K093 Tres Sacrae Cantiones

deutsch K093 Drei Geistliche Gesänge

K93 Tres Sacrae Cantiones

by Carlo Gesualdo di Venosa, completed by Igor Stravinsky for the 400th Anniversary of Gesualdo’s birth – Drei Geistliche Gesänge von Don Carlo Gesualdo, Fürst von Venosa, vervollständigt von Igor Strawinsky aus Anlaß des vierhundertsten Jahrestages von Gesualdos Geburt – Tre Canti sacri di Don Carlo Gesualdo, Principe di Venosa, completati da Igor Strawinsky per il quarto centenario della sua nascita

Scored for: I: Cantus, Altus, Quintus, Sextus*, Tenor, Bassus** ; II: Cantus, Altus, Quintus***, Sextus***, Tenor, Bassus** ; III: Cantus, Sextus**, Altus, Septima pars, Tenor, Quintus, Bassus**.

* Authoritatively reconstructed by canonical indications in the musical text as resolutio.

** Parts from Strawinsky’s completed version.

*** Parts from the completed version that were able to be reconstructed from indications of canonical entries, disputed between

Strawinsky and Watkins.

Summary : Da pacem Domine is a prayer for peace, as it is used liturgically at several points in the Office and Mass, in the post-Tridentine Mass, between the Pater Noster and Agnus Dei, and in relation to Gesualdo’s motets, the text is varied. There are several versions, one of which Da pacem Domine, sustinentibus te... (Give peace, O Lord, to those who wait for You...) forms the Introit antiphon to Psalm 121 Laetatus sum (I was glad) in the Mass for the 18th Sunday after Pentecost in the Tridentine Missa Solemnis, and is a Christian variation of Ecclesiasticus 36,18. In the form in which Gesualdo used it, it is regarded as an antiphon from the Middle Ages which went out of use in the Roman Church after 1934. The Antiphonale Romanum of 1924 still has it under the name Cantus varii in a series of well known songs in honorem Sanctissimi Sacramenti and Beatae Mariae Virginis, pro pace and in connection with other festivals in the Church Year. The next edition of 1934 did not contain the piece, the function and philosophical expression of which (you don't fight for, but against something) created problems. The title ‘Antiphon’ refers to a framing vocal work, which must contain a psalm or at least the possibility of an alternating singing. Neither of these apply to this short melody. For Gesualdo’s (1560-1613) spiritual composition in 1603, there seems only to be in the foreground the textual content of a prayer for inner peace. - Assumpta est Maria is the introductory Marian Antiphon to both Vespers of the Office for the festival on 15th August for the Assumption of Mary into Heaven In festo Assumptionis B. M. V. *, in the form of a Responsorium breve for the 1st Vesper, which is sung in the Minor Hours with a varied form of the text as a verse in the Alleluia of the Mass on the same day. It describes the Angel’s joy at the corporeal Assumption Of Mary into Heaven. - Illumina nos asks God for enlightenment through the sevenfold mercy of the Comforter, to leave the darkness of our own sins and to be able to enter into the glory of eternal life. The origin of the motet text ‘Illumina nos’ is still unknown. In any case, it has not been removed from the medieval Christian prayer stock. Probably it has to be settled in the neo-Latin environment from 1600. The idea of seeing the author himself in Gesualdo is not wrong. The text fits in with the presumed need for the soul of a man who, for fear of the revenge of the Carafa family**, locks himself in his castle and, through the related crimes of murder against woman, child and rival, as well as through the failed life relationships, becomes darkened in his mind, from which there is no longer a secular way out. It is not without reason that ‘Illumina nos’ was included in his motet collection as the last piece, as a final piece with which the author asks for help from the agony of the misconduct.

* B. M. V. = Beatae Mariae Virginis.

** see chapter ‚Source’, annotation *.

Source: Certain compositions by other composers were printed in the part books of Gesualdo’s time , which contained just one voice part for a selection of works without bar lines, and from which both singers might sing just as much as instrumentalists might play. Exclusive printing for chamber and orchestral music only became commonplace from well into the 18th Century, and the printing of scores was still rare up to 1590. Gesualdo’s newly composed madrigals were some of the first works to be produced in score. Music by Gesualdo is therefore reconstructed from printed part books. The loss of a single part book thus means the loss of a complete set of pieces in that particular part. The attempts at reconstructing Gesualdo’s music that Strawinsky saw in 1952 contained gaps in the Bass and -Sextus parts. To fill them was one of the purposes of Strawinsky’s ‘recompositions’. –

In 1603, Gesualdo di Venosa (1560-1613, whose music, as a result of its chromatic colorations, which can be traced back to an enthusiasm for the Greeks as an attempt to revive the Greek tonal sexes of the Chromatic and Enharmonic under the rediscovered old masters, played a special role*), published two volumes of motets using spiritual and liturgical texts. The second volume, which is called Liber primus like the first, contains 19 six- and seven-part motets. Sacrarum cantionum liber primus quorum una septem vocibus, caeterae sex vocibus, was published in part-book form without bar lines, and the seven-part motet Illumina nos was the last in the collection. The printing of the part book was carried out by Don Giovanni Pietro Capuccio and printed by Constantino Vitali in Naples. The motets are not numbered in order, and their order is coincidental and does not serve a purpose. More than a quarter of the works are settings of Marian texts. There was obviously only a single surviving edition of the motets, a set of part books from 1603 which is however incomplete, and which was stored by the Oratorio dei Filippini in Naples and, up to the publication of the complete Gesualdo edition in Germany, was never reprinted, so far as could be traced. The collection of motets, of which the part books for the Sextus and Bass parts have been lost, was printed as a fragment under the aegis of the complete Gesualdo edition and published as the ninth volume in 1961 by Glenn E. Watkins at the Ugrino publishers in Hamburg. Watkins took Strawinsky’s completion of the parts so seriously that he included them in the edition. The publication of the Tres Sacrae Cantiones in Strawinsky’s version by Boosey & Hawkes in 1960 was based on the edition by Glenn E. Watkins at the Ugrino publishers in Hamburg, and also kept the same frontispiece, textually rearranged, and catalogue of contents from the original edition of 1603. At this point in time, the 9th volume of the complete edition had not yet been printed. The selection of Strawinsky’s text for these motets had no textual or theological bases, but exclusively because they were complete. For all 20 motets, the Sextus and Bassus parts have been lost, but as the two motets Da pacem Domine and Assumpta est Maria contain instructions regarding the canon in the surviving parts which make it possible to reconstruct at least the Sextus part authoritatively, they are an exception. –

In the first motet, the Sextus and Bassus parts are missing. The Cantus, Altus, Tenor and Quintus parts are extant. The tenor however contains the marking Canon in Diapente. As a result, there must have been another part at the interval of a fifth to the tenor part, the canonical entry of which is clearly established by a signum congruentiae. The missing Sextus part therefore appears as a third alto part, which would probably not even have needed to be printed when one takes into account the contrapuntal skill of the singers at the time, because it would have been a tenor part transposed into the viola clef. The only missing part remaining is the bass part, the reconstruction of which, inside the five-part mesh of voices, does not allow for many different possibilities. –

It is also a similar case for the second motet, for which Strawinsky’s printed edition and the markings in the revision report seem to contradict themselves. Here two parts of the six are missing: the Sextus and Bassus according to Watkins, but the Altus, Quintus and Bassus parts according to Strawinsky. The Quintus part (the Sextus part according to Strawinsky) contains a marking, this time Canon in Diapason et Diapente, and calls for the formation of two new parts, the first at the octave, and the second at the fifth, developing them contrapuntally. In this particular case, the tenor could have been omitted without detriment to the Cantionum sacrum, because in the same way, it would have been possible to reconstruct the point of entry on the basis of the imitation marking, and certainly by means of a signum congruentiae. What results is the new Sextus part. According to Strawinsky, it is the Altus and Quintus parts that result. Only the Bass part is definitely missing here, the reconstruction of which is the same situation as for the first motet. –

In the third motet, Illumina nos, the Sextus and Bassus are still missing. Both can be inferred from their contexts. Since the 7th part survives, Strawinsky was working inside a five-part web of notes into which two further parts, including the bass part, set narrow limits within which to make the reconstruction. In all the other six-part movements, he would have had to create two to four parts with a much larger potential for error than for the above, rather than creating one or two parts with five already surviving. This may have been the reason why Strawinsky decided on these three particular motets, which in the unnumbered order of the original appear in second, twelfth and twentieth positions. Up to the time of Schütz, the voice registers came out of the relationship between the sung line and the lowest line sung in the tenor and at the same time were defined in connection with the generic, historically established combinations of voices. Quintus therefore in the secular and sacred vocal works of the 16th and 17th Centuries meant the fifth part appearing in addition to the standard four-part writing (Soprano, Alto, Tenor, Bass); it does not imply a new register in itself, but only expands a register that is already being used. A Quintus part, and along the same lines, a Sextus (sixth) part, can therefore occupy any register, as another Soprano (Discantus), Alto, Tenor or Bass, and what type of singer is used depends on the register assigned to it. There are exceptions, where for the Cantus, instead of a Soprano, a Mezzo-soprano is used or a baritone is used in the bass part to add a higher bass. Such parts, as they occupy new registers, have their own clefs: the mezzo-soprano, the mezzo-soprano clef and the baritone, the baritone clef. In the first two Gesualdo motets that Strawinsky completed, the Quintus forms a second and the Sextus a third alto part; in the third motet, Illumina nos, on the other hand, the Quintus is a second tenor part and the Sextus a second soprano. This counting is coherent from a 16th-century point of view, because it views the tenor as the central voice part and subsequently counts out from the soprano, and only then begins with the Soprano if the tenor is not split. Strawinsky therefore only supplied the Bass part in the first two motets, and in the third, which already had the Sextus and Bassus, he supplied the treble line, which was a second soprano part lying under the actual soprano part, and he also supplied the bass as well. In the third motet, the original seventh part is called Septima pars, and it functions as a second alto part. This motet is therefore written for two sopranos (soprano + 6th part), two altos (alto + 7th part), two tenors (tenor + 5th part) and one bass.

* He was a ruling prince, a descendant of one of the most prominent Spanish-Neapolitan aristocratic families, nephew of Cardinal Carlo Borromeo, friend of Torquato Tasso and murderer of his unfaithful wife, Maria of the Avalos family, her lover Fabrizio Carafa, Duke of Andria and, as it is presumed without proof, his probably illegitimate little daughter. The darkening of the mind, coming about as a result of these acts of murder, his unhappy second marriage and the loss of his children, manifesting itself as pangs of conscience make only a journalistically welcome biographical ingredient.

Construction: The Tres Sacrae Cantiones are three sacred choral pieces which have neither metronome markings nor Italian performance markings, and they are in the motet style of the very end of the 16 thCentury. There is a piano reduction printed beneath in the vocal score which was produced by Strawinsky himself but which should not be played with it, but is only to be used for rehearsal purposes (I Da pacem Domine [54 bars in six parts, bass part reconstructed by Strawinsky]; II Assumpta est Maria [49 bars in six parts, bass part reconstructed by Strawinsky]; III Illumina nos [74 bars in seven parts, Second Soprano, i.e. Treble and Bass parts reconstructed by Strawinsky]).

General changes: The number of clefs used is restricted to the usual treble and bass clefs that are used for modern choral writing. Strawinsky’s accidentals always last for the entire bar, unlike in the critical Gesualdo edition, for which the accidentals always revert to the original note for subsequent appearances for the easier identification of every note, even in obvious repetitions of bars, because with music without barlines, an accidental does not carry over any further than the actual note before which it is placed. As a result, notes without accidentals which follow a note with an accidental inside one bar must, in a critical edition divided up into bars, receive a natural sign which is not original. This is how Strawinsky also proceeded. The complete edition that is associated with this departs from this practice because it can inevitably only be fragmentary due to the missing original parts. It repeats identical accidentals inside one bar, but does not regard every note without an accidental as a note with a natural sign. – The Latin orthography of 1603 was rewritten for today. This is the same both for Strawinsky as well as for the complete edition (Do-mi-ne instead of the original Do mi ne). – Unlike in the Boosey edition, which prints the motets completed by Strawinsky with printed bar numbers in groups of five, the complete edition dispenses with any kind of numbering. Here as well, Strawinsky’s completed motets, reprinted, appear without bar numbers. In the first two motets, there are no departures from the original, apart from the fact that the note values are halved throughout in comparison with the original. In the third motet, there are a few small departures which are of little importance.

Single differences : I: Da pacem Domine : no changes - II: Assumpta est Maria : no changes – III: Illumina nos : with reference to the new edition, the note values are halved in comparison with the original; in the Cantus part in bar 25, the last note in the original is a dotted semibreve; the last note of bar 26 is a minim; the last note of bar 54 is an e1; in the Altus part in bar 19, the first note is originally a g1; in the tenor part, the final note of bar 74 is an E; in the Quintus part, both the first notes in bars 16 and 17 are semibreves, in bar 17, the second note is a minim, and in bar 31, the final note is a semibreve, and bar 49 is a brevis. All markings are based on the report of the revisions in the critical complete edition, which is printed without page numbering [German p. 98, English p.99] in the end appendix of the edition.

Discrepancies and Critical Report from the Complete Edition : The remarks in the report of the revisions in the Critical Complete Edition concerning Strawinsky’s changes from the original are, in specific cases, not particularly helpful. The publishers reproduced the three motets in Strawinsky’s version without Strawinsky’s piano reduction underneath and either did not give the original version. Since there are no other critical editions, apart from the original without barlines, which only survives in a few copies, there are no possibilities for comparison, while questions arise at the same time which the revisions report does not answer, because it only catalogues the original form and not the change or the reason for the change. In place of the dotted semibreve in the Cantus in the original at bar 25, in Strawinsky’s version, if this is actually the correct point, there is a quaver tied over to a crotchet. Strawinsky changes the final note of bar 54, e1, into g1; in the Altus in bar 19, he changes the first note, g1, into an e1; in the tenor, the last note of bar 74, previously an e, now becomes a c. At another point in the edition, it is written that the obvious remaining printing errors had implicitly been corrected, but without references. It is not stated whether Strawinsky’s alterations are a result of compositional considerations or whether they are simply the subtle removal of printing errors. When Strawinsky makes a note with a longer duration in the original into a shorter one, the entire structural system must either collapse, or else he must recompose it anew. All this can neither be established, as there is no original, nor explained, because the revisions report says nothing about this, and clearly does not even recognize that there is an issue surrounding this. Further discrepancies arise in comparing the Boosey edition of 1960 with the Critical revisions report by Watkins. In Strawinsky’s edition, the Sextus is indicated as being extant and from it, two other parts, namely the Altus and Quintus parts, were reconstructed using the in canon diapason et diapente marking. According to the Critical report, the marking is in the surviving Quintus part, which dictates the lost Sextus and Tenor parts canonically. Strawinsky’s statement appears more plausible at first glance, because Strawinsky’s Altus diapason part and the Quintus diapente part enter after one another. In actual fact, the entire Sextus part is lost and this must be a printing error in the Boosey edition, if not an actual factual error. A remark in the Critical report on the nature of Strawinsky’s completions is also missing. The Boosey edition was published before the creation of the revision report*.

* Only in the foreword by Robert Craft to the Boosey edition of Illumina nos are there remarks about Strawinsky corrections: „He correted two errors of printing, one of ‚ficta’ and one inaccurate rest, but in the five existing parts he changed the dispotision of only on e note: the tenor’s final E has been dropped an octave.”

Style : Gesualdo’s canonical style of writing in the three motets is different from his other compositional practice. Gesualdo was not regarded in his time as an educated musician, in fact quite the opposite, he was even accused of a lack of technical skill. The motets paint a different picture of him, and Strawinsky supports this picture with his completions. Gesualdo certainly did not write the missing parts in the same way as Strawinsky did; Strawinsky’s completions heap up the idiosyncrasies of Gesualdo’s writing. Where Gesualdo, as was his style, would have written one or a few clashing seconds, Strawinsky fills the entire part with them. Strawinsky adds more canonic imitations to the simple ones written by Gesualdo at points in the text where one would never have expected them, but where they do in fact work well. In Illumina nos, with the completed Sextus and Bassus parts, he has the bass begin with a canon in Diapason, followed by the Sextus, to which he then gives it in inverted retrograde two crotchets later, so that with the beginning of the original cantus, this time 3 crotchets later, a three-part canon is created, the material of which is entirely derived from the Cantus. The phrase in the Sextus part in bar 15 makes the subsequent Altus phrase into a canon in Diatesseron. The examples are abundant. Strawinsky however did not compose his additions freely, but derived his motific workings from those of Gesualdo. In this way, it is stylistically sharpened to Gesualdo’s idiosyncrasy, something which made him such a prominent composer for the 20th Century. The result is in parts a Gesualdo with Strawinsky as subordinate.

Dedication: The dedication is part of the main title.

Date of origin: III ( Illumina nos ): between 28th [27th] April and 9th [10th] May 1957; I/II: September 1959.

History of origin: As he had already sent the completed score of Agon to Roth on 10th May 1957, presumably together with the piano reduction, the time period of composition for Illumina nos is clear. On 18th May, he asked Roth whether everything had arrived, and mentioned his piano reduction, which was to be printed running along under the choir systems, and on 20th May, he cleared up the question of the preface and demanded a fee of 50 dollars for Craft’s preface, a relatively modest sum which later, as is proved by a letter from Strawinsky to Rufina Ampenoff of 20th May 1960, was doubled to 100 dollars for the preface to the three-part edition. In the early morning of 28th May, he received the proofs for correction from the publishers, which he immediately completed on the afternoon of the same day. On 29th May, everything was sent back to the publishers, including Craft’s preface and a sample of the title page. Da pacem Domine and Assumpta est were sent as photocopies of the manuscript on 29th September 1959 to Roth with the remark that he had just completed the two works (‘I have just completed the bass parts of two of Gesualdo’s 6-part sacred Cantiones ’.). At the same time, he began in his usual way to press, because he wanted to have the parts by January for the concerts in New York. On 4th October 1959, he asked by telegram for the copy of Illumina nos to be sent to him, as Craft was going to write a new preface and this would be published together with the new edition. Strawinsky took this opportunity to ask whether they were ready to pay Craft the fee of one-hundred dollars for it, to which the publishers, as can be seen from later letters, agreed. The preface was to go out in the same week, although this did not happen, as Strawinsky announced its posting to Roth in a letter of 3rd December. For Strawinsky, everything was taking much too long. On 28th March 1960, he reminded Roth that he had not yet received the Motets with Craft’s preface. On 12th May, he hassled him with a telegram, and on 20th May, he was still waiting for the Motets and preface, and as a precaution gave his address as the same one to which the $100 for Craft should be sent. After this, he did not broach the subject of the music being sent again, a sign that he had finally received it.

First performance: 10th January 1960in New York, Town Hall, under the direction of Robert Craft, as part of the Strawinsky Music Festival (not: 27th September 1960 in Venice).

Remarks: According to Craft, Strawinsky’s admiration for Gesualdo goes back to 1952 at the earliest, and according to Strawinsky’s own statements, ten to twelve years before 1960. He did not however obtain copies of the Sacrae Cantiones by Gesualdo before 1956. At that time, he did not settle on the idea of a reconstruction of the two missing parts at first, because he required additional compositions for the première of Canticum Sacrum in the cathedral of Venice (13th September 1956), when it became clear that the Canticum could not make up a full-length evening concert by itself due to its brevity. Strawinsky’s letter to Ernst Roth of 10th November 1955 gives information about Strawinsky’s plans. He therefore compiled a sacred programme for Roth; as the first number, he chose a Ricercar for 4 trombones by Andrea Gabrieli, as the second, a five-part Psalm setting by Heinrich Schütz, Motet no.14 by Carlo Gesualdo and Lauda Jerusalem by Claudio Monteverdi, both in seven parts. In the original edition, Illumina nos is piece no.20 in an unnumbered order. How Strawinsky arrived at the no.14, and which is the motet Ardens est cor meum in the original edition, unless he simply made a mistake, is unclear. The concert was to be completed with his orchestration of Bach’s Choral Variations. These plans remained unrealized for the time being, because the predicted reason took on a different form. Strawinsky therefore postponed his thoughts of a completion, without forgetting it completely, up to the time of the completion of Agon, which was on 27th April 1957.

Situationsgeschichte: In the course of the attempt to legitimize New Music historically, the research into Gesualdo in Germany played a special role early on, after Theodor Kroyer had in 1902 already highlighted the remarkable nature of Gesualdo’s chromatic writing and Ferdinand Keiner had written the first doctoral thesis on Gesualdo’s madrigals at the University of Leipzig. This tendency continued on in European high culture after the Second World War, and this was connected to the founding of an association of madrigalists by Robert Craft, exclusively for the purpose of the performance of Gesualdo’s music. The driving force behind this was presumably the record company Columbia, who had discovered a hole in the market and was issuing a five-part series of vinyl records of Gesualdo’s madrigals. The producer was David Raksin, who was respected by Strawinsky and who was the orchestrator of Strawinsky’s Circus Polka for band. The idea for this came, as the vinyl record presented itself, from Strawinsky’s friend Aldous Huxley, who wrote the extensive introduction and included Strawinsky in it >”A COLLECTION OF MARVELS” Igor Stravinsky / [Photography:] / Aldous Huxley & Igor Stravinsky / Aldous Huxley / presents / THE MADRIGALS OF CARLO GESUALDO / Volume / LP 600 LIBRARY OF CONGRESS Catalogue Card Number: R56-1000 / SUNSET RECORDS<. Aldous Huxley was, as proven not only by this introduction, well known as a scientific as well as a musicological and analytical authority on Gesualdo. It was presumably through this path that Strawinsky and probably Craft as well, who never publicly mentioned having introduced Strawinsky to Gesualdo, became acquainted with Gesualdo’s music and Strawinsky’s well quoted phrase regarding Gesualdo was effectively the motto, and not without reason, on the title page of the accompanying booklet for the vinyl edition. The copyright for the series made in October and November 1955 was issued in 1956 to the Sunset Music Corporation. The photographs were by William Claxton, and the sound engineer (recording engineer) was Val Valentin. Robert Craft had for this purpose created a five-man association of madrigalists, which he named ‘The Singers of Ferrara’ and the members of which have become known as a result of other documentary recordings and concert performances of Strawinsky (Tenor: Richard Robinson; Soprano: Grace-Lynn Martin, Marilynn Horne; Contralto: Cora Lauridsen; Bass: ). The group appeared with the same programme on 17th October 1955 in one of the ‘Monday Evening Concerts’ (West Hollywood Park I). On this evening, Claxton also photographed the association. The photography appears in the accompanying booklet. – The connection between Glenn Watkins and Strawinsky was made as a result of the first of the Gesualdo records. The Gesualdo specialist Watkins, who was resident in Ann Arbor and was working at the University of North Carolina on the Critical Complete Edition, which had been started by Wilhelm Weismann in Germany, discovered inaccuracies and conveyed this to Craft by letter. From then on, the dealings between Strawinsky’s circle and Watkins began, which became ever closer and closer; he sought out Strawinsky in 1965 in Hollywood and in doing so gained his promise to write the foreword for the Gesualdo monograph or biography by Watkins when it was finished. Strawinsky in fact honoured the promise with the help of Craft in March 1968 and wrote a two-part preface, the first part of which honours Prof. Watkins, his research and its results, and the second part of which is a description of his own stations on his path to Gesualdo, predominantly a sharply witty report of his journey, when and where he came to Italian cities on Gesualdo’s trail, more unintentionally than intentionally. Watkins prompted the recomposition of the two later completed motets Da pacem and Assumpta est. Strawinsky came across the seven-part Illumina nos independent of and before his acquaintance with Watkins, and in fact was not planning to use it, but then offered, when he had come to know Watkins, photocopies of his work to him. He in turn sent to Strawinsky in Venice copies of two other madrigals in September 1959 and requested him to complete the two missing parts here as well, which Strawinsky completed inside one month. This link explains the length of time of composition and the differing paths to publication of the three motets. Huxley only plays, for Watkins, a role on the commenting team, and Ratkin is not mentioned at all. Huxley was already dead in 1965, and Ratkin was the producer in the publication and was insignificant in the scientific Gesualdo research.

Versions : Strawinsky first recomposed the substantial seven-part motet Illumina nos and had it published in 1957 by Boosey & Hawkes in London with a preface by Robert Craft. Two years later, he completed the motets Da pacem Domine and Assumpta est Maria and combined them with Illumina nos in a new edition, which was published in 1960 by Boosey & Hawkes and for which Craft wrote a slightly altered preface. Strawinsky must have been very satisfied with the edition, otherwise he would not have requested a similar one for the Monumentum. The original frontispiece of the 1603 edition was chosen as the title page and in the solemn presentation of the title, in which originally only Gesualdo’s name stood in cursive fancy lettering, entered in red capital letters the names of Gesualdo and Strawinsky and the working title. Apart from this, a facsimile of the index page of the original Gesualdo edition of 1603 was printed. In 1960, Boosey & Hawkes published the complete three-part edition of the motets. It was finally in 1962 that Watkins adopted the three ‘recomposed’ Gesualdo motets into the Complete edition along with the visual material from Ratkin and Huxley’s series of vinyl records, but in doing so, he removed the image of the part books as well as the printed part names and notes on the reversion. He also left the choral layout, but did not reprint the piano part underneath, something upon which Strawinsky had placed a lot of value, because they would have had to do the same for all the other pieces, and this would have been different from the original. Ugrino Publishers, misprinted in the preface to the Boosey edition but not in the Copyright notice as Kgrino publishers, had, on the urgent instigation of Watkins for the inclusion of these pieces in the Complete edition, made an inquiry of Strawinsky. He then forwarded the issue to Roth with the observation that this piece belonged to Boosey and that they would have to contact Boosey & Hawkes if they wanted to include it in the Complete edition. Legally, this looked somewhat different, as Boosey’s edition was based on the Ugrino edition by Glenn E. Watkins, with whom it was to be arranged along with the acknowledgement ‘By arrangement with Ugrino-Verlag, Hamburg’, and they were able without further delay to print the three Gesualdo motets according to the part books, along with the Sextus and Bassus parts which are also missing from the other motets. Watkins however was clearly very interested in being able to include Strawinsky’s completions in his complete edition, especially as Strawinsky’s version of the edition naturally gave a unique charm. He also printed parts of Craft’s second preface in his own preface, half-dedicated it to Strawinsky’s completion and referred to Strawinsky in the German preface as the ‘ vielleicht größten Tonschöpfer unserer Zeit ’ (in the English preface: ‘perhaps our greatest master today’). The rights for the reprinting of these three works, also in the Complete edition, remained with Boosey & Hawkes. Strawinsky settled the publishing contract for Illumina nos with Boosey & Hawkes on 20th June 1957, and the contract for the other two motets on 28th October 1959.

Comments on Ugrino publishers and the Jahnn edition : Ugrino publishers, based in Hamburg, took its name from a sect for the improvement of the world ‘Ugrino’, which was founded by the enfant terrible and man of letters, Hans Henny Jahnn, who was later an expert on organ construction, restorer of the Hamburg Schnitger organ and co-founder of the Organ Revival Movement (‘Orgelbewegung’) and erotomania (17/12/1894-29/11/1959). This was a select denomination with the goal of the ‘Rebirth of the cultic Archaic period’ aspiring to a ‘Renewal of Mankind’ with its criticism of civilization which Jahnn came up with in Norway, to where he had fled before the First World War. The sect soon fell apart, but the publishing house founded by Jahnn and his friend Gottlieb Harms (died 1931) in 1921, survived. In that house, they specialised in the publication of the works of Samuel Scheidt, Dietrich Buxtehude and other music of the Baroque, and it was also here that the long-due critical complete edition of Gesualdo’s music was published between 1957 and 1967. Strawinsky’s completions, strictly speaking, do not belong in the critical complete edition. It was however a constituent part of the publicity of the Ugrino publishing house, not for example to produce critical editions in the sense of musicological edition techniques, but to produce editions to be used for cultic purposes to further the idea of the sect. It was for this reason that they had from scientific standpoints and also explains the meaning of the critical reports, above all in the early Complete editions; as a result it also made it possible, especially later on, since the edition guidelines at that point were being heeded more exactly, to tolerate a sharpening of the original, as Strawinsky had intended it. The editor was at first Wilhelm Weismann, a composer with rumoured anthroposophical tendencies, who became Professor for Composition at the Musikhochschule in Leipzig and earned himself great prestige in the Communist section of Germany without being a Communist*. He was responsible for the Madrigal volumes I to VI (1957-1962), and Watkins was responsible for volumes VII to XI (1959-1967), and in volume X (1967), which was published last, containing the instrumental works, Psalms and Canzonettas, there is a cover page > Sämtliche Werke<(Complete works) with a statement of the general editorship of Weismann-Watkins. Up to 1961, all the volumes were published at the Ugrino publishers, and from 1962 in connection with the ‘people-owned Firm’ in Leipzig in the Communist section of Germany. The entire edition was printed in South Germany by Stürtz in Würzburg. The fact that the first volumes were produced in the Ugrino publishing house in Hamburg, and the last in the so-called ‘Volkseigener Betrieb’ (people-owned firm) in Leipzig, can be explained by the labyrinthine history of the publishing house. After Harms’s death in 1931 and Jahnns’ recent flight from Germany in 1933, the responsibility predominantly lay with Hilmar Trede (died 1947), who worked for Peters publishers in Leipzig on a commission basis. The owners of Peters, the Hinrichsen family, were murdered by French and German National Socialists. Jahnn returned in 1945 and was the sole owner from 1956. After his death in 1959, his daughter, Signe Trede, took over the ownership of the publishing house, which, now without foreign payments, merged into the old Peters publishers, which the Communists had nationalized after 1945 into a VEB (Volkseigener Betrieb, i.e. a people-owned firm). Wilhem Weismann had come to Peters on 20/09/1929 and remained there without interruption until 1966. He was seen as strong in character, loyal to the publishers and stood by the Hinrichsen family, even in the most difficult times. He published numerous editions of Johann Christian Bach, Brahms, Händel, Haydn, D. Scarlatti, Mozart and in 1930, the Madrigals of Gesualdo. It was therefore nothing more than logical to make him the editor of the Gesualdo Complete edition, when this was begun in 1957 under Jahnn. Presumably, Weismann , responsible in the publishing house for Gesualdo, had absolutely no or only a very small connection to Jahnn’s actual idea. His field was madrigals, and Watkins was responsible for the other compositions by Gesualdo.

* According to informations by Winfried Schrammek and Frieder Zschoch.

Historical recording: non traceable.

CD edition: not contained.

Autograph: no known at present.

Copyright: 1960 by Boosey & Co., Ltd., b y arrangement with Ugrino-Verlag, Hamburg.

Editions

a) Overview

93-1 1957 ChSc Illumina nos ; l; Boosey & Hawkes London; 18 pp.; B. & H. 18345.

93-2 1960 ChSc; l; Boosey & Hawkes London; 35 pp.; B. & H. 18690.

93-3 1962 Gesualdo-Gesamtausgabe; — ; DV 4779.

b) Characteristic features

93-1 Gesualdo – Strawinsky / Illumina nos / Boosey & Hawkes // Don Carlo Gesualdo / Illumina nos / from the book of ‘Sacræ Cantiones’ for six and seven voices / tiré des ‘Sacræ Cantiones’ à six et sept voix / aus den ‘Sacræ Canti für sechs und sieben Stimmen / (1603) / The missing Sextus and Bassus parts composed by / Les parties du sextus et du bassus composées par / Die fehlende Sextus- und Bassus-Stimme hinzugefügt von / Igor Strawinsky / with a preface by / Robert Craft / Boosey & Hawkes, Ltd. / London · Paris · Bonn · Capetown · Sydney · Toronto · Buenos Aires · New York // (Choral score sewn in black 18.3 x 25.9 (8° [Lex 8°]); sung text Latin; 18 [18] pages + 4 cover pages black on creme white [front cover title, 3 empty pages] + 10 pages front matter [title page, empty page, text of the introduction in English without pagination, c ontinuation and end of the text of the introduction in English + text of the introduction in German without pagination, continuation of the text of the introduction in German without pagination, c ontinuation and end of the text of the introduction in German + text of the introduction in French without pagination, c ontinuation and end of the text of the introduction in French without pagination, facsimile of the title page of the first edition of 1603, facsimile of the index page of the first edition of 1603 , empty page] without back matter; title head in connection with authors specified 1. page of the score paginated p. 1 centre centred >DON CARLO GESUALDO / ILLUMINA NOS / from the book (1603) of SACRÆ CANTIONES for six and seven / voices. The missing Sextus and Bassus parts were composed by / IGOR STRAWINSKY<; legal reservations 1. page of the score below type area flush right >All rights reserved< flush left >© 1957 by Boosey & Co., Ltd.<; production indication 1. page of the score below type area inside right >Printed in England<; plate number >B. & H. 18345<; without end marks) // 1957

93-2 ^CARLO GESUALDO DI VENOSA* / (1560-1613)* TRES* / SACRAE CANTIONES* / Completed by / IGOR STRAWINSKY*^ / BOOSEY & HAWKES // (Choral score sewn 18.2 x 25.3 (8° [Lex 8°]); sung text Latin; 35 [29] pages + 6 pages front matter [ornamental front cover title in red, black, grey on creme white in the form of a reproduction of the facsimile of the title page from the first edition of the Gesualdo from 1603, but the original written text has been swapped for the text of the Boosey edition , empty page, introduction English >TRES SACRAE CANTIONES / by / Carlo Gesualdo di Venosa / 1560-1613 / completed by / Igor Stravinsky / For the 400th Anniversary of Gesualdo's birth<, t he continuation and end of the introduction initialled >R.C.< + place of origin italic > This edition is based on the edition of Professor Glenn E. Watkins published by Agrino-Verlag**, Hamburg. <, facsimile of the index page of the first edition of 1603 + 1 page back matter [empty page ]; piece number in Roman numeral without dot and song title as title head 1. page of the score pagineted p. 7 >I / Da pacem Domine< [p. 7: >II / Assumpta est Maria<; p. 18: >III / Illumina nos<]; without author specified; legal reservations below type area flush right pp. 7, 13, 18 >All rights reserved< flush left p. 7, 13 >© 1960 by Boosey & Co., Ltd. / By arrangement with Ugrino-Verlag, Hamburg< p. 18 >© 1957 by Boosey & Co., Ltd. / By arrangement with Ugrino-Verlag, Hamburg<; production indication pp. 7, 13,18 below type area inside right >Printed in England<; plate number >B. & H. 18690<; end number p. 35 flush left as end mark >5. 60. E.) // 1960

^ ^ Surface area 9.7 x 7.4.

* Printed in red.

** Misprint original (Agrino instead of Ugrino).

93-3 1962 [Gesualdo-Gesamtausgabe Band IX; Ugrino-Verlag Hamburg; pp. 19-22, 58-61, 89-97; without plate number; Edition number DV 4779]

K Cat­a­log: Anno­tated Cat­a­log of Works and Work Edi­tions of Igor Straw­in­sky till 1971, revised version 2014 and ongoing, by Hel­mut Kirch­meyer.
© Hel­mut Kirch­meyer. All rights reserved.
http://www.kcatalog.org and http://www.kcatalog.net