Capriccio

Danish Classical Music

Edition·S music¬sound¬art

NANCY DALBERG

Capriccio for orkester / orchestra

Partitur / Score

Kritisk udgave ved / Critical edition by Frederik Døj Erforth Larsen

Copenhagen 2024

Nancy Dalberg: Capriccio

Kritisk udgave ved / Critical edition by Frederik Døj Erforth Larsen

Editors: Frederik Døj Erforth Larsen & Asmus Mehul Mejdal Larsen

Music engraving: Frederik Døj Erforth Larsen in Dorico 4

Cover design: Tobias Røder

Layout: Rudiger Meyer

Udarbejdet og udgivet med støtte fra Augustinus Fonden

Prepared and published with support from The Augustinus Foundation

Edition·S | music¬sound¬art Worsaaesvej 19, 5th ﬂoor

DK-1972 Frederiksberg

Denmark https://edition-s.dk/

Edition·S is supported by The Danish Arts Foundation.

DCM 062

ISBN 978-87-970723-4-9

ISMN 979-0-706839-16-5

Indhold

/ Contents

Danish Classical Music iv Biograﬁ / Biography v Forord / Preface vi Faksimiler / Facsimiles viii Capriccio 11

Abbreviations 54

Critical Commentary 55

Danish Classical Music

Udgivelsesserien Danish Classical Music (DCM) har til formål at tilgængeliggøre dansk musikalsk kulturarv i pålidelige og gennemarbejdede praktisk-videnskabelige nodeeditioner for musikere og forskere i ind- og udland. Således er ambitionen at overtage stafeten fra Dansk Center for Musikudgivelse, som opererede som et forskningscenter under Det Kgl. Bibliotek, 2009-2019. Centeret udgav praktisk-videnskabelige editioner af høj ﬁlologisk kvalitet, og siden lukningen af centeret er denne opgave ikke blevet varetaget – men behovet er ikke blevet mindre.

Mens Dansk Center for Musikudgivelse fungerede som et center med ansate medarbejdere er forholdene for det nye DCM anderledes: Her er tale om selvstændige og individuelt ﬁnansierede projekter under DCM-paraplyen. Derfor er der ikke blevet udarbejdet et nyt sæt redaktionelle retningslinjer – i stedet videreføres de retningslinjer, som blev formuleret af Dansk Center for Musikudgivelse. De eneste ændringer fra retningslinjerne er layoutmæssige, og så er der i DCM-udgivelserne tilføjet en kort biograﬁsk introduktion til komponisten.

De redaktionelle retningslinjer sikrer udgivelsernes høje og konsistente editionsﬁlologiske niveau og grundindstillingen til udgivelsesarbejdet kan sammenfates i nogle få, centrale punkter.

Om “praktisk-videnskabelige editioner”

Med begrebet “praktisk-videnskabelige editioner” sigtes der til, at udgivelserne skal være praktisk anvendelige for musikere, uden at musikerne nødvendigvis skal forholde sig til redaktørens arbejde og filologiske overvejelser. Derfor er selve nodesiden “ren” og uden fodnoter eller lignende. Samtidig er udgivelserne videnskabelige, idet interesserede læsere kan finde den nødvendige information om det editionsfilologiske arbejde i tekstdele placeret før og efter nodedelen: Før nodedelen bringes en introduktion til værket, dets tilblivelses- og receptionshistorie samt generelle kommentarer til det filologiske arbejde (eksempelvis nogle særlige udfordringer eller valg); efter nodedelen følger en grundig kildebeskrivelse og en oversigt over redaktionelle ændringer, deres begrundelse i kilderne samt information om varianter.

Om redaktørens rolle

Som James Grier skriver i bogen The Critical Editing of Music fra 1996, så er al editionsﬁlologisk arbejde også et fortolkningsarbejde, ideelt set baseret på grundige, kritiske og historisk forankrede studier af kildematerialet. Idéen om at den videnskabelige edition videregiver den “eneste rigtige” version af værket er en ﬁktion: Ofte vil redaktører komme frem til varierende udlægninger af et værk, og ofte kan der argumenteres lige godt for den ene læsning som den anden. Det er derfor vigtigt at bevæggrunden for de enkelte valg er tydeliggjort i oversigten over redaktionelle retelser.

I serien undgås såkaldte “eklektiske” editioner, en sammenblanding af forskellige kilder, der kan resultere i en version af værket, der aldrig har eksisteret fra komponistens hånd. Der bestemmes derfor altid en hovedkilde, som editionen er baseret på, mens varianter kan bruges som hjemmel ved retelser af klare fejl.

Thomas Husted Kirkegaard, ph.d.

Danish Classical Music

The publication series Danish Classical Music (DCM) aims to make Danish musical heritage accessible for musicians and researchers in Denmark and abroad by providing reliable and meticulous practical-scholarly music editions. The ambition is thus to take over the baton from the Danish Centre for Music Publication which operated as a research centre under the Royal Library from 2009 to 2019. The centre published practical-scholarly editions of high philological quality, and since the closure of the centre, this task has not been undertaken – but the need has not diminished.

While the Danish Centre for Music Publication functioned as a centre with dedicated employees, the conditions for the new DCM are diﬀerent: it comprises of independent projects funded individually under the DCM framework. Therefore, a new set of editorial guidelines has not been developed – instead, the guidelines formulated by the Danish Centre for Music Publication are being sustained. The only changes to the guidelines relate to layout, and in DCM publications a brief biographical introduction of the composer is added.

The editorial guidelines ensure a high and consistent level of philological quality in the publications, and the fundamental editorial approach can be summarized in a few key points.

On “practical-scholarly editions”

The term “practical-scholarly editions” refers to the aim of making the publications practically useful for musicians without requiring them to engage directly with the editor’s work and philological considerations. The sheet music is therefore “clean”, without footnotes or similar additions. At the same time, the publications are scholarly in nature, as interested readers can find the necessary information about the philological work in sections placed before and after the sheet music: Prior to the sheet music, there is an introduction to the work, its genesis and reception history, as well as general comments on the philological work (such as specific challenges or choices). After the sheet music, a thorough description of sources and an overview of editorial changes, their justification based on the sources, and information about variants are presented.

On the role of the editor

As James Grier writes in his book The Critical Editing of Music from 1996, all philological work is also an act of interpretation, ideally based on thorough, critical, and historically grounded studies of the source material. The notion that the scholarly edition presents the “only correct” version of a work is a ﬁction: Editors often arrive at varying interpretations of a piece, and equally compelling arguments can often be made for diﬀerent readings. Therefore, it is important to clarify the rationale behind each choice in the overview of editorial revisions.

The series avoids so-called “eclectic” editions, which involve a mixture of diﬀerent sources and may result in a version of the work that never existed in the composer’s hand. Therefore, a primary source is always determined as the basis for the edition, while variants can be used as evidence for correcting clear errors.

Thomas Husted Kirkegaard, Ph.D

Biograﬁ

Nancy Dalberg (1881-1949) blev født Nancy Hansen i 1881 på godset Bødstrup i nærheden af Slagelse. Hendes far, Christian D.A. Hansen (1843-1916), var en særdeles succesfuld forretningsmand, der udviklede produkter til mejeribranchen, og Dalberg voksede derfor op i en familie, hvor der ikke manglede økonomiske ressourcer. I 1882 flytede familien ind på det nyerhvervede gods Mullerup på Sydfyn, hvor Dalberg voksede op. I 1901, da hun var 17 år gammel, blev hun gift med ingeniørofficeren og portrætmaleren Erik Dalberg (18751945). Hun modtog klaverundervisning af én af tidens mest anerkendte klaverlærere, Ove Christiansen (1856-1909), og i 1909-11 studerede hun komposition hos den norske komponist Johan Svendsen (1840-1911). Hun var formentlig også elev af komponisten Fini Henriques (1867-1940) før hun i 1913 blev elev af tidens helt store musiknavn, Carl Nielsen (1865-1931). Igennem tiden udviklede Dalberg og Nielsen et tætere professionelt forhold, og Nielsen dirigerede eller medvirkede som violinist i opførelsen af adskillige af hendes værker. Han bad hende også hjælpe med at instrumentere sine værker Alladin og Fynsk Foraar Dalberg fik opført en række sange i 1911, og hendes første strygekvartet blev opført i hendes hjem – med Carl Nielsen på violin – i 1914, men hendes egentlige offentlige debut som komponist kom i 1915, hvor hun holdt en såkaldt kompositionskoncert i Odd Fellow Palæet, kun med hendes værker på programmet. Hun holdt endnu en kompositionskoncert i 1918 og en tredje i 1922. Ved disse koncerter blev blandt andet hendes strygekvarteter, sange og flere orkesterværker – ikke mindst symfonien – opført. Generelt blev Dalbergs musik modtaget godt, men anmelderne undlod sjældent at kommentere på hendes køn, ofte fordi de var overraskede over, at en kvinde kunne komponere så godt.

I vinterhalvåret 1922-23 havde hun et ophold i Algeriet, fordi hun var plaget af helbredsproblemer, blandt andet gigtsmerter. Her blev hun inspireret af nomadefolkets musik og nedskrev melodier, der siden blev til værket Arabisk Musik fra Sahara Efter hjemkomsten begyndte hun at komponere en opera over Selma Lägerlöfs (1858-1940) Gösta Berlings Saga, men da Lägerlöf allerede havde givet italienske Riccardo Zandonai (1883-1944) tilladelse til at komponere en opera over denne historie, måte Dalberg opgive det – dog efterlod hun sig sangen Marianna Sinclairs Sang fra dete arbejde.

I 1929 afholdt Dalberg sin ferde og i 1937 sin sidste kompositionskoncert. Stilmæssigt bevægede Dalberg sig fra det senromantiske og ind i det moderne. I hendes musik ﬁndes både svungne, romantiske melodier og korte, repetitive motiver. Sidstnævnte træk blev af samtidens anmeldere ofte kritiseret men kan også høres som en moderne kvalitet i Dalbergs musik.

Biography

Nancy Dalberg (1881 – 1949) was born Nancy Hansen in 1881 at the estate of Bødstrup near Slagelse. Her father, Christian D.A. Hansen (1843 – 1916), was a highly successful businessman who developed products for the dairy industry, meaning that Dalberg grew up in a family with no lack of ﬁnancial resources. In 1882, the family moved to the newly acquired estate of Mullerup in South Funen, where Dalberg grew up.

In 1901, at the age of 17, she married the engineering oﬃcer and portrait painter Erik Dalberg (1875 – 1945). She received piano lessons from one of the most renowned piano teachers of the time, Ove Christiansen (1856 – 1909), and from 1909 to 1911 studied composition with the Norwegian composer Johan Svendsen (1840 – 1911). She was presumably also a student of the composer Fini Henriques (1867–1940) before, in 1913, becoming a student of the most prominent Danish musician of the time, Carl Nielsen (1865 – 1931). Over time, Dalberg and Nielsen developed a closer professional relationship, and Nielsen conducted or participated as a violinist in the performance of several of her works. He also asked her to help orchestrate his works Aladdin and Springtime on Funen

Dalberg had several of her songs performed in 1911, and her ﬁrst string quartet was performed at her home – with Carl Nielsen on violin – in 1914, but her true public debut as a composer came in 1915 when she held a so-called composition concert at the Odd Fellow Palace in Copenhagen, with only her works on the program. She held another composition concert in 1918 and a third in 1922. At these concerts, her string quartets, songs, and several orchestral works – most notably the symphony – were performed. Generally, Dalberg’s music was well received, but critics rarely failed to comment on her gender, often surprised that a woman was able to compose so well.

During the winter of 1922 – 23, she took up residence in Algeria due to health problems, amongst them arthritis. Here, she was inspired by the music of nomadic people and wrote down melodies, which later became the work Arabic Music from the Sahara. Upon her return, she began composing an opera based on Selma Lagerlöf’s (1858 – 1940) Gösta Berling’s Saga, but since Lagerlöf had already granted the Italian composer Riccardo Zandonai (1883 – 1944) permission to compose an opera on this story, Dalberg had to give it up – however the song Marianna Sinclair’s Song remains from this work.

In 1929, Dalberg held her fourth composition concert, and in 1937, her last. Stylistically, Dalberg moved from the late romantic and into the modern. In her music, one ﬁnds both sweeping, romantic melodies and short, repetitive motifs. The later feature was often criticized by contemporary critics but can also be heard as a modern quality in Dalberg’s music.

Forord

Om tilblivelsesprocessen af Nancy Dalbergs Capriccio er ingen kilder overleveret. Efter Dalbergs kompositionskoncert i 1915 er det muligt, at Dalberg så orkestermusikken som det naturlige næste skridt i sin komponistkarriere (se nedenfor).

Capriccio er formodentlig komponeret i 1917, men dateringen er forbundet med en række usikkerheder. Manuskriptet (se kilde A i kildebeskrivelsen) er udateret. Der er dog visse pejlemærker vi kan gå efter. Nancy Dalberg gjorde brug af den samme nodeskriver til at få udformet stemmematerialet som til hendes Symfoni i cis-mol. Ydermere er hver stemme underskrevet med en dato for hvornår den blev produceret. Her danner der sig et billede af at stemmerne blev produceret i umiddelbar forlængelse af hinanden. Stemmesætet til symfonien blev produceret fra 10. dec. 1917 til 28. jan. 1918 og stemmesætet til Capriccio blev produceret fra 28. feb. 1918 til 4. mar. 1918. 14. mar. 1918 i Odd Fellow Palæet blev værket uropført med Carl Nielsen som dirigent. Ved koncerten blev den føromtalte Symfoni i cis-mol også uropført og Dalbergs Scherzo for strygeorkester genopført. Carl Nielsen var på dete tidspunkt Dalbergs lærer i komposition, efter hendes tidligere lærer Johan Svendsen døde. Forholdet mellem Dalberg og Nielsen forblev tæt resten af Nielsens liv, og Dalberg assisterede ovenikøbet Nielsen med nodeskrivningsopgaver ved ﬂere lejligheder.

At en kvinde i 1918 fik en selvstændig koncert med orkestermusik gik ikke dagspressen forbi. I koncertens anmeldelser var det ikke overraskende Dalbergs Symfoni i cismol, der fik den største opmærksomhed. Symfonien fik en særdeles hård medfart blandt anmelderne. Kristeligt Dagblad skrev blandt andet følgende:

Fru Dalberg havde altsaa paa Forhaand sat Sindene i Bevægelse. Hendes Symfoni blev imidlertid ikke den Indsats, som paa dete Punkt godtgjorde Kvindens Ligeberetigelse med Manden. Det var ganske godt Arbejde, der ogsaa klang godt, men Ideerne nødvendig- gjorde ikke den store Form. Bedst forekom sidste Sats. Ogsaa for de to andre Orkesterstykkers Vedkommende gjaldt det, at man kunde ønske dybere Musikindhold 1

Hvor Dalbergs Symfoni i cis-mol ﬁk en hård kritik, ﬁk Capriccio på den anden side en mere positiv reception.

Nationaltidende skrev bl.a. om Capriccio:

(...) To mindre Stykker af Fruen paafulgte [Symfoni i cis-mol, red.]: en noget tam og blodfattig, men elskværdig “Scherzo” for Strygere og en ikke tidligere hørt “Capriccio,” i hvilken der var større Kraft og et fastere Tag om Motiverne end i Symfonien. Efter disse 3 Arbejder fremkaldtes ikke blot Dirigenten ﬂere gange, men ogsaa Fru Dalberg selv 2

Endvidere skrev Emilius Bangert i dagbladet Hovedstaden:

Symfonien manglede den tematiske Storhed og musikalske Mangfoldighed, man uvilkaarligt knyter til Begrebet Symfoni, – var snarere en Sinfonieta, indeholdende en Række moll-tyngede Stemninger. Den viste, at Fru Dalberg er naaet til større Beherskelse af de musikalske Elementer. Hendes Musik er præget af overordentlig Kultur, hendes Viden er

1 Kristeligt Dagblad 15.3.1918, underskrevet ‘Vic’: citeret i Ahlgren Jensen, “En komponerende Dame”, s. 88

2 Torben Meyer & Frede Schandorf Petersen. 1947. Carl Nielsen: Kunstneren og Mennesket, vol. 1 s. 132. København: Nyt Nordisk Forlag & Arnold Busck

Preface

No sources have been handed down about the creation process of Nancy Dalberg’s Capriccio. After Dalberg’s composition concert in 1915, it is possible that Dalberg saw orchestral music as the natural next step in her composing career (see below). Capriccio was presumably composed in 1917, but the date remains uncertain. The manuscript (see source A in the source description) is undated. However, there are certain indications that can be followed. Nancy Dalberg used the same score copyist to have the parts writen out as for her Symphony in C-sharp minor. Furthermore, each part is signed with the date of its production. From this, a picture emerges in which the parts were produced immediately after each other. The parts for the symphony were produced from 10 Dec. 1917 to 28 Jan. 1918 and the set of parts for Capriccio was produced from 28 Feb. 1918 to 4 Mar. 1918.

The work was ﬁrst performed 14 March 1918 at the Odd Fellow Palace, conducted by Carl Nielsen. At the concert, the previously mentioned Symphony in C-sharp minor was also premiered and Dalberg’s Scherzo for String Orchestra was performed again. Carl Nielsen was Dalberg’s composition teacher at this time, after the death of her previous teacher Johan Svendsen. The relationship between Dalberg and Nielsen remained close for the rest of Nielsen’s life, and Dalberg additionally assisted Nielsen with copyist tasks on several occasions.

The fact that a woman in 1918 was given an independent concert with orchestral music did not go unnoticed by the daily press. In the reviews of the concert, it was not surprisingly Dalberg’s Symphony in C-sharp minor that received the most atention. The symphony received particularly harsh reviews. Kristeligt Dagblad wrote, among other things, the following:

Mrs. Dalberg had, therefore, already set minds in motion. Her symphony however, was not the eﬀort that conﬁrmed women’s equality with men on this point. It was quite good work, and also sounded good, but the ideas did not necessarily require the large form. The last movement came across as the best. The same could be said for the two other orchestral movements: one could wish for a deeper musical content. 1

While Dalberg’s Symphony in C-sharp minor received harsh criticism, Capriccio, on the other hand, was granted a more positive reception.

Nationaltidende wrote, among other things, about Capriccio:

(...) Two smaller pieces by the lady followed [Symphony in C-sharp minor. ed.]: a somewhat tame and anemic, but amiable “Scherzo” for Strings and a previously unheard “Capriccio”, in which there was greater power and a ﬁrmer grip on the motifs than in the Symphony. After these 3 works, not only the conductor was summoned several times, but also Mrs Dalberg herself. 2

Furthermore, Emilius Bangert wrote in the newspaper Hovedstaden:

The symphony lacked the thematic grandeur and musical diversity that one inevitably associates with the concept of

1 Kristeligt Dagblad 15.3.1918, signed ‘Vic’: cited in Ahlgren Jensen, “En komponerende Dame”, p. 88

2 Torben Meyer & Frede Schandorf Petersen. 1947. Carl Nielsen: Kunstneren og Mennesket, vol. 1 p. 132. Copenhagen: Nyt Nordisk Forlag & Arnold Busck

særdeles omfatende, og indenfor et bestemt, afgrænset Felt – det elegiske – præsenterer hun smukke Ting. Andanten vidnede paa bedste Maade herob. Man bliver dog lidt trætet af Ensartetheden i hendes Tone; der kan ganske vist paapeges Modsætninger i hendes Temaers Rytme og ydre Fysiognomi, men Grundfølelsen er noget for ens, ligesom hun endnu ikke rigtig magter at faa den symfoniske Udvikling i Gang. Forsaavidt var Capriccioen hendes bedste Ydelse, den havde betydelig mere Styrke end Symfonien og varslede saaledes godt for hendes fremtidige Udvikling. 3

Med undtagelse af en enkelt koncert i Tivoli i 1918 under ledelse af Frederik Schnedler-Petersen blev Cappricio ikke opført ﬂere gange i Dalbergs samtid. I nyere tid er Capriccio blevet indspillet på DACAPO Records i 1999 med Sønderjyllands Symfoniorkester dirigeret af Frans Rasmussen. Udgivelsen rummede endvidere en samling af Dalbergs kammermusik og sange med klaverledsagelse.

Frederik Døj Erforth Larsen København 2024

a symphony, – was rather a sinfonietta, containing a series of minor-heavy moods. It showed that Mrs. Dalberg has achieved great mastery of the musical elements. Her music is characterized by extraordinary culture, her knowledge is extremely extensive, and within a specific, limited field – the elegiac – she presents beautiful things. The Andante bore witness to this in the best possible way. However, one gets a litle tired of the monotony of her tone; contrasts in the rhythm and external form of her themes can certainly be pointed out, but the basic feeling is somewhat similar, just as she is not yet able to really get the symphonic development going. By far the Capriccio was her best effort, it had considerably more strength than the Symphony and thus boded well for her future development. 3

With the exception of a single concert in Tivoli under the direction of Frederik Schnedler-Petersen in 1918, Capriccio was not further performed during Dalberg’s lifetime. More recently, Capriccio has been released on DACAPO Records in 1999 with The South Jutland Symphony Orchestra conducted by Frans Rasmussen. The release also contained a collection of Dalberg’s chamber music and songs with piano accompaniment.

Frederik Døj Erforth Larsen Copenhagen 2024 3

Faksimile

Facsimile

Faksimile

Første side af renskrevet partitur i Nancy Dalbergs hånd med tilføjelse af metronommærker og blyantstrøg over pauke-delen i ukendt hånd.

Det Kongelige Bibliotek : DK-kk MA ms 6186 mu 0108.2000.

Facsimile

First page of the fair copy score in Nancy Dalberg’s hand with the addition of metronome marks and pencil strokes over the timpani part in an unknown hand.

The Royal Danish Library : DK-kk MA ms 6186 mu 0108.2000.

Orkesterbesætning / Instrumentation

1 Flauto Piccolo

2 Flauti

2 Oboi

Clarinetto 1 in La/si bemolle

Clarinetto 2 in La

2 Fagotti

4 Corni in Fa

2 Trombe in Fa

3 Tromboni

1 Tuba

Timpani

Violini I

Violini II

Viole

Violoncelli

Contrabbassi

Transposed score

Nanc y Dalberg

Nanc y Dalberg: Capriccio

Abbreviations

b. bar

bb. bars

cb. contrabbasso

cl. clarineto cor. corno

cresc. crescendo dim. diminuendo div. divisi

fg. fagoto

ﬂ. ﬂauto

fol. leaf

marc. marcato mark ob. oboe

p. page

pp. pages

stacc. staccato ten. tenuto mark timp. timpani

tr. tromba

trb. trombone

vl. violino

vcl. violoncello vla. viola

Critical Commentary

Description of sources

Source A

The Royal Danish Library (MA ms 6186 mu 0108.2000), autograph score in ink (fair copy/ performance material). A few additions in pencil and with blue crayon in both the composer’s, Carl Nielsen and unknown hands.

The score: 12 double sheets + 1 loose sheet (49 pages in total), paginated.

Paper type: Unknown, 16 systems per page.

Title page: Capriccio/for/Orkester/af/Nancy Dalberg [Capriccio/for/Orchestra/by/Nancy Dalberg]

1r: Tempo indication: Allegro energico “h = m 88” added with pencil in an unknown hand. Possibly Carl Nielsen, who premiered the work […] Title: Capriccio […] Composer: Nancy Dalberg.

Dating: Undated, but it is known from sources for Nancy Dalberg’s Symphony in C-sharp minor that the works were composed parallel to each other and premiered together. The dating of the Symphony in C-sharp minor is on the manuscript’s ﬁrst page set to 1917, which is presumed to be the same for this work, although it cannot be determined with certainty.

Source B

The Royal Danish Library Copenhagen (DK-kk MA ms 6187 mu 0108.2000), autograph parts in ink in an unknown hand with some additions in pencil.

Voices: 32 pars bound with yarn and bound in carboard with a glued cloth book spine. Parts: Flauto Piccolo, Flauto 1,2, Oboe 1,2, Clarineto 1,2, Fagoto, 1,2, Corno (Fa) 1,2,3,4, Tromba (Fa) 1,2, Trombone 1,2,3, Tuba, Timpani, Archi (6/5/4/3/3).

Paper type: Unknown. 12 systems per page 1r/title page: Tempo indication: Allegro energico […] Title: Capriccio […] Composer: Nancy Dalberg.

Dating: The voices were produced between 28 Feb. 1918 and 4 Mar. 1918, which can be seen on the date at the botom of the votes.

Comment: The same engraver was used in Nancy Dalberg’s Symfoni i cis-mol [Symphony in C-sharp minor]. The set of parts for the symphony was produced between 10 Dec. 1917 and 28 Jan. 1918. See: The Royal Danish Library, Copenhagen DK-kk Mf. A. 1567.

Commentary on the edition

Sources A and B are the only known sources for this work. Source B is a copy of A. Source A is a transcription similar to other manuscripts by the composer (see, e.g., Symphony in C-sharp minor, or Orchestral Songs). Therefore, it is assumed that there was a draft for the work that has been lost.

In accordance with the purpose of the Danish Classical Music series, and as described in the series preface in the current edition, the work is presented here in its full length and without indication of editorial additions and corrections. These are only found in the critical apparatus. However, there is one exception to this principle in bar 87 where a tempo is added. This tempo cannot be found in the two main sources of the work but is added based on context. In bar 86, Dalberg has added a perdendosi, but has not speciﬁed where this leads. It is assumed that there is perdendosi until the fermata in bar 87. In the main source A, corrections are found in both pencil and blue coloured pencil. Pencil corrections and notes writen by the composer are included tacitly. Corrections and notes in coloured pencil, often by the conductor, are not included. In cases where corrections and notes by others than the composer are included, this is documented in the critical review.

The music text is standardised so that it follows modern practice in terms of instrument names, notation practices, arrangement, lecture designations, tempi,

practices regarding ﬁxed and loose signs (in horns) and more. This is done tacitly. “Muta in” in connection with the retuning of timpani and switching between A and Bb clarinets is tacitly normalised.

Articulations and signs

Dalberg often only writes articulations for one instrument, even if several appear in the same system. The same applies to accidentals, where Dalberg often does not insert a accidental for one voice, if the accidental has been set for another voice earlier in the measure. Furthermore, Dalberg does not set accidentals if the same note appears again in a diﬀerent octave. This practice is tacitly modernised.

Dalberg often omits accidentals before a modulation. Where it can be analysed from the context that these accidentals are inserted. All accidentals inserted by the editors has been documented in the notes

Rehearsal marks

Rehearsal marks in the present edition of Capriccio follow Dalberg’s own as they appear in the main source A. In these, however, the rehearsal mark J is not found, which is why this edition, from this point onward, will be one rehearsal mark behind.

Slurs

The way Dalberg writes slurs diﬀers in some cases from modern notational practice. This typically applies to places where slurs and ties are placed next to each other. Here, tacit adjustments are made so that the slur begins or ends at the same place as the tie. Dalberg also often forgets to continue a tie over a page break. This is also tacitly corrected. Where slurs contain substantial information that would be lost when translated into modern notation, original slurs are however retained despite the overall editorial strategy.

Tempo, dynamics and character designations

Sometimes it seems that Dalberg does not distinguish clearly between expression and tempi. All tempi that are notated as expressions are tacitly set above the upper system and above the string section according to applicable notation principles. Character, dynamic and tempo designations are also tacitly writen out completely. (e.g. dol., marc., and rit. are tacitly normalised to dolce, marcato, and ritardando.)

Divisi and pizzicato

For divisi and pizzicato, Dalberg does not always use unison and arco. These are tacitly inserted editorially.

Editorial emendations

Bar Part

Commentary

1 A: “h = m 88” added in pencil

1 – 9 vl. 2, vla., vlc. bow marks added by analogy with vl. 1

2, 4 tba. note s 1 – 2: slur added by analogy with fag., cor., trb. 2, 4 vl. 2, vla., vlc. note 1: accent added by analogy with vl. 1

4 trb. 2

A: notes 1 – 2: slur added in pencil [ND]

6 vl. 2, vla., vlc. note 6: accent added by analogy with vl. 1

7 vl. 2, vla., vlc. note 2, 6: accent added by analogy with vl. 1; note 6: f added by analogy with vl. 1

8 – 9, 128 – 129 cor. 1, 2 “a2” added as in B

9 vl. 2, vla., vlc. note 2: accent added by analogy with vl. 1

14 – 15 cl. 2 legato Slur emended from t. 13, note 2 to t. 14, note 2 to be from t. 13, note 2 to t. 15, note 1 by analogy with cl. 1

14 – 15 fag. A: unﬁnished slur in b. 14 in ink, completed in pencil in b. 15

15, 16 fag. f emended from b. 15, note 3 to b. 16, note 1 by analogy with vlc., cb.

16 – 21 timp.

A: “8 basso” added in pencil [ND]

16 vla. note 1: s added by analogy with vl. 1.

17 ob., cl., fag., cor. 1, 2, vl. 2, vla., vlc. “cresc. poco a poco” added by analogy with ﬂ., cor. 3, vl. 1, cb.

17 cor. 1 note 1: f added by analogy with b. 16 (cor. 2)

21 tba. note s 1 – 2: slur added by analogy with tr.

22 picc. note 1: f added by analogy with ﬂ.

22 cor. 3, 4, tr. f added by analogy with cor. 1, 2

22 tr. 1 note 2 emended from e to q by analogy with brass

22 vl. 2

22, 23, 24 tba.

24 picc., ﬂ.

note 1: accent added by analogy with vl. 1

note 1 – 2: slur added by analogy with brass

note 3 – 6: slur added by analogy with b. 144; A: note 1: accent added in pencil [ND] (ﬂ.)

25, 26 picc., ﬂ. b. 25, note 3 to b. 26, note 5: slur added in with b. 145 – 146.; A: bar crossed out in pencil (picc.)

26 cl. note 6 – 11: slur added by analogy with ﬂ.

26 – 28 vl. 2

27 vl. 1, 2

29 ob.

Dynamics added by analogy with vl. 1

note 5: @ added by analogy with b. 8

Slur from b. 29, note 2 to b. 30, note 5 emended to two slurs from b. 29, note 2 to note 5 and one slur from b. 30, note 1 to note 5 by analogy with ﬂ., cl.

29 cl. note 5: @ omited by analogy with ﬂ., ob.

29 fag. 2 note 1: n n added by analogy with ﬂ., ob. 29, 149 vlc., cb. note 1 – 5: slur added by analogy with fag.; b. 29, note 2: accent added by analogy with fag. and b. 149 (vlc., cb.)

30 cl. note 2: n omited by analogy with ﬂ., ob.

32 fag. note 2 emended from e til q by analogy with cor. 1, 2

38 cb. note 1: m added by analogy with vlc.

39 fag.

A: notes 2 – 4 and 6 – 8: slurs added in pencil [ND]

43 ﬂ. note s 1, 2: tenuto added by analogy with ob., cl., cor: tenuto added in pencil 46, 47 picc., ﬂ. bar 46, note 3 and bar 47, notes 4, 8: accent added by analogy with bar 48 – 54; b. 46, notes 1 – 3 and b. 47, notes 2 – 4 and 6 – 8: slur added by analogy with b. 48 – 54

54 picc. note 3: accent added by analogy with note 7 and ﬂ.

54 ob. 1, 2 sf added by analogy with brass, strings

62 – 63 vla. slur added by analogy with ﬂ., ob., fag., cor. 1, 2, vlc., cb..

68 vl. 2

77 vl. 2

note 1: b added by analogy with b. 66

A: note 5: “ces” [Cb]writen in pencil [ND]

77, 78 vl. 2 notes 2, 4: staccato added by analogy with bars 74 – 76, 79 – 87.

81 vl. 2 notes 1, 2: n added by analogy with vla.

85, 86 vl. 2 note 8: n added by analogy with fag. 1

85 vla. note 4: n added by analogy with fag. 1

86 vla.

note 6: n added by analogy with fag. 1

92 vl. 2 note 2: n added by analogy with vl. 1; A: n added in pencil

100 vlc. note 2 emended from h to h by analogy with vl. 1, 2, vla.

104 vl. 1

107 – 108 fag. 2

107 cor. 1

108 fag. 2

112 cl. 1

113 vlc.

A: m added in pencil [ND]

A: tie not completed (page break).

A: “cis” [C#] writen in pencil [ND]

note 2: accent added by analogy with cor. 1

A: note 4: b added in pencil [ND]

note 1: b added above trill by analogy with b. 112

115 ﬂ. 2, ob. 2, cl. 2 p added by analogy with b. 109 (ﬂ.). (NB. can only be seen in the parts.)

119 timp.

A: “8va basso” added in pencil [ND]