This may have originally been owned by Aloys Fuchs. Petersburg at the Saltykow-Stschedrin Library. The middle (fragment) of the first page is located in St. It has an incomplete title at the top of the fragment in Bach's handwriting: " J.J. It once belonged to the Polish concert pianist, Maria Szymanowska (1789-1831). The top part (one third) of the page is located in Paris in the Musée Adam Mickiewicz. 2 is separated into 3 parts/fragments and obviously not all of these parts of a single page will display the watermark which appears only once on a page.Īll three fragments do not have manuscript signatures assigned to them as usually happens with manuscripts kept in larger libraries.ġ. Vertically passing through each capital letter of either "MA" or "AM" there are dashed lines, the number of dashes varying slightly, usually between 5 and 6. Note: the identification of this source is preceded by a "vielleicht" ("perhaps") indicating that this location is only a reasonable guess, but the name of the papermaker is quite certain. Watermark on the page is a "MA" or "AM" (depending upon which side of the paper is being viewed) which was produced or available to Bach (this is verified by the existence of other documents using the same type of paper from this specific paper mill) from Octountil Decemby Adam Michael in the (Doubrava) ('Grün'='Green') paper mill in Asch/Böhmen (Bohemia - which country this is located in now, someone will have to look up and inform us). setting of " Ein feste Burg" and the beginning of Mvt. This is in response to Ed's questions):īWV 80b (the older, original version of " Ein feste Burg" as a Leipzig cantata) Some more information from the NBA KB which I have just uncovered (I had not read this before now. Now, is there any way you can appreciate the distinction I have pointed out above? Please? You obviously know a lot, and you are generous in sharing what you know. Since you still "stand 100% behind" your original statement, you're still hitting us all over the head with the same old pretentiousness about your command of the Bach literature and still never backing down about the fact that you really don't know everything. Haughty pretentiousness is not necessary when discussing objectively a subject such as this one. It respects everybody and it respects the work.ĭo you notice the difference? This is about tone (presenting yourself), and about respect for serious scholarship, not all of which you're in a position to judge. It doesn't gratuitously bash the serious work of skilled researchers, whose work you happen not to agree with. It leaves the door open to further research. It admits honestly that you don't know everything. Notice the differences? It doesn't put down your interlocutor's conjecture as wrong. "I personally have not yet encountered a published analysis that would either support or refute that claim about BWV 80 in its various forms." Something that doesn't present a false front where you allegedly know ALL the scholarship that has been conducted, and are in some position to decide what's real/worthwhile and what's not. Some better-worded sentence that didn't place yourself in the high-and-mighty position to prejudge (and evaluate) all existing Bach scholarship that you didn't happen to have encountered yet. If you had said something less full of chutzpah in the first place, I wouldn't have objected at all. "It is a conjecture which has no basis in any real Bach scholarship that has been conducted in regard to BWV 80 in its various forms." Once again, the offensive statement was as follows, verbatim: Let's try this one last time, because I want to make sure this is clear. >My reaction was to your sentence, this one: "It is a conjecture which has no basis in any real Bach scholarship that has been conducted in regard to BWV 80 in its various forms." That's your blanket statement to which I was referring, specifically, and which I quoted directly. I'm not convinced that the two churches had distinctive repertoires. Douglas Cowling wrote (November 2, 2006):
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |