A term used to denote a piece of music usually but not necessarily consisting of several movements, almost invariably instrumental and designed to be performed by a soloist or a small ensemble. The solo and duet sonatas of the Classical and Romantic periods with which it is now most frequently associated generally incorporate a movement or movements in what has misleadingly come to be called Sonata form (or ‘first-movement form’), but in its actual usage over more than five centuries the title ‘sonata’ has been applied with much broader formal and stylistic connotations than that. From the 13th century onwards the word ‘sonnade’ was used in literary sources simply to denote an instrumental piece, as for example in the Provençal 13th- century Vida da Santa Douce: ‘Mens que sonavan la rediera sonada de matinas’. In a mystery play of 1486 the phrase ‘Orpheus fera ses sonnades’ occurs as a stage direction. Cognate usages appear to be the ‘sennets’ called for in Elizabethan plays and the term ‘sonada’ found in German manuscripts of the same period for trumpet calls and fanfares, a later manifestation of which were the more extended Turmsonaten (‘tower sonatas’) of the 17th and 18th centuries. In El maestro (1536) Luys Milán referred to ‘villancicos y sonadas’, including among the latter pavans and fantasias. Gorzanis gave ‘sonata’ as the actual title for passamezzos and paduanas in the first book of his Intabolatura di liuto (1561), and it is similarly employed in later collections of lute music. The rapid development of instrumental music towards the close of the 16th century was accompanied by a plethora of terms which were employed in a confused and often imprecise manner. ‘Sonata’ was one of them, although it was nearly always applied to something played as opposed to something sung (‘cantata’). 1. Baroque. 2. Classical. 3. 19th century after Beethoven. 4. 20th century. BIBLIOGRAPHY SANDRA MANGSEN (1), JOHN IRVING (2), JOHN RINK (3), PAUL GRIFFITHS (4) Sonata 1. Baroque. (i) Introduction. (ii) Origins and early development. (iii) Development 1650–1750. (iv) Socio-cultural context. (v) Performing practice and dissemination. Sonata, §1: Baroque (i) Introduction. In the 17th century title-pages often used the term ‘sonata’ generically to cover all the instrumental pieces in a volume, which might well contain no single work actually called ‘sonata’; there are no sonatas, for example, in Buonamente’s Il quinto libro de varie sonate, sinfonie, gagliarde, corrente, e ariette (Venice, 1629). As a genre label, the term competed with others (especially canzone and sinfonia, but also capriccio, concerto, fantasia, ricercar, toccata) that were applied to individual pieces difficult to distinguish from sonatas, even in the works of an individual composer within a single printed volume. Only after mid- century did ‘sonata’ finally displace its competitors as the most appropriate term for such instrumental works. For Brossard (Dictionaire, 1703) the sonata was ‘to all sorts of instruments what the cantata is to the voice’, and was designed ‘according to the composer’s fancy’, free of the constraints imposed by dance, text or the rules of counterpoint. Brossard categorized sonatas as da camera or da chiesa, a division that has informed much later commentary; however, the former term, while it appeared on title-pages more frequently than the latter, was rarely applied to specific sets of dance movements before Corelli’s op.2 of 1685. The mature Baroque sonata did acquire a set of more or less consistent attributes, even if copyists still wavered between ‘concerto’ and ‘sonata’ for a work borrowing something from each genre. By 1750 sonatas were independent pieces, usually in three or four separate movements, which could be heard not only in church and chamber, but in concert or as interval music at the theatre, where they might be played orchestrally rather than by the chamber ensembles for which they had originally been written. J.G. Walther’s concise definition (Musicalisches Lexicon, 1732) is accurate for his time, and indeed for much of the Baroque period: ‘the sonata is a piece for instruments, especially the violin, of a serious and artful nature, in which adagios and allegros alternate’. Here the use of the term and the development of the genre from Gabrieli’s Sacrae symphoniae (1597) to the galant sonatas of Scarlatti and Telemann will be traced. But discussion cannot be limited strictly to sonatas so called, since often enough what are (and were) recognizably sonatas appeared under labels referring to another genre (capriccio), or to the number of parts (solo, quadro), or even to proper names (Cazzati’s La Galeazza, 1648). The main concerns in what follows will be the origins and stylistic development, sociocultural functions, performing practices, dissemination and reception of the sonata and its near relatives. (For more comprehensive lists of composers, arranged by chronology and geography, see NewmanSBE, 4th edn.) Sonata, §1: Baroque (ii) Origins and early development. The instrumental canzona, which had grown in Italy from instrumental arrangements of imported chansons, has usually been regarded as the most significant precursor of the Baroque sonata. The similarities between many early sonatas and contemporary canzonas are undeniable: sectional structure defined by contrasts in metre and tempo, reliance on imitative contrapuntal texture, and immediate repetition or final recapitulation of the opening section. For Michael Praetorius sonatas and canzonas were so intimately related that he cited the ‘canzonas and sinfonie of Giovanni Gabrieli’ in his description of the sonata, and noted that ‘sonatas are composed in a stately and magnificent manner like motets, but the canzonas have many black notes and move along crisply, gaily and fast’ (Syntagma musicum, iii, 1618, 2/1619). Although there have been many attempts to distinguish between the two genres, composers and publishers seem to have used the terms interchangeably. Both the generic meaning of ‘sonata’ (e.g. Tarquinio Merula’s Canzoni overo sonate concertate per chiesa e camera, 1637), and the close relation between the two genres (e.g. in Cazzati’s first two volumes of instrumental works, Canzoni, 1642, and Il secondo libro delle sonate, 1648) help to explain this interchangeability. Moreover, local usage may have varied: Montalbano, born in Bologna but working in Palermo, published a set of sinfonias in 1629 that might well have been termed ‘sonate concertate’ had they and he been in Venice with Castello. Even a composer’s occupation and training are relevant, since organists tended to write canzonas, while virtuoso cornett players and violinists more often produced sonatas. After 1620, however, the term canzone was used less and less, although its stylistic influence remained evident in the sonata’s fast imitative movements (actually labelled ‘canzona’ by Purcell). The close relation between the canzonas and sonatas of the early Baroque is clearly reflected in Gabrieli’s two publications (1597, 1615) and in those of Gussago, Corradini and Riccio. Some early sonatas (Gussago, 1608), are indistinguishable from the most conservative of four- or eight-voice canzonas; others combine old and new features. Gabrieli left sonatas or canzonas for as few as three and as many as 22 parts, often grouped in two or more choirs. Their association with sacred vocal music (in Sacrae symphoniae), publication in Venice (which remained central to the dissemination of Italian instrumental music until Bolognese firms began to offer real competition in the 1660s), virtuoso upper parts and precisely specified instrumentation are all typical of the earliest sonatas. The Venetian polychoral style was influential even on works for small ensembles: in one of Nicolò Corradini’s sonatas (1624), pairs of unspecified treble and bass instruments engage in dialogue and join together at cadences just as they would in a double-choir canzona. Several canzonas for one to four instruments and basso continuo and a single ‘Sonata a 4’ from Riccio’s 1620 collection descend from the same tradition, although Riccio incorporated more modern elements (tremolo, virtuoso flourishes, precise instrumentation) than did Corradini. Buonamente (Sonate et canzoni … libro sesto, 1636) and Frescobaldi (Il primo libro delle canzoni, 1628) wrote similar pieces for one to six instruments. The modern scoring in few parts (for one to three instruments) often invoked the label ‘sonata’ in these pre-1650 prints; thus, Marini’s Sonate, symphonie, canzoni op.8 (1629) reserves ‘canzone’ for larger ensembles, but most composers made no such terminological distinctions. One might compare the instrumental works in few parts to Viadana’s Concerti ecclesiastici (1602), composed in response to the practice of performing four- voice motets as solos or duos with basso continuo. While evidence that canzonas a 4 were performed with such reduced forces is lacking (although many do survive as both organ and ensemble pieces), continuo players apparently provided the imitative entries ‘missing’ in the few-voiced pieces, whose model was still the multi-voice canzona (the entries are actually supplied by Montalbano in the continuo part to his solo sinfonias). The ‘stil moderno’ sonatas of Dario Castello (1621, 1629), while still indebted to the ensemble canzona, are even more closely allied to vocal monody. Constructed of sharply contrasting sections, they often begin with an imitative ‘canzona’, and continue with an instrumental dialogue reminiscent of the polychoral idiom, but these sonatas also incorporate virtuoso solos or duets, candenzas, and ‘unmistakable manifestations of Monteverdi’s affections, especially the stile concitato’ (Selfridge-Field, 1975). Riemann was not alone in seeing incipient four-movement designs in Castello’s multi-sectional sonatas, but other scholars have rejected such analyses, arguing that predictability itself is ‘wholly incompatible with the essential spirit of the stil moderno sonata, which sought to overwhelm the listener in a wealth of conflicting emotions’ (Allsop, 1992). Castello’s inclusion of at least one solo as well as an earlier contrapuntal section is predictable enough, but the four-movement sonata favoured by later composers such as Vivaldi or Albinoni is rather far removed. Farina and Marini wrote sonatas comparable to those of Castello. The late 16th-century diminution practices described by Bassano, among others, provided another important source of early sonata style, as in the variations constructed around a repeated melody or bass line by Salamone Rossi, Buonamente and, later, Uccellini. Such pieces were called sonatas (Rossi’s Sonata sopra l’aria di Ruggiero, Il terzo libro de varie sonate, 1613) or arias (Uccellini, 1642 and 1645), or simply carried the name of the borrowed tune (Buonamente’s Le tanto tempo ormai, 1626). A close relation, and one of the few sonatas involving voices, is the ‘Sonata sopra Sancta Maria’ from Monteverdi’s Vespers (1610), in which pairs of violins and cornetts weave a lively commentary around the sopranos’ repeated phrase ‘Sancta Maria, ora pro nobis’, supported by a quartet of bass and tenor instruments. Corelli’s ‘Ciacona’ (op.2, 1685) and ‘Follia’ (op.5, 1700), as well the virtuoso variations of Schmelzer, Biber and J.J. Walther, ultimately derive from the same source. Rossi also used ‘sonata’ for several short binary pieces, which may have served as introductions to larger compositions; among his contemporaries ‘sinfonia’ was the more usual name for such works. Their trio scoring arose naturally enough from an identical disposition of voices and instruments in sacred and secular concerted music (e.g. Monteverdi’s Chioma d'oro for two sopranos, two violins and continuo). Often the two ‘solo’ instruments move in parallel 3rds, supported by a simpler bass; in some works such trios are juxtaposed with a larger force, as in Bernardi’s ‘Sonata in sinfonia à 4’ (1613). Sonatas ‘a due’ (for two solo instruments and basso continuo) and ‘a tre’ (for three soloists and basso continuo) make up most of the sonata literature for a century after 1620, although the earlier variety among solo instruments (ss, sb, bb, ssb, sss) was reduced after 1660 to a focus on the type for two trebles and continuo, and strings increasingly displaced other instruments (cornett, bassoon, trombone) found in the earliest sonatas. Compare Brossard’s recognition of the variety of sonata scorings in 1703 (‘We have Sonatas from one to seven or eight parts; but usually they are performed by a single Violin, or with two Violins and a thorough Bass for the Harpsichord, and frequently a more figured Bass for the Bass Violin’) with Rousseau’s focus on the soloist (Dictionnaire, 1768: ‘The Sonata is ordinarily made for a single instrument which recites, accompanied by a thorough bass’). Solos, more demanding than most duos and trios, were included in several early published volumes (by Castello, Farina, Biagio Marini and Montalbano), but by 1652 only Bertoli, Uccellini and G.A. Leoni had devoted entire collections to solo sonatas. The foregoing discussion has concentrated on developments in Italy for good reason: while sonatas were composed before 1650 north of the Alps, it was Italian immigrants who were in the main responsible. Buonamente worked in Vienna for a time, as did Valentini and Bertali for much of their careers; Bernardi went to Salzburg; Marini left Venice for Parma and Neuburg, returning only late in his career; and Farina carried the Italian sonata and a virtuoso approach to violin playing to Dresden. These Italian immigrants far outnumbered the few native composers of sonatas (Kindermann, Johann Staden, Vierdanck); only after 1650 did many non-Italian composers begin to interest themselves in the genre, but those who did made technical demands equal to or greater than those in the Italian repertory. Sonata, §1: Baroque (iii) Development 1650–1750. Riemann argued that what he somewhat pejoratively called the ‘patchwork’ canzona (Flickwerk) of the early 17th century evolved into the sonata as the individual sections grew in length and were reduced in number, until by Corelli’s time they had achieved the status of separate movements. That much repeated view ignores the persistence of multi-sectional alongside multi-movement designs (e.g. in the sonatas of Uccellini, G.B. Vitali, Biber, J.J. Walther, Buxtehude), yet the observation is not unrelated to the mid-century repertory in which many sonatas do consist primarily of tonally closed, if brief, movements. Merula (who called his serious pieces ‘canzone’ as late as 1651, reserving ‘sonata’ for a few lighter works), Cazzati and Legrenzi favoured such three- or four-movement structures, although they shared no single pattern, and individual ‘movements’ are not always tonally closed. Legrenzi left three books devoted entirely to sonatas, and another that included sonatas and dances, published between 1655 and 1673. (A further collection, op.18, published c1695, is lost.) A clear division into separate movements (often including one in slow triple time), a focus on duos and trios, and precise specification of instrumentation are all evident in these collections. In some of the sonatas, the opening material returns at the end, as in the canzona; others differ from the ‘Corellian’ model only in their lack of an opening slow movement. In contrast to these ‘church’ sonatas, Legrenzi’s six chamber sonatas (op.4, 1656) are single movements in simple binary form; G.M. Bononcini used sonata da camera similarly, for an abstract single-movement work rather than a dance suite (op.3, 1669). Maurizio Cazzati, controversial maestro di cappella in Bologna (1657–71), published eight collections that include sonatas for duos, trios and larger ensembles; three from op.35 include trumpet, a hint of the later association between S Petronio and that instrument. The sonatas in his widely disseminated op.18 (1656) usually consist of four movements: duple-metre imitative, grave, fast triple metre and quick imitative finale. Tarquinio Merula favoured a similar plan: fugal opening, fast triple-time movement, slow movement and vigorous finale. Uccellini also moved away from the simple canzona model towards longer and more virtuoso sonatas, usually divided into three or four sections by changes of metre and tempo. Cazzati’s pupil G.B. Vitali, and Vitali’s Modenese contemporaries Colombi and Bononcini, continued to focus on duos and trios in some ten volumes of sonatas published between 1666 and 1689. Already steeped in those traditions, Corelli had arrived by 1675 in Rome, where Colista, Stradella and Lonati composed sonata-like sinfonias, usually for two violins, lute and continuo. Since the Roman material circulated in manuscript, it has been somewhat underemphasized in most histories of instrumental music, but Corelli surely adopted the slow introductions (rare before the 1680s), strict fugal movements and triple-metre finales from his Roman colleagues. Despite the many references to Corelli’s sonatas (published 1681–1700) as normative, the four-movement model usually attributed to him (slow–fast–slow–fast) is present in only half of his published sonatas. North of the Alps, Bertali’s ensemble sonatas, followed by the solo and ensemble sonatas of Schmelzer, Biber, J.J. Walther and Buxtehude, recall the drama and virtuosity of the Venetian stile moderno at a time when sonata composition in Italy had become more standardized. Their virtuoso solos incorporated multiple stops and athletic string crossings; moreover, they continuted to depend on sectional rather than multi-movement designs in which successive events are on the whole less predictable than they are in Corelli’s sonatas. They differ from the Italian models in other ways as well: virtuoso writing for the bass viol (Johannes Schenck, Buxtehude), greater interest in scordatura tunings (Schmelzer, Biber), and a continuing devotion to ensemble sonatas a 5 or more, reminiscent of Venetian polychoral style, but with even more demanding treble parts for cornett, violin or trumpet. The legacy of the ensemble sonata (and perhaps the continued cultivation of the viol) may help to explain the more demanding bass parts: when Corelli and his north Italian contemporaries were writing duos or trios in which the violone or cello was at best an optional inclusion, Buxtehude composed sonatas for violin and bass viol in which the instruments have equally virtuoso roles. (But it should be remembered that the solo cello sonata did emerge in Bologna at about the same time, in works of Domenico Gabrielli and others.) In addition, the Austrian and German composers devoted more energy than did the Italians to the sonata- suite, in which an abstract introductory movement is followed by a fairly standard set of dances; more than 20 such collections appeared between 1658 and 1698. Rosenmüller’s Venetian publication of such chamber sonatas (1667) had found no Italian imitators, despite a growing tendency to group dances by key rather than type. In the northern prints ‘sonata’ or ‘sonatina’ was the term most frequently attached to the non-dance preludial movement (Rosenmüller used ‘sinfonia’); especially well represented are Biber, Dietrich Becker, J.J. Walther and Schenck. A few native English composers wrote sonatas at mid-century, influenced by the national devotion to the viol and by their acquaintance with Italian and German sonatas. The latter they knew both at home (Jenkins was associated with the family of Francis North, who owned copies of works by Schmelzer, Colista, Cazzati, Stradella and Pietro Degli Antoni), and by virtue of their foreign employment (William Young in Austria, and Henry Butler in Spain). Henry Purcell’s two published sets of sonatas (1683, 1697), after ‘the most fam’d Italian Masters’, shared the growing English market with sonatas by Italian and German immigrants (e.g. Matteis, Finger, Pepusch). After 1700, Italians continued to produce sonatas for both domestic and international markets; Vivaldi, Albinoni and the Marcellos in Venice, F.M. Veracini in Florence, Somis in Turin and Tartini in Padua were some of the main contributors. Moreover, such Italian émigrés as Locatelli in Amsterdam and Geminiani in London brought the latest sonata fashions to northern Europe. That most were violinists is telling, although the oboe, flute, cello and other instruments are also strongly represented in their collective output. In these volumes the four-movement plan finally dominates (although the third movement may not be tonally closed); the emphasis begins to turn towards the solo sonata (nearly three-quarters of Vivaldi’s sonatas, and all of Veracini’s are for one instrument and continuo); and the church-chamber distinction disappears. In Corelli’s ‘church’ sonatas, the final two movements are often dances (sarabanda, giga), but in many of Vivaldi’s sonatas the first two movements also employ binary forms. The keyboard, relatively neglected by earlier sonata composers, begins to receive some attention, especially from Domenico Scarlatti, who focussed on one-movement binary forms, some of which are paired in the sources. Other composers of keyboard sonatas (most in two or three movements) include Benedetto Marcello, Giustini, Durante and Platti. According to Brossard, France was overrun with Italian sonatas early in the 18th century, and French composers soon began to contribute. Most notably these include Leclair l’aîné, preceded by Dornel and Blavet, and even Couperin, who wrote at least three sonatas in the 1690s (published much later as preludes to Les nations). Elisabeth Jacquet de La Guerre left a dozen sonatas for one or two violins and bass; six were published in 1707, but Brossard apparently copied two about 1695, making them among the earliest composed in France. Of special note in France is the ‘accompanied sonata’ (Mondonville, Rameau) in which the violin or flute accompanies the keyboard. The sonata for unaccompanied solo instrument is associated particularly with Austrian and German composers (Biber, Bach, Telemann), although Tartini may have intended some of his sonatas, published with a bass part, for violin alone (Brainard), and the Swedish composer Roman left about 20 multi-movement works of that type, most called assaggi. Some programmatic or narrative sonatas are also associated with composers in Austria or Germany (e.g. Biber’s Mystery Sonatas and Kuhnau’s Biblical Sonatas), but Couperin’s ‘grande sonade en trio’ Le Parnasse, ou L’apothéose de Corelli might also be mentioned. 18th-century Austro-German composers moved more and more towards the multi-movement design already standard in Italy, and played a central role in the mixing and merging of national styles that characterize the high Baroque sonata. Sonatas by Vivaldi, Fasch, Zelenka, Quantz and Telemann placed galant idioms (the ‘natural’ and immediately appealing melody of the Adagio) side by side with more traditional sonata styles (the fugues, whose value for Scheibe in the late 1730s lay chiefly in their contrast with the more expressive movements featuring accompanied melodies). Especially interesting are the new trios and quartets in which the basso continuo participates as a ‘real’ part. Some, composed ‘auf Concertenart’, borrow aspects of a typically Vivaldian concerto style; others borrow from the operatic aria or recitative, French dance and overture. If J.S. Bach’s sonatas (unaccompanied solos, and several works for one or two instruments with obbligato harpsichord or basso continuo) are better known today than are Telemann’s over 200 ensemble sonatas and solos, the situation was reversed in the mid-18th century. Quantity aside, there are parallels between the two composers: both juxtaposed and integrated national styles, and experimented with formal design and scoring; neither abandoned the traditional four movements for the newer three-movement fashion (as did Graun, Fasch, Tartini and Somis). Telemann is often dismissed as over-prolific, but his greater success in the 18th century may be attributable not only to his skill at marketing (he personally printed much of his instrumental music in didactic or encyclopedic collections), but to his serious exploration of the new trio and quartet in the ‘mixed’ style (combining various national styles) for which contemporaries praised him, and to his avoidance of the most old-fashioned elements of sonata style. Elsewhere in Europe, sonatas circulated widely in manuscript, as well as in prints both imported and domestic; and musicians left home in search of a better living, taking their music along. Handel was only one of the many foreign musicians whose careers blossomed in London, where imitations of Corelli and the traditional trio sonata long remained fashionable. Handel’s contribution to the sonata, like that of Bach, represents but a small portion of his total output; however, it does include more keyboard sonatas (Bach preferred the keyboard suite), as well as traditional solos and trios aimed equally at the large amateur market and concert stage. A focus on Handel’s sonatas may have inhibited modern exploration of the many English sonata composers of the time (Babell, Boyce, Arne). Over the 150 years of sonata composition before 1750, several trends are evident: the emphasis on counterpoint lessened; the texture became increasingly treble-dominated; multi-voice and polychoral sonatas gave way to duos and trios, which in turn yielded ground to solos and quartets; the early multi-sectional design grew to four or more separate movements, and then fell back to three or fewer; what distinction existed between church and chamber sonatas evaporated; instruments were more and more precisely specified and their parts became increasingly idiomatic; a focus on the violin grew stronger, and then was tempered by an interest in sonatas for a variety of other instruments; keyboard sonatas finally began to take their place in the repertory. As the sonata gained popularity outside Italy, its Italian and Austro-German elements were further enriched by a variety of national approaches to instrumental music, from the English division (Henry Butler) to the French emphasis on ornamental detail (Leclair). None of these changes occurred overnight, but they are evident enough when one compares sonatas from 1630 or 1700 with those from 1750. Moreover, by mid-century the function and aesthetic stature of the sonata had changed significantly. Sonata, §1: Baroque (iv) Socio-cultural context. Brossard (1703) noted that, while there are many kinds of sonatas, ‘the Italians reduce them to two types. The first is the sonata da Chiesa, that is one proper for the Church, … The second type is the Sonata which they call da Camera, fit for the Chamber. These are actually suites of several small pieces suitable for dancing, and all in the same scale or key’. The liturgical use of Baroque sonatas has been well documented (see Bonta, 1969): 17th-century ensemble canzonas and sonatas replaced the organ solos formerly heard at Mass, and solo violin sonatas were customary at the Elevation; from about 1690, concertos or orchestral performance of trio sonatas might be heard instead. Moreover, 17th- century church musicians may have adapted longer sonatas by performing isolated sections, a practice likely to have encouraged composers to construct independent movements. Early collections mixing vocal and instrumental music had no need of the chiesa and camera labels; in sacred collections, sonatas and canzonas are usually found (Riccio), in the secular ones, dances and variation sonatas (Marini, 1620; Turini, 1621). Even purely instrumental collections were so clearly orientated that their uses would have been obvious to the purchaser: in Buonamente’s fifth and sixth books (1629 and 1636, cited above) both content and scoring suggest strongly that the former is a secular, the latter a sacred collection (Mangsen, 1990). Merula’s ‘per chiesa e camera’ (1637) was thus unusual both in its label and in mixing serious and lighter instrumental music in one volume. Such mixed volumes, as well as those dedicated to church or chamber, appeared throughout the century, usually without labels indicating function. The editions of Corelli’s ‘church’ sonatas (opp.1 and 3) are entitled merely Sonate a tre, whereas most editions of the chamber sonatas are actually labelled da camera. This in itself suggests what can be documented by other means, that serious instrumental music, even if conceived primarily for a liturgical context, was regularly heard elsewhere, possibly somewhat transformed: at meetings of the various academies, as domestic chamber music, in concert, and even in the theatre (as overture or interval music). The occasions for which such music was best suited (and where to store the parts) would have been obvious to the musician of the time. Until 1700, at least in Italy, a sonata was assumed to be serious, and therefore suitable for church; da camera marked the special case. Brossard implied as much when, after describing the sonata da chiesa, he noted that ‘these are what they [the Italians] properly call Sonatas’. Chamber sonatas usually ‘begin with a prelude or little Sonata, serving as an introduction to all the rest’. The long tradition of such sonata-suites in Germany, as well as the growing use of binary movements in place of the more serious fugues (generally associated with sacred music), may explain why Walther (1732) included a separate entry for the church sonata (which merely gives the German equivalent), but not for the chamber variety; chiesa was for him the special case, camera the norm. Beyond title-pages and dictionaries, the dedicatees and collectors of printed volumes sometimes yield information about the music’s use: Telemann dedicated some of his printed volumes individually or collectively to amateurs, but professional musicians are also heavily represented on his subscription lists. Corelli’s church sonatas were dedicated to secular patrons, his chamber collections to clerics, perhaps contrary to expectations. But those expectations are probably too narrow, since some of the most significant collectors of sonatas for the chamber were members of the clergy (Franz Rost, Edward Finch). Sonata, §1: Baroque (v) Performing practice and dissemination. Although some Baroque sonatas may boast a continuous performing tradition, nearly every aspect of their performance has changed since 1750, and even migration across borders within the Baroque era was often attended by marked differences in performance due to local practices. Thus performing practice of Baroque sonatas is intimately connected to matters of dissemination. 20th- century instruments and playing techniques, as well as ideas about pitch, tempo, ornamentation, continuo realization, dynamics and articulation all differ significantly from their Baroque antecendents; even reading from the composer’s autograph is no guarantee of a ‘correct’ performance, since the interpretation of ‘standard’ notational signs will also have changed. Only a few of these matters can be taken up here. Many modern editors of Baroque sonatas suggest substituting one instrument for another, a practice with some historical foundation, but not sufficient to condone a completely ad libitum approach. While instruments were specified more and more exactly between 1600 and 1750, many sources, some tied directly to the composer, did give the performer a good deal of leeway. Leclair, for instance, indicated that some of his violin sonatas could be played on (and may even have been conceived for) the transverse flute, and he even provided alternate versions of some individual movements. Telemann offered several options for some of his ensemble sonatas, as in the viol and cello parts for the Paris Quartets. Some of J.G. Graun’s trio sonatas exist also as works for obbligato harpsichord and one treble soloist; and solo violin sonatas in score were no doubt played as keyboard solos. Italian prints from Rossi and Castello to Vivaldi frequently mention alternative instruments (violin or cornett, theorbo or violone) more or less equally suited to play a part. Even if no instruments were specified, however, it is unlikely that composers were indifferent to questions of instrumentation, or that no conventions operated among those who played such pieces. Ornamentation was a concern even in the 18th century: an important selling- point for Roger’s edition of Corelli’s solo sonatas (1710) seems to have been the inclusion of the ornaments ‘as he played them’. Baroque soloists ornamented sonatas according to their ability and to such criteria as genre, national style, context and tempo. Some composers (Handel, Babell, Telemann) supplied ornamented versions of simpler lines, using smaller note heads, or additional staves, probably intended and still helpful as models. Some used particular phrases (affetti, ad libitum) or signs to encourage departures from the notated pitches. Ornamentation extended to improvisation in sections of sonatas by Colista, Guerrieri and others, who provided only the bass part over which a soloist was to invent a melodic line. Quantz, who included an ornamented Adagio in his flute tutor (1752), warned readers that both tempo and ornamentation should be adapted to suit the context. Mattheson cautioned against performing (and ornamenting) French pieces in the Italian style and vice versa; and Burney noted that (in his day) Corelli’s sonatas were ornamented more lavishly on secular occasions, and given a more restrained performance in church (General History, ii). The increasing density of the ornamentation supplied for Corelli’s solo sonatas in printed and manuscript sources offers one demonstration of the ways in which successive generations of performers embellished the same piece, perhaps slowing the tempo in the process. When a sonata moves across significant boundaries of time and place, more extensive transformation may be expected. Thus, some English sources of Italian sonatas not only misattribute individual works, but alter the musical content, creating chamber sonatas from dances grouped loosely by key, or merging continuo and melodic bass parts. Spanish guitar transcriptions of Corelli’s sonatas simply delete sections whose realization on the guitar was 7 impractical; sonatas in the Rost manuscript (F-Pn Rés.Vm 653; see Rost, Franz) omit inner parts to produce trios from quintets. Availability of printed and manuscript copies of sonatas was ensured as agents in northern Europe imported Italian prints, visitors to the Continent returned to England with much sought-after volumes, and sonata prints from northern presses began to outnumber those from Italy. Sonatas remained throughout the period more likely to achieve publication than operas or other large-scale music (among important publication centres were Paris, London, Hamburg and Amsterdam), but manuscript dissemination was significant as well, especially outside Italy. Manuscript copies, to the degree that they were aimed at a smaller circle of players, yield information about local preferences in repertory and performing practice, in contrast to the homogenizing influence exerted by publication. Rousseau’s quotation of Fontenelle’s remark ‘Sonate, que me veux tu?’ (Dictionnaire, 1768) suggests that, at the end of the Baroque era, sonatas were still less highly regarded than was texted music, at least in France. But by 1739 the ties of abstract instrumental music to narrowly defined social function had already weakened sufficiently for Mattheson to offer a new view of the sonata whose aim is principally towards complaisance or kindness, since a certain Complaisance must predominate in sonatas, which is accommodating to everyone, and which serves each listener. A melancholy person will find something pitiful and compassionate, a senuous person something pretty, an angry person something violent, and so on, in different varieties of sonatas. (Der vollkommene Capellmeister, trans. Harriss, 466) This picture of the sonata as personal and domestic, intended more for the individual player and a few listeners than for public ceremony or concert stage, is one associated more with the Classical period than with the Baroque. In fact Mattheson’s response to the modern sonatas of the 1730s, combined with the long shadow cast by Corelli, suggest a good deal of continuity in the 18th- century approach to the genre.