COMMENT ⊗   VALID 00006 PAGES
C REC  PAGE   DESCRIPTION
C00001 00001
C00002 00002	%\input mytb.tex
C00003 00003	\par\yyskip
C00017 00004	\par
C00022 00005	    The overall form of this work is a dramatic concertato.
C00037 00006
C00054 ENDMK
C⊗;
%\input mytb.tex
\chpar12←1200
\def\yskip{\penalty-50\vskip 10pt plus 3pt minus 2pt}
\def\yyskip{\penalty-100\vskip 25pt plus 6pt minus 4pt}
% \baselineskip11pt	% Normal
\baselineskip18pt


\par\ \par
\ctrline{\bf HEINRICH SCHUTZ:}\par

\ctrline{\bf NO. $8$ OF THE SYMPHONIAE SACRAE, OPUS $6$, $1629$.}\par

\ctrline{\it ``ADJURO VOS, FILIAE JERUSALEM.''}\par

\par\ \par
\ctrline{\it Baroque Music History 101}

\ctrline{\it Professor Cohen}

\ctrline{\it Student: Leslie Nicholson}

\par
\vfill
\eject
\par\yyskip
\hbox par 5 truein{\hangindent 1 truein after 0{\it
``Kindly disposed reader: I must tell you how in the year $1629$, when I had
arrived in Italy for the second time,  I composed in a short period, in the
prevailing musical manner, a little latin work of one, two or three vocal
parts together with two violins, or similar instruments, according to the
modest talent (which I mention without boasting) bestowed on me by God,
and how I published it in Venice under the title: `Sinfoniae sacrae.'}}
\par\
\hangindent 3 truein after 0 -- Heinrich Schutz
\par\yyskip
\ctrline{*******}
\par
    Since abundant and well-documented information about Schutz' life is else
where available, it would be futile for me to attempt to rehash it here.
However, a cursory biography may be  of some use in establishing
the background of the work to be discussed in this paper.

     Schutz was born in Kostritz, Thuringia, (Germany) in $1585$. As
a child he sang in the choir at the court chapel in Kassel. His
musical background set him apart       from those    his german contemporaries
in that he spent the years between $1609$ and $1612$ in Venice  studying
with Giovanni Gabrieli.  Here Schutz published his first work, a
collection of five-part Italian madrigals. Following this influential sojourn
in Venice, he returned  to Dresden to become Master of the Chapel of the
Elector of Saxony, a post he retained to the end of his life.  While
holding this position, Schutz again visited Venice for a year between
$1628$--$1629$.  This time he met Monteverdi, whose music he greatly admired.
The first of three series of the  `Symphoniae sacrae' was published in
$1629$, the year of Schutz' second return to Germany.

     During the trying years of the Thirty Years' War ($1618$--$48$), Schutz 
served as court conductor in Copenhagen on three  occasions, each time
for one or two years. The exigencies of the war had an evident effect on
certain of his compositions during that time, since Dresden's Electoral Chapel 
was short on resources of every kind. ( The `Little Sacred Concertos', 
motets for only a few voices with only organ accompaniment, were published
under war conditions, for example.) 

     The man lived and composed actively until he was  eighty-seven
years old!  He died in Dresden.
\par\yyskip
\ctrline{\it Concerto No. 8}
\ctrline{\it Opus $6$. The Symphoniae sacrae I of $1629$}
\par
     Like Gabrieli's works of the same name, Schutz' `Symphoniae sacrae'
were a significant milestone in his career as a composer.
The term Symphoniae sacrae means `spiritual concert'. This work
is the first of three such Symphoniae, written in $1629$,$1647$ and $1650$,
respectively.
The piece was composed during Schutz' second visit in Italy, a period in which
he studied with Monteverdi. It clearly exhibits the influence of the Italians.
      The expressive quality of Monteverdi's musicianship, in particular the
`stile rappresentativo' of his dramatic works, was the inviting novelty that had a 
magical attraction
  for Schutz.
Schutz  wrote in the foreward to this work,\hfill
\par
\hbox par 5 truein{\hangindent 1 truein after 0{\it
`` When I visited my  friends in Venice, I recognised that the style of musical 
composition had somewhat changed, and that the old laws had been to some
extent abandoned in the attempt to flatter the ears of today with new
delights.  I have now consigned all my mind and strength to producing
something in this new manner of composition, so that you may become
acquainted with it.''}}
\par

     One of the distinct evidences of Italian influence in this work
is the use of the new Italian vocal-instrumental ``mixture literature'' 
(Mischliterature). This style is characterized by the grouping together
of instruments for ritornelles, bridging over the pauses in the voice parts by
overlapping, rather than through alternating  with them.  The instrumental
parts include striking and lyrical passages at times, which serve as 
reminiscent or preparatory interpolations.   The instruments may also unite
with the voice parts in imiative style, presenting a chorus effect. This
``mixed literature'' method of vocal and instrumental writing differed
significantly from the previously prevailing style, in which the instrumental
parts were usually treated simply as integrated additional vocal lines.
\par Rudolph Gerber described Monteverdi's influence on Schutz as follows,\hfill
\par\yskip
\hbox par 5 truein{\hangindent 1 truein after 0{\it
``.....The affective monody of the Monteverdian type --- expressive, made more
telling by vivid contrasts, the music determined by the words --- was put into
practice in the First Part of the Symphoniae sacrae....Schutz' realization
of the monody was carried out within the limits of chamber music in the
`stilus mixtus', the manner of writing for concerted voices and instruments
that was coming into general fashion at the time in Italy.  Its most 
surprising feature is the variety that is achieved in terms of actual sound.
  Solo numbers, duets, trios for every sort of combinatin of voices (though
with a preference for male voices) are combined with distinctive
instrumental colours and mixtures of tone colour (strings and wind) that are
dictated, as is the melodic style of the vocal sections, by the feeling and
expressive content of the text.''}}
\par
     Another evidence of Schutz' admiration for Italian music, specifically
Monteverdi's music, is the quality of `stile agitato' which one senses
in the Opus 6.  Though one would not identify this work as a paradigm of
`stile agitato', it displays certain tendencies of that style and certainly
shows that the composer was familiar with the genre. Monteverdi first 
extensively 
employed
the `stile agitato' in his 7th Volume of Madrigals, published 
in 1624 --- five years prior to the publication of Schutz' Opus 6.  
As used by Monteverdi, the style presents states of emotional agitation through
 enhancement of the text, word-painting and `musica reservata' (expressive
interpretation of the text).  Though Schutz' use of the Monteverdian
`stile agitato' is limited within the  Symphoniae sacrae I,   the 
 Symphoniae sacrae II and III  , written years later, display an unmistakable
germanized version of the style.  Perhaps at the time he wrote the first Symphoniae
sacrae Schutz thought this novel style was a trifle too racy to be incorporated
in a forthright manner in music which, after all, was supposedly sacred.  
  
%{\it TEXT}
\par The subject of this paper, the Concerto No.8 of the Symphoniae sacrae I,
is subtitled `Secunda Pars' since it forms an integrated whole with the
seventh concerto. Although the works are linked musically and textually, 
and without a doubt should be performed together, I have taken the liberty
of isolating the No.8 for the purposes of discussion, since as both a characteristic
sample of Schutz' writing and as an expressive piece of music it stands well
enough alone.
\par 
\hangindent.5truein
The opus $6$, $1629$, may be divided into two subcategories:\par
    1) those compositions which are settings of psalms and other Old Testament 
	texts.\par
    2) those which derive from the Song of Songs.
\par
     Concerti No.s 7 and 8 take their texts from the Song of Songs,
$5$:$6$; $2$:$14$; $15$:$8$. 
Their texts clearly show a close relationship in subject
matter.  Though the text source is biblical, these are sensual, poetic
and rather secular songs of love. As such they form an appreciated contrast
with the rest of the works in the Opus, which are somewhat more pious.
The sensual eroticism of these texts is in perfect harmony with the affective
pathos of the early Baroque.  Their ardent tone has been preserved and 
heightened in effect by Schutz' melodic writing,
for his  music is as passionate as it is expressive of the words.
\par
The words are as follows.\hfill\par
(Concerto No.7 is included to show the relationship
between the two works.)\hfill
\par
\ctrline{\it $7$.ANIMA MEA LIQUEFACTA EST}
\par
\ctrline{\it ``My soul  dissolved as my beloved spoke,}
\ctrline{\it for his voice is sweet and his visage lovely.}
\ctrline{\it his lips are lilies distilling sweetest myrrh.''}
\par
\yyskip
\ctrline{\it $8$.ADJURO VOS, FILIAE JERUSALEM}
\par
\ctrline{\it ``I charge you daughters of jerusalem,}
\ctrline{\it if you see my beloved,}
\ctrline{\it to tell him that i am sick with love.''}

\par

     The works of the Symphoniae sacrae I are particularly interesting
in their instrumentation.  In contrast to the two later sets of
Symphoniae, Schutz took great care to specify the exact instrumentation
he required in  this work. This progression is similar to Monteverdi's
own development, in which he began with rich orchestration in ``Orfeo''
and later showed a preference for uniform instrumentation, as in 
``Ritorno d'Ulisse or ``Incoronazione de Poppea.''

     Instruments designated in the piece discussed here are two coronettini
or fiffari and a `bassus pro organo ' for the continuo part. 

     The use of the coronettini or fiffari suggests that Schutz sought a
{\it Spaltklang} effect, that is, the combination of different tonal 
colours provided by the contrasting tenor voices and high smooth timbre
of the coronettini, or thinner sound of the fiffari.

     The cornettino is the small treble instrument of the cornett family.  These
instruments are wooden and lip-vibrated; they have finger-holes and a cup-shaped 
mouthpiece.  Their tone quality can be desribed as being between that of
a clarinet and a high saxophone, `with a touch of the trumpet's brightness,'
according to Grove's Dictionary of Music. Mersenne described it as `like
a ray of sunshine piercing the shadows, when heard with the choir voices in the 
cathedrals of chapels'!   Dalla Casa's  {\it Il vero modo di diminuir} (1584)
states that the cornett, like the voice, can be played piano or forte and
in every key.  This is a rather significant advantage, since most other
instruments of the baroque were to greater and lesser degrees 
deficient in these respects.  Between 1550 and 1650 the treble cornett
was the most popular wind instrument in use.  Much of the repertoire
for the instrument during this period is highly virtuosic. (It is surprising   
then that the cornetti parts in the Concerto No.8 are not at all
technically demanding, consisting mainly of slow-moving metrical lines
in the instrument's middle register.)

    The fiffaro which is mentioned as an alternative for the instrumental
part in the concerto is a fife of course.  It is a small cylindrical transverse
flute, but it has a narrower bore than the flute and therefore a louder
shriller sound. Schutz must have had a quite flexible concept of the
overall
sound of the piece, for the tones of the fiffaro and the cornetti are
not alike.  Though the fife has less dynamic capability than the cornett,
both are expressive instruments, and able to hold their own in 
dialogue with the tenors.
 
     The solos tenor parts are set below the two cornetti (of fiffari).  Moser
asserts  that in all the Symphoniae sacrae which are vocal duets, the
representation is that of one lover who is accompanied by a counter-point
spinning shadow!\par
\yyskip
    The overall form of this work is a dramatic concertato.
The contrasting use of instruments and voices identify it as such,
the effect of juxtaposition of voices and instruments having an
antiphonal character at times, which is not out of place in church music.
\par Referring to the Concerto No.8, Moser says,\hfill\par
\hbox par 5 truein{\hangindent 1 truein after 0{\it
``There develops a most delightful play of two duet groups, of which at times
the voices take over the declamatory part, and the instruments the illustrative;
... or the singers imitate each ther at close
distances, while the players imitate each other at a greater distance, as
at {\it Adjuro vos}, the voices imitating at low pitch, the instruments at high,
as at {\it filiae Jerusalem}.  Or again, a soloist declaims in a dramatic
 recitative above a sustained bass({\it ``If ye find my beloved, tell him
that I perish from love''}, which is then confirmed by the tutti with all the
forces.''}}
\par
Subdividing the work for the purpose of analysis, one sees that there are
three instrumental groups:a duet of two tenor voices, a duet of two
treble instruments, and a continuo ensemble.  Duality is central to the 
construction of the piece.  Not only is the concerto part of a double set,
but it is composed in part as a double duet --- two tenors against two
cornettini.
 Schutz' writing for these two instruments is interesting in
that the function of the instruments in relation to the rest of the ensemble and in
relation to one another, varies.   At times, the two cornetti operate
almost as part of the thorough-bass accompaniment; at times they
play a more dominant role as separate voices whose melodies are
equally as important as those of the tenors.  Sometimes their two
parts are contrapuntal and other times antiphonal.  This variation
in function provides an element of contrast which is fundamental
to the concertato style.

     A further structural subdivision may be made, separating the piece
into four  non-discrete sections:\hfill\par
1. Sinfonia \hfill\par
2. Stile rappresentivo; duets; ``Adjuro vos, filiae Jerusalem.''\hfill\par
3. Recitativo; ``si inveneritis dilectum meum, et nuncietis ei...''\hfill\par
4. Stile rappresentivo; duets; ``Quia amore langueo.''\hfill\par
\ctrline{*******}
\par\yyskip
 BARS 1-11\hfill\par
     The concerto no. $8$ opens in D minor with an eleven-bar `Sinfonia',
or instrumental prelude, in which a simple yet striking descending
motif is introduced by the first cornettino at a slow 4/4 pulse.
The second cornettino
enters late in neo-fugal manner, exactly replicating the opening
phrase.
This is a somber sinfonia which serves both to set the mood of the
concerto and to prepare the vocal entrance.  The descending chromatic
figures (1st cor. Bars 1 and 4; bass bars 2,7,9) 
evoke a pathetic air.
\par
In the fourth
bar, the harmony ascends    from D minor to E major, a striking non-diatonic
movement.  [It should be mentioned that this piece was written before the
standardization of equal-tempered tuning.  During the period from $1600$
to $1759$, many different systems of tuning were used, both simultaneously
and successively.  The most prevalent tunings throughout this period were
varieties of mean tone temperatment.                  
Mean tone temperament causes the chords of some keys to sound perfectly
in tune, while those of more remote keys sound increasingly dissonant. 
(The concept of ``key character'' therefore had much more meaning
in the Baroque period than it does today.) Therefore the dissonant
harmonies in this concerto should be stressed, for in an historically
accurate performance, the mean-tone temperament tuning would likely have
made these dissonances more piercing.] The sinfonia closes with a perfect
cadence to the major tonic at bar 11.\par
 BARS 12 - 27\hfill\par
	   In the same manner as that in which the cornettini made their
entrances, the two tenors are introduced.  Schutz' writing here is
extremely imitative. One at a time, both voices and both cornettini
enter separately with the same descending 4-note motif. Just as these
phrases do not begin synchronously, neither do they end so; thus there
is a strong sense of momentum, for the voices never simultaneously come
to a full stop (later in the piece, Schutz abandons this technique to
achieve a different affect).
Also, he compresses the phrases by shortening the rhythmic
values of the notes of the motif, and places these phrases closer
and closer together. Furthermore, the tenor  parts are written increasingly 
high in the vocal range.
\par At bar 18, the melody changes to support a new section of the text.
The text-setting here is primarily syllabic and preserves speech rhythms
to some extent.  The 1/16th notes, dotted rhythms relentless imitation
give these measures (bars 24 -27) an excited and driving quality.
\par
BARS 28 - 51\hfill\par
     This is the recitativo section.  Both the cornettini and the second
tenor are tacet, leaving the first tenor to sing his solos recitativo
over a spare continuo part.  This recitative may be divided into 
two sections.  The first section is dry, tense, dramatic recitative on
the line {\it ``If you see my beloved,tell him...''} (bars 28 - 35).
Though now working with a solo voice, Schutz retains the element of
imitation  by repeating each phrase a third higher immediately after
singing it the first time.  This is a very effective device for creating
a sense both of momentum and suspense.
\par
The second section of this solos is closer in spirit to an arioso than
to a recitative.  The very long and lyrical phrases here provide an
opportunity for the singer to prove himself,       
for they require
great control.  Here we find an example of word-painting on the word
{\it `langueo'} (i am sick, languishing), which 
is drawn out to six bars worth of slow-moving melisma.  This slow-tempo-ed
weaving - about conveys to me the image of someone who is diliriously weary
from love's vortex of trials!
At bar 50, the solo ends. A full bar's rest in all parts follows, creating
a clear demarcation between solo and non-solo sections, and underscoring
the drama of the text.\par
BARS 52 - end\hfill
\par The second tenor now re-enters for a two-bar phrase in homorhythm
which is answered by another bar's full rest.
This is the first use of homorhythm in the two voices and is an abrupt 
contrast for this reason; also the 1/16th notes stand in sharp contrast
with the drawn-out notes of the solo section.\par
 The section which follows
is based on harmonic development (bars 82-86,e.g.), a thickening  of the
texture with dissonance (bars 64-65,between first cornetto and first tenor,e.g.),
appoggiaturas and chromaticism (bars 84-85, first tenor part, e.g.).
One of the most distinctive feature of the last part of the piece is
the recurrent use of the pedal point. Schutz establishes a pedal point
and then takes the other parts on a long harmonic excursion,
(usually based on a simple I → IV)
returning at last to
the chord of which the pedal point is the root only at the end of a long
phrase!  This occurs three times, beginning on bars 64, 69, and 75.
These pedal points also occur in the cornetto parts, starting at
bars 88 and 89.  The effect of this sustained note in the treble is
expressively pathetic.  It sets off the increasingly elaborate melisma
in the tenor parts very well.
\par\yyskip
\ctrline{* * * * * * * }
\par\ \par
Schutz did not leave dynamic markings in this work.
Nevertheless, one can probably conjecture  that he intended  performance
dynamics to play a role in the building of climaxes in the piece.
\par
     David D Boyden writes in ``Dynamics in Seventeenth- and Eighteenth-
Century Music,''\hfill
\par
  {\it ``The advent of a deliberately expressive style of performance in
the Florentine Camerata around 1600 required an extension of the existing 
dynamic possibilities.  Consequently, nuance of crescendo, diminuendo or both, 
on single notes or even short phrases, in addition to the existing forte and
piano, was extensively employed by members of the Camerata to bring out the 
emotional connotation of the text in music for the solos voice.''}
\par
     True, Schutz was in Venice, not Florence, but it is still quite
plausible that he intended his music to be performed with the new
Florentine dynamics.
\par
     The fact that Schutz chose instruments known for their expressive
capabilites for the piece suggests that this capability was   indeed a criterion
in the orchestration. There is no reason to believe that Schutz would not
have used the instruments to the limit of their abilities.
     
     Baroque writers on the voice and vocal technique, sych as Caccini in his 
``Le Nuove Musiche'' ($1601/2$) 
and Christoph Bernhard in his ``Von der SingeKunst oder 
Maniera''($1649$) 
discussed dynamic nuance in detail, and encouraged singers 
to practise `messa di voce', the gradual swelling and
diminishing of a single pitch.  As well, those instruments incapable of making
crescendos and diminuendos because of their construction, such as the 
crumhorn, disappeared from common use
in the $17$th century, while  instruments with only a limited capacity for
dynamic variation, such as the transverse flutes and recorders of the Renaissance,
went into a decline.  At the same time, instruments capable of great
dynamic range, notably the violin, gained immense popularity.

     In studying this piece  I listened to two different recording of it.
The first was ``Chorale Music of the Renaissance and Baroque,'' [MD3641] with
the UCLA Men's Glee Club and Madrigal Singers.  The second was a recording
of 9 Concerti from Book I of the Symphoniae sacrae, performed under the
direction of Helmuth Rilling [MD3493].

Between these two performances of the Concerto No.8, the difference was
astounding.

     First of all, non-uniform    instrumentation was used.  In the UCLA
performance (which will henceforth be called A,  a small men's choir
sang each of the solo tenor parts.  This alone gave the piece an
unexpected and probably unintended feeling of grandeur which seemed
inappropriate in a chamber work.

    In the Rilling performance (B), the vocal parts were sung solo, as designated
in the score.
     
    In A two recorders were used instead of the presribed cornettini or fiffari.
The thin sound of these instruments was inexpressive and disappointing,
particularly in comparison with the richer sound of the cor anglais used
on the B recording.
\par Moser writes in ``Schutz, His Life and Work,''\hfill\par
\hbox par 5 truein{\hangindent 1 truein after 0{\it
``In `Adjuro vos,' for two ``tenors,''two fifari or cornettini, are prescribed.
If one wished to retain the original position (d minor), then the instruments
that would best conform to Schutz's tonal wishes --- he notes his instruments
in the mezzo-soprano clef --- had best be two English horns, while the
vocal parts, with a range of c-f', would be given to a baritone and bass. 
 It is better to transpose up to e minor so that tenor and baritone may sing 
and two oboes play.''}}\par
 
     Whereas in B  a harpshichord and bass were used to perform the continuo,
a chamber organ and viola were used on the A recording.   In this case the
UCLA people were probably more historically correct, for the score does
call for a ``Bassus pro Organo.''
 
     The technique of composing an independent bass line in order to indicate
to performers of keyboards and plucked string instruments the requisite
        accompaniment was quite new at the time that Schutz was beginning
to compose.  The
operas, secular monodies and sacred concerti by Peri, Caccini and others,
published in the first decade of the $17$th century, were the earliest volumes 
to include a figured or unfigured basso continuo.  Schutz would likely 
have become familiar with this practice on his visits to Italy, if not sooner.
He used it adeptly in this piece and the rest of his work.
(Though the thorough bass practice was not commonly used until the 17th century,
it has its roots deep in the 16th century, when it was common for harpsichordists, 
organists and lutenists to double the singers of both secular and sacred music.  
Performers gradually realized that it was easier to invent a chordal part than
to prepare a special score in order to follow the vocal lines exactly.  Short scores
and so-called `organ basses'  --- with a basso seguente (a part made up of the
lowest sounding line) and some sketchy indication of one or more upper parts
published with an obligatory thoroughbass.)

     A further disparity is encountered in the tempos of the two performances.
The A recording takes the piece at a pace close to allegretto, whereas the
B performance is at a very natural moderato.  There are more minor fluctuations
in tempo in B.  None of these is extreme enough to be irritating, but seem
carefully introduced in order to accentuate the music's natural movement.
 
 Furthermore, in case my bias is not yet sufficiently clear, let me say that
the B recording seemed to be very much better thought out in terms of 
phrasing and dynamics.  I have notated the   performance in this regard
as accurately as I could on the score in the back of this paper. The
dynamics meticulously follow the contour of the phrase and subtly accentuate
the underlying structural form.  Examples of this are the pianissmo of the
first tenor as he starts his recitativo, growing to a mezzo-forte at bar 35
where he sails to the highest part of his phrase, then an abrupt piano
again at the start of the next unexpected phrase.
     Though dynamics are certainly employed in A, they are not used
so imaginatively and colourfully as in B.  
 
     It is interesting to me, and unexpected, that  in A no ornamentation
whatsoever is used, and in B only a very little occurs.  This is not for
lack of opportunity, for there are places in the vocal lines where ornaments
of the {\it cantar sodo} and {\it cantar d'afetto} types could be used
effectively. {\it Rebatutte} could also be used at the cadences. Yet 
none of these are used.
The reasons
for this performance decision may have been that since the piece is not
a monody but a duet, certain places which might have called for an ornament
of the {\it cantar d'afetto} type have been left unornamented to avoid
obscuring the other voice.  Furthermore, the lines of Schutz' phrases
are such that the absence of ornamentation does not create a feeling
of bareness, as is usually the case in a monodic piece.  At times, such
as in the highly - figured last few bars of the concerto, Schutz has
written ornamentation into the part itself, and no improvisatin is needed.
 
It is possible, perhaps,
that an expert in Baroque performance practice would find recording B
too romantic, too extravagantly expressive and over-wrought.  In comparison
with the thin mono-dimensional and occasionally strident sound of A, I
feel that B is musically preferable.  Too, it is unlikely that B is less
faithful to the Baroque performance ethic.
\par\yyskip
\ctrline{* * * * * * * }
\par\ \par
It is fortunate that a great deal of Schutz' music has survived.  
Considered probably the greatest German composer of the 
                       mid-seventeenth century, Schutz' strength in
large part arises from his synthesis of the Italian and German styles.
Although he was not the first German composer to attempt this, he was
the most successful and the most lastingly significant.  This fusion
of styles, as incorporated by Schutz, became a lasting characteristic
of the remainder of German Baroque music.
\par\yyskip
\ctrline{* * * * * * * }
\vfill
\eject
\par\ \par
\ctrline{REFERENCES}
\par
\par A. Baines: Woodwind Instruments and their History (London, l957)
\par Grove's Dictionary of Music, l980\hfill
\par Putname Aldrich: The  ``Authentic'' Performance of Baroque Music, from
the  `Essay on Music 
\par in Honor of Archibald Thompson Davison', Cambridge, Mass,
l957
\par David D. Boyden: Dynamics in 17th and 18th century Music, Cambridge, l957
\par Moser: Schutz; His Life and Work, St. Louis, Mo.,l959\hfill
\par S. Willoughby: Heinrich Schutz: S.s. ', ``In Lectulo per Noctes'', DMA
Stanford, 1977.
\par
\vfill
\eject
\end