can be resolved if the violone plays an octave lower (see fig. 7). Consequently, it would appear that the bottom string on Zelenka's violone was tuned to C% There is only one other place which provides concrete evidence to support the theory that the violone is to play an 8va lower than notated (V/1,58). Elsewhere Zelenka modified the bassoon line to accommodate the continuo, implying the dui bassi played at different octaves.[32] But this is exceptional. To stick by the letter and play the whole violone part at 16' creates a "muddy" texture. As Zelenka would almost certainly have played the part himself, he may have felt it unnecessary to show all the octave transpositions: he preferred to leave the part at the correct octave for the theorbo.

The presence of Sylvius Leopold Weiss at Dresden and the 1723 Prague festivities[33] was no doubt an incentive for Zelenka to include a theorbo in the Trios. Weiss' abilities as a soloist and accompanist were well known. E.G. Baron stated in Untersuchung des Instruments der Lauten[34] that Weiss played thorough bass in church and orchestra on either lute or tiorba and that his theorbo was tuned in die neue Lauten -Stimmung.[35] The advantage of this was that he could swap from lute "without having to suddenly rethink everything when he picked up the old theorbo."[36]

The figures in the continuo part show the notes in the other parts. Suspensions are generally fully figured although they would not have been played by the continuo as this results in a doubling of one of the upper parts. Zelenka usually notated the figures according to the part in which the note appeared. i.e. if the top voice plays the 4th above the bass, he wrote 4/6 instead of the more usual 6/4.[37] 6/5 harmony is frequently given as 5/3. Another irregularity is the appearance is figures in the unisoni passages at V/1,65,80f; in analogous places tasto solo is indicated.

I have tried to show that Zelenka was, by and large, considerate of the technical demands of the instruments for which he was writing. Baroque composers usually wrote music with specific instruments in mind. The alternatives listed on the title pages of printed music were designed to increase sales, or show the various, not alternative, instrumental combinations. (Eg. Zelenka's Trios could have been labelled "...for 2 oboes or violin and oboe..." not meaning that all sonatas could be performed with either instrumentation but that there were in the collection works suited to both combinations.)[38] Transcription was part of Baroque instrumental practice, but I believe that the effectiveness of these Trios would be damaged by using instruments other than those specified. Part of the effect is in the virtuosity required to play this demanding music on wind instruments. The written-in ambiguities of line (eg. where the two oboes share the theme at the end of 11/2) and the grating dissonances rely upon the sound of oboes to "come off".

Interpretation...

Zelenka's Trios present a multitude of interpretational problems, resulting mostly from notational inconsistencies, Should these be resolved by the interpreter? To answer this let me draw a literary analogy. Until spelling was standardized, a word was spelt the way it sounded to the person writing it, so, different spellings often reflected differences of pronunciation. But when they occur in the same text, this would not be the case. Likewise, the " spelling-out " of the individual notes, rhythms and articulations of a musical "word" or phrase may differ as it recurs in a score, but if it retains the same meaning throughout, is there any justification for pronouncing it differently? It could be argued that to repeat a phrase is to change its emphasis and the dictates of musical rhetoric require that it be given a different inflexion. Now, the distinction between inflexion, pronunciation and meaning are subtle. Changes of pitch affect meaning directly; articulation, dynamics and timbre affect it less: they are methods of varying inflexion; while rhythmic changes can transform meaning or, less obviously, vary its inflexion or pronunciation.

The anomalies in Zelenka's Trios are of various types: a) those due to notational inaccuracy, ambiguity or carelessness; b) those stemming from the degree of detail offered at comparable locations and c) those resulting from Zelenka's method of working. I will discuss each of these in turn.

a) It is frequently impossible to tell on exactly which notes a slur begins and ends or to which note an accidental applies. An example of a simple error of notation is the misplaced ties in V/2. Surely the F# should be re-articulated and tied to the 2nd beat of the following bar, bringing it into line with other appearances of the same theme (see facsim. of V/2,fig.8).[39]

Figure 8

On occasions, Zelenka absentmindedly forgot the key signature and omitted necessary accidentals. II/2,20 is a case in point. An e-natural is required at the cadence to d minor (see fig.9).

Other discrepancies are simply omission like the slurs missing in one of the oboe parts where it moves in parallel motion with the other which is slurred (11/3,42, fig. 10).

b) It is less often that information is contradictory, but that the degree of detail differs. That some semiquaver figures in III/I are not slurred does not mean that they must be articulated in contrast with analogous figures notated more carefully with a slur. Quantz's advice that

... if many figures of the same sort follow one another, and the bowing of only the first is indicated, the others must be played in the same manner as long as no other species of notes appears... [and that] if they are not, the desired effect will not be produced, and perfect uniformity of expression will never be achieved ...[40]

seems appropriate.

c) Frequently it is not the first occurrence of a theme which is the most carefully notated. As he wrote a movement, Zelenka's ideas developed, and he would add more detail to the notation of his themes, not bothering to revise their earlier appearances. Later in the movement, he may have referred again to the opening and copied the theme without bringing it into line with the modifications he had made. This may explain how some notational inconsistencies came about: it does not justify keeping them in performance. To retain this sort of inconsistency would be illogical. I advocate a jigsaw editorial approach: to fill in missing details from where the same music was more carefully notated. Note also that as the first appearance of a theme is not always the model for subsequent recurrences,[41] the music must have been rehearsed and the details remembered. The business of sorting out these discrepancies would have been speeded up by the presence of the composer at rehearsals.

In V/3,76-80,2nd and transposed reappearances in 88-91, 1st and 97-101, 1st, the copyist added slurs to the auxiliary note pattern. On the first occurrence, they coincide with the piano marking, in the second, the f-p contrast in the score has been reversed and slurs again added to the second pair of bars in the parts. In 97-101, slurs occur in only the first two of the four bars marked f in the score, omitted from the part.

Were the slurs intended to enhance the piano effect - meaning bars 76-80 are the model for the figure, or should each four bar passage be slurred for the sake of "uniformity of expression"? Zelenka himself hardly ever marked slurs on this figure; those added by the copyist may reflect a prevailing habit of interpretation. That the composer expected players would add some slurs in fast passages seems evident from the staccato dashes he notated above the first of the semiquavers in V/4,5,44,50, etc.

The examples above refer to matters of pronunciation and inflexion: more closely affecting the meaning of phrases are the following cases concerning accidentals. The motif in fig.11 occurs four times in 1/2. In 1/2, 20, it appears that Zelenka wanted a minor 3rd on the piano echo, but at every other occurrence both antecedent and echo are minor forms. (Each time both notes are flattened, except in bar 94 where no accidental is necessary to indicate this.)

There are countless similar examples, including the nine contradictory spellings of the motif at VI/2,32-38 (fig. 13)

All are harmonized in the same way. a is always a semitonal auxiliary-note pattern followed by an ascending tone; c always consists of two tone steps; but b is four times like c, but needing no accidentals, and once like c with two naturals clearly marked. Is any resolution possible or necessary? The confusion is compounded by Zelenka's non-systematic use of accidental signs.[42] Did he occasionally expect accidentals to operate retrospectively? Eg. the final cadence of IV/3 (fig. 14)

He seems to have assumed that performers would apply some musica ficta when he wrote figures such as this:

The B natural is confirmed in the Ist oboe part which imitates the 2nd a bar later.

The majority of rhythmic incongruities appear in the slow movements. Fig. 15 shows the variants of the theme in 1/3.[43]

In an immediate imitation, we would expect at least the rhythm to be the same! Otherwise the canon would not be obeyed. It is true that the 18th-century was seeking new values: divine rule/canon was losing its authority. A humanistic philosophy, focusing on the individual, passionate voice was taking shape in the arts. Genuine expression was preferred over the hollow passions of rhetoric.[44] Quantz and C.P.E. Bach were not content with "...an accompanist who merely reads and plays figures in the manner of a born pedant, one who memorizes the rules..."[45] Slight uneveness emphasizes the passionate, human element in performance. Still, to a devout Catholic like Zelenka, the theme of divine order would have been important in his music. He was clearly of two minds about the rhythm after the tied minim in the theme of 1/3, and there is, indeed, little difference between the two versions. Is the explanation of the inconsistent dotting that he was trying to indicate a (consistent) rhythmic inequality, more subtle than the 3:1 ratio of the notation? Zelenka may have conceived his motifs with a gentle lilt in mind. Playing notes inégales is a way of introducing a passionate element into the performance and ironing out the rhythmic inconsistencies. The practice of prolonging the first note of each pair, an essential ingredient of French Baroque performance, would not have been unknown in Dresden where several French musicians had been employed from the beginning of the 18th-century, including players in influential positions - the Konzertmeister, Volumier and senior oboist, La Riche. A French musician would automatically provide the effect, a German may need reminding, hence the mixture of dotted and undotted rhythms.

In discussing Zelenka's Trio Sonatas, I have left many questions unanswered, but hope my probing will be thought- provoking. With greater understanding of the composer's character and activities, we may be able to interpret his music in a more authoritative way.

ENDNOTES

1. The majority of his sacred music is now being made available by Carus Verlag (Stuttgart), Hanssler Verlag and in Das Erbe Deutsche Musik.

2. Zelenka's letter of application is duplicated in J. Buzga, "Dokumenty o usoben5] J.D. Zelenky v Sask9 Dvorn5] Kapell v Dr5azoaneeh" (Documents on J.D. Zelenka's work in the Saxon Court Orchestra in Dresden), Hudební Veda, 12, p.87.

3. For an outline of Zelenka's life see M. Furstenau, Beiträg zur Geschichte der Koniglich sächsischen musikalischen Kapelle, (Dresden, 1849); record notes accompanying Zelenka, Die Orchesterwerke, Arkiv 2565 900-101 (1978). The appearance of Suzanne Orchmann's much more extensive research is eagerly awaited.

4. The Trios are published by Barenreiter in the Hortus Musicus series nos. 126 (1,1955), 132 (VI,1957), 157 (V,1959), 177 (111,1961), 188 (11,1965), ed. by C. Schoenbaum. Unverricht was the first to point out the shortcomings of this edition based only on the autographic score, containing many misreadings, printing errors and which does not distinguish editorial changes from the authentic text. (MGG, "Zelenka"; "Einige Bermerkungen", p.329.) For this reason the present paper is based on the original material.

5. A 19th-century copy of the score prepared for Furstenau is at 2358/Q/2.

6. Troyer was a violinist at the Dresden court and is known to have been engaged as a copyist by Zelenka. Unverricht suggested the hand may have been that of the court copyist, J.J. Lindler "Einige Bemerkungen zur 4. Sonate von J.D. Zelenka", Musikforschung, 13,p.330).

7. Paris, 1781, repr. Minkoff, Geneva, 1977.

8. Versuch einer Anweisung die Flöte traversiere zu spielen,
Berlin, 1752, VII,v,7.

9. "Die Kammermusikwerke des J.D. Zelenka (1679-1745)", in Bericht über den internationalen Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongress Wien Mozartjahr, 1956, ed. E. Schenk, Hermann Bohlaus, Graz and Cologne, 1958, p.557.

10. "Zur Datierung der Bläsersonaten von J.D. Zelenka", Musikforschung, 15, p.265.

11. Jan Dismas Zelenka: Thematisch-systematisches Verzeichnis der musikalischen Werke (ZWV), (Stuthen und Materialen zur Musikgeschichte Dresdens), Sachsische Landesbibliothek, Dresden, 1985.

12. J.J. Quantz, "Hernn Johann Joachim Quantz ens Lebenslauf, von ihm selbst enworfen", trans. as "The Life of Herr Johann Joachim Quantz as sketched by himself", in P. Nettl, Forgotten Musicians, Philosophical Library, 1951 -1 repr. Greenwood Press, New York, 1969, p.294.

13. Most of my information on Dresden musicians is from M. Furstenau, Zur geschichte der Musik und des Theaters am Hofe zu Dresden, Kuntze, Dresden, 1861-2; repr. Leipzig, Peters, 1971. A more comprehensive study of wind instruments and players in Dresden is forthcoming in H. Heyde, Die Bedeutung der Bläserinstrumente im Schaffen von Johann Joseph Fux.

14. Quoted by D. Lasocki in "Professional Recorder Playing in England, 1540-1740", Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Iowa, 1983, p.957.

15. W. Kahl, Selbsibiographien deutscher Musiker des XVIII Jahrhunderts, Cologne, 1948, p.273, n.426.

16. G.P. Telemann, "Selbstbiographie", trans. S.Goodman in The Consort, 10, p.25.

17. It is suspected that his large salary takes into account an honorarium for his diplomatic activities.

18. Facsim. ed. with intro. by Bruce Haynes Musica Musica, Basle 1973. The other oboists were Peter Blosch of Berlin and Michael Bohmen of Darmstadt.

19. Locations in the sonatas are abbreviated as follows: Sonata (I-VI)/movement, bar no., part
(Ist=lst oboe, 2nd=2nd oboe, vl=violin, bn =bassoon, bc =basso continuo).

20. " Zu Schonbaums Ausgaben von Zelenkas Blasersonaten", Musikforschung, 22, p.342.

21. A number of changes were made to Sonata II. Details in the version retained in the parts were scratched from the score and revised. 11/2,26f, 2nd changed to

Staccato indications for 2nd theme of 11/2 probably

added at the same time. II/2,91,2nd: repeated notes in place of tie over bar line. Notes were deleted and rests substituted in II/2, 122, 2nd

became

in II/3,37,lst and 2nd. In II/3,lst an appoggiatura was added to the first note. Figuration in II/4,120,lst and 128, lst was changed as were notes in II/4,188, bc and 217, bn.

22. Galpin Society Journal, 31, p.68. The sources are: J[ohn] B[annisterl, The Sprightly Companion (London, 1695); Talbot, Mus.MS 1187, Christchurch Oxford; J.-P. Freillon-Poncein, La Véritable Manière d'Apprendre à jouer en perfection du Hautbois..., (Paris, 1700); P.Miguet y Yrol, Reglas y Advertencias Generales..., (Madrid, 1754); J. Verschuere-Reynvaan, Musikijkaal Kunst-Wordenboek, (Amsterdam, c.1770); V. Paneraj, Principi di Musica (Venice, c.1770); [Anon.], Principi di Musica, (Florence, c.1770). At least one writer found the low C on the oboe unsatisfactory. Francoeur says "L'Ut gravei est toujours faux: c'est-à-dire trop haut pour être considéré comme naturel et trop bas pour être dièse, meme en forçant. (Diapason general de tous les instruments a vent... [the low C is always out of tune: that is to say too high to be considered as a natural, and too low to be sharp - even when forcing], Paris, 1772, repr. Minkoff, 1972, p. 13.

23. In an unpublished paper Haynes speculates that La Riche's oboe may have been made by Bressan and compares it with the anonymous "Galpin" oboe in the Bate Collection which plays well with reeds of similar dimensions to those given by Talbot. ("Talbot's 'French Hautbois' by Bressan and its reed").

24. Haynes "Oboe Fingering Charts", p.93, n.53. E. Halfpenny states incorrectly that it gives a half-hole fingering ("The French Hautbois: A Technical Survey," Galpin Society Journal, 6, p.51). Excerpts from Talbot's NIS are printed in A. Baines," James Talbot's Manuscript... I: Wind Instruments," GSJ, 1, p.13.

25. The earliest source giving fingerings for notes above d ... is P. Minguet y Yrol, op.cit. (1754). This does not rule out the possibility that some oboists were playing higher notes for some time before this.

26. op. cit.

27. See B. Haynes, "Tonality and the Baroque Oboe", Early Music, 7, p. 357 and the tabulation of tonalities of oboe solos by Bach, Telemann and Handel in "Questions of Tonality in Bach's Cantatas: The Woodwind Perspective [part 2]", Journal of the American Musical Instrument Society, 1986, p.55.

28. Diderot and d'Alembert, Encyclopedie, referred to by L. Langwill in The Bassoon and ContraBassoon, (Ernest Benn Ltd., London, 1965) describe how these notes were available "sans deboucher aucun trou, par la seule maniere de pousser le vent dans l'instrument " [without opening any holes - only by the technique of blowing].

29. Circular-breathing greatly extends the sections of music able to be played in one breath, but is referred to only from the 19th-century - and even then as an exceptional phenomenon.

30. See R. Spencer, "Chitarrone, Theorbo, and Archlute ", Early Music, 4, p. 411.

31. In this context, "o" and "e" are interchangeable. (See C. Hogwood, The Trio Sonata, BBC Music Guide, London, 1972, p.11.)

32. Eg. compare score and parts of IV/1.

33. Quantz, "Life", p.297.

34. Nuremberg, 1727, p.78. 131.

35. Spencer calls this "the normal d minor tuning used for solo music", op.cit., p.428.

36. Ibid, p.419.

37. A detailed analysis of these idiosyncracies forms the basis of Jan Stockigt's system of dating Zelenka's MSS (Ph.D. diss., Univ. of Melbourne, Australia, in preparation).

38. See T. Best, "Handel's Solo Sonatas", Music and Letters , 63, p.430.

39. Note that the rhythm of the 2nd bar as given by Schoenbaum is quite incorrect. Original:

Schoenbaum:

40. Versuch, XVII, ii, 5, n..NB Quantz studied with Zelenka in Vienna in 1717 and worked for several years in Dresden.

41. As the case with many 18th-century editions and MSS.

42. Zelenka followed the general rules for marking accidentals used by 18th-century composers: an accidental affects only the note to which it is prefixed (except in the case of repeated notes and octaves); a sharp is contradicted by a flat sign (except in the case of B and E where a natural is used). In the text I speak of nonsystematic usage within this framework.

43. Zelenka was of the habit of writing two bars between the pre-ruled barlines of the score to save space in movements where there were few notes per bar. The same occurs in 11/3, 111/4, and V/1. Apparently the copyist understood that as the length of the bars in V/1 is corrected in the parts.

44. See P. Williams, "The Snares and Delusions of Musical Rhetoric, Some Examples from Recent Writings on J.S. Bach," Alte Musik: Praxis und Reflexion, Amadeus, 1983, p.230.

45. C.P.E. Bach, Versuch uber die Wahre Art des Clavier zu Spielen, Pt.II, 1762, intro. 10. Quantz expressed a similar opinion in his Versuch, XVII,vi,3.

Table of Contents