Not concertists vs. ripienists, but total?numbers (remember, the parts for BWV 71 (not the printed ones, but the handwritten parts) included both concertists and ripienists).? Rifkin had no basis?for his conclusions, therefore.
On Tue, Apr 8, 2025 at 8:15?AM Thierry van Bastelaer via <thierryvanbast=
[email protected]> wrote:
As most of you know, a central piece of evidence in the debate about the size of Bach¡¯s choir is the autograph score of BWV 71. On the top of the first page, Bach wrote ¡°Ab 18.?¨¨ si piace 22¡± (¡°For 18 and, if you wish, 22¡±). Starting with Rifkin, many Bach scholars have read this instruction to mean that the numbers 18 and 22 refer to the number of performers (18 with concertists only, and 22 if ripienists are added)?rather than the number of independent?parts. Yet the number of instrumental and vocal parts?(or lines?on the first page of the?score)?is not 18 but 19 (3 trumpets, drums, 2 violins, viola, violone, 2 oboes, bassoon, 2 recorders, cello, SATB concertists, and organ). All instruments and voice parts are active in the outer movements, so unless a singer was also expected to play?an instrument at the same time,?19 musicians are necessary if no ripienists are called upon, at least for these two movements.
Since it¡¯s very unlikely that Bach incorrectly?counted the number of parts or performers, how are we to understand the discrepancy between 18 and 19, and does it call into question any part of Rifkin and al.¡¯s interpretation of the ¡°For 18 and, if you wish, 22¡± instruction?
?
Thanks.
?
Thierry van Bastelaer
