Dots and Strokes in Late 18th- and 19th-Century Music

Author(s): Clive Brown

Source: Early Music, Vol. 21, No. 4, Monteverdi I (Nov., 1993), pp. 593-597+599-610
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3128368
Accessed: 26-07-2016 20:34 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Early
Music

This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Clive Brown
Dots and strokes in late 18th- and 19th-century
music
The meaning of dots and strokes in 18th- and 19th-
century music has exercised the minds of editors and
scholars for over a century. Much attention has been
focused on the question of what sort of distinctions the-
orists made between these markings and how many dif-
ferent forms were employed by particular composers.
The views of individual theorists, though frequently
mutually incompatible, are fairly clear and straightfor-
ward, yet the relationship of these views to the practices
of specific composers remains highly problematic.
During the last decades of the 18th century an ever
more sophisticated hierarchy of dynamic, accent and
articulation markings began to develop. Composers
increasingly wrote with publication in mind and no
longer expected to exercise personal control over per-
formances of their music; this, together with a growing
diversification of style in the 19th century, meant that
they had a more pressing need to indicate their require-
ments clearly. The music of 18th-century composers
generally lent itself to the application of well tried con-
ventions of performance which any competently trained
musician of the period would have understood; in the
19th century, on the other hand, individualistic dynamic
and expressive nuance were an integral part of the com-
poser's conception of his music and needed to be more
precisely notated.
One important consequence of the use of a wider
range of articulation, accent and expression markings in
the 19th century was that some of the functions pre-
viously inherent in dots and strokes began to be taken
over by other markings, especially accent markings. The
range of meaning of the dot or stroke for any particular
composer, therefore, may be expected to have become
narrower. Some continued to use a single staccato mark
for unslurred notes, but during the course of the century
more composers adopted both markings. A rather
inconsistent and far from clear differentiation seems to
be present in some of the works of Weber and Schubert.
Others, including Marschner, Schumann, Wagner and
Brahms, as well as a host of minor figures, developed a
more consistent distinction between dots and strokes.
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
But even here the relationship of notation and meaning
is still a considerable problem for modern performers.
There is abundant evidence that the dot and the stroke
(or various forms of wedge in printed music) either
alone or in combination with slurs, meant quite differ-
ent things to different composers. There were significant
divisions, for instance, between those who were orien-
tated towards the piano and those who thought primar-
ily in terms of string playing, wind instruments or voice.
Similarly, there were profound differences, especially
with respect to string playing, between composers who
inclined to French practices and those who inclined to
German.
Before trying to identify the range of meanings which
any 18th- or 19th-century composer might have envi-
saged for his articulation markings, it is of course necess-
ary to determine which markings he actually used. This
is a substantial stumbling block, as the widespread dis-
agreements and inconsistencies of editors show. There
seems, in particular, to have been no general agreement
about how they are to be deciphered and transcribed in
the autographs of Classical composers. Did Haydn,
Mozart or Beethoven, for instance, intentionally use
both dots and strokes, or are some of the apparent dis-
tinctions in their autographs the result of such factors as
writing habits or a subconscious response to the musical
content of a work as it was being written down?
Nowhere has controversy raged more fiercely than in
the case of Mozart's staccato marks. Ingenious argu-
ments have been advanced by distinguished scholars on
both sides of the question. In his article in the last issue
of Early music Frederick Neumann lent support to the
view that Mozart used dots and strokes on unslurred
notes with distinct meanings.' (No one seriously dis-
putes that he invariably wrote unambiguous dots in the
context of portato.) Neumann contends that one of the
principal reasons why those who oppose the 'dualist'
approach have been led into error is their failure to
understand that Mozart wrote purposeful dots or
strokes when he regarded the distinction as important,
but that there are many circumstances 'where the exact
EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 593
nature of the staccato did not greatly matter and where
consequently Mozart made no deliberate effort to dis-
tinguish the two types'. Neumann calls the places where
strokes and dots seem to be aimlessly mixed the 'grey i fk
area'. He admits that this area is large, but argues that it is
nevertheless limited and that those who doubt Mozart's
Tr-t -IT T ir
intentional use of the two signs have 'made the mistake
of extrapolating the ambiguity and interchangeability
within this limited area to the whole scope of Mozart's
staccato notation'. This 'grey area' argument, however, -a- OILs
appears unconvincing from a number of viewpoints.
It seems entirely out of character that Mozart, one of
the most careful composers of the late 18th century with
respect to such things as dynamics, phrasing etc., should
so frequently have been negligent and inconsistent in his
use of dots and strokes if he really considered them to
have clearly distinct meanings. If he took trouble con-
sistently to write dots in the context of portato, why 1 1 T
should he have been so capricious in the form of his stac-
cato marks elsewhere? It is much easier to believe that he
regarded the varied functions of staccato marks (far
more than two functions, as Neumann acknowledges) as
determined by their musical context rather than their
appearance and would have relied on the musical intel-
ligence and education of the performer for recognizing
the significance of a staccato mark in any given circum- 1 Mozart, String Quartet in D, K575, Menuetto, bars 44-7
stance; thus, having no intention of writing two distinct
forms, it would have been of no consequence to him if, unclear and inconsistent uses of the staccato marks and
in rapidly committing a work to paper, his staccato it is very difficult to believe that he intended the per-
marks on unslurred notes ranged from large strokes to former to respond to their form in some cases and not in
very small strokes that were sometimes indistinguish- others. If it were only by recognizing from other musical
able from dots. Given the pervasive inconsistency of the clues whether a staccato mark were really a dot or stroke,
articulation marks in Mozart's autographs, those of his or some neutral, intermediate form, Mozart could
contemporaries who wished to determine their impli- hardly have set great store by the graphic distinction.
cations for performance would certainly have been Neumann's discussion of specific instances in
obliged to rely as much on musical intelligence as upon Mozart's autographs, where he believes a distinction to
the apparent forms of the marks. The role of musical have been intended, is vitiated by the very selective
intelligence in ascertaining the function of a staccato nature of his evidence, which suppresses inconsistency,
mark is, in fact, tacitly recognized by Neumann, since it and by his liberal interpretation of the meaning of 'dot'.
is principally by exercising his subjective musical judge- This is the case, for instance, with the Menuetto of the
ment that he seeks to determine whether staccato marks String Quartet in D, K575. Even in Neumann's ex.2a some
which appear to be dots or strokes are purposeful or of the 'dots' are quite 'stroke-like', and if we look at the
whether they merely belong in the 'grey area'. Some- return of the opening idea (illus.i), which he does not
times, according to his hypothesis of the relationship illustrate, we see a mixture of dots and small strokes in
between form and function, marks which appear to be the violins and cello but absolutely unambiguous, bold
dots must really have been intended to be strokes and strokes in the viola. Neumann's examples from the last
vice versa (for instance, in relation to his ex.3a and, as movement of the 'Jupiter' Symphony are similarly open
will be seen, others of his examples). Indeed, Neumann's to question. This is a classic case (like his ex.3a) where
case is fatally undermined by his 'grey areas' argument, Mies's 'writing factor' is likely to have operated. The
for scarcely a page of Mozart's autographs is free from three-note figure (which Neumann misleadingly states

594 EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993

This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
is 'marked throughout by dots'), is a stepwise passage
where the staccato marks would have been, and clearly
were made with a rapid sequential action of the pen,
whereas the four notes of the other figure are at various
disjunct pitches so that Mozart had to make the staccato
marks with separate actions of the pen. Even in the
examples given by Neumann (his ex.5, particularly
ex.5c) many of the staccato marks over the three step-
wise notes are actually small strokes rather than dots
(this is especially evident when they are compared with
Mozart's dots under slurs); as might be expected from
the way they would have been written, they are usually,
7 ..
2 Mozart, Symphony no.41 in C, K551, finale, bars 391-4,
violins I and 2
but not always, smaller than the staccato marks on the
four-note figure. From the passage in illus.2, however, it
seems clear that the argument that we are here dealing
with two mutually exclusive forms of staccato mark
becomes untenable.
In the manuscripts of Mozart and other composers
from this period that I have been able to examine, I have
not, with the possible exception of one or two late
Haydn scores, seen any in which apparent distinctions
appear sufficiently consistent and meaningful to con-
vince me that the writers regarded the matter as signifi-
cant. It is not implausible that subjective impulses may
sometimes have led composers to write larger and bol-
der staccato marks where they envisaged a forceful
delivery and smaller ones where they imagined a gentler
expression (this may have something to do with the
form of the staccato marks in the Menuetto of K575), but
that is something utterly different from the employment
of two quite distinct signs with quite distinct meanings.
The argument will undoubtedly continue, but for
present purposes I should like to cut this particular Gor-
dian knot by suggesting that the question of whether
mid- to late 18th-century composers employed dots and
strokes over unslurred notes with distinctly different
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
meanings is essentially a red herring. The apparent
inclusion of particular forms of articulation marks in
music of that period is, on the whole, unlikely to be a
reliable guide to the appropriate style of delivery for a
specific passage: it is probably more important to under-
stand the technical and stylistic characteristics of vocal
and instrumental performance with which composer
and performer would have been familiar and to be aware
of the factors which conditioned their attitudes towards
musical context at any given period.
C. P. E. Bach, whose reputation as a composer made
him perhaps the most widely respected of all the 18th-
century theorists, took the view that only one mark for
unslurred staccato was necessary; but, stressing that one
mark did not mean one kind of execution, he observed
that the performer 'must execute the staccato in differ-
ent ways according to the length of the note, whether it is
a minim, crotchet or quaver, whether the tempo is fast or
slow, whether the dynamic is forte or piano'." Bach's pref-
erence for a single staccato mark for unslurred notes was
echoed by, among others, Leopold Mozart (1756), J. F.
Reichardt (1776), J. A. Hiller (1793), A. E. Muller (1804)
and Spohr (1832).3 Others, including Quantz (1752),
L6hlein (1773), G. J. Vogler (1778), C. H. Koch (1802),
J. L. Adam, J. H. Knecht (1804) and an increasing
number of 19th-century theorists and composers pre-
ferred two signs.4 But though majority opinion among
these authors favoured the stroke as the sharper and
shorter of the two, there was no universal agreement;
Vogler and his admirer Knecht, for instance, seem to
have wanted it sharper and longer, while as late as 1837
Gustav Shilling still expressed uncertainty about the sig-
nificance of the two signs.5
Depite the differentiated notation suggested by many
theorists, there is little to suggest that, in practice, 18th-
century composers greatly concerned themselves with
this kind of distinction. Joseph Riepel commented in his
Griindliche Erklerung der Tonordnung (1757), after detail-
ing a sophisticated range of articulation marks: 'I have
included the strokes and dots again only for the sake of
explanation; for in practical music one does not see
them except perhaps sometimes when it is necessary on
account of clarity.'6 Even this seems to be a rather ideal-
istic statement, to judge from the surviving manuscript
and printed material, where clarity in this respect is
hardly to be encountered.
A serious problem for the performing musician is not
so much to decide whether a difference should be made
between dots and strokes as whether there is a difference
between notes with an articulation mark and notes with-
EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 595
out any mark at all. In some cases it is obvious from the
context that the previous slurring or staccato is meant to
continue or that the marking which occurs in one part
should also apply to similar figures in another. But in
cases where this is not clear the question arises whether
or not the unmarked notes would have been played any
differently if they did have articulation marks-whether,
in fact, a distinct 'non-legato' execution, associated with
the absence of slurs or articulation marks, existed in the
'-I~
--Cwv?-- -

period under consideration, and, if it did, where and

how it might have applied. Here as elsewhere, contra-
dictions abound which make it difficult to identify any
ruling principles, adding weight to the suggestion that a
knowledge of the performing practice of the period is
often more important than the actual notation, since
much that the composer regarded as obvious to the per-
former was not written down.
Many clues towards achieving an appropriate style of
40 T- 7
execution may be found in the 18th-century attitude
towards context. Throughout most of the second half of
the century there was a strong connection between the
type of music and the style of execution. An Adagio did
not require the same style of performance as an Andante
nor an Andante the same as an Allegro; a solo part would
not be performed in the same style as an accompani-
ment, and so on. Consequently, a note, with or without . it,-
an articulation mark, would be played in very different
ways in different contexts, and the approach of an Italian
violinist would almost certainly differ from that of a
French one, as Quantz implies in his comment about the 1... . . . ..

short bowstroke of the French and the 'long dragging

stoke of the Italians'.' Reichardt observed in 1776: 4_....

The different character of the pieces also requires different

bowstrokes.
Thus the bowstoke in Adagio is very different from that in
Allegro, and contrasts mainly in that the former remains more
on the string than in Allegro.
Nothing but a rest should bring the bow entirely off the
string in Adagio.
Even on the notes marked with a stroke for staccato, even
before an Abzug,i it must not entirely leave the string, but
remain on it with at least an eighth of the hair.
If, however, in a completely contrasting passage, several notes
in an Adagio should be played very sharply detached, the
composer would do well if he signified such a passage with a
particular indication, with a word, for example, furioso (vio-
lent) or adirato (angry).
In Andante the bow must have the lightness of the Allegro
bow without its sharpness and without its rapidity in leaving
the string at an Abzug. For fast notes in Andante the above-
3 Mozart, aria 'Dalla sua pace', K54oa (substitute aria for
Don Giovanni), bars 14-17
mentioned bowstroke where two notes are shortly detached in
an up-bow has a very good effect.
It is the same in Allegretto, only the bow already acquires
somewhat more liveliness and from time to time some
sharpness.
Finally in Allegro, however, the sharpness of the bow in
detached notes and its rapidity at Abzugs is highly necessary.'
Reichardt further commented that short repeated
accompaniment notes, when they have no articulation
mark (his example shows quavers), should be played
'short but not sharp'."' Many other 18th-century writers

596 EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993

This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 -. . .

- ' C . " . . _ _ . _ _ _ _
dr

Tl-,

.7 __ _ _ _ __ _ _
_____ I .1 *

Itl~ 14___ _ _ __ _ _ __ _i.

_ I.
? it

r ;i '
7.4

4 wv

"c~ l - .. "* "? A .6.e

W-----? , .. o -
, ,!
?~i~~
-?
.- ;",.t-
i
..
I
...
Ct3~~c~~, cL

4 Haydn, Symphony no.102, Adagio, bars 1-5

made similar points about the necessity of a detached
manner of playing in faster movements and a smooth
style of performance in Adagio. The logical conclusion
from this is, as Reichardt observed, that if the composer
wanted to go against the ruling character of the piece he
would have to indicate it in some way.
Instances where this sort of thing appears to have been
taken into account can be found in Mozart and Haydn.
In Don Giovanni Don Ottavio's substitute aria 'Dalla sua
pace' is an Andantino sostenuto in which players might
be expected to have interpreted staccato marks with very
little shortening or accent; thus in bar 17, when the music
becomes more agitated, Mozart not only wrote strokes
over the quavers in the bass, but also the word 'staccato',
presumably to obtain a more sharply detached execu-
tion (illus.3). A similar use of the word 'staccato' to
ensure that the notes will be significantly shortened can
be seen in bar 3 of the Adagio of Haydn's Symphony
no.o12 (illus.4). Here Haydn's inconsistency of notation
is particularly revealing: in bar 1 there are quavers with
staccato marks followed by rests for all the lower strings,
but in bar 3 the second violin has quavers and rests while
viola, cello and bass have crotchets with staccato marks
and also the word 'staccato'. It can hardly be doubted
that Haydn wanted the same effect from all the lower
strings in bar 3 and it may reasonably be assumed that it
was meant to be the same as in bar 1; this being so, there
are three different notations in close proximity indi-
cating the same thing. It is surely significant that Haydn
appears to have felt staccato marks alone on the crotch-
ets would not obtain the required shortening from the
players.
In fast movements, if we accept that the unslurred
notes would, according to the normal 18th-century con-

EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 597

This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
vention, be played in a lively staccato manner, what is the
significance of articulation marks? On notes of longer
value they may certainly indicate a shortening, and on
faster moving notes, where further shortening is imprac-
ticable, they may indicate an extra degree of accent. On
the other hand, their inclusion may simply be a reflex
action on the part of the composer-a superfluous
indication of the obvious. But there is a particular con-
text in which they are very regularly encountered even if
hardly used elsewhere--that is, when there are mixed
figures of slurred and separate notes. In such passages
they are necessary to the player, as Koch observed,11 to
make clear which notes are slurred and which separate.
In these circumstances the notes with articulation marks
were not meant to be played shorter or sharper than
notes without articulation marks which came in close
proximity to them; here, too, the musical context would
have determined their manner of performance.
There were other factors, besides whether a piece was
slow or fast, which affected the length and weight given
to notes that required a staccato execution; it was impor-
tant, for instance, to take into account whether the stac-
cato occurred in the solo part of a concerto, a melodic
part in an ensemble or an accompaniment part. Riepel
described staccato notes in concertos as being executed
with 'long and powerful strokes of the bow', in normal
ensemble and solo playing as being 'more or less stac-
cato' according to context, and in accompaniments as
being performed with a 'tiny width of bow'; these he
marked with three different signs (ex.i) but, as men-
tioned earlier, admitted that a notational differentiation
was rarely encountered in practice.'" In fact, much of the
time, 18th-century composers not merely failed to dis-
tinguish between different forms of articulation mark,
they omitted to include them at all.
Ex.i
(a) I I I (b) I I (c) ....
The relationship between context and execution con-
tinued to be important in the 19th century, but changing
stylistic criteria, perhaps directly related to the develop-
ment of the violin bow, brought about some highly sig-
nificant shifts of emphasis in the latter part of the 18th
century. Fr6hlich, in the violin school of his Vollstiindige
theoretisch-praktische Musikschule (1810-11), in a section
which is almost identical in content to passages in Bail-
lot, Rode and Kreutzer's Methode de violon du Conser-
vatoire (1801) and Campagnoli's Nouvelle menthode . .
(1824),13 gave an account which makes interesting com-
parison with the passage from Reichardt cited earlier. He
wrote:
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
In Adagio, and in general in all melodic passages, particularly
deeply expressive ones, where all notes must be slowly sus-
tained, the bow should be used from one end to the other and
all notes performed as connectedly as possible. Or if they
should be specified as staccato one must still give them their
whole value with the same length of bow. In Allegro maestoso
or Moderato assai, where the bowstroke should be faster and
more decided, the staccato notes should be given as much
breadth as possible and about the middle of the bow used for
this so that the string being set into full vibration gives a round
tone. Here one should also make a quick change between the
up- and down-bow so that a small pause comes between every
note. In Allegro the bowstroke must have less length. One
begins the notes about the end of the third quarter of the bow
and plays the notes without separating them with rests.
Then, having recommended as long a stroke as possible
for these notes at a presto tempo, he remarked: 'The
longer one makes the bowstroke the better its effect'.14
This trend is continued in Spohr's 1832 Violinschule.
In the bowing exercises he gives a passage of quavers at
minim = 104 marked with strokes over each note and
makes the somewhat startling comment:
Each note receives a separate bowing. This bowing (called by
the French detachd) is made with a steady upper arm and as
long bowstrokes as possible in the upper part of the bow. The
notes must be perfectly equal in power and duration and suc-
ceed each other in such a manner that in changing from the
down- to the up-bow or the reverse no break or chasm may be
observed [author's italics]."
(But, making no notational differentiation, he also used
strokes in passages in which he specified the short, sharp
martele bowstroke, where both accent and separation
where required.)
The connected rather than distinctly articulated style
of playing, which was already cultivated by some schools
of players and composers during the last decades of the
18th century, became firmly established as the norm
during the early 19th century. This is reflected in the cel-
list Bernhard Romberg's approach to the performance
of notes with articulation marks in passages of mixed
slurred and separate notes. He cautioned against mis-
interpreting the articulation marks in such circum-
stances, saying: 'I must here explain that whenever notes
are marked to be played alternately slurred and
detached, those which are to be played detached
(whether marked with a dot or dash) should never be
made with a close, short boW.'6 In other words, these
notes will not really be staccato in the commonly under-
stood sense of the term, simply unslurred. Koch's
explanation that the inclusion of articulation marks in
such passages does not mean a different type ofperform-
EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 599

_. . to make their intentions clear when they wanted a short,
I1 C '
E .
__ 44 ) 4. ' ' 3E
%---d --Po
5 Weber, Der Freischiitz, overture, bars 300-305
ance from other separate notes without articulation
marks thus remains valid, but since the basic style had
changed the end result is quite different.
It is clear that Romberg's instruction for the inter-
pretation of articulation marks in this context did not
only apply to string players during the first half of the
19th century. An example from the overture to Weber's
Der Freischiitz also seems to illustrate the use of staccato
marks merely to make clear that the notes in question
are unslurred; in flutes, oboes, clarinets and bassoons
bars containing mixed slurs and dots are followed by a
bar of separate notes with dots where Weber has, in addi-
tion, written the word 'staccato', presumably to obtain a
real staccato execution in that bar (illus.5).
Since it appears that 19th-century players saw no con-
tradiction in playing fairly fast notes in Allegro move-
600 EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ments in an essentially legato manner, even if they had
dots or strokes on them, composers of the period needed
sharp staccato. The problem that faced 18th-century
composers in slow movements was thus extended to fast
movements in the 19th century. The increasingly fre-
quent inclusion of words such as 'staccato' 'staccatis-
simo' 'leggiero', 'marcato' in addition to articulation
marks testifies to 19th-century composers' concern to
clarify their intentions. The passage from Der Freischatz
cited above neatly illustrates the fact that a careful
composer now needed to specify staccato in contexts
where an 18th-century player would naturally have used
a detached style of performance (i.e. in an Allegro), but
where a 19th-century player would tend towards a more
legato execution.
During the first half of the 19th century string instru-
ments seem to have been regarded as being incapable of
an effective staccato on faster moving notes. The martelk
is only practicable up to a certain tempo and, especially
in Germany, bounced bowstrokes were widely resisted
until well into the 19th century. Schilling commented in
1837 that 'on bowed instruments, a good staccato can
only be produced on notes of longer duration' but
added that woodwind instruments could produce a
good staccato on faster notes.'7 Weber, who is known to
have admired Spohr's playing, certainly seems to have
been conscious of this distinction and, with his custom-
ary sensitivity to orchestral effect, knew how to use it to
good purpose. This is well illustrated by another passage
from his Freischiitz overture (illus.6). Here the strings
have a downward scale of separate quavers which would
certainly have been played with the detache bowing
described by Spohr; this is followed by the scale a 3rd
higher on wind instruments where Weber has not only
added staccato marks but again written the word 'stac-
cato'. The passage is later repeated with exactly the same
markings.
Even different members of the woodwind family,
though, were regarded as having different staccato capa-
bilities. Fr6hlich considered the oboe and bassoon to be
capable of playing more staccato than the clarinet: in his
Musikschule he used both strokes and dots in the oboe
and bassoon methods, but only dots in the clarinet
method.
Concern to make their intentions clearer induced
many 19th-century composers to employ both strokes
and dots for staccato, which until then had been largely
confined to the realms of theory. Unfortunately, in string
playing, this added another level of confusion, for the

?( ?.
Oft"-- +II -."-.*." 'Af
, Staccato or Stoccato is almost synonymous with spiccato, indi-
' L- ! I - I IF
.__-
_ . .,. I... r , .
A- PE
.-- . -'-
6 Weber, Der Freischiitz, overture, bars 321-5
French and the Germans adopted contradictory
systems. The French, laying emphasis on the shortening
effect of articulation marks, generally adhered to the
concept explained by Adam, who maintained that
strokes were the shortest (ex.2a), dots longer (ex.2b) and
dots under slurs the longest (ex.2c). The Germans, on
the other hand, tended to lay greater emphasis on the
degree of accent indicated by these signs than on the
length of the note; thus, Fr6hlich, for instance, referred
to strokes as indicating 'the more powerful staccato'
('der krdftigrere Stog') and dots as indicating 'the
gentler [staccato]' ('der gelindere [Stoi]').'8 The
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
ex.2
(a)~ = B (b)i =
German theorist A. B. Marx proposed a less extreme
shortening of the notes than Adam, regarding the stroke
as shortening a note by a half and the dot by a quarter,
but cautioned: 'In both cases the exact amount of time
that is to be subtracted from their original value remains
undecided."''
It is interesting to note that this difference of
approach seems to reflect a long-standing duality in the
meaning of the word 'staccato'. In 1732 Walther defined
the terms 'staccato' and 'stoccato' as follows:
cating that the bowstrokes must be short without dragging and
well separated from each other. The first [of these terms]
derives from staccare, separate [entkleben], detach [abl6sen],
and this word from taccare, stick [kleben] and dis[taccare]; or
better from attaccare, attach [anhiingen], stick to [ankleben],
and instead of the syllables at-, dis- or s- signify ent-. The
second [of these terms] however derives from stocco, a stick
[Stock], and means pushed [gestossen], not pulled [nicht
gezogen] .20
The two meanings (leaving aside the question of
whether Walther's etymology was accurate) became
united in the word 'staccato'. In general, the French
inclined towards the former meaning, while the
Germans favoured the latter.
This divergence of approach is evident in the way in
which French and German string players and composers
linked the different forms of staccato marks to different
performing techniques. Baillot in his L'art du violon used
the dot for martele where the bow remained in contact
with the string, while for light, bouncing bowstrokes
where the bow rapidly left the string he used the stroke
(printed as a wedge).2'
Fr6hlich's 'more powerful staccato' indicated by a
stroke is synonymous with the martele (a hammered
stroke at the point of the bow), and at about the time
Baillot's treatise was published Marschner, according to
his later 19th-century editor G. F. Kogel, used the stroke
to indicate 'particularly strong (sfz) short, powerful
bowstrokes'22-in other words a kind of martele.
Another German, Ferdinand David, in his Violinschule
published 30 years later, used wedges and dots in exactly
the opposite sense from Baillot.23 David was followed by
other German tutors while Baillot's system was taken up
in France and was adopted by the Czech violinist Sevcik
in his extremely influential pedagogic material, thus
helping to perpetuate the confusion to the present day."4
EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 601
A correspondence between Brahms and Joachim in 1879
provides a starting point for considering the problem of
what composers meant when they used dots or strokes
under slurs. During work on Brahms's Violin Concerto,
Joachim marked some bowings with dots under a slur.
This puzzled Brahms. It is clear that they did not dis-
agree on the musical effect of the passage (i.e. a sharp
staccato), merely on the manner of notating it. Brahms
wrote to Joachim:
With what right, since when, and on what authority do you vio-
linists write the sign for portamento [i.e. portato]25 where none is
intended? You mark the octave passages in the Rondo [with dots
under slurs], and I would use sharp strokes [scharfe Strichpunkte].
Must that be so? Up to now I have not given in to the violinists
with their damned horizontal lines. Why should [dots under
slurs] mean anything different to us than it did to Beethoven?26
Joachim replied with a detailed account of the origins
and meanings of these signs as he understood them and
remarked that he always cautioned his pupils to take into
account whether the composers were pianists or string
players when deciding how to execute passages desig-
nated with dots under a slur. Joachim thought, erro-
neously, that a divergence of meaning only originated
around 18oo.27
In fact the meaning of articulation marks under a slur
was already a problem in the middle of the 18th century
and has continued to cause confusion among per-
formers. The main difficulty is to decide whether the
notation indicates sharply separated notes, more gently
emphasized and slightly separated, sometimes almost
legato notes, or some intermediate degree of articula-
tion. There is, though, the additional problem in 18th-
and 19th-century string playing of whether sharp separ-
ation, if this was envisaged, was intended to be produced
by a firm or bouncing bowstroke. Thus, the same nota-
tion could indicate every degree of articulation, from a
pulsation with hardly perceptible separation, to a flying
staccato. The range of meanings of dots and strokes
under slurs in the middle and later 18th century is well
illustrated by the following examples.
In 1732 Walther, somewhat vaguely defining the
'Punctus percutiens', remarked that in instrumental and
vocal music a dot over or under a note means that it is to
be played staccato, but when, in instrumental music (by
which he obviously means string music) there is also a
slur these notes are 'to be executed with a single bow-
stroke'. The implication here is that the notes are still to
be performed staccato.'8
Twenty-one years later, C. P. E. Bach, from the clavi-
chord player's point of view, regarded dots under a slur
602 EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
as designating portato (Tragen der Tbne). But when this
sign was written over a single note rather than a group of
notes it signified the Bebung (repeated pressure made
without lifting the key, which affects the steadiness of
pitch of the note).29 Yet five years after the publication of
C. P. E. Bach's Versuch Niccolo Pasquali's The art offin-
gering the harpsichord, apparently leaning towards string
playing practice, used dots under a slur to indicate a suc-
cession of markedly detached notes all to be played stac-
catissimo with the same finger.30
At about the same time J. F. Agricola explained the
singer's portato in a similar manner to Bach's keyboard
portato (the text describes it as notated by 'little strokes'
under a slur, but the accompanying musical example
shows dots under a slur); he counselled that such notes
'must neither be detached nor attacked, but each note
only marked by means of a gentle pressure with the
breast [durch einen gelinden Druck mit der Brust mark-
irt]'.31 Very similar descriptions of the performance of
portato by singers and wind instrument players were
given by other writers, for instance, J. S. Petri and J. B.
Lasser.32
Quantz recognized three types of articulated slur:
these were: (1) slurs alone used on notes repeated at the
same pitch, (2) dots under slurs and (3) strokes under
slurs. The first, which he only mentioned in connection
with the flute, is produced by the breath with move-
ments of the breast; the second is produced on the flute
by sharper articulation 'so to say staccato with the chest',
but without tonguing, and on the violin 'with a short
bowstroke and in a sustained manner' (i.e. portato); and
the third, which is only mentioned in connection with
the violin, is performed with completely detached
strokes in a single bow.33 Leopold Mozart also describes
Quantz's second and third categories in a similar man-
ner, but in addition he used strokes under a slur to indi-
cate a bowstroke which seems to resemble the modern
staccato (i.e. without lifting the bow fully from the
string; for technical reasons it seems clear that when he
refers to 'a quick lift of the bow' he means rather a
release of pressure than raising it clear of the string).34 It
may be significant that both these authors illustrated the
portato only on notes repeated at the same pitch.
Dealing specifically with violin playing, Joseph Riepel
described three possible articulation marks under a slur
(ex.3). His explanation of their meaning does not tally
with Quantz and Mozart. For (a) he seems to have envi-
Ex.3
(a) . (b) : (c)
saged a technique similar to the modern staccato, where
short bowstrokes, with a quick pressure and release, and
the bow barely, if at all, leaving the string, produces
sharply articulated notes; for (b) he required a longer
bowstroke, with the bow somewhat raised from the
string between notes; and for (c) he prescribes a very sus-
tained portato for which he described the execution as
follows: 'the bow is hardly raised at all; rather, it almost

zr \
represents the sound of a lyre'.35 (In practice, though, the
.i
wavy line was commonly written without a slur.)
The casualness with which composers actually used
these signs quickly becomes evident on perusal of manu-
script or printed music of the period. In the autograph of je
a symphony by Pokorny (a pupil of Riepel) dots under a J- A
Sr---
P, r L i

slur and a wavy line can be seen being employed in close

proximity evidently to mean the same thing (illus.7).
J. F. Reichardt, in Ueber die Pflichten des Ripien-Vio-
linisten (1776), referred to sharply separated notes in a
single bowstroke and to the portato, but made no nota-
tional distinction; both are indicated by dots under
T-
slurs. His example of portato, however, is shown with
notes repeated at the same pitch, while his sharply separ-
ated notes are shown in melodic figures. He described
the portato as the 'softest' way of executing repeated
fd
notes, saying: 'one takes several notes in a bowstroke
without completely joining them to one another; /
between every note there remains a small pause of the --7-T -..a

bow.' But he warned against connecting the notes too

smoothly, since this would tend to obscure the melodic J. C3
part;36 in this he seems to be not entirely in agreement
with Mozart, who required merely that the notes 'must
be separated from each other by a slight pressure of the
bow'.

J. S. Lihlein's Anweisungzum Violinspielen (1773) uses

dots under a slur to indicate sharp separation; the text
makes no mention of a portato." In the exercises in
r Ir
chapter XI, however, there seem to be several instances
of what, from their context as repeated accompaniment
notes at the same pitch, look like portato; these too are
simply marked with dots under a slur. Ldhlein also
....

employed dots under a slur over a single note to indicate

vibrato (Bebung) of the left hand-a violinists coun-
terpart to C. P. E. Bach's Bebung on the clavichord.38 But
elsewhere the same notation seems to have been used in
string music to indicate a Bebung with the bow, for
instance, in Gluck's operas, sometimes in conjunction
with the instruction 'tremolando'.
In string music, portato rather than staccato is
generally indicated by the theorists for accompaniment
figures where notes were repeated at the same pitch. 7 Franz Xaver Pokorny, Symphony in C, c14, excerpt

EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 603

This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Ex.4
Indeed, Cambini suggested in 18oo00 that this style of bow-
ing should be used whenever piano, dolce or piano dolce (b)
were written even though the composer had not speci-
fically indicated a portato bowing; to mark this bow-
stroke, Cambini used either dots or a wavy line.39 But, as
the descriptions of Quantz, Mozart and Reichardt imply,
FT71 - A :-ji F L l
a considerable variation in pressure and separation was oo?? ? 11/-??
current.

A final example from an 18th-century treatise intro-

duces the possibility of executing slurred staccato where
none seems to be indicated. In his Anweisung zum Vio-
linspielen of 1793 J. A. Hiller explains that if dots (with-
out a slur) occur:
As long as these dots should not merely be strokes, they signify
a totally different kind of performance, which in artistic lan-
guage is called punto d'arco (attack with the bow). In this case
several of the notes thus marked are taken in one bowstroke
and brought out shortly by a jerk of the bow.
He later adds that 'the punto d'arco can most easily be
made with the up-bow from the point of the bow up to
the middle'.4* As his music example confirms, he is refer-
ring to the staccato in a single bowstroke at a moderate
tempo, which other authors designated by dots under a
slur or strokes under a slur. He adds that soloists can
attempt this bowstroke at much faster tempos. Hiller
used the notation of dots under a slur to mean portato,
but seems to say (the passage is far from clear) that the
same notation could also be used for the punto d'arco; it
certainly was used by others in this sense. (Another,
somewhat different, use of the term punto [or punta]
d'arco seems also to have been current in the late 18th
and early 19th centuries.)
indicate portato. (However, the Gluck tremolando was
referred to by Berlioz in his Grand traite (1843), and the
use of the wavy line as an indication for portato was
touched on by Baillot in 1834.)42 The wavy line continued
to be used in string music to indicate left-hand vibrato
and tremolo with separate bowstrokes, and on the
piano, particularly in vocal scores of operas, to indicate
the pianistic equivalent of the tremolo. The tendency of
composers to use signs haphazardly and inconsistently
continued as before, though the possible range of mean-
ings shifted. For instance, while Pokorny had used the
wavy line and dots under a slur as synonymous for por-
tato, Rossini used the wavy line and four (or three) diag-
onal strokes as synonymous for the tremolo with
separate bowstrokes (illus.8) in the manner described in
the Principes elementaires de la musique . .. du conser-
vatoire (c.1800), where it was observed:
One uses it [the wavy line] normally on a semibreve in the
accompaniment parts of an obbligato recitative. The effect of
the tremolo is the same as that produced by a succession of
demisemiquavers on the same pitch in a fast movement. Only
string instruments and timpani are able to produce the effect
of the tremolo.43

There is evidently a grey area in the 18th-century use

There follows a music example headed 'Manner of exe-
of this notation, where the type of execution envisaged is
cuting the tremolo' (ex.5).
on the borderline between portato and staccato. This is
very clearly brought out in Koch's definition of Piquiren Ex.5
in his 1802 Lexicon. He wrote:
With this expression one denotes a particular kind of bow-

stroke on string instruments by which many stepwise notes
following on from one another are given with a very short stac-
cato. [. . .]; e.g. [ex.4a]
One leaves the performance of running notes in a quick
tempo to solo players who have particularly practised this;
however, on notes which are repeated at the same pitch and
performed at a moderate tempo one also uses this kind of
stroke in orchestral parts; e.g. [ex.4b]4
Nineteenth-century sources reveal a number of dif-
ferent preoccupations. Several of the markings dealt
with by 18th-century writers became largely obsolete; the
Gluck tremolando and the Bebung disappeared from
normal usage, as did the employment of the wavy line to
. . Abbreviation
In piano methods the portato meaning of dots under
a slur seems to have been generally accepted at the begin-
ning of the 19th century; J. L. Adam's explanation of this
notation in his Methode du piano du Conservatoire (1802)
as signifying that each note was to be sustained for three-
quarters of its value44 was widely repeated in other piano
methods and even, somewhat anomalously, in some
string methods. Singing methods and wind tutors also
continued to link the notation of dots under a slur with

604 EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993

This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
8 Rossini, Semiramide, Act 2, NO.10, bars 29-33

4 ;- - f . ... . . - - .. i - .'
li.A~g~&4'
?, ,
ft -, ) i-k
II *
i: , ...-._ ~~~ ~~~~~-??-_. -:, ........... . +- :- = , - .:: .:-? .
A a " .-- - dw

A ..

?~--? ..... + -- --... . ..

..A16 .v:t -
? 7 > .___,.~_. ._..... .,__. .1'
t2, I L i J- I " L Q" W J LJ --_ i ? `tr I"I I I= I
'*,0-

Ex.6
t tIf
' '- " X," #'.,. X_. ----'.#'l?- _ .F . ?--IC X .. -" '.-" +

I . . . . I I - !
esecltzione

/-:-7-'.f TT. ./ op
6: . . . , , "- F 1 1 F " 1 1 , , ,

portato, for instance the oboe method in Fr6hlich's Mus-
ikschule, where he described it as having 'a distinctive
soft character which almost occupies the bridge between
staccato and slurring'."4 Some authorities, particularly
pianists, also noted that in passages marked 'portato'
each note received a slight emphasis;46 for violinists,
such an effect is a natural outcome of the technique. At
least one writer, Lichtenthal, observed that in cantabile
phrases a slightly delayed entry of each note 'contributes
not a little to the expression',47 and gave ex.6 as an illus-
tration. The range of subtle degrees of accentuation,
pressure and separation demanded by particular musi-
cal contexts is undoubtedly greater than any one theor-
ist's description of portato conveys.
In 19th-century string methods more fundamental
ambiguity continued as strongly as ever. Fr6hlich, with
no apparent sense of inconsistency, in the violin method
section of his Musikschule showed dots beneath a slur as
meaning slurred staccato, having earlier shown it as
meaning portato."8 Dotzauer, in his Methode de vio-
loncelle of c.1825, uses dots beneath a slur only in the con-
text of the staccato; but in his Violoncell-Schule of 1836 he
also described a springing staccato (whose use he did
not, however, recommend except in rare instances) with
the same notation.49 Spohr's Violinschule of 1832, on the
other hand, ignoring springing staccato altogether, used
dots beneath a slur for the normal string player's slurred
staccato; however, he also indicated, though only in pas-
sing, that phrases marked in this manner might, especi-
ally in slow movements, be executed with a more gentle
detaching of the notes.5s
The meaning of dots or stokes under slurs during the

EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 605

This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
late 18th and early 19th centuries, therefore, is by no
means clear and consistent. In keyboard music it is safe
to assume, despite the contrary example from Pasquali,
that in the vast majority of instances the intended execu-
tion of dots under slurs is portato. The same is usually
true of wind music and vocal music too. In string music
the situation is much more complex, particularly where
the composer was both a keyboard player and a string
player. With the dissemination of an increasingly sophis-
ticated variety of bowings in the 19th century the range
of possible meanings became even wider. In these cir-
cumstances the musical context considered in conjunc-
tion with what is known about a composer's background
and training is the only reasonable guide to understand-
ing the intentions behind these notatations. It may be
helpful at this point to consider some particular cases in
which one or another interpretation seems to be
required.
On at least a couple of occasions Haydn used quite
distinct strokes rather than dots under slurs. One of
these occurs in the autograph score of his Concertante in
Bb for violin, cello, oboe, bassoon and orchestra (1791; H
I:105), but his intentions are far from clear. In bars
oo-o101 of the first movement he wrote the music of
ex.7a in the solo violin part. Since he almost invariably
wrote unambiguous dots under slurs the use of strokes
here seems to imply that he wanted something different
from a portato bowing, and at first sight it appears likely
that he imagined a sharply detached bowstroke, as indi-
cated by Quantz, Leopold Mozart and Riepel with this
notation. But at the parallel passage in the recapitulation
(bars 218-19) he gave the figure as it appears in ex.7b.
This leaves it in doubt whether he required a contrast the
second time or whether the different notation arose
simply from inadvertence and, if the latter, whether he
regarded the two forms as having distinct meanings at
that stage. Ten years later, in the Trio section of the Min-
uet of his String Quartet, op.77 no.1, he took care to
make a clear notational difference which suggests very
strongly that he was concerned to specify the difference
between sharply detached notes in one bowstroke and
portato. In the Eulenburg miniature score and most edi-
tions of the parts this has uniformly been printed with
dots under slurs in all parts, but in the autograph Haydn
Ex.7 Haydn, Concertante in Bb, H 1:0lo5, Ist movement:
(a) bars loo-lo1; (b) bars 218-19
piti lento piti lento
606 EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
clearly wrote strokes under slurs for the first violin, with
its leaping figures, and dots under slurs for the repeated
crotchet accompaniment of the three other parts. (It is
accurately reproduced in the recent Landon/Barratt-
Ayres score.)
Haydn's late autographs generally show greater con-
cern for precision in matters of articulation than his
earlier ones and it would be rash to assume, just because
in 18oo he used strokes under slurs to indicate staccato,
that passages marked with dots under slurs in his earlier
works should never be performed staccato, or indeed,
since so many of his earlier autographs are missing, that
the printed editions faithfully reflect the original nota-
tion. Haydn, an active violinist throughout his career,
would have been conversant with the use of both nota-
tions for a slurred staccato. Nevertheless, in the vast
majority of cases the musical context suggests that
Haydn used dots under slurs to indicate some kind of
portato; this would undoubtedly have ranged from very
smooth to fairly detached, but lifted or sharply accented
bowstrokes rarely seem appropriate.
Mozart, despite his father's distinction between dots
and strokes under a slur, seems not to have used the
latter at all. In keyboard music he undoubtedly used dots
under slurs to indicate portato, and in most instances in
his string music the context strongly suggests that this is
also what he required there; but the possibility remains
that he sometimes used this notation in string writing in
places where he wanted a more sharply articulated bow-
stroke. It is evident from one of his letters that he knew
and admired the slurred staccato; he described the play-
ing of Frinzl to his father in 1777, saying: 'He has too a
most beautiful clear, round tone. He never misses a note,
you can hear everything. It is all clear cut. He has a beau-
tiful staccato, played with a single bowing up or down.'51
It is quite likely that such a staccato would have been
notated with dots under a slur, and it is certainly possible
that Mozart might have employed the same notation for
this effect. There are places where it appears probable on
musical and technical grounds that this was the execu-
tion he required. One instance, about which there seems
little room for doubt, occurs in the first movement of his
Violin Concerto in D, K211 (illus.9). On the other hand,
there are places where modern performers commonly
play a sharply detached slurred staccato, but where
Mozart probably imagined a more connected bow-
stroke; for instance, in the first movement of the String
Quartet in D, K575. At bar 66 he introduced the figure
given as ex.8a; when he repeated it four bars later and on
all its five subsequent appearances he wrote the bowing
 ? ..V.-,-.baI
IMa"fra . I I. . I t I ., L I,,
?ly?

f ,i F- 31FAIC 1 1 FPS .r

CC%

? .... .,--~w "" " ? -j,, ? _p'_ lrL 7 D :_ _SL_ : l _A @ _ _ ? . _ - ? ' , ' !) ... .. !

|_
._ vI i".--. - - - --I- -- ? l i : L , J 1 ' -,i ,. ] -,
I-o

I . .
-- t_ _ r _.. ... . . ._ l
~1 .
i i, 7-1

', - ,, T- .- -: -' . - ..: ! x ? I- _ i "

9 Mozart, Violin Concerto in D, K211, 1st movement, bars 35-8

shown in ex.8b. Printed editions generally give the first
bowing on all appearances of the figure, but it is arguable
that the other bowing reveals Mozart's intentions more
clearly. A sharply detached bowstroke would certainly be
possible with the first bowing, but the subsequent ver-
sion makes this much less likely; Mozart would have
(b)
been well aware that the down-bow produced a differ-
ent, less crisp staccato than the up-bow.
In general, musical and technical considerations sug-
gest that Mozart used dots under slurs in his later string
music to signify an equivalent to the portato which he
clearly intended in his keyboard music.
Beethoven seems consistently to have meant portato
by dots under a slur in keyboard, wind and string music.
This was surely the significance of his often quoted letter
to Carl Holz on the importance of distinguishing
between strokes and dots in copying the autograph of
the A minor String Quartet;" the only clear and con-
sistent differentiation in this autograph is between dots
under slurs for portato and strokes (without slurs) for
Ex.8 Mozart, String Quartet in D, K575, Ist movement:
(a) bars 66-7; (b) bars 70-71
(a) -'. - .
40 ' i, ,, - - I
I L/ " I I I I I I I I q, ? I II I I
staccato. Such an interpretation of that letter is sup-
ported by Beethoven's care in correcting copyists' parts
of the Seventh Symphony; in the many instances where
the copyist had written dots without slurs or strokes
where there should have been portato, Beethoven pains-
takingly altered these to ensure that staccato was always
indicated by strokes without slurs and portato by dots
under slurs. Despite his often chaotic writing in other
places, Beethoven invariably wrote dots under slurs with
absolute clarity.

EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 607

This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Though Beethoven almost certainly never intended
his dots under slurs to indicate a staccato, the precise
degree of articulation will certainly vary according to the
musical context. Modern performers, especially string
players, but also wind and keyboard players, often mis-
understand the portato implication of Beethoven's dots
under slurs and play them in a sharply detached manner.
It is probable that this notation was already being mis-
interpreted by string players in the mid-19th century.
Schubert, like Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven, was a
string player as well as a keyboard player. He grew up
during a period when the Viotti school was rapidly gain-
ing dominance and the slurred staccato was an essential
part of every aspiring string player's technique, and it
seems clear that not all the passages which he notated
with dots under a slur are meant to be played portato.
For instance, assuming that the first edition faithfully
reflects Schubert's lost autograph, a slurred staccato exe-
cution is surely indicated in the Menuetto of the String
Quartet, op.125 no.2; if this is not Schubert's notation it
merely provides evidence of the 1840 editor's practice.
When Schubert wrote dots under a slur for arpeggio
or scale passages of moderate to rapid velocity it seems
possible that he envisaged something on the borderline
between portato and staccato, even when he gave the
same notation to string and wind instruments, as in the
fourth variation of the Andante of the Octet, or to violin
and piano, as in the Andante of the 'Trout' Quintet (bars
37-48). It is possible in a passage such as this that Schu-
bert was especially concerned to indicate the equality of
accentuation (the slight emphasis on each note). A pass-
age in the 'Trout' Quintet where a more distinct staccato
may be appropriate is variation 2 of the Andantino; the
combination of tempo and notation (the fp and the sep-
arate bow for the first note on the first appearance of the
figure) provide almost a locus classicus for slurred stac-
cato, though a relatively relaxed rather than extremely
crisp staccato would probably be best suited to the
context.
Many of Schubert's string playing associates would
certainly have used dots under slurs as a notation for dis-
tinctly articulated bowstrokes, as is suggested by bow-
ings in manuscript parts of his Sixth Symphony used by
members of his circle, dating from between 1825 and
1828 (now in the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde,
Vienna), where the triplet semiquavers in the second
movement, given in Schubert's autograph with staccato
dots, were marked (after the parts were written) to be
played in groups of three or six semiquavers to the bow.
Composers themselves very rarely notated slurred stac-
608 EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
cato in their orchestral compositions; on occasion,
though, dots under slurs were unquestionably used to
specify this effect. One example occurs in the first move-
ment of Spohr's Fourth Symphony, Die Weihe der Tbne
(bars 49ff.); another is in the Allegro vivacissimo final
movement of Mendelssohn's Third Symphony (bars
16ff.).
When writing for solo strings Mendelssohn quite fre-
quently used dots under slurs in contexts where he
clearly wanted slurred staccato; he also used the same
notation for various types of slurred spiccato as well as
for portato. A good example of the slurred staccato is
found in the Scherzo of the Octet; this is probably also
the bowing required in the last movement of his Piano
Trio, op.66 (dedicated to Spohr, whose performance of
the slurred staccato Mendelssohn admired). In the last
movement of his Violin Concerto Mendelssohn seems
to have intended a lighter staccato or spiccato, while in
the first movement of the same concerto the dots under
slurs in the wind and solo violin part in the second sub-
ject clearly indicate portato.
Even singers could sometimes be expected to execute
dots under a slur as sharply articulated notes rather than
as portato. An interesting example of this can be found
in Meyerbeer's Les Huguenots, Act 2, no. 7, where flute
and oboe have a figure of repeated semiquavers which is
immediately answered by the solo soprano in inversion.
Both figures are notated with dots and slurs, but Meyer-
beer has indicated for the wind instruments 'appuyez
chaque note' ('press each note'), and for the voice 'sac-
cade' ('jerkily') (illus.io).
While most writers before the middle of the 19th cen-
tury seem to have been relatively unconcerned by the
ambiguities of portato/slurred staccato/springing stac-
cato/spiccato notation, the French violinist Baillot
attempted greater precision. For a succession of notes
played in a single rebounding bowstroke-a type of
bowing discouraged by most German authorities at that
time-he proposed strokes or wedges under a slur. He
also observed that since dots under a slur could mean
both a very smooth portato (which he called ondulation)
and staccato (or detache articulk) two other different
notations should be used. For portato he proposed a sign
rather similar to the 18th-century wavy line, confining
dots under a slur to the staccato. But rather confusingly
he also repeated Adam's formula for the rendition of
dots under a slur, and it is not entirely clear from Bail-
lot's account whether he regarded ondulation and por-
tato as synonymous or significantly different.53
Later in the century there was a more widespread con-

l .lenlist. d9.,an.-. -
Appu wtno
" - " . ..o - .. 4;. ,
rrr~~~~~~~~~~~~ .,,.....~rshiu~b~r ne1D~bnbii~~
pp . ,
""->"?
i(U " -" -
lnl " " .
I"= .... .... -t'" I'aw h "
to Meyerbeer, Les Huguenots, Act 2, no.7, bars 40-41
cern for notational precision, and a greater number of
theorists and composers began to use increasingly differ-
entiated systems. The scheme expounded in Ferdinand
David's Violinschule, as mentioned earlier, associated
strokes or wedges with marteld bowstrokes, and dots with
sautillW bowstrokes; David also employed horizontal lines
for tenuto bowstrokes: strokes under slurs indicated the
slurred staccato, dots under slurs indicated sautillW or spic-
cato in a single bowstroke, and horizontal lines under slurs
indicated portato.54 Yet, the association of dots under a slur
with staccato was so deeply ingrained that even David did
not consistently adopt his own criteria for distinguishing
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
between slurred staccato and slurred spiccato in his
numerous editions. Other authors, such as Hermann
Schr6der,55 who were undoubtedly influenced by David's
theoretical notation of articulation marks, followed all his
distinctions except the one between slurred staccato and
spiccato. In a further example of inconsistency, David
often used horizontal lines under slurs for portato in his
editions, but also continued to use dots under slurs where
portato seems to have been intended by the composer. In
this case it is possible that some of David's apparent lack of
consistency arose from the fact that he failed to recognize
the composer's intention; in his edition of Beethoven's
Violin Sonatas, for example, he sometimes used his line
under slur notation, sometimes retained Beethoven's dots
under slurs and sometimes mixed editorial slurred stac-
cato with Beethoven's orignal portato notation.
The horizontal line under a slur to indicate portato was
adopted by many composers during the second half of the
19th century, including Wagner, Dvoriak and Bruch.
Brahms, however, resisted this notation even after his cor-
respondence with Joachim on the subject, and continued
to use dots under a slur solely as an indication for portato.
He did, though, relent to some extent in at least one
instance, for in the first edition of his Violin Sontata,
op.1o8, the violin part in the score has dots under slurs for
the first 16 bars of the third movement, while, for the same
passage, the separate violin part has lines under slurs.
Other signs used in conjunction with slurs, or simply a slur
without articulation marks over notes repeated at the same
pitch (Brahms utilized this, for instance, at the beginning
of this First Symphony), were also employed with increas-
ing frequency by many composers during the second half
of the century in a search for ever more precise definition
of the type of articulation required.
This highly selective survey highlights the considerable
range of meanings given to articulation markings and the
extent to which these meanings varied according to the
period, the composer's background and the musical con-
text. Knowledge of this kind can rarely lead to certainty
about a composer's intentions, but, by helping to identify
the possibilities available, it can greatly assist performers to
make an intelligent choice among the alternatives.
Clive Brown specializes in the study of the Classical and
Romantic periods. His book on performing practice in these
periods is to be published by Oxford University Press. His
other publications include a critical biography of Spohr and
editions of works by Spohr, Weber and Beethoven. He is
Senior Lecturer in Performance Studies at University College
Bretton Hall, University of Leeds.
EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993 609
 'Against: Alfred Einstein; E. Zimmermann, Die Bedeutung der Zei-
chen Keil Strich und Punkt bei Mozart (Kassel, 1957); P. Mies, 'Die Artik-
ulationzeichen Strich und Punkt bei Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart', Die
Musikforschung, xi (1958), p.428 (Mies also argues against two marks in
Beethoven in Textkritische Untesuchungen bei Beethoven (Munich and
Duisburg, 1957)); Editionsrichtlinie musikalischer Denkmdler und
Gesamtausgaben, ed. G. von Dadelsen (Kassel, 1967); R. D. Riggs, Artic-
ulation in Mozart's and Beethoven's sonatas for piano and violin (diss.,
Harvard U., 1987). For: H. Keller, H. Unterricht, O. Jonas and A. Kreutz
in Die Bedeutung der Zeichen Keil Strich und Punkt bei Mozart (Kassel,
1957); R. Elvers in Neue Mozart Ausgabe (Kassel, 1955-) IV/13/1, pref-
ace, p.x (the NMA adopted a consistent policy of attempting to make a
distinction between dots and strokes); F. Neumann, 'Dots and strokes
in Mozart', Early music, xxi/3 (Aug 1993), pp-429-35.
2C. P. E. Bach, Versuch iiber die wahre Art das Clavier zu spielen
(Berlin, 1753).
3L. Mozart, Versuch eine grandliche Violinschule (Augsburg, 1756);
J. F. Reichardt, Ueber die Pflichten des Ripien-Violinisten (Berlin and
Leipzig, 1776); J. A. Hiller, Anweisung zum Violinspielen ... (Leipzig,
1792); A. E. MOller, Klavier und Fortepiano-Schule (Jena, 1804); L.
Spohr, Violinschule (Vienna, 1832).
4J. J. Quantz, Versuch einer Anweisung die Flkte traversiere zu spielen
(Berlin, 1752); J. S. Lbhlein, Anweisung zum Violinspielen (Leipzig und
Ziillichau, 1773); G. J. Vogler, Kuhrpfdlzische Tonschule (Mannheim,
1778); J. H. Knecht, Knechts Allgemeiner musikalischer Katechismus
(Biberach, 1803).
'Encyclopddie der gesammten musikalischen Wisssenschaften ..., ed.
G. Schilling (Stuttgart, 1835-8), i,28 (article 'Abstofgen').
6J. Riepel, Griindlichen Erkliirung der Tonordnung... (Frankfurt
and Leipzig, 1757) p.16.
7Quantz, Versuch, XVII,i,26.
8J. F. Reichardt describes the Abzug as follows: 'The appoggiatura of
fixed length always receives a stronger pressure of the bow than the
note itself. It is erroneous, however, if the note after an appoggiatura is
for this reason always taken off. One can divide Abzugs into the decep-
tive and the true Abzug. In the case of the deceptive Abzug, which is
appropriate to any note that has an appoggiatura, the bow carries on
more weakly, or even remains stationary on the string. In the case of
the true Abzug, which is appropriate to any note that has an appoggiat-
ura and is followed by a rest, the bow is lifted completely from the
strings as soon as the note has been faintly heard.' Ueber die Pflichten
des Ripien-Violinisten (Berlin and Leipzig, 1776), pp.41-2.
'Reichardt, Ueber die Pflichten des Ripien-Violinisten, pp.25-6.
"'Reichardt, Ueber die Pflichten des Ripien-Violinisten, pp.23-4.
"H. C. Koch, Musikalisches Lexikon (Frankfurt am Main, 1802),
cols.44-45 (article 'Abstofen').
"2J. Riepel, Griindlichen Erkldrung der Tonordnung. .. (Frankfurt
and Leipzig, 1757) p.15.
'3A date of c.1797 has conventionally been associated with an original
Italian edition of Campagnoli's violin method, but I have been unable
to find it in any library and there is not, so far as I am aware, any
reliable evidence that such an edition ever existed.
'4F. J. Fr6hlich, Vollstandige theoretisch-praktische Musikschule
(Bonn, 1810-11) iii, p.47.
'5L. Spohr, Violinschule (Vienna, 1832). English translation as Louis
Spohr's celebrated violin school, trans. J. Bishop (London, n.d.) p.118.
'6B. Romberg, Methode de violoncelle (Berlin, 1840). English trans-
lation as A complete theoretical and practical school for the violoncello
(London, 1840) p.35.
'7Encyclopiidie dergesammten musikalischen Wisssenschaften ..., i,29
(article 'Abstof~en').
'8Frdhlich, Ueber die Pflichten des Ripien-Violinisten, iii, p.49.
19A. B. Marx, Allgemeine Musiklehre (Leipzig, 1839); Eng. trans, as
Universal School of Music (London, 1853), p.76.
2J. G. Walther, Musicalisches Lexicon (Leipzig, 1732), article
'Staccato'.
61o EARLY MUSIC NOVEMBER 1993
This content downloaded from 66.7.210.88 on Tue, 26 Jul 2016 20:34:25 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
2P. M. F. de S. Baillot, L'art du violon: nouvelle method (Paris, 1834),
esp. p.92ff.
22'Vorbemerkung' to the Peters full score of Marschner's Hans
Heiling.
23E David, Violinschule (Leipzig, 1863), esp. p.37ff.
240. ?evdik, Schule der Violine-Technik, op.1 (1881), Schule der Bogen-
technik, op.2 (1895) etc.
25'Portato' is used throughout this article to describe all degrees of artic-
ulation indicated by dots under slurs which are intermediate between
legato and a sharply detached staccato. This is a well established usage:
portate notes were defined by Lichtenthal in 1826 as 'those which are
marked to occur without the bow being raised from the string (fig.122);
therefore they are neither legato nor detached [sciolto], but almost
dragged, giving to each note a little stroke of the bow.' P. Lichtenthal,
Dizionario e bibliografia della musica (Milan, 1826), i,128 and fig.122.
26Johannes Brahms: Briefwechsel (Berlin, 1907-22), vi, p.146.
27Johannes Brahms: Briefwechsel, vi, p.148ff.
28Walther, Musicalisches Lexicon, article 'Punctus Percutiens'.
29C. P. E. Bach, Versuch, i, III,20.
30N. Pasquali, The art offingering the harpsichord (Edinburgh, 1758),
lesson XVI.
3'J. F. Agricola, Anleitung zur Singkunst (Berlin, 1757) (a revised edi-
tion of P. E Tosti's Opinioni), p.135.
32J. B. Lasser, Vollstiindige Anleitung zur Singkunst (Munich, 1798);
J. S. Petri, Anleitung zur practischen Musik ... (Leipzig, 2/1782).
33Quantz, Versuch, VI,i,n1, XVII,ii,12.
34L. Mozart, Versuch eine grfindliche Violinschule, I,iii,17, VII,i,17.
35Riepel, Griindlichen Erklarung der Tonordnung ., p.16.
36Reichardt, Ueber die Pflichten des Ripien-Violinisten, pp.24, 17-18.
37J. S. Ldhlein, Anweisung zum Violinspielen (Leipzig and ZAllichau,
1773), VIII,48 pp.32-3.
3" Lohlein, Anweisung zum Violinspielen, pp.68-70.
39G. G. Cambini, Nouvelle methode theorique etpractiquepour le vio-
lon (Paris, c.18oo), p.23.
40J. A. Hiller, Anweisung zum Violinspielen ... (Leipzig, 1792),
pp.41ff.
4'Koch, Musikalisches Lexikon, co1.1156, article 'Piquiren'.
42H. Berlioz, Grand traite d'instrumentation et d'orchestration moder-
nes, op.lo (Paris, 1843), p.19; Baillot, L'art du violon: nouvelle method,
p.137.
43Gossec et al., Principes dlementaires de musique . .. du Conser-
vatoire (Paris, c.1799-1802), p.48.
44J. L. Adam, Methode du piano du Conservatoire (1802).
45C. Czerny, Vollstdndige ... Pianoforte-Schule (Vienna, 1846), iii,
p.24; J. N. Hummel, Ausfiihrliche theoretisch-praktische Anweisung
zum Piano-forte-spiel (Vienna, 1828), i, p.64; F. Starke, Wiener Piano-
forte-Schule (Vienna, 1819), i, pt.1,13; D. Steibelt, Mithode de piano
(Leipzig, [1809]), P.57.
46P. Lichtenthal, Dizionario e bibliografia della musica (Milan, 1826),
i, p.216 and fig.141.
47Frdhlich, Vollstindige praktisch-theoretische Musikschule, ii, p.40.
48Frdhlich, Vollstindige praktisch-theoretische Musikschule, iii, p.48.
49J. J. F. Dotzauer, Methode de violoncelle (Mainz, c.1825), pp.27-8;
Violoncell-Schule ftr den ersten Unterricht (Vienna, 1836), p.22.
50L. Spohr, Violinschule (Vienna, 1832); Eng. trans. as Louis Spohr's
celebrated violin school, trans. John Bishop (London, n.d.), p.115.
51The letters of Mozart and his family, ed. and trans. E. Anderson
(London, 2/1966), p.384.
52The letters ofBeethoven, ed. and trans. E. Anderson (London, 1961),
iii, p.1241.
53Baillot, L'art du violon: nouvelle method, pp.268-7o.
54The horizontal line under a slur has a longer history than might be
suggested by the Brahms-Joachim correspondence. It was apparently
used by the young Franz Berwald as early as 1818 in the Poco adagio of his
G minor String Quartet: F. Berwald: Siimtliche Werke (Kassel, 1966), xi.
55H. Schr6der, Die Kunst des Violinspiels (Cologne, 1887).