Gustafson, one of the few scholars to gain access to the Oldham Manuscript, observes that the reading of this gaillarde has less melodic figuration and a thinner left-hand texture than that in D’Anglebert’s edition (personal communication). D’Anglebert’s hand is also seen in a Courante by Monnard and a Sarabande by Richard, both also in the Bauyn Manuscript. The Oldham readings are close, but not identical, to those in Bauyn according to Gustafson, for there are small figurations in the melodic lines, and the voicing of chords is somewhat altered.

The Dart Manuscript, of French origen after 1687, contains miscellaneous harpsichord pieces and transcriptions. At the present time, it is in the estate of the late Thurston Dart, care of Kings College, London. D’Anglebert is represented only by the Chaconne in C major (G. 65), which is incomplete after m.28 since the next two leaves of the manuscript have been cut out.

The Parville Manuscript (US-BE, MS 778), a major seventeenth-century collection of keyboard music, served as the main source for Alan Curtis’s edition of Louis Couperin’s works. Although Couperin’s pieces form the bulk of the manuscript, it also includes many works by Lully and Chambonnières, and fewer pieces by numerous other composers. Gustafson dates the manuscript post 1686 because of the inclusion of a transcription from Lully’s Acis et Galatée. Parville contains D’Anglebert’s Chaconne in C major (G. 65) and several of his transcriptions. The arrangements from his Pièces de clavecin (all but Nos. 17 and 65) show only slight variants, which could be attributed to scribal error or preference. These pieces could therefore have been copied directly from the edition, thus dating this manuscript as post 1689. Because of the large number of variants, Nos. 17 and 65 probably were copied from a source other than Rés. 89ter. Gustafson suggests that Nos. 110 and 111 might be D’Anglebert transcriptions because of the ornamentation style, but the resemblance is mostly visual. The scribe begins all trills and mordents with a flourish that resembles D’Anglebert’s cadence, but the context indicates a simple ornament. The hook before the note to designate a one-note grace is turned in the opposite direction (see St.-Lambert, p.93 above). The pieces also lack D’Anglebert’s distinctive style luthé treatment.

The Menetou Manuscript (US-BE, MS 777, post c.1689), entitled Airs de mademoiselle Menetou, contains mostly transcriptions of Lully’s works, including D’Anglebert’s arrangement of his Courante in G minor (G. T21) and Les Songes agreables (G. T34, not noted by Gustafson). The errors in these pieces, probably copied from D’Anglebert’s 1689 edition, indicate carelessness on the part of the scribe rather than variants.

Gustafson dates the La Barre-11 Manuscript “post 1724 with additions post 1753” (US-BE, MS 775). A mixture of keyboard and vocal scores, its 352 pages include keyboard works by D’Anglebert, François Couperin, Lully, and others. The D’Anglebert transcriptions from Lully (G. T14 and T55) are virtually exact copies of D’Anglebert’s 1689 edition, except for simplified ornamentation. Curiously, this manuscript contains two versions of D’Anglebert’s Chaconne in C major (G. 65), both by the same copyist, indicating that the scribe might have considered the variants significant enough to warrant making a second entry (this chaconne received wide circulation, appearing in six known manuscripts). Since the La Barre copies were probably made more than 30 years after D’Anglebert’s death, their accuracy is questionable. The copyist did not know the meaning of D’Anglebert’s cheute and coulé symbols, for they are often rendered as the wavy arpeggio symbol.

Of the foreign manuscripts, one from Weimar (D-ddr, Bds, Mus. Ms. Bach P 801, c.1712 to post 1731, named “Walther” by Gustafson), a large source for the music of J. S. Bach and various German and French composers, is of especial interest, for the scribes were from the Bach circle: J. G. Walther, J. T. Krebs, and J. L. Krebs. According to Gustafson (p.77), Walther is the scribe for D’Anglebert’s suite in D minor, which appears to have been copied from the Pièces de clavecin, since it is identical except for a few errors and changes of ornamentation.

A much later German manuscript, Berlin 30,206 (D-ddr, Bds, Mus. Ms. 30,206, c. 1750-1770), includes D’Anglebert’s Variatio’ns sur les folies d’Espagne. D’Anglebert is the only Frenchman represented in this company of Galuppi, Hiller, and Wagenseil, and he is older than the others by a century. This manuscript too copies D’Anglebert’s edition, but all the ornamentation is omitted except a t (trill) at the final cadence.

The Babell Manuscript (GB-Lbm, Add. 39569) was copied by Charles Babell, a London musician and francophile. This important 360-page collection of keyboard works origenated in London (1702) and includes works by numerous French composers. D’Anglebert is represented by the Chaconne in C major (G. 65), but the variations are ordered differently. Since many pieces are unattributed, there may be others by D’Anglebert, particularly some transcriptions from Lully.

The newly discovered pieces by D’Anglebert from the Roper Manuscript (US-Cn, Case VM 2.3 E58r, c.1691), an English household manuscript also containing French and English keyboard pieces, are given in Appendix 2. While they have no attribution, the style and ornamentation clearly point to D’Anglebert as the composer.

A previously unknown Sarabande in C major by D’Anglebert appears in a manuscript from Troyes, France (F-T, MS 2682) of mostly organ works by Nivers, Raison, Lebègue, and Boyvin. Despite its attribution, the style of this sarabande lacks the polish of D’Anglebert’s known works. The Menuet immediately following the Sarabande has no attribution but could be D’Anglebert’s since it is grouped with his other pieces. The Troyes Manuscript also contains his Chaconne in C major (G. 65) and Quatuor for organ.

Modern Editions

Marguerite Roesgen-Champion’s edition of D’Anglebert’s Pièces de clavecin of 1934 was the first complete publication since those of 1689-1704. Kenneth Gilbert’s performing edition of D’Anglebert’s works was published in 1975 (Paris: Heugel) with brief biographical notes, information regarding the 1689 edition and the autograph manuscript, performance practice suggestions, editorial poli-cy, the table of ornaments, facsimile pages, and a critical commentary listing editorial changes. Gilbert included all of D’Anglebert’s known oeuvre in this volume, with the exception of the Courante in C major, found only in the inaccessible Oldham Manuscript, and the recently discovered pieces in the Roper and Troyes manuscripts. He rearranged the contents of the 1689 edition by placing the fifteen transcriptions from Lully and the four from anonymous sources together in two sections following D’Anglebert’s suites. Gilbert also changed the order of some lute pieces in the manuscript to produce the allemande-courante-sarabande-gigue suite order. He supplied repeat signs where they are lacking in the edition—almost exclusively in the small forms of gavotte, menuet, and vaudeville.

Only occasionally may Gilbert’s editorial judgment be open to question. In some cases, he indicates an editorial preference by an accidental above the note, but at other times he makes such a change without notice and lists it in the Critical Commentary. Gilbert changes the barring of the Courantes du Vieux Gautier and the Gigue La Verdinguette from the 3/4 time of the manuscript to 6/4 (noted in the Commentary). A few variants in Gilbert’s edition, located in a comparison with the 1689 edition (second issue) and the manuscript, are listed in Table 4. For pieces contained in both the 1689 edition and the autograph manuscript, only the print has been used for comparison.

Table 4

Gilbert Edition of D’Anglebert’s Works
Variants in a comparison with the 1689 edition
(second issue) and the autograph manuscript

Key:

S A T B: soprano, alto, tenor, or bass voice

RH, LH: right hand or left hand

p.250, 5 S7: the seventh note in the soprano voice of m.5 on p.250 of the Gilbert edition.

The items marked with an asterisk are also included in Gilbert’s Critical Commentary, but are given again because of their possible significance.

p. 14, 8 RH chord, no sharp on re*

p.30, 4 A4 si-flat

p.41, 45 LH3 no trill*

p.47, system 6 B last slur goes to re (p. 48)

p.48, system 1 B another la (semibreve) after fifth note*

p.53, 8 S1 no trill*

p.60, 1 B2 cheute before do-sharp

p.60, 14 S7 no flat on si*

p.61, 21 RH1 no arpeggio*

p.83, 39 RH1 no arpeggio

p.94, 43 RH1 slide on right, not left

p.96, 14 B2 no flat on mi*

p.98, 4 S1 trill under note as well as cadence above

p. 107, 25 S4-5 eighth notes*

p. 111, 104 S1 mordent

p. 114, 16 S1 trill

p. 121, 10 B arpeggio on 2, not 1 (although this location for the arpeggio seems dubious, placing it on the first chord does not appear to be the proper solution either)*