Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 in The Arrangement by Edvard Grieg: A Critical Examination of The Musical Text in The Context of The Primary Sources

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494
in the Arrangement by Edvard Grieg:

A Critical Examination of the Musical Text
in the Context of the Primary Sources
A Thesis Submitted to the College of

Graduate Studies and Research
in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the Degree of Master of Arts
in the Department of Music
University of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon
By
Ohran Noh
© Copyright Ohran Noh, August 2009, All rights reserved

PERMISSION TO USE
In presenting this thesis/dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Postgraduate

degree from the University of Saskatchewan, I agree that the Libraries of this University may
make it freely available for inspection. I further agree that permission for copying of this
thesis/dissertation in any manner, in whole or in part, for scholarly purposes may be granted by
the professor or professors who supervised my thesis/dissertation work or, in their absence, by
the Head of the Department or the Dean of the College in which my thesis work was done. It is
understood that any copying or publication or use of this thesis/dissertation or parts thereof for
financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. It is also understood that due
recognition shall be given to me and to the University of Saskatchewan in any scholarly use
which may be made of any material in my thesis/dissertation.
DISCLAIMER
Reference in this thesis/dissertation to any specific commercial products, process, or service by

trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not constitute or imply its endorsement,
recommendation, or favoring by the University of Saskatchewan. The views and opinions of the
author expressed herein do not state or reflect those of the University of Saskatchewan, and shall
not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.
Requests for permission to copy or to make other uses of materials in this thesis/dissertation in
whole or part should be addressed to:
Head of the Department of Music

Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 0X1
Canada
OR
Dean
College of Graduate Studies and Research
107 Administration Place
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 5A2
Canada
i
ABSTRACT
In 1879-1880, E. W. Fritzsch in Leipzig issued a most unusual collection entitled

Arrangements of Mozart Piano Sonatas with a freely composed second piano part
without opus numbers, prepared by the noted Norwegian composer, Edvard Grieg (1843-
1907). The collection of Grieg’s arrangement of Mozart’s works comprises the Piano
Sonata in F major, KV 533/494 (composed in 1788), Fantasia and the Piano Sonata in c
minor, KV 475 and KV 457 (composed in 1784), the Piano Sonata in C major, KV 545
(composed in 1788), and the Piano Sonata in G major, KV 189h=283 (composed in
1775). According to the letter to Dr. Max Abraham, Grieg originally prepared his
arrangements of Mozart’s four sonatas for pedagogical reasons. In his article Mozart
(November 1897), Grieg also mentions his own Mozart editions:
The writer of this article has himself attempted, by using a second

piano, to impart to several of Mozart’s pianoforte sonatas a tonal
effect appealing to our modern ears; and he wishes to add, by way of
apology, that he did not change a single one of Mozart’s notes, thus
preserving the respect we owe to the great master. It is not my
opinion that this was an act of necessity; far from it. But provided a
man does not follow the example of Gounod, who transformed a
Bach prelude into a modern, sentimental, and trivial show piece, of
which I absolutely disapprove, but seeks to preserve the unity of
style, there is surely no reason for raising an outcry over his desire to
attempt a modernization as one way of showing his admiration for
an old master.
With regard to this collection of Mozart sonatas, this thesis documents the influence of
Mozart, a Viennese classical composer, on Grieg, a Norwegian Romantic composer, with
a special focus on Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 in the arrangement by
Grieg. With Grieg’s bold claim that he “did not change a single one of Mozart’s notes,”
this study reveals the authenticity through the critical examination of the musical text in
the context of the primary sources.
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to give my very personal heartfelt thanks to my principal advisor, Dr.
Walter Kreyszig (Professor of Musicology, University of Saskatchewan) for his
devotion to my work, his patience with this thesis, and his sincere advice about music
and musicology.
I would like to express my appreciation to all my committee members for their helpful
insights and advices on this project: Dr. Gregory Marion (Assistant Professor of Music
Theory, University of Saskatchewan), whose insightful advice helped me shape my
thoughts on musical analysis; Professor Kathleen Solose (Associate Professor of Piano
and Chamber Music, University of Saskatchewan), with whom I studied piano and
chamber music during my undergraduate and graduate years, for the sharing of her
knowledge in pedagogy and style and her insight into the performance aspects of this
work; Dr. David Parkinson (Professor of English, University of Saskatchewan), my
external examiner, whose interest, keen observation, warmth, and kindness will always
be remembered.
I would like to give my special thanks to Dr. Joan Halmo (Adjunct Professor of
Musicology, University of Saskatchewan), whose advice, especially on linguistic issues,
was very helpful; to Dr. Willa Collins (Assistant Professor, University of Miami, USA)
who willingly and wholeheartedly supported my thesis defense as the invigilator; and to
Dr. Stewart Carter (Professor and Chairperson of Music, Wake Forest University, USA)
for his support.
I am also very grateful for Dr. Kris T. Huang (M.D., Ph.D., Wake Forest University,
USA), an important editor in this project, whose critical opinions and discussion from
outside of the musicology field have continuously challenged and motivated my
thinking process.
I also wish to thank Dr. Jo-Anne Dillon (Dean, College of Arts and Science, University
of Saskatchewan), Dr. Peter Stoicheff (Vice Dean of Humanities and Fine Arts and
Professor of English, University of Saskatchewan), Dr. Lawrence Martz (Dean, College
of Graduate and Research, University of Saskatchewan), Dr. Thomas Wishart (former
Dean, College of Graduate Studies and Research, University of Saskatchewan), and
Prof. Dean McNeill (Chairman, Department of Music and Associate Professor of
Trumpet and Jazz Studies) for their generous financial support, which allowed me to
carry out research at the National Library of Norway (Oslo, Norway) and at the
Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum (Salzburg, Austria) during the summer of 2006.
Several individuals have provided their kind assistance in obtaining sources needed for
my thesis as well as answered queries arising from my research. In this connection, I am
grateful to the Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum in Salzburg, especially Prof.
Geneviève Geffray (Bibliotheca Mozartiana), Dr. Ulrich Leisinger (Director,
Wissenschaftlicher Bereich, Mozart-Institut), Dr. Johanna Senigl (Bibliotheca
Mozartiana), and Holger M. Stüwe (Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter); Inger Johanne
Christiansen (Hovedbibliotekar Musikkformidling, National Music Collection at the
National Library of Norway, Oslo); Siren Steen (Head of Music Department and The
Grieg Archives, Bergen); and the Interlibrary Loan Staff at the University of
Saskatchewan.
iii
DEDICATION OF THESIS
I would like to dedicate my thesis to my family, which has never failed to encourage me
throughout the long period of my study. Without their love and support, I would not be
here today.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PERMISSION TO USE....................................................................................................... i
ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................ ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................................................................... iii
DEDICATION OF THESIS .............................................................................................. iv
TABLE OF CONTENT.......................................................................................................v
TABLE OF EXAMPLES ................................................................................................. vii
TABLE OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ xi
NOTES.............................................................................................................................. xii
CHAPTER 1. Establishing the Perspective of Edvard Grieg’s Initiative in Arranging

Mozart’s Keyboard Works: A Review of the Literature .............................1
CHAPTER 2. Grieg as a Champion of Mozart in the Context of the Keyboard

Arrangement ..............................................................................................10
2.1 The Relationship between Grieg and Mozart ..................................................10
2.2 The State of the Arrangement in Europe in the Era of Grieg ..........................15
2.3 Grieg as an Arranger........................................................................................24
CHAPTER 3. Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494: Historical Issues and
Musical Analysis........................................................................................31
3.1 Historical Background of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 ..31
3.2 Structural/Musical Analysis of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major,
KV 533/494: Studies in the Musical Text........................................................41
3.2.1 The First Movement (Allegro) of KV 533/494..............................41
3.2.2 The Second Movement (Andante) of KV 533/494 ........................59
3.2.3 The Third Movement (Rondo) of KV 533/494..............................66
3.3 Grieg’s Choice of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 ..............73
CHAPTER 4. Grieg’s Arrangement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:

The Musical Text in the Original and in the Arrangement.......................76
4.1 Grieg’s Changes from Mozart’s Original in Piano I........................................77
4.1.1 Dynamics .......................................................................................77
4.1.2 Articulation ....................................................................................85
4.1.3 Phrasing..........................................................................................86
4.1.4 Musical Notes (Pitches) .................................................................88
4.1.5 Accidentals.....................................................................................91
4.1.6 Musical Designation ......................................................................92
v
4.1.7 Other Modifications .......................................................................93
4.1.8 Changes in Andante and Rondo .....................................................94
4.2 Piano II...........................................................................................................100
4.2.1 Allegro..........................................................................................100
4.2.2 Andante ........................................................................................112
4.2.3 Rondo ...........................................................................................120
CHAPTER 5. Grieg as an Innovator of the Musical Arrangement: Implications and

Conclusion ...............................................................................................138
BIBLIOGRAPHY............................................................................................................147
APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................A1
Appendix A Edvard Grieg’s Arrangements of Wolfgang Amadeus
Mozart’s Keyboard Works: A Survey of Primary Sources
and Early Editions.............................................................A1
Appendix B Printed Editions of Mozart’s Four Piano Sonatas.............B1
Appendix C Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494: Grieg’s
Changes from Mozart’s Original (i.e. Piano I) .................C1
vi
LIST OF EXAMPLES
3.1.1 Autograph of Mozart’s Rondo, KV 494 ..........................................................37

3.2.1.1.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Exposition,
mm. 99-102 ................................................................................................46
3.2.1.1.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Development,
mm. 142-145 ..............................................................................................46
3.2.1.1.c Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Recapitulation,
mm. 236-239 ..............................................................................................46
3.2.1.2 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 1-15 ..............48
3.2.1.3 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 16-26 ............49
3.2.1.4 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,
mm. 145-153 ..............................................................................................51
3.2.1.5.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Exposition,
mm. 32-41 ..................................................................................................52
3.2.1.5.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Recapitulation,
mm. 154-168 ..............................................................................................53
3.2.1.6.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, First Subsection,
mm. 103-104 ..............................................................................................55
3.2.1.6.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Second Subsection
mm. 109-110 ..............................................................................................55
3.2.1.6.c Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Third Subsection
mm. 116-117 ..............................................................................................55
3.2.1.6.d Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Fourth Subsection
mm. 125-126 ..............................................................................................55
3.2.1.7.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,
mm. 104-106 ..............................................................................................57
3.2.1.7.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,
mm. 110-112 ..............................................................................................57
mm. 115-116 ..............................................................................................57
3.2.1.9.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 127...................58
3.2.1.9.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,
mm. 131-132 ..............................................................................................58
mm. 159-160 ..............................................................................................58
3.2.2.1.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm. 1-2 ...............61
3.2.2.1.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm. 23-28 ...........61
3.2.2.2 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm. 28-31 ...........62
3.2.2.5.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, Exposition,
mm. 5-8 ......................................................................................................64
3.2.2.5.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, Development,
mm. 59-70 .................................................................................................64
vii
3.2.2.7 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, Coda,
mm. 114-122 ..............................................................................................66
3.2.3.1.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 39 ......................68
3.2.3.1.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 45 ......................68
3.2.3.2.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 3 ........................69
3.2.3.2.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 41 ......................69
3.2.3.3 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, mm. 109-116..........70
4.1.1.a Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 18-19 ....................................................................................78
4.1.1.b Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 75-81 ....................................................................................78
4.1.1.c Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 208-214 ................................................................................79
4.1.2 Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm.128-130 .................................................................................80
Allegro, m. 101, m. 144, and m. 238 .........................................................81
Allegro, m. 77 and m. 210..........................................................................82
4.1.5 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 45 ..................................82
Allegro, m. 41 and m. 125..........................................................................83
Allegro, mm. 70-74 ....................................................................................84
Allegro, mm. 16-17 ....................................................................................84
Allegro, mm. 78-79 ....................................................................................86
4.1.10 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 70-72..........................87
Allegro, mm. 49-54 ....................................................................................88
4.1.13 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 77 and m. 80 .................89
4.1.14 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 116 and m. 220 .............90
4.1.15 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 145 ................................90
4.1.16 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 207-208......................91
Allegro, m. 42 and m. 128..........................................................................92
Allegro, m. 42 ............................................................................................93
Allegro, m. 145 and m. 174........................................................................94
Andante, m. 4 .............................................................................................95
4.1.22 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 142 and m. 185 ...............96
viii
Rondo, m. 178 ............................................................................................96
Rondo, m. 184 ............................................................................................97
Andante, mm. 101-102...............................................................................98
Rondo, m. 1 ................................................................................................98
Rondo, mm. 95-102....................................................................................99
4.2.1 Grieg’s Piano II of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 21-22 ..................................................................................101
Allegro, mm. 32-41 ..................................................................................101
Allegro, mm. 50-54 ..................................................................................102
Allegro, mm. 63-64 ..................................................................................103
4.2.5 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 82-88........................104
4.2.6 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 95-98........................105
4.2.7.a Grieg’s Piano II of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 122-125 ..............................................................................106
4.2.7.b Grieg’s Piano II of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 142-145 ..............................................................................106
Allegro, mm. 104-111 ..............................................................................107
Allegro, mm. 116-121 ..............................................................................108
Allegro, mm. 32-41 (excerpt from the exposition) ..................................109
Allegro, mm. 153-168 (excerpt from the recapitulation).........................110
Allegro, mm. 99-102 ................................................................................111
Allegro, mm. 236-239 ..............................................................................111
Allegro, m. 107 and m. 113......................................................................112
4.2.13 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, m. 22....................114
Andante, mm. 37-38 (Piano I on the top and Piano II on the bottom).....115
Andante, mm. 83-90.................................................................................117
4.2.16 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante,
mm. 105-108 ............................................................................................118
ix
4.2.17 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante,
mm. 121-122 ............................................................................................119
4.2.18 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo,
mm. 1-2 ....................................................................................................120
m. 19 and m. 21........................................................................................121
4.2.20.a Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo,
mm. 23-24 versus mm. 136-137 ..............................................................122
4.2.20.b Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo,
mm. 27-28 versus mm. 140-141 ..............................................................123
mm. 13-18 versus mm. 87-88 ..................................................................125
mm. 117-120 ............................................................................................125
4.2.23 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo,
mm. 132-135 ............................................................................................127
mm. 143-144 versus mm. 147-149 ..........................................................128
mm. 55-58 ................................................................................................129
mm. 72-77 ................................................................................................130
4.2.27 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo,
mm. 80-82 ................................................................................................131
4.2.28.a Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo,
mm. 95'-98'...............................................................................................132
4.2.28.b Edvard Grieg, Hølje Dale, Opus 17, No.19, mm. 15-18 .............................133
4.2.28.c Edvard Grieg, Røtnams-Knut. Halling, Opus 72, No.7, mm. 141-147.........133
mm. 113'-116'...........................................................................................134
mm. 152-157 ............................................................................................134
mm. 161-163 ............................................................................................135
mm. 166-169 ............................................................................................136
x
LIST OF TABLES
3.2.1.1 Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:

A Structural overview of Allegro...............................................................43
3.2.2.1 Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:
A Structural overview of Andante .............................................................60
3.2.3.1 Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegretto:
A Structural overview of Rondo ................................................................67
xi
NOTES
1. For the examination and the analysis on the original piano sonata by Mozart and
the arrangements by Grieg, only the autograph and the first printed edition have
been used in this thesis.
2. The musical excerpts used for the examples in this thesis are truncated from the
original scores so that the excerpts sometimes miss the clef signs at the
beginning of each example. Therefore, the author of this thesis has inserted clef
signs marked in square brackets accordingly.
xii
Chapter 1
Establishing the Perspective of Edvard Grieg’s Initiative
in Arranging Mozart’s Keyboard Works:
A Review of the Literature
In 1879-1880, E. W. Fritzsch in Leipzig issued a most unusual collection entitled

Arrangements of Mozart Piano Sonatas with a Freely Composed Second Piano Part
without Opus Numbers, prepared by the noted Norwegian composer, Edvard Grieg
(1843-1907).1 Following decades of composing songs, chamber music, or piano music
based on the Norwegian folk music, Grieg in the winter of 1876-1877 turned to the solo
repertory of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791) and began the collection of the
arrangements. In his letter dated 23 April 1877 to the Danish composer August Winding
(1835-1899), Grieg makes the following comment:
Lately in my spare time I have occupied myself with composing

“Piano 2da” to piano sonatas by Mozart and tried them out recently
with Mrs. Lie-Nissen.2 Much of the result really sounds very well
indeed, so well that I have reason to hope that Mozart “would not
turn in his grave.”3
1
[Edvard Grieg], Musikk for to klaverer: Originalkomposisjoner og arrangementer / Musik für zwei
Klaviere: Originalkompositionen und Bearbeitungen / Two Pianos, Four Hands: Original Compositions
and Arrangements, ed. by Arvid O. Vollsnes as Vol. 7 of Edvard Grieg: Samlede Verker / Gesamtausgabe
/ Complete Works, ed. by the Edvard Grieg Committee (Finn Benestad et al.) (Frankfurt am Main: C. F.
Peters, 1981) [includes Grieg’s arrangements of W.A. Mozart’s “Sonata F Major (KV 533 & 494),”
“Fantasia and Sonata C Minor (KV475 & 457),” “Sonata C Major (KV 545),” and “Sonata G Major (KV
189h=283)].”
2
[Ohran Noh’s remark] Mrs. Lie-Nissen was the concert pianist who showcased Grieg’s arrangements of
Mozart’s piano sonatas, particularly the one in F Major, in a concert for the first time. On this occasion, she
played the second piano part which was newly added by Grieg, while Ms. Rytterager, a pianist who
studying in Leipzig Conservatory, played the first piano part which is the original version of Mozart. Grieg
proclaimed that his arrangement sounded so good in the concert that the two pianists were called back to
the stage twice. For the full comment of Grieg on the arrangement and the concert, see Peter Jost, “‘Eine
Norwegisierung Mozarts?’ Zu Edvard Griegs Bearbeitungen Mozartscher Klaviersonaten,” in Im Dienst
Der Quellen Zur Musik: Festschrift Gertraut Haberkamp zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. by Paul Mai (Tutzing:
Hans Schneider, 2002), pp. 597-598.
3
This letter is dated 23 April 1877 and is extracted from the page “Concerning the Present Volume” in:
[Edvard Grieg], Musikk for to klaverer.
1
Unlike many of the well-known original compositions for two pianos by several
composers from different countries,4 arrangements for the same musical idioms,
particularly Grieg’s Arrangements of Mozart Piano Sonatas, are surprisingly not all too
familiar to many musicians, including pianists, as they are rarely heard in live
performances.5 Even in the secondary scholarly literature, these pieces have not received
a full-fledged discussion, but they have been merely hinted at in writings on Grieg.6 The
lack of previous studies on Grieg’s Arrangements of Mozart Piano Sonatas explains that
these pieces have not been considered as important as Grieg’s other repertories by both
scholars and performers. Besides the insufficient number of scholarly sources, another
problematic issue is found in music dictionaries. For example, the compilers, Finn
Benestad, Harald Herresthal, and Heinrich W. Schwab, in the preparation of the
comprehensive work lists of Grieg’s compositions for Die Musik in Geschichte und
Gegenwart have failed to provide accurate information with regard to these
arrangements.7 They list only Mozart’s Fantasia in C Minor, KV 475 but not his Sonata
in C Minor, KV 457 that is paired as No.2 in Grieg’s list of the arrangements.8 Also, the
reference to the Sonata in F Major, No.1 (to use Grieg’s numbering) is only identified
with the Köchel Number 533, leaving out a critical reference to the third movement of
KV 533 which was originally composed by Mozart as an individual Rondo and
subsequently acknowledged by Ludwig Ritter von Köchel in the assigning of a separate
number in the catalogue, namely KV 494.9 This important detail might have persuaded
4
See, for examples, Frédéric Chopin’s Rondo for Two Pianos in C Major, Op. 73 (1828); Franz Liszt’s
Réminiscences de Don Juan [Mozart] (1876-7); and Sergei Rachmaninov’s Fantaisie-tableaux (Suite no.1)
for Two Pianos, Op. 5 (1893).
5
A recent rare performance of these pieces was given as a lecture-recital in connection with the paper
entitled “Edvard Grieg as Arranger. Mozart in Romantic Suit” by Professor Patrick Dinslage (Universität
der Künste, Berlin) presented in the International Grieg Conference in May-June, 2007 in Bergen, Norway.
6
Goebel’s article is one of the few sources that discuss the arrangements of Mozart by Grieg in some
detail; see Albrecht Goebel, “Die Mozart-Bearbeitungen von Edvard Grieg,” in: Zeitschrift für
Musikpädagogik, 12/42 (1987), pp. 8-14.
7
Finn Benestad, Harald Herresthal and Heinrich W. Schwab. “Grieg, Edvard Hagerup,” in: Die Musik in
Geschichte und Gegenwart: Allgemeine Enzyklopädie der Musik, begründet von [founded by] Friedrich
Blume; zweite, neubearbeitete Ausgabe von [second revised edition by] Ludwig Finscher, 26 vols. in two
parts (Kassel: Bärenreiter and Stuttgart: Metzler, 1998-2008), Vol. 8 (Personenteil, 2002), col.14.
8
[Edvard Grieg], Musikk for to klaverer.
9
Ludwig Ritter von Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis sämtlicher Tonwerke Wolfgang
AmadéMozarts nebst Angabe der verlorengegangenen, angefangenen, von fremder Hand bearbeiteten,
zweifelhaften und unterschobenen Kompositionen, ed. by Franz Giegling et al. (Wiesbaden: Breitkopf &
Härtel; 1964 is sixth ed. of Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1862), p. 548 for Rondo, KV 494 and p. 605 for
2
Grieg to include this unusual sonata in his collection along with the other three sonatas, at
least from the point of its compositional history.
A general review of the secondary literature on Grieg at the Bergen Public
Library10 brings to the light of day the following biographical sources: J. de Jong’s article
entitled “En norskcomponist: Edvard Grieg,” published in 1881;11 as well as three recent
studies all published in 2007: Edvard Grieg: en introduksjon til hans liv og musikk by
Erling Dahl;12 Edvard Grieg Dal diario di Edvard Grieg by Finn Benestad;13 and
Biografien om Edvard Grieg: en trollmann emd toner by Inger Wethe.14 Among the vast
number of biographical sources completed over the span of 128 years between 1881 and
2009, many are only available in Norwegian,15 some in German,16 but comparatively few
in English.17 Apparently, none of these sources provide any significant discussion of the
arrangements either from the point of view of Mozart’s compositional approach18 or from
the point of view of Grieg’s arrangements with the Mozart repertoire. Secondary source
materials on Grieg’s music certainly exist, and especially those with a focus on genres
such as songs and vocal music,19 repertories such as chamber music,20 as well as
Allegro und Andante, KV 533; see also Ulrich Konrad, Mozart-Werkverzeichnis: Kompositionen —
Fragmente — Skizzen —Bearbeitungen — Abschriften — Texte (Kassel and Basel: Bärenreiter, 2005). pp.
146 -147.
10
For further information, see the official website of the Edvard Grieg Archive at Bergen Public Library.
[http://www. bergen. folkebibl. no]
11
J. de Jong, “En norskcomponist: Edvard Grieg” (De Tijdspiegel, 1881), [no vol. number, 4 pages].
12
Erling Dahl, Edvard Grieg: En introduksjon til hans liv og musikk (Bergen: Vigmostad & Bjørke, 2007).
13
Edvard Grieg, Edvard Grieg: Dal diario di Edvard Grieg, contributed by Finn Benestad (Bergen: Bergen
Offentlige Bibliotek, 2007).
14
Inger Wethe, Biografien om Edvard Grieg: En trollmann emd toner (Oslo: Gyldendal, 2007).
15
See, for example, Reidar Storaas, Edvard Grieg (Bergen: Bergens tidende, 1993); Claire Lee Purdy,
Historien om Edvard Grieg, part of Elite-Serien (Oslo: Forlagshuset, 1974).
16
See, for example, Richard Heinrich Stein, Grieg: Eine Biographie (Berlin: Schuster & Loeffler, 1922 is
third edition of 1920); Gerhard Schjelderup, Edvard Grieg: Biographie und Würdigung seiner Werke
(Leipzig: C.F.Peters, 1908).
17
See, for example, Henry T. Finck, Grieg and His Music (London and New York: John Lane, 1909);
Wendy Thompson, Edvard Grieg, part of Series The World’s Greatest Composers (Watford: Exley, 1995);
Christopher Steel, E. Grieg (Borough Green, Sevenoaks, Kent: Novello, 1987).
18
For example, the recent publication of the encyclopedia on Mozart from Cambridge also does not include
any reference to Grieg's arrangement of Mozart’s works. For more details, see, Cliff Eisen and Simon P.
Keefe, eds., The Cambridge Mozart Encyclopedia (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006).
19
Beryl Foster, The Songs of Edvard Grieg (Aldershot: Scolar Press, 1990); Beryl Foster, Edvard Grieg:
The Choral Music (Aldershot, Hants. and Burlington,Vermont: Ashgate, 1999).
20
Finn Benestad, Edvard Grieg: Chamber Music — Nationalism, Universality, Individuality (Oslo:
Universitetsforlaget, 1993); Rolf Christian Erdahl, Edvard Grieg’s Sonatas for Stringed Instruments and
3
materials on the historical, social, and particularly cultural aspects of his oeuvre have
been known.21 It is unfortunate, however, to learn that relatively little academic discourse
has been devoted to Grieg studies.22 No single secondary sources are devoted to a
comprehensive coverage of Grieg’s piano music in general, or his arrangements of
Mozart’s piano sonatas in particular, and this in spite of the fact that Grieg has been
venerated as Norway’s national hero for some time, both at home and abroad.23
Since there is very little secondary source material concerning Grieg’s Mozart
arrangements, Grieg’s own article on Mozart is essential to the present study. Although
Grieg does not cover each of the arranged works in great detail, his general interest in
Mozart and his keen motivation in having this project come to fruition are clearly made
manifest in his document, which affirms Grieg’s own deep commitment to this
endeavour.24 The significance of this particular source is further underscored by the
existence of translations in Norwegian and German.25 Here, Grieg proclaims Mozart as
the “unapproachable master” who has the “divine instinct” and “[whose] highest
inspirations seem untouched by human labor.”26 Grieg’s praise for Mozart is not just
randomly phrased but is, in fact, based on the critical research Grieg himself had devoted
to it. From his insightful comments, it appears that during his stay in Vienna Grieg
engaged in textual criticism, especially with regard to his careful examination of the
manuscript of Mozart’s Concerto in D Minor for Piano and Orchestra, KV 466 (1785).27
Piano: Performance Implications of the Primary Source Materials (Baltimore, Maryland: Peabody Institute
of The Johns Hopkins University, 1994).
21
Erling Dahl et al. Edvard Grieg: Art and Identity (Bergen: Edvard Grieg Museum- Toldhaugen, 2000);
Sybil Deucher, Edvard Grieg: Boy of the Northland (London: Faber and Faber, 1950); Mona Levin,
“Edvard Grieg: A True Cultural Giant,” in: Listen to Norway: Musical Review, Vol. 1/1 (1993), pp. 6-12.
22
See the bibliography at the end of this study.
23
Ibid.
24
Edvard Grieg, “Mozart,” in The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine (New York, November 1897),
p.140.
25
Edvard Grieg, “Mozart,” in The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine. trans. in Norwegian as in
Samtiden: Populært Tidsskrift for Litteratur og Samfundsspørgsmaal, Vol. 9, ed. by Gerhard Gran (Bergen:
John Griegs Forlag, 1898), pp. 112-124; trans. in German as Edvard Grieg, “Mozart,” in: Die Zeit, ed. by J.
Singer, Hermann Bahr, and Heinrich Kanner, Number 219 (Vienna, 10 December 1898), pp. 167-169.
These Norwegian and German translations are available in the Grieg archive in the Bergen Public Library.
26
Grieg, “Mozart,” in The Century, p.140.
27
Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis. pp. 504-505; I provide the Köchel number based on
the text from the article. Grieg did not provide the Köchel number in his article. Further on KV 466, see
Konrad, Mozart-Werkverzeichnis, pp. 94-95.
4
In his observations on the original source recorded in the article, Grieg advocates the
direct use of Mozart’s manuscript, rather than alternatives, such as Hummel’s Mozart
edition,28 the latter of which provides “superfluous ornamentations and other arbitrary
changes [of Mozart’s scores].”29 In my study, Grieg’s critical examination of the musical
text in the manuscript is mapped onto Mozart’s piano sonatas and Grieg’s arrangements.
The collection of Grieg’s arrangement of Mozart’s works comprises the Piano
Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 (composed in 1788), Fantasia and the Piano Sonata in
C Minor, KV 475 and KV 457 (composed in 1784),30 the Piano Sonata in C Major, KV
545 (composed in 1788), and the Piano Sonata in G Major, KV 189h=283 (composed in
1775).31 Given the particular choices, it seems evident that Grieg was less concerned with
selecting pieces from one exclusive period but rather focusing on a more or less random
choice, perhaps guided by his own personal predilection and judgement with regard to the
significance and uniqueness of these pieces. In a letter to Dr. Max Abraham (1831-
1900),32 Grieg states that he originally prepared his arrangements of Mozart’s four
sonatas for purely pedagogical reasons.33
As shown in Appendix A, the available autographs for Mozart’s sonatas are the
Fantasia and the Piano Sonata in C Minor, KV 475 and KV 457 and the Piano Sonata in
G Major, KV 189h=283, but unfortunately, the whereabouts of the autographs of the
Piano Sonata in C Major, KV 545 and the Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 are
presently unknown. Despite the loss of the autograph of KV 533/494, the careful
examination in a comparison of Mozart’s original Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494
and Grieg’s arrangement of KV 533/494 will be the case study for this thesis. There are
three compelling reasons to justify this approach. First of all, the source situation on the
28
The Hummel’s edition indicates Johann Julius Hummel, Dutch-German family of music publishers.
29
Grieg, “Mozart,” p. 145.
30
Grieg also brings KV 475 and KV 457 together as one by numbering as No. 2 in his collection.
31
For more details on these compositions, see Footnote 1 of this chapter.
32
In 1863, Dr. Max Abraham became a partner in the C. F. Peters, the music publishing house in Leipzig,
and in 1888, he took the company over as its sole proprietor. He was the founder of its “Edition Peters” and
the Peters Music Library. For further information, see Irene Lawford-Hinrichsen, Music Publishing and
Patronage: C. F. Peters, 1800 to the Holocaust (Kenton, UK: Edition Press, 2000).
33
This letter is dated 27 May 1877 and is extracted from the page “Concerning the Present Volume” in:
[Edvard Grieg], Musikk for to klaverer; this pedagogical connection to his Mozart arrangements shows
Grieg’s plan of placing two pianos, which certainly encourage two pianists (especially here, a teacher and a
student) to learn the communication in their collaboration; see also, Chapter 5, Footnote 14.
5
arrangements becomes an important issue. As outlined in Appendix A, Grieg’s
arrangement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 is the only composition
in the entire collection for which the autograph survives.34 Although the whereabouts of
Mozart’s autograph of KV 533/494 is unknown, the first printed edition is considerably
reliable — that document being regarded closest to the original which will be discussed
in greater detail later. Therefore, the surviving sources identified in Appendix A,
specifically the autograph of Grieg’s arrangement of Mozart’s KV 533/494, the available
first printed edition of Mozart’s KV 533, and the autograph of Mozart’s KV 494 in a
facsimile, offer the ideal basis for a thorough examination of the musical text and
consequently will allow the scholars and the performing musicians access to the
composition chambers of both Mozart and Grieg. As seen in Grieg’s comment on the
Hummel edition with regard to Mozart’s Concerto for Piano and Orchestra in D Minor,
KV 466, cited earlier, a crucial question arises as to the specific source for Mozart’s
works Grieg actually referenced while working on his arrangements. Peter Jost suspects
that Grieg used the Peters Edition (1890)35 for Mozart’s pieces unfortunately without
giving any concrete evidences for his opinion.36 Although one must entertain the
possibility that Grieg had access to the original sources or to the other editions, it is not
certain which materials Grieg actually consulted. Unfortunately, Grieg does not provide
any information as to the edition he deems reliable to examine in the study of Mozart’s
music in the connection to his arrangements. With regard to the Hummel edition,
mentioned earlier, the Fantasia in C Minor, KV 475 and the Piano Sonata in C Minor,
KV 457 were included in Hummel’s publication, while the other three sonatas that Grieg
arranged were not. Apart from Hummel, Mozart’s piano sonatas which Grieg arranged
surely attracted the attention of the major publishing houses in Europe including Johann
André (Offenbach am Main), Hoffmeister & Comp. (Vienna), and Nikolaus Simrock
(Bonn and Cologne) as shown in Appendix B.37 While Grieg voiced strong concern about
one particular publishing house, namely, Hummel, it is most unfortunate that Grieg does
34
For a survey of the sources, see Appendix A.
35
Jost, “‘Eine Norwegisierung Mozarts?’,”p.599; see also, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Sonaten für
Klavier zu Zwei Händen, according to the sources, newly edited by C. A. Martienssen and Wilhelm
Weismann (Frankfurt am Main and London: C. F. Peters, 1951).
36
Jost, “‘Eine Norwegisierung Mozarts?’,” pp. 599-600.
6
not provide any written opinion on the number of publishers who have included one or
more of the Mozart piano sonatas he arranged.38 Thus, regarding Grieg’s silence on the
topic of the printed editions in his preparation of the arrangements of Mozart’s piano
sonatas and the concern with the hitherto extant archival documents mainly in Oslo and
Bergen, we are in no position to identify precisely one or more editions which Grieg
might have consulted in the process of this project.
As an important part of his article, Grieg explains the issue of the arrangements of
Mozart’s aforementioned piano works. Here, Grieg admits that the activity of his
contemporary composers is dangerous, for they all too often subject Mozart’s music to a
“modernization” to fulfil the public’s fickle taste. As an example, Grieg talks about Pyotr
Ilyich Tchaikovsky’s (1840-1893) arrangement of a group of Mozart’s piano and choral
pieces into an orchestral suite.39 Then, Grieg puts into words his approach to arranging
Mozart’s pianoforte sonatas:
The writer of this article has himself attempted, by using a second

piano, to impart to several of Mozart’s pianoforte sonatas a tonal
effect appealing to our modern ears; and he wishes to add, by way of
apology, that he did not change a single one of Mozart’s notes, thus
preserving the respect we owe to the great master. It is not my
opinion that this was an act of necessity; far from it. But provided a
man does not follow the example of [Charles-François] Gounod,40
who transformed a Bach prelude41 into a modern, sentimental, and
trivial show piece, of which I absolutely disapprove, but seeks to
preserve the unity style [sic!; unity of style], there is surely no reason
for raising an outcry over his desire to attempt a modernization as
one way of showing his admiration for an old master. 42
37
For a survey of Mozart’s piano sonatas arranged by Grieg, see Appendix B.
38
Ibid.
39
Grieg does not provide specific information on these pieces in his article.
40
[Ohran Noh’s remark] Charles-François Gounod, “Mélodie religieuse adaptée au 1er Prélude de J. S.
Bach,” in: Quatre Célèbre Ave Maria (Bruxelles, Belgium: Schott Freres, [19--]).
41
[Ohran Noh’s remark] Johann Sebastian Bach, “Praeludium 1, BWV 846,” in: Das Wohltemperierte
Klavier I (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1977), pp. 2-3.
42
Grieg, “Mozart,” in The Century, p. 144.
7
By proclaiming that Gounod’s practice of transcribing music does not agree with
his notion of what an arrangement is to be, Grieg presents his two-piano transcription of
Mozart’s keyboard sonatas. Throughout these works, Grieg elevates the value and
meaning of the artistic activity by retaining the originality of Mozart, which in Grieg’s
view, can embrace more than the mere change of musical materials but may also pertain
to elements of style and even to interpretation. Grieg’s art of arrangement is far from the
typical or even derogatory manner, which is usually accomplished in a way of reworking
the original. Grieg attempts this endeavour, not as a mere activity of changing music from
one version to another, but as a complete piece that contains both the original and the
newly written versions superimposed, thus unfolding simultaneously. In this fashion of
interweaving two different musical styles, Grieg brings them together in an unusual
dialogue, expanding Mozart’s music in time and space with full colour and texture. In
that sense, it is reasonable to suggest that Grieg needs to be acknowledged as one of the
innovators in the field of arranging, an activity whose value has been minimized and
trivialized by many composers and musicians. This notion becomes evident especially
among performers, past and present, who focus their attention on original compositions
rather than on arrangements.43 His ideal for the activity of the arrangement originated
from the kind of respect one composer can have toward another composer. As a way of
apology, Grieg emphasizes that he did not change a single note of Mozart’s original
music but he still would want “to impart to several of Mozart’s pianoforte sonatas a tonal
effect appealing to our modern ears.”44
Second, the Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 is the very first piece among the
collection of Grieg’s arrangements of Mozart’s keyboard works, which Grieg used for his
endeavour into his art of arranging. This would obviously suggest an examination of KV
533/494 as the point of departure for this study and at that for any subsequent, systematic
examination of the other already identified keyboard works of Mozart and their
43
Arrangements have been less formally published than regular pieces and generally circulate as sheet
music, although there are exceptions such as Liszt’s arrangements of Beethoven’s symphonies and A-R
Editions. For example, Armand-Louis Couperin, Selected Works for Keyboard in: Instrumental Music, 2
vols. as Vols. 1-2 of Recent Researches in the Music of the Pre-Classical, Classical and Early Romantic
Eras, ed. by David R. Fuller (Madison, Wisconsin: A-R Editions, 1975).
44
Grieg, “Mozart,” in The Century, p. 144.
8
arrangements by Grieg, either individually or as comparison in juxtaposition,
conveniently using the piece as a reference.
In the secondary literature, Albrecht Goebel is one of the very few authors45 to
make explicit reference to Grieg’s Mozart arrangements. In a decisively music-
pedagogical bent, Goebel claims that the Sonata in G Major, KV 189h=283, functions as
the prototype for Grieg’s art of arranging and thus as a defining example of Grieg’s
musical style, although this piece is in fact the last one which the composer worked on
among his collection.46 This unsubstantiated opinion would exclude the wide range of
possible analyses focusing on the development and experimentation of arrangement
technique in Grieg’s overall compositional process, drastically reducing the avenues of
examination and side-stepping the gradual growth in the composer’s skilful handling of
the craft.
Third, Mozart’s KV 533/494 has an interesting and somewhat unusual
compositional history. The work was originally not one piece but two separate pieces,
that is, one piece comprising the Allegro and the Andante under the umbrella of KV 533,
and a single Rondo, KV 494.47 Mozart decided to bring these two separate pieces together
as the Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494. In light of the surviving primary sources
and early editions of KV 533/494 briefly alluded to before, the significant and intriguing
background information of these two versions by both Mozart and Grieg surely make KV
533/494 a point of departure for the examination.
Beyond that, the arrangements of Mozart’s sonatas have never been factored into
the overall assessment of Grieg’s musical legacy. The present study will fill a lacuna in
Grieg’s scholarship, which hitherto has focused predominantly on his other important
repertories such as folk songs and lyric pieces.
45
There are few other articles regarding Grieg and Mozart, and those that exist are available only in
German. See, for example, Joachim Brügge, “Edvard Griegs Mozartbearbeitungen – ein früher Modellfall
aus postmoderner Überschreibungsästhetik und Bloomschen Misreading?” in Musikgeschichte als
Verstehensgeschichte Festschrift für Gernot Gruber zum 65 Geburtstag, ed. by Joachim Brügge, Franz
Födermayr, Wolfgang Gratzer, Thomas Hochradner and Siegfried Mauser (Tutzing: Hans Schneider,
2004), pp. 411-420; Jost, “ ‘Eine Norwegisierung Mozarts?’” pp. 595-607.
46
Goebel, “Die Mozart-Bearbeitungen von Edvard Grieg,” pp. 8-14.
47
Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis. p. 548 and p. 605; see also Konrad, Mozart-
Werkverzeichnis, pp. 146-147.
9
Chapter 2
Grieg as a Champion of Mozart
in the Context of the Keyboard Arrangement
2.1 The Relationship between Grieg and Mozart
In the overall consideration of Grieg’s vast oeuvre, the composer’s affinity to the
compositional legacy of Mozart deserves special attention. Grieg’s experiences with the
music of Mozart began early in his childhood. From the age of six he had taken piano
lessons from his mother who would hold regular musical gatherings in her home,
participating herself in the piano performance and assembling the programs. This
particular musical environment helped young Grieg gain a special affection especially for
the works of Mozart.1 Grieg’s interest in Mozart continued throughout his musical career.
For instance, in the summer of 1880, Grieg was appointed as the conductor of the Bergen
Harmoniske Selskab (Bergen Harmonic Society), which produced several concert series
under Grieg’s leadership. Grieg included Mozart’s Vesper Song for Choir and String
Orchestra in the program for the first concert of the annual series on October 22, 1880.2
Grieg chose Mozart’s Requiem for the final concert of the season on March 31, 1881.3
Grieg’s admiration of Mozart also let the Norwegian composer to write an article entitled
“Mozart,” for the November 1897 issue of The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine in
New York.4 Here, Grieg criticises the contemporary conductors who paid careful
attention to the compositions of Richard Wagner (1813-1883), while Mozart’s works,
such as his operas, would not be prepared as carefully. Grieg shows a deep appreciation
of his master in the following passage:
“What kind of face would Bach, Handel, Haydn, and Mozart make
after hearing an opera by Wagner?” asks an English writer. I shall not
attempt to answer for the first three, but it is safe to say that Mozart,
1
David Monrad-Johansen, Edvard Grieg, trans. by Madge Robertson (New York: Tudor Publishing
Company, 1945), pp. 25-26.
2
The full program is consisted of Svendsen’s Norwegian Rhapsody, op. 21, Haydn’s Symphony in D
Major, Hob I:104, Beethoven’s Fantasy in C minor for Piano, chorus, and Orchestra, op. 80 and Bach’s
Fantasy and Fugue in G Minor, BWV 542 featuring Erika Nissen (1845-1903), Norwegian pianist, as
soloist. See Monrad-Johansen, Edvard Grieg, p. 232.
3
Monrad-Johansen, Edvard Grieg, p. 234.
4
Grieg, “Mozart.”
10
the universal genius whose mind was free from Philistinism and one-
sidedness, would not only open his eyes wide, but would be as
delighted as a child with all the new acquisitions in the departments of
drama and orchestra. In this light must Mozart be viewed. To speak of
Mozart is like to speak of a god. When Gretchen asks Faust, “Do you
believe in God?” he answers, “Who dares name him, who confess
him?” In these profound words of Goethe I would express my feelings
towards Mozart. Where he is greatest he embraces all times.5
On another occasion, in 1906, Grieg was asked to write an article for the one hundred-
and-fiftieth anniversary of Mozart’s birth. In his diary entry on January 14, 1906, Grieg
remarks that:
[I] have had a request by telegram to write a Mozart article for the
master’s 150th anniversary, January 26. I have two days to write it in.
The article must be sent on Monday morning at latest as it must be out
on Friday, the 19th. I thought of Falstaff: What is honor? For this is
undeniably an enormous honor, that from Mozart’s own town I, a far
away Northerner, am asked to do what a hundred others could do. But I
remembered Falstaff’s philosophy of life and telegraphed: Yes! Now
we shall see. This means two days at my desk. I shall lock my door and
do my best. Good God! Life is so short! What happiness to be allowed
to do reverence to my immortal master, the beloved of my youth,
Mozart, in his own Vienna!6
5
Ibid., p. 140; in Norwegian translation: “ ‘Hvilket ansigt vilde Bach, Händel, Haydn og Mozart sætte op,
om de fik høre en opera af Wagner?’ spörger en engelsk forfatter. Jeg skal ikke indlade mig paa at svare for
de tre første, men det er ikke farligt at sige, at Mozart, det universelle geni, hvis sjæl var fri for filisteri og
ensidighed, ikke blot vilde aabne sine øine vidt op, men vilde glæde sig som et barn over alle de nye
erobringer I dramaet og orkestret. I dette lys maa Mozart sees. At tale om Mozart er som at tale om en gud.
Da Gretchen spørger Faust: “Glaubst du an Gott? Svarer han: ‘Wer darf ihn nennen und wer bekennen?’ I
disse Gøthes dybe ord vilde jeg udtrykke mine følelser for Mozart. Hvor han er størst, omfatter han alle
tider. …”; as cited in: Edvard Grieg, “Mozart,” in: Samtiden: Populært Tidsskrift for Litteratur og
Samfundsspørgsmaal 9, ed. by Gerhard Gran (Bergen: John Griegs Forlag, 1898), p. 112; in German
translation: “[‘] Welch Gesicht würden wohl Bach, Händel, Haydn und Mozart aufsetzen, wenn sie eine
Oper von Wagner zu hören bekämen?[’] fragt ein englischer Schriftsteller. Für die drei Erstgenannten
möchte ich keine Verantwortung übernehmen, aber was Mozart betrifft, dies universelle Genie, dessen
Seele frei war von Philisterei und Einseitigkeit, läßt sich wohl unbedenklich behaupten, dass [sic!, daß] er
nicht bloß seine Augen weit öffnen, sondern wie ein Kind sich all der neuen Eroberungen auf der Bühne
und im Orchester freuen würde. In diesem Lichte muss [sic!, muß] Mozart gesehen werden. Von Mozart
sprechen, ist wie von einem Gotte sprechen. Als Gretchen Faust fragte: ‘Glaubst du an Gott?’ antwortete
er: ‘Wer darf ihn nennen und wer bekennen …’ In diesen tiefen Worten Goethes möchte ich meine
Empfindungen für Mozart ausdrücken. Wo er am größten ist da umfasst [sic!, umfaßt] er alle Zeiten. …”;
as cited in: Edvard Grieg, “Mozart,” in: Die Zeit, ed. by J. Singer , Hermann Bahr, and Heinrich Kanner,
No. 219 (Vienna, 10 December 1898), pp. 167-168. Incidentally, Grieg’s article “Mozart” is available in
published form in three distinctly different sources, all of which have been identified in this footnote.
11
Grieg’s enthusiasm toward his “immortal master” is clearly revealed in his
project, the Arrangements of Mozart Piano Sonatas with a Freely Composed Second
Piano Part without Opus Numbers, which were completed in the winter of 1876/ 1877. A
number of scholars have voiced opinions, mostly in a negative tone, as to the reason why
Grieg broached these pieces. Among the reasons, it seems that some scholars like to hold
fast to the idea that Grieg chose Mozart’s sonatas and arranged them in order to pass from
the artistic crisis with musical forms he was experiencing that time.7 Scholars such as
Peter Jost and Joachim Brügge argue that Grieg needed to learn how to manage the more
serious types of musical form, in particular the sonata forms, and that as a means of
coming to terms with formal issues, turned to Mozart’s piano works.8 Despite the obscure
origin of Grieg’s arrangements, a topic of great concern to some scholars, including Jost
and Brügge, Grieg himself declares his original purport of the arrangements as teaching
resources. Grieg’s arrangements, however, eventually became known through the concert
performed by Erika Lie-Nissen (1847-1903) and Ms. Rytterager9 as stated in a letter of
May 27, 1877, in which Grieg articulates his view to Max Abraham (1831-1900):
In the winter I had intended a work that interested me, namely, to

compose a freely [conceived] second piano for several sonatas of
Mozart. This work was initially intended for teaching, however, by
chance reached the concert hall, where Mrs. Lie-Nissen played in a
6
Monrad-Johansen, Edvard Grieg, pp. 360-361.
7
This seems as one of the examples of the over-simplification that may lead to the problems of adopting
semantics as a means to explain a composer’s musical crisis, which in fact can be a part of the creative
process. For further information on this issue, see, Walter Kreyszig, “Tracing Wolfgang Hildesheimer’s
Assessment of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Legacy to Franz Schubert’s Diary Entry of 1816: The Case of
Mozart’s String Quintet in G Minor, KV 516 (1787),” in: Mozart — eine Herausforderung für Literatur
und Denken / Mozart — A Challenge for Literature and Thought, ed. by Rüdiger Görner in collaboration
with Carly McLaughlin as Vol. 89 of Conference Reports [Kongressberichte], Series [Reihe] A of
Jahrbuch für Internationale Germanistik: Mozart-eine Herausforderung für Literatur und Denken/Mozart-
A Challenge for Literature and Thought (Bern and New York: Peter Lang, 2007), pp. 177-233, especially
pp.191-206, Part III; Wolfgang Hildesheimer, Mozart (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1977); also in
English translation by Marion Faber as Wolfgang Hildesheimer, Mozart (New York: Farrar Straus and
Giroux, 1982); Style and Idea: Selected Writings of Arnold Schoenberg, ed. by Leonard Stein with
translations by Leo Black (New York: St. Martins Press, 1975); Arnold Feil, Werner Aderhold, Walther
Dürr and Walburga Litschauer, eds. Franz Schubert, Jahre der Krise, 1818-1823: Bericht über das
Symposion, Kassel, 30. September – 1. Oktober 1982 — Arnold Feil zum 80. Geburtstag am 2. Oktober
1985 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1985).
8
For further information, see Jost, “‘Eine Norwegisierung Mozarts?’” pp. 595-607; Brügge, “Edvard
Griegs Mozartbearbeitungen—ein früher Modellfall aus postmoderner Überschreibungsästhetik und
Bloomschen Misreading?” pp. 411-420.
9
Unfortunately, the first name of Ms. Rytterager as well as her dates cannot be identified.
12
most masterful way my part to the first sonata (in F), [KV 533/494].
The part [which] Mozart [had composed] was played by Ms. Rytterager
(a pupil of the Leipzig Conservatory), and the story [i.e. performance]
was so well received that the ladies were called back [to the podium]
twice. If I accomplish more, I intend to make a dedication to Professor
[Theodor] Kullak, and perhaps afterwards enjoy the honour to be
accepted by the Edition Peters.10
Although Grieg was surely pleased with his own arrangements of Mozart’s piano
sonatas, the pieces, after all, were initially rejected by the publishing house and
eventually also by scholars. As shown in the letter from 27 May 1877 to Abraham, Grieg
contacted the publisher C. F. Peters, who had had business interactions with Grieg since
1863, with the intent to address the possibility of publishing his arrangements of Mozart’s
works. In his letter, Grieg also mentioned his intention to dedicate these pieces to
Professor Theodor Kullak (1818-1882),11 and that as a means of further enhancing his
eventual success of publishing with this esteemed publishing house. In that case, Kullak
would be associated with the first performance of the published edition. Despite Grieg’s
earnest attempt to get his arrangement of Mozart’s piano sonatas published with Peters,
this undertaking failed.12 Grieg received Abraham’s response some three months later, on
September 4, 1877, in which Abraham, in a most subtle manner, communicated to Grieg
what in essence amounted to a rejection of Grieg’s submission. In defence of his
rejection, Abraham emphasized that composing original pieces was more important and
10
“…Ich habe im Winter eine Arbeit vorgehabt, was mich interessierte; nämlich ein freies 2tes Piano zu
mehreren Sonaten von Mozart [EG 113] hinzukomponiert. Die Arbeit war zunächst für den Unterricht
bestimmt, kam aber zufälligerweise in den Concert-Saal, wo Frau Lie-Nissen ganz meisterhaft meine
Stimme zur ersten Sonate (in F) vortrug. Die Mozartsche Partie wurde von Fräulein Rytterager (Schülerin
des Leipziger Konservatoriums) gespielt, und die Geschichte klang so gut, das die Damen 2 Mal gerufen
wurden. Wenn ich noch mehr fertig bringe, habe ich die Absicht, Prof. Kullack eine Dedication zu machen,
und geniesse vielleicht nachher die Ehre, in die Edition Peters aufgenommen zu werden…”; as cited in
Edvard Grieg, Briefwechsel mit dem Musikverlag C. F. Peters, 1863-1907, ed. by Finn Benestad and Hella
Brock (Frankfurt am Main and Leipzig: C. F. Peters, 1997), pp. 54-55. The English translation is kindly
provided by Dr. Walter Kreyszig.
11
Born as a Polish musician, Theodor Kullak (1818-1882) is known as a pianist, composer, and teacher. In
1851, Kullak established the Neue Akademie der Tonkunst, which was also referred to as “Kullak's
Academy.” This institution specialized in the training of pianists, and became the largest private music
school in Germany. In 1861, Kullak was made Professor and was also elected to honorary membership of
the Royal Academy of Music in Florence; see Horst Leuchtmann, “Kullak, (1) Theodor Kullak,” in: The
New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie (London: Macmillan, 2001),
Vol. 14, pp. 19-20.
12
Peters, in Leipzig, eventually published Grieg’s Mozart arrangements in 1879/1880. For a further
discussion, see Jost, “‘Eine Norwegisierung Mozarts?’,” pp. 598-600.
13
meaningful than arranging already existing works of other composers, which he viewed
as a most trivial task. From Grieg’s pen, Abraham wanted to see more of the original
compositions than arranged works that he, Abraham, most unfortunately considered as
“incidental music,” such as lyrical pieces for piano and so forth. In short, Abraham saw
any kind of arranged works as a small contribution compared to original compositions in
traditional genres such as symphonies and concertos. In Abraham’s view, Grieg’s
arrangements of Mozart’s piano sonatas belonged to the category of the “small works,” a
point he enforced in a subtle but obvious way:
As a result of your concert, the two violin sonatas [op. 8 and 13]13 and
individual piano works14 you have already made yourself an esteemed
name in the musical world; now you may neither rest on your laurels
nor waste time on giving lessons or [other] diversions, which are not
lacking in Leipzig. The world is awaiting important original
compositions from you and not, if I may allow myself to make this
remark, a second piano [part] to Mozart sonatas! Such work, as fine and
ingenious it way be, I would not publish, if I were you, at least not in
the next few years.15
13
[Ohran Noh’s remark] The Violin Sonata, No. 1, op. 8 was composed in 1865 and the Violin Sonata, No.
2, op. 13 was composed in 1867. For a modern edition, see Edvard Grieg, Sonate for fiolin og klaver I F-
dur / Sonate für Violine und Klavier in F-dur / Sonata for Violin and Piano in F major, Op. 8 and Sonate
for fiolin og klaver I G-dur / Sonate für Violine und Klavier in G-dur / Sonata for Violin and Piano in G
major, Op. 13, ed. by Finn Benestad as Vol. 8 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works, ed. by The Edvard
Grieg Committee (Frankfurt am Main, New York, and London: C. F. Peters, 1979).
14
[Ohran Noh’s remark] Here Abraham was possibly thinking about Lyric Pieces, Book 1, Op. 12, which
were composed around the same time as the violin sonatas. These Lyric Pieces were composed between
1864 and 1867. For a modern edition, see Edvard Grieg, Lyriske Stykker / Lyrische Stücke / Lyric Pieces,
Op. 12, Book 1, ed. by Dag Schjelderup-Ebben as Vol. 1 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works, ed. by The
Edvard Grieg Committee (Frankfurt am Main, New York, and London: C. F. Peters, 1977).
15
“…Sie haben sich durch Ihr Konzert, die beiden Violin-Sonaten [op.8 und 13] u. einzelne Klavierwerke
schon einen geachteten Namen in der musikal. Welt gemacht; indessen dürfen Sie weder auf Ihren
Lorbeeren ruhen, noch durch Stundengeben oder Zerstreuungen, an denen es hier in Leipzig nich fehlen
würde, Ihre Zeit verlieren. Die Welt erwartet von Ihnen bedeutende Original-Kompositionen u. nicht,
gestatten Sie mir die Bemerkung, ein 2. Klavier zu Mozartschen Sonaten! Solche Arbeit, so fein u.
geistreich sie auch sein mag, würde ich an Ihrer Stelle garnich herausgeben, wenigstens nicht in den
nächsten Jahren…”; A letter from Abraham to Grieg in 4 September 1877, “Die Erstausgabe der
Claviersonaten von Mozart mit frei hinzucompoirter Begleitung eines zweiten Claviers, EG [Edvard Grieg:
Gesamtausgabe / Complete Works] 113, erschien nicht bei Peters, sondern bei E. W. Fritzsch im Jahre
1879. Es sind die Sonaten F-Dur KV 533, c-Moll KV 475, C-Dur KV 545 und G-Dur KV 283,” as cited in:
Grieg, Briefwechsel, p. 56; in English translation, “The first edition of the Piano Sonatas of Mozart with a
Freely Added Accompaniment of the Second Piano, EG 113 did not appear with Peters, but with E. W.
Fritzsch in 1879. These are the Sonatas in F Major, KV 533/494, in C Minor, KV 475, in C Major, KV
454, and in G Major, KV 283.” The English translation is kindly provided by Dr. Walter Kreyszig.
14
Grieg’s initial setback with C. F. Peters did not stop him from pursuing his own goals. In
fact, Grieg eventually published the Mozart arrangements with another Leipzig publisher,
Ernst Wilhelm Fritzsch. Grieg’s arrangements were reassigned with different numberings
in the publication of Fritzsch, namely, Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 as No. 1 (1879),
and the arrangements of the remaining keyboard pieces, namely, Fantasia and Sonata in
C Minor, KV 475 and KV 457; Sonata in C Major, KV 545; and Sonata in G Major, KV
189h=KV 283 as Nos. 2-4, all published a year later in 1880.16
2.2 The State of Musical Arrangements in Europe in the Era of Grieg
In general, musical arrangements can be divided into two broad categories: one,
changing the original music and medium partly or completely to a newly written version,
and the other, retaining the original but adding new materials to the exemplar. While the
former procedure, from a historical perspective, is more common within the art of
arrangement, it is the latter approach to the arrangement which has produced far more
unusual contributions. With regard to the arrangement of Mozart’s piano sonatas, Grieg
fully subscribes to the second method to show his artful skills of arranging.
The term “arrangement” is generally defined as any piece of music that is based
on pre-existing material.17 While the practice of arrangement has been in existence across
all periods in the history of Western music, its aesthetic perception has been often
questioned and disapproved by both musicians and scholars. Public performances include
the arrangements of pieces much less frequently than original pieces, even though there
are some exceptions, such as Franz Liszt’s popular paraphrases, for example, of Giuseppe
16
With regard to Grieg’s autograph of his arrangements of the Mozart sonatas, only the arrangement of
Mozart’s Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 exists in Grieg’s own handwriting. This autograph, kept at the
National Library of University of Oslo (Oslo, Norway), comprises forty pages with pagination in red pencil
and with the annotation “E. W. F. 353” in blue pencil at the bottom of page 1 of the autograph, referring to
the early edition of Grieg’s keyboard arrangement published by E. W. Fritzsch in Leipzig in 1879; see
Claviersonaten von Mozart mit frei hinzucomponirter Begleitung eines zweiten Claviers von Edvard Grieg
— No. 1 F- dur (No. 1 der Peters’schen Ausgabe) (Leipzig: E.W. Fritsch, 1879) [Edition Nr. 353]. The
autographs of the other sonatas are unknown.
17
For additional information on arrangements in general, see, for example, Malcolm Boyd, “Arrangement,”
in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie (New York:
Macmillan, 2001), Vol. 2, pp. 65-71.
15
Verdi’s Rigoletto.18 Nevertheless, the art of arrangement has been practiced continuously
and has become even more popular since the invention of music printing in the late
Renaissance, which provided for the rapid dissemination of works in numerous copies
across a wide geographic area. At least until the beginning of the nineteenth century,
almost all music was still dispersed in handwritten form, and that owing to the expenses
incurred in the printing mechanics combined with the fragility of the types or cuts
compared to the large quantity of production.19 By the mid-nineteenth century, the
business of preparing transcriptions became the standard practice for publishers in the
printing of full scores and piano arrangements alike. Such change in the production of
printed materials was clearly in response to the growing demands from musicians, and in
particular pianists.20 Obviously, the piano arrangements were an essential vehicle for
promoting people’s attention and enthusiasm for live concerts as well as for advertising
of the printed music itself. Karl Franz Brendel (1811-1868),21 the German music critic
and historian, once emphasized that “for a [musical work] to be truly popular with us, to
attain the widest recognition, it must be arranged and disseminated in a four-hand
arrangement for an instrument.”22
18
For modern edition, see Giuseppe Verdi, Rigoletto: Melodrama in Three Acts by / Melodramma in tre
atti de Francesco Maria Piave, ed. by Martin Chusid as Vol. 17 of [Giuseppe Verdi]: Operas / Opere
tetarali, Series / Sezione I of The Works of / Le opera di Giuseppe Verdi, ed. by Philip Gossett et al.
(Chicago, Illinois and London: The University Chicago Press and Milan: Ricordi, 1983); see also, François
Liszt, “Rigoletto de Verdi” (1859), in: De Verdi Trois Paraphrases de Concert pour Piano (Leipzig and
New York: J. Schuberth. 1860), pp. 4-14.
19
For further information on music printing, see Stanley Boorman, et al., “Printing and Publishing of
Music,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie (London:
Macmillan, 2001), Vol. 20, pp. 326-381; Alec Hyatt King, Four Hundred Years of Music Printing
(London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1964); D.W. Krummel and Stanley Sadie, eds. Music Printing
and Publishing, part of The Norton / Grove Handbooks in Music (New York and London: W.W. Norton,
1990).
20
Thomas Christensen, “Four-Hand Piano Transcription and Geographies of Nineteenth-Century Musical
Reception,” in: Journal of the American Musicological Society 52/2 (Summer 1999), p. 267.
21
From 1845 until his death in 1868, Brendel was also the later owner and the editor of Die Neue
Zeitschrift für Musik, the famous music magazine founded by Robert Schumann founded in the early
1830s; See Gustav Wustmann, “Zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Schumannischen Zeitschrift für Musik,” in:
Zeitschrift der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft 8 (1907), pp. 396-403. Further on Schumann’s literary
contributions, see Leon B. Plantinga, Schumann as Critic, Vol. 4 of Yale Studies in the History of Music,
ed. by William G. Waite (New Haven, Connecticut and London: Yale University Press, 1967).
22
“… Was bei uns populär warden, wirklich in die Menge eindringen soll, muß in vierhändiger Gestalt für
ein Instrument allein arrangirt [sic!, arrangiert] vorliegen. …”; as cited in: [Karl] F[ranz] Brendel, “F[ranz]
Liszt’s symphonische Dichtungen,” in: Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 49/8 (20 August 1858), p.75. The
English translation is taken from Christensen, “Four-Hand Piano Transcription,” p. 267.
16
Along with the ongoing issue of music printing, particularly in the keyboard
repertory of the nineteenth century, several major developments promoted the nature of
the arrangement. First of all, the piano became the dominant and popular instrument for
both public and private venues,23 where the arrangement of piano music received the
most applause, as attested to by Richard Wagner in his statement that “[the pianoforte is
the] essential mediator between music and the public.”24 Because of the easier physical
access to the piano, both amateur musicians and middle-class music lovers cherished the
opportunity to familiarize themselves through the transcriptions with the traditional
repertories, comprising orchestral and chamber works, without actually attending the live
concerts still considered a luxury at that time.25 With regard to many forms of the
arrangement in vogue during the nineteenth century, finding a piano for one or two
performers was less complicated than organising a small ensemble of wind or string
instruments, this difficulty being connected directly with the decline in popularity of the
these instruments, particularly the strings.26 As a result, other forms of arrangements,
such as the quartet, fell out of favour during the second quarter of the nineteenth century,
and eventually the piano four-hand arrangements became the most commercially viable
enterprise.27 Eduard Hanslick (1825-1904), the noted Bohemian-Austrian music critic,
also had an enthusiasm and love for four-hand arrangements. He joined in founding a
chapter of the Davidsbündler28 with fellow musicians in Prague, where they regularly
23
As mentioned before, Grieg’s mother was also one of the musicians who held the regular performance at
her private home where she and other musicians would have had regular access to the piano as the principal
instrument for music making. It is obvious that Grieg grew up in the musical environment and became
familiar with the development of the piano which would be certainly reflected in his compositions.
24
Quoted in Leon Botstein, “Music and Its Public: Habits of Listening and the Crisis of Musical
Modernism in Vienna, 1870-1914” (Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, Harvard University, 1985), Part I, p.
70 and p. 72.
25
William Weber, Music and the Middle Class: The Social Structure of Concert Life in London, Paris and
Vienna Between 1830 and 1848, part of Music in Nineteenth Century Britain (New York: Holmes and
Meier, 2004 is second edition of 1975), pp. 23-24.
26
Vera Funk, “Die Zauberflöte in der bürgerlichen Wohnstube des 19. Jahrhunderts,” in: Musikalische
Metamorphosen: Formen und Geschichte der Bearbeitung, ed. by Silke Leopold as Vol. 2 of Bärenreiter
Studien Bücher zur Musik (Kassel: Barenreiter, 1992), pp. 123-136.
27
The collection of the essays in Musikalische Metamorphosen explains the many forms of arrangements
and transcription and their uses in the history of Western music.
28
The Davidsbündler (League of David) was originally an imaginary music society, which Robert
Schumann created in his writings. There were two main members, namely, Florestan and Eusebius, which
respectively symbolized both extroverted and introverted sides of Schumann’s persona. The role of the
society was to fight against new music. For further information on Der Davidsbündler, see Plantinga,
Schumann as Critic.
17
played the four-hand arrangements of music of Robert Schumann (1810-1856), Felix
Mendelssohn-Bartholdy (1809-1847), and Hector Berlioz (1803-1869).29 Hanslick notes
that:
[an arrangement is] really the most intimate, the most convenient, and
within its limits, the most perfect kind of domestic music-making
[häuslichen Musicirens]. It is younger than our generation imagines,
and it owes its popularity to the rapid spread of piano playing, and the
enlargement and perfection of the piano. The string quartet, trio, or
quintet, once wanting in no good musical household, is shunted aside—
a loss to be sure, but no disadvantage for getting to know orchestral
literature in one’s own home. When one pages through the musical
catalogues of Mozart's and Haydn's era all the way past the middle of
Beethoven's effectiveness,30 one hardly notices a four-hand
arrangement among dozens of arrangements for three, four, and five
different instruments. Also long ago Beethoven's first symphonies had
been arranged for string quartet, before one began to arrange them for
four hands. Nowadays, our concerts include no ouverture, no
symphony, which one cannot immediately enjoy before or after [the
concert]. A wellspring of enjoyment and instruction flows for the
friends of music from this modest domain [of the four-hand
arrangement]. 31
29
Christensen, “Four-Hand Piano Transcription,” p. 262.
30
[Ohran Noh’s remark] See, for example, The Breitkopf Thematic Catalogue: The Six Parts and Sixteen
Supplements, 1762-1787, ed. and with an introduction and indexes by Barry S. Brook (New York: Dover
Publications, 1966 is reprint of Leipzig: Breitkopf, 1762 and 1787); see also Footnote 43 of this chapter.
Further on the significance of the Breitkopf & Härtel, see George B. Stauffer, “The Breitkopf Family and
Its Role in Eighteenth-Century Music Publishing,” in: J.S. Bach, the Breitkopfs, and Eighteenth-Century
Music Trade, ed. by George B. Stauffer as Vol. 2 of Bach Perspectives, ed. by George J. Buelow et al.
(Lincoln, Nebraska and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1996), pp. 1-10.
31
“… Ist es doch die intimste, die bequemste und in ihrer Begrenzung vollständigste Form häuslichen
Musicirens. Sie ist jünger, als unsere Generation wähnt, und verdankt der rapiden Verbreitung des
Clavierspiels, der Erweiterung und Vervollkommung der [sic!, des] Pianoforte ihren Aufschwung. Das
Streichquartett, Trio oder Quintett, das sonst in keinem gut musikalischen Haus fehlte, ist dadurch
verdrängt; ein Verlust ohne Zweifel, doch kein Nachtheil für die bestmögliche Kenntniss der Orchester-
Literatur auf der eigenen Stube. Wenn man die Musikalien-Kataloge aus Haydn’s und Mozart’s Zeit bis
über die Mitte von Beethoven’s Wirksamkeit durchblättert, so begegnet man kaum Einem [sic!, einem]
vierhändigen Arrangement auf Dutzende von Bearbeitungen für drei, vier und fünf verschiedene
Instrumente. Auch Beethoven’s erste Symphonien waren längst für Streichquartett arrangirt [sic!
arrangiert], ehe man sie vierhändig zu setzen began. Heutzutage bringen unsere Concerte keine Ouvertüre,
keine Symphonie, die man nicht sofort im vierhändigen Arrangement vorkosten oder nachgeniessen kann.
Eine Quelle von Vergnügen und Belehrung fliesst den Musikfreunden aus diesem bescheidenen Gebiete
zu.”; as cited in: Eduard Hanslick, “Eine Feuilleton-Kritik,” in: Neue Freie Presse, 25 August [1866]; also
as reprint in: Leipziger Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 1, No. 43 (24 October 1866), p. 346. The partial
English translation of this passage is taken from Christensen, “Four-Hand Piano Transcription,” p. 262. The
translation of the additional passages has been kindly provided by Dr. Walter Kreyszig.
18
Second, the composers and performers alike became more interested in creating
different instrumental colours on the keyboard, which was possible with the development
of the piano pedals and techniques, particularly by the middle of 1800s.32 Both square
and grand pianos made in Germany and Austria between 1760 and 1850 typically had
several pedals, although square or cheaper pianos usually had fewer.33 Except for the
sustaining pedal and the una corda, professional musicians did not consider the other
pedals necessary in performance and these pedals largely disappeared by the 1830s.34
This trend to simplify the instrument was evident as early as the 1790s, proceeding as far
as omitting levers and pedals altogether, and this phenomenon lasted until the early years
of the nineteenth century, especially in England. Broadwood, the English piano company,
started to make grand pianos with three pedals — two for sustaining and one for una
corda — after 1806. A few years later, this firm switched to a split-pedal arrangement,
with the right pedal divided in half and functioning as two sustaining pedals on the three-
pedal models.35 The sostenuto pedal appeared later in the second half of the nineteenth
century as an optional third, middle pedal addition to the two-pedal standard design.36
Although the novel idea of the sostenuto pedal was mostly preferred by American
makers, such as Steinway & Sons, European makers also started to experiment with the
pedal throughout Europe. Some makers immediately adopted the sostenuto pedal while
others, especially in England, were opposed to the introduction of this device.37
Grieg is one of the composers whose music is fully involved with the use of
pedals, in essence following a practice widespread throughout Europe. For obvious
32
See, for example, David Rowland, A History of Pianoforte Pedalling, part of Cambridge Musical Texts
and Monographs (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993); Eva Badura-Skoda, The
History of the Pianoforte: Famous or Noteworthy Instruments Played by Great Artists: A Documentation in
Sound [video recording], script and presentation by Eva Badura-Skoda, directed by Piotr Szalsza, produced
by Televisfilm in cooperation with ORF (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1999).
33
Rowland, A History of Pianoforte Pedalling, p. 20.
34
Rosamond E. M. Harding, The Piano-Forte: Its History Traced to the Great Exhibition of 1851 (St. Clair
Shores, Michigan: Scholarly Press, 1976 is reprint of Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1933), pp.
53-72.
35
Rowland, A History of Pianoforte Pedalling, pp. 21-22.
36
Joseph Banowetz, The Pianist’s Guide to Pedaling (Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press,
1985), pp. 90-109.
37
The issue of the sostenuto pedal is a controversial topic throughout the twentieth century, with
Bösendorfer and the major Asian makers including this device, while many European makers viewed the
sostenuto pedal in a negative light; see Cyril Ehrlich, The Piano: A History (Oxford: Clarendon Press and
New York: Oxford University Press, 1990 is second revised edition of London: J. M. Dent, 1976), pp. 128-
142.
19
reasons, Mozart, working in the era prior to these rapid mechanical developments of the
piano, particularly the pedals, did not factor this organological property into his
compositional process. In fact, when Grieg entered onto the compositional scene, a
standardization of keyboard pedal had already occurred.38 Grieg’s full awareness of the
keyboard including the use of pedals in his arrangements of Mozart’s sonatas will be
pointed out in the subsequent chapter of the present study.
The tremendous innovation in pedal techniques allowed composers and arrangers
to capture the original display of colours embedded in the diverse orchestral instruments
into their keyboard arrangements. These developments lay to rest any concerns raised
with regard to the appropriateness of adequately capturing the colourful palette of the
original composition in the arrangements. This issue is addressed by E. T. A. Hoffman
(1776-1822) as follows:
It cannot be denied that the solitary enjoyment in one’s own room of a

masterpiece one has heard played by the full orchestra often excites the
imagination in the same way as before and conjures forth the same
impressions in the mind. The piano reproduces a great work as a sketch
reproduces a great painting, and the imagination brings it to life with
the colours of the original.39
With these various pedals and their functions, composers in the nineteenth century
broadened their musical horizons with the keyboard repertories, and this had a profound
effect on the art of musical arranging. Because of the advancement in the mechanical
development of the piano, any composition literally could be rearranged from one genre
to another with the newly organised combination of musical instruments, for example,
from a folksong to an arrangement for two pianos, such as in the case of Grieg’s
Gammelnorsk romance med variasjoner (Altnorwegische Romanze mit Variationen / Old
Norwegian Melody with Variations) for two pianos, Op. 51 (1890),40 and the subsequent
38
Rowland, A History of Pianoforte Pedalling, especially, see Part III “Pedalling after c.1800,” pp. 105-
155.
39
David Charlton, ed., annotated, and introduced, E. T. A. Hoffmann’s Music Writings: Kreisleriana, The
Poet and the Composer, Music Criticism, trans. by Martyn Clarke (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1989), p. 251.
40
For a modern edition, see Edvard Grieg, Gammelnorsk romance med variasjoner / Altnorwegische
Romanze mit Variationen / Old Norwegian Melody with Variations, op. 51, ed. by Arvid O. Vollsnes as
20
rearrangement of the same composition from a work for two pianos into an orchestral
work.41 In fact, composers and arrangers alike were at ease in transferring
melodic/harmonic materials from one performance medium to another, depending on the
particular occasion.
The vast number of publications throughout the nineteenth century provided
ample testimony to popularity and resultant demand of performers and audiences alike. In
the third edition of Carl Friedrich Whistling’s catalogues of music published in the
nineteenth century, the list surprisingly shows about nine thousand individual titles of
four-hand piano music, and that accounting is only for those publications produced in
Germany and neighbouring countries. In fact, with the number of individual titles listed
in contemporary catalogues of French, Italian, and British publishers added to
Whistling’s list, the total number of publications of four-hand piano music would be
significantly higher.42 Among numerous composers included in the aforementioned
catalogues of Whistling, Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827), in his oeuvre relies most
heavily on keyboard transcriptions, with approximately 150 entries, in various genres
such as symphonies, overtures, and many other chamber music.43 Even his thirty-two
sonatas for solo piano were newly transcribed for duet by Louis Köhler (1820-1886), who
was known not only as a composer and arranger but also a prominent piano pedagogue.44
Vol. 7 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works, ed. by The Edvard Grieg Committee (Frankfurt am Main, New
York, and London: C. F. Peters, 1981).
41
Grieg’s Op. 51 was not well-known to most of the public until 1907 when he rearranged the piece for full
orchestra because his initial instrumental choice for two pianos was not practical. See, Finck, Grieg and His
Music, pp. 189-190.
42
Carl Friedrich Whistling, Adolph Hofmeister, and Friedrich Hofmeister, C. F. Whistling's Handbuch der
musikalischen Literatur oder allgemeines systematischgeordnetes Verzeichniss der in Deutschland und in
der angrenzenden Ländern gedruckten Musikalien, auch musikalischen Schriften und Abbildungen mit
Anzeige der Verleger und Preise, 3 vols. (Leipzig: Hofmeister, 1845 and 1975), Vol. 2, pp. 71-120.
43
Curiously enough, the thematic catalogue detailing Beethoven’s compositional legacy does not include
any reference to his arrangements and the arrangements of his works by other composers or arrangers, such
as Wagner who arranged Beethoven’s work; see Klaus Kropfinger, Wagner and Beethoven: Richard
Wagner’s Reception of Beethoven, trans. by Peter Palmer (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge
University Press, 1991); see also Das Werk Beethovens: Thematisch-bibliographisches Verzeichnis seiner
sämtlichen vollendeten Kompositionen, von [by] Georg Kinsky, nach dem Tode des Verfassers
abgeschloßen und herausgegeben [after the death of the author completed and edited by] Hans Halm
(Munich and Duisburg: G. Henle Verlag, 1955).
44
Köhler’s experience as a piano pedagogue directly links with this contribution to the art of arranging,
with the affinity between these topics explored later in Chapter 2 of this study. Köhler’s experience as a
pedagogue is amply illustrated in his own writings; see Louis Köhler, Systematische Lehrmethode für
Klavierspiel und Musik, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1888 is third edition of 1857-1858); Führer
durch den Clavierunterricht: Ein Repertorium der Clavierliteratur, etc. als kritischer Wegweiser für Lehrer
21
These arrangements by Köhler were available from the Litolff publishing house.45 Louis
Köhler also revised Grieg’s arrangements of Mozart’s piano sonatas published later by
Peters Edition, and from Köhler’s revision, several new editions of these works
appeared.46
The aforementioned developments in the keyboard organology led to the
popularity of the virtuosos. During the nineteenth century, numerous keyboard
transcriptions of orchestral and operatic works were readily accessible to both audiences
and performers alike, including solo and duet pianists. The Hungarian Franz Liszt (1811-
1886) illustrates the versatility of contemporary musicians who could compose,
transcribe, and perform as virtuosic pianists. Among his voluminous arrangements, Liszt
worked on symphonies, songs, or operatic compositions by various composers from the
past or the present by crafting them, sometimes as more direct transcriptions47 and other
times as more elaborate paraphrases.48 Notwithstanding the emphasis on pianistic
und Schüler (Leipzig: J. Schuberth, 1894 is ninth edition of 1859); Der Clavierunterricht: Studien,
Erfahrungen und Ratschläge (Leipzig: J. J. Weber, 1905 is sixth edition of 1861); see also Renate
Grünbaum, “Louis Köhler: Talent, Pädagoge, Anreger im Schatten der Großen” (Unpublished Ph.D.
Dissertation, Hochschule der Künste Berlin, 1996).
45
Ibid., Vol. 2, pp. 72-74. Unfortunately, Köhler’s compositional legacy, presumably including his
arrangements, is lost; see James Deaville, “Köhler, (Christian) Louis (Heinrich),” translated from the
German by Erwin Kroll in: Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Allgemeine Enzyklopädie der Musik,
begründet von [founded by] Friedrich Blume; zweite, neubearbeitete Ausgabe von [second revised edition
by] Ludwig Finscher, 26 vols. in two parts (Kassel: Bärenreiter and Stuttgart: Metzler, 1998-2008), Vol. 10
(Personenteil, 2003), cols. 435-436. The related article in the New Grove Dictionary of Music and
Musicians does not include this important information; see James Deaville, “Köhler, (Christian) Louis
(Heinrich),” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie
(London; Macmillan, 2001), Vol. 13, p. 741. On the prominence of the Litolff publishing firm, see, for
example, Collection Litolff (50 Jahre): Haus-Chronik von Henry Litolff’s Verlag, Braunschweig
([Braunschweig]: Litolff, 1914); Rudolf Hagermann, Henry Litolff (Herne: R. Hagermann, 1981 is second
edition of 1978).
46
For more information on music publishing with Peters Edition, see Lawford-Hinrichsen, Music
Publishing and Patronage.
47
See, for example, Franz Liszt’s transcriptions of the nine symphonies of Ludwig van Beethoven; Franz
Liszt: Transkriptionen II-IV / Ferenc Liszt: Transcriptions II-IV — Symphonies de Beethoven Nos. 1-9,
herausgegeben von / edited by Zoltán Farkas et al. as Vols. 17-19 of [Franz Liszt]: Freie Bearbeitungen
und Transkriptionen für Klavier zu zwei Händen / [Ferenc Liszt]: Free Arrangements and Transcriptions
for Piano Solo, zusammengestellt von / compiled by Imre Sulyok and Imre Mezö as Series 2 of Franz
Liszt: Neue Ausgabe Sämtlicher Werke / Ferenc Liszt: New Edition of the Complete Works (Budapest:
Editio Musica, 1991 – 1993); see also Zsuzsanna Domokos, “Orchestrationen des Pianoforte: Beethovens
Symphonien in Transkriptionen von Franz Liszt und seinen Vorgängern,” in: Studia Musicologica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 37/2-4 (1996), pp. 249-341.
48
See, for example, Liszt’s paraphrase of Mozart’s opera Don Giovanni for piano; Franz Liszt,
“Réminiscences de Don Juan de Mozart: Grande fantaisie (R 288, SW 418),” in: Franz Liszt: Freie
Bearbeitungen V / Ferenc Liszt: Free Arrangements V, herausgegeben von / edited by Adrienne
Kaczmarczyk and Imre Mezö as Vol. 5 of [Franz Liszt]: Freie Bearbeitungen und Transkriptionen für
22
technique which undoubtedly informed many of the transcriptions and paraphrases, these
arrangements in many cases went far beyond the mere display of the performer’s
virtuosity. Here, Grieg’s arrangement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494
and the other of Mozart’s sonatas that Grieg chose to arrange serve as case in point as
will be shown in the following chapters of this study. While Liszt’s reputation as an
arranger combined with his virtuosity has received wide attention in the concert hall49 as
well as in scholarly publications,50 Grieg has not been accorded a comparable reception,
although his arrangements arguably are of superior quality, as the present study
demonstrates. The reason for Grieg’s apparent falling into a state of oblivion appears to
be bound up with his philosophy of composition and his compositional output. Here, it is
important to recognize that Liszt and Grieg, by virtue of their respective compositional
practices, obviously place their emphasis on different genres, namely, Liszt primarily on
transcriptions and paraphrases for piano from large-scale symphonic and operatic
repertories,51 and to a lesser extent on the art song,52 and Grieg less so on the arrangement
of symphonic or dramatic works but predominantly on the art song repertories — that
genre which was dear to his heart owing to his familiarity with the folksong of Norway.53
Klavier zu zwei Händen / [Ferenc Liszt]: Free Arrangements and Transcriptions for Piano Solo,
zusammengestellt von / compiled by Imre Sulyok and Imre Mezö as Series 2 of Franz Liszt: Neue Ausgabe
Sämtlicher Werke / Ferenc Liszt: New Edition of the Complete Works (Budapest: Editio Musica, 2000), pp.
90-124; see also Sieghart Döhring, “Réminiscenses: Liszts Konzeption der Klavierparaphrase,” in:
Festschrift Heinz Becker zum 60. Geburtstag am 26. Juni 1982, ed. by Jürgen Schläder and Reinhold
Quandt (Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 1982), pp. 131-151.
49
Werner Füssmann and Béla Mátéka, Franz Liszt: Ein Künstlerleben in Wort und Bild (Langensalza: J.
Beltz, 1936); Alan Walker, Franz Liszt: The Virtuoso Years, 1811-1847 (New York and London: Alfred
Knopf. 1990 is second edition of 1983); Robert Stockhammer, Franz Liszt: Im Triumphzug durch Europa
(Vienna: Österreichischer Bundesverlag, 1986); Adrian Williams, Portrait of Liszt by Himself and His
Contemporaries (Oxford: Clarendon Press and New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).
50
Jacques Drillon, Liszt Transcripteur, ou, La charité bien ordonnée (Arles: Actes Sud and [Paris]:
Diffusion PUF, 1986); Dorothea Redepennig, “‘Zu eig’nem Wort und eig’ner Weise’…: Liszts Wagner-
Transkriptionen,” in: Die Musikforschung 39 (1986), pp. 305-317.
51
See, for example, Franz Liszt, The Great Liszt Opera Paraphrases [Sound Recording], performed by
Jerome Lowenthal (New York: RCA Records, 1981); see also, Barbara Allen Crockett, “Liszt’s Opera
Transcriptions for Piano.” (Unpublished D.M.A. Thesis, University of Illinois, 1968).
52
See, for example, Ernst Hilmar, “Kritische Betrachtungen zu Liszts Transkriptionen von Liedern von
Franz Schubert: Allgemeines und Spezielles zur Niederschrift des ‘Schwanengesangs’,” in: Kongress-
Bericht Eisenstadt 1975, ed. by Wolfgang Suppan as Vol. 1 of Liszt-Studien (Graz: Akademische Druck-
und Verlagsanstalt, 1977). pp. 115-123; Stefan Bromen, Studien zu den Klaviertranskriptionen
Schumannscher Lieder von Franz Liszt, Clara Schumann und Carl Reinecke, Vol. 1 of Schumann-Studien:
Sonderband (Sinzig am Rhein: Studio, 1997).
53
Examples for Grieg’s arrangements in various formats will be discussed in more detail later in this
chapter in the connection with his arrangements of Mozart’s works.
23
With regard to the arrangement, these developments also reflect another important
aspect, the realm of music pedagogy. There is no doubt that the duet transcriptions would
become the pedagogical methods at music conservatories and academies, such as the
Royal Academy of Music (London, England) which the arrangements as part of their
curriculum are heavily emphasized. Also, Universal-Edition reports that the four-hand
arrangements are strongly recommended by the Austrian Ministry of Education (Vienna)
to be used as the teaching materials.54 The professors would use the arrangements to
improve their students’ learning of various repertories, with recourse not solely to piano
music but also to other genres, such as symphony, opera, and chamber music.
Furthermore, these arrangements would serve the purpose of providing practical
instruction in various aspects of the performance, including tempo, phrasing, as well as
balances in dynamics and textures.55 Antoine François Marmontel (1816-1898), the
French piano pedagogue, attributes special significance to the learning of transcriptions
and arrangements beyond acquiring technical virtuosity. This facet can be readily gleaned
from comments included in his treatise — a sentiment that is most forcefully expressed in
his comment that “[to learn the] nobility of style and a majesty of interpretation [that
music written for the instrument, whose sole aim is often just virtuosity, can never
give.”56
2.3 Grieg as an Arranger
Unlike the common practice of arranging large-scale compositions, such as

symphonies, operas, and so forth for four-hand piano, Grieg unusually turned to solo
works for piano from Mozart’s collection. In his arrangements, Grieg was consciously
striving to embrace approaches to music pedagogy, as he articulated explicitly in his own
54
For more information about the Austrian Ministry of Education in Vienna, check the website at
http://www.bmukk.gv.at/.
55
Christensen, “Four-Hand Piano Transcription,” p. 265.
56
“…Une noblesse de style, une façon magistrale d’interpréter que la musique spéciale, dont le but unique
est souvent la virtuosité, ne peut toujours donner…” See, Antoine François Marmontel, Art classique et
moderne du piano, 2 vols., Vol. 1: Conseils d’un Professeur sur l’enseignement et l’estétique du piano
(Paris: Henri Heugel, 1876), p. 156. The English translation is taken from Christensen, “Four-Hand Piano
Transcription,” p. 265.
24
writing.57 Eugen Eisenstein, the Austrian piano pedagogue, believed that the activity of
playing bigger repertories such as symphony or chamber music on the piano as four-hand
transcription would enable the two pianists to “be on intimate terms with the spirit of its
creators,”58 which would also strengthen their interpretation of the music. He evaluates
the purpose of the arrangements as a sufficient way of studying masters’ works:
One cultivates an intimacy with a composition only when one has

brought its forms to sounding life. This has nothing to do with just
pounding out the notes, because one cannot get to know Haydn,
Mozart, or Beethoven simply by playing the notes. Rather, it requires
an inspirationally beautiful performance. As long as one does not awake
the spirit and breath dormant in these forms through a meaningful,
radiant performance, the performer will never really know the music
and composer. It is for this purpose that a four-hand performance of
well-arranged works is to be most highly recommended.59
In the art of arranging earlier and contemporary repertories embracing nearly all
large-scale genres as keyboard works for four hands or two pianos, shortcomings arising
from the reduction in instrumentation places the arranger in a precarious situation of
creating a composition inferior to the original, in the estimation of certain musicians and
critics. Gustav Heuser, a nineteenth-century critic, voiced his complaint towards
incompetent transcriptions:
It is horrifying and worthy of the strongest censure how masterpieces

have been arranged — particularly for four hands — with such
ineptitude, superficiality, and disrespect. It is enough to make plausible
the ironic anecdote about the busy arranger who lays out on his desk
four different scores and four empty pages of manuscript paper so that
as soon as one page is filled up, he can move on without interruption to
another without having to wait until the ink has dried.60
57
John Horton, Grieg as part of The Master Musicians Series (London: J. M. Dent, 1974), p. 53; see also
Grieg, “Mozart.”
58
Eugen Eisenstein, Die Reinheit des Claviervortrages: Dem Idealismus in der Tonkunst (Graz: Leuschner
und Lubensky, 1870), p. 37.
59
Ibid., pp. 4-5. The English translation is taken from Christensen, “Four-Hand Piano Transcription,” p.
266.
60
Die Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 17, No. 52 (27 December 1842), p. 213. Heuser criticized for the
distortion of the original music after being transcribed. For example, he saw the problems in an
unforgivable number of transcriptions — not only the important details of voicing, melodic lines, and
harmony as problematic but also the balance between important issues such as colours and timbres of the
25
As reflected in Heuser’s comment on the general practice of arranging in vogue at that
time, Carl Czerny (1791-1857) as one of the principal representatives of art of arranging
came under heavy criticism. In fact, Czerny was frequently mocked by critics for his
transcriptions, such as those of Beethoven’s nine symphonies, arranged for two pianos.
Indeed, the negative comments by critics ironically referred to Czerny’s faithfulness to
the musical text of the original. In that vein, his transcriptions included every replicated
instrumental voice and registral doubling on the piano which as a result produced a
completely non-transparent texture, typical of the original.61 In fact, Louis Köhler’s
description of Czerny’s arrangements represents the common criticism of the time:
Czerny packed both hands full, so that very often the possibility of
making single tones and voices prominent ceases; indeed in the light-
winged scherzos he frequently leads on a dance of leaping hands full of
chords, in a manner that is absolutely impracticable; for even with the
correct execution of a master’s hand, the inward and essential character
of the music is not always presentable. … Moreover, Czerny always
brings in play the entire surface of the keyboard, from the lowest to the
highest tones; hence there is an end to all alternation of coloring; a
continual screaming discant tortures the nerve of hearing, besides
falsely representing the orchestral effect. For Beethoven does not
continually employ the high violin registers nor half a dozen of never
resting piccolos.62
As mentioned earlier, Grieg also received a number of criticisms on his

arrangements of Mozart’s piano sonatas. The critics raised similar concerns as they
believed that Grieg, like Czerny, distorted the value of the original composition of those
masters. These concerns, however, had been pointed out in detailed examination by
instruments. The English translation is taken from Christensen, “Four-Hand Piano Transcription,” p. 269;
see also Arthur Loesser, Men, Women, and Pianos: A Social History (New York: Dover, 1990 is a reprint
of 1954), p. 362.
61
For example, Czerny’s arrangement of Ludwig van Beethoven’s Symphony No. 1 in C-Major, op. 21
(composed 1799-1800), particularly, in the opening of the first movement, shows that the use of thick
chords in the bass line of the secondo part and the grating in sound due to the doublings in the highest
register of the primo part do not create unity but unpleasant screaming discant continuously, while the
original of Beethoven conveys more delicate sound and the balance in texture; see Christensen, “Four-Hand
Piano Transcription,” pp. 269-272.
62
[no author], [no title] in: Dwight’s Journal of Music 4, No. 6 (Boston, Mass., 12 November 1853), p. 41.
Further on the significance of Dwight’s Journal for musicological research, see, for example, Matthew
Dirst, “Doing Missionary Work: Dwight’s Journal of Music and the American Bach Awakening,” in: Bach
26
Grieg’s biographers, such as such as Richard H. Stein,63 John Horton,64 and David
Monrad-Johansen,65 all of whom provided only brief information about the Mozart
arrangements. Therefore, is the criticism levied against Grieg justified in light of the
rather sparse information provided in the aforementioned publications? Here, it suffices
to say that the value of Grieg’s seminal contribution will undoubtedly require us to
refocus our assessment of Grieg’s endeavour. In fact, there are few scholars who see
Grieg’s Mozart arrangements as a positive proceeding “which helps to reawaken interest
in neglected works of the old masters.”66 Johannes Brahms (1833-1897), who like Grieg,
focused on both the art of composing and the art of arranging, suggests a key to a
successful piano transcription, that is, simply as “knowing what to leave out as much as
what to put in.”67 Brahms was dissatisfied with the transcriptions by Robert Keller (1828-
1891) who was in business with Brahms as a dedicated transcriber, so that he insisted to
arrange his music by himself saying, “[a good arrangement must be] light, brisk, leaving
out all that is possible … just so it sounds really well for four hands and is playable!”68
Taken in such a light, it will be an interesting and important process to examine Grieg’s
arrangements, particularly that of Mozart’s KV 533/494, in order to challenge the
unsubstantiated opinions of the critics and consequently to offer a drastic reassessment of
Grieg’s art of arranging — one which is complicated owing to the multifaceted approach
of Grieg which stands in clear contrast to a more uniform approach that is characteristic
of his contemporaries.
Considering the arrangement as an internationally popularised, yet conservative
practice, Grieg showed his keen interest in making his own unique contribution to the
widespread art of arranging. It was fairly natural for him to adopt the musical ideas of his
in America, ed. by Stephen A. Crist as Vol. 5 of Bach Perspectives, ed. by George J. Buelow et al. (Urbana,
Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 2002), pp. 15-36.
63
Stein, Grieg.
64
Horton, Grieg, p. 53.
65
Monrad-Johansen, Edvard Grieg, p. 191.
66
This quotation is taken from Finck, Grieg and His Music, pp. 219-220.
67
Jost, “Eine Norwegisierung Mozarts?” p. 270.
68
Johannes Brahms, Letter of December 21, 1876, quoted in George Bozarth and Wiltrud Martin, eds., The
Brahms-Keller Correspondence (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1996), p. 32; For more
information on Brahms as arranger, see Valerie Woodring Goertzen, “The Piano Transcriptions of
Johannes Brahms” (Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Illinois, 1987); Robert Komaiko, “The
Four-Hand Piano Arrangements of Brahms and Their Role in the Nineteenth Century” (Unpublished Ph.D.
Dissertation, Northwestern University, 1975).
27
native country for his artistic activity, especially with regard to his arrangements in
general. In the summer of 1858, Ole Bull (1810-1880),69 a Norwegian violinist and
composer who was close to Grieg’s family, suggested to John and Gesine to send Edvard
to the Leipzig Conservatory for more advanced musical training. There, he studied with
Ernst Ferdinand Wenzel (1808-1880), a close friend of Robert Schumann (1810-1856),
and Grieg became intimately familiar with early German Romantic tradition, especially
the work of Schumann.70 For Grieg, the Germanic tradition served as a point of departure
for his ultimate musical styles, but his artistic life entered a new phase with his growing,
genuine interest in Norwegian folk music, which ultimately fostered his passion for the
art of arranging.
Grieg’s interest in national folk music did not occur suddenly but started in his
early youth through his acquaintance with Ole Bull, who was in fact the first major
Norwegian musician to incorporate national Romanticism into the musical tradition of
Viennese Classicism.71 In 1865, Grieg was introduced to Rikard Nordraak (1842-1866),72
another influential Norwegian composer in Grieg’s life, in Copenhagen, and this meeting
further enhanced Grieg’s involvement with folk music. As a result of this meeting, which
provided additional motivation for Grieg, his newly awakened Norwegian nationalism
became more apparent in the first set of Lyriske stykker hefte I (Lyrische Stücke Heft I /
Lyric Pieces I), Op.12 for piano solo, composed at the end of 1867.73 Within this set, he
gave symbolic titles to some of the pieces, such as Folkevise (No.5),74 Norsk (No.6),75
69
John Bergsagel, “Bull, Ole (Bornemann),” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29
vols, ed. by Stanley Sadie (New York: Macmillan, 2001), Vol. 4, pp. 592-595.
70
Dennis F. Mahoney, ed., The Literature of German Romanticism (Rochester, New York: Camden House,
2004); see also John Daverio, Nineteenth-Century Music and the German Romantic Ideology (New York:
Schirmer Books, 1993).
71
Further on the topic of national Romanticism, see Roy Porter and Mikuláš Teich, eds., Romanticism in
National Context (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988). For further biographical
information on Ole Bull, see Mortimer Brewster Smith, The Life of Ole Bull (Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press, for the American-Scandinavian Foundation, New York, 1947 is the second
printing of 1943); Einar Ingvald Haugen and Camilla Cai, Ole Bull: Norway's Romantic Musician and
Cosmopolitan Patriot (Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993).
72
Kari Michelsen, “Nordraak [Nordraach], Rikard,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and
Musicians, 29 vols, ed. by Stanley Sadie (New York: Macmillan, 2001), Vol.18, pp. 37-38.
73
For a modern edition, see Grieg, Lyriske stykker hefte, op. 12.
74
For a modern edition, see Grieg, “5. Folkevise: Volksweise – Folk-song,” in: ibid., pp. 8-9.
75
For a modern edition, see Grieg, “6. Norsk: Norwegisch – Norwegian,” in: ibid., pp. 10-11.
28
and Fedrelandssang (No.8).76 Some six months later, in June 1868, Grieg completed his
Piano Concerto in A Minor, Op.16 at Søllerød, Denmark.77 The completion of his piano
concerto coincides more or less with the beginning of his involvement with folk musical
sources, through which he eventually became one of the leading composers of Norwegian
nationalism in its Golden Age of the Romantic era.78 Grieg’s harmonic language involves
rich chromaticism and the use of long pedal points in association with rhythmic or
melodic folk elements, the latter which are generally defined by minor or modal scales,
sometimes mixed with major scales, to create a sober and haunting sound.79
The years 1876/77, when Grieg started to work on the piano sonatas by Mozart,
represented the pinnacle in his practice of arranging. Only on two occasions did Grieg
resort to an arrangement for two pianos, namely, in the case of the Gammelnorsk
romance med variasjoner (Altnorwegische Romanze mit Variationen / Old Norwegian
Melody with Variations) for two pianos, Op. 51 (1890)80; and in the case of the
arrangements of Mozart’s sonatas, Grieg’s first project for two pianos prepared more than
ten years earlier, in 1876/1877. Presumably due to the difficulty of securing two pianos in
a single locale, Grieg’s Opus 51, in its original scoring for two pianos, was not well-
known to most of the public at large until 1907, the year when he finally rearranged this
piece for full orchestra.81 In a similar vein, as Grieg’s arrangements of Mozart’s keyboard
works were composed long before Opus 51, the particular instrumentation, namely the
requirement of two pianos, would have presented insurmountable challenges with regard
to assembling two pianos on the same stage, which undoubtedly would have placed
restrictions on popularizing these arrangements. Prior to the years of his arrangements of
Mozart’s piano works for two pianos, Grieg also wrote piano duet music for four hands,
such as I Høst. Konsertouverture (Im Herbst. Konzertouvertüre / In Autumn. Concert
76
For a modern edition, see Grieg, “8. Fedrelandssang: Vaterländisches Lied – National Song,” in: ibid., p.
14.
77
Finck, Grieg and His Music, p. 44.
78
Oscar J. Falnes, National Romanticism in Norway (New York: AMS Press, 1968).
79
For a detailed discussion of Grieg’s harmonic language used in the preparation of his arrangement of
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, see Chapter 3 of the present study. For incidental
comments on Grieg’s harmonic language, see John Horton and Nils Grinde, “Grieg, Edvard (Hagerup),” in:
The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols, ed. by Stanley Sadie (New York: Macmillan,
2001), Vol. 10, pp. 396-410.
80
For a modern edition, see Grieg, Gammelnorsk romance med variasjoner.
81
Finck, Grieg and His Music, pp. 189-190.
29
Overture), op.11 (1866)82 and To symfoniske stykker (Zwei symphonische Stücke / Two
Symphonic Pieces), op.14 (1869).83 In addition, his dramatic compositions, such as
Siguard Jorsalfar, op. 22 (1874)84 and Peer Gynt, op. 23 (1876) were rearranged for
piano duet.85 Unlike his compositions for two pianos, the works for piano duet
presumably eased the access for both amateur and professional performers, which in turn
enhanced the popularity of the arrangements for piano four hands over the arrangements
scored for two pianos.
When one takes into consideration that contemporary musicians and critics alike
had voiced concerns over issues revolving around the preservation of authenticity of the
original work in the arrangement, Grieg’s genuine endeavour in his arrangement of
Mozart’s keyboard works needs to be judged in response to these criticisms. Unlike the
surviving arrangements from the second half of the nineteenth century, the majority of
which are mere adaptations of chamber, symphonic, and dramatic repertories, mostly for
one or two keyboards, Grieg’s preparation of the Mozart arrangements needs to be
accorded a special niche within the realm of the wider genre of the arrangement. In fact,
in his Mozart arrangements, Grieg embraces the original keyboard work in the overall
arrangement as an entity unto itself and creates collaboration between two pianos.
Moreover, his careful separation of Mozart’s original composition from his own unique
creation, specifically the superimposition of the materials from two distinct eras, that is,
the Viennese Classicism of Mozart and the Norwegian Romanticism of Grieg, provides a
most unusual compositional venture — one which has had few parallels in the history of
Western music. Grieg’s wholesale, not partial, adoption of Mozart’s original presents a
tour de force on Grieg’s part, which underscores an astute level of creativity, as detailed
examination of his arrangement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 in
Chapter 4 will confirm.
82
For a modern edition, see Edvard Grieg, I Høst. Konsertouverture / Im Herbst. Konzertouvertüre / In
Autumn. Concert Overture, op.11, ed. by Rune J. Andersen as Vol. 5 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works,
ed. by The Edvard Grieg Committee (Frankfurt am Main and New York: C. F. Peters, 1992).
83
For a modern edition, see Grieg, To symfoniske stykker / Zwei symphonische Stücke / Two Symphonic
Pieces, op. 14, in: ibid.
84
For a modern edition, see Edvard Grieg, Siguard Jorsalfar, op.22, ed. by Nils Grinde as Vol. 6 of
[Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works, ed. by The Edvard Grieg Committee (Frankfurt am Main and New
York: C. F. Peters, 1982).
85
For a modern edition, see Edvard Grieg, Peer Gynt, op.23, in: ibid.
30
Chapter 3
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:
Historical Issues and Musical Analysis
The understanding of the compositional process and the creativity of Grieg in his
arrangement for two pianos of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 is
enhanced through the examination of Mozart’s original score, initially in a historical
context and subsequently from the perspective of the musical analysis.
3.1 Historical Background of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s keyboard music has been broadly and constantly
researched and investigated over a lengthy period of time.1 The continuous popularity of
the musical genius and his music across time and place may be derived from the
ingenuity of his musical sense, particularly on the compositional process, which
generates not only the artistic but also the scientific approaches. Mozart’s father Leopold
(1719-1787) saw his son’s extraordinary talents, and that initiated Leopold to raise his
son up to the level of a Wunderkind, as communicated in scholarly literature of
subsequent eras.2 Such views on Mozart’s compositional activities are evident in the
1
For studies of this repertory, in particular the Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 as well as the other three
sonatas arranged by Grieg, namely, Sonata in G Major, KV189h=283, Fantasia, KV 475 & Sonata in C
minor, and Sonata in C Major, KV 545, see, for example, Wolfgang Burde, Studien zu Mozarts
Klaviersonaten ― Formungsprinzipien und Formtypen, Vol. 1 of Schriften zur Musik (Giebing über Prien
am Chiemsee: Musikverlag Emil Katzbichler, 1969), pp. 34-44 and pp. 69-92; see also, Richard Rosenberg,
Die Klaviersonaten Mozarts: Gestalt- und Stilanalyse (Hofheim am Taunus: Friedrich Hofmeister, 1972),
pp. 45-53 (KV 283), pp. 105-115 (KV 475 & KV 457), pp. 117-124 (KV 533 & KV 494), and pp. 125-129
(KV 545); Joachim Brügge, “Typus und Modell in den Klaviersonaten Wolfgang Amadeus Mozarts,” in:
Mozart-Studien 3 (1993), pp. 143-189; John Irving, Mozart’s Piano Sonatas: Contexts, Sources, Style
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999 is reprint of 1997).
2
Walter Kreyszig, “Tracing Wolfgang Hildesheimer’s Assessment of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Legacy
to Franz Schubert’s Diary Entry of 1816: The Case of Mozart’s String Quintet in g-minor, KV 516 (1787),”
in: Mozart — eine Herausforderung für Literatur und Denken / Mozart — A Challenge for Literature and
Thought, ed. by Rüdiger Görner in collaboration with Carly McLaughlin as Vol. 89 of Kongressberichte
[Conference Reports], Reihe [Series] A of Jahrbuch für Internationale Germanistik (Bern and New York:
Peter Lang, 2007), pp. 177-180. Further on the notion of Wunderkind, see [no author], “Vom Wunderkind
zur Meisterschaft,” in: Mitteilungen für die Mozart-Gemeinde in Berlin, ed. by Rudolf Genée, Vol. 21
(February 1906), pp. 379-389; Alec Hyatt King, “The Nature of Mozart’s Genius: Some Analogies and
Reflections,” in: Mozart in Retrospect: Studies in Criticism and Bibliography, ed. by Alec Hyatt King
(London and New York: Oxford University Press, 1956), pp. 188-197; Kurt Pahlen, Wolfgang Amadeus
Mozart: Sein Leben und seine Zeit (Herrsching: Manfred Pawlak Verlagsgesellschaft, 1991); William
Robinson, Conceptions of Mozart in German Criticism and Biography, 1791-1828: Changing Images of a
31
enthusiastic comment of Franz Joseph Haydn (1732-1809) recorded in a letter dated 16
February 1785 from Leopold Mozart (1719-1787) to his daughter Maria Anna, also
known as Nannerl (1751-1829). Haydn expresses his personal impression of Wolfgang
Amadeus Mozart, which appears as a thought-provoking statement:
Before God and as an honest man I tell you that your son is the
greatest composer known to me either in person or by name. He has
taste and, what is more, the most profound knowledge of composition
[Compositionswissenschaft].3
In his original comment,4 Haydn captures the manifold contributions of W.A. Mozart in a
single noun, namely Compositionswissenschaft, which literally means the “science of
composition.” In various English translations of the letters,5 this critical term in Haydn’s
prophetic comment has been interpreted merely as “knowledge of composition.”
Considering its origin, the disciplina musicae had been viewed not as ars but as scientia
since Antiquity and through the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and beyond, evidenced by
its inclusion with arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy as part of the quadrivium and also
of the artes liberales, the latter of which also comprised the disciplines of the trivium,
Musical Genius (Unpublished Ph. D Dissertation, Yale University, 1974); Gloria Flaherty, “Mozart and the
Mythologization of Genius,” in: Studies in Eighteenth-Century Culture 18 (1988), pp. 289-307; Petra
Milhoffer, “Mozart — ein ewiges Wunderkind? Nachdenken über Erziehung und Werdegang eines
Genies,” in: Mitteilungen der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum 40/1-4 (1992), pp. 1-22; Annette
Richards, “Automatic Genius, Mozart and the Mechanical Sublime,” in: Music and Letters 80 (1999), pp.
366-389; William Stafford, “Genius,” in: The Cambridge Mozart Encyclopedia, ed. by Cliff Eisen and
Simon P. Keefe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006), pp. 190-195.
3
Emily Anderson, chronologically arranged, translated and edited with an introduction, notes and indexes.
The Letters of Mozart and His Family, 2 vols. London: Macmillan and New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1966
is the second revised edition, prepared by A. Hyatt King and Monica Carolan of 1938, p. 886.
4
Mozart: Briefe und Aufzeichnungen — Gesamtausgabe, herausgegeben von [ed. for] der Internationale
Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg, gesammelt und erläutert von [collected and explained by] Wilhelm A.
Bauer, Otto Erich Deutsch, und Joseph Heinz Eibl, 7 vols. (1755-1975), Band III (Kassel and Basel:
Bärenreiter, 1780-1786), p. 373. The original reads as: “ich sage ihnen vor Gott, als ein ehrlicher Mann, ihr
Sohn ist der größte Componist, den ich von Person und den Nahmen nach kenne: er hat geschmack, und
über das die größte Compositionswissenschaft.”
5
Anderson, ed. The Letters of Mozart; Mildred Mary Bozman, ed. Letters of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
(London: J. M. Dent, 1928).
32
namely, dialectics, grammar, and rhetoric.6 In this light, Haydn holds fast to this earlier
notion of music embedded in scientific discourse.
Within his oeuvre, Mozart’s piano sonatas have been abundantly performed and
recorded.7 Mozart’s music is generally interpreted as elegant, simple, and even detached
in expression, and these sonatas also embrace similar effect in authentic performances.8
Mozart’s keyboard oeuvre comprises eighteen sonatas, all of which were written between
late 1774 and mid 1790. In general, Mozart’s compositional activities occurred for
various reasons, such as for teaching,9 for displaying of his and other performers’
virtuosity,10 for publication,11 and, above all, for supporting himself financially.12
Occasionally, Mozart dedicated his music to various connoisseurs, as, for example, in the
case of his Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, the autograph of which includes a
dedication to Emperor Joseph II (1741-1790). Mozart’s piano sonatas, however, were
6
For an overview of the artes liberales as well as subdivisions of the trivium and quadrivium, see, for
example, Friedmar Kühnert, “Zur Reihenfolge der artes liberales in der Antike,” in: Wissenschaftliche
Zeitschrift der Universität Rostock 12 (1953), pp. 249-257; see also Friedmar Kühnert, Allgemeinbildung
und Fachbildung in der Antike, Vol. 30 of Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin: Schrifen der
Sektion Altertumswissenschaft (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1961); Gerhard Pietzsch, Studien zur Geschichte
der Musiktheorie im Mittelalter, 2 vols. (Halle an der Saale: [no publisher], 1929) [Vol. 1. Die
Klassifikation der Musik von Boetius bis Ugolino von Orvieto; Vol. 2. Die Musik im Erziehungs- und
Bildungsideal des ausgehenden Altertums und frühen Mittelalters]; Hans Martin Klinkenberg, “artes
liberales / arte mechanicae,” in: Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie, ed. by Joachim Ritter and
Karlfried Gründer (Basel and Stuttgart: Verlag Schwake, 1971- ), Vol. 1, pp. 531-535; Claude V. Palisca,
Humanism in Italian Renaissance Musical Thought (New Haven, Connecticut and London: Yale University
Press, 1985), pp. 226-279 and pp. 333-407; Ann E. Moyer, Musica Scientia: Musical Scholarship in the
Italian Renaissance (Ithaca, New York and London: Cornell University Press, 1992); Walter Kreyszig,
“Humanismus, musikalischer,” in: Pauly’s Realenzyklopädie der Klassischen Altertumswissenschaften:
Rezeptionsgeschichte, 3 vols. (Stuttgart: Metzler, 1998-), Vol. 2 (2000), cols. 560-563; also in English
translation as Walter Kreyszig, “IV Music,” in Classical Tradition, Vol. 2: DEM-IUS, ed. by Mandred
Landfester in corporation with Hubert Cancik and Helmuth Schneider, part of Brill’s Encyclopaedia of the
Ancient World: New Pauly (Leiden and Boston, Massachusetts: Brill, 2007), cols. 1036-1039; Joseph Dyer,
“The Place of Musica in Medieval Classification of Knowledge,” in: The Journal of Musicology: A
Quarterly Review of Music History, Criticism, Analysis, and Performance Practice, 24/1 (Winter 2007),
pp. 3-71.
7
For more recent recordings of Mozart’s keyboard works, see, for example, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart,
The Complete Piano Sonatas [Sound Recording], performed by Ronald Brautigam (fortepiano) (Djursholm,
Sweden:BIS, 2000); Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Piano Sonatas [Sound Recording], performed by
Mitsuko Uchida (piano) (United States: Philips, 1988).
8
For further discussion on Mozart’s piano music and interpretation, see Eva and Paul Badura-Skoda,
Interpreting Mozart on the Keyboard, trans. by Leo Black (London: Barrie and Rockliff, 1970 is a reprint
of 1962); Siegbert Rampe, Mozarts Claviermusik: Klangwelt und Aufführungspraxis: Ein Handbuch
(Kassel and New York: Bärenreiter, 1995).
9
Piero Melograni, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: A Biography, trans. by Lydia G. Cochrane (Chicago and
London: The University of Chicago Press, 2007), p. 197.
10
Melograni, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, pp. 63ff.
11
Ibid., pp. 125-126 and pp. 153-159.
12
Ibid., p. 227.
33
little known during his lifetime, and, in fact, their dissemination after his death was not
immediate. With the exception of the Piano Sonata in D Major (“Dürniz-Sonate”), KV
284 (=205b) published in Vienna by Torricella in 1784,13 Mozart’s early set of piano
sonatas14 was not printed during his lifetime.15 The sonatas in C Major, KV 309 (=284b),
in A minor, KV 310 (=300d), and in D Major, KV 311 (=284c) were published in Paris
by Heina and in Brüssel by Godefroy, respectively, as Opus 4, Numbers 1-3 around
1781-1782.16 The sonatas in C Major, KV 330 (=300h), in A Major, KV 331 (=300i), in
F Major, KV 332 (=300k) (“Linzer Sonate”),17 and in Bb Major, KV 333 (=315c),
respectively, were printed in Vienna by Artaria in 1784,18 likewise, the Sonata in C
minor, KV 457 was published in Vienna by Artaria in 1785. The Sonata in F Major, KV
533/494 was printed in Vienna by Hoffmeister in 1788.19 The sonatas in C Major, KV
545, in Bb Major, KV 570, and in D Major, KV 576 were published in Vienna
posthumously in between 1796 and 1805.20
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 represents a unique composition
in its own right, because of its most unusual origin, as reflected in two different Köchel
numbers. According to Mozart’s own thematic catalogue,21 the final movement of this
13
Cliff Eisen and Stanley Sadie, “(Johann Chrysostom) Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart,” in The New Grove
Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie (New York: Macmillan, 2001), Vol. 17,
p. 332; Konrad, Mozart-Werkverzeichnis, pp. 144-145.
14
This early set of piano sonatas comprises the Sonata in C Major, KV 279 (=189d), the Sonata in F
Major, KV 280 (=189c), the Sonata in Bb Major, KV 281 (=189f), the Sonata in Eb Major, KV 282
(=189g), and the Sonata in G Major, KV 283 (=189h).
15
Eisen, “Mozart,” p. 332; Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis, p. 214; Konrad, Mozart-
Werkverzeichnis, pp.144-145; see also Wolfgang Plath, “Zur Datierung der Klaviersonaten KV 279-284,”
in: Acta Mozartiana 21 (1974), pp. 26-30.
16
Eisen, “Mozart,” p. 332; Konrad, Mozart-Werkverzeichnis, pp. 144-145.
17
Martin Just, “Zur Klaviersonate F-Dur, KV 332,” in: Mozart-Jahrbuch 1973/1974 (Internationalen
Stiftung Mozarteum), pp. 211-216.
18
Eisen, “Mozart,” p. 332; Konrad, Mozart-Werkverzeichnis , pp.144-145. Further on KV 332 and KV 333,
see Wye Jamison Allanbrook, “Two Threads through the Labyrinth: Topic and Process in the First
Movement of K. 332 and K. 333,” in: Convention in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-Century Music:
Essays in Honor of Leonard G. Ratner, ed. by Wye Jamison Allanbrook et al. as Vol. 10 of Festschrift
Series (Stuyvesant, New York: Pendragon Press, 1992), pp. 125-171.
19
Eisen, “Mozart,” p. 332; Konrad, Mozart-Werkverzeichnis , pp.146-147.
20
Eisen, “Mozart,” p. 332; Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis; Konrad merely identifies KV
570 as published posthumously in Vienna by Artaria in 1796.
21
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Mozart’s Thematic Catalogue: A Facsimile — British Library, Stefan Zweig
MS 63, with introduction and transcription by Albi Rosenthal and Alan Tyson (London: The British
Library, 1990; also Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1990); also as Otto Erich Deutsch, ed.,
Mozart’s Catalogue of His Works, 1784-1791 (New York: H. Reichner, 1938, also 1956); see also Alec
Hyatt King, “A Review of Mozart’s Thematic Catalogue” in: Music & Letters 72/4 (Nov. 1991), pp. 597-
599.
34
sonata, Rondo, was composed separately under the title Ein kleines Rondo für das Klavier
allein about two years earlier (10 June 1786) than the first two movements. In the
aforementioned thematic catalogue, Mozart supplies the date of 3 January 1788 for the
entry of these two movements. In his autograph, however, Mozart’s signature and the
composition date are not present.22 Originally, it would seem that Mozart was not intent
on combining these two separate pieces — namely, the Allegro und Andante (both of
which Mozart had conceived as one composition), and the Rondo — together into a
single composition. The original Rondo was even separately published, first as KV 494 in
1788. Prior to Mozart’s combining of this Rondo (KV 494) with the Allegro und Andante
(both of which Mozart had regarded as a complete composition in 1788), this very same
Rondo had existed in two different editions. The earlier edition of this Rondo, based on
the no longer extant autograph, was presumably released as the British edition entitled
Storace’s Collection of Original Harpsichord Music,23 with “S. Storace” indicating
Stephen Storace, Mozart’s friend and pupil.24 The other edition of this Rondo was
published by Heinrich Bossler (1744-1812) in Speyer.25
The Rondo that Mozart reshaped as the final movement of the Piano Sonata in F
Major, KV 533/494 includes an additional cadenza, which is not found in the solo edition
of the work, separately published in 1788.26 The absence of both the autograph and the
precise date of composition for the cadenza in the newly prepared Rondo draws into
22
Mozart often wrote his signature and date of a piece in the upper right-hand corner of the first page,
which have been found in many of his autographs. See Hans Neumann and Carl Schachter, “The Two
Versions of Mozart’s Rondo, K 494,” in The Music Forum I (1967), p. 9.
23
This collection was issued by Birchall and Andrews in London in 1789; see Edith Betty Schnapper, ed.,
The British Union Catalogue of Early Music Printed Before the Year 1801, 2 vols. (London: Butterworth,
1957), Vol. 2, p. 712.
24
On Stephen Storace, see Karl and Irene Geiringer, “Stephen and Nancy Storace in Wien,” in:
Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 34 (1979), pp. 18-25; see also Simon P. Keefe, “Storace Family,” in: The
Mozart Cambridge Encyclopedia, ed. by Cliff Eisen and Simon P. Keefe (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2006), pp. 493-494.
25
Heinrich Philipp Carl Bossler was a German music printer and publisher. He founded his publishing firm
in Speyer in 1781 and in 1785 another branch, Krämer & Bossler, was established in Darmstadt, where the
company moved in 1792. By 1796 almost 300 titles had been published and Bossler settled in Gohlis, near
Leipzig, in 1799. The publishing house, later directed by his son Friedrich Bossler, closed in 1828. See
[Stephen Storace], Storace’s Collection of Original Harpsichord Music. printed for Stephen Storace, N. 23
(London: Birchall, 1788); also, see Hans Schneider, Der Musikverleger Heinrich Philipp Bossler, 1744-
1812 (Tutzing, 1985), p.147.
26
The cadenza, absent of the autograph, was composed specifically for inclusion in the first edition of this
work; see Otto Jahn, W. A. Mozart, 2 vols., ed. and rev. by Hermann Abert (Leipzig: Breitkopt & Härtel,
1924 is the sixth edition of 1921), Vol. 2, p. 373. For Jahn’s original comment and the English translation,
see Chapter 3, Footnote 91.
35
question the authenticity of this cadenza from a number of different points of view, such
as stylistic and aesthetic aspects regarding Mozart’s compositional endeavors.
Nevertheless, the presumed date of the reshaped Rondo, in all likelihood, must fall
between 10 June 1786 and January or February 1788, as indicated by Anton Hoffmeister
in his thematic catalogue.27 Hoffmeister’s first edition of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F
Major, KV 533/494 is considered to be as significant as the missing autograph. In fact,
some Mozart scholars attribute more significance to the Hoffmeister edition than to the
autograph because of its inclusion of the cadenza. For example, Alfred Einstein’s third
edition of Köchel catalogue (1937) contains the remark that the Hoffmeister edition is
more complete and definitive for the Rondo so that this first edition is more authoritative
than the autograph of the original Rondo which does not include the cadenza.28 Scholarly
opinions, including those of Hans Neumann and Carl Schachter, tend to favor Mozart as
the composer of the cadenza, although there is no definitive evidence to suggest that the
cadenza of the expanded Rondo was actually written by Mozart himself.29 The twenty-
seven measure cadenza, included in the Rondo, KV 494, extends this single movement
from the original 160 measures of the earlier Rondo to the revised version of 187
measures of this movement included as part of the sonata. In addition to the change in its
length, the revised Rondo comprises different musical parameters, such as tempo,
dynamics, ornamentation, and articulation. Indeed, those parameters have given rise to
the questioning of the authenticity of this cadenza. Example 3.1.1 reproduces a facsimile
of Mozart’s autograph that includes the total 160 measures of the original Rondo, KV
494.30
27
Henry H. Hausner, “Franz Anton Hoffmeister (1754-1812): Composer and Publisher,” in Mitteilung der
Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum (MISM), xxxviii (1990), pp. 155-162.
28
Neumann et al. “The Two Versions of Mozart’s Rondo, K 494,” pp. 17-20.
29
Neumann et al. “The two versions of Mozart’s Rondo, K 494,” pp. 1-34. Further study on Mozart’s
cadenza in general, see Badura-Skoda, Interpreting Mozart on the Keyboard, pp. 214-241; see also Eva
Badura-Skoda, “Textual Problems in Masterpieces of the 18th and 19th Centuries,” trans. by Piero Weiss, in:
The Musical Quarterly, 51 (1965), pp. 301-317.
30
This facsimile of the autograph is reproduced from Neumann and Schachter, “The Two Versions of
Mozart’s Rondo, K 494,” pp. 6-8. For further description of the autograph of the Rondo KV 494, see pp. 5-
12. Further discussion on the autograph is provided in Irving, Mozart’s Piano Sonatas, p. 187.
36
Example 3.1.1 Autograph of Mozart’s Rondo, KV 494
37
Example 3.1.1 Autograph of Mozart’s Rondo, KV 494 (continued)
In Köchel’s Thematic Catalogue, Mozart’s three movements of the Sonata in F Major are
not categorized under the Sonatas, but KV 533 is entered as Allegro und Andante für
Klavier, while KV 494 is entitled Rondo für Klavier. According to the records in
Köchel’s Thematic Catalogue, Mozart’s decision to combine two individual pieces as a
single sonata is an unusual activity with respect to his keyboard sonatas.31 However, the
joining of the Rondo with the two preceding movements has received considerable
attention, beginning with Otto Jahn (1813-1869), who questioned the notion of a coherent
cycle in the three-movement structure.32 Later, Hermann Abert (1871-1927) even
criticized, in a rather forceful tone, the alleged musical coherence in Mozart’s Piano
Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, by stating that “the addition of the Rondo KV 494 to
31
Putting two individual works into one category such as the Fantasy in C Minor, KV 475 and the Sonata
in C minor, KV 457 is considered as a different matter in this paper.
32
Jahn, W. A. Mozart, IV, p. 14 and p. 28. This information is taken from Christoph Wolff, “Two Köchel
Numbers, One Work,” in Music as Social and Cultural Practice: Essays in Honour of Reinhard Strohm,
ed. by Melania Bucciarelli and Berta Joncus (Woodbridge: Suffolk, The Boydell Press, 2007), p. 187.
38
bring about a complete sonata is not by Mozart.”33 Here, the two separate Köchel
numbers may, at first glance, suggest a non-affinity between the two respective works. In
light of this criticism, Mozart’s KV 533/494 deserves a better consideration than has been
previously accorded in the secondary literature.
Contrary to aforementioned negative opinions circulating in the secondary
literatures, Wolff argues in a favor of the musical unity which suggests a natural tie
between KV 533 and KV 494,34 a topic to which we shall return later in this study.
Although the origin of K.533/494 is not precisely known, the biographical sources
provide crucial information on the piece. Above all, the autograph of the Allegro and
Andante, respectively entered as KV 533 in Köchel’s Thematic Catalogue, is hitherto
unknown. Along with the Rondo movement, Mozart scholars consider the Hoffmeister
Edition as the most authentic source for the first two movements as well.35 Scholars prior
to Alexander Weinmann assumed the publication of this sonata to have occurred in
approximately 1790. However, Weinmann challenged the previously assumed date of the
publication by proposing a period sometime between January and February of 1788.36
Subsequently, Otto Erich Deutsch (1883-1967) confirmed Weinmann’s newly set date for
KV 533 in his revised list of individual titles within Mozart’s oeuvre.37 The first two
movements of the Piano Sonata in F Major were recorded originally as Ein Allegro und
Andante für das Clavier allein in Mozart’s own thematic catalogue on January 3, 1788.38
Later that same year, KV 533 was bound with the newly revised Rondo, KV 494 as a
single work and published by Hoffmeister in Vienna. The title on the publication read as
33
Hermann Abert, W.A. Mozart, 1783-1791, II, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Breitkopf and Härtel, 1956), p. 427, “Die
Ergänzung dieser Sätze zu einer vollständigen Sonate durch das Rondo K.-V. 494 stammt nicht von
Mozart.” The English translation is taken from Wolff, “Two Köchel Numbers, One Work,” pp. 187-188.
34
Wolff, “Two Köchel Numbers, One Work,” pp.185-195; see also, Christoph Wolff, “Musikalische
“Gedankenfolge” und “Einheit des Stoffes,”: Zu Mozarts Klaviersonate in F-Dur (K. 533+494),” in: Das
musikalische Kunstwerk: Geschichte, Ästhetik, Theorie — Festschrift Carl Dahlhaus zum 60. Geburtstag,
eds. by Hermann Danuser et al. (Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 1988), pp. 241-255.
35
Alexander Weinmann, Die Wiener Verlagswerke von Franz Anton Hoffmeister, Series [Reihe] 2, Nr.
[Folge] 8 of Beiträge zur Geschichte des Alt-Wiener Musikverlages, part of Wiener Urtext Ausgabe, ed. by
Karl Heinz Füssl and H.C. Robbins Landon (Vienna: Universal Edition, 1964); see also Appendix B.
36
Ibid., p. 84.
37
Otto Erich Deutsch, Musikverlagsnummern: Eine Auswahl von 40 datierten Listen, 1710-1900 (Berlin,
Merseburger, 1961), p. 14.
38
Neue Mozart Ausgabe x/33/1, fols 14v-15r.
39
follows: Sonata Pour le Fortepiano, ou Clavecin, Composé par Mr. W. A. Mozart au
Service de sa Majesté J [mperial]. et R [oyal]. à Vienne chez Hoffmeister.39
The title of this publication originates from the time when Mozart acquired his
new position as Kapellmeister of the Court of Joseph II on 6 December 1787, succeeding
Christoph Willibald Gluck (1714-1787).40 While in the employ of Joseph II, Mozart
completed the first two movements, KV 533, within the next two months. With regard to
the background of the Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Wolff convincingly suggests that
Mozart must have been in a big rush to prepare a full-fledged piece for the Emperor.
Hence, the composer started preparing a sonata with the first two movements, but then
was at a loss on how to proceed with the final movement.41 This “small” challenge
eventually led him to rework the pre-existing Rondo KV 494, which had not been
published by then, and the substantially revised Rondo became the third movement of the
sonata.42
Concerning both the autograph and the Hoffmeister edition of the Rondo, André’s
Thematisches Verzeichniss derjenigen Originalhandschriften von W. A. Mozart,
published in 1841,43 did not list either document.44 Furthermore, the 1862 version of
Köchel’s Thematic Catalogue does not include the autograph and the first edition. Until
39
This first printed edition was acquired from the Mozarteum in Salzburg, Austria by the author of this
thesis. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Sonate pour le Forte-Piano, ou Clavecin, au Service de sa Majesté J. et
R. (Vienna: Hoffmeister, 1788); see also, Gertraut Haberkamp, Die Erstdrucke der Werke von Wolfgang
Amadeus Mozart, 2 vols., Vol. 10 of Musikbibliographische Arbeiten (Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1986), p.
265.
40
Mozart’s letter to his sister saying “that His Majesty the Emperor has now taken me into his service will
probably be news to you. I am sure you will be pleased to hear it,” from: Mozart’s Letters, Mozart’s Life,
ed. and trans. by Robert Spaethling (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000), p. 396.
41
Wolff, “Musikalische ‘Gedankenfolge’ und ‘Einheit des Stoffes,’” pp. 241-255; see also Irving, Mozart’s
Piano Sonatas, p. 187.
42
Irving, Mozart’s Piano Sonatas, p. 84; see also Wolff, “Two Köchel Numbers, One Work,” p. 194.
43
Thematisches Verzeichnis derjenigen Originalhandschriften von W. A. Mozart geboren den 27. Januar
1756, gestorben den 5. Dezember 1791, welche Hofrath André in Offenbach a. M. besitzt, ed. by Heinrich
Henkel (Offenbach am Main: [Johann Anton André], 1841); see also Appendix B (Footnote 4).
44
Johann Anton André is the publisher in Offenbach who bought Mozart’s autograph of his thematic
catalogue, which listed all the compositions written between February 9, 1784 and November 15, 1791
from Constanze, and then André published this catalogue first in 1805 with the preface written by himself,
“It is most interesting to study his original scores, since one can best observe Mozart’s first inspiration, as
well as the further development of his ideas.” This quotation is taken from Erich Hertzmann, “Mozart’s
Creative Process,” in: The Creative World of Mozart, ed. by Paul Henry Lang (New York: W. W. Norton,
1963), pp. 17-18.
40
June of 1799, the autograph was in the hands of Constanze Mozart (1762-1842).45 Some
time before 1878, this autograph was passed to the violinist, Joseph Joachim (1831-
1907), through some unknown route. In 1878, Joachim handed over the copy of the
manuscript to Breitkopf and Härtel, the publisher in Leipzig, in anticipation of the
publication of the three-movement composition as part of the Mozart Gesamtausgabe.46
After this autograph had been in Joachim’s possession for several years, it was eventually
passed to the Wittgenstein family in Vienna around 1907, the year of Joachim’s death.
Since then, the specific records on the whereabouts of this autograph are lacking
including the period of World War II. Finally, only the autograph of KV 494 surfaced in
the collection of the American musicologist Felix Salzer (1904-1986) in New York.47
Mozart’s Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 undoubtedly stands out as an important
keyboard composition, and its uniqueness will be more specifically addressed through the
structural/musical analysis in this chapter.
3.2 Structural/Musical Analysis of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:

Studies in the Musical Text 48
3.2.1 The First Movement (Allegro) of KV 533/494
The opening Allegro from Mozart’s Keyboard Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,

is in sonata form, a musical form widely in use during the early Classical period, and
typically found in the first movement of multi-movement compositions such as sonatas,
45
Neumann and Schachter, “The two versions of Mozart’s Rondo, K 494,” p. 5; see also Cecil Bernard
Oldman, “Constanze Nissen: Four Unpublished Letters from Mozart’s Widow,” in: The Music Review 17
(February 1956), pp. 69-70.
46
Joseph Joachim, Revisionsbericht, Serie VIII, XIII-XXII: Verzeichniss der benutzten
Originalhandschriften (Leipzig: Breitkopf an Härtel, 1888).
47
A facsimile of the autograph for the Rondo is shown in the earlier part of this chapter. See Footnote 30.
48
The analytical observations on Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 are based on the First
Printed Edition [give information of this source]. For a modern critical edition of the musical text of
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, see Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, “Sonate in F: 1. und 2.
Satz = KV 533, 3. Satz = KV 494,” in: [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]. Klaviersonaten, Vol. 2, ed. by
Wolfgang Plath and Wolfgang Rehm as Werkgruppe 25 of [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]: Klaviermusik,
Series 9 of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Neue Ausgabe sämtlicher Werke, ed. by Internationale Stiftung
Mozarteum Salzburg in collaboration with the Mozart Cities [in Verbindung mit den Mozartstädten]
Augsburg, Salzburg, and Vienna, (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1986), pp. 98-121.
41
concertos, and symphonies.49 The first movement of KV 533/494 is comprised of three
main sections, namely, the exposition, the development, and the recapitulation, as shown
in Table 3.2.1.1:
49
For the historical overview and development of this form, see, for example, Vladimír Helfert, “Zur
Entwicklungsgeschichte der Sonatenform,” in: Archiv für Musikwissenschaft 7 (1925), pp. 117-146; see
also Charles Rosen, Sonata Forms (New York and London: W. W. Norton, 1988 is second edition of
1980); Leonard Ratner, Classic Music: Expression, Form, and Style (New York: Schirmer Books, 1980);
Charles Rosen, The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven (New York: W. W. Norton, 1997 is the
expanded version of New York: Viking Press, 1971); William. S. Newman, “The Recognition of Sonata
Form by Theorists of the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries,” in: Papers of American Musicological
Society (1941), pp. 21-29.
42
Table 3.2.1.1
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494: A Structural Overview of Allegro
Exposition Development // Recapitulation
(mm. 1-102) (mm. 103-145) (mm. 146-239)
First Bridge Second First Bridge Second
Group Group Group Group
(KA1) (KA2) (KA1) (KA2)
Theme 1 T 1' T 1" T 1"' Bridge Theme 2 Closing Retransition // Theme 1 Bridge Theme 2 Coda
Section50
F+ modulating ss 1 C+ ss 1 (c-) F+ non- F+ F+
(d- G+) ss 2 ss 2 (g-) modulating C+ as
ss 3 (d- A+) (f- V/F+
C+ ss 4 (d- g- C+ F+ C+) C+ as V/F+)
retransition (C+ 7th) //
I V V7 // I I V I
43
mm.1-8 mm. mm. mm. mm. mm. mm. m.103 mm. mm. mm. mm.
9-18 19-26 27-32 32-41 41-66 89-102 m.109 146-153 153-168 168-225 226-239
mm. m.116
66-88 m.125
m. 145 //
* KA: Key Area * ss: subsection * //: Interruption (Generalpause) * T: Theme
50
In the secondary literature pertaining to the structural analysis of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, the closing section of the exposition and of
the recapitulation are invariably designated as the coda; see F. Helena Marks, The Sonata Its Form and Meaning: As Exemplified in the Piano Sonatas by Mozart
– A Descriptive Analysis (London: William Reeves, [1921]), pp. 113-124. However, since the term, coda, used in connection with full-fledged sonata-form
movements, embracing exposition, development, recapitulation, and coda proper as well as on occasion, an introduction preceding the exposition proper, applies
to segments of considerable dimension, often with exposure of totally new materials therein not employed before, I consider it necessary to separate the coda
proper from segments of considerably smaller dimensions, of which the opening movement of KV 533/494 is a prime example.
43
As outlined in the table above, there are some intriguing issues to observe in this piece.
Theme 1 included in the larger thirty-two-measure segment, what some scholars have
called the first group51 or key area 1,52 in the exposition comprises thirty two measures,
which is unusually long for a Classical-era keyboard sonata.53 In sonata form movements
in general, the first group in tonic typically moves quickly on to the second group
because musical events of greater complexity are anticipated in the unfolding of Theme
2, and that soon after the completion of the first group. This particular movement of
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, then displays an unusual phenomenon,
whereby Mozart expands Theme 1 in the exposition to considerable dimensions, on the
whole unlike those found in the majority of his other keyboard sonatas.54 In the
recapitulation, this material from the exposition returns, albeit in a truncated form.
Mozart shortens the thirty-two-measure section of the first group in the exposition to the
more typical length of an eight-measure phrase (mm. 146-153). This distinction between
the first group of the exposition and that of the recapitulation gives the impression that
Mozart intended to place more weight on the former.
Mozart created this atypical length of the first group in the first movement of his
Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 by repeating the thematic and motivic materials
constantly in inverted forms (mm. 1-32). The manner of constructing the main theme and
its treatment in various types of contrapuntal combinations, such as exchanged imitations
between the two hands, shows the uniqueness of the piece Mozart created. This
composition certainly represents Mozart’s unusual use of the strict contrapuntal but non-
fugal form55 among his piano sonatas, and he brings the piece closest to such formal
51
For general discussion of the term “First Group” material, see, for example, James Webster, “Sonata
Form,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie (London:
MacMillan, 2001), Vol. 23, pp. 687-701, especially, pp. 688-690; see also Rosen, Sonata Forms, pp. 98-
106.
52
For general discussion of the term “Key Area,” see, for example, Ratner, Classic Music, pp. 217-247.
53
For general information on classical forms, see William E. Caplin, Classical Form, A Theory of Formal
Functions for the Instrumental Music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1998); Ratner, Classic Music.
54
Another exception is the first subject in the finale of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 332, in
which the first key area extends to 35 measures.
55
Wolff, “Two K. Numbers,” p. 194.
44
design in which the double counterpoint and canonic imitation are naturally
interspersed.56
The exposition of KV 533/494 has two themes ― Theme 1 in tonic, F Major,
eight measures, which serve as basis for the thematic/motivic development across thirty-
two measure first group and Theme 2 in the dominant, C Major, extending from the third
beat of measure 41 to the first beat of measure 88. Unlike Theme 1, Theme 2 is divided
into two clearly distinguished sub-sections of non-developmental character with the
presenting unrelated thematic materials in juxtaposition. Mozart places the modulating
bridge (mm. 32.4-41.1) between the two main themes in the exposition, and a closing
section (mm. 89.2-102) that includes the arpeggiated four-measure (mm. 99-102) passage
at the end of the exposition.57 In fact, Mozart resorts to this figure extensively in the
development section, for example, in the left hand of measure 104 and beyond. Mozart
uses the arpeggiated closing section commonly at the end of each major point of division,
that is, the exposition, the development, and the recapitulation, which renders a sense of
unity to these different sections of the movement,58 as shown in Example 3.2.1.1:
56
Further on these eighteenth-century contrapuntal practices in general, see Ebenezer Prout, Double
Counterpoint and Canon (as part of the series Augener's edition (New York: Greenwood Press, 1969 is
reprint of London: Augener, 1891); Charles Herbert Kitson, Invertible Counterpoint and Canon (London
and New York: Oxford University Press, 1970); Allen Irvine McHose, The Contrapuntal Harmonic
Technique of the 18th Century, part of Eastman School of Music Series (New York: F. S. Crofts, 1947);
Ernst Pepping, Übungen im doppelten Kontrapunkt und im Kanon, part of Der polyphone Satz (Berlin:
Walther de Gruyter, 1957); Klaus-Jürgen Sachs, “Contrapunctus/Kontrapunkt,” in: Handwörterbuch der
musikalischen Terminologie, ed. by Hans-Heinrich Eggebrecht (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1982);
Joel Lester, Compositional Theory in the Eighteenth Century (Cambridge, Massachusetts and London:
Harvard University Press, 1992).
57
Further on the coda in Mozart’s works in general, see Esther Cavett-Dunssy, “On Mozart’s Codas,” in:
Music Analysis 7 (1988), pp. 31-51; see also David H. Smyth, “Codas in Classical Form: Aspect of Large-
Scale Rhythm and Pattern Completion” (Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin,
1985).
58
The interpretation given here contradicts views expressed by Walter Georgii and by Joachim Brügge,
both of whom attribute an emptiness to the extended unison passage; see Walter Georgii, Klaviermusik
(Zürich: Atlantis-Verlag, 1950); Joachim Brügge, “Solowerke für Klavier: Von der ‘Lehrbuch’-Sonate zur
Intertextualität,” in: Mozarts Klavier- und Kammermusik, ed. by Matthias Schmidt as Vol. 2 of Das
Mozart-Handbuch, ed. by Gernot Gruber in Verbindung mit [in collaboration with] Dieter Borchmeyer
(Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 2006), pp. 121-122; see also Armin Raab, Funktionen des Unisono: Dargestellt an
den Streichquartetten und Messen von Joseph Haydn (Frankfurt am Main: Haag and Herchen, 1990).
45
[?]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.1.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Exposition,
mm. 99-102
[?]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.1.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,

Development, mm. 142-145
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.1.c Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,

Recapitulation, mm. 236-239
46
In the opening of the exposition, Mozart expands the first eight-measure statement
of Theme 1 embracing the antecedent-consequent phrase structure,59 an organizational
hallmark of the eighteenth-century Taktordnungen, to use a term from the contemporary
music theoretical discourse of Joseph Riepel (1709-1782)60 and Heinrich Christoph Koch
(1749-1816).61 Mozart achieves this expansion by inverting the voices at measure 9,
when the left hand replays the melodic statement and further after, reflecting on the
compositional technique of the Fortspinnung, prevalent in eighteenth-century
59
On the significance of this symmetrical construction of phrases in the context of sonata-form movements,
see Wolfgang Budday, Grundlagen musikalischer Formen der Wiener Klassik: An Hand der
zeitgenössischen Theorie von Joseph Riepel and Heinrich Christoph Koch dargestellt an Menuetten und
Sonatensätzen (1750-1790) (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1983), pp. 91 ff.
60
Joseph Riepel, Anfangsgründe zur musicalischen Setzkunst, nicht zwar nach altmathematischer
Einbildungs-Art der Zirkel-harmonisten sondern durchgehends mit sichtbaren Exempeln abgefasset, 10
vols. (Regensburg et al., 1752-1786), Vol. 1 (De rhythmopoeia, oder Von der Tactordnung; Regensburg
and Vienna, 1752); Vol. 2 (Grundregeln zur Tonordnung insgemein; Frankfurt am Main and Leipzig,
1755). For a modern edition, see Thomas Emmerig, ed. Joseph Riepel: Sämtliche Schriften zur
Musiktheorie, 2 vols., Vol. 20 of Wiener Musikwissenschaftliche Beiträge (Vienna: Böhlau, 1996). Further
on Riepel’s Taktordnungen, see Ernst Schwarzmaier, Die Takt-und Tonordnung Joseph Riepels: Ein
Beitrag zur Geschichte der Formenlehre im 18. Jahrhundert, Vol. 4 of Regensburger Beiträge zur
Musikwissenschaft, ed. by Hermann Beck (Regensburg: Gustav Bosse, 1938); John Walter Hill, “The Logic
of Phrase Structure in Joseph Riepel’s Anfangsgründe zur musicalischen Setzkunst,” Part 2 (1750), in:
Festa Musicologica: Essays in Honor of George J. Buelow, ed. by Thomas J. Mathiesen and Benito V.
Rivera as Vol. 14 of Festschrift Series (Stuyvesant, New York: Pendragon Press, 1995), pp. 467-487; see
also Nola Jane Reed, “The Theories of Joseph Riepel as Expressed in His Anfangsgründe zur
musicalischen Setzkunst (1752-1768)” (Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Rochester, 1983);
Justin M. London, “Riepel and Absatz: Poetic and Prosaic Aspects of Phrase Structure in Eighteenth-
Century Theory,” in: The Journal of Musicology: A Quarterly Review of Music history, Criticism, Analysis,
and Performance Practices 8 (1990), pp. 505-519. In fact, this treatise of Riepel in all likelihood served
young Mozart as a pedagogical tool for his own musical instruction supervised by his father, Leopold; see
Walter Kreyszig,, “Das Menuett W. A. Mozarts unter dem Einfluß von F. J. Haydns ‘gantz neue besondere
art’: Zur Phrasenstruktur in den Menuetten der ‘Haydn-Quartette’,” in: Bericht über den Internationalen
Mozart-Kongress Salzburg 1991, 2 vols. ed. by Rudolph Angermüller et al. as Mozart-Jahrbuch 1991
(Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum), (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1991), Vol. 2, p. 656; Walter Kreyszig,
“Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Motivische Arbeit: Aspects of Sonata Form in the Minuets of KV 421
(=417b) and KV 458 and Their Relationship to the Scherzi of Joseph Haydn’s opus 33,” in: Essays by
Alumnae and Alumni of the Don Wright Faculty of Music, University of Western Ontario, ed. by James
Grier as Vols. 19-20 (2000-2001) of Studies in Music from the University of Western Ontario (London,
Ontario: University of Western Ontario, 2006), pp. 204-205 and p. 236.
61
Heinrich Christoph Koch, Versuch einer Anleitung zur Composition, 3 vols. (Leipzig: Bey A. F. Böhme,
1782-1793). For an English translation, see Nancy Kovaleff Baker, trans. with introduction and
annotations, Heinrich Christoph Koch: Introductory Essay on Composition, part of Music Theory
Translation Series, ed. by Claude V. Palisca (New Haven, Connecticut and London: Yale University Press,
1983); see also Stephan Maulbetsch, “Die Kunst, Töne zu verbinden: Heinrich Christoph Koch als
Komponist und Theoretiker,” in: Mozart-Studien, ed. by Manfred Hermann Schmid, Vol. 12 (Tutzing:
Hans Schneider, 2003), pp. 217-277.
47
compositional practice.62 Example 3.2.1.2 shows the opening of the exposition, including
the initial eight-measure phrase and the location where the voices invert:
Example 3.2.1.2 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 1-15
After measure 8, the passage is extended via fantasy-like figurations, octave leaps, and
contrapuntal texture, in different manners using invertible counterpoint and parallelism.
The textural inversion, the action of changing the voices becomes a motivic tool for
Mozart throughout the movement. The practice of contrapuntal inversion was widely
employed in the Baroque period63 and is likely the source of Mozart’s inspiration in this
particular piece. His use of Baroque procedures in this sonata not only relates to
invertible counterpoint but presumably also to his ultimate objective, the “Fantasia”
effect.64 In the Baroque era, the fantasy is typically considered a keyboard piece with
alternating sections of rapid passages or fugal texture deeply rooted in the art of
improvisation.65 Thus, it is clear that Mozart continues this Baroque concept of the
62
Kreyszig, “Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Motivische Arbeit,” p. 213; see also Wilhelm Fischer, “Zur
Entwicklungsgeschichte des Wiener Klassischen Stils,” Habilitationsschrift, (University of Vienna, 1915);
excerpt published in Studien zur Musikwissenschaft 3 (1915), pp. 24-84.
63
Further on the multifaceted approach to this practice in the Baroque period, see, for example, Laurence
Dreyfus, Bach and the Patterns of Invention (Cambridge, Massachusetts and London: Harvard University
Press, 1996).
64
Christopher D. S. Field, et al. “Fantasia,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29
vols, ed. by Stanley Sadie (London: Macmillan, 2001), Vol. 8, pp. 545-558; see also Walter Kreyszig, “Der
Begriff der Fantasie bei Mozart und dessen Beeinflussung durch Sonate, Praeludium und Toccata: Zur
Wechselbeziehung zwischen Satztechnik und Gattung in der c-Moll-Fantasie KV 475,” in: Internaionaler
Musikwissenschaftlicher Kongress zum Mozartjahr 1991, Baden-Vienna, 2-7 December 1991: Bericht. 2
vols., ed. by Ingrid Fuchs (Tutzing, Germany: Hans Schneider, 1993), Vol. 2, pp. 693-715.
65
On the significance of improvisation in the context of fugal texture, see, for example, Willi Apel,
Geschichte der Orgel- und Klaviermusik bis 1700 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1967); also in English translation
by Hans Tischler as Willi Apel, The History of Keyboard Music to 1700 (Bloomington, Indiana and
London: Indiana University Press, 1972); see also the collection of essays in Keyboard Music Before 1700,
48
fantasy in his own sonata.66 As shown in Example 3.2.1.3, Mozart’s effort to broaden the
first statement of the exposition is solidified with parallelism in measures 16 and 17, and
with an unexpected seventh chord (V7 of V) at measure 22 — what appears to be a
delaying tactic, that would have been predicted to resolve to the tonic via the dominant,
but surprisingly points towards the bridge section. In fact, the sections from measures 22
to 24 suggest Mozart’s reliance on invertible counterpoint in the tonic:
The bridging process is a typical appearance in sonata-form movements, and in

this particular sonata the bridge begins in the second half of measure 32. In the exposition
of KV 533/494, the bridge spans nine measures only, moving from D minor to G Major,
then creates the expectation of C minor (mm. 37-38) and finally reaches the dominant of
C Major, leading to Theme 2, which starts on the second beat of measure 41. Theme 2 is
now clearly in C Major, the dominant of the home key, F Major, thereby briefly touching
on D minor (subtonic of C Major). Mozart concludes the exposition by featuring the
arpeggiated closing section, which lasts for fourteen measures (mm. 89-102), at the end
after Theme 2.
At the opening of the development (m. 103), Mozart changes the key from C
Major to its parallel minor, C minor. Starting with this sudden change of mood, he
ed. by Alexander Silbiger as part of Studies in Musical Genres and Repertories, ed. by R. Larry Todd (New
York: Schirmer Books and London: Prentice Hall International, 1995).
66
Further on improvisation in Mozart’s works, see, for example, Frederick Neumann, Ornamentation and
Improvisation in Mozart (Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1986), pp. 179-281.
49
continues to vary the keys in a circle of fifth.67 Mozart changes the initial C minor to G
minor at measure 108, and then proceeds from G minor to D minor at measure 115,
where he now oscillates between D minor and its dominant, A Major, until measure 125.
Then, Mozart’s adventure to find his ways back to the home key continues again with a
circle of fifth beginning in A Major in measure 125. From here on, the change of keys
occurs at shorter distances (See Table 3.2.2.1). At measure 115, the augmented chord
(Italian sixth) and the repeated V – I progressions strengthen the harmonic context in D
minor, which Mozart maintains for a longer segment embracing measures 114 – 119. The
development section overall appears to unfold in the idiom of the style galant68 with the
adherence to a more or less strict tactus, suggestive of late Baroque practices, albeit
leaving some room for freedom of expression.69 The earlier mentioned four-measure
arpeggio occurs again in the middle of the development (mm. 122-125), where the
arpeggiated section divides the first and the second subjects. Then, another arpeggiated
motion closes the development section, extending from measure 142 to the fourth beat of
measure 145 before returning to the recapitulation.70 This simple arpeggiated figures of
the closing section (mm. 99-102) may appear as insignificant on first inspection, as
Mozart from the opening up to this point (mm. 1-98) has displayed a plethora of thematic
materials with recourse to a vast array of compositional techniques already disclosed.
However, it seems that Mozart places this closing section purposely, thereby
foreshadowing the continuation of this figuration, initially in the left hand (mm. 104 –
106) and subsequently in the right hand (mm. 107-108). The continuation of this pattern
interchanges between hands throughout the extended section of the development (mm.
110- 119), which eventually leads to another closing section of the development.
67
For additional information on the minor mode used in sonata form, particularly during the eighteenth
century, see Rey M. Longyear, “The Minor Mode in Eighteenth Century Sonata Form,” in: Journal of
Music Theory 15 (1971), pp. 182-229.
68
On the style galant, see, for example, Lothar Hoffmann-Erbrecht, “Der ‘galante Stil’ in der Musik des 18.
Jahrhunderts,” in: Studien zur Musikwissenschaft 25 (1962), pp. 252-260; David A. Sheldon, “The Galant
Style Revisited and Re-Evaluated,” in: Acta Musicologica 47 (1975), pp. 240-270; David A. Sheldon, “The
Concept Galant in the Eighteenth Century,” in: Journal of Musicological Research 9 (1989), pp. 89-108.
69
On the juxtaposition of the stricter style galant and the free counterpoint, see, for example, Carl
Dahlhaus, “Galanter Stil und freier Satz,” in: Die Musik des 18. Jahrhunderts, ed. by Carl Dahlhaus as Vol.
5 (1985) of Neues Handbuch der Musikwissenschaft, 11 vols., ed. by Carl Dahlhaus, fortgeführt von
[continued by] Hermann Danuser (Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 1980-1992), pp. 24-32.
70
A more detailed description for the development section will follow after the explanation of the
recapitulation section in this present study.
50
At measure 145, this development section comes to a momentary point of repose,
but then carries on quickly to the recapitulation, where the music restarts in the exact
same way as the very first measure at the opening of the movement, so that Mozart here
momentarily points the listener with a déjà vu to the opening of the exposition. In fact,
here, the recapitulation is a reiteration of merely a small segment of the exposition. As
briefly mentioned, Mozart shortens Theme 1 to only eight measures in the recapitulation
and then begins Theme 2 on the third beat of measure 168, as shown in Example 3.2.1.4.
The recapitulation of the first movement in KV 533/494 lasts for ninety-three measures,
having two themes joined by the bridge, yet under a single tonality, namely, the home
key, as is common in the recapitulations of sonata form. In view of the fact that the
bridge between the two themes in the recapitulation of sonata-form movements generally
is accorded merely a thematic function with no harmonic role, Mozart, in the opening
movement of the Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, proceeds in a most unusual
manner. He associates the bridge between the respective themes of the recapitulation with
the key of F minor, purposefully altering the harmonic context in order to set the opening
of Theme 2 distinctly apart from that of Theme 1, with a brief recourse to the isolated C
Major cadence in measure 168, which immediately reverts to F Major. This is all
accomplished in the absence of any modulation. While the tonic/dominant polarity
characteristic of exposition in sonata-form movements is effaced in the recapitulation as a
rule, in the opening movement of KV 533/494, Mozart, in his most unusual treatment of
the harmonic language, seems interested in setting up a harmonic situation that has a
parallel to the point of incision between exposition and development, which changes the
key from C Major to C minor.
51
After the first part of Theme 2, which is stated in the tonic, the second part of
Theme 2 leads to the closing section in which F Major returns as the tonic. Here again,
Mozart finishes the recapitulation of the first movement with the closing section,
including the four-measure arpeggio (mm. 236-239). In view of the fact that the tonic-
dominant polarity — typical of the exposition in eighteenth-century sonata form
movements — is effaced in the recapitulation (again a normal procedure), the bridge
section in the recapitulation obviously fulfils a purpose distinctly different from that in
the exposition. The bridge of the recapitulation in its prominent reliance on chromaticism
mirrors the related segment in the exposition, however obviously without fulfilling the
harmonic function assigned to the bridge section of exposition. As illustrated in the table
3.2.1.1, Mozart also retains the closing section including the four-measure arpeggio, first
heard in the exposition (mm.99-102), at the end of the recapitulation (mm.236-239).
Example 3.2.1.5 shows the bridges in both the exposition and the recapitulation of this
sonata.
Example 3.2.1.5.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Exposition,

mm. 32-41
52
Example 3.2.1.5.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,
Recapitulation, mm. 154-168
While the exposition and recapitulation convey a similar musical structure, the
development section, departing distinctly from the main theme, consists of musical
material, some of which is presented in a different guise.71 In general, the development
section of sonata-form movements is not stable because its function is to destabilize key
area 2 of the exposition and eventually to transition back to the home key.72 As a result,
the development closes with the critical cadential dominant of the home key. Chord V at
the end of the development represents the “retransition,”73 which signals the arrival of the
cadential dominant of the home key. So, in this particular piece, the critical cadential
dominant is C Major as V of F Major. This cadential dominant is expected to finish the
piece by moving into the final tonic, but instead the initial tonic revisits after the
interruption (Generalpause).
The unusually complex intriguing harmonic structure of the development was first
noticed by the German music theorist and pedagogue, Ernst Friedrich Richter (1808-
1879), who, in his description of the sonata-allegro form,74 proposed a two-part structure
of the development, with the first part consisting of modulating periods that closes with a
71
See Footnote 49 of this chapter.
72
David Bushler, “Harmonic Structure in Mozart’s Sonata-Form Developments,” in: Mozart Jahrbuch
1984/85, pp. 15-24; see also Rosen, Sonata Forms, pp. 262-283.
73
Further on this topic, see Beth Shamgar, “On Locating the Retransition in Classic Sonata Form,” in: The
Music Review 42 (1981), pp. 130-143; Sarah Davis, “H.C. Koch, the Classic Concerto, and the Sonata-
Form Retransition,” in The Journal of Musicology: A Quarterly Review of Music History, Criticism,
Analysis, and Performance Practice 2 (1983), pp. 45-61.
74
Ernst Friedrich Richter, Die Grundzüge der musikalischen Formen und ihre Analyse (Leipzig: Verlag
von Georg Wigand, 1852), pp. 26-39.
53
half cadence in a related minor key, and with the second part comprising a retransition to
the repetition of the principal theme of the movement, which is achieved through the
dominant of the home key. Richter’s observations here find full confirmation in the
development of the opening movement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV
533/494, with the two parts clearly delineated in the tonal plan — the first segment in C
minor coming to a halt on the half cadence on the III #, that is, A Major (V of vi) in
measure 116 with its extension through measure 125, and the second segment moving
sequentially to the dominant with its prolongation for several measures prior to the return
to the tonic (m. 146).75 Richter, though the first nineteenth-century theorist to recognize
the third relation, provided impetus to twentieth-century scholarship, with both David
Beach and Joseph C. Kraus formulating their observations as an obvious continuation of
Richter’s earlier deliberations.76 While both Beach and Kraus, in their respective
writings, point to the important third relation as a principal harmonic frame for the
development of the opening movement of KV 533/494, Mozart’s minute attention to
detail warrants a more careful scrutiny of the development, as discussed below.
As shown in the Table 3.2.1.1 earlier, different subsections are found in the
development and each subsection presents different musical statements that are usually
identified by various musical materials, such as key, rhythm, dynamic, or changes in
mood. In the development of the opening movement of KV 533/494, four separate
subsections are present, which unmistakably embrace stylistic tenets of the style galant.
The first subsection begins in measure 103 in C minor and gives way to the second
subsection at measure 109 where the key changes to G minor. Mozart starts the third
subsection at measure 116, where the D minor sonority (begun at measure 114) is still
present. The fourth subsection starts at measure 125 where Mozart retraces his path back
to stability via the keys through which he had previously travelled. The move back to C
Major occurs quickly, starting with D minor (vi of F) for two measures and then
75
While Richter argues in favor of A Major as the stronger third relation, one might assign this position of
preeminence to D minor. I am grateful to Professor Solose for her observation.
76
David Beach, “A Recurring Pattern in Mozart’s Music,” in: Journal of Music Theory 27/1 (Spring 1983),
pp. 1-29; Joseph C. Kraus, “Chromatic Third Relations in Mozart’s Late Instrumental Works,” in: Bericht
über den Internationalen Mozart-Kongreß Salzburg 1991, 2 vols., ed. by Rudolph Angermüller et al. as
Mozart-Jahrbuch 1991 (Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum). (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1992), Vol. 2, pp. 1056-
1065.
54
progressing to G minor (ii of F) for another two measures. C Major (V of F) comes in
immediately from measure 129 and maintains the sonority until the conclusion of the
development, with exception of a brief passing through F Major and Bb Major (mm. 132-
134). Example 3.2.1.6 shows the beginning of these subsections in the development:
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.6.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, First
Subsection, mm. 103-104
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.6.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Second
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.6.c Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Third
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.6.d Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Fourth
55
Regarding the stylistic components in the first movement of KV 533/494, Mozart
showcases two distinct features, namely, the style galant, which replaces Mozart’s earlier
more prominent reliance on the learned counterpoint,77 as most elegantly illustrated in the
Concerto for Piano and Orchestra in D Major, KV 175,78 and the linear counterpoint.
His use of the eighth-note triplet rhythmic patterns throughout the movement gives a
sense of a simple musical style with an overall steady harmonic rhythm from the
eighteenth century Mannheim court, where Mozart had come in contact with the tradition
of the style galant.79 The regularity between rhythm and rest generates the symmetry,
which is shown particularly in the development section. For example, Mozart inserts the
quarter rest at the third beat in the upper line consistently across three measures (mm.
104-106), while the bottom line continues the restless rhythmic pattern, somewhat
reminiscent of the gigue. Then, he reverses the roles between two hands so that the left
hand plays each measure with the quarter rest on the third beat, while the right hand takes
over the triplet rhythmic pattern (mm. 110-112):
77
On this shift in compositional paradigms, see Ludwig Finscher, “Galanter und gelehrter Stil: Der
kompositionsgeschichtliche Wandel im 18. Jahrhundert,” in Funkkolleg Musikgeschichte:
Studienbegleitbrief 6, ed. by Deutsches Institut für Fernstudien an der Universität Tübingen (Weinheim:
Beltz, 1988), pp. 141-196; see also V. Kofi Agawu, Playing with Signs: A Semiotic Interpretation of
Classic Music (Princeton, New Jersey and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 1991), pp. 90-91.
78
On the synthesis of learned counterpoint and style galant in KV 175, see Bernd Sponheuer, “Zum
Problem des doppelten Finales in Mozarts ‘erstem’ Klavierkonzert KV 175: Zwei Versuche der
Synthetisierung von ‘Gelehrtem’ und ‘Galantem’,” in: Archiv für Musikwissenschaft 42 (1985), pp. 102-
120.
79
On Mozart’s sojourn in Mannheim, beginning 14 July 1763 and ending 25 October 1790, see Luwig
Schiedermair, “Mozart und die Gegenwart,” in: Neues Mozart-Jahrbuch 1 (1941), pp. 24-38, especially pp.
25-27; 176 Tage W.A. Mozart in Mannheim, ed. by Karin v. Welck and Liselotte Homering (Mannheim:
Reiß-Museum der Stadt Mannheim and Edition Braus, [1991]); see also Herbert Meyer, Mozart und
Mannheim: Ausstellung des Städtisches. Reiss-Museums, Mannheim, 27. Nov. 1971-12. März 1972
(Mannheim: Städtisches Reiss-Museum, 1971); Roland Würtz and Hans Budian, “Mozart und Mannheim:
Eine Bibliographie,” in: Das Mannheimer Mozart-Buch, in commission of [im Auftrag der]
Mozartgemeinde Mannheim-Ludwigshafen-Heildelberg, ed. by Roland Würtz as Vol. 47 of Taschenbücher
zur Musikwissenschaft (Wilhelmshaven: Heirnichshofen, 1977), pp. 275-304. Many of Mozart’s Mannheim
works, including his Piano Sonata in C-Major, KV 309 and his Piano Sonata in D-Major, KV 311, are
written under the influence of the stile galant. Further on Mozart’s Mannheim repertory, see Ludwig
Finscher, “Mozarts Mannheimer Kompositionen,” in: ibid., pp. 140-151. Beyond that, the symphonic style
cultivated at the Court in Mannheim was characterized by a prominent reliance on the stile galant; see
Eugene K. Wolf, “Zur Enstehungsgeschichte des Mannheiner sinfonsichen Stiles,” in: Mannheim und
Italien: Zur Vorgeschichte der Mannheimer ― Bericht über das Mannheimer Kolloquium im März 1982,
ed. in commission by [im Auftrag der] Mozartgemeinde Kurfpalz by Roland Würtz as Vol. 25 of Beiträge
zur Mittelrheinischen Musikgeschichte (Mainz and New York: Schott, 1984).
56
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.7.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 104-106
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.7.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 110-112
Another important stylistic feature in this movement is the linear counterpoint

combined with chromatic inflection, which is reflected in several locations, among which
measure 115 stands out as an intriguing moment; here a dual message is delivered, due to
the single appearance. The i – V progression in D minor is underscored by the voice-
leading — with the first note of each triplet figure in the left hand mirroring the stepwise
descent of the “soprano voice” of the right hand progressing in parallel tenth with an
augmented sixth chord (Italian sixth) interspersed prior to the arrival on the dominant
chord with the raised third,80 which leads directly from the minor mode to the major
mode in the following measure (m. 116), while the section is still prominent for its style
galant as Mozart continues the earlier rhythmic pattern.
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.1.8 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV533/494, Allegro, mm. 115-116
80
I am grateful to Dr. Marion for this observation.
57
In measures 127 and 131, Mozart provides a chromatic line in the alto voice, but played
simultaneously with the soprano voice, which moves by step. As a result, sudden and
dense chromatic lines are created. In the latter example, Mozart in fact continues the
chromatic line into the next measure (m. 132).
[G]
[G]
Example 3.2.1.9.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 127
[G]
[G]
Example 3.2.1.9.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 131-132
From measure 159 to measure 160, the linear motion takes place in the top voice, where
the long notes (half notes) move against eight-note figurations in the left hand, as shown
in Example 3.2.1.10.
[G]
[?]
58
3.2.2 The Second Movement (Andante) of KV 533/494
Written in B-flat Major, the subdominant key of F Major, the second movement
of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 is also in sonata form. While
composers of eighteenth-century classical sonatas often resort to forms other than sonata
form for the second movement, such as Minuet and Trio as ternary form81 and rondo
form,82 Mozart in his keyboard oeuvre considers the sonata form at par with the other
forms found in second movements of sonatas. In fact, among his eighteen keyboard
sonatas, Mozart used the sonata form or modified sonata form in the slow movement of
eight sonatas.83 As typical of the sonata form, this slow movement comprises of three
different sections, namely, the exposition, development, and recapitulation, as shown in
Table 3.2.2.1:
81
See, for example, Mozart’s Piano Sonata in Eb Major, KV 282 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973),
Vol. 1, pp. 40-46; Piano Sonata in C Major, KV 309 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 1, pp.
79-95; Piano Sonata in C Major, KV 330 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 2, pp. 1-13; Piano
Sonata in A Major, KV 331 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 2, pp. 14-27.
82
See, for example, Mozart’s Sonata in D Major, KV 284 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 1,
pp. 59-78; Sonata in D Major, KV 311 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 1, pp. 96-113; Sonata
in C minor, KV 457 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 2, pp. 75-91; Sonata in Bb Major, KV
570 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 2, pp. 120-132.
83
See his Sonata in C Major, KV 279 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 1, pp. 1-13; Sonata in F
Major, KV 280 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 1, pp. 14-25; Sonata in Bb Major, KV 281
(Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 1, pp. 26-39; Sonata in G Major, KV 283 (Vienna: Wiener
Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 1, pp. 47-58; Sonata in A minor, KV 310 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition,
1973), Vol. 1, pp. 114-130; Sonata in F Major, KV 332 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 2, pp.
28-46; Sonata in Bb Major, KV 333 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 2, pp. 47-65; Sonata in F
Major, KV 533/494 (Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973), Vol. 2, pp. 92-109.
59
Table 3.2.2.1
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494: A Structural Overview of Andante
Exposition Development // Recapitulation
(mm. 1-46) (mm. 47-72) (mm. 73-122)
First Bridge Second Retransition // First Bridge Second Co-
Group (Transition) Group Group Group detta
(KA 1) (KA 2) (KA 1) (KA 2)
Bb+ Modulating F+ ss 1 (F+ modulating Bb+ modulating Bb+ Bb+
(via G- ss 1 via mostly in minor
(via C- F+ as
ending on a modes and finishing on
ss 2 ending on a V/Bb+
half-cadence an inverted cadence in
half-cadence
in F+) A+)
in Bb+)
ss 2 (D- modulating via
various keys)
retransition (F+ 7th) //
I V V7 // I I V I
mm. mm.19-22 mm. mm. 47-59 mm. mm. 87-90 mm. mm.
1-18 23-33 mm. 60-72 // 73-86 91-114 114 -
mm. 122
33-46
*ss: subsection * //: Interruption (Generalpause)
In the exposition of the second movement, Mozart presents two different themes,
the first in tonic, Bb Major (mm. 1-18) and the second in dominant, F Major (mm. 23-46).
In the first group with its pronounced opening embracing a neighbouring-note figure (m.
1), which skips down to the tritone, a rather remarkable progression in an otherwise
diatonic context (m. 2) appears as a motivic gesture played by the right hand, while a
similar motion occurs in the second group with the return to the characteristic gesture in
the bass line, here leaping down to the interval of a perfect fourth (mm. 23-24), then the
diminished fifth. This motivic gesture in the second group is played three times by the
left hand as a continuous pattern, but with the difference that the final note of each
pattern maintains C as the bass, suggesting a point of repose. Also, the beginning note of
the individual pattern steps upward each time, starting on F and landing on A for the third
occurrence. Example 3.2.2.1 shows the initial motivic gesture in the first theme (a) and
the following imitative motives in the second theme (b):
60
Example 3.2.2.1.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm. 1-2
[G]
Example 3.2.2.1.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm. 23-28
Between the two themes in the exposition of this second movement Mozart inserts a
relatively short bridge from measure 19 to measure 22, where the right hand plays the
running figures in a downward motion over the seventh chord. This bridge section is
presented as a series of sequences with quick tonicization through G minor, and the
modulation ends with a half cadence in F Major before the second theme starts.
The second group in the exposition from the second movement is divisible into
two separate sections presenting different subjects (See Table 3.2.2.1). The first section
of the second group is mainly based on the first group. A distinctive characteristic here is
the use of the series of chromatic chords and foray into Eb minor, spanning measures 28-
30, in which the last chord finally resolves on F Major, as a first inversion of the chord, at
measure 31. Example 3.2.2.2 shows the series of chromatic chords with its resolution:
61
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.2.2 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm. 28-31
The second section of the second group presents a new subject, which is carried
over a pedal point on F. Mozart then prepares dramatically via a Neapolitan sixth chord
(N6) for the F minor chord (m. 38) — which lends a most astonishing and moving effect
to this passage.84 Subsequently, he moves to an Ab Major chord (m. 40), before finishing
the section in the tonic, F Major (V of the home key, Bb Major), as shown in Example
3.2.2.3:
[G]
[?]
At the opening of the development section of the second movement (m. 47),
Mozart restates the motive from the earlier neighbour-note gestures (m. 1 and m. 23),
leading into the Fantasia-like segments (also observed in the development section of the
first movement), which recur after each statement of the neighbour-note figure (mm. 47-
54). Here, the left hand opens the section, which recalls the beginning of Theme 2 in the
exposition, but this time, placed within an octave gesture instead of occurring on a single
voice. The right hand sounds more elaborate because of the running sixteenth-note
figures in triplet motion, compared to that in Theme 2 of the exposition, where each
running sixteenth pattern mostly starts with a sixteenth rest and then is played in duple
rhythm. After four measures of the opening part in this second movement, both parts are
inverted at measure 51 so that the left hand now plays the sixteenth-note triplet running
figures at measure 52. This type of inversion between the two hands continues at
measures 55 and 57.
84
I am grateful to Professor Solose for her observation.
62
[G]
[?]
The development section starts in the dominant key of Bb Major, that is, F Major,
but Mozart quickly moves through several different key areas, namely, D minor, Bb
Major, G minor, C minor, D minor, and G minor. This “tonal journey” finally ends the
first subsection of the development on the first inversion of the A Major chord at the first
beat of measure 59, underscoring the key of D minor, before the next sequential passage
starts on the third beat of the same measure. This next subsection also recalls the opening
of the movement in its motivic gesture (m. 5). Here, the first note played in octaves
moves down by the interval of a major third, and then immediately reverts back to an
ascending stepwise motion, still in parallel octaves. In both the exposition and the
development, this sequential pattern occurs in various forms, such as in its sixths, thirds,
and octaves. However, alternating the patterns between hands in the development (mm.
47-72) is a distinctive characteristic that differs from the first group of the exposition
where only the right hand articulates the melodic sequence (mm. 1-18). Example 3.2.2.5
shows the two different moments from both the exposition and the development as
described above:
63
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.2.5.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, Exposition,
mm. 5-8
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.2.5.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante,

Development, mm. 59-70
In the second subsection of the development, Mozart, in the context of intense

chromaticism and upward surge of the melodic gesture, again moves freely and quickly
through various keys, namely, G minor, Bb Major, C minor, Eb Major, F Major, and G
minor. In the process of tonicization, the major keys, namely, Bb Major, Eb Major, and F
Major, are the dominant seventh, and Mozart finishes this second subsection on the
dominant seventh of Bb Major, which is the main key of the recapitulation starting at
measure 73.
The recapitulation of the second movement of KV 533/494 includes two themes,
mirroring the exposition, although, within the context of sonata-form structure,
differences are expected and given, similar to those observed in the first movement of the
sonata. Theme 1 of the exposition is truncated in the opening of the recapitulation,
64
namely, from the original eighteen measures to merely ten measures, giving rise to the
sudden appearance of a new passage (m. 82, beat 3 – m. 86) prior to the bridge section
(m. 87). In the recapitulation, Mozart borrows the motive of the sixteenth-note triplet
figuration of the development section of this movement and inserts the passage prior to
the bridge of the recapitulation, as shown in Example 3.2.2.6:
Within the second group of the recapitulation, Theme 1, taken from the beginning
portion of Theme 2 in the exposition, appears as an inverted form between the hands, so
that now the right hand carries the neighbouring gesture first in the higher register (mm.
91-94), followed by the sixteenth-note running figures in the left hand. Theme 2 is also
taken from Theme 2 in the exposition, but the second portion of it played in the right
hand. At the end of the recapitulation, Mozart adds a codetta (mm. 114-122), comprised
of a short series of cadential interruptions, the first of which proceeds by means of a
deceptive cadence, ending on G minor (vi of Bb Major, m. 117) after a three-measure
phrase (mm. 114-116). Then, the second cadential interruption takes place after another
three-measure phrase, but this time, Mozart extends it by adding arpeggiated sixteenth-
note figures across two measures before drawing the movement to a close. Here, the
arpeggiated ending is a reminder of the similar gestures at the ends of each section in the
first movement of this sonata. Example 3.2.2.7 reproduces the codetta section with the
double bar and repeat at the end of the entire second movement:
65
[G]
[?]
Example 3.2.2.7 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, Codetta, mm.
114-122
From a stylistic point of view, this second movement is more freely laid out than
the first movement, in which the metrical patterns are more prominent. Especially in the
second movement, Mozart’s display of more diverse rhythms and diminutions reflects the
fantasy-like quality. Compared to the first movement in which the rhythmically gigue-
like features are suggestive of the style galant, this freely written second movement is
suggestive of the Empfindsamer Stil.
3.2.3 The Third Movement (Rondo) of KV 533/494
The third movement, entitled Rondo, is written as an Allegretto, in the key of F

Major, resorting to the same key as in the first movement. As Mozart originally intended,
this piece follows a rondo form.85 As reflected in Table 3.2.3.1, this Rondo movement
opens with the initial refrain extending fifty measures. This lengthy opening refrain
recalls the lengthy theme at the beginning of the first movement of KV 533/494. In fact,
this unusual structural disposition of the principal theme, respectively, in the first and last
85
On the manifold approach to the rondo form, see, for example, Joel Galand, “Form, Genre, and Style in
the Eighteenth-Century Rondo,” in: Music Theory Spectrum 17 (1995), pp. 27-52; see also Malcolm S.
Cole, “Sonata-Rondo, the Formulation of a Theoretical Concept in the 18th and 19th Centuries,” in: The
Musical Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 2 (April 1969), pp. 180-192.
66
movements of this sonata, provides a convincing argument in favour of the overriding
unity between KV 533 and KV 494 (with diverging opinions mentioned earlier in this
chapter).86
Table 3.2.3.1
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegretto: A Structural Overview of Rondo
A B A' C A'' D
mm. 1-50 mm. 51-82 mm.83-94 mm. 95-116 mm.117-119 mm.120-151 mm.152-187
Refrain Episode 1 Refrain Episode 2 Link Refrain Coda
(Ternary (First 12 (Ternary “Maggiore” (Partial
Form ) measures Form) reappearance
only) “Minore” only)
Part 1: Part 1: Part 1: leading to the (a) repetition (a) Cadenza
melody melody in F minor and third entry of of Part 1 with (mm.
in F Major in D minor Ab Major with the refrain slight variation 152-169)
(mm.1-12) (mm. 51-67) double bar and (mm. 120-129)
repeat
Part 2: Link (m. 67) (mm.95-102) Link (b) Coda (or
founded on (m.130) after the
figures in Part 2: Part 2: Cadenza)
first melody passage (b) repetition (mm.
melody in Bb Major modulating of portion of 170-183)
(mm. 13- & and ending on Part 2 (mm.
38) modulating half-cadence 19-30),
and ending in F minor transposed into (c) Codetta
Part 3: on a half- (mm. 103- the key of the (mm.
repetition cadence 108) Tonic, and 184-187)
of Part 1 in F minor merging into
with slight (mm. 68-79) Part 3: a connecting
variation repetition of passage
(mm. 39- Link leading Part 1 in the leading
50) to second key of F minor to the Coda
entry of the with double (- m. 151)
refrain bar and repeat
(mm. 79-82) (mm. 109-
116)
The initial refrain is divisible into three parts, the first of which conveys the
principal melody at the opening and then a variation of the principal melody in the
following part. After the first twelve measures of the melody in the key of F Major, Part 2
is based on the motives taken from the principal melody. Part 3 simply repeats Part 1, but
86
Interesting enough in this Rondo, this lengthy subject is controversial on its own as the principal
subject—maybe embracing only the first twelve measures, at least in the opinion of F. Helena Marks. In
her analysis, she regards the subsequent part embracing measures 13-38, after twelve measures of the
principal subject, as the second part of the principal subject, while measures 39-50 represent another entry
of the principal subject. However, since Parts 2 and 3 are in a varied form, it is difficult to agree with the
opinion on seeing the parts as a “complete entries of the principal subject.” On this discussion, see Marks,
The Sonata Its Form and Meaning, p. 122.
67
with various changes from measure 39 to measure 50. In Part 3, Mozart resorts to
diminutions over a steady bass line adopted from Part 1 of the Rondo theme as shown in
measures 39 and 45.
[G]
[G]
Example 3.2.3.1.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 39
Example 3.2.3.1.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 45
In this particular movement, Mozart shows an unusual phrase structure, which

seems to be planned purposely. The first twelve measures are comprised of two phrases,
each six measures in length, the first of which finishes on the dominant (m. 6), while the
second phrase closes on the tonic (m. 12). Part 2 starts in measure 13, and opens in the
key of the dominant. Part 3 is preceded by a separate four-measure section (mm. 35-38).
In Part I, Mozart inserts the extra measures (m. 3 and m. 5), so that the phrase structure
results in 2 + 1 (repeat) + 1 + 2, creating the six-measure phrase. This rather odd looking
six-measure phrase disrupts the four-measure “normal” structure, with the expansion of
the phrase pointing to the Empfindsamer Stil. Toward the end of the Rondo, Mozart
interpolates another short section with this six-measure phrase structure right after the
cadenza ends. Here, the thematic material is taken from the earlier figures seen as part of
the principal refrain, particularly from measure 30 to measure 34, which is considered as
the four-measure extension to the Part 2 of the refrain. From measure 170 to measure
175, Mozart keenly uses the same materials making a four-measure phrase (mm. 170-
68
173), but then adds two more measures at the end (mm. 174-175), so that the whole
section results in another odd but purposeful six-measure phrase. The beginning note F in
the soprano line in measure 170 comes down in two octaves to the F still played by the
right hand, but written as the bass clef at measure 176. Then, Mozart presents the
restatement of the theme for the last time, however as four-measure phrase structure. As a
result, he creates this unusual “joke” into the music overall.87 In addition to the
experimentation with the phrase structure, Mozart includes subtle changes in the melody.
For example, in measure 41, he replaces the earlier passage of repeated notes (m. 3) with
a new and non-repetitive melody.
[G]
[G]
Example 3.2.3.2.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 3
[G]
[G]
Example 3.2.3.2.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 41
Throughout the entire Rondo, Mozart states the refrain three times with
contrasting episodes (Sections B and C). However, the three-part structure of the rondo
refrain does not recur beyond its opening statement. At the second appearance of the
refrain, only twelve measures from the initial refrain are provided, and at the third entry,
the refrain becomes even more truncated, owing to the partial repetition of Part 1 and Part
87
I am grateful to Professor Solose for her observation. For an interesting discussion on Mozart’s phrase
structure as symmetry and asymmetry in a connection with Joseph Haydn’s Scherzi, Op. 33, Hob. III: 37-
42, see Kreyszig, “Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Motivische Arbeit,” pp. 199-256.
69
2 from the first entry.88 In fact, the initial refrain’s distinct three-part disposition is
mirrored in Episode 2, laid out in F minor, the parallel minor of the tonic, F Major. The
first phrase of Part 1 in Episode 2 unfolds in a descending melodic sequence, in which the
two upper parts are in double counterpoint, as the alto voice imitates the soprano voice at
the interval of a perfect fifth below. The following phrase modulates to Ab Major, the
relative major of F minor, concluding on a perfect authentic cadence.
Out of Part 1 of Episode 2, Mozart develops Part 2 of the same episode by
displaying a sequence in Bb Major and Ab Major. Part 3 of this episode follows
immediately at measure 109 as a repetition of Part 1 but in an inverted form, so that the
imitation now takes place between the alto line and the bass line at the interval of a fourth
above. Before moving to the third entry of the principal subject, a short link returns from
minor to major. Example 3.2.3.3 reproduces Part 3 of Episode 2 as described above:
Example 3.2.3.3 Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, mm. 109-116
Unlike Episode 2, Episode 1 presents two different melodies, the first of which is
in D minor, and is predicated upon sequential repetition (mm. 51-54), with this pattern
recurring in measures 59–62. In response to the antecedent phrase (mm. 51-54), the
consequent phrase (mm. 55-58), at its initial appearance of the pattern, is based on the
88
Such changes with regard to the overall structure of the refrain are typical of Mozart’s rondos for piano.
In fact, Mozart treats the refrain in a much freer fashion than his predecessors and contemporaries, who
generally resorted to a more stereotype refrain structure with little flexibility in the treatment of theme.
Further on this topic, see Maximilian Hohenegger, “Die Struktur des Ritornells in Mozarts Rondo-Sätzen
für Klavier: Vergleiche mit François Couperin, Jean-Philippe Rameau, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Joseph
Haydn, Muzio Clementi und Ludwig van Beethoven,” in: Bericht über den Internationalen Mozart-
Kongreß Salzburg 1991, 2 vols., ed. by Rudolph Angermüller et al. as Mozart-Jahrbuch 1991
(Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum) (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1992), Vol. 2, pp. 693-698. Indeed, the rondo
included in Mozart’s Piano Sonata in B flat Major, KV 333, represents an exception. I am grateful to Dr.
Marion for this observation. For a discussion of this rondo, see, Marks, The Sonata, pp. 92-97.
70
figures from the initial refrain and is finished on a half-cadence, D minor (m. 58), before
returning to the second entry of the same pattern (m. 59). The second melody of Episode
1 begins in the key of Bb Major (m. 68), passes through the key of G minor (mm. 73-75),
and ends on a half-cadence in F minor (m. 79). Mozart certainly links the two distinct
sections by extending the right hand arpeggiations and scale passages of the half cadence
in F minor (mm. 79 -82). Another four-measure bridge between measures 79 and 82 links
Episode 1 to the next second entry of the initial refrain. This Rondo concludes with a
lengthy coda (mm. 152-187), which is consistent with similar extended endings identified
in previous two movements of this sonata.89 In the third movement, Mozart resorts to a
diverse rhythmic palette, one which is the reminiscent of rich rhythmic profile also
encountered in the second movement, and at lesser degree in the opening Allegro.
In his examination of Mozart’s keyboard works, Otto Jahn included an interesting
observation on the Rondo of KV 533/494, citing the style galant as a key facet,
entrenched in the unfolding of the refrains and episodes:
… Only in the act of composing the new style becomes apparent in

the little F-Major Rondo (KV 494, S. XXII, 8)90 of 10 June 1786. In
its expression [this movement] is still completely in the stile galant
and in its structure quite loose; nevertheless, [this movement]
already reveals the intention, to have the principal thought [that is,
the principal theme] faintly represented also in the episodes and to
have it varied with increased expression on each occurrence, until it
[that is, the principal thought] appears in the coda with good humour
in the bass;91 the minore section [that is, Episode 2] is also already
strict in movement [that is, with regard to the compositional
process].92
89
See tables 3.2.1.1 for the first movement and 3.2.2.1 for the second movement.
90
[Translation of Jahn’s remark within the text, page 373, with the reference pointing to Vol. 1 of Jahn’s
W. A. Mozart; see Footnote 92 of this chapter]: “In these works, the tradition is saturated by the fire of
Mozart’s genius to such an extent that it [that is, the tradition] immediately separates from the ashes and
renders completely new structures …” The English translation is kindly provided by Dr. Walter Kreyszig.
91
[Translation of Jahn’s Footnote 1, page 373; see Footnote 92 of this chapter]. “The cadenza-like little
insertion (Collected Edition, page 6) of twenty-seven measures is lacking in the autograph; however, [this
insertion] was definitely composed by Mozart as an afterthought for the first edition [of this work].” In his
mentioning of the “Collected Edition,” Jahn undoubtedly refers to the first printed edition by Hoffmeister.
The English translation is kindly provided by Dr. Walter Kreyszig.
92
“… Erst im Werden zeigt sich der neue Stil in dem kleinen F Dur-Rondo (K. =V. 494, S. XXII, [7], 8, [9-
10]: … Die Tradition ist in diesen Werken dergestalt vom Feuer des Mozartschen Genius durchglüht, daß
sie schließlich der Asche gleich abfällt und ganz neue Gestalten erscheinen läßt.…) vom 10. Juni 1786. Im
Ausdrucke noch ganz ‘galant’ und im Gefüge recht locker, zeigt es doch schon das Bestreben, den
Hauptgedanken auch in den Episoden durchblicken zu lassen und ihn bei jeder Wiederholung mit
71
For Jahn, the unfolding of the refrains and episodes of this Rondo is entrenched in
the style galant, with this idiom providing an overall cohesiveness to the treatment of the
principal theme and the episodes, and that notwithstanding the aforementioned expansion
of the phrases suggesting the gradual movement toward the melding of the style galant
and the Empfindsamer Stil. The significance of Jahn’s comments, what may be
interpreted as an implicit reference to the doctrine of affections (Affektenlehre),93 a topic
of importance not only in contemporary music theoretical discourse but also present in
polyphonic repertories of the eighteenth century, is fully borne out by the other two
movements of Mozart’s Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, as notions of learned
counterpoint, style galant and Empfindsamer Stil, which surface throughout the sonata,
admittedly in varying degrees, leave an undeniable imprint on this composition, with
Mozart in quest of achieving unity, both on the small scale and the large scale construct.
Beginning in the second half of the eighteenth century, composers working in the
German-speaking world moved more rapidly towards a fusion of the style galant and the
Empfindsamer Stil,94 with this compositional tendency well displayed in Mozart’s
Fantasia in C minor, KV 475 (completed in 1784). In that light, the Piano Sonata in F
Major, KV 533/494 (completed in 1788) is somewhat unusual in that the blending of
these compositional tenets associated with the style galant and Empfindsamer Stil has not
materialized to its full extent. The overarching compositional practice displayed in KV
533/494 seems to suggest a somewhat retrospective view in Mozart’s compositional
outlook.
gesteigertem Ausdruck zu variieren, bis er sich in der Coda mit gutem Humor tief im Basse empfiehlt
[Anmerkung 1: Das kadenzartige Einschiebsel (S. 6 der G[esamt]=A[usgabe] von 27 Takten fehlt im
Autograph, ist aber sicher von Mozart für die Erstausgabe nachkomponiert worden.]; das Minore ist auch
bereits streng im Satz”, as cited in: Jahn, W. A. Mozart, Vol. 2, p. 373. The English translation is kindly
provided by Dr. Walter Kreyszig.
93
On the significance of the doctrine of affections in the eighteenth-century musical discourse and
compositional practice, see, for example, Hans Lenneberg, “Johann Mattheson on Affect and Rhetoric in
Music,” in: The Journal of Music Theory 2 (1958), pp. 47-84 and 193-236.
94
Philip G. Downs, Classical Music: The Era of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven, part of The Norton
Introduction to Music History (New York and London: W.W. Norton, 1992), p. 32ff. and p. 58ff.
72
3.3 Grieg’s Choice of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494
Mozart’s music has served as a model for many composers in the crafting of their
arrangements.95 Grieg’s arrangements of Mozart’s keyboard works are certainly
important examples. Among Grieg’s arrangements of Mozart’s keyboard compositions,
Grieg’s choice of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 is fully exemplified by
the unique compositional history of the original as well as by the unusual
musical/stylistic features in each of the three movements. The fact that this particular
sonata was assembled from two separate compositions, namely, KV 533 and KV 494,
underscores the unusual situation which Mozart encountered at that time. Following his
official appointment as a composer to the Imperial Court of Joseph II in Vienna in 1787,
Mozart was faced with the challenge of presenting a new solo keyboard composition to
the Emperor, with a very little time to fulfil this task. The exceptionally brief timeline
explains Mozart’s decision to combine the two separate keyboard pieces mentioned
earlier into a complete three-movement keyboard sonata, namely, the Piano Sonata in F
Major, KV 533/494.
In terms of the musical features displayed in KV 533/494, it is a great mixture of
three distinct styles, namely, style galant, Empfindsamer Stil, and Baroque learned
counterpoint: in the Allegro, simple rhythmic patterns of the eighth-note triplet and
metrically laid-out relationship between notes and rests suggest the style galant, while the
freer use of the rhythmic varieties and the subsequent emotional expressions in the
Andante and the Rondo keenly relate to the Empfindsamer Stil. At last, the whole sonata
is thoroughly grounded in Baroque contrapuntal practices, with which Mozart had been
preoccupied both as a student of counterpoint and, later in life, as an instructor of his own
private students.96 Incidentally, at that time of his completion of the Piano Sonata in F
Major, KV 533/494, Mozart was putting final touches to the arrangement of the Messiah
95
For survey of the arrangements of Mozart’s works in the decades prior to Grieg’s contributions, see, for
example, Karl Gustav Fellerer, "Mozartbearbeitungen im frühen 19. Jahrhundert," in: Neues Mozart-
Jahrbuch 2 (1942), pp. 224-230.
96
Erich Hertzmann and Cecil B. Oldman, Thomas Attwoods Theorie-und Kompositionsstudien bei Mozart,
Vol.2 of Werkgruppe 30, Vol.2 of [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]: Supplement, Series 10 of Wolfgang
Amadeus Mozart: Neue Ausgabe sämtlicher Werke, in Verbindung mit den Mozartstädten Augsburg,
Salzburg und Wien, ed by Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg, prepared and completed by Daniel
Heartz and Alfred Mann (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1965); Erich Hertzmann, “Mozart and Attwood,” in Journal
of the American Musicological Society 12/2-3 (Summer-Autumn, 1959), pp. 178-184.
73
of George Frideric Handel (1685-1759) for the premiere performance in London in the
spring of 1789. The latter project, which was inspired by the prefect of the Imperial
Library in Vienna, Baron Gottfried van Swieten (1733-1803),97 in all likelihood also left
traces on Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494. With regard to his adherence
to the Rococo art and the Enlightenment throughout his life, Mozart, in the Piano Sonata
in F Major, KV 533/494 is clearly committed to the prevailing aesthetics of the time,98
reflected in his recourse to the style galant and Empfindsamer Stil. Moreover, the
particular characteristics, such as the unusual way of featuring the main subject or theme,
particularly found in the first and the third movements, the extended coda commonly
found at the endings of all three movements, and the frequent but careful use of Baroque
counterpoint, diverse rhythmic palette in the second and the third movements, and the
fantasy-like treatment of melodies, found throughout all three movements, strongly
identify this particular composition as one of Mozart’s distinct master works. The
Baroque counterpoint found in his KV 533/494 represents an integral part of his formal
design. Unlike Bach, whose fugues generally present the frequent shifts of the musical
parameters, such as meter or accent, so that the phrases are naturally irregular,99 Mozart
maintains the regularity of the metric design and symmetry as a result of the periodicity
of phrasing. Even when his musical phrases generate an irregularity or asymmetry, they
are still structured by an overarching design, so that the music never loses the clarity and
lucidity Mozart always desired.100 Indeed, KV 533/494 is a good representative of
Mozart’s innate thought to achieve the formal design and balance in his music as an
expression of his own creativity, and that in a decisively freer fashion than encountered in
97
Christoph Wolff, “Mozart’s Messiah: ‘The Spirit of Handel’ from van Swieten’s Hands,” in: Music and
Civilization: Essays in Honor of Paul Henry Lang, ed. by Edmond Strainchamps and Maria Rika Maniates
in collaboration with Christopher Hatch (New York and London: W.W. Norton, 1984), pp. 1-14.
98
For more detailed discussion of the eighteenth-century aesthetics, see, for example, Aesthetics and Music
in the Eighteenth Century, ed. by John Valdimir Price, Vol. 1 by William Holder; Vol. 2 by James
Grassineau; Vol. 3 by Charles Avison; Vol. 4 by John Potter; Vol. 5 by Francesco Algarotti; Vol. 6 by
Anselm Bayly; Vol. 7 by Benjamin Stillingfleet and William Jackson (Bristol, England: Thoemmes Press,
2003).
99
See, for example, Johann Sebastian Bach, Die Kunst der Fuge / Art of the Fugue, BWV 1080, Band 25.1
as part of the series Bach-Gesellschaft-Ausgabe (1851-1899), 46 vols. (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1878).
100
Further on this topic, see, for example, Edward E. Lowinsky, “On Mozart’s Rhythm,” in: The Creative
World of Mozart, ed. by Paul Henry Lang (New York: W. W. Norton, 1963), p. 32 and pp. 34-35.
74
his earlier solo keyboard music.101 In that light, it is easy to see why Grieg chose KV
533/494 as one of Mozart’s keyboard compositions for his arrangement. The carefully
crafted differentiation of the segments, showing the diversity of Mozart’s approach but
within the overriding arch, embracing the richness of ideas and symmetry of form, offers
for Grieg an ideal base for his own creativity throughout the experimentation of arranging
works of his respected hero, Mozart.
101
The emphasis on the freer treatment of the musical parameters within the sonata-form construct has been
articulated in the secondary literature. See, for example, Brügge, “Solowerke für Klavier,” pp. 109-163.
75
Chapter 4
Grieg’s Arrangement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:
The Musical Text in the Original and in the Arrangement
Grieg, in his artful arrangement of Mozart’s keyboard works followed an unusual

and noble approach, for he superimposes materials from two distinct eras, namely,
Classicism and Romanticism. Indeed, Grieg had confessed that in his compositions he did
not intend to change any single note of Mozart’s original score.1 Grieg’s claim of
retaining Mozart’s original notes appears to be true upon cursory inspection of the
arrangement, which embraces two separate piano parts, namely, Piano I, which replicates
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, and Piano II, which contains Grieg’s
newly composed second part. Further examination of the autograph of Grieg’s
arrangement reveals that Grieg designates the two musical forces in the abbreviated form
as “Piano 1me [prime]” and “Piano 2de [seconde]” for the first and third movements, while
he writes “Piano I” and “Piano II” for the second movement. In the first printed edition of
Grieg’s arrangements of Mozart’s keyboard works — published by E. W. Fritzsch — the
musical forces are printed solely as “Piano I” and “Piano II,” which appear only at the
beginning of the first movement. Moreover, in this particular edition, the word “original”
is clearly printed right below “Piano I” on the first page of the first movement of the
sonata, although Grieg does not resort to this convention in his autograph of the
arrangement.
Was Grieg truly faithful to Mozart’s original musical text when he arranged the
master’s piano solo works, by placing the original as the first piano and adding the
second piano? Only a careful and detailed examination of the musical text of both
Mozart’s original and Grieg’s arrangement will provide an answer. In that context,
Appendix C shows every single measure that contains any changes Grieg made in Piano I
in his arrangement of Mozart’s original. Regardless of Grieg’s original intention, his
autographs, in fact, embrace numerous changes, which include not only musical
parameters such as dynamics, phrasings, and musical designations (e.g., poco rit. and so
1
Grieg’s view is communicated in his own article “Mozart,” quoted earlier; see Chapter 1 (Footnotes 24
and 25).
76
forth.), but also rhythms, accidentals, and even actual pitches that are contradictions to
what Grieg advocated in his aforementioned article on Mozart’s legacy.2
4.1 Grieg’s Changes from Mozart’s Original in Piano I
4.1.1 Dynamics
At the outset of this examination, it is crucial to consider Grieg’s modifications to

Mozart’s original version of the Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, and that with
regard to Piano I. In the first movement (Allegro) of KV 533/494, all of Grieg’s changes
to Mozart’s version found in Piano 1 of Grieg’s arrangement are placed into seven
different categories (Appendix C-I). Group I, one of the most noticeable changes in
Grieg’s arrangement, consists of issues relevant to dynamics. Compared to Mozart’s
actual dynamic markings, which sparsely occur throughout the entire movement, Grieg is
more explicit in his dynamic indications. Undoubtedly, such differences in the
compositional scores of both composers reflect the performance practices of the Classical
and the Romantic eras, respectively.3 Grieg’s dynamic range spans from pp to ff, and
beyond that, he resorts to more diverse dynamic markings, such as fp, fz, and sf.
Appendix C includes a Sub-category I (9), showcasing Grieg’s frequent use of crescendo
(<) and decrescendo or diminuendo (>) symbols. Sub-category I (10) details Grieg’s
direct addition to and/or alteration of dynamic markings from Mozart’s original. Also
worth mentioning here is Grieg’s addition of pp, which appears only three times in this
movement, while his use of p occurs more often. Specifically, Grieg inserts pp in
measures 19, 78, and 211. The function of dynamic indications of pp at measures 78 and
2
Grieg, “Mozart,” in The Century.
3
For the discussion of the performance practice in the Classical period, see, for examples, Rosen, The
Classical Style, especially, pp. 19-53; Giorgio Pestelli, The Age of Mozart and Beethoven, trans. by Eric
Cross (London and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984), especially, pp. 1-40 and pp.136-166;
Reinhard G. Pauly, Music in the Classic Period, part of Prentice Hall History of Music Series, ed. by H.
Wiley Hitchcock (Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2000 is the fourth edition of Englewood
Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1965), especially, pp. 1-10, pp, 93-104, and pp. 125-133; For discussion
of the performance practice in the Romantic period, Leon Plantinga, Romantic Music: A History of Musical
Style in Nineteenth-Century Europe, part of The Norton Introduction to Music History (New York and
London: W.W. Norton, 1984), pp. 1-22 and pp. 389-397; Charles Rosen, The Romantic Generation (The
Charles Eliot Norton Lectures) (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1995), pp. 1-40.
77
211, respectively, underscores two incidences associated with the same musical phrases.
Closer examination of the respective sections reveals that measures 75-81 are identical to
measures 208-214, though the respective measures are in different keys. In both
instances, the preceding measures (mm. 76-77 and mm. 209-210) also share an identical
dynamic indication, namely, p and fp in succession, followed by the rare appearance of
pp. Structurally, these locations are found prior to the closing sections of both the
exposition and recapitulation of the Allegro. Unlike the pp in measures 78 and 211, which
functions only as a continuation of the previous dynamic marking fp in order to support
the phrase, measure 19 signals the beginning of a new phrase, which is intensified by the
rest in the preceding measure (m. 18). Example 4.1.1 demonstrates that these three
moments, although rare, share common pp indications.
[G]
[?]
Example 4.1.1.a Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 18-19
[G]
[?]
Example 4.1.1.b Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,

Allegro, mm. 75-81
78
[G]
[G]
Example 4.1.1.c Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,

Allegro, mm. 208-214
Grieg’s use of p usually appears in structural places, such as at the beginning or

ending of musical phrases. For example, the first three p markings occur in measures 1,
12, and 18, respectively. Measure 1 initiates the main theme which begins in the right
hand only; moments later, in measure 4, the left hand provides an accompaniment for the
right-hand melody. In measure 12, the right hand then accompanies the left-hand melody
within the range of one octave. In contrast, measures 18 and 26 end phrases as
appoggiatura. While the soprano line carries the appoggiatura above the tied bass notes
in measure 18, the alto and the bass voices begin the same appoggiatura motion in
measure 26. Another p marking appears in measure 40, which signals the end of the
opening section. Measures 70 and 197, both marked as p by Grieg, demonstrate similar
musical contexts in which the right hand plays the melody in staccato. In measures 76
and 209, respectively, where the right hand plays ornaments, Grieg employs another p
marking.
Other locations in which Grieg employs p are measures 83 and 85, where the
consequent phrase in the right hand follows the antecedent phrase. The antecedent
phrases are written as staccato and marked as f, while the consequent phrases are
indicated with slurred legato. Similarly, measures 220 and 222 again reveal the slurred
79
legato phrases of the right hand at a p dynamic, while their preceding measures (m. 219
and m. 221) are written as staccato with f markings. The p markings at measures 91, 94,
and 228 seem to reflect both the beginning and the ending of phrases, with the f
indications framing the respective sections on both sides. In fact, Grieg constantly
alternates dynamic markings between p and f at each measure from measure 231 to 235,
and this scheme eventually leads the music to its climax, marked ff at measure 239.
Measures 103-104 designate the start of a new musical section, that is, the
development. At measure 108, where the melody begins in the left hand, Grieg inserts p
and gradually adds the right hand, also in p, beginning at measure 110. The p markings at
measures 134 and 136 occur in connection with sequentially descending lines, which start
as fz paired with p. In measures 156 and 158, Grieg inserts p at the beginnings of the
motive — first in the right hand and next in the left hand. In both places, f (m. 155 and m.
157) is also followed by p. At measure 167, p is paired with fz across three measures
(mm. 167-169). In all, Grieg seems to have no hesitation in using p with a certain
consistency in these and related places,4 while Mozart limits the use of p indication
throughout the first movement. Ironically, there are only two locations where Mozart uses
p in the bass line of measures 128 and 130, respectively, but Grieg omits this dynamic
indication in his own version for Piano I.
[G]
[?]
Example 4.1.2 Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 128 -130
At the other end of the dynamic spectrum, Grieg employs a diverse set of “loud”
dynamic markings such as mf, f, ff, fp, and fz. He limits the application of mf to two
places (m. 8 and m. 153) in the first movement. Here, the left hand carries the motivic
melody equally in both measures — the first time in F Major and the second time in F
4
See Appendix C-I (2) for additional examples.
80
minor. Grieg incorporates f most frequently in association with staccato markings.5 At
other times, he associates f with the notes of longer value, as, for example, in measures 73
and 206. In measure 92, Grieg inserts f in the music, with an increase of the dynamic
level moving towards fz, while he uses f at the beginning of the descending line at
measure 161. Also, measures 107 and 113 display similar musical contexts in which the
hands switch from the previous measures with regard to the carrying of the triplet
rhythms — in the right hand (m. 107) and in the left hand (m. 113) — and here, in both
places, Grieg adds f to Mozart’s original. At the beginning of the closing sections of the
exposition (m. 99), the development (m. 142), and the recapitulation (m. 236), Grieg
accords equal significance to his use of f.
Unlike the use of f, the occurrences of ff in the first movement of this sonata are
employed with a relative consistency. As indicated in both measures 66 and 193, the left
hand alone plays the staccato ascending line across two measures. All other instances of
ff occur at the endings of all three closing sections, respectively, namely in measure 101
(exposition), measure 144 (development), and measure 238 (recapitulation).
[G]
[?]
m. 101 m. 144 m. 238
Allegro, m. 101, m. 144, and m. 238
With the use of fp in measures 77 and 210, Grieg highlights the musical context of related
passages, notwithstanding the transposition into different keys. Further, his overall use of
fp is not consistent within this first movement since the other three occurrences of fp
identified in Appendix C, in contrast to measures 77 and 210, do not mirror related
passages but rather emphasize the diversity of Mozart’s compositional practice.
5
Examples of this particular dynamic indication are found in measures 16, 24, 32, 49, 82, 84, 86,129, 200,
201, 219, 221, and 223.
81
[G] [G]
[?]
m. 77 m. 210
Allegro, m. 77 and m. 210
With regard to the fz marking, Grieg chooses locations needing certain emphasis,
such as during repetitive patterns, and in these contexts fz is often used as a means of
underscoring these patterns. For example, in measures 16-17, fz is repeated three times
consecutively for the slurred three-note descending pattern in the right hand. In measure
53, fz is applied in the left hand for chords of long duration, which accompany the right-
hand melody. In other instances, fz is not necessarily employed in consecutive passages,
but repeated every other measure in order to support the alternating f - p phrases in the
right hand. For example, in measures 82-86, Grieg indicates fz below the left hand at the
beginning of each two-measure phrase, that is to say, fz appears in measures 82, 84, and
86, respectively. Grieg eliminates sf in his arranged version of Piano I, which is present in
Mozart’s original (m. 45 under the bass line), as shown in Example 4.1.5.
[G]
[G]
[?] [?]
Mozart Grieg
Example 4.1.5 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 45
82
There are many other places in which Grieg incorporates dynamic markings in
ways that are distinctly different from Mozart’s original. For example, Mozart resorts to
sf at measures 41, 45, 49-50, and 168, while he inserts f at measures 125, 127, 129, 131,
172, 177, and 180. The locations where Mozart applies sf consistently show a common
trait in that this particular dynamic indication is associated only with half notes. On the
other hand, f markings by Mozart do not necessarily appear with only half notes but also
with quarter notes. Mozart’s use of both sf and f is strongly associated with the same
musical context, namely, Theme 2 (m. 41), a descending line starting with a half note and
followed by triplets, and its restatements in different registers at various locations. While
Mozart employs these markings consistently, Grieg, on the other hand, changes Mozart’s
use of both sf and f to fz in each of these cases.
[G] [G]
[?] [?]
m. 41 m.125
In addition to the specific dynamic indications in his Piano I part, Grieg supplies
crescendo and diminuendo in many places where Mozart includes no dynamic indications
at all in his original score.6 Grieg’s uses these symbols in accordance with established
traditions. Grieg frequently resorts to both the written version of dynamic abbreviations
such as cresc and the symbolized version (< or >) throughout the entire movement. The
markings are usually associated with other dynamic symbols, such as p and f. A case in
point occurs in measures 70-74. In measure 70, Grieg begins the phrase with p, which is
followed by a cresc and that leads to f ; this section eventually ends with the marking
dim.
6
See Appendix C-I (9) for Grieg’s inclusion of crescendo and diminuendo.
83
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
Allegro, mm. 70-74
In terms of dynamics, Grieg prefers to employ explicit markings according to the

musical context, whereas Mozart in his original is implicit with regard to the dynamics,
showing fewer details in his notation. Additionally, Grieg not only inserts or, on rarer
occasions, eliminates dynamic markings present in Mozart’s version. In many places,
Grieg replaces Mozart’s original sf and f with his own fz.7 Under closer scrutiny, Grieg
deploys fz only for notes of long value such as the half note, which is used as the
beginning note of motivic patterns, as disclosed, for example, in measures 16-17 (here,
three eighth-note pattern makes the equal value of a half note).
[G]
[?]
Allegro, mm. 16-17
7
The details are shown in Appendix C (“Use of different dynamic markings”). The specific measures
indicated under Number 7 (fz) in Appendix C demonstrate consistency of usage in the musical text.
84
4.1.2 Articulation
The second category of changes where Grieg deviates from Mozart’s original
pertains to issues of articulation, for which conventional usage of common devices, such
as staccato dot ( . ), stroke ( ' ), dash ( - ), and accent ( < ). Grieg typically resorts to these
articulations, where Mozart does not. As shown in Appendix C, Grieg specifically
incorporates staccato dots in measures 47, 49, and 51, respectively, where Mozart does
not include any in his original. One exceptional place is measure 157, where a stroke
above the half note in the left hand of Mozart’s version is lacking altogether in Grieg’s
arrangement. A difference in style between these two composers in their use of
articulation symbols is that Grieg incorporates the dot as a staccato marking, while
Mozart resorts to the stroke, carrying the same meaning as the staccato marking — a
topic, which has received considerable attention in Mozart studies,8 including an
examination of his autograph and related editorial practices in his oeuvre.9
In the first movement, Mozart does not include a single accent in his score,
whereas Grieg uses this marking many times.10 These accents are associated with the
musical patterns and note values. For example, in measure 70, Grieg inserts an accent at
the beginning of a long pedal note G in the bass line, while two upper voices play more
florid musical lines against the bass note. In measures 78-79 and 211-212, which display
the same musical phrase but in different registers, Grieg includes accents on the notes
that begin each short phrase. The following example demonstrates one instance of
Grieg’s use of accents.11
8
Paul Mies, “Die Artikulationzeichen Strich und Punkt bei Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart,” in: Die
Musikforschung 11 (1958), pp. 428-455; Frederick Neumann, “Dots and Strokes in Mozart,” in: Early
Music 21 (1993), pp. 429-435; see also Clive Brown, “Dots and Stokes in Late Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-
Century Music,” in: Early Music 21 (1993), pp. 593-610; Clive Brown, Classical and Romantic
Performing Practice, 1750 -1900 (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1999).
9
Bernhard R. Appel and Joachim Veit in collaboration with [unter Mitarbeit von] Annette Landgraf,
Editionsrichtlinien Musik, in commission of [im Auftrag der] Fachgruppe Freie Forschungsinstitute in der
Gesellschaft für Musikforschung (Kassel and Basel: Bärenreiter, 2000), p. 273.
10
Grieg’s heavy reliance on accents is summarized in Appendix C-II (2).
11
Though somewhat different in detail, related examples of this practice are found in measures 104-106
and 111-112, in which accents are given to the musical sequences played by alternating hands — at first in
the right hand (mm. 104-106) and then in the left hand (mm. 111-112) — against triplets in the hand which
has no accents.
85
[G]
[?]
Allegro, mm. 78-79
4.1.3 Phrasing
The third category of Grieg’s alterations of Mozart’s original involves phrasing

issues associated with ties and slurs. In a number of locations in the autograph of the
arrangement, Grieg incorporates ties and slurs, while Mozart in his original does not
resort to these indications. Grieg resorts to the tie most frequently in soprano line and
bass line; yet, there are a few exceptional occasions (“Phrasing,” Appendix C) where the
arranger resorts to the ties in alto and tenor voices. In measures 70-72 of Mozart’s
original score, the ties are faintly visible, though the poor condition of the print renders
the analysis of these markings difficult.
86
[G]
[?]
Mozart
[G]
[?]
Grieg
Example 4.1.10 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm. 70-72
On the other hand, Grieg omits Mozart’s slurs in measures 54 (bass line) and 152
(alto line), respectively. In measure 54, the absence of a slur seems to suggest an
oversight on the part of Grieg — an interpretation, which is confirmed by the presence of
the slur in the analogous passage beginning in measure 49. In the bass line, Grieg places a
slur in the left hand linking measures 49, 50, and 51, confirming that he, in all likelihood,
intended to have the slur also included in the bass line at measure 54.
87
[G]
[?]

Allegro, mm. 49 -54
4.1.4 Musical Notes (Pitches)
Perhaps more critical than dynamics, articulations, and phrasings is the

examination of Grieg’s autograph for Piano 1, on the basis of alterations with regard to
the musical notes themselves — all of which underscores Grieg’s faithfulness to Mozart’s
original. It is thus intriguing to see Grieg’s modifications of individual notes in light of
the promise made in his aforementioned article on Mozart, in which he states that he did
not alter a single note. When one considers all of Grieg’s deviations from Mozart’s
musical text, it becomes readily apparent that Grieg’s art of arranging here stands in clear
contradiction to his comments on the arrangements in his aforementioned article.12 Here,
the majority of changes to the original notes are heavily concentrated in the soprano line,
as summarized in Appendix C. In measure 40, Grieg changes Mozart’s high C in the
soprano line in the right hand to high Eb. Here, Mozart has Eb in the left hand, and in
order to yield the proper harmony for this measure, Grieg also should have used Eb in the
left hand instead of E natural, as detailed in the following example. This is an apparent
error on Grieg’s part, unmistakably pointing to the omission of the flat.
12
Grieg, “Mozart,” in The Century.
88
[G]
[G]
[?] [?]
Mozart Grieg
Another major deviation from Mozart’s original is the change of quarter notes to
eighth notes. Grieg either adds an eighth note and an eighth rest to the measure (see, for
example, m. 77) or two eighth notes tied together (see, for example, m. 80), in order to
fill out the tactus.
[G]
[G]
[?] [?]
Mozart (m. 77) Grieg (m. 77)
[G] [G]
[G]
Example 4.1.13 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 77 and m. 80
In measure 116, Grieg adds an extra note that is absent from Mozart’s original. In
Mozart’s score, the half note, A, is provided only in the bass line, but Grieg’s version
doubles this note value in addition to including another A one octave higher. In measure
220, Grieg adds an extra A to C-F-C original, thereby constructing a cadential 6/4 chord.
89
[G]
[G]
[?] [?]
[G] [G]
[?] [?]
Example 4.1.14 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m. 116 and m. 220
A further example of note doubling occurs in the cadence of measure 145, where
a C Major chord is supplied with the doubled C in the left hand and with a C Major
seventh chord in the right hand. However, Mozart’s final chord at measure 145 is, in fact,
much simpler — the notes are spread across the grand staff, so that the left hand only
plays the single note C, while the right hand plays the diminished chord on E.
[G]
[?]
Mozart Grieg
One final example of note modification in this movement occurs in measure 208. Mozart
originally has a dot, presumably a rest, in place of the beginning eighth beat of the
90
measure, while Grieg interprets this dot as an actual eighth note D, which starts off the
modified measure. Grieg then ties the eighth note with the ending quarter note D from the
preceding measure (m. 207).
[G]
Mozart
[G]
Grieg
4.1.5 Accidentals
In addition to the changes of individual notes, Grieg modifies a significant

number of accidentals as well. In measure 22, Mozart indicates a B natural for the bass
chord in the left hand, whereas Grieg designates that particular note as Bb instead.
[G]
[G]
[?] [?]
Mozart Grieg
91
The other examples considered under the category of the accidentals mainly concern the
presence or absence of flat and natural signs between the original and the arrangement.
While in general Grieg seems less meticulous about faithfully duplicating Mozart’s
original indication of natural signs, in three locations (m. 128, m. 135, and m. 182) he
explicitly writes the natural sign, where Mozart clearly does not (“Accidentals,”
Appendix C). The following example speaks to this issue of accidentals.
[G] [G]
[?] [?]
m. 42 m. 128
Examples 4.1.18 Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
4.1.6 Musical Designation
Another pertinent observation is that Grieg prefers to use musical designations

such as animato, pesante, and so forth, more explicitly than Mozart. For example, Grieg
specifies the musical sections at measures 42, 211, and 219, respectively, as animato,
while Mozart does not include the indications in his original version. These three
measures commonly occur in connection with Theme 2 in both the exposition and the
recapitulation, where the thematic material is presented as melodic sequences. However,
the directions of the phrases and the dynamic indications do not reveal any common traits
among these three locations. Grieg specifies the interpretation of the respective passages
by supplying the aforementioned written expression markings, and that unlike Mozart,
who presumably reflects these expressive markings in his score without feeling obliged to
indicate them in written form. Therefore, Grieg’s expressive markings originate from his
intuition or personal interpretation of Mozart’s original. And here, Grieg’s notion of
supplying expressive markings reinforces Romantic compositional practices, which are
92
generally associated with a significant increase in the number of written indications,
suggesting a rise in expressivity pertaining to all musical parameters, not mirrored in
Viennese Classicism.13 Thus, Grieg’s own inner feelings about the music and his urge to
communicate these feelings in written form are also well expressed in this particular
arrangement. In measures 66 and 193, Grieg uses pesante, while tranquillo is employed
in measures 145-146, 207-208, and 214-217, respectively. On the other hand, in the
aforementioned measures, Mozart leaves these decisions to the performer’s discretion.14
[G]
[?]
Allegro, m. 42
4.1.7 Other Modifications
Grieg’s inclusion of two other new modifications occurs only once in the entire
first movement. The first such modification is a fermata that is placed over the quarter
rest on the third beat of measure 145, where Mozart’s original is devoid of this same
musical symbol, as shown in Appendix C (under VII. “Special.”) After the final chord of
the development, which Grieg notates in staccato (while Mozart has no articulation
marking at all), the quarter rest enters right before the first note of the recapitulation
begins. The second new modification is a trill which Grieg adds to the soprano voice in
measure 174. Grieg’s indication of the trill in this particular location matches with
13
Further discussions on the dichotomy of Romanticism and Viennese Classicism, see Footnote 3 of this
Chapter.
14
With respect to general comments on the interpretation of Mozart’s piano works, see Eva and Paul
Badura-Skoda, Mozart-Interpretation (Vienna: Eduard Wancura Verlag, 1957); see also in English
translation by Leo Black as Eva and Paul Badura-Skoda, Interpreting Mozart in the Keyboard (London:
Barrie and Rockliff, 1970 is reprint of 1962); see also the most recent edition of Badura-Skoda’s book; Eva
and Paul Badura-Skoda, Interpreting Mozart: The Performance of His Piano Pieces and Other
Compositions (New York and London: Routledge, 2008).
93
another trill found in measure 175 of Mozart’s original, which appears in a similar
musical pattern, although Mozart’s original shows the second trill only of the measure
175.15
[G] [G]
[?]
m.145 m.174
4.1.8 Changes in Andante and Rondo
In the following two movements of KV 533/494, namely, the Andante and the
Rondo, Grieg modifies Mozart’s original score in a similar fashion as in the Allegro;
however, these two later movements have their own unique features that distinguish them
from the remainder of this composition as a whole. The Andante contains only one new
trill in Grieg’s arrangement (m. 58) as does the Allegro (m. 174). However, the two
composers differ with regard to the specificity of the written indications (Appendix C).
The major difference in their markings is that Grieg writes out Mozart’s trill indications.
For instance, as shown in measure 4, Mozart in his original score notates the soprano
melody as F-Eb-D and adds the shortened trill symbol (as tr) underneath the main notes
that are slurred. On the other hand, Grieg’s version of Piano I in the same measure reads
as an extended ornament over the written F as a point of departure for the fully notated
ornamentation (Eb-F-Eb-F-Eb-D-Eb) resolving to D — pointing to Grieg’s adherence to
15
Further on Mozart’s trills, see, for example, Paul Badura-Skoda, “Mozart’s Trills,” in: Perspectives on
Mozart Performance, ed. by R. Larry Todd and Peter Williams as part of Cambridge Studies in
Performance Practice, ed. by Peter Williams, et al. (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University
Press, 1991), pp. 1-26.
94
the performance practice of the Romantic period. As indicated in Appendix C, Grieg
shows a preference in providing detailed trills and/or ornaments in his score, while
Mozart simplifies his writing and his musical markings in the exclusive use of dynamics
and ornaments, with the specific example shown below.
[G]
[G]
[?] [?]
Mozart Grieg
Andante, m. 4
In the Rondo, Grieg engages in further diversifying of the ornamentation. First of all, he
inserts ornaments twice in the soprano voice in measure 142 and measure 185,
respectively, for which Mozart does not indicate the markings shown in Grieg’s Piano I.
In measure 142, Mozart inserts an appoggiatura on the second half of the first beat of the
measure in cut time, which Grieg turns into an actual sixteenth note on that beat. Grieg
then adds a turn on the second main beat in that very same measure. At measure 185,
Grieg again places the additional ornamentation in the form of a conventional sign over
the eighth note on the second half of the first beat, while Mozart’s original does not
include any such ornamentation, either in notated form or with recourse to a conventional
symbol, though undoubtedly the traditional performance practice in Mozart’s time would
have allowed for extra ornamentation.
95
[G] [G]
[G] [G]
[?]
[?] [?]
Example 4.1.22 Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 142 and m. 185
In contrast to Grieg, Mozart specifically indicates an ornamental symbol after the half
note on the second main beat of the soprano line in measure 178. Yet, Grieg omits this
symbol from Piano I.
[?]
[?]
[?]
Mozart Grieg
Rondo, m. 178
96
Measure 184 is the only example where Grieg adheres to Mozart’s original. However,
Grieg’s ornament (turn) is located on the second half of the first beat in the soprano voice
of that measure with a natural sign as part of the ornament, while Mozart’s original
excludes the natural sign.
[G]
[G]
Rondo, m. 184
In addition to the issues surrounding the topic of ornamentation, both composers

in their respective works use the treble and bass clefs interchangeably. The Andante and
the Rondo share common differences in the writings of the clef signs between these two
composers. For example, starting at measure 101, Grieg momentarily places the notes of
the tenor and bass voices in the treble clef, which presumably extends to measure 108.
This assumption seems to have its correlation with Grieg’s mistake of writing no clef sign
on the presumed change of the clef in the tenor and bass lines at measure 109. On the
other hand, Mozart notates the passage exclusively in the bass clef, as shown below.
97
Mozart
[G]
[G]
Grieg
Andante, mm. 101-102
In the Rondo, Mozart starts out the movement in treble clef for both right and left hand,
while Grieg uses the bass clef at the opening of the movement (m. 1), and then
immediately resorts to the treble clef (m. 1).
Mozart Grieg
Rondo, m. 1
Finally, the Rondo features a distinct usage of the repeat sign that is unique to this
movement. As shown in Appendix C, repeat signs appear in two locations (mm. 95-102
98
and mm. 103-116). In each instance, Mozart uses a repeat sign and a double bar.
However, Grieg actually writes out those two sections in their entirety without recourse
to any repeat signs. In his decision, Grieg is guided by his layout of Piano II. For the
initial statement of the repeat, he silences Piano II, while Piano I has the solo part; then
he brings back Piano II for the second statement of the repeat as a duet with Piano I.16
The following example shows the first time appearance of measures 95-102 where Piano
II remains absent.
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
Rondo, mm. 95-102
16
This topic will be discussed in more details in section 4.2 (Piano II) of this chapter.
99
4.2 Piano II
4.2.1 Allegro
In the arrangement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Grieg

coordinates Piano II with Piano I, and that without obscuring the main thematic materials
of Piano I, although Grieg, especially in the arrangement of the first two movements,
makes an exceptional contribution in his conception of the Piano II part. In the opening of
the first movement of KV 533/494, Grieg leaves the first three measures blank, where
Piano I starts the antecedent phrase of the main theme as solo. Piano II enters in measure
4, marking the beginning of the consequent phrase of the theme in simple chordal
accompaniment (with a melody embracing a C-C#-D-E-F pattern in measures 7-8). In
measures 9-11, Grieg again silences Piano II, while Mozart expands the first eight-
measure statement in Piano I by placing the theme in the left hand. Using Piano II, Grieg
faithfully continues to respond in the same way to Piano I at principal points of division
(exposition beginning at m. 1; development beginning at m. 103; and recapitulation
beginning at m. 146). While Piano I plays the extended passage, in which the fantasy-like
figurations, octave leaps, and contrapuntal texture are brilliantly displayed, Piano II
maintains the chordal downbeats, although the upper voices mostly move in both
stepwise and motion by leap (mm. 12-15). In measure 16-17, where Mozart solidifies his
first statement of the exposition by using parallelism between voices, Grieg boldly
emphasizes this passage by supplying staccato articulations and octaves as a means of
reinforcing his interpretation of fz on the syncopated beats for Piano II. In measure 22,
Grieg doubles the outer voices (D in the left hand and F in the right hand) by one octave
and adds fp to both Pianos I and II, so as to lend forceful support to the crucial moment
generated by Mozart’s seventh chord (V7 of V) prior to the beginning of the bridge
section. Unlike Mozart who intimates to close with a V (6/4 to 7/5/3) chord ― (I implied)
cadence in measure 21, Grieg adds a crescendo and leads into the rest of the passage.
Before Mozart’s seventh chord enters in measure 22, the right hand of Piano II plays the
partial chromatic line, which starts in measure 21.
100
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.1 Grieg’s Piano II of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,
Allegro, mm. 21-22
In the bridge section of the exposition, Grieg expands Mozart’s initial melody,
which alternates between both hands in Piano I, to octave notes in the right hand of Piano
II, while the left hand of Piano II harmonizes the initial melody in thirds, underscoring a
well-established compositional practice of the eighteenth century. In measures 35-36,
Grieg inserts the staccato above the C dyad leaping to the accented third (E′). Then, in
the following measures towards the end of the bridge section, Grieg maintains the use of
staccatos in both hands in conjunction with the crescendo effect before Theme 2 begins.
The following example shows Grieg’s structuring of the bridge section.
[G]
[?]

Allegro, mm. 32-41
101
From measure 41 to measure 43, Grieg completely silences Piano II in order to
emphasize Mozart’s Theme 2, just as he does for Theme 1 at the beginning of this
movement. However, with regard to the ensuing thematic material, Grieg adds octaves to
the leaps in both hands, leaps that are performed f with staccato and accent, against
Mozart’s more delicate descending lines first presented in p in measure 50 and then as f
in measure 54.
[G]
[?]

Allegro, mm. 50-54
In Theme 2, Piano II melodically imitates Piano I, although Grieg rearranges the order of
the individual notes so that both piano parts create an exciting duet. For example, in
measure 63, Grieg coordinates the right hand of Piano II with the right hand of Piano I
(G′-B′-D″-G″-B″-D″′) by playing the ascending line B-D′-G′-B′-D″-G″, the first
inversion of the arpeggio. However, Grieg insists on solely ascending lines in this
passage, while Mozart’s melody alternates between ascending and descending lines.
102
[G]
[?]
Allegro, mm. 63-64
Another musical gesture Grieg adopts for Piano II is the doubling of notes, a
procedure that is also present in Piano I. At the beginning of the second subsection of
Theme 2, Mozart employs a solo line for the left hand only (mm. 66-69), and Grieg
copies the same line, but unlike Mozart places it an octave lower. From measure 70 to
measure 75, Piano II doubles the pedal point on G of Piano I in the left hand, which
subsequently moves to the bass A in measure 76. From measure 82 to the closing section
at measure 89, Grieg eliminates a number of musical phrases in favour of homophonic
gestures in both hands of Piano II, which features rhythms that are identical to Piano I.
Example 4.2.5 details an excerpt of Grieg’s technique of doubling, which accompanies
the elaborate right-hand figurations of Piano I, suggesting orchestral texture, which
coincides with the cadential trill (m. 88). The orchestral texture can be generated from
imagining the violins and flutes in an orchestra, which would play the high and brilliant
musical lines (the right- hand figuration of Piano I), while the bass instruments such as
cellos and double basses along with the brass instruments and perhaps the percussion
play the bass chords that have long note values and staccatos (the left-hand of Piano I and
both hands of Piano II).
103
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
At the closing section of the exposition (mm. 89-102), where Mozart’s version
displays arpeggiated musical lines, Grieg, as he does in Piano I, accordingly adopts the
dynamic contrasts between soft and loud that are properly placed along with the
articulated right hand notated in staccato. As a result, Grieg’s choice of dynamics
enhances the musical expression of Mozart’s ascending and descending arpeggios. Also,
unlike Mozart, with his uniform rhythmic distribution characteristic of his original, Grieg
varies the rhythms in Piano II. In some places of this closing section, Grieg applies duple
104
rhythms that complement the triple rhythms of Mozart. And moreover, Grieg shows no
hesitation in his placing of diminutions against Mozart’s triplet figurations.
[G]
[?]
[?]
At the end of the recapitulation, Grieg repeats musical ideas that are identical to
those shown within the arpeggiated conclusion of the exposition, where widely spaced
chords appear without rests between them in Piano II. In the two four-measure
arpeggiated sections at the end of the development, the widely spaced chords recur in
Piano II but with rests between them. Also, the chords are enhanced by the dynamic, fz,
placed on the second beat of each measure; Grieg here achieves a sound more robust than
earlier passages. Example 4.2.7 shows those particular sections of the development,
which appear twice (mm. 122-125 and mm. 142-145).
105
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.7.a Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm.
122-125
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.7.b Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm.
142-145
In the opening section of the development, Grieg introduces a series of

interlocking voice-exchanges between the two pianos. Here, the notes that are slurred and
accented, clarify the second and the third voice exchanges, while the other notes, marked
staccato, clarify the first voice exchange. At measure 104, Piano II imitates the first half
of the right-hand melody of Piano I, but the melody is played one octave lower and
delayed by a half measure. In measure 105, Piano II plays a G-Eb dyad in the right hand
with a staccato marking on the second beat, which occurs in reverse as an Eb-G dyad in
the same hand of Piano I on the fourth beat. At measures 110 and 111, Grieg repeats the
same techniques, such as the placing of dyads in different octaves and the delaying of
their appearance by a half measure, but the interlocking voice exchange and the imitation
take place in the left hand of both pianos.
106
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.8 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm.
104-111
Another characteristic to observe in the development is that Grieg brings out his
own inner voice by presenting musical material that is different from Mozart’s original,
especially by including articulations. In general, Grieg writes more in homophony for the
passages where Mozart has running figures, as for example, in measures 82-87 (see
Example 4.2.5). In those places, Grieg adds more contrasting textures and articulations
107
for Piano II — at times as legato and at other times as staccato. The following example
shows both legato and staccato passages in consecutive order.
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.9 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, mm.
116-121
As mentioned in Chapter 3, Mozart, in the development section of the Piano

Sonata in F Major, KV533/494, appears to follow by-and-large the essence of the style
galant, which is associated with a harmonic rhythm that unfolds more or less uniformly.
Piano I generates rhythmic regularity with more emphasis on the melody itself than on
harmony, both parameters of which are also clearly associated with the use of a simple
bass line; this profile consequently simplifies the musical phrases and helps to regulate
their length. On the other hand, Grieg’s Piano II complements Piano I with an increase in
homophony and in a variety of rhythmic structures, and at that without destroying
Mozart’s melody. As a result, both pianos yield uniformity within two distinct eras of
composition, that is to say, Viennese Classicism and Romanticism.
Grieg begins the bridge of both the exposition and the recapitulation with forte
markings. While Mozart maintains the simple and brisk melodic lines circumscribed by
short phrases and regular rhythms, Grieg sketches Piano II as bold and heavy, as shown
108
in the homophony and notes of long value. The bridge sections (between the first and the
second groups) within the exposition and the recapitulation are not identical; rather, each
of these two bridge sections displays distinctly different characters. In the bridge of the
exposition, Grieg supplies additional staccato and accents for Piano II. On the other hand,
in the bridge of the recapitulation, he includes more legato lines and longer phrases that
are accentuated by slurs and pedal points. Especially in Piano II, Grieg imitates the linear
motion of Piano I exposed in the outer voices. The following example comprises the
bridge section of the exposition and the recapitulation of Piano II.
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.10.a Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,

mm. 32-41 (excerpt from the exposition)
109
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.10.b Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,

mm. 153-168 (excerpt from the recapitulation)
For the closing sections of the exposition and the recapitulation, Piano II contains
notes of relatively long value, such as quarter, half, and dotted half notes — in essence
achieving a texture that is quite plain compared to the rapid motion in Piano I, which
abounds with brilliant passage work comprising four-measure arpeggios constructed of
triplet-eighth notes described earlier in the chapter. At the end of the exposition, Piano II
unfolds accented half and dotted half notes along with staccato quarter notes. Similarly,
in each measure at the end of the recapitulation, Grieg applies a dotted half note without
accents and quarter notes with staccatos.
110
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.11.a Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,
mm. 99-102
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.11.b Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,

mm. 236-239
Another technical aspect of Piano II within this movement is the explicit use of
pedal signs, which are marked below the bass clef of Piano II in Grieg’s autograph. In
comparison to Mozart’s original work, which is entirely devoid of pedal markings, Grieg
specifically defines the exact locations to apply the pedal, using the abbreviated
indication “Ped” to denote the depression of the pedal and “*” to denote the cessation of
the pedal. In the first movement of the Piano Sonata KV 533/494, Grieg’s use of pedal is
limited to six instances. The first passage spans measures 63-65, which in the left hand of
Piano II includes the repetitive G major chord in root position without the third.
Similarly, measures 116-120 contain pedal marks, which coincide with octave chords on
A in the bass line across the first four measures, to form one protracted pedal point. In
this passage, Mozart also features the linear counterpoint combined with chromatic
inflections as described in the previous chapter. In measure 115, Grieg again embraces
111
Mozart’s harmony, but in a chordal fashion featuring chromatic motion before moving to
the next measure (m. 116), where he immediately shifts from the minor key (D minor) to
the major mode (V of D minor). Here, Grieg draws attention to the texture by applying
pedal markings and trills in the right hand of Piano II. Additionally, he maintains the
particular passage in fz, which reflects the significance of the third subsection as the
climax, representing the crucial moment of the harmonic change (V of D minor).17 The
other two locations (m. 107 and m. 113) that contain the pedal marks also occur in the
development of the first movement. The pedal indications for these two measures are
both marked under the half-diminished seventh chord, which appears at the beginning of
the fz after the previous gradual crescendo. Here, Grieg initiates the harmonic change
from the fourth beat to the first beat (ii7 of G minor; ii7 of D minor), as shown in Example
4.2.12.
[G] [G]
[G] [G]
m.107 m.113
Example 4.2.12 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, m.
107 and m. 113
4.2.2 Andante
As is true of the first movement, the second movement of KV 533/494 is

composed in sonata form, as discussed in Chapter 3. At the opening of the slow
movement, Grieg allows Piano I to stand out simply by delaying the entry of Piano II
until the conclusion of the first theme of this movement. Piano II enters at measure 11 in
imitative fashion, while Piano I repeats the first theme. The top voice of Piano II doubles
17
For the structural overview of the Allegro movement, see Table 3.2.1.1 in Chapter 3 of this study.
112
the melody of Piano I one octave higher, while the rest of the voices in Piano II
harmonize the main melody. However, Grieg displays a different attitude towards the
second theme, where he permits Piano II to participate in the presentation of the theme
instead of allowing only Piano I to play, as in the previous movement. When the second
theme appears at measure 23, Piano II doubles the theme of Piano I, the pattern of which
appears three times in stepwise motion, and that one octave lower in the bass line of the
left hand. In the presentation of the second theme, the tenor voice in the left hand of
Piano II plays a long pedal on C, spanning six measures alongside the bass line extending
and joining Mozart’s C in every other measure, with the pedal underscoring the role of
repose (as described in Chapter 3). The right hand of Piano II repeats an eighth-note
rhythm, though Grieg disturbs the moments of repose by adding f to Piano I and ff to
Piano II. This ff dynamic marking, which appears at the beginning of every two
measures, quickly alternates with p to build the tranquil mood, eventually moving to
Mozart’s sudden diminished seventh chord notated with fz in Piano II at measure 28.
This is precisely the moment where Mozart uses a series of chromatic chords spanning
measures 28 through 30, with this passage leading directly to the final chord, F Major, in
measure 31.
In the four-measure bridge (mm. 19-22) inserted between the first and the second
groups, Grieg reinforces Piano I, which plays a series of chords in succession, with this
passage suggestive of tonicization. However, Grieg adds special effects for Piano II at the
end of the bridge before starting the second theme; here, at measure 22, Grieg inserts the
poco rit sign for Piano I and dolcissimo e poco rit for Piano II. These performance
indications illustrate Romantic traits, starting with the arpeggiated chord on a downbeat
followed by chromaticism with the “rubato” effect, which coincides with the climax of
the first theme, and which suggests a transition to the subsequent theme, embracing a
motive from Theme 1 with a distinct character. The following example reproduces this
special moment.
113
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.13 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, m. 22
After the bridge in the second subsection of the second group (as illustrated in
Chapter 3, Table 3.2.2.1), Mozart sets forth a new theme, which appears above the pedal
point on F. In measure 38, Mozart introduces the minor mode Db (ivb3), and then
dramatically moves to an F minor chord via a Neopolitan sixth chord (m. 40, beat 3).
Grieg enhances this moment with the indication tre corde, an Italian term that literally
means “three strings,” with the reference to the lifting of the una corda pedal so that three
strings can sound simultaneously to achieve the desired increase in volume, as applied to
both Pianos I (m. 38) and II (m. 37). Here, the chord progression in both pianos and the
chromatic upper line in Piano I together create a unique, moving atmosphere. The
following example shows the tre corde section in this slow movement.
114
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.14 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm. 37-38
At the opening of the development section of the second movement, Piano II

continuously imitates the neighbour-note motive of Piano I. Piano II plays eighth-note
chords in the same harmony as Piano I, but Grieg adds crescendo and decrescendo
markings every measure, which heighten the background for the elaborate soprano line in
the right hand of Piano I. Grieg’s careful choice of dynamics prepares the upcoming
declamatory segment in measure 55. When this segment begins, Grieg adds detailed
descriptions to both piano parts, which intensify the atmosphere of the music as a whole
by resorting to octaves and arpeggios in both hands. In measure 55, Grieg supplies the
indications of sempre più ed agitato in f to both piano parts. In addition, he inserts
accents consecutively for both pianos, in the case of Piano II prolonging the accents
throughout the following four measures (mm. 56-59). With this gesture, Grieg’s version
of the movement reaches a climax at the end of the first subsection (m. 59) in the
development.
On the third beat of measure 59, a sequential passage starts with motivic
presentation in Piano I. Grieg designates this second subsection of the development as
115
tranquillo, which is reflected in the music played by Piano II. He inserts triplets or dotted
quarter notes continuously, creating the calm and quiet effect, which contrasts with
Mozart’s intense chromaticism. Piano II starts with long notes solely in the left hand at
measure 60, and these long notes gain importance in the right hand, in the passage
embracing measures 65-68, where both hands share the same rhythm. Grieg imitates
Mozart’s upward surge of the melodic gesture that appears in measures 66-67, however,
laid out in octave in bass line. Grieg’s use of consistent rhythm, fp, and cresc. e sosten
(Piano I) and cresc. molto e sosten (Piano II) towards the end of this subsection prepares
for the opening of the recapitulation.
The recapitulation of the second movement of Mozart’s KV 533/494 is unique,
but truncated, compared to Theme 1 of the exposition (mm. 1-18). As is true of Mozart,
Grieg also pays special attention to this section, and that in contrast to earlier occurrence
of Theme 1 of the exposition. While Piano II is silent at the opening of the exposition
where Piano I plays Theme 1 (mm. 1-10), Grieg, in the recapitulation, adds wide-ranging
arpeggios to Piano II marked as pp with una corda, while Piano I is directed to perform
cantabile and p. Moreover, Grieg’s application of the sustaining pedal in this arpeggiated
section continuously creates a flowing mood that moves along with Mozart’s melodic
line. Grieg’s special treatment of the theme is further emphasized when he inserts de
novo la melodia ben tenuto [again the melody well held] to the melody carried by the left
hand of Piano I. Here, the arpeggios are written tre corde in order to make the full sound
in volume until the end of the bridge through this independent addition of this section
(mm. 83-90).
116
Example 4.2.15 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm.
83-90
As discussed in Chapter 3, Piano I presents the first subject of the second group of
the recapitulation, (partially taken from Theme 2 in the exposition), in an inverted form
between the hands. Likewise, in Piano II, Grieg approaches this section of the
recapitulation, which is based on Theme 2 of the exposition. He inserts a similar
embellished passage starting on the second beat of measure 90, which leads to the next
measure where the left hand of Piano II imitates the theme presented against the strict
117
eighth-note rhythm in the right hand. From measure 103 onward, Piano II doubles the
melodic line of Piano I one octave higher. Also, Grieg contrasts the direction of the
musical phrases in the running passages, so as to accentuate the conversation between the
two pianos. For instance, he places ascending arpeggios in Piano II in opposition to the
descending running passages occurring in Piano I at measure 105, followed by another
ascending passage at measure 108, which immediately leads to the descending figures in
Piano I, as shown in Example 4.2.16.
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.16 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm. 105-108
118
Grieg concludes this slow movement with a codetta (mm. 114-122), and that in an
unusual way by adding chromaticism and dissonant harmony in Piano II, which
romanticizes Mozart’s original. Grieg’s use of chromaticism is apparent in the right hand
of Piano II, first in measures 114–115 where the short phrase (F-F#-G-F in octaves)
ascends, and next in measures 117-119 where the descending line (Bb-A-Ab-G-Ab-G)
follows, with the diminished seventh chord transformed into a V9 adding the G to the
bass line. Chromaticism appears in both pianos in measures 118-119 where Grieg
indicates più tranquillo with p. He also includes the tenuto sign over the thirty-second
notes that are doubled in both pianos in measure 119. Grieg specifies that the particular
passage is to be rubato, and this gesture eventually leads to the conclusion of this
segment, which is notated as ritardando with pp. In the second-last-measure (m. 121),
Grieg superimposes a descending minor melodic scale on harmony (added Ab and Gb) in
the right hand, while he uses an augmented prime interval (A natural in the left hand and
Ab in the right hand in Piano II), the dissonance of which generates an exotic sound for
the finale.
[G]
Example 4.2.17 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante, mm.
121-122
Overall, in the second movement of KV 533/494, Grieg presents free flowing

musical gestures throughout Piano II, which amplify the fantasy-like passages of Piano I.
Grieg’s use of arpeggios, diminutions, and pedal signs in Piano II of this slow movement
complements Mozart’s composition. Unlike Mozart’s first movement, in which the style
galant features prominently, his free layout of the second movement is suggestive of the
119
Empfindsamer Stil. Grieg employs the musical ideas that are foreign to Mozart’s version,
meshing two radically different styles and emotional ranges.
4.2.3 Rondo
Mozart’s third movement, the Rondo, exhibits different characteristics from the
previous two movements. Its formal structure unfolds with recurring themes and
subsequent episodes. In an effort to reflect issues encountered in this movement, Grieg
strives towards a close collaboration between Piano I and Piano II. Here, Grieg adds a
number of musical parameters such as dynamics, articulations, and musical designations
to Piano II, in order to achieve a close union between the two pianos. Grieg starts Piano II
of the Rondo by harmonizing the melody of Piano I with light staccatos in p, with the
open fifth recalling a folk-like idiom, typical of Grieg. He also adds written description
un poco marcato to Piano II. Grieg’s continuous use of pedal indications (written as
segue in his manuscript) supports the direction to emphasize softly the musical
expression in Piano II by blurring and rounding out the resulting sound.
Example 4.2.18 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, mm.
1-2
As discussed in the previous chapter, Grieg divides the unusually lengthy initial
refrain (mm. 1-50) of the third movement into three segments. He approaches the musical
structure of this refrain in various ways. At the opening of the movement, Grieg applies
staccatos to both hands of Piano II which moves to the left hand only at measure 7, with
Piano I repeating the first melody. Grieg maintains the long pedal on F during the initial
120
twelve measures, which embrace two statements of the first melody of the initial refrain.
In measure 13, the chords of Piano II broaden in their range, while the top voice of the
right hand doubles the new melody of Piano I, which is based on the figures of the first
melody. In measure 19, which is in Part 2 of the initial refrain (see Table 3.2.3.1), Grieg
changes the character of Piano II from “bouncy” and almost folk-like music to a heavy
and legato phrase through the use of long notes, the most structural of which Grieg
emphasizes with accents (m. 19 and m. 21).
[G] [G]
[?] [?]
m.19 m.21
Example 4.2.19 Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 19
and m. 21
In measures 23 and 24, the right hand of Piano II, with the left hand tacet, imitates
the right hand of Piano I. Instead of articulating the melody with identical rhythm, Grieg
delays the right hand of Piano II until the second beat of each measure, which results in a
canonic effect between the two pianos. Mozart’s half notes in those measures are
transformed to quarter notes for Piano II, but Grieg gives extra emphasis to those notes
through the placement of accents. In measures 27-28, he repeats a similar canonic
phenomenon, yet this time with the harmony in the left hand of Piano II accompanying
the right hand of Piano II. In the same context, Grieg reiterates the third entry of the
refrain (mm. 136-137 and mm. 140-141). In Part II of the third entry, Grieg resorts to the
same rhythmic arrangement, in which the left hand of Piano II rests, while the right hand
of Piano II continues the conversation with Piano I.
121
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
mm. 23-24
[G]
[G]
[G]
[?]
mm. 136-137
Example 4.2.20.a Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, mm. 23-24
versus mm. 136-137
122
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
mm. 27-28
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
mm.140-141
Example 4.2.20.b Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, mm. 27-28
versus mm. 140-141
The passage extending from measure 30 to measure 34 in Mozart’s third

movement is considered a four-measure extension of Part 2 of the refrain, which is
composed of three parts, as discussed in the previous chapter. This passage also serves as
123
the point of departure for Grieg’s change of his overall musical expression in Piano II. He
uses the arpeggiated right-hand figuration along with a repeated short-patterned bass line
in octaves comprised of a chromatic counter-motive. In measure 34, Grieg directs both
pianos to crescendo, leading to Part 3 of the initial refrain at measure 39. Incidentally, in
measure 37, Grieg uses a harmony (V of V) in the bass line before continuing Part 3 of
the refrain in measure 39. In Part 2 of the refrain, Grieg draws upon the frequent use of
the dynamic marking, fp, which is employed in both Pianos I and II. Grieg’s repeated
pattern of sixteenth notes in the right hand of Piano II also alludes to the upcoming
passage, where Mozart resorts to diminutions over a steady bass line, though Part 3
mainly repeats Part 1.
As discussed in Chapter 3 of this study, Mozart states three refrains three times
throughout the entire Rondo. Unlike the initial refrain with three-part structure, the
second (m. 83) and the third (m. 120) appearances only partially disclose the refrain.
Concerning the second entry of the refrain (m. 83), Grieg proceeds along a path similar to
that of the first entry for Piano II, though he includes new musical ideas. For instance, he
maintains the chordal musical figures in both hands accented by staccatos throughout the
passage; however, for the second entry, the grace note occurs in the right hand, which
enhances the playful atmosphere encapsulated in the melody. The choice of these
articulation and ornamentation complements Mozart’s decision to elaborate the melody
with diminutions in the second appearance of the refrain. Grieg also locates measures 87
and 88 in a new register by placing these measures one octave higher — a musical tactic
to which Grieg resorts earlier in a similar context, and that with regard to the initial
refrain (mm. 13-18), notwithstanding the fact that on the recurrence of this passage he
presents the material in a truncated form. The following example shows the difference in
musical expression between the related passages.
124
[G]
mm. 13-18
[G]
[?]
mm. 87-88
13-18 versus mm. 87-88
In the third and partial entry of the refrain (m. 120), Grieg explores a number of
different musical ideas in the embellishment of Piano II. With regard to the second entry,
Piano II states the grace note in the right hand. However, at the beginning of the third
entry, Grieg intensifies the right hand of Piano II by applying trills through measures
120-125. In fact, Grieg prepares the third entrance of the refrain in measure 117,
indicated as Maggiore (Major), by imitating the diminution of Mozart’s melody in the
right hand of Piano II, encompassing the quintuplet. Grieg then begins trills two measures
in advance to the third entry.
117-120
125
Measure 130 marks the point of incision between the first and the second parts of
the refrain at its third entry. When the trills in the right hand of Piano II end at measure
125, Grieg widens the range of Piano II by placing the right hand one octave higher than
Mozart’s original. In essence, Piano II plays the variation of the melody below Mozart’s
original. After the less melodic, fiery staccato first section of this movement marked
forte, Grieg proceeds with a contrasting section at measure 132 identified as tranquillo.
In this new section, Grieg focuses on linear expressions laid out as legato for the
independent melodic line in Piano II. While the right hand of Piano II conveys its own
melody against that of Piano I, the left hand of Piano II carries a chromatic bass line
(mm. 132-135).
126
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.23 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, mm. 132-135
From measures 143-144, Grieg showcases a combination of chromatic and

stepwise eighth-note motions in the right hand of Piano II against free-flowing sixteenth
notes in Piano I. Then, continuing in the right hand of Piano II, Grieg three times states
an eighth-note pattern comprising a chromatic motion followed by a leap beginning in
measure 147, which continues to play against the sixteenth-note passages of Piano I. Both
of these patterns are organized in upward motion, which is in opposition to the downward
127
motion of the sixteenth notes played by the right hand of Piano I, excepting the very last
pattern at measure 149, in which the left hand of Piano I states the sixteenth-notes in the
downward motion. In measure 150, Grieg ceases the opposing motion between the two
pianos and arranges the right hand of Piano II to play in the same upward motion as the
right hand of Piano I. However, this section of the passage ultimately ends in contrasting
motion between Pianos I and II, with fz and staccatos leading into the coda. The
following example demonstrates both chromatic-step and chromatic-leap combinations.
[G]
[?]
mm. 143-144
[G]
[?]
mm. 147-149
143-144 versus mm. 147-149
128
Prior to a more detailed discussion of the coda, the two episodes in the Rondo
must be considered as a feature of Grieg’s unique treatment of these particular sections.
Episode 1 in D minor occurs between measures 51 and 82, while Episode 2 in Ab Major
extends from measure 95 to measure 116, with the respective episodes sharing no
common ground. Episode 1 consists of two main parts (mm. 51-67 and mm. 68-79), both
of which unfold in the key of Bb Major, and a short link (mm. 79-82), which leads to the
second entry of the refrain in F Major (m. 83), while Episode 2 illustrates clearly the
three-part structure comparable to that of the initial refrain (see Table 3.2.3.1). In Episode
1, Grieg’s Piano II begins with a sparse texture, while Piano I plays the melody in
sequence, alternating dynamic levels between f and p at measures 51-54. For the next
four measures (mm. 55-58), Piano II starts the tremolo bass line on A, the dominant of D
minor, the main key of the melody in Part 1 of Episode 1. This tremolo on A appears
again beginning in measure 63 dramatizing the N6, but this time Grieg superimposes the
subdominant chord over Mozart’s tonic with a double appoggiatura — a somewhat
unusual procedure for Grieg, which recurs in measure 138.18 With regard to the first
appearance of the tremolo bass line in measure 55, Piano II carries the main melodic
motion in its right hand, which points back to the brilliantly arpeggiated line in measure
59 as an accompaniment to the melody carried by Piano I. At the second appearance of
the tremolo bass line (m. 63) in Piano II, the right hand plays a melodic line in the alto
voice complementary to the bass voice of Piano I. Then, Grieg inserts a ritardando for
the one-measure link between the two main parts of Episode 1, and that prior to returning
to the a tempo in measure 68.
[G]
[?]
55-58
18
I am grateful to Professor Solose for this observation.
129
In the new section in Bb Major (mm. 70-77), the left hand of Piano II imitates the
Alberti bass of the left hand in Piano I. The difference between the two pianos in the
application of the Alberti bass is the range of the notes used in the two left hands, with
Piano II exhibiting a wider range than Piano I. After the corresponding right-hand
melodic progression in measures 70-71, Piano II disassociates itself from the musical
ideas of Piano I, while both maintain the Alberti bass figurations in the left hands. The
layout of the right hands creates the “question-and-answer relationship,” heard three
times in this passage (mm. 72-77). Piano I starts with upward running sixteenth notes
ending with eighth notes (m. 72, m. 74, and m. 76). Piano II responds with two paired
sixteenth notes in parallel motion, but in syncopation (m. 73, m. 75, and m. 77).
[G]
[?]
72-77
The short link that leads to the second entry of the refrain spans four measures
(mm. 79-82), where Grieg again makes use of a heightened sense of chromaticism, as
reflected in the use of the French sixth at beats 1 and 3 of the measure 82.19 Both the alto
voice (in the right hand) and the bass voice (in the left hand) of Piano II state chromatic
lines in a downward direction, creating parallelisms, first in major sixths, and then in
19
I am grateful to Professor Solose for this observation.
130
minor sevenths between the respective voices. This parallelism, first begun on the fourth
beat of measure 80, continues in major sixths until the fourth beat of the following
measure, where the right hand repeats the same note D twice, while the left hand
continues moving downward to E natural from F. Grieg designates this linking section as
dim. e ritard. in preparation for the next section marked a tempo (m. 83). The following
example demonstrates Grieg’s congruent use of double chromaticism.
[G]
[?]
[G]
[?]
Example 4.2.27 Grieg, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, mm. 80-82
Episode 2 of the Rondo has an intriguing structure, which is closely related to the
formal layout of the initial refrain, with both this episode and the initial refrain sharing a
ternary form. Grieg specifically indicates this episode as the Minore above the treble staff
of Piano I in his autograph. In Mozart’s original score, Episode 2 repeats two sections in
succession: the first section (mm. 95-102) features the same material as Part 1 of Episode
2, and the second section (mm. 103-116) combines both Parts 2 and 3 of Episode 2. Here,
Grieg’s approach is remarkable in that this particular episode does not encompass Piano
II at all during the first iteration of each repeat, but instead draws on the second iteration
for both passages. Therefore, Grieg explicitly lays out the entire score without repeat
131
signs in his autograph, while Mozart simply employs double bars with repeat signs.20
During the second iteration of the first repeat (mm. 95-102), Grieg focuses on
emphasizing the volume of Piano I by allowing Piano II to play consecutive octave
chords throughout the passage to create an imitative, fugato-like quality. Since the
melodic progression in Part 1 of Episode 2 is intended to be quiet and legato in Piano I,
Grieg’s choice of the simple but sympathetic addition of volume using the chordal
progression in Piano II produces a serene atmosphere, which conjures up images of
Norwegian folksongs and dances. The texture described here is somewhat reminiscent of
Grieg’s setting of the tunes from Opus 1721 and Opus 7222 for solo piano. The following
example shows the excerpts from some of Grieg’s folk tunes that convey similar musical
texture and mood.
[G]
Example 4.2.28.a Grieg’s Piano II of Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, mm.
95΄- 98΄
20
In order to clarify Grieg’s notation as opposed to Mozart’s original, the measures shown in Examples
4.2.28.a and 4.2.29 have been supplied with superscripts indicating the second iteration of the respective
passages.
21
Edvard Grieg, “Hølje Dale,” in: 25 Norske Folkeviser og Danser / 25 Norwegische Volksweisen und
Tänze / 25 Norwegian Folk-songs and Dances, Op. 17, No. 19 as part of [Edvard Grieg], Arrangements of
Norwegian Folk Music, in: Edvard Grieg: Complete Works, No. 3, ed. by Dag Schjelderup-Ebbe (New
York and London: C.F. Peters, 1982), p. 19.
22
Edvard Grieg, “Røtnams-Knut. Halling,” in: Slåtter/Norwehische Bauerntänze / Norwegian Peasant
Dances, Op. 72, No. 7 as part of [Edvard Grieg], Arrangements of Norwegian Folk Music, in: Edvard
Grieg: Complete Works, No. 3, ed. by Dag Schjelderup-Ebbe (New York and London: C.F. Peters, 1982),
pp. 71-75.
132
[G]
Example 4.2.28.b Edvard Grieg, Hølje Dale, Opus 17, No.19, mm. 15-18
Example 4.2.28.c Edvard Grieg, Røtnams-Knut. Halling, Opus 72, No.7, mm. 141-147
The repetition of the second section of Episode 2 unfolds in p until the end of Part
2 of Episode 2 (m. 108), which is immediately followed by Part 3 (m. 109) stated in f. In
Part 2, Grieg maintains the chordal expression for Piano II just as in Part 1 (mm. 95-102)
but this time in each measure. In Part 2, Piano II moves slowly between the notes, with an
emphasis mainly on half-note motions. In addition, Piano II progresses through the
chords in stepwise fashion, predicated on a sequentially descending bass line, derivative
of a decisively Baroque affect. The serious nature of this section persists through to Part 3
in f with an increase in diminution, consisting mostly in eighth notes. Grieg ends Part 3
with the instructions piu tranquillo and ritardando, before moving on to the Maggiore
link at measure 117. The following example shows the ending passage of Part 3 of
Episode 2.
133
[G]
[?]
113΄- 116΄
The coda consists of three distinguishable sections (mm. 152-169; mm. 170-183;
mm. 184-187). In measure 152, the coda starts with a cadenza, which lasts until measure
169. In Piano I of the cadenza, Mozart begins with a fugato-like section, abounding in
imitation between both hands, which also occurred in Part 1 of Episode 2. In this
cadenza, Grieg again employs the tremolo effect in Piano II, which was used earlier, in
Part 1 of Episode 1. While Mozart increases the musical tension in his original by shifting
the register from low to high, Grieg has Piano II respond to Piano I by assigning tremolo
beginning as pp and building in dynamic level.
[G]
[?]
152-157
From measure 158 onward, Piano I changes from a high register to a low register,
prominently displayed in the right hand. Grieg sets the soprano voice (right hand) and the
tenor voice (left hand) of Piano II, with both parts moving downward in stepwise fashion.
134
On the other hand, Grieg sustains the alto voice and bass voice on F and C, respectively,
thereby in essence prolonging a single harmony (V) via standard voice-leading
procedures. Grieg also synchronizes the dynamics with the musical context, for which the
climax of this particular passage is indicated as f, then dim. (mm.158-159), which
immediately leads to the next passage designated as p and pp (mm. 161-162). In his
original work, Mozart enriches the cadenza with an accelerating quality by employing
notes alternating between long and short values toward the end of this movement. Grieg
enhances the significance of the cadenza by imitating Mozart’s major rhythms in Piano
II, while leaving plenty of room for rests. For instance, Grieg reproduces Mozart’s
rhythms in both hands for Piano II at measure 161, but then inserts an eighth rest at the
end of each group of eighth notes, where Mozart indicates notes for the right hand of
Piano I without rests. Grieg continues to apply imitative rhythms with rests, especially in
the right hand of Piano II in the following two measures (mm. 162-163), while the left
hand of Piano II shortens the main rhythm of the bass voice in Piano I, which contains
quarter notes paired with quarter rests, to eighth notes paired with eighth rests.
[G]
[?]
161-163
In measure 164, the dominant pedal point enters, as is typical of cadenzas; from
here, the cadenza leads to a climax with fast-running passages in both pianos. Tension
135
builds, toward the end of the section (beginning in measure 169), with trills in Piano I
accompanied by staccatos in Piano II. At this point, Grieg also uses loud dynamics to
generate heightened tension, so as to signal the peak of the movement.
[G]
[?]
166-169
After the cadenza, a passage partially taken from measures 30-35 quickly enters,
using both tranquillo and other soft dynamics (mm. 170-183). In the second section of
the coda, Piano II rhythmically imitates Piano I from measure 170 to measure 173,
allowing the left hand of Piano II to play its own melody in octave chordal gestures
alongside the single melodic line of Piano I, while the right hand states a short
arpeggiated pattern in repetition. At measure 174, Piano II continues the right-hand
pattern an octave lower, entering one beat after Piano I, with this passage leading to
measure 175, where both pianos articulate synchronized triplets. Beginning in measure
176, Grieg simplifies the material in Piano II by alternating chords between hands until
measure 183, marking the end of this additional passage, which lies clearly outside the
structural confines of the Rondo-form proper. In the codetta (mm. 184-187), Grieg
136
strengthens Piano I by leaving Piano II at rest on the second half of the measure until
measure 186, with this texture leading up to the chords signalling the close of the Rondo.
***
The findings in this extended and detailed examination of Grieg’s arrangement of

Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 refocus the reader’s attention on the
initial and very critical question raised at the beginning of this chapter: was Grieg truly
faithful to Mozart’s original musical text when he arranged this Viennese composer’s
piano solo works by placing the original as the first piano and adding a second piano?
Grieg may have intended to follow Mozart in detail. However, when we consider the
changes in musical parameters and alterations of the actual musical notes in Grieg’s
autograph, as summarized in Appendix C, it becomes all too obvious that Grieg did not
follow through on his intent. As this study shows, Grieg has extensively modified
Mozart’s original musical elements, including dynamics, phrasings, musical designations,
rhythms, accidentals, and even actual musical notes. Does this imply that Grieg was
misleading or disrespectful of Mozart, who inspired him? Quite on the contrary, as Grieg
emphatically stated in his article entitled “Mozart,” Grieg’s arrangement still preserves
the overarching structure and the majority of details pertaining to the thematic, motivic,
rhythmic, melodic, and harmonic constructs solidly embedded in Mozart’s original.
Although Grieg’s autograph shows a large number of alterations in the arrangement of
this particular composition, it is Grieg’s interpretation and divergence from Mozart’s solo
work that allow the arrangement to stand independently of the original. Grieg’s eloquent
reworking of coexisting materials from two distinct eras, namely, Viennese Classicism
and Norwegian Romanticism, truly attests to his pre-eminence as an innovator in the art
of arrangement.
137
Chapter 5
Grieg as an Innovator of the Musical Arrangement:
Implications and Conclusion
During the winter of 1876-1877, the Norwegian composer Edvard Grieg had been
preoccupied with the solo keyboard works by the Austrian composer Wolfgang Amadeus
Mozart. As much as Grieg was pleased with his arrangement for two pianos at the time, a
fair amount of criticism concerning Grieg’s arrangement of Mozart’s keyboard works
surfaced during the subsequent decades. This criticism and the legitimacy of Grieg’s
collection of Mozart arrangements are still in question. Karl Gustav Fellerer (1902-
1984),1 the Grieg biographer and Mozart scholar, states that (1942):
…it was a curious idea to write…a second piano part for Mozart’s
fine and transparent sonatas…Chord repetitions, arpeggios,
harmonic reinterpretations, and melody paraphrases in the second
piano make something different out of the Mozart sonatas than they
were. Mozart is forced into Grieg and thus a distortion of the original
is attained that is worse than that Georg [Abbé] Vogler2 did in his
“improvements” of the Bach fugues…3
As shown in Chapter 2 of this study, most often the critics raise their concerns that such
activity of arranging the compositions of old masters distorts their originality. And this
type of conflict may initiate from the overall understanding of Mozart’s music, as
1
Karl Gustav Fellerer, Edvard Grieg (Potsdam: Athenaion, 1942).
2
[Ohran Noh’s remarks] Joachim Veit, “Abt Voglers ‘Verbesserungen’ Bachscher Choräle,” in: Alte Musik
als ästhetische Gegenwart: Bach, Händel, Schütz — Bericht über den Internationalen
Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongress, Stuttgart 1985, ed. by Dietrich Berke und Dorothee Hanemann in
collaboration with Gesellschaft für Musikforschung, 2 vols. (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1987), Vol. 1, pp. 500-
512; see also Helmut Kreitz, “Abbé Georg Vogler als Musiktheoretiker,” (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation,
Universität Saarbrücken, 1957); Floyd Grave, “Abbé Vogler and the Bach Legacy,” in: Eighteenth-Century
Studies 13 (1979-1980), pp. 119-141.
3
“Es war ein kurioser Gedanke, zu Mozarts feinen und durchsichtigen Sonaten … ein zweites Klavier zu
schreiben … Akkordwiederholungen, Arpeggien, Harmonieumdeutungen und Melodieumspielungen im
zweiten Klavier machen aus den Mozartschen Sonaten etwas anderes, als sie waren. Mozart wird zu Grieg
gezwungen und damit eine Verballhornung des Originals erreicht, schlimmer als das Georg Vogler bei
seinen, ‘Verbesserungen’ der Bachfugen tat…,” cited in Irmlind Capelle, “Einführung,” which is the
introduction to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Sonatas with Additional Second Piano by Edvard Grieg;
Edvard Grieg Peer Gynt Suites No. 1+2 arr. for Piano 4 Hands [Sound Recording], performed by Evelinde
Trenkner and Sontraud Speidel, Piano Duo ([no city of publication]: MDG, 2006) [MDG 930 1382-6] with
[introduction] also in English translation by Susan Marie Praeder, p. 6 (English) and p. 23 (German); see
also Floyd K. Grave, “Abbé Vogler and the Study of Fugue,” in: Music Theory Spectrum (April 1979), Vol.
1, No. 1, pp. 43-66 and Floyd K. Grave and Margaret G. Grave, In Praise of Harmony: The Teachings of
Abbé Georg Joseph Vogler (Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1988).
138
detailed in the secondary literature,4 which has partly influenced more recent research
and studies in interpretation.5 Therefore, Grieg’s unusual procedure of arranging
Mozart’s piano works could make performers and scholars feel uncomfortable, especially
in terms of remaining true to Mozart’s original. With regard to Grieg’s intent underlying
this project, which obviously originated from his admiration and respect for Mozart, this
collection of arrangements needs to be examined more extensively. With the exception of
a few short articles,6 no comprehensive studies on these arrangements exist. Among
Grieg’s collection of four piano sonatas and one piano fantasia,7 the arrangement of
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 was selected as the focal point for the
present examination because of the following three compelling reasons: the availability
of Grieg’s autograph of this arrangement; the significance as Grieg’s first completed
work in this collection; and the unique background of Mozart’s KV 533/494.
Mozart’s original KV 533/494 has survived merely in the first printed edition of
1788.8 KV533/494 is the only arrangement among Grieg’s collection of Mozart sonatas
that has survived as an autograph. This disposition of sources renders the study of the
primary documents and comparison between the original and its arrangement more
urgent. Also, although there is no accredited specific explanation as to why Grieg chose
KV533/494 as part of his collection of arranging Mozart’s works and why this particular
composition was apt for opening this collection of the arrangements, Mozart’s original
KV533/494, in particular includes a juxtaposition of compositional and stylistic features
current at his time, such as the style galant, the Empfindsamer Stil, and the Baroque
learned counterpoint.9 Moreover, the background of KV 533/494, the work which itself
originates from two separate compositions merged into one by Mozart, attests to
significance of this particular composition. This claim offers a perspective, which is
distinct from that provided by Albrecht Goebel,10 who argues that the last piece of the
4
See, for example, Irving, Mozart’s Piano Sonatas; see also Badura Skoda, Interpreting Mozart.
5
R. Larry Todd and Peter Williams, eds., Perspective on Mozart’s Performance, part of Cambridge Studies
in Performance Studies, ed. by Peter Williams et al. (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University
Press, 1991).
6
See, for example, Goebel, “Die Mozart-Bearbeitungen von Edvard Grieg.”
7
For more details, see Footnote 1 in Chapter 1 of this study.
8
This issue has been discussed in Chapter 3 of this study; see especially Footnote 22.
9
These topics have been discussed in Chapter 3 of this study; see especially Section 3.3 “Grieg’s Choice of
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494.”
10
Goebel, “Die Mozart-Bearbeitungen von Edvard Grieg.”
139
collection, namely, the Sonata in G Major, KV 189h=283, functions as the prototype for
Grieg’s Mozart arrangements and thus the defining of Grieg’s musical style.
Unfortunately, Goebel’s stipulation on this particular issue lacks strength due to the
dearth of evidence surrounding his argument. First of all, Grieg’s KV 189h=283 does not
survive as an autograph, which weakens his arguments considerably in defining that
particular composition as the prototype of Grieg’s musical style. Moreover, the order of
the arrangements in Grieg’s collection of Mozart’s keyboard works affirms that KV
533/494 serves as a point of departure in further tracing Grieg’s musical language present
in his arrangements of Mozart’s other piano works included in this collection.
Several findings in the analysis of the Piano Sonata in F Major, KV533/494 may
indeed suggest further study of the other Mozart’s sonatas that Grieg arranged (KV
189h=283, KV 475 and KV 457, and KV 545). First and foremost is Grieg’s striking
claim that no changes were made in his arrangement to Mozart’s original material, as
Grieg articulates in his article “Mozart,” — a claim which remains unfulfilled as readily
gathered from the careful examination of KV 533/494 in the present study. Regardless of
Grieg’s original intent, his autograph reveals numerous changes (as summarized in
Appendix C) to various musical parameters, including actual musical notes of Piano I,
that part which Grieg anticipated to be a faithful reproduction of Mozart’s original.
Changes in all three movements of Grieg’s arrangement of KV 533/494,
particularly in Piano I, are suggestive of Grieg’s inclination towards a wider range of and
a more explicit indication of these dynamic markings. First of all, Grieg prefers to add the
indication of specific dynamics, such as p and f, to Mozart’s original, which is generally
devoid of these dynamic indications. Another interesting observation in dynamics is that
Grieg prefers using fz for the locations where Mozart normally uses sf or f. Also, Grieg is
more meticulous in the application of the articulations, such as staccatos and accents,
which Mozart again is not in favour of specifying. The difference in style between these
two composers is also borne out in the distinct phrasing. Grieg employs ties and slurs
numerous times to denote musical expressions, while Mozart resorts to these markings
only on occasion within the entire sonata.
Furthermore, these differences between Grieg and Mozart in their musical
expressions parallel the contrasting compositional practices of two musical eras, namely,
140
that of Classicism and Romanticism, resulting in different compositional scorings and
musical styles for both KV 533/494 and its arrangement. Mozart’s writing style is
generally simple and implicit so that his music gives the performers more freedom to
generate their personal interpretations. Grieg’s arrangement of KV 533/494, on the other
hand, is much more specific and explicit in that the performers can more readily observe
the arranger’s own implicit “analysis” of the original composition. For instance, none of
Grieg’s musical designations, such as animato or tranquillo in Piano I, are present in
Mozart’s original. The musical designations that Grieg added to Mozart’s original (as
shown in Appendix C) follow the character of each individual movement, which is
strongly tied to the Romantic tradition. For example, the first movement mainly contains
such musical designations as animato, pesante, and tranquillo, which overall depict the
fast, energetic, and vivid atmosphere of the movement. In the second movement, which is
characterized by a slow, cantabile and freely conceived layout, Grieg adopts such
different musical designations as poco rit., dim., ritardando, a tempo, dolce, and
cantabile, and that in order to intensify not only the flexibility of the tempo but also the
fantasy-like mood in the music. In the third movement, Grieg uses similar musical
designations as in the first movement, and yet with an expanded variety of markings,
such as vivace, una corda, tre corde, and so forth, all of which underscore the reoccurring
rondo theme and the opposing episodes.
In his modification of Mozart’s actual musical notes, Grieg widens the variety of
rhythms and note values. Note changes appear in all three movements of KV 533/494,
but most prominently in the first and third movements — a fact which may be accounted
for by the sheer brevity of the second movement. In the first movement of KV 533/494,
Grieg changes Mozart’s quarter notes to eighth notes, while in the third movement of KV
533/494, Grieg resorts to half notes, which correspond to two quarter notes in Mozart’s
original.11 In addition to changing the rhythms and values of the notes, Grieg also
modifies the pitch of Mozart’s actual musical notes by interpolating accidentals or
inserting altogether new notes.12 Even then, most of the time, these changes in notes do
not stray far from the original, since Grieg’s added notes are mostly present either in the
11
For details concerning the rhythmic profile, see, Appendix C.
12
For further details concerning the accidentals, see, Appendix C.
141
particular harmonic framework or within the vicinity of Mozart’s original.13 Pitch
changes might be explained as “mistakes” on Grieg’s part during the process of
arranging, although it is difficult to conclude decisively whether or not these changes
were deliberate or intentional.
Finally, Grieg adds several special features to Piano I, which results in another
point of deviation from Mozart’s original. For example, in the first movement of KV
533/494, Grieg includes fermatas and trills, none of which exist in Mozart’s original
score. In the second movement, Grieg writes out Mozart’s trills either in abbreviated
form or with recourse to a conventional symbol of ornamentation. Another intriguing
feature in this slow movement is Grieg’s uses of the alternative clef signs. At measures
101-102, Grieg notates the tenor and bass voices in the treble clef rather than in bass clef
as Mozart had done. In the final movement of this sonata, on the whole, Grieg alters
Mozart’s ornamentation in that he adds extra ornaments twice to the original score (m.
142 and m. 185). Yet, at measure 178, Grieg omits Mozart’s ornament, whereas at
measure 184, he maintains Mozart’s ornament while adding an accidental (natural sign)
as part of the ornament. In the third movement, the clef change is also carried out. Grieg
inserts the bass clef first at the beginning of the movement, which is immediately
followed by the treble clef, while Mozart has no bass clef at all but starts with the treble
clef right from the opening.
Overall, Grieg’s selected designations and changes of this particular sonata create a
different, “romanticized” atmosphere, which is distinct from Mozart’s original.
Moreover, Grieg acknowledged these arrangements for pedagogical instructions initially,
with all the changes Grieg made from Mozart’s original strongly reflecting his ideas of
teaching and interpretation of Mozart’s piano sonatas.14 As he declared in his article
“Mozart,” Grieg’s goal for these Mozart arrangements is to appeal to the modern ears of
the time by adding a second piano to several of Mozart’s piano sonatas. Grieg’s
procedure of arranging indeed underscores his full respect for Mozart, without any
intention to distort or to mislead the performer and audience with regard to the originality
of the great master. Ultimately, Grieg seeks unity between the two pianos, which reflects
13
For further details concerning the musical notes, see Section 4.1.4 in Chapter 4 of this study.
14
This point was raised earlier in Chapter 1 of this study; see especially Footnote 33.
142
two dramatically different musical styles in a modernized way, so as to disseminate
Mozart’s compositions to a wider audience, which was exposed to Romanticism in
Grieg’s own time.
Piano II in Grieg’s arrangement of the Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494
partners equally with Piano I, the basis of which constitutes Grieg’s interpretation of
Mozart’s piano sonata. Grieg’s musical language, especially in his piano music, is well
known for its lyrical and poetic elements, characteristics of his Norwegian origin.15 His
piano music speaks innate ideas and interpretations that are particularly rooted in
Norwegian folk-music,16 which in turn has strong associations with pedal points,
rhythmic diminutions, chromaticism, and syncopated articulations or accents. Grieg
places Piano II appropriately throughout KV 533/494, without minimizing the role of
Piano I. He silences Piano II when Piano I carries the main theme or relevant melodic
components, and, in fact, emphasizes the thematic and motivic density of Piano I by
applying repetitions of motives or even by placing rests in Piano II. Grieg always focuses
on complementing Mozart’s musical language, even when he thickens the harmony in
both pianos. Beyond that, Grieg exceeds the boundaries of Mozart’s original, in order to
elevate the intensity of musical expression, which would resonate with the norms of
Grieg’s time. The efforts of Grieg are particularly evident in Piano II, where he inserts
additional voices as chromatic counterparts or intermediary notes, neither of which exists
in Mozart’s original, to modify the overall texture of the sonata. Also, Grieg’s plentiful
use of ornamentations results in complementing the overall musical effect and colourful
portrayal of Mozart’s original.
Considering the era in which this arrangement was prepared, it must have been
necessary for Grieg to edit Mozart’s original into something unexpected or surprising to
contemporary musicians and listeners, who were already more familiar with the wide-
spread interpretation of Mozart’s music. Grieg’s addition of dynamic markings,
articulations, accents, written musical designations, and even his change of the musical
notes in Piano I were in all likelihood interpreted as “a nice touch” to Mozart’s original
15
This topic has been explored in Chapter 2 of this study. Further on the characteristics of Norwegian
origin, see, for example, Falnes, National Romanticism in Norway.
16
Further on this topic, see, for example, Haugen and Cai, Ole Bull: Norway's Romantic Musician and
Cosmopolitan Patriot.
143
sonata, in order to achieve Grieg’s ultimate goal of making Mozart’s music appealing to
the modern ear of his time, as he declared in his article on “Mozart.” And, in fact, the title
Arrangements of Mozart Piano Sonatas with a Freely Composed Second Piano Part
without Opus Numbers underscores Grieg’s intention with respect to this collection. His
musical instinct towards the piano sonatas of Mozart is freely expressed in Piano II of
KV 533/494. And since this composition is for two pianos, both pianists logically must
agree on a common understanding of the music as part of convincing interpretation.
Therefore, any pianists who wish to perform this particular arrangement or any other
arrangements included in Grieg’s collection must also comprehend the arranger’s
interpretation of Mozart’s music.
Several recordings of these arrangements by Grieg have been published, although
they are a rare treasure and consequently difficult to acquire. Most of the available
recordings of these arrangements are more commonly circulated in Norway than in North
America.17 The National Library of Norway in Oslo, which also serves as the Music
Library for the University of Oslo, possesses only two such recordings—one entitled
Mozart Arranged: Four Sonatas Arranged For Two Pianos by Grieg,18 and the other
entitled Mozart Piano Sonatas with Freely Added Accompaniment for A Second Piano by
Grieg.19 Beyond that, an additional recording of the arrangement by Grieg, entitled
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Sonatas with Additional Second Piano by Edvard
Grieg/ Edvard Grieg Peer Gynt Suites No. 1+2 arr. For Piano 4 Hands,20 is
commercially available in Oslo.21
Overall, the pianists in the aforementioned recordings regard these arrangements
positively, summarizing the observations in a number of remarks such as: “…fascinating
17
In 2006, I searched for the music recordings on Grieg’s arrangements of Mozart’s piano sonatas in both
North America and Europe, particularly in Norway.
18
Edvard Grieg, Mozart Arranged Four Sonatas Arranged For Two Pianos By Grieg [Sound Recording],
performed by Julie Adam and Daniel Herscovitch, pianos, recorded in 1995 by ABC Classic (Australia:
ABC Classics, 1996).
19
Edvard Grieg, Mozart Piano Sonatas with Freely Added Accompaniment for A Second Piano By Grieg
[Sound Recording], performed by Elisabeth Leonskaja (piano) and Sviatoslav Richter (piano), recorded in
1993 by Teldec (Leipzig: C.F. Peters, 1995).
20
Edvard Grieg, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Sonatas with Additional Second Piano by Edvard
Grieg/ Edvard Grieg Peer Gynt Suites No. 1+2 arr. For Piano 4 Hands [Sound Recording], performed by
Evelinde Trenkner (piano) and Sontraud Speidel (piano), recorded in 2005 by MDG (Germany: MDG,
2006).
21
I wish to thank Dr. Inger Johanne Christiansen (National Library of Oslo in Norway) for bringing the
latter recording of Grieg’s arrangements to my attention.
144
insights…,”22 “…Grieg donning a pair of metaphorical spectacles…,”23 on the
composer’s part, and a “…surprisingly good story…”24 on the music itself. As a pianist
myself, I also have performed one of Grieg’s arrangements, namely, the Fantasia in C
Minor, KV 475 and the Piano Sonata in C Minor, KV 457, with Professor Kathleen
Solose.25 This live performance has testified to Grieg’s astute art of arranging and
consistency of approach, whereby the many facets of the arrangement explored in KV
533/494 find their continuation in KV 475 and KV 457. It is rather unfortunate that these
arrangements of Grieg are not as popular as the original sonatas of Mozart — a fact,
which is readily corroborated both in the limited number of recordings circulating and in
the dearth of public concerts. However, from a positive perspective, it would mean that
there be many more opportunities for the performers and musicians of the present and
future generations to explore and to disseminate these arrangements in their
interpretations.
This study underscores the powerful “collaboration” between the Classicist
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and the Romanticist Edvard Grieg, as witnessed on the many
levels of the examination pursued in the present study. For Piano I of the arrangement of
KV 533/494, one needs to convey Mozart’s simple and clear musical style, while
understanding Grieg’s added personal expressions. For Piano II, one needs to adopt the
Romantic tradition Grieg has shown in a most colourful manner. When one focuses on
the uniqueness of these arrangements of Grieg and his genuine intent towards these
works, the beauty of Grieg’s arrangements of Mozart’s piano sonatas permeates the
overall compositional fabric, thereby attesting to Mozart’s exemplary compositional skill
and Grieg’s innovative and perceptive art of arranging. There is great significance in the
equal partnership between the two pianos, and it is essential that musicians understand
22
Julie Adam’s observation in the text to her recording; see also Footnote 18 of this chapter.
23
Hans-Christian Schmidt’s observation in the text to the recording of Grieg’s arrangements, translated by
Stewart Spencer; see also Footnote 19 of this Chapter.
24
Irmlind Capelle’s observation in the text to the recording of Grieg’s arrangements, translated by Susan
Marie Praeder; see also Footnote 20 of this Chapter.
25
This performance was held in April 1, 2006 in Quance Theatre at University of Saskatchewan. The
concert was a part of the Celebration of the 250th Anniversary of the Birth of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: A
Year Long Commemoration of Mozart's Legacy Through Performances of and Lectures and Lecture
Recitals on His Compositions and the Arrangements of His Works (January 2006 - December 2006) under
the sponsorship of Dr. Peter Stoicheff (Vice-Dean, Humanities and Fine Arts, College of Arts and Science,
University of Saskatchewan).
145
this facet, so that the different styles of two composers, elegantly superimposed in this
collection, will produce the well-balanced communication presented in the arrangement
of KV 533/494.
146
Selected Bibliography
Abert, Hermann. W. A. Mozart, 1783-1791, II. 2 vols. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1956.
Aesthetics and Music in the Eighteenth Century, Vol. 1 by William Holder; Vol. 2 by James
Grassineau; Vol. 3 by Charles Avison; Vol. 4 by John Potter; Vol. 5 by Francesco
Algarotti; Vol. 6 by Anselm Bayly; Vol. 7 by Benjamin Stillingfleet and William
Jackson, Bristol, England:Thoemmes Press, 2003.
Agawu, V. Kofi. Playing with Signs: A Semiotic Interpretation of Classic Music. Princeton,
New Jersey and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 1991.
Allanbrook, Wye Jamison. “Two Threads through the Labyrinth: Topic and Process in the
First Movement of K. 332 and K. 333,” in: Convention in Eighteenth- and Nineteenth-
Century Music: Essays in Honor of Leonard G. Ratner, ed. by Wye Jamison
Allanbrook et al. as Vol. 10 of Festschrift Series. Stuyvesant, New York: Pendragon
Press, 1992, pp. 125-171.
Anderson, Emily, chronologically arranged, translated and edited with an introduction, notes
and indexes. The Letters of Mozart and His Family, 2 vols. London: Macmillan and
New York: St Martin’s Press, 1966 is the second revised edition, prepared by A. Hyatt
King and Monica Carolan of 1938.
Apel, Willi. Geschichte der Orgel- und Klaviermusik bis 1700. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1967;
also in English translation by Hans Tischler as Willi Apel, The History of Keyboard
Music to 1700. Bloomington, Indiana and London: Indiana University Press, 1972.
Appel, Bernhard R. and Joachim Veit. unter Mitarbeit von [in collaboration with] Annette
Landgraf, Editionsrichtlinien Musik, im Auftrag der [in commission of] Fachgruppe
Freie Forschungsinstitute in der Gesellschaft für Musikforschung, Kassel and Basel:
Bäerenreiter, 2000.
Bach, Johann Sebastian. Die Kunst der Fuge / Art of the Fugue, BWV 1080, Band 25.1 as
part of the series Bach-Gesellschaft-Ausgabe (1851-1899), 46 vols. Leipzig: Breitkopf
& Härtel, 1878.
[Bach, Johann Sebastian]. Praeludium 1, BWV 846 in Das Wohltemperierte Klavier I.
Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1977, pp. 2-3.
Badura-Skoda, Eva. “Textual Problems in Masterpieces of the 18th and 19th Centuries,”
trans. by Piero Weiss, in The Musical Quarterly, LI (1965), pp. 301-317.
Badura-Skoda, Eva. The History of the Pianoforte: Famous or Noteworthy Instruments
Played by Great Artists: A Documentation in Sound [video recording], script and
presentation by Eva Badura-Skoda, directed by Piotr Szalsza, produced by Televisfilm
in cooperation with ORF. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1999.
Badura-Skoda, Eva and Paul. Interpreting Mozart on the Keyboard. translated by Leo Black.
London: Barrie and Rockliff, 1962.
Badura-Skoda, Eva and Paul. Interpreting Mozart: The Performance of His Piano Pieces
and Other Compositions. New York and London: Routledge, 2008.
Badura-Skoda, Eva and Paul Mozart-Interpretation. Vienna: Eduard Wancura Verlag, 1957;
see also in English translation by Leo Black as Eva and Paul Badura-Skoda,
Interpreting Mozart in the Keyboard. London: Barrie and Rockliff, 1970 is a reprint of
1962.
147
Badura-Skoda, Paul. “Mozart’s Trills,” in: Perspectives on Mozart Performance, ed. by R.
Larry Todd and Peter Williams as part of Cambridge Studies in Performance Practice,
ed. by Peter Williams et al. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991, pp. 1-26.
Banowetz, Joseph. The Pianist’s Guide to Pedaling, Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana
University Press, 1985.
Beach, David. “A Recurring Pattern in Mozart’s Music,” in: Journal of Music Theory 27/1
(Spring 1983), pp. 1-29.
Benestad, Finn. Edvard Grieg: Chamber Music — Nationalism, Universality, Individuality.
Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1993.
Benestad, Finn, Harald Herresthal and Heinrich W. Schwab. “Grieg, Edvard Hagerup,” in:
Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Allgemeine Enzyklopädie der Musik,
begründet von [founded by] Friedrich Blume; zweite, neubearbeitete Ausgabe von
[second revised edition by] Ludwig Finscher, 26 vols. in two parts. Kassel: Bärenreiter
and Stuttgart: Metzler, 1998-2008, Vol. 8 (Personenteil, 2002), cols.1-23.
Bergsagel, John. “Bull, Ole (Bornemann),” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and
Musicians, 29 vols, ed. by Stanley Sadie, New York: Macmillan, 2001, Vol. 4, pp.
592-595.
Boorman, Stanley. et al., “Printing and Publishing of Music,” in: The New Grove Dictionary
of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie. London: Macmillan, 2001,
Vol. 20, pp. 326-381.
Botstein, Leon. “Music and Its Public: Habits of Listening and the Crisis of Musical
Modernism in Vienna, 1870-1914.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Harvard
University, 1985.
Boyd, Malcolm. “Arrangement,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29
vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie. New York: Macmillan, 2001, Vol. 2, pp. 65-71.
Bozarth, George and Wiltrud Martin. eds., The Brahms-Keller Correspondence. Lincoln,
NE: University of Nebraska Press, 1996.
Bozman, Mildred Mary. ed. Letters of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. London: J. M. Dent,
1928.
Brendel, [Karl] F[ranz]. “F[ranz] Liszt’s symphonische Dichtungen,” in: Neue Zeitschrift für
Musik 49/8 (20 August 1858), pp.73 -76.
Bromen, Stefan. Studien zu den Klaviertranskriptionen Schumannscher Lieder von Franz
Liszt, Clara Schumann und Carl Reinecke, Vol. 1 of Schumann-Studien, Sonderband.
Sinzig am Rhein: Studio, 1997.
Brook, Barry S. edited, introduced, and indexed, The Breitkopf Thematic Catalogue: The Six
Parts and Sixteen Supplements, 1762-1787. New York: Dover Publications, 1966 is
reprint of Leipzig: Breitkopf, 1762 and 1787.
Brown, Clive. Classical and Romantic Performance Practice, 1750-1900, Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1999.
Brown, Clive. “Dots and Stokes in Late Eighteenth- and Nineteenth- Century Music,” in:
Early Music 21 (1993), pp. 593-610.
Brügge, Joachim. “Edvard Griegs Mozartbearbeitungen — ein früher Modellfall aus
postmoderner Überschreibungsästhetik und Bloomschen Misreading?” in
Musikgeschichte als Verstehensgeschichte Festschrift für Gernot Gruber zum 65
Geburtstag, ed. by Joachim Brügge, Franz Födermayr, Wolfgang Gratzer, Thomas
Hochradner and Siegfried Mauser. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 2004, pp.411-420.
148
Brügge, Joachim. “Solowerke für Klavier: Von der ‘Lehrbuch’-Sonate zur Intertextualität,”
in: Mozarts Klavier- und Kammermusik, ed. by Matthias Schmidt as Vol. 2 of Das
Mozart-Handbuch, ed. by Gernot Gruber in Verbindung mit [in collaboration with]
Dieter Borchmeyer. Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 2006, pp. 109-163.
Brügge, Joachim. “Typus und Modell in den Klaviersonaten Wolfgang Amadeus Mozarts,”
in: Mozart-Studien 3 (1993), pp. 143-189.
Budday, Wolfgang. Grundlagen musikalischer Formen der Wiener Klassik: An Hand der
zeitgenössischen Theorie von Joseph Riepel and Heinrich Christoph Koch dargestellt
an Menuetten und Sonatensätzen (1750-1790). Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1983.
Burde, Wolfgang. Studien zu Mozarts Klaviersonaten ― Formungsprinzipien und
Formtypen, Vol. 1 of Schriften zur Musik. Giebing über Prien am Chiemsee:
Musikverlag Emil Katzbichler, 1969.
Bushler, David. “Harmonic Structure in Mozart’s Sonata-Form Developments,” in: Mozart
Jahrbuch 1984-85, pp. 15-24.
Capelle, Irmlind. “[Einführung],” in: Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Sonatas with
Additional Second Piano by Edvard Grieg; Edvard Grieg Peer Gynt Suites No. 1+2
arr. for Piano 4 Hands [Sound Recording], performed by Evelinde Trenkner and
Sontraud Speidel, Piano Duo ([no city of publication]: MDG, 2006) [MDG 930 1382-
6]; with [introduction] also in English translation by Susan Marie Praeder, p. 6 and p.
23.
Caplin, William E. Classical Form, A Theory of Formal Functions for the Instrumental
Music of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Cavett-Dunssy, Esther. “On Mozart’s Codas,” in: Music Analysis 7 (1988), pp. 31-51.
Charlton, David. ed., annotated, and introduced, E. T. A. Hoffmann’s Music Writings:
Kreisleriana, The Poet and the Composer, Music Criticism, trans. by Martyn Clarke,
Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Christensen, Thomas. “Four-Hand Piano Transcription and Geographies of Nineteenth-
Century Musical Reception,” in: Journal of the American Musicological Society, 52/2
(Summer 1999), pp. 255-298.
Cole, Malcolm S. “Sonata-Rondo, the Formulation of a Theoretical Concept in the 18th and
19th Centuries,” in: The Musical Quarterly, Vol. 55, No. 2 (April 1969), pp. 180-192.
Constapel, Britta. Der Musikverlag Johann André in Offenbach am Main: Studien zur
Verlagstätigkeit von Johann Anton André und Verzeichnis der Musikalien von 1800
bis 1840, Vol. 21 of Würzburger Musikhistorische Beiträge, begründet von [founded
by] Wolfgang Osthoff, fortgeführt von [continued by] Ulrich Konrad. Tutzing: Hans
Schneider, 1998.
Couperin, Armand-Louis. Selected Works for Keyboard in: Instrumental Music, 2 vols. as
Vols. 1-2 of Recent Researches in the Music of the Pre-Classical, Classical and Early
Romantic Eras, ed. by David R. Fuller. Madison, Wisconsin: A-R Editions, 1975.
Crockett, Barbara Allen. “Liszt’s Opera Transcriptions for Piano,” Unpublished D.M.A.
Thesis, University of Illinois, 1968.
Dahl, Erling. et al. Edvard Grieg: Art and Identity. Bergen: Edvard Grieg Museum-
Toldhaugen, 2000.
Dahl, Erling. Edvard Grieg: En introduksjon til hans liv og musikk. Bergen: Vigmostad &
Bjørke, 2007.
149
Dahlhaus, Carl. “Galanter Stil und freier Satz,” in: Die Musik des 18. Jahrhunderts, ed. by
Carl Dahlhaus as Vol. 5 (1985) of Neues Handbuch der Musikwissenschaft, 11 vols.,
ed. by Carl Dahlhaus, fortgeführt von [continued by] Hermann Danuser, Laaber:
Laaber-Verlag, 1980-1992, pp. 24-32.
Daverio, John. Nineteenth-Century Music and the German Romantic Ideology, New York:
Schirmer Books, 1993.
Davis, Sarah. “H. C. Koch, the Classic Concerto, and the Sonata-Form Retransition,” in
Journal of Musicology A Quarterly Review of Music History, Criticism, Analysis, and
Performance Practice 2 (1983), pp. 45-61.
Deaville, James. “Köhler, (Christian) Louis (Heinrich),” translated from the German by
Erwin Kroll in: Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart: Allgemeine Enzyklopädie
der Musik, begründet von [founded by] Friedrich Blume; zweite, neubearbeitete
Ausgabe von [second revised edition by] Ludwig Finscher, 26 vols. in two parts.
Kassel: Bärenreiter and Stuttgart: Metzler, 1998-2008, Vol. 10 (Personenteil, 2003),
cols. 435-436.
Deaville, James. “Köhler, (Christian) Louis (Heinrich),” in; The New Grove Dictionary of
Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie, London; Macmillan, 2001, Vol.
13, p. 741.
Deucher, Sybil. Edvard Grieg: Boy of the Northland. London: Faber and Faber, 1950.
Deutsch, Otto Erich. Musikverlagsnummern: Eine Auswahl von 40 datierten Listen, 1710-
1900. Berlin, Merseburger, 1961.
Dirst, Matthew. “Doing Missionary Work: Dwight’s Journal of Music and the American
Bach Awakening,” in: Bach in America, ed. by Stephen A Crist as Vol. 5 of Bach
Perspectives, ed. by George J. Buelow et al. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois
Press, 2002, pp. 15-36.
Döhring, Sieghart. “Réminiscenses: Liszts Konzeption der Klavierparaphrase,” in:
Festschrift Heinz Becker zum 60. Geburtstag am 26. Juni 1982, ed. by Jürgen
Schläder and Reinhold Quandt. Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 1982, pp. 131-151.
Domokos, Zsuzsanna. “Orchestrationen des Pianoforte: Beethovens Symphonien in
Transkriptionen von Franz Liszt und seinen Vorgängern,” in: Studia Musicologica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 37/2-4 (1996), pp. 249-341.
Downs, Philip G. Classical Music: The Era of Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven, part of The
Norton Introduction to Music History. New York and London: W.W. Norton, 1992.
Dreyfus, Laurence. Bach and the Patterns of Invention. Cambridge, Massachusetts and
London: Harvard University Press, 1996.
Drillon, Jacques. Liszt Transcripteur, ou, La charité bien ordonnée. Arles: Actes Sud and
[Paris]: Diffusion PUF, 1986.
Dyer, Joseph. “The Place of Musica in Medieval Classification of Knowledge,” in: The
Journal of Musicology: A Quarterly Review of Music History, Criticism, Analysis, and
Performance Practice, 24/1 (Winter 2007), pp. 3-71.
Ehrlich, Cyril. The Piano: A History, Oxford: Clarendon Press and New York: Oxford
University Press, 1990 is second revised edition of London: J. M. Dent, 1976.
Eisen, Cliff and Stanley Sadie. “(Johann Chrysostom) Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart,” in: The
New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie.
London: Macmillan, 2001, Vol. 17, pp. 276-347.
150
Eisen, Cliff and Simon P. Keefe, eds. The Cambridge Mozart Encyclopedia. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2006.
Eisenstein, Eugen. Die Reinheit des Claviervortrages: Dem Idealismus in der Tonkunst,
Graz: Leuschner und Lubensky, 1870.
Emmerig, Thomas. ed. Joseph Riepel: Sämtliche Schriften zur Musiktheorie, 2 vols., Vol. 20
of Wiener Musikwissenschaftliche Beiträge. Vienna: Böhlau, 1996.
Erdahl, Rolf Christian. Edvard Grieg’s Sonatas for Stringed Instruments and Piano:
Performance Implications of the Primary Source Materials. Baltimore, Maryland:
Peabody Institute of The Johns Hopkins University, 1994.
Falnes, Oscar J. National Romanticism in Norway. New York: AMS Press, 1968.
Feil, Arnold, Werner Aderhold, Walther Dürr and Walburga Litschauer, eds. Franz
Schubert, Jahre der Krise, 1818-1823: Bericht über das Symposion, Kassel, 30.
September – 1. Oktober 1982 — Arnold Feil zum 80. Geburtstag am 2. Oktober 1985.
Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1985.
Fellerer, Karl Gustav. Edvard Grieg. Potsdam: Athenaion, 1942.
Fellerer, Karl Gustav. "Mozartbearbeitungen im frühen 19. Jahrhundert," in: Neues Mozart-
Jahrbuch 2 (1942), pp. 224-230.
Field, Christopher D. S. et al. “Fantasia,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and
Musicians, 29 vols, ed. by Stanley Sadie, London: Macmillan, 2001, Vol. 8, pp. 545-
558.
Finck, Henry T. Grieg and His Music. London and New York: John Lane, 1909.
Finscher, Ludwig. “Galanter und gelehrter Stil: Der kompositionsgeschichtliche Wandel im
18. Jahrhundert,” in Funkkolleg Musikgeschichte: Studienbegleitbrief 6, ed. by
Deutsches Institut für Fernstudien an der Universität Tübingen, Weinheim: Beltz,
1988, pp. 141-196.
Fischer, Wilhelm. “Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte des Wiener Klassischen Stils,”
Habilitationsschrift, University of Vienna, 1915; excerpt published in Studien zur
Musikwissenschaft 3 (1915), pp. 24-84.
Flaherty, Gloria. “Mozart and the Mythologization of Genius,” in: Studies in Eighteenth-
Century Culture 18 (1988), pp. 289-307.
Foster, Beryl. Edvard Grieg, The Choral Music. Aldershot, Hants and Burlington, Vermont:
Ashgate, 1999.
Foster, Beryl. The Songs of Edvard Grieg. Aldershot, Vermont: Scolar Press, 1990.
Funk, Vera. “Die Zauberflöte in der bürgerlichen Wohnstube des 19. Jahrhunderts,” in:
Musikalische Metamorphosen: Formen und Geschichte der Bearbeitung, ed. by Silke
Leopold as Vol. 2 of Bärenreiter Studien Bücher zur Musik. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1992.
Füssmann,Werner and Béla Mátéka. Franz Liszt: Ein Künstlerleben in Wort und Bild.
Langensalza: J. Beltz, 1936.
Galand, Joel. “Form, Genre, and Style in the Eighteenth-Century Rondo,” in: Music Theory
Spectrum 17 (1995), pp. 27-52.
Geiringer, Karl and Irene. “Stephen and Nancy Storace in Wien,” in: Österreichische
Musikzeitschrift 34 (1979), pp. 18-25.
Georgii, Walter. Klaviermusik. Zürich: Atlantis-Verlag, 1950.
Goebel, Albrecht. “Die Mozart-Bearbeitungen von Edvard Grieg,” in: Zeitschrift für
Musikpädagogik, 12/42 (1987), pp. 8-14.
151
Goertzen,Valerie Woodring. “The Piano Transcriptions of Johannes Brahms.” Unpublished
Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Illinois, 1987.
Gounod, Charles-François. “Mélodie religieuse adaptée au 1er Prélude de J. S. Bach,” in:
Quatre Célèbre Ave Maria. Bruxelles, Belgium: Schott Freres, [19--].
Grave, Floyd K. “Abbé Vogler and the Bach Legacy,” in: Eighteenth-Century Studies 13
(1979-1980), pp. 119-141.
Grave, Floyd K. “Abbé Vogler and the Study of Fugue,” in: Music Theory Spectrum (April
1979), Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 43-66.
Grave, Floyd K. and Margaret G. Grave. In Praise of Harmony: The Teachings of Abbé
Georg Joseph Vogler. Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1988.
Grieg, Edvard. Briefwechsel mit dem Musikverlag C. F. Peters, 1863-1907, ed. by Finn
Benestad and Hella Brock. Frankfurt am Main and Leipzig: C. F. Peters, 1997, pp. 54-
55.
[Grieg, Edvard]. Claviersonaten von Mozart mit frei hinzucomponirter Begleitung eines
zweiten Claviers von Edvard Grieg — No. 1 F- dur (No. 1 der Peters’schen Ausgabe).
Leipzig: E.W. Fritsch, 1879 [Edition Nr. 353].
Grieg, Edvard. Edvard Grieg: Dal diario di Edvard Grieg, contributed by Finn Benestad.
Bergen: Bergen Offentlige Bibliotek, 2007.
Grieg, Edvard. Gammelnorsk romance med variasjoner / Altnorwegische Romanze mit
Variationen / Old Norwegian Melody with Variations, Op. 51, ed. by Arvid O.
Vollsnes as Vol. 7 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works, ed. by The Edvard Grieg
Committee. Frankfurt am Main, New York, and London: C. F. Peters, 1981.
Grieg, Edvard. “Hølje Dale,” in: 25 Norske Folkeviser og Danser / 25 Norwegische
Volksweisen und Tänze / 25 Norwegian Folk-songs and Dances, Op. 17, No. 19 as part
of [Edvard Grieg], Arrangements of Norwegian Folk Music, in: Edvard Grieg:
Complete Works, No. 3, ed. by Dag Schjelderup-Ebbe, New York and London: C.F.
Peters, 1982, p.19.
Grieg, Edvard. I Høst. Konsertouverture / Im Herbst. Konzertouvertüre / In Autumn.
Concert Overture, Op.11, ed. by Rune J. Andersen as Vol. 5 of [Edvard Grieg]:
Complete Works, ed. by The Edvard Grieg Committee, Frankfurt am Main and New
York: C. F. Peters, 1992.
Grieg, Edvard. Lyriske Stykker / Lyrische Stücke / Lyric Pieces, Op. 12, Book 1, ed. by Dag
Schjelderup-Ebben as Vol. 1 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works, ed. by The Edvard
Grieg Committee. Frankfurt am Main, New York, and London: C. F. Peters, 1977.
Grieg, Edvard. Mozart Arranged Four Sonatas Arranged For Two Pianos By Grieg [Sound
Recording], performed by Julie Adam and Daniel Herscovitch, pianos, recorded in
1995 by ABC Classic, Australia: ABC Classics, 1996.
Grieg, Edvard. “Mozart,” in: The Century Illustrated Monthly Magazine 1881-1906, Vol.
55; New Series, Vol. 33. New York: The Century Company and London: Macmillan,
November 1897 to April 1898, pp.140-146; in Norwegian translation as Edvard Grieg,
“Mozart,” in: Samtiden: Populært Tidsskrift for Litteratur og Samfundsspørgsmaal 9,
ed. by Gerhard Gran (Bergen: John Griegs Forlag, 1898), pp. 112-124; in German
translation as Edvard Grieg, “Mozart,” in: Die Zeit, ed. by J. Singer, Hermann Bahr,
and Heinrich Kanner, No. 219. Vienna, 10 December 1898, pp. 167-169.
152
Grieg, Edvard. Mozart Piano Sonatas with Freely Added Accompaniment for A Second
Piano By Grieg [Sound Recording], performed by Elisabeth Leonskaja (piano) and
Sviatoslav Richter (piano), recorded in 1993 by Teldec, Leipzig: C.F. Peters, 1995.
[Grieg, Edvard]. Musikk for to klaverer: Originalkomposisjoner og arrangementer / Musik
für zwei Klaviere: Originalkompositionen und Bearbeitungen / Two Pianos, Four
Hands: Original Compositions and Arrangements, ed. by Arvid O. Vollsnes as Vol. 7
of [Edvard Grieg]: Samlede Verker / Gesamtausgabe / Complete Works, ed. by the
Edvard Grieg Committee (Finn Benestad et al.). Frankfurt am Main: C. F. Peters,
1981. [includes Grieg’s arrangements of W.A. Mozart’s “Sonata F Major (KV 533 &
494),” “Fantasia and Sonata C Minor (KV475 & 457),” “Sonata C Major (KV 545),”
and “Sonata G Major (KV 189h=283)”].
Grieg, Edvard. Peer Gynt, Op.23, ed. by Nils Grinde as Vol. 6 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete
Works, ed. by The Edvard Grieg Committee. Frankfurt am Main and New York: C. F.
Peters, 1982.
Grieg, Edvard. “Røtnams-Knut. Halling,” in: Slåtter/Norwehische Bauerntänze/Norwegian
Peasant Dances, Op. 72, No. 7 as part of Edvard Grieg, Arrangements of Norwegian
Folk Music, in: Edvard Grieg: Complete Works, No. 3, ed. by Dag Schjelderup-Ebbe.
New York and London: C.F. Peters, 1982, pp.71-75.
Grieg, Edvard. Siguard Jorsalfar, Op.22, ed. by Nils Grinde as Vol. 6 of [Edvard Grieg]:
Complete Works, ed. by The Edvard Grieg Committee, Frankfurt am Main and New
York: C. F. Peters, 1982.
Grieg, Edvard. Sonate for fiolin og klaver I F-dur / Sonate für Violine und Klavier in F-dur /
Sonata for Violin and Piano in F major, Op. 8 and Sonate for fiolin og klaver I G-dur /
Sonate für Violine und Klavier in G-dur / Sonata for Violin and Piano in G major, Op.
13, ed. by Finn Benestad as Vol. 8 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works, ed. by The
Edvard Grieg Committee. Frankfurt am Main, New York, and London: C. F. Peters,
1979.
Grieg, Edvard. To Symfoniske Stykker / Zwei Symphonische Stücke / Two Symphonic Pieces,
Op. 14, ed. by Rune J. Andersen as Vol. 5 of [Edvard Grieg]: Complete Works, ed. by
The Edvard Grieg Committee, Frankfurt am Main, New York, and London: C. F.
Peters, 1992.
Grieg, Edvard. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Piano Sonatas with Additional Second Piano by
Edvard Grieg / Edvard Grieg Peer Gynt Suites No. 1+2 arr. For Piano 4 Hands
[Sound Recording], performed by Evelinde Trenkner (piano) and Sontraud Speidel
(piano), recorded in 2005 by MDG, Germany: MDG, 2006.
Grünbaum, Renate. “Louis Köhler: Talent, Pädagoge, Anreger im Schatten der Großen.”
Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Hochschule der Künste Berlin, 1996.
Haberkamp, Gertraut Die Erstdrucke der Werke von Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, 2 vols.,
Vol. 10 of Musikbibliographische Arbeiten. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1986.
Hagermann, Rudolf. Henry Litolff. Herne: R. Hagermann, 1981 is second edition of 1978.
Hanslick, Eduard. “Eine Feuilleton-Kritik,” in: Neue Freie Presse, 25 August [1866]; reprint
in: Leipziger Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 1, No. 43 (24 October 1866), p. 346.
Harding, Rosamond E. M. The Piano-Forte: Its History Traced to the Great Exhibition of
1851, St. Clair Shores, Michigan: Scholarly Press, 1976 is reprint of Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1933, pp.53-72.
153
Haugen, Einar Ingvald and Camilla Cai, Ole Bull: Norway's Romantic Musician and
Cosmopolitan Patriot. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press, 1993.
Hausner, Henry H. “Franz Anton Hoffmeister (1754-1812): Composer and Publisher,” in
Mitteilung der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum (MISM), xxxviii (1990), pp. 155-
162.
Helfert, Vladimír. “Zur Entwicklungsgeschichte der Sonatenform,” in: Archiv für
Musikwissenschaft 7 (1925), pp. 117-146.
Henkel, Heinrich. ed. Thematisches Verzeichnis derjenigen Originalhandschriften von W. A.
Mozart geboren den 27. Januar 1756, gestorben den 5. Dezember 1791, welche
Hofrath André in Offenbach a. M. besitzt. Offenbach am Main: [Johann Anton André],
1841.
Hertzmann, Erich. “Mozart and Attwood,” in Journal of the American Musicological Society
12/2-3 (Summer-Autumn 1959), pp. 178-184.
Hertzmann, Erich. “Mozart’s Creative Process,” in: The Creative World of Mozart, ed. by
Paul Henry Lang. New York: W.W. Norton, 1963, pp. 17-30.
Hertzmann, Erich and Cecil B. Oldman. Thomas Attwoods Theorie-und
Kompositionsstudien bei Mozart, completed by Daniel Heartz and Alfred Mann as
Vol. 2 of Werkgruppe 30, Vol. 2 of [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]: Supplement, Series
10 of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Neue Ausgabe sämtlicher Werke, in Verbindung mit
den Mozartstädten Augsburg, Salzburg und Wien, ed by Internationale Stiftung
Mozarteum Salzburg. Kassel: Barenreiter, 1965.
Hildesheimer, Wolfgang. Mozart. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 1977; also in English
translation by Marion Faber as Wolfgang Hildesheimer, Mozart. New York: Farrar
Straus and Giroux, 1982.
Hill, John Walter. “The Logic of Phrase Structure in Joseph Riepel’s Anfangsgründe zur
musicalischen Setzkunst,” Part 2 (1750), in: Festa Musicologica: Essays in Honor of
George J. Buelow, ed. by Thomas J. Mathiesen and Benito V. Rivera as Vol. 14 of
Festschrift Series. Stuyvesant, New York: Pendragon Press, 1995, pp. 467-487.
Hilmar, Ernst. “Kritische Betrachtungen zu Liszts Transkriptionen von Liedern von Franz
Schubert: Allgemeines und Spezielles zur Niederschrift des ‘Schwanengesangs’,” in:
Kongress-Bericht Eisenstadt 1975, ed. by Wolfgang Suppan as Vol. 1 of Liszt-Studien.
Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1977, pp. 115-123.
Hoffmann-Erbrecht, Lothar. “Der ‘galante Stil’ in der Musik des 18. Jahrhunderts,” in:
Studien zur Musikwissenschaft 25 (1962), pp. 252-260.
Hohenegger, Maximilian. “Die Struktur des Ritornells in Mozarts Rondo-Sätzen für Klavier:
Vergleiche mit François Couperin, Jean-Philippe Rameau, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach,
Joseph Haydn, Muzio Clementi und Ludwig van Beethoven,” in: Bericht über den
Internationalen Mozart-Kongreß Salzburg 1991, 2 vols., ed. by Rudolph Angermüller
et al. as Mozart-Jahrbuch 1991 (Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum). Kassel:
Bärenreiter, 1992, Vol. 2, pp. 693-698.
Horton, John. Grieg, part of The Master Musicians Series. London: J. M. Dent, 1974.
Horton, John and Nils Grinde. “Grieg, Edvard (Hagerup),” in: The New Grove Dictionary of
Music and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie. London; Macmillan, 2001,
Vol.10, pp. 396-410.
Imbault, Jean-Jérôme. Catalogue thématiques des ouvrages de musique, Introduction de
[with an introduction by] Rita Benton and avec un index des compositeurs cités [an
154
index of compositions cited], Vol. 7 of Archives de l’Édition Musicale Française,
publiées sous la direction de [published by] François Lesure, Geneva: Minkoff
Reprint, 1972 is reprint of Paris, 1792.
Irving, John. Mozart’s Piano Sonatas: Contexts, Sources, Style, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1999 is reprint of 1997.
Jahn, Otto. W. A. Mozart, 2 vols., ed. and rev. by Hermann Abert, Leipzig: Breitkopt &
Härtel, 1924 is the sixth edition of 1921.
Joachim, Joseph. Revisionsbericht, Serie VIII, XIII-XXII: Verzeichniss der benutzten
Originalhandschriften. Leipzig: Breitkopf an Härtel, 1888.
Johansson, Cari. J.J. & B. Hummel: Musik-Publishing and Thematic Catalogues, 3 vols.,
Vol. 3 of Publikationer utgivna av Kungl. Musikaliska Akademiens Bibliotek /
Publications of The Library of the Royal Swedish Academy of Music. Stockholm:
Almqvist & Wiskell Informationsindustrie AB Uppsala, 1972. [Vol. 1: Text; Vol. 2:
Music-Publishing Catalogues in Facsimile; Vol. 3: Thematic Catalogue 1768-74 in
Facsimile].
Jong, J. de. “En norskcomponist: Edvard Grieg.” De Tijdspiegel, 1881, [no vol. number], 4
pages.
Jost, Peter. “‘Eine Norwegisierung Mozarts?’ Zu Edvard Griegs Bearbeitungen Mozartscher
Klaviersonaten,” in: Im Dienst der Quellen zur Musik: Festschrift Gertraut
Haberkamp zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. by Paul Mai. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 2002, pp.
595-607.
Just, Martin. “Zur Klaviersonate F-Dur, KV 332,” in: Mozart-Jahrbuch 1973/1974, pp. 211-
216.
Keefe, Simon P. “Storace Family,” in: The Mozart Cambridge Encyclopedia, ed. by Cliff
Eisen and Simon P. Keefe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 493-
494.
King, Alec Hyatt. A Review of Mozart’s Thematic Catalogue in: Music & Letters, 72/4 (Nov
1991), pp. 597-599.
King, Alec Hyatt. Four Hundred Years of Music Printing. London: Trustees of the British
Museum, 1964.
King, Alec Hyatt. “The Nature of Mozart’s Genius: Some Analogies and Reflections,” in:
Mozart in Retrospect: Studies in Criticism and Bibliography, ed. by Alec Hyatt King.
London and New York: Oxford University Press, 1956, pp. 188-197.
[Kinsky, Georg]. Das Werk Beethovens: Thematisch-bibliographisches Verzeichnis seiner
sämtlichen vollendeten Kompositionen, von [by] Georg Kinsky, nach dem Tode des
Verfassers abgeschloßen und herausgegeben [after the death of the author completed
and edited by] Hans Halm. Munich and Duisburg: G. Henle Verlag, 1955.
Kitson, Charles Herbert. Invertible Counterpoint and Canon. London and New York:
Oxford University Press, 1970.
Klinkenberg, Hans Martin. “artes liberales / arte mechanicae,” in: Historisches Wörterbuch
der Philosophie, ed. by Joachim Ritter and Karlfried Gründer, Basel and Stuttgart:
Verlag Schwake, 1971- , Vol. 1, pp. 531-535.
Koch, Heinrich Christoph. Versuch einer Anleitung zur Composition. 3 vols. Leipzig: Bey
A. F. Böhme, 1782-1793; also partial English translation as Nancy Kovaleff Baker,
trans. with introduction and annotations, Heinrich Christoph Koch: Introductory Essay
155
on Composition, part of Music Theory Translation Series, ed. by Claude V. Palisca.
New Haven, Connecticut and London: Yale University Press, 1983.
Köchel, Ludwig Ritter von. Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis sämtlicher Tonwerke
Wolfgang Amadé Mozarts nebst Angabe der verlorengegangenen, angefangenen, von
fremder Hand bearbeiteten, zweifelhaften und unterschobenen Kompositionen, ed. by
Franz Giegling et al. Wiesbaden: Breitkopf & Härtel; 1964 is sixth ed. of Leipzig:
Breitkopf & Härtel, 1862.
Köhler, Louis. Der Clavierunterricht: Studien, Erfahrungen und Ratschläge, Leipzig: J. J.
Weber, 1905 is sixth edition of 1861.
Köhler, Louis. Führer durch den Clavierunterricht: Ein Repertorium der Clavierliteratur,
etc. als kritischer Wegweiser für Lehrer und Schüler. Leipzig: J. Schuberth, 1894 is
ninth edition of 1859.
Köhler, Louis. Systematische Lehrmethode für Klavierspiel und Musik, 2 vols. Leipzig:
Breitkopf & Härtel, 1888 is third edition of 1857-1858.
Komaiko, Robert. “The Four-Hand Piano Arrangements of Brahms and Their Role in the
Nineteenth Century.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University, 1975.
Konrad, Ulrich. Mozart-Werkverzeichnis: Kompositionen — Fragmente — Skizzen —
Bearbeitungen — Abschriften — Texte. Kassel and Basel: Bärenreiter, 2005.
Kraus, Joseph C. “Chromatic Third Relations in Mozart’s Late Instrumental Works,” in:
Bericht über den Internationalen Mozart-Kongreß Salzburg 1991, 2 vols., ed. by
Rudolph Angermüller et al. as Mozart-Jahrbuch 1991 (Internationale Stiftung
Mozarteum). Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1992, Vol. 2, pp. 1056-1065.
Kreitz, Helmut. “Abbé Georg Vogler als Musiktheoretiker,” Unpublished Ph.D.
Dissertation, Universität Saarbrücken, 1957.
Kreyszig, Walter. “Das Menuett W. A. Mozarts unter dem Einfluß von F. J. Haydns ‘gantz
neue besondere art’: Zur Phrasenstruktur in den Menuetten der ‘Haydn-Quartette’,” in:
Bericht über den Internationalen Mozart-Kongress Salzburg 1991, 2 vols. ed. by
Rudolph Angermüller et al. as Mozart-Jahrbuch 1991 (Internationale Stiftung
Mozarteum). Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1991.Vol.2, pp.655-664.
Kreyszig, Walter. “Der Begriff der Fantasie bei Mozart und dessen Beeinflussung durch
Sonate, Praeludium und Toccata: Zur Wechselbeziehung zwischen Satztechnik und
Gattung in der c-Moll-Fantasie KV 475,” in: Internaionaler Musikwissenschaftlicher
Kongress zum Mozartjahr 1991, Baden-Vienna, 2-7 December 1991: Bericht. 2 vols.,
ed. by Ingrid Fuchs. Tutzing, Germany: Hans Schneider, 1993, Vol.2, pp. 693-715.
Kreyszig, Walter. “Humanismus, musikalischer,” in: Pauly’s Realenzyklopädie der
Klassischen Altertumswissenschaften: Rezeptionsgeschichte, 3 vols., Stuttgart:
Metzler, 1998- , Vol. 2 (2000), cols. 560-563; also in English translation as Walter
Kreyszig, “IV Music,” in Classical Tradition, Vol. 2: DEM-IUS, ed. by Mandred
Landfester in corporation with Hubert Cancik and Helmuth Schneider, part of Brill’s
Encyclopaedia of the Ancient World: New Pauly. Leiden and Boston, Massachusetts:
Brill, 2007, cols. 1036-1039.
Kreyszig, Walter. “Tracing Wolfgang Hildesheimer’s Assessment of Wolfgang Amadeus
Mozart’s Legacy to Franz Schubert’s Diary Entry of 1816: The Case of Mozart’s
String Quintet in G-minor, KV 516 (1787),” in: Mozart — eine Herausforderung für
Literatur und Denken / Mozart — A Challenge for Literature and Thought, ed. by
Rüdiger Görner in collaboration with Carly McLaughlin as Vol. 89 of Conference
156
Reports [Kongressberichte], Series [Reihe] A of Jahrbuch für Internationale
Germanistik: Mozart-eine Herausforderung für Literatur und Denken/Mozart-A
Challenge for Literature and Thought. Bern and New York: Peter Lang, 2007, pp.
177-233.
Kreyszig, Walter. “Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Motivische Arbeit: Aspects of Sonata Form
in the Minuets of KV 421 (=417b) and KV 458 and Their Relationship to the Scherzi
of Joseph Haydn’s opus 33,” in: Essays by Alumnae and Alumni of the Don Wright
Faculty of Music, University of Western Ontario, ed. by James Grier as Vols. 19-20
(2000-2001) of Studies in Music from the University of Western Ontario. London,
Ontario: University of Western Ontario, 2006, pp.199-256.
Kropfinger, Klaus. Wagner and Beethoven: Richard Wagner’s Reception of Beethoven,
trans. by Peter Palmer. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Krummel, Donald W. and Stanley Sadie, eds. Music Printing and Publishing, part of The
Norton / Grove Handbooks in Music. New York and London: W.W. Norton, 1990.
Kühnert, Friedmar. Allgemeinbildung und Fachbildung in der Antike, Vol. 30 of Deutsche
Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin: Schrifen der Sektion Altertumswissenschaft.
Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1961.
Kühnert, Friedmar. “Zur Reihenfolge der artes liberales in der Antike,” in: Wissenschaftliche
Zeitschrift der Universität Rostock 12 (1953), pp. 249-257.
Lawford-Hinrichsen, Irene. Music Publishing and Patronage, C.F. Peters, 1800 to the
Holocaust. Kenton: Edition Press, 2000.
Lenneberg, Hans. “Johann Mattheson on Affect and Rhetoric in Music,” in: The Journal of
Music Theory 2 (1958), pp. 47-84 and 193-236.
Lester, Joel. Compositional Theory in the Eighteenth Century. Cambridge, Massachusetts
and London: Harvard University Press, 1992.
Leuchtmann, Horst. “Kullak, (1) Theodor Kullak,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music
and Musicians, 29 vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie, London: Macmillan, 2001, Vol. 14, pp.
19-20.
Levin, Mona. “Edvard Grieg: A True Cultural Giant,” in: Listen to Norway: Musical
Review, Vol. 1/1 (1993), pp. 6-12.
[Liszt, Franz]. Franz Liszt: Transkriptionen II-IV / Ferenc Liszt: Transcriptions II-IV —
Symphonies de Beethoven Nos. 1-9, herausgegeben von / edited by Zoltán Farkas et
al., as Vols. 17-19 of [Franz Liszt]: Freie Bearbeitungen und Transkriptionen für
Klavier zu zwei Händen / [Ferenc Liszt]: Free Arrangements and Transcriptions for
Piano Solo, zusammengestellt von/ compiled by Imre Sulyok and Imre Mezö as Series
2 of Franz Liszt: Neue Ausgabe Sämtlicher Werke / Ferenc Liszt: New Edition of the
Complete Works. Budapest: Editio Musica, 1991 – 1993.
Liszt, Franz. “Réminiscences de Don Juan de Mozart: Grande fantaisie (R 288, SW 418),”
in: Franz Liszt: Freie Bearbeitungen V / Ferenc Liszt: Free Arrangements V,
herausgegeben von/ edited by Adrienne Kaczmarczyk and Imre Mezö as Vol. 5 of
[Franz Liszt]: Freie Bearbeitungen und Transkriptionen für Klavier zu zwei Händen /
[Ferenc Liszt]: Free Arrangements and Transcriptions for Piano Solo,
zusammengestellt von / compiled by Imre Sulyok and Imre Mezö as Series 2 of Franz
Liszt: Neue Ausgabe Sämtlicher Werke / Ferenc Liszt: New Edition of the Complete
Works. Budapest: Editio Musica, 2000, pp. 90-124.
157
Liszt, François. “Rigoletto de Verdi” (1859), in: De Verdi Trois Paraphrases de Concert
pour Piano. Leipzig and New York: J. Schuberth, 1860, pp. 4-14.
Liszt, Franz. The Great Liszt Opera Paraphrases [Sound Recording], performed by Jerome
Lowenthal (piano), New York: RCA Records, 1981.
Loesser, Arthur. Men, Women, and Pianos: A Social History, New York: Dover, 1990 is a
reprint of 1954.
London, Justin M. “Riepel and Absatz: Poetic and Prosaic Aspects of Phrase Structure in
Eighteenth-Century Theory,” in: The Journal of Musicology: A Quarterly Review of
Music history, Criticism, Analysis, and Performance Practices 8 (1990), pp. 505-519.
Longyear, Rey M. “The Minor Mode in Eighteenth Century Sonata Form,” in: Journal of
Music Theory 15 (1971), pp. 182-229.
Lowinsky, Edward E. “On Mozart’s Rhythm,” in: The Creative World of Mozart, ed. by
Paul Henry Lang. New York: W. W. Norton, 1963, pp. 31-55.
Mahoney, Dennis F. ed., The Literature of German Romanticism. Rochester, New York:
Camden House, 2004.
Marks, F. Helena. The Sonata Its Form and Meaning: As Exemplified In the Piano Sonatas
by Mozart — A Descriptive Analysis. London: William Reeves, [1921].
Marmontel, Antoine François. Art classique et moderne du piano, 2 vols., Vol. 1: Conseils
d’un Professeur sur l’enseignement et l’estétique du piano. Paris: Henri Heugel, 1876.
Matthäus. Wolfgang. Johann André, Musikverlag zu Offenbach am Main: Verlagsgeschichte
und Bibliographie, 1772-1800, ed. by Hans Schneider. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1973.
Maulbetsch, Stephan. “Die Kunst, Töne zu verbinden: Heinrich Christoph Koch als
Komponist und Theoretiker,” in: Mozart-Studien, ed. by Manfred Hermann Schmid,
Vol. 12, Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 2003, pp. 217-277.
McHose, Allen Irvine. The Contrapuntal Harmonic Technique of the 18th Century, part of
Eastman School of Music Series. New York: F.S. Crofts, 1947.
Melograni, Piero. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: A Biography, trans. by Lydia G. Cochrane.
Chicago, Illinois and London: The University of Chicago Press, 2007.
Meyer, Herbert. Mozart und Mannheim: Ausstellung des Städtisches. Reiss-Museums,
Mannheim, 27. Nov. 1971-12. März 1972. Mannheim: Städtisches Reiss-Museum,
1971.
Michelsen, Kari. “Nordraak [Nordraach], Rikard,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music
and Musicians, 29 vols, ed. by Stanley Sadie, New York: Macmillan, 2001, Vol.18,
pp. 37-38.
Mies, Paul. “Die Artikulationszeichen Strich und Punkt bei Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart,” in:
Die Musikforschung 11 (1958), pp. 428-455.
Milhoffer, Petra. “Mozart — ein ewiges Wunderkind? Nachdenken über Erziehung und
Werdegang eines Genies,” in: Mitteilungen der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum
40/1-4 (1992), pp. 1-22.
Monrad-Johansen, David. Edvard Grieg, translated from the Norwegian by Madge
Robertson. New York: Tudor Publishing, 1945.
Moyer, Ann E. Musica scientia: Musical Scholarship in the Italian Renaissance. Ithaca,
New York and London: Cornell University Press, 1992.
[Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus]. Mozart: Briefe und Aufzeichnungen ― Gesamtausgabe,
herausgegeben von [ed. for] der Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg,
gesammelt und erläutert [collected and explained by] Wilhelm A. Bauer, Otto Erich
158
Deutsch, und Joseph Heinz Eibl, 7 vols. (1755-1975), Band III. Kassel and Basel:
Bärenreiter, 1780-1786.
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. “Sonate in F: 1. und 2. Satz = KV 533, 3. Satz = KV 494,” in:
[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]. Klaviersonaten, Vol. 2, ed. by Wolfgang Plath and
Wolfgang Rehm as Werkgruppe 25 of [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]: Klaviermusik,
Series 9 of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Neue Ausgabe sämtlicher Werke, ed. by
Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg in collaboration with the Mozart Cities [in
Verbindung mit den Mozartstädten] Augsburg, Salzburg, and Vienna. Kassel:
Bärenreiter, 1986.
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. Mozart’s Thematic Catalogue: A Facsimile — British Library,
Stefan Zweig MS 63, with introduction and transcription by Albi Rosenthal and Alan
Tyson. London: The British Library, 1990; also Ithaca, New York: Cornell University
Press, 1990; also as Otto Erich Deutsch, ed., Mozart’s Catalogue of His Works, 1784-
1791. New York: H. Reichner, 1938, also 1956.
[Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus]. Piano Sonatas [Sound Recording], performed by Mitsuko
Uchida (piano), United States: Philips, 1988.
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. Piano Sonatas in Eb Major, KV 282, Vol. 1, pp. 40-46; in C
Major, KV 309, Vol. 1, pp. 79-95; in C Major, KV 330, Vol. 2, pp. 1-13; in A Major,
KV 331, Vol. 2, pp. 14-27; in D Major, KV 284, Vol. 1, pp. 59-78; in D Major, KV
311, Vol. 1, pp. 96-113; in C minor, KV 457, Vol. 2, pp.75-91; in Bb Major, KV 570,
Vol. 2, pp. 120-132; in C Major, KV 279, Vol. 1, pp. 1-13; in F Major, KV 280, Vol.
1, pp. 14-25; in Bb Major, KV 281, Vol. 1, pp. 26-39; in G Major, KV 283, Vol. 1, pp.
47-58; in A minor, KV 310, Vol. 1, pp. 114-130; in F Major, KV 332, Vol. 2, pp. 28-
46; in Bb Major, KV 333, Vol. 2, pp. 47-65; in F Major, KV 533/494, Vol. 2, pp. 92-
109. Vienna: Wiener Urtext Edition, 1973.
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. “Sonate in F: 1. und 2. Satz = KV 533, 3. Satz = KV 494,” in:
[Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]. Klaviersonaten, Vol. 2, ed. by Wolfgang Plath and
Wolfgang Rehm as Werkgruppe 25 of [Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart]: Klaviermusik,
Series 9 of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Neue Ausgabe sämtlicher Werke, ed. by
Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum Salzburg in collaboration with the Mozart Cities [in
Verbindung mit den Mozartstädten] Augsburg, Salzburg, and Vienna, Kassel:
Bärenreiter, 1986, pp. 98-121.
[Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus]. Sonate pour le Forte-Piano, ou Clavecin Composé par M.
W. A. Mozart: au Service De Sa Majesté J. et R. Vienna: Hoffmeister, 1788 [first
printed edition housed at Salzburg, Bibliothek der Internationalen Stiftung
Mozarteum, No.142].
Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus. Sonaten für Klavier zu Zwei Händen, according to the sources,
newly edited by C. A. Martienssen and Wilhelm Weismann. Frankfurt am Main,
London, and New York: C. F. Peters, 1951.
[Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus]. The Complete Piano Sonatas [Sound Recording], performed
by Ronald Brautigam (fortepiano). Djursholm, Sweden: BIS, 2000.
Müller, Hans-Christian. Bernhard Schott, Hofmusikstecher in Mainz: Die Frühgeschichte
seines Musikverlages bis 1797, mit einem Verzeichnis der Verlagswerke, 1779-1797,
Vol.16 of Beiträge zur Mittelrheinischen Musikgeschichte, ed. by Arbeitsgemeinschaft
für Mittelrheinische Musikgeschichte. Mainz: B. Schott’s Söhne, 1977.
159
Neumann, Hans and Carl Schachter. “The Two Versions of Mozart’s Rondo, K 494,” in:
The Music Forum I (1967), pp. 17-20.
Neumann, Frederick. “Dots and Strokes in Mozart,” in: Early Music 21 (1993), pp. 429-435.
Neumann, Frederick. Ornamentation and Improvisation in Mozart. Princeton, New Jersey:
Princeton University Press, 1986.
Newman, William. S. “The Recognition of Sonata Form by Theorists of the Eighteenth and
Nineteenth Centuries,” in: Papers of American Musicological Society (1941), pp. 21-
29.
[no author]. Collection Litolff (50 Jahre): Haus-Chronik von Henry Litolff’s Verlag,
Braunschweig. [Braunschweig]: Litolff, 1914.
[no author]. [no title], in: Dwight’s Journal of Music 4, No. 6, Boston, Mass., 12 November
1853, p. 41.
[no author]. “Vom Wunderkind zur Meisterschaft,” in: Mitteilungen für die Mozart-
Gemeinde in Berlin, ed. by Rudolf Genée, Vol. 21 (February 1906), pp. 379-389.
Oldman, Cecil Bernard. “Constanze Nissen: Four Unpublished Letters from Mozart’s
Widow,” in: The Music Review 17 (February 1956), pp. 69-70.
Pahlen, Kurt. Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: Sein Leben und seine Zeit. Herrsching: Manfred
Pawlak Verlagsgesellschaft, 1991.
Palisca, Claude V. Humanism in Italian Renaissance Musical Thought. New Haven,
Connecticut and London: Yale University Press, 1985.
Pauly, Reinhard G. Music in the Classic Period, part of Prentice Hall History of Music
Series, ed. by H. Wiley Hitchcock. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall,
2000 is the fourth edition of Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall 1965.
Pepping, Ernst. Übungen im doppelten Kontrapunkt und im Kanon, part of Der polyphone
Satz, Berlin: Walther de Gruyter, 1957.
Pestelli, Giorgio. The Age of Mozart and Beethoven, trans. by Eric Cross. London and New
York: Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Pietzsch, Gerhard. Studien zur Geschichte der Musiktheorie im Mittelalter, 2 vols. Halle an
der Saale: [no publisher], 1929 [Vol. 1. Die Klassifikation der Musik von Boetius bis
Ugolino von Orvieto; Vol. 2. Die Musik im Erziehungs- und Bildungsideal des
ausgehenden Altertums und frühen Mittelalters].
Plantinga, Leon B. Romantic Music: A History of Musical Style in Nineteenth-Century
Europe, part of The Norton Introduction to Music History. New York and London:
W.W. Norton, 1984.
Plantinga, Leon B. Schumann as Critic, Vol. 4 of Yale Studies in the History of Music, ed.
by William G. Waite, New Haven, Connecticut and London: Yale University Press,
1967.
Plath, Wolfgang. “Zur Datierung der Klaviersonaten KV 279-284,” in: Acta Mozartiana 21
(1974), pp. 26-30.
Porter, Roy and Mikuláš Teich, eds., Romanticism in National Context. Cambridge and New
York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Price, John Valdimir. ed. Aesthetics and Music in the Eighteenth Century, Vol. 1 by William
Holder; Vol. 2 by James Grassineau; Vol. 3 by Charles Avison; Vol. 4 by John Potter;
Vol. 5 by Francesco Algarotti; Vol. 6 by Anselm Bayly; Vol. 7 by Benjamin
Stillingfleet and William Jackson. Bristol, England: Thoemmes Press, 2003.
160
Prout, Ebenezer. Double Counterpoint and Canon, part of the series Augener's edition. New
York: Greenwood Press, 1969 is reprint of London: Augener, 1981.
Purdy, Claire Lee. Historien om Edvard Grieg, part of Elite-Serien. Oslo: Forlagshuset,
1974.
Raab, Armin. Funktionen des Unisono: Dargestellt an den Streichquartetten und Messen
von Joseph Haydn. Frankfurt am Main: Haag and Herchen, 1990.
Rampe, Siegbert. Mozarts Claviermusik: Klangwelt und Aufführungspraxis: Ein Handbuch.
Kassel and New York: Bärenreiter, 1995.
Ratner, Leonard. Classic Music: Expression, Form, and Style. New York: Schirmer Books,
1980.
Redepennig, Dorothea. “‘Zu eig’nem Wort und eig’ner Weise’ …: Liszts Wagner-
Transkriptionen,” in: Die Musikforschung 39 (1986), pp. 305-317.
Reed, Nola Jane. “The Theories of Joseph Riepel as Expressed in His Anfangsgründe zur
musicalischen Setzkunst (1752-1768).” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of
Rochester, 1983.
Richards, Annette. “Automatic Genius, Mozart and the Mechanical Sublime,” in: Music and
Letters 80 (1999), pp. 366-389.
Richter, Ernst Friedrich. Die Grundzüge der musikalischen Formen und ihre Analyse.
Leipzig: Georg Wigand, 1852.
Riepel, Joseph. Anfangsgründe zur musicalischen Setzkunst, nicht zwar nach
altmathematischer Einbildungs-Art der Zirkel-harmonisten sondern durchgehends mit
sichtbaren Exempeln abgefasset, 10 vols., [Vol.1 (De rhythmopoeia, oder Von der
Tactordnung; Regensburg and Vienna, 1752); Vol. 2 (Grundregeln zur Tonordnung
insgemein; Frankfurt am Main and Leipzig, 1755); Vol. 3 (Gründliche Erklärung der
Tonordnung insbesondere, zugleich aber für die mehreren Organisten insgemein;
Frankfurt am Main and Leipzig, 1757); Vol. 4 (Erläuterung der betrüglichen
Tonordnung; Augsburg, 1765); Vol. 5 (Unentbehrliche Anmerkungen zum
Contrapunct, über die durchgehend-verwechselt-und ausschweifenden Noten;
Regensburg, 1768); Vol. 6 (Vom Contrapunct [Manuscript]); Vols. 7-8 (Baβschlüssel,
as ist, Anleitung für Anfänger und Liebhaber der Setzkunst, die schöne Gedanken
haben und zu Papier bringen, aber nur Klagen, daβ sie keinen Baβ recht dazu zu
setzen wissen; Regensburg, 1786); Vol. 9 (Der Fugen-Betrachtung erster Theil
[Manuscript]); Vol. 10 (Der Fugen-Betrachtung zweyter Theil [Manuscript]).
Robinson, William. “Conceptions of Mozart in German Criticism and Biography, 1791-
1828: Changing Images of a Musical Genius.” Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Yale
University, 1974.
Rosen, Charles. Sonata Forms. New York and London: W. W. Norton, 1988 is second
edition of 1980.
Rosen, Charles. The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven. New York: W. W. Norton,
1997 is the expanded version of New York: Viking Press, 1971.
Rosen, Charles. The Romantic Generation (The Charles Eliot Norton Lectures). Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1995.
Rosenberg, Richard. Die Klaviersonaten Mozarts: Gestalt- und Stilanalyse. Hofheim am
Taunus: Friedrich Hofmeister, 1972.
Rowland, David. A History of Pianoforte Pedalling, part of Cambridge Musical Texts and
Monographs. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993.
161
Sachs, Klaus-Jürgen. “Contrapunctus/Kontrapunkt,” in: Handwörterbuch der musikalischen
Terminologie, ed. by Hans-Heinrich Eggebrecht, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag,
1982.
Schiedermair, Luwig. “Mozart und die Gegenwart,” in: Neues Mozart-Jahrbuch 1 (1941),
pp. 24-38.
Schjelderup, Gerhard. Edvard Grieg: Biographie und Würdigung seiner Werke. Leipzig: C.
F. Peters, 1908.
Schnapper, Edith Betty. ed., The British Union Catalogue of Early Music Printed Before the
Year 1801. 2 vols. London: Butterworth, 1957.
Schneider, Hans. Der Musikverleger Heinrich Philipp Bossler, 1744-1812. Tutzing, 1985.
[Schoenberg, Arnold]. Style and Idea: Selected Writings of Arnold Schoenberg. ed. by
Leonard Stein with translations by Leo Black. New York: St. Martins Press, 1975.
Schwarzmaier, Ernst. Die Takt-und Tonordnung Joseph Riepels: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte
der Formenlehre im 18. Jahrhundert, Vol. 4 of Regensburger Beiträge zur
Musikwissenschaft, ed. by Hermann Beck. Regensburg: Gustav Bosse, 1938.
Shamgar, Beth. “On Locating the Retransition in Classic Sonata Form,” in: The Music
Review 42 (1981), pp. 130-143.
Sheldon, David A. “The Concept Galant in the Eighteenth Century,” in: Journal of
Musicological Research 9 (1989), pp. 89-108.
Sheldon, David A. “The Galant Style Revisited and Re-Evaluated,” in: Acta Musicologica
47 (1975), pp. 240-270.
Silbiger, Alexander, ed. Keyboard Music Before 1700 as part of Studies in Musical Genres
and Repertories, ed. by R. Larry Todd, New York: Schirmer Books and London:
Prentice Hall International, 1995.
Smith, Mortimer Brewster. The Life of Ole Bull. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press; For the American-Scandinavian Foundation, New York, 1947 is the
second printing of 1943.
Smyth, David H. “Codas in Classical Form: Aspect of Large-Scale Rhythm and Pattern
Completion.” Unpublished Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, 1985.
Spaethling, Robert. ed. and trans., Mozart’s Letters, Mozart’s Life. New York: W.W.
Norton, 2000.
Sponheuer, Bernd. “Zum Problem des doppelten Finales in Mozarts ‘erstem’ Klavierkonzert
KV 175: Zwei Versuche der Synthetisierung von ‘Gelehrtem’ und ‘Galantem’,” in:
Archiv für Musikwissenschaft 42 (1985), pp. 102-120.
Stafford, William. “Genius,” in: The Cambridge Mozart Encyclopedia, ed. by Cliff Eisen
and Simon P. Keefe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006, pp. 190-195.
Stauffer, George B. “The Breitkopf Family and Its Role in Eighteenth-Century Music
Publishing,” in: J.S. Bach, the Breitkopfs, and Eighteenth-Century Music Trade, ed. by
George B. Stauffer as Vol. 2 of Bach Perspectives, ed. by George J. Buelow et al.
Lincoln, Nebraska and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1996, pp. 1-10.
Steel, Christopher. E. Grieg. Borough Green, Sevenoaks, Kent: Novello, 1987.
Stein, Richard Heinrich Grieg: Eine Biographie. Berlin: Schuster & Loeffler, 1922 is third
edition of 1920.
Stockhammer, Robert. Franz Liszt: Im Triumphzug durch Europa. Vienna: Österreichischer
Bundesverlag, 1986.
Storaas, Reidar. Edvard Grieg. Bergen: Bergens tidende, 1993.
162
[Storace, Stephen]. Storace’s Collection of Original Harpsichord Music. printed for Stephen
Storace, N. 23, London: Birchall, 1788.
Thompson, Wendy. Edvard Grieg, part of Series The World’s Greatest Composers.
Watford: Exley, 1995.
Tischler, Hans. Trans. as Willi Apel, The History of Keyboard Music To 1700. Bloomington,
Indiana and London: Indiana University Press, 1972.
Todd, R. Larry and Peter Williams, eds., Perspective on Mozart’s Performance, part of
Cambridge Studies in Performance Studies, ed. by Peter Williams et al. Cambridge
and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
Veit, Joachim. “Abt Voglers ‘Verbesserungen’ Bachscher Choräle,” in: Alte Musik als
ästhetische Gegenwart: Bach, Händel, Schütz — Bericht über den Internationalen
Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongress, Stuttgart 1985, 2 vols., ed. by Dietrich Berke und
Dorothee Hanemann in collaboration with Gesellschaft für Musikforschung. Kassel:
Bärenreiter, 1987, Vol. 1, pp. 500-512.
Verdi, Giuseppe. Rigoletto: Melodrama in Three Acts by / Melodramma in tre atti de
Francesco Maria Piave, ed. by Martin Chusid as Vol. 17 of [Giuseppe Verdi]: Operas
/ Opere tetarali, Series / Sezione I of The Works of / Le opera di Giuseppe Verdi, ed.
by Philip Gossett et al. Chicago, Illinois and London: The University Chicago Press
and Milan: Ricordi, 1983.
Verzeichnis des Musikalien-Verlages von Breitkopf & Härtel in Leipzig: Vollständig bis
Ende 1902. [no city]: [no publishing house], [no date].
Verzeichniss des Musikalien-Verlages von N. Simrock in Berlin in alphabetischer
Reihenfolge mit vorgeschickter systematischer Uebersicht: Vollständig bis 1897.
Berlin: [no publishing house], [no date].
Walker, Alan Franz Liszt: The Virtuoso Years, 1811-1847. New York and London: Alfred
Knopf. 1990 is second edition of 1983.
Weber, William. Music and the Middle Class: The Social Structure of Concert Life in
London, Paris and Vienna Between 1830 and 1848, part of Music in Nineteenth
Century Britain. New York: Holmes and Meier, 2004 is second edition of 1975.
Webster, James. “Sonata Form,” in: The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 29
vols., ed. by Stanley Sadie. London: MacMillan, 2001, Vol. 23, pp. 687-701.
Weinmann, Alexander. Die Wiener Verlagswerke von Franz Anton Hoffmeister, Series
[Reihe] 2, Nr. [Folge] 8 of Beiträge zur Geschichte des Alt-Wiener Musikverlages,
part of Wiener Urtext Ausgabe, ed. by Karl Heinz Füssl and H.C. Robbins Landon.
Vienna: Universal Edition, 1964.
Weinmann, Alexander. Vollständiges Verlagsverzeichnis Artaria & Comp., Reihe [Series] 2,
Folge [Number] 2 of Beiträge zur Geschichte des Alt-Wiener Musikverlages, ed. by
Alexander Weinmann. [Vienna]: [Universal Edition], 1978 is second rev. edition of
Vienna: Ludwig Krenn, 1952.
Welck, Karin and Liselotte Homering. eds. 176 Tage W.A. Mozart in Mannheim.
Mannheim: Reiß-Museum der Stadt Mannheim and Edition Braus, [1991].
Wethe, Inger. Biografien om Edvard Grieg: En trollmann emd toner. Oslo: Gyldendal,
2007.
Whistling, Carl Friedrich, Adolph Hofmeister, and Friedrich Hofmeister. C. F. Whistling's
Handbuch der musikalischen Literatur oder allgemeines systematischgeordnetes
Verzeichniss der in Deutschland und in der angrenzenden Ländern gedruckten
163
Musikalien, auch musikalischen Schriften und Abbildungen mit Anzeige der Verleger
und Preise, 3 vols. Leipzig: Hofmeister, 1845 and 1975.
Williams, Adrian. Portrait of Liszt by Himself and His Contemporaries. Oxford: Clarendon
Press and New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.
Wolf, Eugene K. “Zur Enstehungsgeschichte des Mannheiner sinfonsichen Stiles,” in:
Mannheim und Italien: Zur Vorgeschichte der Mannheimer ― Bericht über das
Mannheimer Kolloquium im März 1982, ed. in commission by [im Auftrag der]
Mozartgemeinde Kurfpalz by Roland Würtz as Vol. 25 of Beiträge zur
Mittelrheinischen Musikgeschichte. Mainz and New York: Schott, 1984.
Wolff, Christoph. “Mozart’s Messiah: ‘The Spirit of Handel’ from van Swieten’s Hands,”
in: Music and Civilization: Essays in Honor of Paul Henry Lang, ed. by Edmond
Strainchamps and Maria Rika Maniates in collaboration with Christopher Hatch. New
York and London: W.W. Norton, 1984, pp. 1-14.
Wolff, Christoph. “Musikalische ‘Gedankenfolge’ und ‘Einheit des Stoffes’: Zu Mozarts
Klaviersonate in F-Dur (K. 533+494),” in: Das musikalische Kunstwerk: Geschichte,
Ästhetik, Theorie — Festschrift Carl Dahlhaus zum 60. Geburtstag, eds. by Hermann
Danuser et al. Laaber: Laaber-Verlag, 1988, pp. 241-255.
Wolff, Christoph. “Two Köchel Numbers, One Work,” in Music as Social and Cultural
Practice: Essays in Honour of Reinhard Strohm, ed. by Melania Bucciarelli and Berta
Joncus, Woodbridge: Suffolk, The Boydell Press, 2007, pp. 185-195.
Wustmann, Gustav. “Zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Schumannischen Zeitschrift für
Musik,” in: Zeitschrift der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft 8 (1907), pp. 396-403.
Würtz, Roland and Hans Budian. “Mozart und Mannheim: Eine Bibliographie,” in: Das
Mannheimer Mozart-Buch, in commission of [im Auftrag der] Mozartgemeinde
Mannheim-Ludwigshafen-Heildelberg, ed. by Roland Würtz as Vol. 47 of
Taschenbücher zur Musikwissenschaft. Wilhelmshaven: Heinrichshofen, 1977, pp.
275-304.
164
Appendix A
Edvard Grieg’s Arrangements of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Keyboard Works:
A Survey of Primary Sources and Early Editions
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart Edvard Grieg

(Jan 27, 1756 ~ Dec 5, 1791, Austria) (June 15, 1843 ~ Sept 4, 1907, Norway)
Piano Sonatas and Fantasia Arrangements of Mozart Piano Sonatas with a freely composed second piano
part without opus numbers (Klaviersonaten von Mozart mit frei
hinzukomponierter Begleitung eines zweiten Klaviers)
Piece Composed Autograph First Edition Remarks Piece Composed Autograph First Edition Remarks
Location Location
Keyboard early 1775 Autograph in 1788 for the The film for the No.4. KV written in the no Ms. published in Ernst Wilhelm
Sonata in G Berlin PrStB first printed first printed 189h=283 winter of 1876- 1879-80 Fritzsch edition
Major, KV (Seit edition edition is now 1877 (No.4 in 1880) is the first
1
189h=283 Kriegsende located in edition in
verschollen) Krakow, Leipzig
Poland
Fantasia KV Oct 14, 1784 Mozarteum, 1785 for the C Minor No.2. KV 475 written in the no Ms. published in E.W. Fritzsch
2
475 + Sonata Salzburg, first printed Sonata was + KV 457 winter of 1876- 1879-80 edition is the
A1
3
KV 457 in C Austria edition published with 1877 (No.2 in 1880) first edition in
Minor published by C Minor Leipzig
Artaria in Fantasia as
4
Vienna. Op. 11 (1785,
Vienna)
Keyboard Jan 3, 1788 unknown K 533/494 as KV 533 for No. 1. KV 533 written in the National published in the only
Sonata in F one piece for First and + KV 494 winter of 1876- Library in Oslo, 1879-80 existing
5
Major, KV 533 the first printed Second 1877 Norway (No.1 in 1879) autograph
6
+ KV 494 edition by Movements) among these
Hoffmeister in Rondo K 494 arrangements;
7
Vienna, 1788 for Third E.W. Fritzsch
Movement edition is the
(1788; K494 first edition in
Autograph to Leipzig
Dr. Felix
Salzer in New
York but
unknown now)
Keyboard June 26, 1788 unknown 1805 for the First printed No.3. KV 545 written in the no Ms. published in E.W. Fritzsch
Sonata in C first printed edition in winter of 1876- 1879-80 edition is the
8
Major, KV 545 edition Czech 1877 (No.3 in 1880) first edition in
Republic Leipzig
A1
1
Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis, p. 217; Konrad, Mozart-Werkverzeichnis, pp. 144-
145.
2
155.
3
Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis, pp. 496-497; Konrad, Mozart-Werkverzeichnis, pp.
146-147.
4
5
147.
6
Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis, p. 548.
7
8
147.
A2
Appendix B
Printed Editions of Mozart’s Four Piano Sonatas1
Piano Sonata Fantasia and the Piano Sonata in Piano Sonata

in F major, Piano Sonata C major, KV in G major,
KV 533/494 in c minor, 545 (composed KV
(composed in KV 475 and KV in 1788) 189h=283
1788) 457 (composed in (composed in
1784) 1775)
Artaria & No Yes No No
Comp.
(Wien)2
André, Johann No No No No
(Offenbach am (First Edition) (First Edition) (First Edition)
Main)3 Yes Yes Yes
(Early Edition)4 (Early Edition)5 (Early Edition)6
Breitkopf & No No8 No9 No10
Härtel
(Leipzig)7
Götz, Johann No Yes No No
Michael (Early Edition)
(Mannheim,
Worms,
München)
Hoffmeister & Yes Yes Yes No
Comp. (First Edition)12 (Early Edition)13 (Early
(Wien)11 Edition)14
1
For survey of editions, see Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis, pp. 941-949.
2
Alexander Weinmann, Vollständiges Verlagsverzeichnis Artaria & Comp., Reihe [Series] 2, Folge
[Number] 2 of Beiträge zur Geschichte des Alt-Wiener Musikverlages, ed. by Alexander Weinmann
([Vienna]: [Universal Edition], 1978 is second rev. edition of Vienna: Ludwig Krenn, 1952).
3
Britta Constapel, Der Musikverlag Johann André in Offenbach am Main: Studien zur Verlagstätigkeit von
Johann Anton André und Verzeichnis der Musikalien von 1800 bis 1840, Vol. 21 of Würzburger
Musikhistorische Beiträge, begründet von [founded by] Wolfgang Osthoff, fortgeführt von [continued by]
Ulrich Konrad (Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1998), pp. 80-86 [“1.3.1.1. André als Mozart-Verleger”]; see
also Wolfgang Matthäus, Johann André, Musikverlag zu Offenbach am Main: Verlagsgeschichte und
Bibliographie, 1772-1800, ed. by Hans Schneider (Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1973).
4
Constapel, Der Musikverlag Johann André, p. 440: “V[erlags]N[umme]r 6327: Sonate für Klavier Nr. 17,
KV 533, Op.-Nr. 6/2.”
5
Ibid., p. 431: “V[erlags]N[umme]r 1525: Fantasie und Sonate für Klavier KV 475, 457”; p. 434:
“V[erlags]N[umme]r 3339: Fantasie und Sonate für Klavier, KV 475, 457.”
6
Ibid., p. 444: “V[erlags]N[umme]r 2142: Sonate für Klavier, KV 545, Op.-Nr. 112”; p. 444:
“V[erlags]N[umme]r 3448: Sonate für Klavier, KV 545, Op.-Nr. 112.”
7
Verzeichnis des Musikalien-Verlages von Breitkopf & Härtel in Leipzig: Vollständig bis Ende 1902 ([no
city]: [no publishing house], [no date]).
8
Ibid., p. 745.
9
Ibid., p. 745.
10
Ibid., p. 744.
11
Weinmann, Die Wiener Verlagswerke von Franz Anton Hoffmeister.
B1
1784) 1775)
Hummel, J.J. Yes16 Yes No No
(Berlin und (Early Edition)17
Amsterdam)15
12
Ibid., p. 245[“142 Sonate (F) Pfte. K 533 u. 494”].
13
The existence of early editions is not substantiated in publication of Alexander Weinmann (see Footnote
2 above).
14
Köchel in his listing made an unequivocal reference to this particular sonata as shown in the table of
Appendix B. In the catalogue of the publishing house, these is a reference to “280 Cah[ier] I VI Sonatines
(C, F, D) arr[angiert] v[on] Hoffmeister”; see Weinmann, Die Wiener Verlagswerke, p. 246. Presumably,
the cryptic reference to the key of C major may indeed refer to Mozart’s Keyboard Sonata in C Major, KV
545.
15
Cari Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel: Musik-Publishing and Thematic Catalogues, 3 vols., Vol. 3 of
Publikationer utgivna av Kungl. Musikaliska Akademiens Bibliotek / Publications of The Library of the
Royal Swedish Academy of Music (Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiskell Informationsindustrie AB Uppsala,
1972) [Vol. 1: Text; Vol. 2: Music-Publishing Catalogues in Facsimile; Vol. 3: Thematic Catalogue 1768-
74 in Facsimile].
16
(a) “Mozart, Son[ata], op. 17 — 1 R[eichs]th[a]l[er],” as cited in: Catalogus von musikalischen Werken,
welche in der Königl[ichen] privilegirten Noten-Fabrique und Handlung bey dem Commercienrath J. J.
Hummel, zu Berlin, sehr sauber gestochen und auf holländisch Papier gedruckt für beygesetzte Preise zu
haben sind 1797; as reproduced in: Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel Musik-Publishing and Thematic
Catalogues, Vol. 2, F. [p.] 42; (b) “Mozart, Son[ata], op. 17 — 1 R[eichs]th[a]l[er],” as cited in: Catalogus
von musikalischen Werken…1798, as reproduced in: Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel Musik-Publishing and
Thematic Catalogues, Vol. 2, F. [p.] 46; (c) “Mozart, Son[ata], op. 17 — 1 R[eichs]th[a]l[er],” as cited in:
Catalogus von musikalischen Werken…1802, as reproduced in: Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel Musik-
Publishing and Thematic Catalogues, Vol. 2, F. [p.] 50; (d) “Mozart, Son[ata], op. 17 — 1
R[eichs]th[a]l[er] [und] 16 Gr[oschen],” as cited in: Catalogus von musikalischen Werken…1819, as
reproduced in: Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel Musik-Publishing and Thematic Catalogues, Vol. 2, F. [p.]
54. With regard to the latter catalogue, Johansson assumes the year 1814 as a tentative date of publication.
The Sonata op. 17 presumably refers to Mozart’s Allegro und Andante für Klavier, KV 533, as cited in:
Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis, p. 605; see also Footnote 22. Curiously enough, Köchel
makes no reference to the Hummel edition in Appendix E of Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis; see
ibid., p. 944.
17
(a) “Mozart, Fantasia & Sonata, op. 4 — 1 R[eichs]th[a]l[er] [und] 4 Gr[oschen],” as cited in: Catalogus
von musikalischen Werken, welche in der Königl[ichen] privilegirten Noten-Fabrique und Handlung bey
dem Commercienrath J. J. Hummel, zu Berlin, sehr sauber gestochen und auf holländisch Papier gedruckt
für beygesetzte Preise zu haben sind 1792; as reproduced in: Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel Musik-
Publishing and Thematic Catalogues, Vol. 2, F. [p.] 34; (b) “Mozart, Fantasia et Sonata, op. 4 — 1
R[eichs]th[a]l[er] [und] 4 Gr[oschen],” as cited in: Catalogus von musikalischen Werken…1797; as
reproduced in: Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel Musik-Publishing and Thematic Catalogues, Vol. 2, F. [p.]
42; (c) “Mozart, Fantasia & Sonata, op. 4 — 1 R[eichs]th[a]l[er] [und] 4 Gr[oschen],” as cited in:
Catalogus von musikalischen Werken…1798, as reproduced in: Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel Musik-
Publishing and Thematic Catalogues, Vol. 2, F. [p.] 46; (d) “Mozart, Fantasia & Sonata, op. 4 — 1
R[eichs]th[a]l[er] [und] 4 Gr[oschen],” as cited in: Catalogus von musikalischen Werken…1802, F. [p.] 50;
(e) “Mozart, Fantasia & Sonata, op. 4 — 2 R[eichs]th[a]l[er],” as cited in: Catalogus von musikalischen
Werken…1819, as reproduced in: Johansson, J. J. & B. Hummel Musik-Publishing and Thematic
Catalogues, Vol. 2, F. [p.] 54. With regard to the latter catalogue, Johansson assumes the year 1814 as a
tentative date of publication.
B2
1784) 1775)
Schott, No Yes No No
Bernhard (Early Edition)19
(Mainz)18
Simrock, Yes Yes Yes No
Nikolaus (Early Edition) (Early Edition) (Early Edition)
(Bonn, Bonn
und Köln)20
Henning Yes No No No
(Amsterdam) (Early Edition)21
Birchall, Only Yes for No No No
Robert KV 494
(London) (Early Edition)
Bland & No No No Yes
Weller (Early
(London) Edition)22
Longman & No Yes No No
Broderip (Early Edition)
(London)
Imbault, J. J. Only Yes for No No No
(Paris)23 KV 494
(Early Edition)24
18
Hans-Christian Müller, Bernhard Schott, Hofmusikstecher in Mainz: Die Frühgeschichte seines
Musikverlages bis 1797, mit einem Verzeichnis der Verlagswerke, 1779-1797, Vol. 16 of Beiträge zur
Mittelrheinischen Musikgeschichte, ed. by Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Mittelrheinische Musikgeschichte
(Mainz: B. Schott’s Söhne, 1977).
19
The existence of early editions is not substantiated in publication of Hans-Christian Müller (see Footnote
14 above).
20
Verzeichniss des Musikalien-Verlages von N. Simrock in Berlin in alphabetischer Reihenfolge mit
vorgeschickter systematischer Uebersicht: Vollständig bis 1897 (Berlin: [no publishing house], [no date]),
pp. 233-235 [“Klavier Sonaten (Phrasirungs Ausgabe, hrsg. von Hugo Riemann)”].
21
22
23
Jean-Jérôme Imbault, Catalogue thématiques des ouvrages de musique, Introduction de [with an
introduction by] Rita Benton and Avec un index des compositeurs cités [an index of compositions cited],
Vol. 7 of Archives de l’Édition Musicale Française, publiées sous la direction de [published by] François
Lesure (Geneva: Minkoff Reprint, 1972 is reprint of Paris, 1792).
24
The existence of early editions is not substantiated in publication by Jean-Jérôme Imbault (see Footnote
17 above).
B3
Appendix C
Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:
Grieg’s Changes from Mozart’s Original (i.e. Piano I)
I. First Movement (Allegro)
Topic Measure Mozart Grieg

I. Dynamics
(1) pp 19 no yes
78 no yes
211 no yes
(2) p 1 no yes
4 (bass) no yes
12 no yes
18 no yes
26 no yes
40 no yes
70 no yes
76 no yes
83, 85 no yes
91 no yes
94 no yes
96, 98 no yes
103-104 no yes
108 no yes
110 no yes
128 (bass) yes no
130 (bass) yes no
134-136 no yes
156 no yes
158 no yes
167 no yes
197 no yes
209 no yes
220, 222 no yes
228, 231, 233, no yes
235
(3) mf 8 no yes
153 (bass) no yes
(4) f 16 no yes
24 no yes
32 no yes
49 no yes
53 (bass) yes no
73 no yes
C1
82, 84, 86 no yes
92 no yes
99 no yes
107 no yes
113 no yes
129 no yes
142 no yes
157 no yes
161 no yes
200, 201, 206 no yes
219, 221, 223 no yes
229, 232, 234 no yes
(5) ff 66 no yes
101 no yes
144 no yes
193 no yes
238 no yes
(6) fp 22 no yes
28-30 no yes
77 no yes
210 no yes
219 (bass) no yes
(7) fz 16-17 no yes
53 (bass) no yes
82, 84, 86 no yes
(bass)
89 no yes
92 no yes
134-136 no yes
167 no yes
176 no yes
201, 203, 205 no yes
223 (bass) no yes
224, 225 no yes
226, 229 no yes
(8) sf 45 (bass) yes no
(9) Crescendo & 5-6 no yes
decrescendo/diminuendo 13-14 no yes
15 no yes
20-25 no yes
32 no yes
37-39 no yes
44-45 no yes
48 no yes
70-72 no yes
74-75 no yes
C2
89-90 no yes
92-93 no yes
95, 97 no yes
100 no yes
105-108 no yes
111 no yes
138 no yes
140 (piu no yes
cresc.)
143 no yes
150-151 no yes
158-159 no yes
166 no yes
171-172 no yes
175 no yes
199 no yes
213-214 no yes
224 no yes
227, 230 no yes
232, 234, 237 no yes
(10) Use of different 41 sf fz
dynamic markings 45 sf fz
49-50 sf fz
125 f fz
127 (bass) f fz
129 f fz
131 (bass) f fz
168 sf fz
172 f fz
177 f fz
180 (bass) f fz
II. Articulation
(1) Staccato (.) /stroke(ֽ) 1 no yes
/tenuto (-) 46 (bass) no yes
47 (soprano) no (on first two yes (on first two
notes) notes)
49 (soprano) no (on last note) yes (on last note)
51 (bass) no (on last two notes) yes (on last two
notes)
79 (bass) no yes
82, 84, 86 no yes
(soprano and
quarter note
in bass)
83, 85 no yes
(quarter note
C3
in bass)
102 no yes
110-111 (last no yes
note in bass)
125 no yes
131-133 no yes
135 no yes
145 no yes (on the chord at
the second beat; the
note in sp. At 4th
beat)
157 (half note yes no

in bass)
176 no yes
219, 221, 223 no yes
(soprano)
239 no yes
(2) Accent (>) 70 (bass) no yes
78 -79 no yes
(soprano)
104-106 no yes
111-112 no yes
(bass)
122 (soprano) no yes
129 (bass) no yes
211-212 no yes
(soprano)
236 (on the no yes
first notes in
both bass and
soprano)
III. Phrasing
(1) Tie 7-8 (bass) no yes
17-18 no yes
(soprano)
25-26 no yes
(soprano)
45-46 no yes
62-63 (alto) no yes
70-74 (bass) no (mm. 70-72: yes
presence of faint ties
but not precise)
152-153 no yes
(bass)
158-159 (alto) no yes
C4
197-201 no (only between yes
(bass) 199-200)
207-208 no yes
(bass)
211-213 no yes
(tenor)
(2) Slur 7 no yes
16-17 (bass) no yes
48-49 (tenor) no yes
50 (bass) no yes
54 (bass) yes no
54-59 no yes
(soprano)
57-62 no yes
(soprano &
bass)
62-66 no yes
(soprano)
83, 85, 87 no yes
(soprano)
110 (bass) no yes
126-127 no yes
(soprano)
132 (bass) no yes
134-140 no yes
152 (alto) yes no
158-159 no yes
(soprano)
170-171 no yes
(tenor)
173 no yes
175 (tenor) no yes
177-179 no yes
181-186 no yes
189-193 no yes
197-198 no yes
(tenor)
220, 222, 224 no yes
(soprano)
IV. Musical Notes 40 (soprano) high C high Eb
(Pitch) 77 (soprano) quarter note on E 8th note on E and
8th rest
80 (soprano) quarter note on E two 8th notes tied on
E
th
81 (soprano) quarter note on C two 8 notes tied on
C5
C
116 (half note no yes
on A in tenor)
145 C7 chord (C in the full chords in both
bass; E, G, Bb in the hands (C+ dyad as
upper part) octave in the bottom
part; C7 chord in the
upper part)
208 (soprano) 8th note D is tied with no tied note but a 8th
D in the previous dot
measure
213 (soprano) a quarter note on A tied two 8th notes
on A
214 (soprano) a quarter note on F tied two 8th notes
on F
215 (soprano) a quarter note on Eb tied two 8th notes
on Eb
216 (soprano) a quarter note on Db tied two 8th notes
on Db
217 (soprano) a quarter note on Bb tied two 8th notes
on Bb
218 (soprano) a quarter note on F tied two 8th notes
on F
220 (bass) C, F, C chord added note on A to
C, F, C dyad
V. Accidentals 22 natural Flat
40 (alto) Eb no flat
42 (treble E yes no
natural)
48 (natural in yes no
tenor)
75 (natural in yes no
soprano)
80 (D natural yes no
in soprano)
83-85 (natural yes no
in soprano)
128 (bass) no yes
135 (natural no yes
on E in bass)
182 (natural no yes
on F in bass)
VI. Musical Designation 42 (animato) no yes
66 (pesante) no yes
145-146 no yes
(tranquillo)
C6
164-165 no yes
(sostenuto)
193 (pesante) no yes
207-208 no yes
(tranquillo)
211 (animato) no yes
214-217 (piu no yes
tranquillo
dim. poco rit.)
218 (animato no yes
/a tempo)
VII. Special
(1) Fermata 145 no yes (on the rest at
the third beat)
(2) Trills 174 (soprano) no yes
II. Second Movement (Andante)

I. Dynamics
(1) pp 35 no yes
103 no yes
122 no yes
(2) p 1 no yes
11 no yes
23, 25, 27, 31 no yes
41, 43, 45 no yes
73 no yes
83 no yes
91, 93, 95 no yes
99 no yes
109, 111, 112 no yes
119 no yes
(3) f 9 no yes
24, 26, 28-30 no yes
40, 42, 44 no yes
47 no yes
71 no yes
81 no yes
92, 84, 96, 97, 98 no yes
108 no yes
120 no yes
(4) fpp 118 no yes
(5) fp 2 no yes
C7
4 no yes
6 no yes
12,14,16 no yes
19-21 no yes
35, 37-39 no yes
59-61 (bass) no yes
62, 67 no yes
63-66 (bass) no yes
68-70 no yes
74 no yes
76 no yes
78-79 no yes
83-84 no yes
87-89 no yes
103, 105-107 no yes
115 no yes
(6) fz 72 no yes
(7) ffz 59 no yes
(8) Crescendo & 8-10 no yes
18 no yes
21-22 no yes
24, 26, 28-30 no yes
39-40 no yes
41-42 no yes
44-45 no yes
51 , 53 (above the no yes
treble staff)
58 no yes
71 no yes
81-82 no yes
86 no yes
89, 90, 92, 94 no yes
96-98 no yes
105-114 no yes
116-119 no yes
122 no yes
II. Articulation
(1) Staccato (.) /stroke(ֽ) 16 (on 3rd beat) yes no
/tenuto (-) 22(on 2nd beat) yes no
21 (on 3rd beat) no yes
89 (last 3 notes) no yes
90 yes no
(2) Accent (>) 70 (last 3 notes ) no yes
III. Phrasing
(1) Tie 122 no yes
C8
(2) Slur 2-4 (tenor) no yes
4 (bass) no yes
8 (soprano) no yes
10 (tenor) no yes
16 (tenor) no yes
22 (tenor) no yes
34 (sp/tenor) no yes
42 (soprano) no yes
46 (tenor) no yes
51 (alto) no yes
74 (sp/tenor) no yes
76 (tenor/bass) no yes
82 (alto) no yes
84 (bass) no yes
85 (soprano) no yes
86 (sp/ tenor/bass) no yes
91 (soprano) no yes
96 (soprano) wavy slur regular slur
IV. Notes 97 (bass chord) no high Eb added high Eb
97 (soprano) first note on Ab first note on Bb
99 (bass) 8th note on Eb 8th note on E
V. Accidentals 68 (alto) written as E # written as E
86 (bass) as tr mark natural
116 (for the first no natural symbol written out
ornament) yes natural symbol
VI. Rhythm 86 written as four 64th written as four
notes 32nd notes (wrong)
90 quarter notes on 8th notes with 8th
2nd beat rest on 2nd beat
VII. Designation 22-23 (poco rit. a no yes
tempo)
33 (dolce) no yes
35 (una corda) no yes
38 (tre corde) no yes
45 (poco rit.) no yes
47 (a tempo) no yes
55 (un poco shelto no yes
ed agitato ?)
60 (tranquillo) no yes
70 (cresc. e no yes
sosten.)
73 (a tempo no yes
cantabile)
C9
83 (la melodia ben no yes
tenuto)
90 (poco rit.) no yes
91 (a tempo) no yes
101 (dolce) no yes
118-119 (piu no yes
tranquillo)
121-122 (dim. no yes
ritardando)
VIII. Special
(1) Trills 4 as tr mark written out
14 as tr mark written out
58 no tr mark for the
bass
76 as tr mark written out
85 ornament symbol written out
119 ornament symbol written out with
tenuto marks on
(2) Clef 101-102 written in bass clef written in treble
(bass/tenor) clef
III. Third Movement (Rondo)

I. Dynamics
(1) pp 13 no yes
50 no yes
70 no yes
117 no yes
162 no yes
186 no yes
(2) p 1 no yes
7 no yes
19 no yes
26-28 no yes
30, 32, 34 no yes
39 no yes
45 no yes
53 yes no
54-55 no yes
63, 64 no yes
83 no yes
89 no yes
C10
95' no yes
103, 105, 107 no yes
103', 105', 107' no yes
120 no yes
132 no yes
140 no yes
145 no yes
152 no yes
161 no yes
170, 172 no yes
(3) mf 95 no yes
(4) f 25 no yes
29, 31, 33, 36 no yes
63, 64 no yes
68 no yes
77 no yes
79 no yes
109 no yes
109' no yes
126 no yes
143, 144 no yes
147-149 no yes
158 no yes
164 no yes
171, 173 no yes
(5) fp 23, 24 no yes
27, 28 no yes
38 no yes
100 no yes
100' no yes
114 no yes
114' no yes
136, 137 no yes
140, 141 no yes
(6) fz 131 no yes
151 no yes
168, 169 no yes
(7) Crescendo & 6 no yes
17-18 no yes
20, 22 no yes
28-29, 30-31, no yes
32-33
34-36 no yes
44 no yes
57 no yes
C11
67 no yes
72-73, 74-75 no yes
78-82 no yes
88 no yes
94 no yes
99 no yes
99' no yes
104, 105, 108 no yes
113 no yes
103'-106' no yes
108' no yes
113'-114' no yes
118-119 no yes
(crescendo molto)
124-125 no yes
131, 133, 135 no yes
138-139 no yes
141-144 no yes
146-148 no yes
150 no yes
156 no yes
165-168 no yes
170-173 no yes
175 no yes
187 no yes
II. Articulation
(1) Staccato (.) /stroke(ֽ) 16 (on 3rd beat) yes no
/tenuto (-) 22(on 2nd beat) yes no
21 (on 3rd beat) no yes
89 (last 3 notes) no yes
90 yes no
(2) Accents 70 (last 3 notes ) no yes
III. Phrasing
(1) Tie 64-65 (Fs in no yes
soprano)
138 (tenor) yes no
(2) Slur 7-9 (bass) one long slur over separate slurs for
3 measures each measure
49 (soprano) use of tie between use of slur
Ds between D and F
68-78 (tenor/bass) no yes
70-72 (soprano) no yes
83-85 (bass) one long curvy slur separate slurs for
C12
over 3 measures each measure
102 (alto) no yes
131 (soprano) yes no
133, 135 no yes
(tenor/bass)
138 (alto) yes no
139 (bass) no yes
IV. Notes 51 (bass chord) F & A as quarter F & A as half
notes notes
53 (bass chord) Bb & C# as quarter Bb & C# as half
notes notes
59 (bass chord) F & A as quarter F & A as half
notes notes
61(bass chord) Bb & C# as quarter Bb & C# as half
notes notes
91 (soprano) F# F natural
98 (alto) dotted quarter note two 8th notes on F
on F and 8th note & G with two 8th
on G rests in the middle
98' (alto) dotted quarter note two 8th notes on F
on F and 8th note & G with two 8th
on G rests in the middle
105 (alto) a half note on Ab a half note on A
natural
112 (last note in E without any E with a written b
bass) direct written
accidental
137 (bass chord) C natural on the Cb on the 2nd beat
2nd beat
151 (bass chord) B natural Bb
169 (soprano) no grace notes at written grace notes
the end of the trill at the end of the
trill
V. Rests 37 (bass) yes no (wrong)
VI. Rhythm 99 (soprano) half note on E with four 8th notes on E
4 strokes above the with tenuto above
note head and a the note heads
dash through the
C13
stem
99' (soprano) half note on E with four 8th notes on E
4 strokes above the with tenuto above
note head and a the note heads
dash through the
stem
125 (soprano) 8th note with a four 16th notes
grace note on the slurred on the 4th
4th beat beat
th
127 (soprano) 8 note with a four 16th notes
grace note on the slurred on the 4th
4th beat beat
131 (soprano) number 3 for no indication of
triplet number 3 as triplet
175 (soprano) number 3 for no indication of
triplet number 3 as triplet
th
179 (soprano) 8 note with a four 16th notes on
grace note on the the 2nd beat
2nd beat
183 (soprano) 8th note with a four 16th notes on
grace note on the the 2nd beat
2nd beat
VII. Accidentals 91 (natural sign on no yes
F in soprano)
VIII. Designation 37 (dim.) no yes
38 (poco ritard.) no yes
39 (a tempo) no yes
49 (dim.) no yes
65-67 (ritardando) no yes
68 (a tempo) no yes
68 (vivace) no yes
81 (dim. e retard.) no yes
83 (a tempo) no yes
89 (sempre) no yes
95 (minore) no yes
113'-114' (piu no yes
tranquillo)
115'-116' with the no yes
2nd ending
(ritardando)
117 (maggiore) no yes
117 (a tempo) no yes
117 (animato) no yes
C14
159 (dim.) no yes
180-181 (piu no yes
tranquillo poco a
poco e sempre
dim.)
185 (ritard.) no yes
IX. Special
(1) Ornaments 142 (soprano) no yes (between 3rd
and 4th beats)
178 (soprano) yes (after the half no
note)
184 (soprano) yes (without any yes (with natural
accidental sign as part of the
indication as part ornament)
of the ornament)
185 (soprano) no yes (with natural
sign as part of the
ornament)
(2) Clef 1 no bass clef in the bass clef first and
beginning but only then treble follows
treble clef
(3) Repeat 95-102 Use of repeat sign the repeat is
with double bar written out
103-116 Use of repeat sign the repeat is
with double bar written out
C15

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 in The Arrangement by Edvard Grieg: A Critical Examination of The Musical Text in The Context of The Primary Sources

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 in The Arrangement by Edvard Grieg: A Critical Examination of The Musical Text in The Context of The Primary Sources

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494 in The Arrangement by Edvard Grieg: A Critical Examination of The Musical Text in The Context of The Primary Sources

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494

in the Arrangement by Edvard Grieg:

A Thesis Submitted to the College of

© Copyright Ohran Noh, August 2009, All rights reserved

In presenting this thesis/dissertation in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Postgraduate

Reference in this thesis/dissertation to any specific commercial products, process, or service by

Head of the Department of Music

In 1879-1880, E. W. Fritzsch in Leipzig issued a most unusual collection entitled

The writer of this article has himself attempted, by using a second

DEDICATION OF THESIS .............................................................................................. iv

TABLE OF EXAMPLES ................................................................................................. vii

TABLE OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ xi

CHAPTER 1. Establishing the Perspective of Edvard Grieg’s Initiative in Arranging

CHAPTER 2. Grieg as a Champion of Mozart in the Context of the Keyboard

CHAPTER 4. Grieg’s Arrangement of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:

CHAPTER 5. Grieg as an Innovator of the Musical Arrangement: Implications and

3.1.1 Autograph of Mozart’s Rondo, KV 494 ..........................................................37

3.2.1.1 Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:

In 1879-1880, E. W. Fritzsch in Leipzig issued a most unusual collection entitled

Lately in my spare time I have occupied myself with composing

The writer of this article has himself attempted, by using a second

2.1 The Relationship between Grieg and Mozart

In the winter I had intended a work that interested me, namely, to

2.2 The State of Musical Arrangements in Europe in the Era of Grieg

It cannot be denied that the solitary enjoyment in one’s own room of a

2.3 Grieg as an Arranger

Unlike the common practice of arranging large-scale compositions, such as

One cultivates an intimacy with a composition only when one has

It is horrifying and worthy of the strongest censure how masterpieces

As mentioned earlier, Grieg also received a number of criticisms on his

3.1 Historical Background of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494

3.2 Structural/Musical Analysis of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494:

3.2.1 The First Movement (Allegro) of KV 533/494

The opening Allegro from Mozart’s Keyboard Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,

* KA: Key Area * ss: subsection * //: Interruption (Generalpause) * T: Theme

Example 3.2.1.1.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,

Example 3.2.1.1.c Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro,

The bridging process is a typical appearance in sonata-form movements, and in

Example 3.2.1.5.a Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Allegro, Exposition,

Another important stylistic feature in this movement is the linear counterpoint

*ss: subsection * //: Interruption (Generalpause)

Example 3.2.2.5.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Andante,

In the second subsection of the development, Mozart, in the context of intense

3.2.3 The Third Movement (Rondo) of KV 533/494

The third movement, entitled Rondo, is written as an Allegretto, in the key of F

Example 3.2.3.1.b Mozart, Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494, Rondo, m. 45

In this particular movement, Mozart shows an unusual phrase structure, which

… Only in the act of composing the new style becomes apparent in

Grieg, in his artful arrangement of Mozart’s keyboard works followed an unusual

4.1 Grieg’s Changes from Mozart’s Original in Piano I

At the outset of this examination, it is crucial to consider Grieg’s modifications to

Example 4.1.1.b Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,

Example 4.1.1.c Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,

Grieg’s use of p usually appears in structural places, such as at the beginning or

In terms of dynamics, Grieg prefers to employ explicit markings according to the

The third category of Grieg’s alterations of Mozart’s original involves phrasing

Example 4.1.11 Grieg’s Piano I of Mozart’s Piano Sonata in F Major, KV 533/494,

4.1.4 Musical Notes (Pitches)

Perhaps more critical than dynamics, articulations, and phrasings is the

ss: subsection //: Interruption (Generalpause)