INconclusion
The Mystery of BWV 1067
T HE SECOND ORCHESTRAL SUITE of
J.S. Bach, BWV 1067, occupies a
special place in the repertoire of the
flute. Because Bach left behind no flute
concerto, this work has filled the gap.
For some time, one of the flute
worlds best kept secrets has been that
the B-minor work as it survives is, in
fact, a hasty reworking of a suite, now
lost, in A minor, a pitch that would have
made the work unsuitable for traverso.
The original parts were copied from
parts in A minor by Bach with the help
of four copyists, which, in itself, sug-
gests a time constraint. This much is
agreed upon by all who have looked at
the evidence.
So, if the flute was not the original
soloist, which instrument played this
famous work? Some scholars have
endorsed a reconstruction featuring the
violin, which is, as we shall see, a prob-
lematic hypothesis. Until my recent per-
formances, no consideration had been
given to the most obvious solution to
this musical mystery: BWV 1067 was
in all likelihood a work for oboe and
strings.
Although it is regularly performed
with great artistry by the worlds top
flutists, BWV 1067 is a singularly unsat-
isfying piece on flute. The texture and
tessitura are the main culprits. Not only
does the flute part lie quite low, but the
solo lines are often submerged below
the first violin, making for balance prob-
lems, even when the minimum comple-
ment of strings is used. Tallying on a
quarter-note basis, the soloist spends
exactly two-thirds of the time at or
below the range of the violin I. What is
56 Spring 2005 Early Music America
By Gonzalo X. Ruiz
Until my recent performances, no consideration
had been given to the most obvious solution to a
musical mystery: Bachs Second Orchestral Suite
was in all likelihood a work for oboe and strings.
a problem for the flute would still be a
problem for the violin in A minor. This
type of orchestration is not used by
Bach or any other Baroque composer in
violin works but is a standard feature of
oboe writing, not only in Bach but in
Telemann, Vivaldi, C.P.E. Bach, Fasch,
and others. On the basis of the ripieno
texture alone, this work could be safely
assigned to the oboe.
The internal evidence of the solo
part also supports the oboe hypothesis.
Most of the solo line in the first move-
ment consists of standard woodwind
figuration, while the putative string-
crossing passages are notable for their
similarity to passages in famous oboe
works. A clear example of the distinc-
tion may be found in the Brandenburg
Concerto No. 2. The first movement
features a type of imitation string-
crossing that was lingua franca to both
violins and woodwinds. The third move-
ment, however, offers classic examples
of the type of true string-crossing that
is the exclusive domain of string
instruments.
Two obvious objections can be raised
here. First, could the original solo have
been substantially different from the
extant flute text, and unplayable on
oboe? Its unlikely: if the solo were any
lower, the textural balance issues already
mentioned would be exacerbated. On
the other hand, if it were higher, it
wouldnt make sense to change that
aspect when adapting it to the flute. The
second objection is that since what we
now have is a version for flute, whose
lowest note was D, it is small wonder
that it can be played on the oboe, whose
lowest note was C, one step lower. But
the large majority of Bachs flute writing
is unplayable on the oboe, even in a
downward transposition.
The above should not be confused
with a different, though related, phe-
nomenon: one can always play oboe
music on flute by transposing it up a
step or a third. This, combined with
market realities (commercial flute music
sold in much larger numbers than oboe
music), led to the publication of many
volumes of oboe music in upward
transposition for flute. But its not only
secondary oboist-composers who
engaged in this practice. At least two of
Handels oboe sonatas were published in
a higher key for flute. Mozart once tried
to pass off his C-major oboe concerto,
which had received several perform-
ances, as a new D-major flute concerto.
The most pertinent example of this
practice comes from none other than
J.S. Bach. The cantata Ich Habe
Genug, BWV 82, is a sublime, substan-
tial work for solo baritone, oboe, strings,
and continuo. Bach transposed it with
minor changes for a performance using
soprano and flute. This is the pattern
that I believe he applied to the A minor
suite that became BWV 1067. ,
A prizewinner at the Brugges Early Music
Competition in Belgium, Gonzalo Xavier Ruiz
has performed with most of the leading
period instrument groups in America and
Europe. For 12 years, he has been professor of
oboe at the Oberlin Conservatorys Baroque
Performance Institute. He has given six per-
formances of his reconstruction of the Suite in
A Minor after BWV 1067 under the direction
of Monica Huggett and Giovanni Antonini of Il
Giardino Armonico.