i ntrodu ction

This volume contains Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach’s sixteen ment.4 There is no evidence of anything similar occurring
extant solo sonatas: one for unaccompanied flute and fif- with Bach’s works.
teen for wind or string instruments with basso continuo. In his Autobiography (p. 207), Bach refers to his solo
The compositions with basso continuo, which contempo- sonatas as “18 Solos für andere Instrumente als das Cla-
rary sources most often refer to simply as “solos,” comprise vier”5—virtually the same phrase used in his estate cata-
eleven works for flute, two for viola da gamba, and one each logue (NV 1790). The latter has nineteen entries for in-
for oboe and for harp. Manuscripts for the flute sonatas dividual “soli” (NV 1790, pp. 48–51), including musical
with basso continuo were discovered in the music archive incipits for those that remained unpublished, and gives
of the Sing-Akademie zu Berlin when that collection, dates and places of composition for all but the first two.
lost since World War II, resurfaced in 1999. These eleven The Autobiography accounts for all but the last solo sonata,
works, all but one previously known only in single sources, written in 1786. Charles Burney, who met Bach in Hamburg
are edited in the present volume using Sing-Akademie in 1772, published Bach’s summary of works in English as
manuscripts in the hand of Bach’s chief Hamburg copyist “eighteen solos, for different instruments.”6
as the principal sources.1 The works in the present volume coincide with those
By the 1720s, when C. P. E. Bach was growing up in listed as “soli” in NV 1790, with the exception of two duets
Leipzig, italianate solo sonatas with four movements for melody instruments recorded there as items 16 and 17
in the succession slow–quick–slow–quick were giving (Wq 140 and 141), and a lost violoncello sonata, item 10.
way to three-movement works containing a single slow NV 1790 incorrectly lists item 11 as a work for flute rather
movement.2 During the 1730s and 1740s, one variety of than viola da gamba, an error that Bach’s widow mentions
three-movement work, with movements in the sequence in her correspondence (see “Evaluation of Sources” in the
slow–quick(er)–quick, came to dominate among sonatas critical report). Table 1 summarizes the information from
composed at Dresden and Berlin. It was this type, exempli- NV 1790 together with individual movement headings, in-
fied by the compositions of Johann Joachim Quantz (1697– strument ranges, and catalogue numbers. The present edi-
1773) for flute and basso continuo, that Bach composed tion organizes the sonatas by instrument and Wq number
until moving to Hamburg.3 Hence Bach’s sonatas conform with one exception: Wq 132, published during Bach’s life-
with those of other musicians working in the circle of King time, opens the volume.
Frederick II of Prussia (1712–86), who reigned from 1740.
Quantz wrote numerous sonatas specifically for Frederick;
Chronology and Transmission
evidence of the change in taste that occurred at about the
time Bach began composing solo sonatas can be seen in According to NV 1790, Bach’s solo sonatas were composed
the fact that older four-movement sonatas by Quantz were from 1735 to 1786, in Frankfurt an der Oder, Berlin, and
later recopied for the king without their third (slow) move- Hamburg. Most of the solo sonatas apparently did not cir-

1. All previous editions of these works have been edited based on the 4. On the recasting of Quantz’s four-movement works, see Mary
MSS in B-Bc. For further discussion see Mary Oleskiewicz, review of Oleskiewicz, “Quantz and the Flute at Dresden: His Instruments, His
C. P. E. Bach. Complete Sonatas for Flute and Basso Continuo, ed. Ulrich Repertory and Their Significance for the Versuch and the Bach Circle,”
Leisinger, Notes 59 (2002): 169–76. (Ph.D. diss., Duke University, 1998), 166–72.
2. Bach based his variations Wq 118/7 of 1735 on the minuet from 5. Bach’s autobiography was substituted for Burney’s biography in
Pietro Antonio Locatelli’s op. 2, no. 10 (1732), the only one of Locatelli’s Carl Burney’s der Musik Doctors Tagebuch seiner musikalischen Reisen,
twelve works for flute and basso continuo that is not in the older four- vol. 3, Durch Böhmen, Sachsen, Brandenburg, Hamburg und Holland
movement format. (Hamburg, 1773), 199–209.
3. This type is also prescribed by the theorist Johann Adolph Scheibe 6. Burney, The Present State of Music in Germany, the Netherlands and
in his Critischer Musikus (Leipzig, 1745), 681–82. United Provinces, 2nd ed. (London, 1775), 266.

[ xi ]
 Table 1. Bach’s Soli in nv 1790
No. in Wq H Place Date Instrument Key Movements Treble Bass
NV 1790 Range Range

1 135 549 Leipzig? by 1735? oboe g Adagio—Allegro—Vivace d–d C–c

2 134 548 Berlin? c. 1747? flute G Adagio—Allegro—Vivace d–e D–e
3 123 550 Frankfurt 1735 flute G Andante—Allegro— Tempo di minuetto d–e D–d
4 124 551 Frankfurt 1737 flute e Adagio—Allegro—Minuetto d–e BB–d
5 125 552 Berlin 1738 flute B Adagio—Allegro—Vivace d–e BB–e
6 126 553 Berlin 1738 flute D Largo—Allegro—Vivace d–f AA–d
7 127 554 Berlin 1739 flute G Adagio—Allegro—Vivace d–e BB–g
8 128 555 Berlin 1740 flute a Andante—Allegro—Vivace d–d C–e
9 129 556 Berlin 1740 flute D Adagio—Allegro—Vivace d–e C–d
10 138 557 Berlin; rev. 1740; violoncello g Largo (lost; incipit in critical report)
Hamburg 1769
11 136 558 Berlin 1745 viola da gamba C Andante—Allegretto—Arioso F–d C–d
12 137 559 Berlin 1746 viola da gamba D Adagio ma non tanto— C–e D–f
Allegro di molto—Arioso
13 130 560 Berlin 1746 flute B Largo—Allegro—Allegro d–e C–d
14 131 561 Berlin 1747 flute D Andante—Allegretto—Allegro d–e D–e
15 132 562 Berlin 1747 flute a Poco adagio—Allegro—Allegro d–f —
16 140 598 Berlin 1748 flute, violin* e Andante—Allegro—Allegretto
17 141 599 Berlin 1752 2 violins* d Largo (lost)
18 139 563 Berlin 1762 harp G Adagio un poco—Allegro—Allegro g–e D–e
19 133 564 Hamburg 1786 flute G Allegretto—Rondo. Presto d–g D–e

* See CPEB:CW, II/5

culate during the eighteenth century beyond a few owners, tas for viola da gamba, Wq 136–137, and three new flute
and most of these works have come down to us in only one works, Wq 130–132. Thereafter he twice briefly returned to
or two manuscript copies. Bach’s autographs and house the composition of solo sonatas, writing the harp sonata,
copies, from which the existing manuscripts must have Wq 139, in 1762 and the so-called Hamburg sonata for
descended, are lost. Only the unaccompanied flute sonata, flute, Wq 133, in 1786. He had also revised the cello sonata
Wq 132, was published during the composer’s lifetime, and in Hamburg in 1769, his first full year there after moving
consequently it must have had the widest circulation.7 from Berlin.
While NV 1790 notes that the work was composed at The two undated solo sonatas in NV 1790 (Wq 134 and
Berlin in 1747, it was not printed until 1763, when it ap- 135) are usually assumed to have been composed by 1735.8
peared both in the anthology Musicalisches Mancherley and However, the flute sonata, Wq 134 may have been com-
individually in an offprint. The earliest dated solo sonatas posed in Berlin and substantially revised there; the oboe
are two for flute, Wq 123–124, composed in 1735 and 1737 sonata, Wq 135, on the other hand, could well date from
at Frankfurt. Bach’s composition of solo sonatas at Berlin Bach’s youth in Leipzig, perhaps written under his father’s
was divided between two periods. The first, from 1738 to supervision. A more precise understanding of their chro-
1740, produced five sonatas for flute, Wq 125–129, as well nology can be reached by considering these works in rela-
as the lost sonata for cello, Wq 138. During the second tion to certain stylistic developments in the solo sonatas as
period, from 1745 to 1747, Bach composed the two sona- a group. The first movements in the Frankfurt and early
Berlin sonatas bear the tempo markings Largo, Adagio, and
Andante (see table 1); in the works from the second Berlin
7. The only other instrumental chamber works with flute published
during Bach’s lifetime are the duet with violin, Wq 140 (published in
CPEB:CW, II/5) and the trio for flute, violin, and basso continuo, 8. Helm, 118–19, gives the date of both works as “Probably 1735 or
Wq 161/2 (CPEB:CW, II/2.1). earlier.”

[ xii ]
period, Bach twice uses more nuanced movement headings ulation. The three movements of Wq 134, moreover, are of
such as Adagio ma non tanto (in Wq 137) or Poco adagio (in considerable length and harmonic sophistication, the sec-
Wq 132). The second movements of Bach’s solo sonatas are ond movement even incorporating two confirmed modula-
nearly all in , with three exceptions: in the gamba sonatas, tions within its second (“development”) section. From the
Wq 136 and 137, and the flute sonata, Wq 134. Most of the point of view of form, therefore, Wq 134 clearly belongs to
second movements are labeled Allegro or Allegretto, often this post-1745 Berlin period of sonata composition.
making them quicker than their concluding movements. However, certain aspects of Wq 134—its movement
The two Frankfurt sonatas conclude with a minuet (or headings, and the contrapuntal texture of its second move-
Tempo di minuetto) and variations, a format also used in ment—may offer evidence that the sonata was composed
two of the early Berlin sonatas where, however, the theme earlier. If so, it underwent revision, perhaps in 1746 or 1747
is designated Vivace (in Wq 126 and 128). This same Vi- when Bach returned to the composition of flute sonatas.
vace marking is used for the concluding movements of the NV 1790 shows that in 1747 Bach revised six early trio
remaining sonatas from the first Berlin period, although sonatas that include flute (Wq 143–148 all originate in
these are not variation movements. Beginning in 1745, the 1730s). In 1746 he also significantly reworked the final
third movements have more varied characters, including movement of Wq 125 to update it formally and melodically
two marked Arioso in  and three Allegro in . Considered as the last movement of Wq 130. If Wq 134 had a similarly
alone, tempo markings could suggest early dates for both complex history, that could explain why NV 1790 provides
Wq 134 and 135: both show tempo designations found in it with neither date nor place of origin.10
Wq 125, 127, and 129; third movement markings align with On the other hand, form and style in Wq 135 suggest a
all five works from the first Berlin period. Evaluating for- pre-1735 origin. Its brief first movement does not employ
mal structures, however, offers a different prospect for sonata-form principles; in fact, the Adagio seems inten-
Wq 134. tionally to avoid any sort of regular musical patterning. Its
At least one movement in each of Bach’s solo sonatas expressive dissonances and dissonant melodic leaps appear
shows elements of incipient sonata form. This structural to have been strongly influenced by music of J. S. Bach, and
principle gradually becomes more prevalent, and it is the the voice leading of its final cadence, where the bass moves
opening slow movements that are the last to be consis- from the sixth degree to the dominant, is found only in
tently constructed as sonata forms, beginning with Wq 125 other very early pieces. The second and third movements
of 1738. The term sonata form, in this context, is meant formally resemble those in several early flute sonatas: the
to describe the clear division of a movement into two or Allegro a three-part sonata form without a return, the Vi-
three sections that are roughly parallel in construction; vace a minuet with variations. The work contains none of
each section opens with a thematic statement followed by the counterpoint typically found in the later Frankfurt
modulating passages, often sequential, that lead to one or and early Berlin works, such as the canonic imitation in
more closing phrases and a full cadence. In quick move- Wq 126/ii, or the two-voiced fugue in Wq 127/ii.
ments, a double bar typically follows the first section; this NV 1790 records Bach’s lost violoncello sonata, Wq 138,
is absent in the slow movements, which nevertheless of- as “erneuert” (revised or renewed)—the term, also applied
ten have essentially the same form, especially in the later to many early works of other genres, implies a substantial
works. Indeed, except in the quick movements of Wq 131 compositional revision. The same recomposition process
and 133, each movement of Bach’s solo sonatas from 1745 apparently extends to at least two other solo sonatas as
onward comprises a full three-part sonata form.9 All three well. Two sources for Wq 125 transmit its final movement
movements of Wq 134 are of this type; unlike the opening in two distinct versions, neither of which appears to be the
movements of sonatas dated to the earlier Berlin period, its original. What appears to be the later of these versions in-
first movement falls into three sections, each clearly articu- troduces some melodic variations into the upper part (see
lated by a thematic statement. The last of these statements critical report), and the first two movements show some
constitutes the return and repeats the opening theme in
the tonic, giving the final section the character of a recapit- 10. Miller, 228–30, offers a similar explanation for the absence of a
date in NV 1790, but inaccurately regards the form of the work’s first
movement as typical of 1738–40. The Sing-Akademie source for Wq 125
9. For a more detailed account of sonata form in Bach’s works, see reveals that movement iii underwent at least one earlier revision before
David Schulenberg, The Instrumental Music of Carl Philipp Emanuel being reworked as the final movement of Wq 130 (see “Evaluation of
Bach (Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1984), 99–145. Sources” in the critical report).

[ xiii ]
evidence for similar revisions as well. The final movement Mm. in Wq 131/iii Compare mm. in:
of Wq 125 recurs in Wq 130 in a third form that not only
1–12 Wq 136/iii, 1–12
incorporates the earlier melodic variations but also adds a
17–23 Wq 137/iii, 21–27
number of entirely new passages.
29–36 Wq 137/iii, 35–42
Recomposition also occurs in Wq 131, which is to some 37–45 Wq 136/iii, 37–45
degree a pastiche: its second and third movements borrow 61–67 Wq 137/iii, 94–100
motives and rework passages from three earlier solo sona- 73–80 Wq 137/iii, 108–115
tas. Movement ii draws on the corresponding movement
of the flute sonata Wq 129, whereas movement iii derives Bach’s instrumental chamber music likely was heard in
in large part from the third movements of the gamba so- a variety of venues. These include the Collegium Musicum
natas, Wq 136 and 137. Bach’s substantial variation of the (“Musikalische Akademie”) at Frankfurt; the courts at
borrowed material, as well as the complex manner in Ruppin, Rheinsberg, Potsdam, and Berlin; music acade-
which he interweaves borrowings from different works mies at Berlin and Rheinsberg; and public concerts in Ber-
into a new structure, make Wq 131 a fundamentally new lin and Hamburg. Wq 131 survives in a copy (source D 1)
work, not merely a version of any one of the previous so- dating to Bach’s lifetime that may have been connected to
los.11 In view of the nature of the reworkings and the inclu- one such academy, the Musikübende Gesellschaft.
sion of both works in NV 1790, there can be no question
that Wq 129 remained, in Bach’s view, a valid, independent
The Flute Sonatas
flute sonata. The measures from which musical material is
borrowed are listed below. Very little material is re-used Bach’s two Frankfurt sonatas (Wq 123–124) pose no par-
without alteration. Both character markings and formal ticular technical challenges to the flutist and might have
structures differ between the corresponding movements: been composed for a musician of limited abilities, though
while Wq 131/iii, is marked Allegro, the third movements of this observation does not bear on their artistic merit. The
Wq 136 and 137 are both designated Arioso. Both of these upper range of Wq 124 to e is normal for flute music of
borrowed movements are ternary sonata forms; the third the period and conforms to that of the works Bach com-
movement of Wq 131, however, is constructed as a two-part posed between 1738 and 1746 (see table 1); Wq 123 falls
sonata form. Likewise, the second movements of Wq 131 within the same range, although its first movement also
and 129 are, respectively, Allegretto and Allegro. The forms calls for a somewhat unusual trill from e to f.
of these two movements also differ in an important respect: The five solo flute sonatas composed in Berlin between
although both are ternary sonata forms, with a second for- 1738 and 1740 may well have had a more elevated audience,
mal cadence in B minor, Wq 129/ii subsequently restates as Bach in 1738 had probably been promised a position
the opening theme in the tonic (m. 72), whereas Wq 131/ii with the future king (Frederick II of Prussia) and already
does not. had been serving him informally.12 The first of these sona-
tas, Wq 125, is in B-flat major, not an easy key on the eigh-
Mm. in Wq 131/ii Compare mm. in:
teenth-century instrument but one encountered regularly
1–6 Wq 129/ii, 1–6 in works that Quantz composed for the king; Bach’s work
25–30 Wq 129/ii, 27–32 is similar in its technical demands to those of Quantz. As
31–36 Wq 129/ii, 33–38 in Quantz’s works, pure intonation would have been more
56–64 Wq 129/ii, 60–68 easily achieved on the special two-keyed flutes that Quantz
77–86 Wq 129/ii, 78–87 had invented and which he made for the king; the sepa-
rate keys for D and E would have been useful in the first
movement of Wq 128, although enharmonic distinctions
11. Previous authors, including Miller, Leisinger, and Leisinger/ are already called for in the Frankfurt sonata Wq 124.
Wollny 1993, have noted the use of borrowed material from Wq 129
and 136 in Wq 131, but have overlooked the borrowings from Wq 137. Bach’s later Berlin flute sonatas are lengthier composi-
Miller, 213, calls Wq 136 a “model” for Wq 131; she notes that the connec-
tion between these two works may explain the mistaken designation 12. For further discussion of Bach’s employment at court as it con-
of Wq 136 as a flute sonata in NV 1790 (Miller, 239, 242–45); see also cerns flute composition, see Mary Oleskiewicz, “Like Father Like Son?
Leisinger/Wollny 1993, 188. Leisinger, vol. 5, describes Wq 129 and 131 Emanuel Bach and the Writing of Biography,” in Music and Its Ques-
as “two versions of the same piece,” raising the question of whether Bach tions: Essays in Honor of Peter Williams, ed. Thomas Donahue (Rich-
“regarded both versions as legitimate alternatives.” mond, Va.: OHS Press, 2007), 253–79, esp. 267–68.

[ xiv ]
tions, making greater demands on the player’s technique Bach’s last solo sonata for flute, Wq 133 of 1786, incor-
and expressivity. But only Wq 132 takes the flute beyond porates several new features that reflect its late date. Fol-
the range of the earlier works (with the single exception of lowing a trend that can be observed in Bach’s late keyboard
Wq 126; see table 1), requiring multiple fs and fs. The sonatas, it is in two rather than three movements, although
note f can be found in some flute sonatas and concertos a short bridge passage connects the two. The work’s extro-
by Quantz and Frederick II, and also occurs in flute sona- verted virtuosity includes florid passagework in the flute’s
tas published about 1750 by Georg Zarth with a dedication uppermost register, extending a half step higher than in
to the king.13 Bach’s previous sonatas (to g; see table 1). The work re-
Much later, at Hamburg in 1783, Bach made the ac- sembles some nineteenth-century flute etudes in demand-
quaintance of the blind touring flute virtuoso Friedrich ing the agility of an expert player.18
Ludwig Dülon, who performed for him and had several
lessons. Twenty-four years later, Dülon reported that he
The Sonatas for Violoncello and Viola da gamba
had played “a solo of [Bach’s] own composition.”14 This
is likely to have been the unaccompanied flute sonata, Only the first two measures of the cello sonata are known
Wq 132, as no other sonata of Bach’s had been published or from early catalogue entries (see critical report). This in-
is known to have been in circulation at the time. According cipit reveals a Largo in  whose theme opens with a slurred
to Dülon, Bach responded to the performance by claiming dotted figure followed by a descending tritone and a half-
that “the one for whom I wrote this piece couldn’t play it; step appoggiatura, graced with an Anschlag; together with
the one for whom I did not write it can.”15 While Miller its minor key, this phrase perhaps suggests an opening
interprets this to mean that Bach had composed the work movement of intimate, expressive character. Several of
for Frederick, music composed for the king would not have Bach’s Berlin court colleagues also composed at least one
been published during his lifetime.16 Furthermore, the so- sonata for cello and basso continuo.19
nata, although demanding a high level of proficiency, is not The two sonatas for viola da gamba and basso continuo
as difficult technically as other music known to have been mark the beginning of Bach’s renewed activity as a com-
played by the king (such as Quantz’s sonatas and concertos poser of solo sonatas at Berlin, after a five-year hiatus.
in keys such as B-flat major and E-flat major). A practiced The gamba, whose use by this date was confined largely
flutist can readily play chromatically up to a on the type to German court circles, continued to be played by pro-
of flutes played by Frederick and Quantz, using the em- fessionals almost to the end of the 18th century. Between
bouchure and technique described by Quantz. Even the 1741 and 1763, for instance, the Prussian court retained the
f demanded by Bach is practical, and Quantz’s flutes not virtuoso Christian Ludwig Hesse (1716–72), whose father
only have a strong low register but give the player the flex- had studied with the French gambist Antoine Forqueray.
ibility needed to negotiate wide leaps, both of which are Hesse’s technique and instrument were French, which per-
requirements of Wq 132.17 haps appealed to the king’s francophile taste.20
In Bach’s sonatas for the gamba, the solo part is notated
in treble clef, an octave higher than sounding pitch, follow-
13. SIX SONATES | A FLUTE SEULE | Avec la Basse Continüe
| DÉDIÉES | A Sa Majesté | LE ROI DE PRUSSE | ET COMPO-
ing a convention employed in other Berlin works.21 The oc-
SÉES | PAR M.R ZARTH . . . (Paris, c. 1750; facsimile, Béziers: Société
de Musicologie de Languedoc, n.d.). Audio examples are available at <http://www.music.ed.ac.uk/euchmi/
14. Dülons des blinden Flötenspielers Leben und Meynungen von ihm galpin/gwjk.html>.
selbst bearbeitet (Zurich, 1807–8), 151–52; excerpt translated in Leta E. 18. While Ernst Schmid has suggested that Bach may have written
Miller, “C. P. E. Bach and Friedrich Ludwig Dülon: Composition and Wq 133 for Dülon, Miller notes that Dülon is not known to have been
Improvisation in Late Eighteenth-Century Germany,” Early Music 23 in Hamburg at the time of its composition, but that virtuoso Christian
(1995): 66. Carl Hartmann, of the Royal Academy in Paris, performed twice in
15. Ibid. public concerts in Hamburg during June 1786; see Schmid 1931, 91 and
Miller, 215–16.
16. A letter of 5 April 1785, from C. P. E. Bach to an unknown patron,
verifies this. Concerning a sonata he had composed for Princess Amalia 19. These include Christoph Schaffrath, Carl Heinrich Graun, Georg
(Wq 70/2) Bach writes: “This sonata was composed for the organ for Czarth, and one of the Bendas.
Princess Amalia, and I would have acted poorly and risked much if I 20. Michael O’Loghlin, “Ludwig Christian Hesse and the Berlin Vir-
had had it printed.” CPEB-Letters, 225–26. tuoso Style,” Journal of the Viola da Gamba Society of America 35 (1998): 71.
17. See Mary Oleskiewicz, “The Flutes of Quantz: Their Construc- 21. Some composers elsewhere, such as Carl Friedrich Abel, also fol-
tion and Performing Practice,” Galpin Society Journal 53 (2000): 201–20. lowed the convention of notating parts for bass viol in treble clef.

[ xv ]
tave transposition, although primarily a notational conve- The second and third movements of Wq 137 present
nience, might also reflect a psycho-acoustic phenomenon special challenges for the performer. In movement ii, mm.
whereby the tone of the gamba is not necessarily perceived 67–69, Bach writes a sequence involving rapidly repeated
as sounding in the octave in which it is played; as a result three-note chords. These can be sounded simultaneously
the occasional crossing of the solo part beneath the bass (without arpeggiation), but doing so requires great agil-
may not be as noticeable in these works as it would be in ity and considerable pressure from the bow on the strings.
those for another instrument.22 An alternative view is that Typical French bow grips of the period are inadequate for
the solo parts of both Wq 136 and 137 were intended for this purpose, but a portrait thought to be of Carl Friedrich
a treble viol sounding at written pitch. This would elimi- Abel shows a different grip in which the third finger of
nate the many crossings of the bass over the solo part in the right hand presses against the hair of the bow to cre-
both works, but in Wq 137 it does not account for the note ate greater tension on the hairs.25 Also problematic in this
c in movement ii, m. 69, which requires a seventh string passage is the final chord (in movement ii, m. 70), which is
unknown on the treble form of the instrument. “Inverted” again unplayable as written (see critical report). Additional
harmony, such as occurs repeatedly in Wq 137, movement challenges are posed by parallel thirds and sixths in move-
ii, mm. 106–18, is common in music for bass voice; if found ment iii (mm. 28–34 and parallel passages).
objectionable, it could be avoided by the keyboard player’s The presence of similar writing in other Berlin works for
doubling the bass in octaves. gamba, especially those by J. G. Graun, may have given rise
As shown in table 1, the earlier of Bach’s gamba sonatas, to the alternative instrumentation for violin or viola that is
Wq 136 in C major, has a solo part spanning two octaves documented for them in some sources. Indeed, Bach’s trio
and a sixth (sounding F–d) and fits easily on a six-string for viola da gamba and obbligato keyboard (which makes
bass viol (tuned D–G–c–e–a–d). The solo part could be no such technical challenge) is also designated alternatively
played alternatively on the violin; in fact, the one multiple for viola in at least one source (see Wq 88, published in
stop (in movement ii, m. 38) is playable as written only CPEB:CW, II/3.1). That alternative is not documented
on the latter instrument.23 Bach’s second gamba sonata, for Wq 136 or 137.
Wq 137 in D major, also has a problematic multiple stop
and in addition presents technical challenges that approach
The Oboe Sonata
the limits of what is possible on the instrument. The range
covers three octaves plus a third (sounding C–e), re- Bach wrote two oboe concertos, but these are from his last
quiring the extra seventh string (AA) of the late-Baroque years at Berlin (c. 1765; published in CPEB:CW, III/5)
French instrument for one note (in movement ii, m. 70). and are fully mature works, unlike the undated Wq 135.
Bach was not alone in requiring a seven-string gamba that The range of the oboe part (d–d) in Wq 135 falls well
must also ascend high above the frets; works by Johann within that of the instrument of the period, and the music
Gottlieb Graun and Christoph Schaffrath make similar itself does not make great technical demands. There was
demands.24 certainly no lack of good oboists at Leipzig in the 1730s,
to judge from the parts for the instrument in cantatas of
J. S. Bach. Numerous military oboists were present in both
22. Praetorius in 1619 described a similar phenomenon involving Ruppin and in Potsdam, where Friedrich Wilhelm I estab-
flutes and recorders, which he perceived to sound an octave lower than
they actually play. See Michael Praetorius, Syntagma Musicum II, De
lished a regimental music school.
Organographia: Parts I and II, trans. and ed. David Z. Crookes (Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1986), 36.
23. On the gamba, a gap within the chord must be “filled up” by insert-
ing an additional note; see Johannes Boer, “The Viola da Gamba Sona- 25. I am grateful to Brent Wissick for discussing with me the techni-
tas by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach in the Context of the Late German cal issues that arise in Wq 137 and for providing information about the
Viol Masters and the ‘Galant’ Style,” in A Viola da Gamba Miscellany: Abel portrait. The portrait, which is in a private American collection, is
Proceedings of the International Viola da Gamba Symposium, Utrecht 1991, undated and unsigned. Scholars believe it may have been made in Lon-
ed. Johannes Boer and Guido van Oorschot (Utrecht: STIMU, 1994), don, in part because Abel appears to be playing an English gamba. Ben
127. Hebbert believes from the head of the gamba that the instrument is by
24. See Michael O’Loghlin, “The Viola da Gamba Music of the Ber- Barak Norman or perhaps another English maker at that time. Susan
lin School, 1732–1772” (Ph.D. diss., University of Queensland, 2002), Sloman believes that the painter was English but definitely not Gains-
221, 261, and 319, on works by Berlin composers, as well as arrangements borough. I thank Peter Holman and Susan Sloman for their friendly
by Hesse, that require the AA string. communications.

[ xvi ]
 Many types of harps were in use at the time of Bach’s
The Harp Sonata sonata, and there is no record of the actual intruments
Bach wrote his only solo work for harp, Wq 139, in 1762, used by any contemporary harpist at the Prussian court.
at a time when he was experimenting with new types of The chromaticism in Bach’s work, however, narrows the
music, including the sonatinas for keyboard and ensem- range of possibilities. Bach’s harp sonata was written for
ble (Wq 96–110). The harp sonata appears, perhaps not an instrument that could easily produce chromatic notes
coincidentally, at the end of the Seven Years’ War, when down to E, and it requires the ability to play turns and
Frederick resumed his regular private chamber concerts in other ornaments involving chromatic notes. These fea-
Potsdam after a long hiatus. The same year also saw the tures appear to rule out the hook harp and various double
publication of part II of Bach’s Versuch über die wahre Art and triple chromatic harps, leaving the single-action pedal
das Clavier zu spielen, which treats extensively the art of ac- harp the most plausible instrument. The first single-action
companiment and figured bass realization, including some pedal harp had its debut in 1749 at the Concert Spirituel in
of the “refinements” of accompaniment implied by certain Paris by a German player named Goepfert.29 Pedal harps
details in the figuration of Wq 139. The harp sonata also at that time possessed a complex mechanism operated by
incorporates most of the keyboard ornament signs de- seven foot pedals, which, when depressed, raised the pitch
scribed in the Versuch. of a given diatonic note by a semitone instantaneously
There had been harpists at Frederick’s court since 1735, throughout the compass of the instrument. Despite the
engaged presumably to play arrangements or to accompany, availability of such a sophisticated mechanism, the harp
as there was little written specifically for the instrument. apparently still functioned primarily as an accompanying
Bach’s closest association with a harpist must have been to instrument, with very little development of solo literature
the Prussian court harpist Franz Brennessell, about whom or technique. Wernich’s harp treatise provides a chapter
very little is known; in 1772 Brennessell was praised in a on the fundamentals of realizing basso continuo,30 clearly
treatise on harp playing published in Berlin.26 Frederick offering instruction in accompanying other instruments or
had engaged Brennessell in May 1755 as an apprentice to the voice, including recitative. The novelty of Bach’s sonata
Bach, for a period of study that continued until 1763, when may be appreciated from the fact that ten years after Goep-
Brennessell began to receive a salary from the king’s private fert had introduced the instrument in public, a student of
funds.27 Although Bach’s Versuch does not mention the Goepfert’s described his technique as not “playing” in an ac-
harp, the instrument was in common use for accompani- tual sense but rather “preluding” (improvising) on chords.31
ment elsewhere in Europe, and Bach’s pedagogical activity This was just three years before the composition of Bach’s
with the young harpist is likely to have focused on accom- harp sonata of 1762, which instead is musically and nota-
paniment and figured bass realization. For most of the cen- tionally akin to his keyboard sonatas of the period.
tury court harpists had functioned as accompanists, and in A professional at the Prussian court is likely to have
1792 the Berlin naturalist and harp player Johann Friedrich played the pedal harp by this date. French pedal harps were
Wilhelm Herbst still recommended Bach’s treatise, among very costly, in part due to their elaborate rococo ornamen-
others, for material applicable to the harp.28 The date of tation and gilding, but Frederick II was interested in the
the harp sonata coincides with the end of Brennessell’s ap- latest technical developments on all musical instruments,
prenticeship with Bach. playing the first two-keyed flutes and collecting Silber-
mann fortepianos equipped with a special mutation stop
that resembled the bray pins of a harp. The king also or-
26. Johann Carl Gustav Wernich, “Vorbericht,” Versuch einer richtigen dered the most recent harpsichords by Schudi in the 1760s
Lehrart die Harfe zu spielen (Berlin, 1772), [ii]. that featured the newly invented machine stop. As an elite,
27. Archival documentation for the period of Brennessell’s study with “scientific” product of current French culture and design, a
Bach is given by Christoph Henzel, “Neues zum Hofcembalisten Carl
Philipp Emanuel Bach,” BJ 85 (1999): 176–77. Brennessell had previ-
ously been rejected as a candidate for this work; see Darrell M. Berg, 29. Dagmar Droysen-Reber, Harfen des Berliner Musikinstrumenten-
“C. P. E. Bach’s Harp Sonata,” The American Harp Journal 7 (1980): 12. Museums (Berlin: Staatliches Institut für Musikforschung Preußischer
Kulturbesitz, 1999), 54. Goepfert went by the name of Gaiffre in
28. Hans Joachim Zingel, Harfe und Harfenspiel vom Beginn des 16.
France.
bis ins zweite Drittel des 18. Jahrhunderts (Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1932),
151, citing Johann Friedrich Wilhelm Herbst, Über die Harfe, nebst einer 30. Wernich, Versuch, 8.
Anleitung, sie richtig zu spielen (Berlin, 1792), p. 6: “wo der Harfenspieler 31. Droysen-Reber, Harfen, 54: “er im eigentlichen Sinne gar nicht
sehr vieles finden wird, was sich für sein Instrument eignet.” Harfe spiele, sondern nur in Akkorden präludiere.”

[ xvii ]
single-action pedal harp would have appealed to the king Bach uses the sign  for a trilled turn (prallender Dop-
as the most advanced type available. pelschlag) in his keyboard music and in the harp sonata.38
In the solo sonatas, this ornament is signified most often
by a plain “tr” standing over the second of two descending
Issues of Performance Practice 8th notes, or on a quarter note preceded by a descending
Bach’s rule of thumb for articulation, at least in keyboard appoggiatura.
music, is that notes bearing no articulation symbol receive Bach notes that appoggiaturas were generally written as
half their written value; this conforms to what Quantz de- small 8th notes prior to the time of the Versuch.39 Only in
scribes for other instruments. A stroke or a dot shortens a few of the later sonatas, especially Wq 137 and 132, do the
the note further (Bach makes no distinction between the written values of some appoggiaturas clearly correspond to
two signs), while the word tenuto indicates that the note is their intended rhythm. Even in those works, many appog-
held for its full written value.32 giaturas were probably meant to remain short or “invari-
In the sonatas for flute and oboe, slurs occasionally able” in length, that is, played quickly. The “variable” appog-
stand over dots, resembling the type of notation used in giatura, on the other hand, takes half the value of the main
Bach’s keyboard music for the Tragen der Töne (portato) note, or two thirds if the note is dotted. These two types of
and Bebung (a kind of vibrato).33 In music for winds, this appoggiatura can be distinguished only from the context,
notation apparently represents a breath articulation, which although Bach insisted that both types always be played on
Quantz explains as being produced by exhalation, using the beat, avoiding the pre-beat French style of execution
chest action, not the tongue.34 favored by Quantz for certain short appoggiaturas.40 A
In the Versuch, Bach observes that most of the orna- compound appoggiatura (Anschlag) comprises two notes,
ment symbols used by keyboard players are not generally one below and one above the main note; it takes both plain
understood by other musicians, even though these same and dotted forms. The dotted type requires that the small
ornaments are essential to instrumental and vocal music.35 dotted first note of the ornament take most of the value of
The sources for the solo sonatas rarely employ those sym- the main note.41
bols, using for the most part only the abbreviation “tr.” It is Slides (Schleifer) of either two or three notes likewise
possible that Bach, especially in the earlier works, instead appear in both plain and dotted forms. Two-note slides
used “t” or “+”; traces of these readings occur in several of connect notes separated by a melodic leap (e.g., Wq 132/i,
the copies. All three of these symbols were probably synon- mm. 40 and 67), and are played quickly in the time of the
ymous, and indicate not just the trill but a variety of other following note.42
ornaments, depending on context. The harp solo departs Explicit indications for improvisation are found in the
from this convention by employing many of the ornament fermatas that occur at least once in most of these works.
symbols used in Bach’s keyboard music of the period. These indications are of two types: fermatas within the
In Bach’s solo sonatas, the abbreviation “tr” might stand body of a movement, especially where the music pauses
not only for the ordinary trill—always played on the beat, before a rest; and fermatas over the penultimate or ante-
starting with the upper note—but for three other types penultimate note of a final cadence, signifiying a cadenza.
that he describes in detail in the Versuch,36 as well as for the Though Bach left no written-out cadenzas for his solo
turn (Doppelschlag). Bach expects all trills on long notes to sonatas, he provides numerous realized examples of both
end with a two-note suffix (Nachschlag); sometimes this is types of improvisation in the Versuch and in a manuscript
written out in regular notes.37 collection of cadenzas for his concertos.43 Fermatas of

32. Versuch I:3, §22.

33. Versuch I:3, §19–20. 38. Versuch I:2.4, §28 and Tab.V, Fig. lxiii–lxv.
34. Quantz, 6.1, §11; see Oleskiewicz, “Quantz and the Flute at Dres- 39. Versuch I:2.2, §5.
den,” 237, 314–15, and 352–53. 40. Versuch I:2.2, §11; also compare Versuch I:2.2, §25 with Quantz,
35. Versuch I:2.1, §14–15. 8, §6.
36. The descending trill (Triller von oben), the ascending trill (Triller 41. Versuch I:2.6, §9, and Tab. VI, Fig. lxxxvi.
von unten), and the half or short trill (Halber oder Prall-Triller); Versuch 42. Versuch I:2.7, §3–4.
I:2.3, §3. Only the harp sonata uses distinct symbols for any of these, 43. B-Bc, 5871 MSM; facsimile ed. E. Eugene Helm, Carl Philipp
calling for the ascending trill or “trill from below” (see Wq 139/i, m. 17). Emanuel Bach. 75 Cadenzas (H. 264/W. 120) for Keyboard (Utrecht:
37. Versuch I:2.3, §13, 16. STIMU, 1997); published in CPEB:CW, VIII/1. A study of notated

[ xviii ]
the first type occur in the gamba sonata, Wq 137/ii, m. 81, on the keyboard alone. In this context it is significant that
and in the unaccompanied solo for flute, Wq 132/ii, m. 94, Bach reported in his Autobiography (p. 200) that he had ac-
where the player might add some sort of decorated arpeg- companied the first sonata played by Frederick II as king in
giation or elaboration around the notes of the chord. Bach Charlottenburg “ganz allein,” that is, completely alone (i.e.,
describes the notation in his Versuch and gives examples with no other accompanying instruments).
of how it might be elaborated.44 Wq 131/iii twice comes The instruments available for accompaniment during
to rest on a pair of notes—an appoggiatura and its resolu- the eighteenth century were numerous and varied. At court
tion—both bearing fermatas (mm. 28 and 72). they included double-manual harpsichords by Michael
Fermatas of the second type, or cadenzas proper Mietke and Burkat Schudi, among others and, from 1746
(Schlußcadenzen), occur in Bach’s solo sonatas at the end of onwards, fortepianos by Gottfried Silbermann. Silber-
the first, slow movement. Although the sources for most of mann’s fortepianos were used for court concerts, includ-
these works include a fermata in one or both parts, the ab- ing the private chamber concerts of the king, and featured
sence of the sign does not necessarily preclude the addition a mutation stop that produced a bright, harpsichord-like
of a cadenza. For example, in Wq 137/i the final cadence tone. They also had a transposing keyboard that accom-
has no fermata, but is preceded by a fortissimo passage; this modated the low French pitch (a= 385–87 Hz) of the
corresponds with Bach’s observation that “the notes that in- king’s flutes.47 Princess Amalia accompanied solo sonatas
troduce the final cadence are performed loudly … to let the on her two house organs in Berlin (available from 1755 and
soloist know that one is expecting an ornamented cadence 1772, respectively), and chamber organs were also available
[i.e., a cadenza]. . . .”45 One early work, Wq 124, seems not in house concerts hosted by Johann Gottlieb Janitsch and
to tolerate a cadenza at the end of its first movement; a others. By 1762, when he published the volume of the Ver-
cadenza would also be out of place in Wq 133, whose first such that concerns accompaniment, Bach’s instrument of
movement, an Allegretto, departs from the mold of the ear- choice for that purpose was the fortepiano, but he men-
lier solos. tions the clavichord as a possibility, and the harp quite
Bach’s solo sonatas do not call for specific continuo likely also accompanied chamber music (see above).
instruments and simply label the accompanying line as C. P. E. Bach criticized composers who failed to provide
Basso, if at all. But in Part II of his Versuch, Bach makes fully figured continuo parts, observing that “no piece can
his preference clear: the most perfect accompaniment to a be well performed without some form of keyboard accom-
solo sonata is a keyboard instrument with a cello.46 Thus paniment.”48 Yet two duets for unaccompanied melody
it is puzzling that in four of the five solo sonatas for flute instruments survive (Wq 140–141), and Bach’s widow as-
composed before 1740, the bass line descends below C, the sured the collector J. J. H. Westphal that a number of works,
cello’s lowest note (see table 1). Works composed after 1740 presumably including the gamba sonata Wq 136, lacked
never exceed the range of the cello. It is possible that for continuo figures.49 The complete lack of figures in Wq 136,
the early pieces Bach had a seven-string gamba at hand, an unusual feature in a mature work of Bach, leaves open
descending to AA, or perhaps preferred accompanying the possibility that the work was intended for performance
by two stringed instruments without continuo realization,
like many other eighteenth-century duo sonatas.
cadenzas and fermata embellishments by Bach, Quantz, and their con-
temporaries is given in Mary Oleskiewicz, “The Art of the Cadenza:
More fundamental issues about accompaniment arise in
Improvisation and Composition in Eighteenth-Century Sonatas and the harp sonata. Its two-staff score format and title, “Solo
Concertos for Flute,” in Geschichte, Bauweise und Spieltechnik der Quer- für die Harfe,” take precisely the same forms used for other
flöte. 27. Musikinstrumentenbau-Symposium Michaelstein, 6. bis. 8. Ok-
tober 2006, ed. Boje E. Hans Schmuhl and Monika Lustig (Augsburg:
Wißner–Verlag; Michaelstein: Stiftung Kloster Michaelstein, 2008), 47. On performing pitch and the keyboard instruments available for
237–62. accompanying at court, see Mary Oleskiewicz, “The Trio in Bach’s Mu-
44. Versuch I:2.9, §4–5, and Tab. VI, Fig. xcvi. sical Offering: A Salute to Frederick’s Tastes and Quantz’s Flutes?,” in
45. Versuch II:29, §12: “Die Noten, welche in eine Schlußcadenz ein- Bach Perspectives, vol. 4, The Music of J. S. Bach: Analysis and Interpre-
leiten, werden stark vorgetragen . . . Man giebet der Hauptstimme da- tation, ed. David Schulenberg (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press,
durch zu verstehen, daß man eine verzierte Cadenz erwarte . . .”; see also 1999), esp. 98–101.
Quantz’s chapter on cadenzas in Quantz, 15. 48. Versuch II, Einleitung, §7: “Man kann also ohne Begleitung eines
46. Versuch II, Einleitung, §9: “Das vollkommenste Accompagnement Clavierinstruments kein Stück gut aufführen.”
beym Solo, dawider niemand etwas einwenden kann, ist ein Clavierin- 49. Letter of 7 October 1791 from Johanna Maria Bach to J. J. H.
strument nebst dem Violoncell.” Westphal, no. 7 in Schmid 1988, 495–96.

[ xix ]
works that clearly involve separate basso continuo accom- usually occurs over pedal points, but in the harp sonata
paniment, yet modern editors and performers have treated it occurs on short bass notes that underlie written-out
it as an unaccompanied work.50 Although the harp would appoggiaturas in the melody; this is a type of passage in
eventually emerge as a fully autonomous instrument, which Bach expressly calls for “especially refined” accompa-
eighteenth-century works treat it either as an essentially niment.54 Another somewhat unusual use of the tasto solo
melodic instrument that plays occasional chords, like the indication occurs in the last movement of Wq 133, where it
viola da gamba, or as an instrument that may play melody serves in some piano and pianissimo passages apparently to
and bass lines but not simultaneously provide the type of prevent right-hand chords from obscuring the presence of
full harmonic texture implied by Bach’s figured bass part. motivic statements in the bass.55 The same movement twice
Neither Handel’s harp concerto of 1736 nor later concertos includes the related marking unisono or unisoni, which calls
by Mozart (K 299) and Franz Petrini require the harpist for octave doubling of the bass.56
to realize the basso continuo while performing solo pas- A related feature of the figured bass in the harp sonata
sages, even though harp players must have routinely pro- is the use of the “Telemannischer Bogen”: a half-circle set
vided continuo accompaniments in the ritornellos of these over a continuo figure, as on the last note of Wq 139/i, m. 3.
concertos and in other music.51 This symbol, whose invention Bach credits to the composer
The upper voice in Bach’s harp sonata is melodically Georg Philipp Telemann, directs the performer to add just
intricate, containing considerable chromaticism and nu- two, not three voices, above the bass.57
merous ornament signs. On a pedal harp, the player might
have played both melody and bass line, except at one point
Doubtful and Spurious Works
where a simultaneous cross relation arises between treble
and bass (see Wq 139/i, m. 23). But it is unlikely that any The edition omits the following doubtful or falsely attrib-
harp player could at the same time have adequately real- uted works:
ized the figured bass. Hans Joachim Zingel has suggested
Sonata in C Major for Flute and Basso Continuo, H 564.5.
the likelihood of an accompanying keyboard instrument, Preserved in a manuscript copy by the youthful Emanuel
noting the existence of a similarly notated publication in Bach with an attribution to his father (D-B, Mus. ms. Bach
1724 of “Welsh Airs arranged for the harp or another in- St 460), this sonata is listed among the works of Johann
strument, with a figured Bass for the harpsichord.”52 In- Sebastian Bach as BWV 1033. The attribution has long been
deed, without the participation of at least two players it questioned, and the work has been posited as an early com-
is difficult to understand how the unisons between upper position by C. P. E. Bach written under the supervision of the
part and bass (as in movement i, m. 6) could be executed, elder Bach or jointly by the two.58 It has been published in
or why Bach notated bass figures that prescribe little more the NBA, VI/5.
than a doubling of the upper voices (as in movement i, mm.
10 and 12). Unfortunately there appear to be no other simi-
larly notated harp works by contemporary composers to 54. Versuch II:27, §2: “die Begleitung besonders fein seyn muß.” The
provide material for comparison.53 examples for Versuch II:27–28 contain a number of instances of tasto
solo, although none in precisely the same contexts as in the solo sonata
The figured bass for the harp sonata includes a num- for harp (cf., e.g., movement i, m. 10). For further discussion of refined
ber of indications calling for tasto solo, that is, playing the accompaniment, see David Schulenberg, “‘Towards the Most Elegant
bass note alone, without a chord. The expression elsewhere Taste’: Developments in Keyboard Accompaniment From J. S. to C. P. E.
Bach,” in The Keyboard in Baroque Europe, ed. Christopher Hogwood
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), 157–68.
50. See, for example, the editions listed in Helm, item 563, some of 55. See mm. 35 and 80. Elsewhere, tasto solo is apparently used to pre-
which alter the bass line and add notes to the harp part to flesh out the vent the keyboard player from striking a triad that would clash with
harmonies implied by the figured bass. accented non-chord tones in the flute (e.g., m. 4).
51. See Franz Petrini. Concerto No. 4 in E-flat Major for Harp and 56. Versuch II:22, §8.
Chamber-Orchestra, ed. Hans Joachim Zingel (Cologne: Edition Gerig, 57. In Wq 139/i, m. 3, this symbol means to omit the sixth of the
1973); the editor points out that Petrini wrote out the harp part in the chord, leaving a diminished triad; see Versuch II:4, §3.
tutti passages in the style of a realized continuo part.
58. This view has been argued to various degrees by Alfred Dürr,
52. Zingel, Harfe und Harfenspiel, 203. ed., Sonate C-dur für Flöte und Basso continuo BWV 1033, Sonaten
53. A set of works by Adolph Kunzen published in London, described Es-dur, g-moll für Flöte und obligates Cembalo BWV 1031, 1020, überlie-
in various reference works as sonatas for harp and continuo, are in fact fert als Werke Johann Sebastian Bachs (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1975), p. i;
keyboard sonatas. Hans Eppstein, “Über J. S. Bachs Flötensonaten mit Generalbaß,” BJ 58

[ xx ]
 Sonata in G Major for Flute and Basso Continuo, Wq/H
deest. This unique copy in D-B, SA 4818, which belonged to
Acknowledgments
Sara Levy (1761–1854), bears an ambiguous attribution to “Sr. The Packard Humanities Institute provided travel assis-
Bach.” However, the work is not among the solo sonatas listed tance instrumental in the preparation of this volume, for
in NV 1790, and its style is much later than Bach’s and for- which I am grateful. Permission to publish the plates was
eign to that of his authenticated sonatas. kindly provided by Johan Eeckeloo and the staff of the
Koninklijk Conservatorium Bibliotheek in Brussels, and
Solo in F Minor for Flute and Basso Continuo, Wq/H deest.
by Helmut Hell and the staff of the Staatsbibliothek zu
The source, D-B, SA 4819, also from Levy’s collection, bears
an explicit attribution to C. P. E. Bach. The work is not among
Berlin—Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Musikabteilung mit
the sonatas listed in NV 1790, however, and its style makes Mendelssohn-Archiv. In addition, I owe a debt of thanks
an attribution to Bach unlikely. A partial concordance is at- to the following persons for assistance and advice: Sarah
tributed to Carl Wilhelm Glösch (1731/32–1809) in the peda- Adams, Marcy D’Avis, Wolfram Enßlin, Susanne Evers,
gogical manuscript known as Quantz’s Solfeggi.59 Peter Holman, John Koster, Andrew Lawrence-King,
Karyl Louwenaar, Klaus Martius, Walter Mayhall, David
Two Solos for Flute and Basso Continuo in G Major and Schulenberg, Susan Sloman, Janet Stewart, Nancy Thym,
B Minor, H 565/1–2. The source, D-B, Mus. ms. 19751/6, Brent Wissick, and Peter Wollny. Finally, I am grateful
attributes these pieces to “Sigr Bach & Schaffrath,” but Bach’s to the entire editorial staff of C. P. E. Bach: The Complete
contribution to the two works cannot be ascertained. The Works for sharing their time, information, and expertise
hand and provenance are unknown, and neither piece is listed generously.
in NV 1790. Therefore both sonatas are excluded from the
Mary Oleskiewicz
edition. The Prieger auction catalogue of 1924 lists sonatas in
G major and B minor for flute and basso continuo composed
jointly by C. P. E. Bach and Christoph Schaffrath; the parts
described in Prieger match those in D-B, Mus. ms. 19751/6.60
Neither work’s style suggests Bach’s involvement.

(1972): 13; Robert Marshall, The Music of Johann Sebastian Bach: the
Sources, the Style, the Significance (New York: Schirmer, 1989), 203; and
perhaps most convincingly by Jeanne R. Swack, “On the Origins of the
Sonate auf Concertenart,” JAMS 46 (1993): 399–401, who showed that
at least movement iv reworks a preexistent keyboard composition by
Christoph Förster.
59. The concordance is with movement iii, mm. 47–58, among the
last of three excerpts headed “Soli di Glösch”; see “SOLFEGGI | Pour
| La Flute Traversiere | avec l’enseignement; | Par | Monsr. Quantz.” In
DK-Kk, mu 6210.2528 (Gieddes Samling I, 16); ed. Winfried Michel
and Hermien Teske (Winterthur: Amadeus, 1978), 5.
60. See Georg Kinsky, Musiksammlung aus dem Nachlasse Dr. Erich
Prieger–Bonn, nebst einigen Beiträgen aus anderem Besitz. III Teil.
Musikerbriefe, Handschriften, Musikalien (Cologne: Lempertz, 1924),
lot 353. The Prieger catalogue lists this manuscript among others from
a private library in Silesia. A paraphrase of the entry appears in Schmid
1931, 90, fn. 2. See also Rachel W. Wade, “Newly Found Works of C. P. E.
Bach,” Early Music 16 (1988): 527, and Miller, 230–31, who suggests that
the works might have been products of “some type of composition
game.”

[ xxi ]