Beethoven Piano Sonata number 15

Isn't it just that it was poorly digitized?

Thank you Ettore

Lestofante wrote:

Regarding Beethoven's Op. 28, the Pastoral

Via IMSLP

http://imslp.org/wik...en,_Ludwig_van)

i happened to get my hands on the manuscript and I noticed that a part of the development in the first movement is completely missing, measures 175-216.

Where does the development come from?

Thanks in advance to anyone who wishes to respond

In fact, they are missing.

I had fun comparing it with another printed edition available on IMSLP and I noticed that the missing measures are within the page, so a scanning error can be ruled out.

It could be that Beethoven added the measures during the revision of the print proofs or that he forgot to include them in the manuscript copy in question.

We should hear what Armando thinks, as he is certainly the most well-documented on the subject.

Interesting!

It seems to me that the manuscript does not constitute a preliminary sketch, but rather the final draft... a curious matter because the scan will surely be a digitization of the Beethoven Haus collection.

Terenzio, which edition did you check? Perhaps two pages of the folder are simply missing... at least I hope so, otherwise someone has invented the development that we are attributing to Beethoven

Eagle wrote:

It seems to me that the manuscript does not constitute a preliminary sketch, but rather the definitive draft... a curious matter because surely the scan will be a digitization of the Beethoven Haus collection.

Terenzio, which edition did you check? Perhaps two pages of the folder are actually missing... at least I hope so, otherwise someone has invented the development that we are crediting to Beethoven.

I compared it with the other editions present on the IMSLP page. All of them have the incriminated measures, including the first edition by the Bureau des Arts et d'Industrie.

I do not think pages are missing from the manuscript because they are numbered.

So Terenzio, it seems official... after Per Elisa, even a part of the Pastorale is not by Beethoven ...

...it's strange that those who are at home at the Beethoven Haus (excuse the pun) cannot provide more details on the matter. Thank you Lestofante for the sharp observation... yet it is strange that no one noticed it before, it seems so blatant to me.

We are not talking about a complete opera erroneously attributed ... but of a single part, it seems truly difficult to me that an oversight occurred in these terms... but these seem to be the facts.

I am already thinking about the pathetic ...

I am convinced that it is an addition made by Beethoven at a later stage before publication.

We must take into account that the manuscript in question should be the copy that Beethoven gave as a gift to Joseph Sonnenfels, the dedicatee of the work.

The composition was completed in 1801 and the publication is from 1802, so during the year passed, the composer might have made some retouching.

If, with my poor English, I have interpreted the article from the Beethoven-house correctly, there should be other manuscripts that should be compared, but it would be difficult for us.

http://www.beethoven...thoven&_seite=1

Manuscript sources in other libraries

Berlin: Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Musikabteilung mit Mendelssohn Archiv

Sweden, Stockholm: Stiftelsen Musikkulturens främjande

Switzerland, Cologny-Geneva: Fondation Martin Bodmer - Bibliotheca Bodmeriana

USA, Washington (D.C.): The Library of Congress

Austria, Vienna: Wienbibliothek, Musiksammlung

In my opinion, there are still some missing pages: musically it makes no sense to go from p. 8 to p. 9 of the manuscript (pp. 9-10 of the pdf), i.e., from G Major to the dominant of B minor.

Furthermore, the deleted measures at the beginning of p. 9 correspond to mm. 216-222 of the "official" Sonata.

If RedScharlach is right, there is probably the photographer's error as well as the copyist's error. Which I don't know if it existed in Beethoven's time...

Dearest all, I did a little research and then received confirmation directly from the Beethoven-Haus in Bonn from my dear friend, the Director and curator of manuscripts, that the sheet containing measures 177-215 is missing and unfortunately it is unknown where it is or if it still exists. But there are also other Beethoven manuscripts where one or more pages are missing, not to mention those in the possession of the publisher Artaria. Many pages were given as gifts by Artaria to friends, musicians, or sold... Consider that in an auction catalog from the 1920s, a handwritten sheet by Beethoven or one of his letters cost little more than one of his first printed editions of Fidelio! See you soon, Luigi

RedScharlach wrote:

In my opinion, there are still some missing pages: musically, it makes no sense to go from p. 8 to p. 9 of the manuscript (pp. 9-10 of the pdf), i.e., from G m to the dominant of B m.

Furthermore, the measures deleted at the beginning of p. 9 correspond to mm. 216-222 of the "official" Sonata.

Great Red, you hit the nail on the head; the phrase also didn't hold up harmonically. (For the others, only a consolation prize) The "problem" of sheets given away for free or lost is an issue that has its roots as far back as Ludwig's lifetime. Many manuscripts disappeared in remote times, such as the beautiful copies of the trios Opus 3, which were supposed to be at Artaria, or the manuscript of the serenata opus 8, which was with Cappi at least until 1830. As for the sketchbooks, their fate was even worse: considered little more than "souvenirs," they were destroyed during his lifetime, or donated post mortem by tearing them into single sheets; I have the sketches of opus 22 right here in my hands: out of 34 sheets / recto-verso we have these locations: Berkeley, Berlin, Bonn, New York, Private Collection, Stockholm, St. Petersburg, Vienna, Paris.... a cyclopean disaster. Just think that until the studies of Nottebohm or Thayer (we are talking about the late 1800s), even museum collections did not take them into their care....

Anyway, great Luigi, as always. I still owe Eagle a clarification

Eagle wrote:

So Terenzio, it seems official... after Für Elise, even part of the Pastoral is not by Beethoven ...

..... Naturally, it is a media joke; regarding the "Für Elise" issue (let's call the Klavierstück WoO 59 that), I have the BH 116 manuscript right here, and good Nohl hasn't added anything that a third-year conservatory student couldn't do. Honor to Nohl, then. And a note of resentment toward those who, speaking televisionally, always seek news at all costs.

Friendship and fraternity,

LuigiB wrote:

Dearest all, I did a little research and then received confirmation from the Beethoven-Haus in Bonn directly from my dear friend, the Director and curator of manuscripts, that the sheet containing measures 177-215 is missing and unfortunately it is not known where it is or if it still exists.

But does the "mystery" of the consistency of the page numbering of the manuscript itself remain?

And no, because, if you look closely, the handwriting of the page numbering is the same as the one who writes "BH116" at the top left. This numbering was done with a copyist's pencil at the time of the precious binding, i.e., in the late 1800s (or even the end of the 1800s). I presume (but I should be right) that it is the BH archivist. (With a visit to Bonn with Luigi, we will easily be able to discover his name) This LH/RH handwriting is found in other manuscripts in the same museum. In the meantime, we have established that the pages were already missing at the time of the beautiful Victorian binding! Graphology is my field..... notice the "28" with the eight closed by the date: neither the pen nor the hand belong to Beethoven.... instead notice in the date 1801 and at the bottom the other "28": the eight is open, written in the typical manner of a thirty-year-old Beethoven.... Every manuscript must be analyzed in a maniacal way!

What more is there to add, it seems clear to me.

But I have another curiosity (you won't hate me for this). How did that piece of development reach us if the sheet where it was written is missing? What is the most typical thing that could have happened? I have my suspicions but I would like to hear it from you...

As usually happens, for a publication the manuscript (and in Beethoven's case rewritten by copyists) was given to the publishing house for printing. In the case of the Op. 28 sonata at the Bureau d'Arts et d'Industrie in Vienna, whose publication took place in 1802 (in a contemporary magazine dated July 1802, news of the printing of this sonata was reported). Then over time (subsequent to the publication), it happens that part of the manuscript, or even just a single sheet, or the complete manuscript is either lost or there is no longer any trace of where it is (perhaps part of private collections).

OrlandiArmando wrote:

And no, because, if you look closely, the handwriting of the page numbering is the same as the one who writes "BH116" at the top left. This numbering was done with a stationer's pencil at the time of the precious binding, i.e., in the late 1800s (or even the end of the 1800s). I assume (but I should be right) that it is the BH archivist. (With a visit with Luigi to Bonn, we will easily be able to discover his name)

Dear Armando, it is so. That number is the BHXX numbering given by the Beethoven Haus, reported by Schmidt-Görg when he published the catalogue of Beethoven manuscripts owned by the BH, whereas the binder of this manuscript was Friedrich Hermann Scheibe (1843-1901), so as you say, the page numbering could be towards the end of the 1800s.

Reviewing the manuscript, one notices that precisely where measures 178-223 are missing, i.e., between pages 8 and 9, a leaf has been cut or removed. Several other pages that have been inserted and sewn into the manuscript are also noticeable.

On the last page (p. 26v) there are two other handwritten citations: the first line of "Hol dich der Teufel" Hess 254, and the transcription of the scherzo "Lob auf den Dicken" WoO 100.

This manuscript has been in the hands of many people, so during this transition the missing page could have been "lost" or given as a gift or sold.

For information, here are all the previous owners before the BH purchased it in 1904:

Heinrich Steger in Vienna, Edmund Schebeck in Prague, Adalbert Ritter von Zanna, Johann Nepomuk Kafka in Vienna, Carl Haslinger in Vienna, Tobias Haslinger in Vienna, Sigmund Anton Steiner in Vienna, Kunst- und Industriekontor in Vienna.

I notice another curious fact: in the last movement of the Sonata there are two blank pages (pp. 37 and 42 of the PDF, numbered 35a and 40a respectively by the "late nineteenth-century hand" that was mentioned).

PDF p. 38 is essentially an "abbreviated" variant of p. 36: the two pages start and end the same way, but the first counts 15 measures, the second 18. The strange thing is that p. 38 seems to testify to a stage of elaboration prior to p. 36: it lacks the graceful re-presentation of the second theme embellished by the three sixteenth notes on the upbeat.

In fact, p. 36 contains measures 29-46 of the Rondo that we all know.