Terminology – the profession of Hautboist

The word Hautboisten (also Hoboisten) is the plural form of the name for a musical profession once common in German-speaking countries. Their appearance in official eighteenth-century salary lists is relatively rare, and often the only surviving evidence of their existence comes in the form of documentation concerning conflicts with other groups of musicians such as Stadtpfeifer (town pipers), making research a challenging task.Footnote ⁹ Individual members of this profession were referred to by the title Hautboist (singular), which derives from the French hautbois (oboe). The term Hautboisten, however, cannot be simply translated as oboe-players, given that in addition to performing on double-reed instruments, such as oboes and bassoons, they were also able (and indeed expected) to play numerous other instruments. For this reason, even using the phrase ‘hautboy band’, as introduced by Haynes, seems to ignore the true versatility of these musicians.

The title Hautboisten was in use from the latter decades of the seventeenth century up until the end of World War I, by which time it had become a term used solely to describe military musicians. Not surprisingly then, many modern scholars were led to the conclusion that the term Hautboisten had at all times referred primarily to military musicians.

A further term in need of clarification here is ‘orchestra’. John Spitzer and Neal Zaslaw define the orchestra as an ensemble ‘based on string instruments of the violin family plus double basses’.Footnote ¹⁰ Among the additional key elements that constitute orchestras, they also require numerous violins, whose parts are doubled more than the other strings in the ensemble, as well as the presence of wind instruments, the latter usually not playing in unison and with the number employed depending on the era and location.

According to Michael Robertson the German Lullists, such as Johann Sigismund Kusser (1660–1727), followed the French tradition of doubling the outer parts in their orchestral works, scoring the bassoon along with the basses and both hautboys along with the first violin.Footnote ¹¹ This seems to be true in many cases. In Kusser's opera Adonis, however, the composer employs five double-reed players among four of the five parts of the score. These are two hautboys, one Haut-contre d'hautbois (most likely another hautboy in C), one Taille d'hautbois and one bassoon. Regularly, the first hautboy plays in unison with the first violin, whilst the second and third hautboys join the second violin. The Taille doubles the part of the first viola and the bassoon plays the same part as the other basses.Footnote ¹² In light of Kusser's instrumentation in Adonis it may be questionable, and warrants future investigation, whether Spitzer's and Zaslaw's definition was already the norm rather than one of many possibilities during the period they describe as the time of ‘the birth of the orchestra’, that is, 1680–1740.Footnote ¹³

From the mid-seventeenth century onwards the term Kapelle (chapel), which had previously been used largely to denote ensembles of vocalists, also came to refer to instrumentalists performing alongside the singers, and even to pure instrumental ensembles, which resembled an orchestra in today's commonly accepted sense, adding further to the confusion in terminology.Footnote ¹⁴

Although many courts, such as, for example, those based in Celle, Hanover, Dresden, Darmstadt, Stuttgart and Berlin, had orchestras established during the first half of the eighteenth century,Footnote ¹⁵ and the term ‘orchestra’ began to be established by that time, the vast majority of courts in the German-speaking territories comprised small earldoms and duchies, which did not have the financial means to support such large musical bodies. When Johann Mattheson (1681–1764) complained about every small court's desire for its own ‘orchestra’ in the 1725 issue of his periodical Critica Musica (published between 1722 and 1725), it may be understood that many such small groups of musicians did indeed exist.Footnote ¹⁶ Accordingly, it might be assumed that one-to-a-part instrumentation was still the norm rather than the exception at that time. Therefore, the term ‘orchestra’ will appear regularly with inverted commas throughout this article in order to remind the reader that different concepts of instrumentation existed in earlier periods.

Stadtpfeifer – Hautboisten

Prior to about 1680 when the hautboy came into fashion in German-speaking lands, there were already established ensembles specializing in wind instruments, comprising capable musicians who were required to perform on and teach string instruments as well. The tradition of these Stadtpfeifer groups can be traced back to the fourteenth century. They provided much of the music required in towns, including ceremonial music as well as music for pure entertainment. From the mid-seventeenth century they were organized into regional guilds, which provided them with the rights to perform music in their town of employment.Footnote ¹⁷ In addition to the income they received for their official work as civil servants, their guild affiliation entitled the Stadtpfeifer to earn a living by performing for any private occasion such as weddings and birthday celebrations.Footnote ¹⁸

When the newly developed hautboys arrived in German-speaking lands in the latter decades of the seventeenth century, naturally the Stadtpfeifer learned how to play these instruments and were required to show some proficiency on them;Footnote ¹⁹ however, there is also some evidence to suggest that on occasion Hautboisten groups were accorded a privileged status, and therefore provided competition to the Stadtpfeifer. For example, Renate Hildebrand has shown that in 1700 the so-called Hyntzsche Hautboistencompagnie was given the right to be the only ensemble to perform publicly on hautboys in the town of Halle.Footnote ²⁰ On the other hand, in Leipzig, at the time when Johann Sebastian Bach was employed as the cantor of the St. Thomas’ Church (1723–50), it was the Stadtpfeifer Caspar Gleditsch who performed the parts for the first hautboy in Bach's works during the services.Footnote ²¹

The inclusion of the hautboy as part of already established groups, such as the Stadtpfeifer, as well as in the comparatively newly formed ensemble-type, the Hautboisten – both groups likely performed the same kind of music – makes a definitive investigation of their respective repertoire difficult. Yet although the professional titles of these groups differed, the similarity of the music they performed therefore serves as an indicator for the concept and understanding of Hautboisten ensembles in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

Scope of this study

Where did these musicians usually find employment during the eighteenth century? What kind of music did they perform, and was this music really the same as that performed by the Stadtpfeifer, as implied above, or did their repertoire differ from that of the Stadtpfeifer? What were the typical instrumentations of the music they performed? What was the usual size of a group of Hautboisten? How can we identify whether music might have been intended specifically for Hautboisten? And, finally, can the analysis of the repertoire found in the Lilien Partbooks assist in establishing a fuller picture of the use of music in the daily life of Baroque society and the perception of the concept of Hautboisten by their contemporaries?

The analysis of a representative group of pieces contained within the Lilien Partbooks allows for significant light to be shed on Hautboisten and the role they played in the daily musical life of German towns, courts and the military. In addition to answering some of the questions outlined above, our understanding of the music profession in general during the eighteenth century may have to be revised in order to take into account this distinct, but often overlooked, group of musicians.

Achim Hofer investigated the extent and the significance of music composed specifically for regimental Hautboisten in his studies on the history of the military march.Footnote ²² The works collated in the Lilien Partbooks, however, are generally in a musical form that today would be categorized as ‘art music’. It is for this reason that the large number of marches still extant in libraries was ignored for the purposes of this article.

Furthermore, it is necessary to inform the reader that the number of secondary sources used for this article, not only in the parts concerning the general history of Hautboisten but also in the presentation of the provenance of the Lilien Partbooks, is due to the state of the manuscript data collated in the archives. Jacques Rensch from the Regionaal Historisch Centrum Limburg in Maastricht (Netherlands) stated in a personal conversation that the vast number of files concerning the history of the Sonsfeld family were yet to be catalogued and therefore could not be accessed by scholars.Footnote ²³

Because not only the primary sources but also the recent output of research publications on Hautboisten are widely spread and require modern-day investigators to search in many different places, the following comprehensive summary of our current state of knowledge is warranted as an aid for future research.

Recalling the current state of knowledge of Hautboisten, their history, and the concept of homogeneous instrumental consorts (as evident in the scores of the time) will create a platform for an understanding of the music performed by these groups. The study of music that is known to have been composed for such groups aims to complement our historical knowledge. A comparison of these works, specifically composed for Hautboisten, with those contained within the Lilien Partbooks, will draw a picture of the types of music commonly heard as part of everyday life at the beginning of the eighteenth century.

Following this introduction, part 2 of this article details the French origins of these groups and further provides an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding the spread of Hautboisten from France to the German-speaking lands of the Holy Roman Empire. The prime source of information in this field remains a seminal book chapter published by Werner Braun in 1971,Footnote ²⁴ and subsequently revised and translated into English in 1983: ‘The “Hautboist”: An Outline of Evolving Careers and Functions’.Footnote ²⁵ Braun's chapter is therefore considered in some depth, together with a selection of more recent research.

Part 3 examines published music known to have been composed for use by Hautboisten during the first half of the eighteenth century, much of which was marketed directly to Hautboisten as potential buyers. Additionally, a selection of manuscript music for wind ensembles that features instrumentation typical for Hautboisten will be investigated.

Subsequently, the provenance and contents of the Lilien Partbooks within the Sonsfeldsche Musikalien Sammlung will be analysed in part 4. The distinct labelling of the six partbooks as the ‘Lilien Partbooks’ identifies them as a group and sets them apart from the rest of the entire collection currently owned by Wennemar Freiherr von Fürstenberg.

France – the development of the Hautbois

Present-day scholars agree that the hautboy's origin can be found in France.Footnote ²⁶ When King Louis XIV (1638–1715) reigned (from 1661), his passion for the arts provided musicians and instrument makers (often combined in one person) with employment and, more importantly, with the possibility, perhaps even the commission, to experiment and invent. The instruments in use at the beginning of the Sun King's sovereignty were still basically the same as they had been during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. In the 1660s, the woodwind instruments from these earlier periods, which at this stage had been in use for a long time, went through a number of experimental stages involving a series of modifications that led to the creation of the Baroque versions of the hautboy, the bassoon, the recorder and the transverse flute, among others. An exact date for the introduction of the newly invented hautboy into existing ensembles at the French court cannot be identified because the instruments now known as the shawm, Baroque oboe and modern oboe were at all times, in French, labelled hautbois. We are therefore reliant upon other sources, such as iconography, literature and music (which occasionally offers clues regarding scoring) to provide us with evidence of the change in the hautbois's use and appearance, in order to gauge the approximate date of structural changes made to the instrument.

About 30 years before the period of transformation of this double-reed instrument, Marin Mersenne, in his Harmonie universelle (Paris, 1636), described two versions of the hautbois in use in France. The illustration of the first, the hautbois (or as he also calls it, the ‘grands Haut-bois’), shows members of the instrument family today known as shawms.Footnote ²⁷ In German sources of the same period this descant of the double-reed consort was referred to as the Schalmey and any lower versions, from the treble onwards, were called Pommer.Footnote ²⁸ These were instruments with a double reed directly controlled by the lips with some support of a pirouette.Footnote ²⁹ The distinct terminology in German-speaking lands, calling the earlier versions Schalmey and Pommer, whilst adopting the term Hautbois for the hautboy, makes it much easier to find particular dates as to when the newer version was first introduced into German music-making.

The second pertinent double-reed instrument discussed and illustrated in Mersenne's book is the Hautbois de Poictou (or Poitou), which appears to be an instrument with a wind cap covering the reed – similar to a crumhorn.Footnote ³⁰ According to modern definitions this would perhaps no longer be classified as a member of the oboe family; however, surviving evidence seems to suggest that musicians may have experimented by playing without the cap for more direct control of the reed which is suggested by Bruce Haynes and Marc Ecochard, respectively, in their contribution to an anthology on evolving instruments and music from the Renaissance to the Baroque periods.Footnote ³¹

Ecochard discusses a letter by Michel de La Barre (ca. 1675–1745) that is an eighteenth-century report of the development of wind instruments at the French court between the 1660s to the 1680s.Footnote ³² Although La Barre omits to provide specific dates for the first use of the new hautboy (his testimony was written more than 80 years after the development of the new hautboy in ca. 1740), it provides us with a historical view of what might have happened.

La Barre claims that the newer version of the transverse flute was introduced much later than the hautboy, and that the constructional changes finally made the doublereed instruments ‘useful’ within an ensemble of other instruments such as violins, recorders, viola da gambas and plucked string instruments. He further names two players, Philibert Rebillé (1639–1717) and René Pignon dit Descoteaux (ca. 1645–1728), who were given new positions in 1667 to perform on the new transverse flutes.Footnote ³³ Since these musicians are mentioned for the first time in official paylists in 1667,Footnote ³⁴ La Barre's letter appears to prove that the hautboy was first introduced to the court music before that year.Footnote ³⁵

Both types of hautbois presented by Mersenne are described as consort instruments of different sizes, thus confirming the fact that by the time Harmonie universelle was published in the early seventeenth century, the tradition of homogenous groups of instrument families was still in place. Combining these groups, in order to amalgamate the timbral characteristics of individual consorts, seems to have been the exception rather than the norm, and the idea of a large string ‘orchestra’ with an additional small number of wind instruments appears to be an innovation introduced by Jean-Baptiste Lully.Footnote ³⁶

In trying to establish an accurate date before 1667 for the inclusion of the hautboy into existing ensembles at the French court it becomes clear that the process of development of the hautboy was one of transition over many years rather than a particular moment at which all the old instruments were exchanged with new ones. It is highly likely that for a long period the different versions of the hautbois coexisted.

According to Haynes, it is currently undoubtedly believed that a ‘useful’ hautbois (e.g. for joining a consort of various types of instruments) premiered in a performance with the Petite Bande in 1657 in Lully's work L'Amour malade.Footnote ³⁷ His investigation of iconographic evidence within Mersenne's treatise and also on gobelins created in Charles Le Brun's (1619–1690) workshop led him to conclude that hautbois instruments between the mid-1650s and the early 1670s were ‘transitional’ versions which he calls ‘protomorphic hautboys’.Footnote ³⁸ He further explains that Lully, apparently, did not score for hautbois in his stage works between 1664 and 1670, the latter being the year of the premiere of Le bourgeois gentilhomme.Footnote ³⁹ Haynes concludes in his article that from towards the change of the decade up until 1664 protomorphic hautboys joined the strings of the Petite Bande, and that by 1670 the development of the new hautboy in its Baroque version was finalized.

France – provenance of double-reed ensembles

Initially, players of any type of wind instrument were generally employed by the Musique de l’Écurie; however, in the last decade of the seventeenth century, string consorts of the Musique de la Chambre and the Chapelle Royale began to engage double-reed players in permanent positions.Footnote ⁴⁰ Whenever wind instruments were required within these groups prior to that time, they would have been specially invited for that particular occasion.

The Écurie was divided into five separate groups, of which the first four utilized double-reed instruments, while the fifth group, Les Trompettes, was an independent formation consisting of trumpets, timpani and drums:

1. Violon, Hautbois, Saqueboutes et Cornets

   later known as the Douze Grands Hautbois du Roi

2. Hautbois et Musettes de Poitou

3. Fifres et Tambours

4. Cromornes et Trompettes Marines

5. Les Trompettes

By the sixteenth century it was not necessarily the case that the instruments mentioned in the title of a particular group were actually played by its members.Footnote ⁴¹ These titles were retained long after the musical style as well as the instruments themselves had changed. A further complicating factor is the fact that the majority of instrumentalists routinely performed on more than one instrument in this era, which makes it difficult to know exactly how the consorts were arranged. It seems likely, however, that the hautbois-instrumentsFootnote ⁴² were used initially in consort groupings as wind band instruments.

During the second half of the seventeenth century, double reeds were introduced, as a novelty, to the Petite Bande – the smaller of the two string consorts of the Musique de la Chambre. Although this may indicate the beginnings of the ‘orchestra’, with an instrumentation ratio of 4:1 for strings and woodwinds, it also suggests that the different consorts at court were still organized in the Renaissance tradition of smaller ensembles of like instruments, which retained their own qualities when performing together for special and rare occasions. Having one group taking the leading role, whilst others only provided additional tone colour, was the necessary innovation leading to the institutionalization of the ‘orchestra’.

Hautboist – a German profession

Origins and provenance of German Hautboisten

Regarding the origins of the Hautboisten, Braun points to the earliest double-reed ensembles, evidence of which he claims first appeared in archival records at the court in Burgundy at the end of the fifteenth century.Footnote ⁷² In the Middle Ages these ensembles were made up of treble and alto shawms. Later, lower instruments were added, including the larger shawm instruments (tenor and bass). The bass shawm was replaced by the dulcian, the Renaissance forerunner of the bassoon, towards the end of the sixteenth century. Bernhard Höfele states that Friedrich Wilhelm of Brandenburg (known as the ‘Great Elector’, 1620–88) added a group of four shawms to the standard band of four drummers for each of his dragoon regiments. This group would have comprised two trebles, one alto and one bass instrument, and thus marks the beginning of the double-reed ensemble, which by the end of the seventeenth century had been established as the hautboy quartet. Höfele further claims that the earliest known source mentioning trumpets in use together with fifes and shawms in Brandenburg military music dates from 1620.Footnote ⁷³ He also draws attention, however, to the fact that these double-reed bands were employed above all to perform for entertainment purposes and to represent the glory of their employer, whereas trumpeters, pipers and percussion players were primarily engaged in signalling duties for the military and at court.Footnote ⁷⁴ Remnants of medieval double-reed ensembles can still be found in the vast variety of shawm-like instruments played by French and Spanish folk musicians.Footnote ⁷⁵

The most successful versions of either family of Renaissance instruments – shawms for the top and inner parts and dulcians for the bass – were subsequently chosen for future development by instrument makers, and by following this traditional instrumentation of Renaissance double-reed consorts, at the end of the seventeenth century hautboys were chosen for the higher and middle parts, whilst bassoons provided the bass in a Baroque double-reed ensemble.Footnote ⁷⁶ Thus one standard configuration for an hautboy band around 1700 appears to have been a quartet featuring two treble instruments, one alto (or tenor)Footnote ⁷⁷ and one bass instrument. This allowed these ensembles to perform any music written in four parts, including works for two violins, one viola and bass, which in modern concert practice would normally be performed by a string orchestra and harpsichord continuo; however, many different instrumental combinations were possible for Hautboisten, as will be explored below.

Braun states that musical ensembles known as Hautboisten, Hautboistenbanden or Hautboistencompagnien were well established by the first half of the eighteenth century. He notes that in 1798, more than a century after the first hautboy bands were employed in German-speaking lands, these groups were still known by these names. Braun also explains, however, that by then they had evolved to become mainly large brass ensembles and normally the players were unable to perform on any type of oboe.Footnote ⁷⁸

Indeed, the term Hautboisten remained in use until the beginning of the twentieth century, especially for German military bands: the Historischer Bilderdienst (an online archive of illustrations documenting military history, in particular uniforms),Footnote ⁷⁹ provides reproductions of pictures of Hautboisten dating from the beginning of the twentieth century. In some of the images, percussion players are referred to as Hautboisten, which provides clear evidence that this had become the generic term for any military musician (see Figure 1). Thus, it appears to have been relatively easy for scholars, including Braun, to conclude that in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries Hautboisten had also generally been part of the military.

Figure 1. Anonymous, Musician (‘Hoboist, Lyraschläger’) of the Prussian Kaiser Alexander Garde-Grenadier-Regiment No. 1 (ca. 1910). Reproduced in Reinhard Quenstedt, ‘Alte Armee: Kesselpauker, Trompeter, Hautboisten’, Historischer Bilderdienst Website.

Braun believes it ‘is particularly difficult to describe the German hautboist because the documents referring to his existence – employment records like those often found for town pipers, cantors, organists, court musicians, trumpeters and drummers – are not usually available’,Footnote ⁸⁰ a situation that would soon lead to frustration on the part of any scholar. He goes on to state that ‘a monograph devoted to them has not yet been written.’Footnote ⁸¹Hautboisten rarely appear on payrolls or similar lists, and most written evidence regarding non-regimental Hautboisten concerns disagreements between them and both the Stadtpfeifer and court musicians. Adequate research would therefore require considerable time spent in archives collecting data and, as the records on Hautboisten are scarce, Braun states that further collation of facts by any scholar would be a major achievement. Thus, the investigation of the Lilien Partbooks represented in this article is just one step towards a monograph on the subject of Hautboisten.

Despite the rather unaccommodating state of the primary-source material, Braun nevertheless attempts to categorize the different types of Hautboisten and the nature of their employment and duties. His chapter provides a detailed discussion of three main divisions: military; court; and town. Yet while this undoubtedly offers a basis for research in this field, each particular group still requires detailed research to be undertaken. Even establishing a clear differentiation between the Stadtpfeifer (town pipers), Hofmusici (court musicians) and Hautboisten seems to be a problematic task. The same group of players might have appeared in different situations under a different professional title, either as Hofmusici or as Hautboisten; indeed, some of them appeared with both titles in lists of courtly Kapellen.Footnote ⁸² Samantha Owens, for example, notes in her dissertation the existence of Hautboisten at the Württemberg court and provides information on their direct involvement with the courtly Kapelle.Footnote ⁸³

Early publications

Questions arise as to the typical instrumentation of a band of Hautboisten in the early eighteenth century, the occasions upon which they performed, and, last but not least, how to determine whether a composer had Hautboisten in mind when writing a particular piece of music. Two extant early publications will be investigated in the following paragraphs. This discussion will contribute substantially to the background required when determining what was considered ‘typical music’ for Hautboisten, and will therefore be crucial to answering some of the questions posed in this article.

Manuscript sources of music for Hautboisten

In attempting to determine the nature of music for Hautboisten through the analysis of early publications it becomes apparent that there are a number of instrumentation possibilities to be taken into account when investigating sources of manuscript music that, according to Haynes, were intended for ‘oboe band’. Whilst only a selection of the latter compositions can be investigated given the limitations of the present article, the following discussion facilitates a preliminary definition of music for Hautboisten.

Music for pure double-reed ensembles will be analysed first by examining eighteenth-century arrangements of orchestral music by Francesco Venturini (1675–1745), which demonstrate how Hautboisten were able to adapt any suitable music to their needs. These works feature four hautboys and two bassoons, an instrumentation that also occurs regularly in the Lilien Partbooks. In addition, Telemann's works for wind bands featuring a core group of double-reed players with added horns will be discussed, thus demonstrating the evolution of Hautboisten bands into Harmoniemusik ensembles.

Francesco Venturini – arrangements for Hautboisten

Special attention needs to be drawn to a composer who is today almost forgotten, but who was undoubtedly of major importance in the German-speaking lands at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Probably born in Brussels in 1675, Francesco Venturini died on 18 April 1745 in Hanover, where he appears to have spent the majority of his life. In the court files of the House of Welf, the Duchy of Braunschweig-Lüneburg (later Hanover), he is listed as ‘François Venturini’Footnote ¹⁴⁵ and it is unclear whether he Italianized his name for reasons of fashion. Several musicians with the name Venturini can be found in Hanoverian files during this period; all were very likely part of his family.Footnote ¹⁴⁶

Initially employed as a chamber violinist, Venturini advanced to the rank of Konzertmeister and finally to that of Hofkapellmeister, a position he held until his death. He appears to have been well regarded by other composers of the time. As pointed out by David Plantier, Händel's fugue theme in his Concerto Op. 3, No. 3 is extremely similar to the main theme in the overture movement of Venturini's Sonata XI from his Concerti da camera, Op. 1,Footnote ¹⁴⁷ whilst Telemann stated in his autobiography, published in Mattheson's Grundlage einer Ehren-Pforte in 1740, that he learnt the distinction between the French and the Italian style when he was in Hanover, possibly as a result of contact with Venturini.Footnote ¹⁴⁸

Venturini's compositional art is evident in his collection of 12 Concerti da camera, Op. 1, published by Estienne Roger in Amsterdam sometime before 1714.Footnote ¹⁴⁹ The suites with odd numbers are in the French style with several dances following an overture, whereas those with even numbers are more Italianate, opening with a movement labelled ‘Concerto’. The basis of the instrumentation is a French-style string group of two violins, two violas and bass, joined by two hautboys and one bassoon. Occasionally ripieno violins, an extra violoncello and bassoon, and sometimes recorders are added. The music is of very high quality and can easily stand next to similar works by Händel, Telemann and J. S. Bach.

Venturini's contemporaries must have shared this high opinion, as there are a number of manuscript arrangements of this music still extant. One of them – of the most relevance to the present discussion – is a manuscript set of three of the 12 works from Op. 1 arranged for Hautboisten, now held at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin (D-B, Mus. Ms. 22305 2, 4 and 6). Unfortunately, it is no longer possible to identify the arranger, but the title page of each of the three pieces carries a note on the bottom right-hand corner identifying the owner of these parts (see Figure 2).Footnote ¹⁵⁰ Haynes identifies this as the court of ‘Witmar’; however, it is clear in the second piece that the ‘J’ and the ‘D’ of ‘J. Ditmar’ are, in fact, separate letters, indicating that J. Ditmar was their possessor.Footnote ¹⁵¹

Figure 2. Title page of Venturini's Overture in A minor (Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin Musikabteilung mit Mendelssohn-Archiv, D-B, Mus. Ms. 22305/4).

These works represent how Hautboisten adapted music for their own needs. They are also similar to those works set for four hautboys and two bassoons within the Lilien Partbooks.

Music for double reeds and brass

As mentioned earlier, music for Hautboisten could also involve brass instruments playing together with a purely double-reed ensemble. One example can be found in Prussia, when, soon after coming to the throne in 1713, King Friedrich Wilhelm I decreed that all music at court would be performed by regimental Hautboisten and ordered one trumpeter to join each band.Footnote ¹⁵² By the beginning of the eighteenth century, horns also became common in wind bands. Many marches dating from the first half of this century featured an instrumentation of a double-reed band joined by brass instruments;Footnote ¹⁵³ furthermore, an incalculable number of pieces in a much wider variety of genres can still be found in libraries, stemming from the pens of anonymous composers as well as renowned masters such as Telemann, Mattheson and Johann Friedrich Fasch, testifying to what must have been a widespread practice.

Prussia in the early eighteenth century and the Wittenhorst-Sonsfelds

Prussia played a unique role in the ongoing history of Hautboisten in the German-speaking lands. Given this role and the surviving evidence pointing to clear connections between the Sonsfeld Collection and the Prussian military, it is necessary at this point to take a closer look at the situation in Prussia in the early eighteenth century.

Prussia became a kingdom on 18 January 1701, when Elector Friedrich III (1657–1713), a son of Friedrich Wilhelm, the so-called ‘Great Elector’ (1620–1688), crowned himself King Friedrich I in Königsberg (now Kaliningrad in Russia). In order to earn the support of the Habsburg Emperor Leopold I (1640–1705) for the elevation of Prussia's status to a kingdom, it was necessary for Friedrich to collaborate with the Holy Roman Empire against France in the War of the Spanish Succession. Leopold I, however, only agreed that those lands not already within the realm of the Empire could become part of the Prussian kingdom, and therefore granted Friedrich I the title King in Prussia. Friedrich II ‘the Great’ (1712–86), great-grandson of the ‘Great Elector’, was the first to become King of Prussia in 1772, after the Prussian annexation of territories in Poland.

The grandson of the ‘Great Elector’, son of Friedrich I (the first King in Prussia) and father of Friedrich II ‘the Great’ (the first King of Prussia) was the so-called Soldatenkönig (Soldier-King), Friedrich Wilhelm I. He commenced his reign in 1713 and promptly dismissed the court orchestra, as his own father's extravagance had left him with meagre resources. The sole musical entertainment Friedrich Wilhelm I retained at the court was that provided by the Hautboisten of the Königsregiment (the king's regiment). In 1713 this ensemble comprised 15 players, and from 1723 onwards engaged 21 Hautboisten, divided into three groups of seven.Footnote ¹⁶³ To each of these he ordered the addition of a single trumpeter. Prior to this development, trumpeters – who were members of the Imperial Guild of Trumpeters – would not have performed with a band of Hautboisten. And since the Prussian ‘Soldier-King’ was the first to order the combination of trumpeters and Hautboisten within the same ensemble, this provides a strong clue to the dating of the music in the Lilien Partbooks as well as to their connection to the Prussian kingdom, eliminating the possibility of any year earlier than 1713 for the works including trumpets that are found in the Lilien Partbooks.

As established in part 2, it was the ‘Soldier-King’ who was responsible for founding the Hoboistenschule in Postdam in 1724,Footnote ¹⁶⁴ an institution that was led by Heinrich Gottfried Pepusch (after 1667–1750) with the assistance of ‘Cammer Musicant’ (chamber musician) Sydow (d. 1754). The latter directed the establishment himself from 1738. According to Mary Oleskiewicz, Samuel Peter Sydow (d. 1701) was employed as Kapellmeister at the Prussian court from 1679 until 1701, and was most likely father of ‘Cammer Musicant’ Sydow, who is regularly confused with his father in secondary literature.Footnote ¹⁶⁵ Oleskiewicz also notes that neither Sydow junior's given names nor his exact dates can be established with certainty.Footnote ¹⁶⁶ Bandt, therefore, is referring to Sydow junior rather than Samuel Peter when stating that ‘Sydow’ held the positions of both Kapellmeister and Komponist (composer) at the Prussian court.Footnote ¹⁶⁷ It appears that some of the compositions in the Lilien Partbooks can be attributed to Sydow, either father or son, as will be discussed in the following analysis of the music within these sources.

In addition to the Hautboisten of the Königsregiment, the apprentices of the Hoboistenschule regularly supplied entertainment at Friedrich I's court. Although he unfortunately fails to provide a reference, Bandt quotes a source that describes the courtly activities of the students of the Hoboistenschule as follows:

Further research is needed to investigate whether any of the works in Sophie-Charlotte's collection were composed for wind band. Bandt's quotation seems to imply that the Hautboisten apprentices acted as a Kapelle – or an ‘orchestra’ – performing the music in scorings that would most likely have included string instruments and harpsichord as well as wind instruments.

Prussian enclaves in the lower Rhine region

Although Prussia had gained leadership over the duchy of Kleve, as well as the Grafschaften (counties) of Mark and of Ravensberg, following an inheritance dispute in 1614, these areas, which were near to the Dutch border and thus separated from the contiguous territory of Prussia, were repeatedly occupied by other nations. Initially, the Catholic Spanish ruled these Prussian enclaves in the Lower Rhine region, and then, from 1629 to 1672, governance was taken over by representatives of the Calvinist Netherlands, who had managed to oust the Spanish intruders. By agreement, however, the inhabitants of these duchies and counties were guaranteed religious freedom.

Friedrich Wilhelm, the ‘Great Elector’, was the first to strengthen Prussia's contacts with the Netherlands, when he was sent there to live with his mother's uncle Friedrich Heinrich of Orange (1584–1647) from 1634 until 1638, during which time he studied at the University of Leiden. In 1646, Friedrich Wilhelm married Princess Luise Henriette (1627–67) from the House of Orange-Nassau in The Hague.Footnote ¹⁶⁹ In the early 1700s the Rhine area around Kleve was once more the subject of military conflicts as a result of fierce disputes over inheritance. In 1703 the Prussian military conquered the stronghold of Geldern, which had previously been thought to be impenetrable. At the Peace in Utrecht in 1713, those parts of the duchy of Geldern formerly ruled by the Spanish were given to Prussia in compensation for the principality of Orange, which was lost to France.Footnote ¹⁷⁰ And although France subsequently conquered Kleve in the turmoil of the French Revolution later in the eighteenth century, these eastern areas of the former duchy of Geldern were returned to Prussia after the Congress of Vienna in 1815 and are now part of Germany.Footnote ¹⁷¹ The western area called Gelderland remained in the Netherlands (as it does to this day).

The Prussian lands in Geldern were labelled the Herzogtum Geldern preußischen Antheils (Prussian division of the duchy of Geldern), and were administered from 1713 to 1726 by Georg von Lilien (1652–1726), who held the post of Governor of Geldern (see Figure 3). His father, Georg Lilien (1597–1666), had been the Domprobst (provost) at the St. Nicolai-Kirche (St Nicholas’ Church) in Berlin. In 1704, Georg von Lilien and his wife were ennobled; he subsequently held the ranks of Prussian General Major (from 1709) and General Lieutenant (from 1720).Footnote ¹⁷²

Figure 3. Georg von Lilien, engraving by Georg Paul Busch, ca. 1725. Available from VU Amsterdam University Library [http://imagebase.ubvu.vu.nl/cdm/singleitem/collection/prt/id/1639/rec/1/lang/en_US].

In 1725, von Lilien appears to have been dismissed for discharging a farm labourer who had been drafted into military duties against his will. He subsequently retired and moved to a residence in the vicinity of Wittstock (some 95 kilometres northwest of Berlin), where he died in 1726 with no heirs.Footnote ¹⁷³

Von Lilien's successor in the post of governor of Geldern was Friedrich Otto Freiherr von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld (1678–1755), who became the head of the new Dragonerregiment No. 2 (Second Dragoon Regiment) – which also carried his name – in 1725, and governor of Geldern in 1726. On 25 July 1739 Friedrich Otto was promoted to the rank of General Lieutenant of the Prussian cavalry.Footnote ¹⁷⁴ His sister, Dorothea Louise (1681–1746), is known to have served as Hofdame (lady-in-waiting) at the Prussian court in Berlin, as well as having been employed as nanny to Wilhelmine of Prussia (the favourite sister of Friedrich ‘the Great’). In 1731, when Wilhelmine married the Hereditary Margrave (and later Margrave) of Brandenburg-Bayreuth, she took her confidante ‘Sonsine’ (Dorothea Louise von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld) with her to her new residence in Bayreuth. Dorothea Louise was later to be appointed Oberhofmeisterin at the court.Footnote ¹⁷⁵

According to Erich Thurmann, in an unpublished article focusing on the Sonsfeldsche Musikalien Sammlung, little is known about Friedrich Otto von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld's personal life; nevertheless, secondary sources repeatedly state that he was presumably a ‘musikalischer preußischer General’ (a musical Prussian general),Footnote ¹⁷⁶ who, as stated by Hanne Buschmann, apparently composed and also played the hautboy.Footnote ¹⁷⁷ However, no primary-source evidence is provided to back up either claim; furthermore, it seems somewhat doubtful that a person of noble status would have played the hautboy – an instrument usually considered to be played solely by professionals. Indeed, Thurmann cites an inventory of the musical instruments owned by Friedrich Otto's mother that include listings for keyboards (positive organ, clavichord, harpsichord) and strings (viols, chitara) – instruments generally preferred by such noble amateurs.Footnote ¹⁷⁸

Countess Maria Adriana Alexandrina Theresia von Arberg und Frézin, who was Friedrich Otto's aunt, lived in Horst (now in the Netherlands and on the western side of the Rhine), and belonged to the Catholic branch of the family – the Wittenhorst-Horsts. Friedrich Otto fought a long court case against this aunt for the feudal rights of the lands in Horst. When the countess died in 1738, Friedrich Otto moved temporarily to Horst, taking over the property illegitimately in disregard of his aunt's will of 17 September 1736, which stated that her goddaughter Maria Alexandrina von Fürstenberg was her sole heir. This was the same year that his regiment, which until then had been in Treptow/Hinterpommern (now in Poland), was stationed in his home area. For the rest of his life Friedrich Otto mostly lived in the Prussian enclaves in the Lower Rhine region.

Baron Clemens Lothar von Fürstenberg (1725–91), brother and guardian of the countess’ goddaughter, engaged in a long-lasting legal dispute over the inheritance with Friedrich Otto on behalf of his sister, who died a minor, never becoming the legal owner of her inheritance. Officially Clemens Lothar, who won these legal fights, was given the feudal rights for Horst in 1754; however, Friedrich Otto did not hand anything over before he died in 1755. Accordingly it appears that Friedrich Otto was possessor of those lands from 1738 until 1755.Footnote ¹⁷⁹

The Lilien Partbooks and their owners

In his study of the musical history of the courts of Westphalian nobility, Joachim Domp focuses on music that forms part of the Bibliotheca Fürstenbergiana, the library of the Fürstenberg family, which is held in the castle of Herdringen. Domp suggests that this music collection comprises repertoire that was performed by an ensemble at the local court.Footnote ¹⁸⁰ Within this library works can be found that formerly belonged to Friedrich Otto von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld. According to Thurmann, Domp's study provides the first scholarly attention given to the Sonsfeld Collection in modern times.Footnote ¹⁸¹ Thurmann also notes, however, that while Domp's work lays the foundation for research on Westphalian music history, ‘his information needs supplementing and correcting, in order to be able to characterize fully the peculiarity of this music collection’.Footnote ¹⁸² According to Thurmann, the surviving archival material does not indicate that a Kapelle was ever employed by the Fürstenbergs and, therefore, that any performance at the Herdringen court of the music in their collection cannot be safely assumed.

Also kept in the Fürstenberg library is a manuscript entitled Des Herren General Major Frey Herrn von Sonsfeldt Musicalisches Cathallogium (D-HRD, Fü 3720a), published as a facsimile reprint within a modern catalogue, edited by Jürgen Kindermann in 1987/88.Footnote ¹⁸³ Strikingly, according to Barry S. Brook, this appears to be the earliest known thematic music incipit catalogue.Footnote ¹⁸⁴ It was initiated by Friedrich Otto and lists the contents of his music collection, which was extended once it came into the possession of Freiherr Clemens Lothar von Fürstenberg (1725–91) in 1755. Only parts of the works listed in the catalogue are still extant, but among them are the compositions contained within the six partbooks whose leather bindings are imprinted with the golden letters ‘G. v. L.’ – the so-called Lilien Partbooks – which form the focus of this article.

A number of secondary sources suggest that Governor Georg von Lilien was most likely the person to have been the original owner of the six partbooks.Footnote ¹⁸⁵ Although it is possible that Johann Christoph Graf (Count) von Wylich and Lottum (1681–1727), brother-in-law of Friedrich Otto von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld, was the first owner of the partbooks – given that his name also provides the initials ‘G. v. L.’ (Graf von Lottum) found on the covers of the partbooks – little evidence remains to confirm this supposition and Thurmann believes it to be less likely.Footnote ¹⁸⁶

Exactly how and when the Lilien Partbooks changed ownership for the first time will perhaps never be uncovered; however, it is known that the second person to call these six books his own was Friedrich Otto von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld. He integrated them into his own music collection – now referred to as the Sonsfeld Collection. Some of the works from these partbooks are listed in the incipit catalogue that he initiated – the Sonsfeld Catalogue.

Thurmann assumes that once von Lilien had been dismissed from the military he no longer had access to his regimental Hautboisten. He further states that von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld did, however, and accordingly made better use of the six partbooks.Footnote ¹⁸⁷ It may have been this fact that led Haynes to the conclusion that the music in the partbooks was collated in the period ‘ca. 1713–1725’,Footnote ¹⁸⁸ the first date marking the appearance of trumpets within an ensemble of Hautboisten and the second an estimation of the time when the partbooks came into Sonsfeld's possession. According to Curt Jany, the Sonsfeld Regiment employed one timpanist and four Hautboisten. It may be assumed that the music in the six partbooks was played by this ensemble, even though the music collated in the Lilien Partbooks does not have a single piece requiring timpani, and usually six or more players are engaged, suggesting that additional players were involved if performing the music from the six partbooks.Footnote ¹⁸⁹

A number of errors regarding the history of the Sonsfeld family and the provenance of the Lilien Partbooks have recently been published that stand in need of correction. The fact that Friedrich Otto von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld was born on Dutch territory in Huissen, and also that the official language remained Dutch in this area, appears to have led to David Whitwell's incorrect conclusion that the Sonsfeld family were Dutch nobility.Footnote ¹⁹⁰ Whitwell further claims that the music in the Lilien Partbooks must have been composed at the French court, given the presence of ‘one Christian Friedrich Theodor von Furstenberg’Footnote ¹⁹¹ in Paris in 1711 and 1712, alongside the fact that some of the pieces in the Partbooks bear French titles. He therefore assumes that this music provides an example repertoire for French Hautboisten dating from the beginning of the eighteenth century.

Yet while Dutch family connections are evident in primary sources relating to the Sonsfelds, the family's loyalty to the Prussian (or at that time still Brandenburg) court is evident from at least the early seventeenth century, as demonstrated by Johann III von Wittenhorst (1568–1617), who held the position of councillor to the Prince-Elector of Brandenburg (‘kurfürstlich-brandenburgischer Rat’).Footnote ¹⁹² Furthermore, as we have seen, Georg von Lilien was also a Prussian General.

Whereas the connections of the Sonsfeld family to Georg von Lilien remain rather uncertain, it is clear that after 1755 the inheritance of Countess Maria Adriana Alexandrina Theresia von Arberg und Frézin, including the music collection, made its way into the ownership of the Fürstenberg family.Footnote ¹⁹³ After Friedrich Otto's death in 1755, and therefore after his music library (including the incipit catalogue) became part of Clemens Lothar von Fürstenberg's Bibliotheca Fürstenbergiana, Clemens Lothar added items to the Sonsfeld Catalogue. It seems unlikely, however, that any changes or additions were made to the contents of the Lilien Partbooks after that time. Along with the Sonsfeld Catalogue and the Sonsfeld Collection, the Partbooks have since been kept in the Fürstenberg family's residence in Herdringen, with the exception of the period from 1919 to 1969, when the collection was lent to the Erzbischöfliche Akademische Bibliothek in Paderborn.Footnote ¹⁹⁴ The current owner is Wennemar Freiherr von Fürstenberg.

The music in the Lilien Partbooks – categories of instrumentation

In the following, the focus will be upon the music of the Lilien Partbooks in order to provide more detailed evidence of the context of Hautboisten music in eighteenth-century Prussia. A musical analysis of the entire contents of these partbooks, however, would go far beyond the scope of this article. Therefore a selection of examples, portraying the various categories of instrumentation found in this collection, will serve as representative for a comparison with Hautboisten music discussed previously.

Each of the six Lilien Partbooks is covered in leather and embossed with the golden letters ‘G. v. L.’. The instrument corresponding to each partbook is stated on its cover, that is:

• HAUTBOIS. I. ET.

• HAUTBOIS. II. ET.

• HAUTBOIS. III. ET.

• TAILLE. ET.

• BASSON. I. ET.

• BASSON. II. ET.

These match with an instrumentation commonly used by Hautboisten ensembles of the early eighteenth century, as seen earlier with the arrangements of music by Venturini; however, the additional ‘ET.’ (that is, et cetera) on each partbook indicates that a variety of instrumentations are found inside these partbooks. Generally the partbook titled Hautbois. I. et. requires the player (most likely the bandleader) to perform on an hautboy, but occasionally the same player must exchange the hautboy for a recorder, transverse flute or even violin. Similarly, the other partbooks also usually ask for the instrument specified on the cover, but fairly frequently the players either have to read from another partbook (for example, the bassoonists regularly share – having one part on the right page of the open book and the other part on the left page), or play different instruments, such as string instruments.

Each of the movements bears a number, making it easier to find the corresponding piece in any of the other partbooks. This numbering system continues throughout each entire partbook independently of the works themselves and was most likely inserted during the eighteenth century, possibly even at the time when each movement was added to the partbooks, given that the numbers are written in the same hand as the music. It nevertheless appears that these numbers do not continue to the end of each partbook. In Partbook 1 the last numbered movement is 329, in Partbooks 2 it is 321, in Partbook 3 it finishes with 319, in Partbook 4 with 314, in Partbooks 5 with 325, and finally in Partbook 6 it is movement 332 that is given the last number. Subsequent numbers are partly given in pencil, likely by a twentieth-century scholar. In the appended catalogue, those movements for which no numbering is provided in the partbooks will be tacitly supplied with the appropriate number.

The partbooks contain several instances in which numbers are missing, or a movement is numbered and has clefs and a key signature provided, but has no music in the staves that follow. After movement 12, for example, there are a number of empty pages in each of the partbooks, followed by the next piece, which is numbered 16. There are also other cases in which movements either seem to be missing, or the writer intended to add another movement at a later point in time, the reasons for which can only be a matter for speculation. Accordingly, the number of movements in the partbooks totals 331, even though the continued numbering in the attached catalogue finishes at 340.

A second numbering system in pencil, marking the beginning of each composition (that is, for example, a concerto or overture with its following movements) rather than each movement, is also provided. These numbers are in square brackets, written with pencil and probably date from the twentieth century. This numbering starts at [1] and finishes at [52]; however, one composition is numbered [32] and one [32a]. This makes for a total of 53 works, contrary to statements in the secondary literature, such as Haynes’ bibliography, that the partbooks contain ‘52 multi-movement pieces of instrumental music for 2-3 Obs, Taille, 2 Bsns (usually 6 separate parts) and occasional Trp’.Footnote ¹⁹⁵ In the attached catalogue of the Lilien Partbooks (see below), a numbering is adopted following the original system, together with the prefix ‘LPb’. The instrumentation suggested by Haynes (mentioned earlier) will be considered in the context of the following investigation of selected works, since it appears that many more instruments than just the ‘occasional trumpet’ can be found. The sequence of the works in the Lilien Partbooks does not follow any thematic order of instrumentation but seems to suggest that works have been added apparently at random. For the purposes of this discussion, the following categorization will be used:

1. Hautboisten – Pure Double-Reed Ensembles (12 works)

2. Hautboisten and Trumpets

   • (a) Double-Reed Ensemble and Trumpet (11 works)

   • (b) Double-Reed Ensemble, Strings and Trumpet(s) (4 works)

3. Hautboisten and Horns

   • (a) Double-Reed Ensemble and Horns (3 works)

   • (b) Double-Reed Ensemble, Strings and Horns (2 works)

4. Hautboisten and Strings (10 works)

5. Solo Instrument and ‘Orchestra’ (8 works)

6. Miscellaneous (3 works)

These categories indicate the general instrumentation of the music, although in some cases compositions are included within one of these subheadings even though they also ask for other instruments. These specific examples, however, will be mentioned in the attached catalogue, and are usually those in which players must exchange an instrument for another (generally taking up a recorder) in only one movement (or even only a few bars).Footnote ¹⁹⁶

Pure double-reed ensembles

Of the 53 works collated in the partbooks, only 12 are scored for a double-reed ensemble that could be described as an ‘hautboy band’. One of these compositions is set for two hautboys and two bassoons, whilst the remaining 11 are for four hautboys and two bassoons, with two of those works featuring a taille de hautbois rather than a fourth hautboy. Furthermore, one of the 12 works requires two players to exchange their hautboys for recorders for a period. In all of the works, a textural differentiation is made between tutti and a smaller group of players. The first hautboy and the first bassoon usually have the most elaborate parts, with the concertino groups (called ‘Duetto’ or ‘Trio’) often consisting of either two hautboys, two bassoons, one hautboy and one bassoon, or sometimes two hautboys and one bassoon. In some cases the two hautboys are accompanied by the remaining hautboys, which provide a quasi bass in place of the bassoons.

The Concerto in B-flat major (LPb 6), in three movements, represents the most common type of double-reed instrumentation in the Lilien Partbooks. Furthermore, this scoring is the same as that seen in the arrangements of the overture suites by Francesco Venturini (discussed in part 3), strengthening the argument that during the first half of the eighteenth century a standard double-reed ensemble of six players usually performed with four hautboys and two bassoons.

The third and fourth bar of the first movement of this work (see Example 1) indicates that the term ‘Trio’ refers solely to a distinct differentiation from the ‘Tutti’ section (here with the French term tous) – in this case the first and second hautboys are featured, a pattern that is also regularly found in the remaining works with the same instrumentation.

Example 1. Anonymous, Concerto in B-flat major (LPb 6), 1^st movement, bars 1–6.

In Example 2, it can be seen that the two bassoons also regularly play unaccompanied. This instrumentation pattern for the concertino parts can be found throughout most of the works in the Lilien Partbooks.

Example 2. Anonymous, Concerto in B-flat major (LPb 6), 1^st movement, bars 32–35.

In Example 3 the preference for the first and second hautboys and also for both bassoons as solo instruments is particularly clear, since the third and fourth hautboy remain silent through the entire movement.

Example 3. Anonymous, Concerto in Bb major (LPb 6), 2^nd movement bars 1–5.

The Concerto in C major (LPb 8) can be attributed to a ‘Sign. Sydow’ according to its entry in the Sonsfeld Catalogue, which led Kindermann to suggest that Samuel Peter Sydow was the composer of this work. No composer is given in the Lilien Partbooks, and since no first names are mentioned in the Sonsfeld Catalogue it appears to be more likely to be Sydow junior, whose first name as yet remains unknown. In this work the pair of bassoons often forms the concertino group, but with the first hautboy also regularly featured as a solo instrument accompanied by the first bassoon (see Examples 4 and 5).

Example 4. Sydow, Concerto in C major (LPb 8), 1^st movement, bars 45–49.

Example 5. Sydow, Concerto in C major (LPb 8), 1^st movement, bars 59–62.

In most of the works scored for pure double-reed consort in the Lilien Partbooks the ‘Tutti’ passages require four voices. The instrumentation for these passages varies, with either two doubling hautboy parts and two separate bassoon parts, or one doubling hautboy part, two separate hautboy parts and one doubling bassoon part.

Two exceptions can be found amongst the works that require six players: the first is LPb 37, which appears to feature the first hautboy as a solo instrument accompanied by the rest of the band, and the second is LPb 49, a selection of opera arias arranged for Hautboisten, with the first hautboy part notated in C1 clef, commonly used for a soprano at this time.

Only two of the works scored for ‘hautboy band’ are not for six players. LPb 47, a Concerto in B-flat major, requires only four hautboys and one bassoon, while LPb 50, a Concerto (labelled Sinfonia) in F major, is set for two hautboys and two bassoons. In the case of LPb 47 there is a pencil marking in the partbook indicating that this work is by Telemann – an assumption that may be debatable. In LPb 50 both hautboys and both bassoons have independent parts, a situation that is particularly clear in the second part of the first movement, which comprises a fugue in four parts. Interestingly, in the third part of the first movement of this work the second part has to play two notes simultaneously during three bars, suggesting double-stopping on a violin. Since only the part for the first bassoon is labelled for a specific instrument – Basson Primo – the other bass part may also be intended for a bassoon. It is possible that the upper parts might have been intended for violins; however, the range of those parts does not exceed that of an hautboy. Taking ‘Tutti’ and ‘Trio’ markings into account, it might be plausible to assume that the upper parts were doubled.

Hautboisten and trumpets

Two of the works from the Lilien Partbooks were investigated by Albert Lee Moore in 1981:Footnote ¹⁹⁷ the Concerto in D major (LPb 3) and another Concerto in D major (LPb 32a, labelled Sÿmphonia – referred to as 32b in Moore's dissertation). Moore states that LPb 32a (one of the two works for two trumpets in the collection) is not an arrangement of pieces taken from Handel's opera Amadigi (1715). At the end of this work in Partbook 3 (Hautbois III) the title for Handel's opera is given; however, this refers to the music on the following pages (LPb 33), which is an arrangement of the complete opera, excluding the recitatives.Footnote ¹⁹⁸ Perhaps Moore did not have access to the entire manuscripts, which could have led to the misunderstanding that the title for Amadigi referred to the music on the same page and on the previous pages rather than to the next page (of which he most likely did not possess a copy).

The Lilien Partbooks contain 11 compositions that fall into the category of double-reed ensemble including one trumpet. A further four works also employ trumpets, in one case two trumpets, plus additional string instruments. The instrumentation for LPb 11, a Concerto in D major, is one trumpet, four hautboys and two bassoons. The entry in the Sonsfeld Catalogue states that the composer of this Concerto is again a ‘Sign. Sydow’.Footnote ¹⁹⁹ Following the argument made earlier regarding the dating of compositions including trumpets (that is, after 1713) it appears likely that Sydow junior was the composer of this work, rather than his father, Samuel Peter Sydow.

Another work for double-reed ensemble and one trumpet collated in the six partbooks also exists in a further copy that is held at the Universitätsbibliothek in Rostock.Footnote ²⁰⁰ The opening of this work, a Concerto in E-flat major for trumpet, three hautboys and one bassoon (LPb 31), is provided as Example 6.

Example 6. Anonymous, Concerto in E-flat major (LPb 31), 1^st movement, bars 1–7.

In this concerto both the first hautboy and the trumpet are treated as solo instruments, often competing with each other. In ‘tutti’ passages, however, the first hautboy usually plays in unison with the second hautboy. The trio formed by the double-reed ensemble requires two hautboys and one bassoon. Movements 190 and 191 of this work seem to be missing from the trumpet part of the Lilien Partbooks; however, they exist in the Rostock copy. Movement 192 is a second Menuet, labelled ‘Trio’, scored for two hautboys and one bassoon.

As mentioned earlier, the categorization of the music in the Lilien Partbooks leaves many questions unanswered. Several compositions contain occasional references to strings in the middle of a movement. It remains unclear whether this indicates that the wind players exchanged their instruments for string instruments for a short period of time, or if perhaps in an ‘orchestral’ performance in which strings doubled the hautboy parts, the winds were asked to remain tacet for those sections. Another solution may be that terms such as ‘Basson 1mo’ referred solely to the player in question rather than to the instrument he was playing. Nevertheless, it also seems clear that some instrumentations were chosen simply to have an instrument with the necessary range for the part (in this case a viola rather than a taille de hautbois), as can be seen in LPb 5, a concerto (labelled ‘Sinphonia’) in E-flat major for trumpet and Hautboisten ensemble.

In LPb 5 the Hautboisten are required to perform on three hautboys, two bassoons and one viola. Yet whereas elsewhere in the Lilien Partbooks the middle part in alto clef is either labelled simply ‘Taille’ or has no instrument specification at all, in LPb 5 this part is marked ‘Viola Alto’. Analysing this specific part proves the necessity of this choice, since on a number of occasions an e-flat is required, a note below the range of the taille de hautbois (see Example 7). In the following bar (bar 27), the third hautboy has a b-flat, a note below the range of this instrument; however, since this is in unison with the viola and bassoons, it seems plausible that the player would have performed the same notes as the second hautboy by repeating b-flat’. In this work the bassoons play mostly in unison, but in one movement the other instruments are tacet, leaving the bassoons to perform a duet, and in another movement they form a trio with the first oboe – each instrument playing its own distinct part.

Example 7. Anonymous, Concerto in E-flat major (LPb 5), 1^st movement, bars 26–27.

The first hautboy and trumpet often appear as the two ‘concertino’ instruments in this work. Interestingly, in movements 41 and 42 (that is the third and fourth movements in this concerto) the first hautboy part is notated in C1 clef rather than in G2 clef as is more generally the case in this partbook. All movements following the first in this concerto-style work are dances more commonly found in an overture suite.

Another composition in which the scoring includes strings is LPb 32a, a Concerto in D major in three movements titled Symphonia, and which is one of the two works investigated by Moore. Scored for two trumpets, two hautboys, two violins, one viola and one bassoon, generally the pairs of instruments form an entity competing with the other pairs and also joining in the tutti passages. The middle movement features both violins in unison as a basset, whilst the first hautboy plays a solo. Only in the final one-and-a-half bars do all parts (with the exception of the trumpets) join in a cadence on the dominant chord, which leads into the final movement featuring highly ornamented hautboy parts (see Example 8), in a piece in which hautboys, trumpets and violins are generally thematically doubling. In a usual ‘orchestral’ set-up nowadays, this composition would be performed with a string orchestra, a harpsichord, an additional bassoon, two hautboys and two solo trumpets. Nothing in the work would change, but the concept seen in the Lilien Partbooks – that is, a concerto performed by a group such as Hautboisten – implies that the winds were leading rather than merely adding timbral colour to a string orchestra.

Example 8. Anonymous, Symphonia in D major (LPb 32a), 3^rd movement, bars 1–11.

Hautboisten and horns

Six works in the Lilien Partbooks include horns, which can be divided into those compositions with cors de chasse (natural horn) and those with cors de post (signal horn for post coaches). In those works with two cors de post, the scoring was most likely for one instrument in F and one in B-flat. Both Overture Suites in F major (LPb 23 and LPb 24) are scored for double-reed ensemble and two cors de chasse. Two Concertos in B-flat major (LPb 26 and LPb 36) feature also two violins and require two post horns rather than hunting horns (one in F and one in B-flat), and finally the Intrada in B-flat major (LPb 25) is for double-reed ensemble with two horns in F and one post horn in B-flat. The Concerto in F major (LPb 7), which includes horns, strings and recorders, will be discussed in the group of miscellaneous compositions.

LPb 23 and LPb 24 feature the instrumentation considered by Hofer to represent the ‘birth of the Harmoniemusik’: hautboys, two horns and bassoons.Footnote ²⁰¹ A variety of versions of this instrumentation exist from the first half of the eighteenth century, including either two or three hautboys and either one or two bassoons. LPb 23 requires three hautboys, two horns and one bassoon, whilst LPb 24 is set for a second bassoon.

The Overture in F major (LPb 23) is a work in ten movements, beginning with tri-partite overture. The second movement, entitled Combattans, is an example of a ‘battle’ composition for wind instruments with repeated semiquavers. A string of eight varied movements follow, some of which require the second and third hautboy players to exchange their instruments for recorders.

LPb 24, an overture suite in F major, represents exactly the instrumentation regarded by Hofer as the beginnings of the Harmoniemusik as it was discussed in part 3 with regard to Telemann's compositions for double-reed ensemble including horns, and which can also be seen in Haydn's Divertimenti for two hautboys, two horns and two bassoons (Hob. II, No. 7, No. 15 and No. 23).

On the other hand, the other works that include post horns are unique in their instrumentation. It appears that they only produced two notes in each of the compositions in the Lilien Partbooks: the fundamental and the octave. Exactly what type of horns these were remains to be investigated in future research. The works including two post horns are scored for one instrument in B-flat (the first horn) and one in F (the second horn).

Hautboisten and strings

Approximately half of the compositions included in the Lilien Partbooks require string instruments, despite the collection clearly being intended for use by Hautboisten. As already explored earlier (see Examples 7 and 8), in some instances these merely employ a tenor part that exceeds the range of a taille de hautbois, whilst in other cases the middle parts are specified for string instruments, assigning the solo parts and the bass to double reeds. In further instances they are scored in a way that would nowadays be considered ‘orchestral’.

Example 9, an extract from an anonymous Symphonia in G minor (LPb 2), shows the opening of an overture-type first movement, which is then followed by a number of dances. It appears that this work is scored for two hautboys, two violins, one ‘La Taille’ and two bassoons. The ‘La Taille’ part was most likely intended to be executed on a viola, since in several places it exceeds the range of the taille de hautbois. When the concertino instruments (here labelled trio) separate from the tutti in bar 6, the first violin and the viola provide a four-foot bass in unison, which is marked in the parts with the term basset. This instrumentation was common practice with seventeenth-century German Lullists’ such as Philipp Heinrich Erlebach (1657–1714).Footnote ²⁰²

Example 9. Anonymous, Symphonia in G minor (LPb 2), 1^st movement, bars 1–6.

In this first movement, in bar 48 (see Example 10), the second bassoon part contains the marking ‘violoncello’. Interestingly, the spelling for instrumental specifications on the bass parts is given as Passon Primo and Passon Secundo. In bar 48 to 50 the concertino is scored for two violins, one viola and one bass instrument. It seems reasonable to assume that the bass instrument for this group may also have been a string instrument rather than a bassoon. It remains questionable as to whether the second Passon part was intended to be performed entirely on a violoncello in this work, or if the performer may have exchanged instruments in the middle of that movement. Considering the size of a violoncello and of a bassoon, the latter seems rather implausible; however, it may be that the performer exchanged instruments between the movements. Assuming that one bass part was played on a bassoon and the other on a violoncello, scoring of this work was presumably two hautboys, one bassoon, two violins, one viola and one violoncello. If one were to add a harpsichord, this would be the same instrumentation as any other typical ‘orchestral’ overture suite of the first half of the eighteenth century.

Example 10. Anonymous, Symphonia in G minor (LPb 2), 1^st movement, bars 48–52.

The third movement in this composition also deserves attention: an Andante, numbered 18 (see Example 11). In the partbook labelled Hautbois II, parts for Flauto Primo and Flauto Secondo are provided for this movement on the left-hand and right-hand pages, respectively. This requires the player of the second hautboy to exchange his hautboy for a recorder; however, it also implies that a further, eighth, player is needed for this movement.

Example 11. Anonymous, Symphonia in G minor (LPb 2), 3^rd movement, bars 1–10.

This might open the path to speculation concerning the possibility that the second bassoon part was intended to be doubled by a violoncellist, who may perhaps have performed the second recorder part in the Andante. Confusingly, however, in the part for ‘La Taille’, there is a textual note added below the actual piece, showing the first four bars of the 1^st violin line in viola clef (a passage which is in thirds with the viola) and stating that ‘die ersten 4 Tacte werden mit lauter Hautbois gemarschierdt’ (the first four bars will be marched with loud hautboy). Unfortunately this remains a conundrum, since both violin parts as well as the viola part extend below the range of an hautboy. Furthermore, with the added recorders, it appears that the first hautboy remains the solo instrument in this movement, given that it engages in elaborate ornamentation.

In the other compositions that include strings in the Lilien Partbooks, the general scoring appears to be similar. Usually these works are for two hautboys, two violins, one viola and two bassoons. It seems far more likely in these cases that the ‘La Taille’ parts were meant for a viola rather than a taille de hautbois.

The work with the most movements in the Lilien Partbooks – namely 30 in total – is an arrangement of the entire opera Amadigi (1715) by George Friderick Handel (except for the recitatives) – LPb 33. Winton Dean examined this arrangement of the work in a 1991 article.Footnote ²⁰³ Interestingly, in the fourth partbook some movements call for a viola and some for a ‘Taille’, while other parts also regularly call for change of instruments. In three movements a trumpet is added to the score.

Arrangements of several other works by Handel can be found in the partbooks. LPb 45 is the overture to the opera Il Pastor Fido (1712), and LPb 51 can be recognized as Handel's Concerto grosso, op. 3 no. 4. Several other arrangements of opera arias could recently be identified. These are LPb 34, LPb 37, LPb 40, LPb 47 and LPb 49 in the attached catalogue, and include, beside Handel, composers such as Francesco Mancini (1672–1737), Alessandro Scarlatti (1660–1725), Johann David Heinichen (1683–1729), Reinhard Keiser (1674–1739) and Antonio Lotti (1667–1740).Footnote ²⁰⁴ The instrumentation varies between four hautboys and two bassoons, or strings and trumpet added to the double-reed ensemble. Future research will analyse the details of these arrangements; however, these works appear to allow the hypothesis that Hautboisten adapted any music to their needs.

Solo instrument and Hautboisten (or ‘Orchestra’?)

The category of ‘solo works’ is represented by eight compositions in the Lilien Partbooks. Five of these feature an hautboy as the solo instrument, two feature a ‘Flauto Traverso’ (LPb 19, LPb 41) and one a solo bassoon (LPb 17). In several of the works in this category the first violin is also presented as a solo instrument in some passages.

Example 12 shows the ‘orchestral’ opening of the first movement of the Concerto in C minor for hautboy (LPb 15). Similar to concertos by Antonio Vivaldi (1678–1741) or Tomaso Giovanni Albinoni (1671–1751), this work features the hautboy in the solo sections and has it remain tacet during the ritornelli. The latter are generally scored for first and second violin, together with both bassoons in unison. Only in the second movement do the violins have separate lines.

Example 12. Anonymous, Concerto in C minor (LPb 15), 1^st movement, bars 1–3.

The solo sections for the hautboy are generally accompanied by the first bassoon, but also occasionally by the strings (see Example 13).

Example 13. Anonymous, Concerto C minor (LPb 15), 1^st movement, bars 13–15.

The Overture Suite in G minor (LPb 42) differs only in that it is not a concerto but a series of dances including its opening movement, yet featuring one hautboy as a solo instrument. The Concerto in B-flat major (LPb 17) presents a virtuosic solo part for the first bassoon and uses the hautboy merely as a ripieno instrument to double the first violin in the tutti passages. The Concerto in F major (LPb 16) is, according to a pencil note, by Handel. This pencil mark, however, was most likely added by the same scholar who provided the work numbers in the twentieth century.

The composition with the work number LPb 41 deserves attention, since it appears to be a well-known work by Georg Philipp Telemann. This Concerto in D major for ‘Flauto Traverso’ is a transcription of his Concerto for recorder and orchestra in F major (TWV 51:F1). The part for the second bass is clearly marked for a violoncello, which remains tacet in the solo sections, during which the first bassoon accompanies the flute.

All the concertos for one solo instrument and ‘orchestra’ in the Lilien Partbooks appear to correspond to the general style of solo concertos of the time. The only difference appears to be the regular instrumentation incorporating two bassoons for the bass part; however, in those works that specify a violoncello, the forces are the same as those generally required for standard early eighteenth-century concertos. The use of a keyboard instrument as part of the basso continuo group is not evident in the partbooks either through instrumentation markings or through figures in the bass line; nevertheless, it may well be possible that in some circumstances this instrument might have been added. If these works were performed in a [battle] field situation, however, it seems most unlikely that a keyboard would have been involved, as has been argued above.

Miscellaneous

The final category of compositions from the Lilien Partbooks to be discussed here are those works that cannot be placed in any of the other groups. Two are scored for two recorders as distinct instruments in addition to the two hautboys through the entire work (as opposed to being exchanged for hautboys for a number of bars or one entire movement); and one is a trio sonata for hautboy, violin and bass, probably by Handel.

Example 14 shows an excerpt of a Concerto in F major for two recorders, two hautboys, two horns and two bassoons (LPb 7). A number of instrumental changes are marked, though it appears uncertain as to what they mean. In bar 18 of the first movement, for example, the first hautboy part is marked as ‘violin basset’, while the horns and the bassoons remain tacet for the following 34 bars. Both hautboy parts are in unison in these bars, and their line extends down to g, a note that, indeed, cannot be performed on the hautboy. Whether this indicates that both parts were intended to be doubled by violins, leaving the hautboys to remain tacet in this part, or that the term ‘Hautbois’ at the beginning of the subsequent tutti section was used for the player rather than for his instrument, cannot be answered with certainty.

Example 14. Anonymous, Concerto in F major (LPb 7), 1^st movement, bars 15–22.

In the second movement of this Concerto, an Adagio, the second recorder part is marked ‘Hautbois solo’ (see Example 15). The music for both recorders is not particularly soloistic, but instead functions as an accompaniment to the elaborate first hautboy part (which may perhaps have been intended for violin – see comments on ‘violin basset’ earlier). Accordingly, it seems likely that this marking only served to inform the recorder players that this is the movement with the hautboy solo.

Example 15. Anonymous, Concerto in F major (LPb 7), 2^nd movement, bars 1–8.

The first of the two Gigues in this Concerto (movement No. 53) requires both recorder players to exchange their instruments for hautboys, playing in unison with the first and the second hautboys, as marked in their parts. This is also evident in the range of the parts that exceeds that of a treble recorder. The second Gigue, however, clearly requires recorders (being marked ‘Flauto’) again, whilst the second hautboy and the second bassoon are tacet.

Alongside the works scored for larger ensembles (which are by far the majority of the repertoire in the Lilien Partbooks) is a single trio sonata in B-flat major (LPb 52). This work was published in 1935 in an edition by W. Hinnenthal.Footnote ²⁰⁵ A second manuscript copy of this work is also kept in the Bibliotheca Fürstenbergiana and listed in the Sonsfeld Catalogue, which identifies Handel as its composer. The bass part in Lilien Partbooks is simply labelled ‘Basso’, and although there are no figures (either in this copy or in the second one held in Herdringen), Hinnenthal's edition offers a realized part for harpsichord. While it cannot be answered with certainty that a keyboard instrument was used alongside with a bassoon or a violoncello in performance by the Hautboisten for whom these partbooks were compiled (either under the auspices of von Lilien or von Wittenhorst-Sonsfeld), again it seems reasonable to assume that no keyboard instrument would have been transported to a [battle] field. It is, however, necessary to keep in mind that Hautboisten were, of course, able to play the harpsichord, as indicated in a document dating from 1737, which contains an order from King Friedrich Wilhelm I to both Sydow junior and to the ensemble of the Prussian Königsregiment:

The examples from the Lilien Partbooks discussed above seem to represent music collated for performance by Prussian Hautboisten. It also emerges that the musical genres included in these partbooks vary greatly. Some of the works are clearly for hautboy band (that is, for pure double-reed ensembles), whilst others include brass instruments, and still others even strings. Recorders are occasionally employed in order to provide a different sound colour for a few bars or for a single movement; sometimes they even have their own part throughout an entire composition. Those works with strings frequently require an instrumentation that is now commonly recognized as the ‘orchestra’, accompanying solo instruments such as a transverse flute or an hautboy and, on one occasion, a bassoon. In other cases, however, strings merely provide the middle parts in a work, while hautboys present the elaborate melody lines and bassoons provide the bass lines.

In light of the description of the musical activities of the students of the Hoboistenschule provided earlier, the variety of works in the Lilien Partbooks demonstrate clearly that the concept of independent groups did not function in a manner different from any other ‘orchestral’ group of performers.

A preliminary definition of music for Hautboisten?

This article has explored a wide-ranging selection of extant music for Hautboisten and has engaged in the hypothesis that compositions might offer clues as to the instrumentation, the number of players and also a general understanding of the common consorts in use in the German-speaking lands in the early decades of the eighteenth century. This Conclusion further draws on this evidence of ‘music for the masses’, which Haynes referred to as the ‘Muzak’ or the ‘radio’ of the time.Footnote ²⁰⁷

The primary goal of the previous section of this article was to establish the grounds for a hypothetical definition of the music typically played by Hautboisten. From this examination, it appears that the current convention of equating Hautboisten with ‘oboists’ and, accordingly, the phrase Hautboisten Bande with ‘oboe band’ (or ‘hautboy band’) cannot withstand scrutiny. Even though the surviving eighteenth-century publications of music for Hautboisten appear to indicate a pure double-reed band – an ‘oboe band’ – as a common formation, the analysis of manuscript music presumably intended for performance by Hautboisten illustrates the diversity of these players’ roles in reality, and sheds light on the variety of possible instrumentations for these ensembles.

It seems safe to assume that composers like Krieger definitely had bands of Hautboisten in mind among the potential purchasers of their published music. Furthermore, we can be certain that the manuscript arrangements of music by Venturini were meant for one of these groups. Nevertheless, only a minority of surviving compositions for Hautboisten are for double-reed instruments alone. Recalling that Krieger indicates that ‘small ensembles of amateurs also can perform these suites with violins’, and since the original edition of the Feld-Musik provided ensembles with three parts for the first treble and the bassoon, respectively, and two parts for the second treble, ‘so that when performing as Feldmusik and in bands these parts can be stronger’,Footnote ²⁰⁸ this collection was primarily intended for a pure double-reed band. Although Krieger only suggests strings and a harpsichord as an alternative instrumentation, the possibility, and indeed the likeliness, cannot be ruled out that these suites were also performed by a combination of strings and winds, perhaps joined by a keyboard instrument for the basso continuo. This possibility may represent an amalgamation of consorts of double-reeds and strings of equal strength, sometimes featuring the hautboys as a timbral colour within a string ensemble, but in other instances perhaps using strings to fill the middle parts in a wind band as we have seen in some of the works within the Lilien Partbooks.

Accordingly, when Robertson asks whether ‘perhaps string ensemble and double-reed ensemble were interchangeable’,Footnote ²⁰⁹ he allows the hypotheses, on one hand, that the concept of an orchestra with a substantial number of string players with solo wind players may not yet have been established as the single norm in German-speaking lands at the beginning of the eighteenth century, and, on the other hand, that any music, whether intended for string bands or any other instrumentation, may have been used by Hautboisten.

It seems, therefore, that a limited knowledge of double-reed ensembles performing as an entity has misled scholars and musicians nowadays to equate Hautboisten with ‘oboe bands’. For Prussian Regiments-Hautboisten the trumpet was an early and essential addition to the score. Music including other wind instruments, such as horns, clarinets and flutes, nevertheless, seems to provide the largest quantity of surviving scores intended for Hautboisten. This music is evidently the predecessor of the wind octet, the Harmoniemusik ensemble, which is often considered a less important sideline in the canon of Western art music. Accordingly, and not unsurprisingly, scholars have also regarded Hautboisten as musicians of minor significance; however, as existing pieces by Telemann, Mattheson and others prove, instrumentation alone does not inform us about the quality of a composition and its players. It might suggest, nevertheless, that elaborate music for wind ensembles composed by these masters was possibly intended for court Hautboisten rather than those employed by the military.

Drawing upon our knowledge of the French provenance of Hautboisten and the information provided by Braun on their role in the German-speaking lands, there can be no doubt that these multi-instrumentalists performed on wind as well as on string instruments. Braun demonstrates that Hautboisten were known to have been involved in performing Tafelmusik and also shows the variety of instrumentation these groups were able to provide. Assuming that Tafelmusik was played by Hautboisten (or at least by a combination of them and players of the courtly Kapelle), an instrumentation of ‘oboe band’ with added strings becomes one of many standard combinations for these ensembles, rather than an exception. Moreover, the examples from the Lilien Partbooks discussed earlier prove that there is evidence for the use of strings for the middle parts in a wind band.

The practice of arranging music, such as the works by Venturini, shows that any music may have been performed by Hautboisten, since these players made use of any Gebrauchsmusik whenever music was needed. This became even more evident in the foregoing analysis of the music of the Lilien Partbooks, which, along with many works by anonymous composers, contain several arrangements of music by well-known masters, such as George Friderick Handel and Georg Philipp Telemann.

This article has demonstrated that the instrumentation possibilities for Hautboisten are to be found in much of the musical repertoire of the eighteenth century. There can be no doubt that Bach and his contemporaries were familiar with Hautboisten and Stadtpfeifer.Footnote ²¹⁰ It seems most likely, even if only for financial reasons, that performances with one-per-part were still the norm in German-speaking lands and doubling strings was the exception.

The existence of Hautboisten ensembles and their utilization by composers prove that they were common in the German-speaking music world. Accordingly, the analysis of a selection of compositions considered in combination with knowledge of the history of Hautboisten in German-speaking lands, and in particular in Prussia, provides some answers to a number of the questions asked at the beginning of this article. Nevertheless, the research focus on wind ensembles and their role in the art music of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, as well as the unanswered queries that appeared throughout this investigation, allows us to utilize the presented current state of knowledge and the attached catalogue as a stepping stone for future research.