R E P O RT Scor.2
ob.1Bar.solo
CORO 2 B.

55
6567
71
218

note 2: instead of c ', read c'instead of  , read add dim. (by analogy with T.solo, B.solo)
note 2: instead of A, read c  (as in source B)
b.383: instead of Coro 2, A read Coro 2, A., T.

cl.2
cl.2
fl.2
fg.1,2tr.2,3tr.2,3fg.
vl.1
tr.1
tr.2
fl.2,3
trb.t.1,2

97
97
97
98
100
100
109
110
115
115
116
118

note 1: instead of c '', read c''note 1: instead of c '', read c ''note 1: add marc. (by analogy with fl.1)
note 2: instead of b , read b note 2: marc. added by analogy with tr.1
note 3: marc. added by analogy with tr.1
note 1: instead of e ', read e 'note 5: instead of a'', read a ''
notes 2-4: add marc. (by analogy with cor., trb.b.)notes 1-2: add marc. (by analogy with fl., cl.)note 1: add marc. (by analogy with fl.1)
note 3: add marc. (by analogy with fg., cor.1,2, tr.)Springtime on Funen‘Nu vil vi ud og lege’/44 S
Dansevisen/42
A. T. B.

172
184

note 3: instead of a', read b 'note 4: omit stacc. by analogy with b.34

409
478500532
List of emendations
Sleep
115
117
118
124
134
135
184
192
214
214
219
233

[Quoted from Carl Nielsen Studies II (2005), pp. 229-233]

Source material for Carl Nielsen’s Sym-

was re-established in West Germany) andphony no. 3, Sinfonia espansiva, in Säch-

its subsequent liquidation, at some stagesisches Staatsarchiv, Leipzig

all the publisher’s music and manuscripts

Until the year 2000 it was assumed in Carl

were packed in brown parcels and stored

Nielsen scholarly circles that the compos-

in a basement in Leipzig. In 1977 these

er’s fair copy of the Third Symphony, Sinfo-parcels (including the manuscript fornia espansiva, had been lost: in bombing

Carl Nielsen’s Third Symphony) wereduring the war, said one version of thefound and transferred as a whole collec-story; carried off to Russia, said another.

tion to the Sächsisches Staatsarchiv in one

What was certain was that the manuscriptof the suburbs of Leipzig, where they havehad at one point been in Germany, specifi-

been ever since – unnoticed by anyone ex-cally in Leipzig, where the publisher C.F.

cept the Mahler scholar Knud Martner,

Kahnt was based. For it was C.F. Kahnt Ver-

who came upon them coincidentally while

lag that had published the symphony inon other business some twenty years ago.

1913, and Carl Nielsen had therefore natu-

At the time Martner made a note about

rally sent his manuscript to the publisher

the manuscript and passed it on to theas the printing manuscript for the edition.

leading Carl Nielsen scholar of the day,

After the closing-down of the publishingand thought no more about the matter –house in the GDR period (after which it

and unfortunately the information went229

CN Studies indmad vol II229

11/07/05, 14:03

REPORTS

no further. By chance the story emergedin an anonymous manuscript copy withagain in the autumn of 2000,1 and cameautograph additions. The material consists

as a very great surprise to the editors of theof the first movement, bars 1-252 (theCarl Nielsen Edition.

primo part) and bars 1-290 (the secondo

Quick telephone and mail contactspart). The arrangement is identical to Carl

with Leipzig confirmed that the missing

Nielsen’s own pencil draft for a four-228-page manuscript was in the archives,handed piano arrangement (mentionedand a trip to Leipzig made it possible for

as Source D in CNU Vol. II/3, p. 189). There

the editors of the Carl Nielsen Edition to view

can be no doubt that this torso is part ofthis important source for the first time.

what was to be the printing manuscript

In Leipzig, too, no one had been aware

for the four-handed piano arrangementthat this was an autograph score by ofthat the publisher C.F. Kahnt announced

one of the great symphonists of the twen-

would appear in 1913, but which was ap-tieth century. In fact they were a little sur-parently never published.2

prised by all the fuss. Before the visit by theCarl Nielsen Edition on Friday 6th Octo-

DESCRIPTION OF SOURCE

ber 2000 only two people had handled

Ms.-Lpz.

the manuscript since 1977: Knud Martner

Score, autograph, printing manuscript.

and a person unknown to the Carl Nielsen

D-LEsta [Sächsisches Staatsarchiv Leipzig],

Edition (this is evident from the list on

Musikverlag C.F. Kahnt, Leipzig No. 148.

which anyone using a manuscript in theCover, on the middle of the page a labelarchives must write their name). The re-pasted on with the wording: ‘Carl Nielsen:

discovered manuscript is so to speak ‘the/ Symfoni / for / Orstester. / (Partitur.)’ (CN).

missing link’ in the source history of theTop, faint addition in pencil: ‘Frits Gail-

Third Symphony. The typical source situa-lard / Leon Meerloo / 71344’. Bottom cen-tion for a major Carl Nielsen work is as fol-tre, another label stamped with the word-

lows: sketches – pencil draft – ink fair copying ‘Staatsarchiv Leipzig / Musikverlag /(= printing manuscript) – first impression.

C.F. Kahnt Leipzig Nr. 148’. Bottom left:

And the manuscript in question is thus

‘C.F. Kahnt N [illegible] 2/6 13’.

the composer’s own ink fair copy – theInside cover: Additions in pencil (CN). Toplast handwritten version before printing.

left: ‘III / Fagotti Pag 17 Takt 2 / Tromboni

Besides the manuscript for Carl Niel-Pag 34-35 og 89-90 / Corni Pag 5 og 82 med

sen’s Sinfonia espansiva, Sächsisches Staats-

1st Bassen [separator line] / Tutti Pag 85 /archiv also has the torso of a four-handed

Tutti 53-55 / Bassen Pag 26’. Top right:

piano arrangement of the Third Symphony‘Amsterdam / [illegible] / (Mendes)’. Centre

1 It was Knud Ketting who kindly drew the attention of The Carl Nielsen Edition
to the possible presence of the manuscript in Leipzig.
2 On this subject, see CNU vol. II/3, page 189, description of Source D, as well
as footnote 6.

230

CN Studies indmad vol II

230

11/07/05, 14:03

R E P O RT Sright: ‘Stuttgart / Fräulein Polach (Sopran)in the pencil draft to the last adjustments/ S. Bartenstein.’ Centre left: ‘Viol II No 5 /in connection with the printing of themell 6 og 7’. Bottom centre: ‘Pag 158 Trbscore. It can now be documented, for ex-

II III og Corni’.

ample, that the four introductory bars toTitle on page of otherwise blank music

the final movement which are found inpaper (fol. 1r): ‘Symfoni. / for / Orkester. / af /the pencil draft were at all events omit-

Carl Nielsen. / (Partitur)’ted before the fair-copying. Similarly, aAcquired by Sächsisches Staatsarchiv Leip-

cut of one bar in the first movement (be-zig in 1977 as part of C.F. Kahnt publish-

tween b. 463 and b. 464) was made in thising archives.

phase. However, it is equally interesting

35.5x27.2 cm, 227 numbered pages writtenthat Carl Nielsen, in several not unim-

in ink. A blank page at the end after page

portant respects, only arrived at the final

227. Grey, much worn cardboard covers.

version after fair-copying the work – andMusic paper type: B. & H. Nr. 14 A. 7.09. (24in the case of certain things possibly onlystaves).

after the first performance.

The score has scattered corrections and ad-

It is already known that for the firstditions in pencil. A few markings in blue

performance the work was entitled simply

and red crayon appear to have been added

Symfoni for orkester and was only laterin connection with performances. The

given the title Sinfonia espansiva after thescore was used for the first performances

tempo marking in the first movement.

before being used later as the printing

The fair copy further confirms that thismanuscript. Title at top of page 1: ‘Sinfonia

movement originally just had the tempo

espansiva’, added in an unknown hand.

marking Allegro, and only after it was firstAs will be evident from the following

written out had the espansivo added.

overview, the printing manuscript in sev-Among other late changes in the faireral cases confirms the editorial work

copy attention should be drawn here topresented in Volume II/3 of the Carl Niel-

the passage bb. 159-165 in the first move-

sen Edition, and even if the editor hadment, where a C  in fg.1 has been changed

been aware of the manuscript in connec-

to a C , apparently because the composertion with the editorial work, it is unlikely

wanted a greater similarity to the corre-that this would have led to other emenda-

sponding figure in cl.1, bb. 138-140. We

tions than those already made. On thecan further mention bb. 412-422, whereother hand, the source does shed sometr.1 has been changed from an accompa-

light on interesting factors related to thenying part to the melody part.

genesis of the work. It is thus now possible
to specify in detail how the composer gave

The table below refers solely to the ink ma-

the finishing touches to his work all theMs.-Lpz.
nuscript (Ms.-Lpz.
Ms.-Lpz.). The table lists notable

way from the first complete writing-out

231

CN Studies indmad vol II

231

11/07/05, 14:03

REPORTS––variants in relation to the printed score(Source A), but have been corrected in(Source A),

the Carl Nielsen Edition

things that must be considered copy-–changes in the manuscript made bying errors in Ms.-Lpz. and which are

the composer after the first writing-reproduced in the printed score

out.

First Movement
Bar
Instrument
1
49-52
71
79
113-114113-114114-115
115-116
117
119
160, 164
226, 228, 230,
232

Comment
Allegro espansiva, the second word added in pencil (CN) [NB! espansiva, not espansivo]tb.
at first notated an octave higher, but later furnished with an 8va
basso (CN)cor.1notes 5-6: c ' [confirms the emendation in CNU]
fg.
[confirms the emendation in CNU]
cl.3 cor.2 tr.2,3 tie across bar line
fl.1,2 ob.2,3 cl.2
fg. cor.4 trb.t.
trb.b. tb. timp. tie across bar line crossed out
trb.t. trb.b. tb.
timp.
tie across bar line crossed out
trb.t.
b.115 to b.116 note 1: slur  œ œ œ [presumably a copying error]
tr.1
vl.1
loco [confirms the emendation in CNU]
fg.1
note 1: c ' changed to c 'timp.

338
412-422

vl.1
tr.1,2

418
418
582
582
617-620701

trb.b.
tb.
fg.
cor.
vl.2
vc.

Second movement
29-30
99
S. Bar.
135-144cb.

Third movement
39
cor.2
80
va.
91
va.
111
cor.1,3

no wave line [must thus have been added in the proofreading
phase]
note 5: e '' [confirms the emendation in CNU]
corresponds to B [see music example CNU vol. II/3, p. 195], NB Tr. I
Melodi added at bottom of page (CN)d changed to d'
D changed to dnote 1: e [probably a copying error]
note 1: b ' [probably a copying error]
double stem on e''
note 3: f ' [confirms the emendation in CNU]

one bar between b.29 and b.30 crossed out
Sopran solo (bag Scenen) and Baryton solo (bag Scenen) ‘soprano solo(behind the stage) and baritone solo (behind the stage)’e changed to Ea ' [probably a copying error]
note 5: b ' [probably a copying error]
chord 3: upper part: f' [probably a copying error]
b ' [probably a copying error]

232

CN Studies indmad vol II232

11/07/05, 14:03

R E P O RT S

Fourth movement
80fg.1
151, 153
cor.ingl.

173
after last bar

note 2: g [probably a copying error]
note 1: g'' [confirms the emendation in CNU (CN has forgotten tochange the key signature from two to three sharps where ob.3
changes to cor.ingl. and in this sense the fair copy is formallycorrect)]note 6-7: f ' - e' [probably a copying error]
Husk Tæppe ‘Remember curtain’ added in brownish-red writing(CN) [the addition presumably refers to the performance at theRoyal Theatre on 4th May 1912, when the orchestra was actuallyon the stage3 ]tr.1

Carl Nielsen’s Letters
The first volume of the collected, anno-and third parties. Nielsen’s diaries are

tated edition of Carl Nielsen’s letters was

moreover inserted in the proper places

published in the summer of 2005. Vol-in the chronological order.

ume 1 covers the period up to 1897. TheThe edition is edited by John Fel-

material is in strict chronological order

low and is described in more detail inand comprises letters from Nielsen sup-Carl Nielsen Studies Volume 1 pp. 166-167.

plemented by a selection of letters toNielsen as well as letters between secondNiels Bo Foltmann and Niels Krabbe

3 See CNU vol. II/3, page xvi.

233

CN Studies indmad vol II233

11/07/05, 14:03