“I don’t think there has been a musical object of this importance on sale for almost 35 years, when Stravinsky’s The Rite of Spring came on the market in 1982,” says the critic Norman Lebrecht, author of two books on Mahler. “It’s a hugely historic document. It probably ought to be sold in a major art sale rather than a music sale, it is that important.”

The “Resurrection” symphony, as it is also known, was composed during the Austrian composer’s summer holidays in Alpine and lakeside retreats. It was the second of only nine completed symphonies that he wrote during a parallel career as a conductor that took him from central Europe to New York. “Complete autograph symphonies of works by people like Johannes Brahms (1833-1897), Anton Bruckner (1824-1896) or Gustav Mahler (1860-1911), the culmination of the great Romantic repertoire, they just don’t appear. This is one of the biggest,” says Simon Maguire, Sotheby’s books and manuscripts specialist.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 1: Allegro maestoso: Mit durchaus ernstem und feierlichem Ausdruck.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 1: Allegro maestoso: Mit durchaus ernstem und feierlichem Ausdruck.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 2: Andante moderato. Sehr gemächlich.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 2: Andante moderato. Sehr gemächlich.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 3: In ruhig fliessender Bewegung.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 4: “Urlicht”. Sehr feierlich, aber schlicht.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 5: “Aufersteh’n”. Im Tempo des Scherzos. Wild herausfahrend.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 5: “Aufersteh’n”. Im Tempo des Scherzos. Wild herausfahrend.

18-12-1894. Manuscript Symphony No. 2. Sign off.

Owner manuscript No. 1: Gustav Mahler (1860-1911)

  • Period: 1895-1911.

Owner manuscript No. 2: Alma Mahler (1879-1964)

  • Period: 1911-1920. Heir.

Owner manuscript No. 3: Willem Mengelberg (1871-1951) since 1920

Owner manuscript No. 4: Gilbert Kaplan (1941-2016) since 1984

  • Gilbert Kaplan, who died 01-01-2016, was a New Yorker who founded the financial magazine Institutional Investor in 1967. He encountered the Second Symphony at a Carnegie Hall concert in 1965 and was left sleepless by the experience. “He realised this work was somehow the leitmotif of his life,” says Lebrecht, Kaplan’s friend and biographer. He first realised his dream of conducting the enormously complex piece in 1982, at a New York concert attended by notables in town for an International Monetary Fund meeting. “The world’s financial leadership were in the hall,” Lebrecht says. “They had all come down from a financial summit. He laid his whole reputation on the line.” Having sold Institutional Investor for an undisclosed sum in 1984, rumoured at $75m, the Mahler-smitten publisher went on to conduct numerous recitals and recordings of the Second Symphony.
  • Kaplan purchased the Second Symphony manuscript in a private sale from a Willem Mengelberg (1871-1951) foundation in 1984. Rather than keep it for himself, he placed it in New York’s Pierpont Morgan Library and published a facsimile edition for public use.
  • “He wasn’t at all possessive about it. If you cared about Mahler, then you were allowed to come and look at his Mahler manuscript,” Lebrecht says. “There is a spirit in manuscripts,” Bychkov says, “in the handwriting, in the feeling of paper, in the things that have been erased. It belongs to the whole world. Whoever the owner will be, it has to continue to be available to people who really care about it.
  • Period: 1984-2016 Gilbert Kaplan Foundation.

Gilbert Kaplan (1941-2016) with Manuscript Symphony No. 2.

  • Auction of the Manuscript Symphony No. 2 at Sotheby’s in London on Tuesday 29-11-2016, 10:00 AM GMT
  • 00-07-2016 Announcement of the upcoming auction: “People often ask what it feels like to conduct. It is very hard to describe,” says the Russian conductor Semyon Bychkov who has led many of the world’s finest orchestras. “At the end of it you feel that you have arrived in heaven having gone through hell. The work to which he refers is Gustav Mahler’s Symphony No. 2, an immense piece of music about life and death requiring the full force of a 90-strong orchestra and choir, hailed by Bychkov as “one of the greatest monuments of musical civilisation”. On 29-11-2016, the symphony’s 232-page original manuscript, notated in Mahler’s own hand between 1888 and 1894 during breaks from his day job as a conductor, will be sold by Sotheby’s in London. The first ever autograph of a complete symphony by the composer to appear at auction, it is expected to raise £3.5m to £4.5m, the most for a music manuscript since nine Mozart symphonies sold for £2.5m in 1987.
  • 17-08-2016 Hong Kong: On show at Sotheby’s. 17-08-2016, 18-08-2016 and 19-08-2016.
  • 30-08-2016 London: Text Sotheby’s London:

  • 02-11-2016 Hamburg: On show in Hamburg.
  • 04-11-2016 London: Register to bid closed.
  • 13-11-2016 London: Sotheby’s catalogue text: Sotheby’s, Music and Continental Books and Manuscripts, London | 29 Nov 2016, 10:30 AM | L16406: LOT 36, MAHLER, GUSTAV, THE AUTOGRAPH MANUSCRIPT OF THE SECOND SYMPHONY (“THE RESURRECTION”), THE COMPLETE WORK IN FIVE MOVEMENTS

A monumental and dramatic manuscript written throughout in the composer’s characteristic bold musical script, mainly in intense black ink, with some parts in brown or violet ink (the final seven pages in violet ink), on up to twenty-eight staves per page, a working manuscript in places, with inserted leaves, corrections and deletions, including an important pencil sketch for the opening of the third movement, together with many revisions and additions to the orchestration written in blue crayon in the first three movements and in violet ink in the final movement, inscribed and dated by the composer at the end of first and last movements respectively: “Sonntag 29. April (18)94 renovatum” & “Beendigt am Dienstag, den 18. Dezember 1894 zu Hamburg”. 232 pages, large folio (c.35 x 27cm), 24- & 28-stave papers, without a title page, unbound bifolios, each movement foliated separately by the composer (the fourth paginated in another hand), retaining the original composing structure, including inserted leaves and bifolios, traces of earlier stitching to the first three movements, the final two movements unstitched, annotations in pencil to the lower margins by Mahler’s copyists, modern clothcovered folding box, gilt lettering labels, mainly Hamburg (some parts possibly also at Steinbach am Attersee), April to December 1894, a few creases to margins.

  1. “Maestoso. Mit durchaus ernstem und feierlichem Ausdruck”, comprising 15 bifolios, with the remains of stitching, a total of 58 pages.
  2. “Andante con moto”, comprising 8 bifolios, the remains of stitching, a total of 30 pages.
  3. (Scherzo), comprising 14 bifolios, one unnumbered, the remains of stitching, a total of 53 pages.
  4. ‘Urlicht’. Sehr feierlich, aber schlicht”, comprising two unstitched bifolios, a total of 8 pages.
  5. “Im Tempo des Scherzos. Wild herausfahrend!”, comprising 21 unstitched bifolios, a total of 83 pages.

ESTIMATE 3,500,000 – 4,500,000 GBP


THIS MANUSCRIPT HAS AN IMPECCABLE PROVENANCE. Mahler retained it during his lifetime and in 1920 it was given by his widow, Alma Mahler, to his friend the conductor Willem Mengelberg on the occasion of the first Mahler Festival in Amsterdam. It passed to the Mengelberg Foundation after the conductor’s death in 1951, and was put on deposit at the Gemeentemuseum in The Hague from 1982. Finally, the financial publisher and great Mahler enthusiast Gilbert Kaplan acquired the manuscript from the Foundation in 1984, since when it has been on deposit at the Morgan Library & Museum in New York. This manuscript has never been offered or sold on the open market until today.


THIS IS THE GREATEST AUTOGRAPH MUSIC MANUSCRIPT TO BE OFFERED AT AUCTION FOR NEARLY THIRTY YEARS. The only comparable autographs are those of the nine Mozart symphonies (Sotheby’s London, 22 May 1987, lot 457) and Schumann’s Second Symphony (Sotheby’s London, 1 December 1994, lot 317). NO AUTOGRAPH OF A COMPLETE SYMPHONY BY MAHLER HAS APPEARED AT AUCTION FOR NEARLY SIXTY YEARS. Indeed, since Sotheby’s sold Mahler’s First Symphony in 1959, no autograph of a complete symphony by any of the great late Romantic composers–Brahms, Tchaikovsky, Bruckner or Mahler–has been sold at auction; this is a unique opportunity to acquire such a manuscript.

MAHLER’S MONUMENTAL SECOND SYMPHONY WAS THE GRANDEST OF ALL NINETEENTH-CENTURY SYMPHONIES. With the vast forces and great length (around an hour and a half), it easily surpassed its choral predecessors by Beethoven, Berlioz and Liszt in its enormous range and conception. It is a standard work in the concert repertory, performed and recorded by all the great conductors. Mahler demands an orchestra of over one hundred players, comprising four or five each of the woodwind instruments (including piccolos, E-flat clarinets and contrabassoon), ten trumpets, ten French horns, four trombones and tuba, two harps, organ, an extensive battery of percussion and the largest possible contingent of strings.

THIS IS THE ONLY AUTOGRAPH MANUSCRIPT OF THE COMPLETE SYMPHONY: There are early drafts of individual movements now dispersed in Basel, Yale, New York and London, together with a fair number of sketchleaves

in Vienna and elsewhere. There is no other autograph score of the great Finale to Mahler’s symphony, its crowning glory. Mahler began this as a fair copy of his complete symphony, but subsequently revised the manuscript making important changes to the orchestration in blue crayon and in violet ink, introducing new instruments such as the E-flat clarinet, extra timpani and harp parts. These alterations are particularly extensive in the third and fifth movements. Mahler also revises the opening of the third movement; there is a pencil sketch in his hand, where the manuscript differs markedly from his final version. This manuscript is particularly important for being unaltered, untrimmed and unbound. It retains its original physical form, reflecting and revealing how Mahler created the final musical structure of his work. Mahler wrote the manuscript on a series of numbered bifolios (sheets folded to form four pages each), and the insertion and extraction of leaves into this sequence provides crucial evidence of how Mahler brought his masterpiece to its final form. Other manuscripts of his symphonies now in libraries are mostly bound, sometimes with the leaves separated and mounted on guards, so that such evidence has been irretrievably lost. Although the facsimile that Gilbert Kaplan published reproduces the colours of the manuscript faithfully, it does not show anything of this physical structure.

MAHLER’S “RESURRECTION” SYMPHONY DEALS WITH MATTERS OF LIFE AND DEATH; IN DOING SO, IT REPRESENTS THE CULMINATION OF THE NINETEENTH-CENTURY SYMPHONY. It is his most accessible and arguably his greatest early treatment of such existential issues and this is why it has always been among his most popular works. Mahler was following a great tradition, building on the expansion of the form achieved by Beethoven in his Ninth; that work also concluded with a great choral finale, expressing Schiller’s humanist Ode to Joy, and linking all the movements. These innovations were developed by Berlioz and Liszt to express mortal, supernatural, diabolic and mystical concepts. Mahler was fully aware that this continual development and expansion of the symphony went hand in hand with the desire to express grander and more profound concepts and “newer elements of feeling”. He wrote in Hamburg in 1893 that “composers began to include ever deeper and more complex sides of their emotional lives in the realm of their creative work…from (Beethoven) on not just the fundamental shades of the mood–thus e.g. sheer joyfulness or sadness etc.–but also the transition from one mood to another–conflicts–Nature and her impact upon us–humour, and poetic ideas–were the objects of musical emulation…”. All aspects of metaphysics, religious problems and existentialism fascinated Mahler, and he continually engrossed himself in philosophical problems and reflected them through music.

At this time Mahler was better known as a conductor than as a composer, and specifically an opera conductor.

Inevitably, his daily diet was not Berlioz and Liszt, but Weber’s Der Freischütz, Beethoven’s Fidelio, Mozart’s Don Giovanni & Die Zauberflöte, Rossini’s Il barbiere di Siviglia, Meyerbeer’s Les Huguenots, Bizet’s Carmen, Verdi’s Un ballo in maschera and, increasingly from 1885 on, the operas of Wagner. His repertoire as a conductor included well over one hundred operas, many staged in several different productions.

Not surprisingly, Mahler’s “Resurrection” Symphony is a vividly dramatic work. It portrays the triumph of the human spirit in overcoming death, whose depiction in the first movement is as dramatic and terrifying as in Verdi’s Requiem. In the long first movement, Mahler presents us with the relentless struggle with death, firmly bound in the fateful key of C minor. The even-more-ambitious Finale, lasting over half an hour, contains the voice crying in the wilderness, the Last Trump, the Resurrection and all the struggle that leads up to it. Mahler’s fourteen-year experience of conducting operas informed his dramatic presentation, not least in his striking use of offstage brass and percussion.

Mahler originally composed the first movement in August and September 1888, but could not continue the symphony; he later retitled his fair copy ‘Todtenfeier’ (Funeral rites). He took the work up again in July 1893, writing the second, third and fourth movements. Only in April 1894 did Mahler return to assembling these disparate movements into a coherent whole, by revising the first movement and composing his great Finale. The inspiration came to him on 29 March 1894, when he attended the memorial service of the great pianist and conductor Hans von Bülow (1830-1894) in Hamburg. Mahler explained to Arthur Seidl that it was only then that he fixed on the conclusion that would bind his great work together: “I had long contemplated bringing in the choir in the last movement, and only the fear that it would be taken as a superficial imitation of Beethoven made me hesitate again and again. Then Bülow died and I went to the memorial service (Todtenfeier) …the choir, up in the organ loft, intoned Klopstock’s Resurrection chorale. It flashed on me like lightening, and everything became plain and clear in my mind! It was the flash that all creative artists wait for, ‘conception by the Holy Ghost’! What I experienced had now to be expressed in sound”.

Mahler did on three occasions write a descriptive programme about the symphony: In a letter of 1896, Mahler wrote that “…The first movement depicts the titanic struggles of a mighty being still caught in the toils of this world; grappling with life and with the fate to which he must succumb–and his death. The second and third movements, Andante and Scherzo, are episodes from the life of the fallen hero…While the first three movements are narrative in character, in the last movement everything is immediate action. It begins with the death-shriek (reprised from near the end) of the Scherzo. And now the resolution of the terrible problem of life–redemption. At first, we see it in the form created by faith and the Church…It is the day of the Last Judgement…the earth trembles. Just listen to the drum-roll, and your hair will stand on end! The Last Trump sounds; the graves spring open, and all creation comes writhing out of the bowels of the earth, with wailing and gnashing of teeth. Now they all come marching along in a mighty procession: beggars and rich men, common folk and kings…There now follows nothing of what had been expected: no Last Judgement, no souls saved and none damned; no just man, no evil-doer, no judge! Everything has ceased to be. And softly and simply there begins: “Aufersteh’n, ja aufersteh’n” (the Resurrection chorale: “Rise up again, yes rise up”)…“. Please see the comprehensive description of this manuscript in the separate catalogue. Sotheby’s is happy to acknowledge the advice and assistance of Professors Stephen Hefling and Paul Banks.

Sotheby’s London.

Manuscript Symphony No. 2 – Movement 5: “Aufersteh’n”. Im Tempo des Scherzos. Wild herausfahrend.

  • 29-11-2016 London: Auction Sotheby’s London (29-11-2016).

Auction Manuscript Symphony No. 2.

Auction Manuscript Symphony No. 2

Auction Manuscript Symphony No. 2

Owner manuscript No. 5: The winning bidder chose to remain anonymous, since 2016.

  • 29-11-2016 London: LOT SOLD. 4,546,250 GBP, 5,360,043 EUR, 5,600.000 USD. (Hammer Price with Buyer’s Premium). The winning bidder chose to remain anonymous. There were four telephone bidders. Time 12:42.

  • 29-11-2016 London: The hammer price for the original manuscript of Mahler’s Second Symphony was £3.9m. The added Sotheby’s premium brought the total to £4,546,250. There were four telephone bidders. The only comparable handwritten music manuscripts of major symphonic works to have been sold at auction include the manuscript of nine Mozart symphonies – which fetched £2.5m in 1987. The manuscript of Robert Schumann’s Second Symphony sold for £1.5m in 1994.
  • 15-02-2017 Hamburg: The Gustav Mahler Association Hamburg is very pleased with another wonderful exhibit for the new Mahler Museum. On 15 February 2017 Katharina zu Sayn-Wittgenstein and her co-worker Julia Mundhenke (Sotheby’s) handed over to the board of the Mahler Vereinigung (Ingeborg Stifensand, Dr. Albrecht Schultze and Dr. Alexander Odefey) in the Elysee in Hamburg a splendid facsimile edition of the original score of the Second Symphony by Gustav Mahler from the estate of Gilbert Kaplan. The impulse for the gift to the Mahler Association was initiated by Marcela Silva (Kaplan Foundation).

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

More about the manuscript and sketches in detail

  • The Sources in Detail (p. 336), by Reinhold Kubik, English Translation by David Pickett:

Sketch1: Sketch for the Scherzo (p. 336) (prior to 1901)

Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Wien, Musiksammlung,

call mark: Mus.Hs. 41.421

One sheet in landscape format 26.5 x 34 cm, bought in 1993 from the estate of Kammersänger Anton Dermota.

Printed music paper made by the Eberle music publishers, Vienna, “J.E. & Co. / No. 14 / 24linig.”, without watermark. On the back an old anonymous note in lead pencil: “Noten in Mahlers / Waldhäuschen gefunden / Wörthersee 1907.” {“Music found in Mahler’s hut in the woods, Wörthersee 1907”}. This sheet was obviously left behind in the Maiernigg composing hut when the property was sold in 1908.

The earliest currently known sketch, i.e. 1901 at the latest (see also Reilly, NSNC p. 58): short score with sketches for bars 40–49 and 95–106 of the third movement, but with longer sequential runs of the motifs. Illustrated in Reilly, NSNC, p. 58 (Ill. 1).

Sketch2: Sketches for the Scherzo (p. 336) (no later than 1901)

Pierpont Morgan Library, New York, Robert Owen Lehman Deposit, no call mark.

Twelve sheets in landscape format 26.5 x 34 cm.

Printed music paper made by the Eberle music publishers, Vienna, in part with the watermark “J.E. & Co. / WIEN” (e.g. on folio 6). The following types of paper were used: “J.E. & Co. / No. 14 / 24linig.” (folio 1), “J.E. & Co. / No. 12a / 20linig.” (folios 2, 3 and 12) and “J.E. & Co. / No. 18 / 18linig.” (folios 4–11).

Written in ink, additions with different writing implements (black, blue, brown pencil). Sk2 and Sk3 are at present kept together as loose sheets in a folder. Sk2 is an earlier and Sk3 a later stage of the composition process.

Contents of the sketch pages

1r: Title “Scherzo” (blue pencil).

1v: blank.

2r: “I” (blue pencil); sketch of bars 1–82. Illustrated in Reilly, NSNC, p. 59 (Ill. 2).

2v: blank

3r: “Reprise”, two systems in ink (material for bars 579–595) and two in lead pencil (material of the episode beginning in b. 709).

3v: four bars for the fifth movement, namely the (later unused) combination of the quaver (eighth-note) theme (Vc., b. 56ff) with the fourth-motif (Ob. and Cl., b. 92). Illustrated in Reilly, NSNC p. 61 (Ill. 5).

4r: “Einlage a” {“Insert a”} (brown pencil), referred to on folio 1r, i.e. material for bars 40–47. Illustrated in Reilly, NSNC p. 59.

4v: blank

5r: “II” (blue pencil); sketch of bars 83–128; the labels “Variation 4” and “Variation 5” are interesting for the understanding of the formal structure; furthermore, details of the later tonalities, also for the “Reprise”

5v: sketch for b. 129–135.

6r: “Nur Streicher” {“Strings only”} (lead pencil) — “B dur II C schließt an II b vorne an” {“B-flat major II C connects to II b in front”} (blue pencil) — (further below) “D-dur ?” — “verrückt / dann anschließend” {“moved (or crazy?)/ then later”}; material that is related to bars 136ff.

6v: blank

7r: “III” (blue pencil); sketch of bars 136–187, linked to another continuation (with addendum “Reprise”, however).

7v: blank.

8r: “IV” (blue pencil); sketch of parts of the development between b. 200 and b. 250.

8v: blank.

9r: “V” (blue pencil): Sketch of bars 251–300, thereafter of b. 242ff, continued on

9v: One system of 16 bars.

10r: “VII” (blue pencil); sketch for the section b. 280 – 388

10v: blank.

11r: “IV” (blue pencil, crossed out, followed by two systems with more sketches for b. 280ff and 352ff), beneath this “VIII” (blue pencil, 2 systems with sketches for b. 306–336).

11v: (upside down) one system with the horn-motif of bars 277–280.

12r: “X” (blue pencil) — “vorher Trio” {“before Trio”} (lead pencil); sketch of bars 432ff. NB: Mahler still used figured bass signs — also on other pages (see his manuscript of the Piano Quartet!).

12v: blank.

Sketch3: Sketches for the Scherzo (p. 337) (later than Sk2)

Pierpont Morgan Library, New York, Robert Owen Lehman Deposit, no call mark.

Fifteen sheets in landscape format 26.5 x 34 cm (today kept together with Sk2, see above).

Printed music paper made by Eberle music publishers, Vienna, in part with watermarks, viz: “J.E. & Co. / No. 14 / 24linig.” (folios 5, 6, 11 and 15), “J.E. & Co. / No. 12a / 20linig.” (folio 12) and “J.E. & Co. / No. 18 / 18linig.” (folios 1–4. 7–10, 13 and 14).

Written in ink, additions with different writing implements (black, blue, brown pencil).

Contents of the sketch pages

1r: “1” (blue pencil), “Variation” (brown pencil), 3 pasted-on fragments of identical music paper; sketches of bars 1–82

1v: blank.

2r: “2” (brown pencil), “hier nochmals Wiederholung / Reprise / in Fis-m.” {“here again repeat / reprise / in F-sharp minor”} (blue pencil), 3 pasted-on fragments of the same type of music paper; sketch of bars 83–130.

2v: Two systems with one bar and ten bars (Trio material).

3r: “3” (blue pencil) “Es-dur bei der Reprise B-dur” {“E-flat major in the reprise B-flat major”} (brown pencil), “letzte Variation / Dominante, Tonika” {“last variation / dominant, tonic”} (lead pencil), at the bottom a frame, “A-dur” {“A major”} and “4” (brown pencil); only three systems, the bottom four staves of the page have been cut off. Sketch of bars 131–185.

3v: blank

4r: “4” (brown pencil); sketch of bars 186–187, thereupon directly connected bars 201–281

4v: blank

5r: “5” (corrected to “4”, lead pencil), the first four bars crossed out with brown pencil, “Trio” (ink), lower right a pasted-on fragment of 18-stave manuscript paper; sketch of bars 282–388.

5v: blank.

6r: “6”, “Cis-moll” {“C-sharp minor”} and “Einlage b” {“Insert b”} (at the bottom, blue pencil), “Reprisissimo” {“definitely reprise”} and “Einlage b” {“Insert b”} (at the top, brown pencil), at the bottom a pasted-on page fragment, which is again pasted over; eight encircled bars, then bars 389–428, notice “Einlage b”, {“Insert b”} thereupon bars 429–461; at the bottom “Einlage b” comprises Trio material.

6v: One system with six bars (?)

7r: “7” changed from “3” (blue pencil), at the bottom “folgt Variation 6 und 12. / eventuell nochmals Mittelsatz Es-dur” {“Variation 6 and 12 follows. / possibly again the middle section E-flat major”} (brown pencil) and “mit Veränderung” {“with change(s)”} (lead pencil); sketch of bars 462–526. Illustrated in Reilly, NSNC p. 60 (Ill. 4).

7v: comprises only the title “Reprise-Var” (brown pencil) in the centre of the page.

8r: “8” (blue pencil), frame at the bottom, crossing out and “Übergang ins Trio” {“transition to the Trio”} as well as “# kom(m)t bei der Reprise” {“comes in the reprise”} (blue pencil), and then “1 gr. Terz tiefer / cis-m” {“a major third lower / C-sharp minor”} and “bleibt” {“stet”} (pencil); two fragments of paper are pasted on at the top; material for the development section (b.579–608), thereupon differently continued, several false starts, partly crossed out.

8v: blank.

9r: “V” – “IIb” (crossed out) and “9” (blue pencil), “bei der Reprise als Anfang zum”, “eventuell”, “—Anfang / wahnsinnig / durch alle Tonarten hetzen!” {“in the reprise as beginning to the”, “perhaps”, —beginning / frantic / chasing through all keys!”} (blue pencil). “1) Coda / 2) Überleitung / zum Trio / 3.) Trio” {“1) Coda / 2) Transition / to the Trio / 3.) Trio”} (lead pencil), “richtig” {“correct”} (brown pencil); at the bottom left a small fragment of paper is pasted on; sketch of bars 632–655, thereupon continued differently. In the midst of instrument details (“Tromp. Hörner”) {“trumpet, horns”} one finds “Mahler” and further on “Gustav”.

9v: blank.

10r: “Coda”, “10” and “eventuell” {“possibly”} (blue pencil), “Seite 3 / Reprisissimo” {“Page 3 / definitely reprise”} (brown pencil), at the bottom right in lead pencil “Schluss Skizzenbuch” {“end of sketchbook”} (whence it doubtless arises that there had been a sketchbook for the Fifth — unfortunately lost) and “Trio Reprise”. Begins with a sketch of bars 662–673, continued completely differently, then a sketch of bars 683–690 with other further unelaborated continuations, end in the area of the Horn episode (at b. 709).

10v: blank.

11r: “11” (blue pencil), “Einlage b” {“Insert b”} and “Hörner” {“horns”} (brown pencil), “1 Ton tiefer” {“one note lower”} (lead pencil); sketches for the second horn episode from bar 709, thereafter to bars 737–782, followed by crossed out continuations.

11v: blank.

12r: “12” (blue pencil); begins with sketches to bars 768–782, thereafter an ending to the movement (not thus realized). Illustrated in Reilly, NSNC p. 60 (Ill. 3).

12v: Several short sketches, among them bars 690–696.

13r: “Einlage b” {“Insert b”} (brown pencil), “1 Quarte tiefer” {“a fourth lower”} (lead pencil); sketches to a part specified for the reprise (but not used), corresponding to the segment of bars 201–239.

13v: blank.

14r: “Coda” (brown pencil), “IIIb” (blue pencil); crossed-out fragments with Trio material.

14v: blank.

15r and 15v: not written on; this is the second half signature of the first sheet of Sk2.

Sketch4: Autograph titlepage of the Scherzo (p. 338) (dated Maiernigg, August 1901)

Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München, Musiksammlung, Moldenhauer-Archive, callmark Mus.ms. 22740.

One page in landscape 26.5 x 34 cm, “J.E. & Co. / No.12a / 20linig.” On the front in ink: “2. Satz / (Scherzo) / (August 1901. Maiernigg beendet” (last word scratched out but legible).) On the back, upside down in lead pencil: “Der Tamboursg’sell”. The dating supplies a terminus ante quem for Sk2 and Sk3. Der Tamboursg’sell came into being on 12 July 1901 (date on Mus.ms. 22752 in the same collection).

Aut: Autograph Score (p. 338) (Fall 1902 – Spring 1903)

Pierpont Morgan Library, Mary Flagler Cary Music Collection, call mark CARY 509.

Until 1964 the manuscript belonged to Alma Mahler. It was later the property of Robert Owen Lehman, whose signature is found twice on the inner flyleaf. In 1983 it was acquired by the Pierpont Morgan Library with financial help from Mary Flagler Cary.

In the 1960s the manuscript was disassembled into single sheets and subsequently bound. Unfortunately, through this the original state of the grouping of the gatherings was lost, though it can be reconstructed on the basis of the autograph gathering numbers. The magnificent dark red leather single volume bears “Gustav / Mahler/ V / Symphonie” stamped in gold on the spine.

The manuscript is not dated, and contains therefore no reference to the dates of the composition or writing down. According to Alma’s reminiscences it might have come into being during the winter months of 1902/03. Placed before the music part is a sheet of foolscap with the following autograph inscription: “Meinem lieben Almscherl, / der treuen und tapferen Begleiterin / auf allen meinen Wegen. / Wien, Oktober 1903.” {“To my dear Almscherl, / the faithful and brave companion / on all my journeyings. / Vienna, October 1903.”} Underneath, the title “V. Symphony / für großes Orchester / Gustav Mahler. / I. Abtheilung / Nro 1. (Trauermarsch)” Illustrated in Kaplan 1992, p. 33.

The music part consists of 294 handwritten pages in portrait format 34 x 26.5 cm. Mahler used two sorts of paper of Eberle music publishers: “J.E. & Co. / No.5 / 18linig.” and “J.E. & Co. / No.6 / 20linig.” Several sheets have the watermark which is also found in Sk1 and Sk2 (see above). The barlines are drawn throughout with lead pencil and ruler; notes, instrument names in the left margins and system brackets with black ink.

Entries with different writing implements point to several stages of revision by Mahler. In this connection the following observations can be made. The first and second movements have autograph entries in lead pencil, blue pencil, brown pencil, blue and bright violet ink. The third movement, however, has in addition very many entries in red and brown ink, which were used only in this movement. In the Adagietto again all the alterations were effected by scraping and black ink, as if Mahler had wanted to preserve the look of the score “undamaged” (sometimes the corrected notes appear at first in pencil and were then traced in ink). In the Rondo-Finale most of the alterations were also executed by scraping and black ink. For the few other entries Mahler used pencil and violet ink.

Alma’s handwriting is found without doubt three times in this manuscript: In the third movement, b. 201 “3. Ob. nimmt engl. Hr.” {“third oboe changes to cor anglais”} and b. 272 “geth.” {“divided”} in the celli, as well as in the fifth movement in bars 709–710 the notes of the first violins. Whether the details added in violet ink (e.g. accidentals or missing pauses) also originate from Alma can not be clarified unequivocally.

First movement

This comprises 46 page-sides (the pencil pagination “3–48” does not originate from Mahler; autograph bifolio-numberings 1–12, each bifolio comprises 4 page sides, with the exception of bifolio 4, which consists of a single sheet). {Translator’s note: the word bifolio is used here to mean a sheet of paper 34 x 53 cm, folded in half to make four page-sides of manuscript paper with page size 34 x 26.5 cm.}

Page 1 (b. 1–9): The large scratching out above the trumpet stave expunges text and not notes, as Reilly erroneously wrote (NSNC, p. 63), and is decipherable to the extent that the content is evidently: “Die Triolen stets etwas” {“The triplets always somewhat”} — then it is unreadable.

Page 2 (b. 10–18): The entry “nicht schleppen!” {“dont drag!”} next to the triplet in b. 11.

Second movement

Again a sheet of foolscap is placed at the beginning with the autograph subtitle “Nro 2 (Hauptsatz)”. {“No. 2 (main movement)”} The music part comprises 17 gatherings each of four page sides, gathering 16 and 17 only of 2 pages, thus together 64 page-sides.

Page 17 (b. 138–146): “Da capo”, doublebar and repeat sign added in pencil, likewise a “Segno” at the beginning of the movement. This repeat is therefore a later addition!

Page 33 (b. 283–291) Entries in lead and brown pencils: “Anm. f. d. Setzer / N.B. Clarinetten nach A umschreiben bis incl. Bog 10” {“Note for the engraver / N.B. Change clarinets to A until bifolio 10”}. Alma already carried out the requested transposition in the engraving copy (StV).

Page 61 (b. 557–564): In the first Violins “Flag.” {“harmonic”} in blue pencil; the changed notation appears in the engraving copy as an autograph entry; it would appear that Mahler “transferred back” to the autograph many of the revisions that he had entered in StV.

Third movement

A single foolscap sheet is placed at the beginning with the autograph subtitle which reads: “2. Abtheilung / Nro 3. (Scherzo)” {“2nd Part / No. 3 (Scherzo)”}. 80 music page-sides follow, i.e. 20 bifolios, each of four page-sides. Since Mahler’s revisions are here especially numerous, this, the oldest movement from the point of view of the symphony’s genesis, was obviously less perfected than the other movements. On the first page alone (b. 1–10) there are corrections and additions in red and blue ink as well as brown pencil. The enigmatic addition of the first two bars was done in black ink; Reilly correctly points out that these bars already existed in all sketches (NSNC, p. 63; illustrated, ibid. p. 62, Ill. 7). The existing erasures in bars 3 and 4 (i.e. at one time b. 1 and b. 2) indeed indicate that Mahler could actually briefly have planned a different beginning and not have simply forgotten the horn call.

Page 2 and others: The triangle part is throughout distinguishable as a later addition in lead pencil (already contained in StV).

An enigmatic mathematical equation without numbers ornaments the bottom margin of page 5 (b. 43–53).

Page 35 is a single sheet of 24-stave music paper, on the back of which the music (on 18-stave paper) is pasted; underneath and on the front is nothing. Probably the copied alterations on the previous page were so extensive, that a rewrite was needed.

After the end of the movement: “längere Pause”. {“prolonged pause”}

Fourth movement

The usual sheet of foolscap is placed at the front with the autograph subtitle “3. Abtheilung / Nro 4 (Adagietto) / und Nro 5 (Rondo-Finale)”. {“3rd Part / No.4 (Adagietto / and No.5 (Rondo-Finale)”} The following music part comprises 26 bifolios each of 4 page-sides, consequently 104 written pages of music. Reilly has described in detail the alterations and additions in the Adagietto in Kaplan 1992, p. 46–57.

The tempo indication in b. 96 reads “Sehr zurückhaltend!”. {“Molto ritenuto”}

Fifth movement

Connects on the first side of the fifth folded sheet directly to the Adagietto. Between the two movements the instruction “folgt ohne Unterbrechung / Nro 5”. {“No.5 follows without a break”}

The handwriting is slap-dash in this movement. Obviously it was written in great haste.

Pages 100–103 (from b. 758): the cymbal part added in lead pencil at the foot of the page.

StV: Engraving copy (p. 340) (by Alma Mahler, begun in Spring, finished in August 1903)

New York Public Library for the Performing Arts, call mark JOB 85–9.

Copy in Alma Mahler’s handwriting (in violet ink), prepared spring/summer 1903 in Maiernigg (on 28 August Gustav wrote to Alma “I have not yet told you how touched I was by the perfection of the copy when I saw the whole thing lying so tidy and complete before me.”, see GMA, p. 156). Many entries by the composer (mostly in lead pencil, occasionally in brown or blue pencil, black and red ink), numerous entries (with a thin nib in black ink) by the editor at Peters music publishers, Paul Schäfer (Klemm 1979, p. 99), and the music engraver (with thin lead pencil).

The connection with the Peters music publisherspublishing house was accomplished by Gustav Brecher (through the intervention of Bruno Walter), who was employed at the Vienna Court Opera in the 1901/2 season and who was also an advisor at Peters music publishers (Klemm 1979, p. 10). On 14 October 1903, Henri Hinrichsen (1868-1942) acknowledged receipt of this manuscript. The datings at the end of the third movement (23/10/03) and at the end of the symphony (24/10/03) presumably originate from Paul Schäfer (they refer to his reading revision). The engraving copy remained in the publisher’s archive, until Walter Hinrichsen brought it to new York in 1946. The New York Public Library acquired it from the Hinrichsen family in 1986.

The manuscript was formerly bound (the remains of the binding cords are preserved). At present it consists of loose bifolios, which are stored in a wrapper. The same two varieties of Eberle music publishers music paper were used as in the autograph (see above). Alma numbered the bifolios throughout, a page numbering was added by the publisher in black ink, and several page numbers were added in lead pencil by Mahler. Alma was visibly anxious to duplicate the autograph correctly, e.g. even to keep the division of the pages. The barlines were drawn in in lead pencil, though without a ruler.

First movement

On the first page a succession of entries by the publisher, which throw light on the working practice of reading and engraving departments (see Ill. 3). The title and list of instruments were rewritten by the reader, namely in the form that they actually appeared in the first edition. The name of the composer was added. The gaps in the barlines (between instrument groups) were standardized, for the percussion instruments “3 individual lines” were prescribed; graphical flaws of the engraving copy were corrected (“Kreuze wie gewöhnlich zum Notenkopf, nicht höher setzen.” {“Sharps as normal beside the notehead, not set higher.”}). Then one finds the plate number, the specification of the copyright mark and an estimate of the required quantity of plates. In the penultimate bar the casting-off can be read, namely, the required staves are counted from top to bottom for the first page, which should end here.

On the second page of the third movement the following amusing note of Mr Paul Schäfer is found: “NB Die einzelnen Vorschlagnoten / immer nur als Achtel {drawing of an acciaccatura (quaver with a line through it)} / (wird dem Componisten schon recht sein)” {“The separate gracenotes / always only as quavers /(the composer will not care)”}.

Mahler’s notable additions,

i.e. those that are more than simple corrections of Alma’s copy

b. 59–60 addition of notes for the 2nd trombone

b. 128 sf in the woodwind

b. 198 “viel Bogen” {“many bow changes”} in Vc. and Cb.

b. 242–244 six times sf in Vc. and Cb.

b. 385 “Griffbrett” {“sul tasto”}, also added in Aut

b. 397 “Zurückhaltend”, {“Ritenuto”} likewise added in Aut

Sheets of paper were inserted between the movements (old paper with the watermark “King David with harp” and 8 lines in the space of 2.9 cm).

Second movement

b. 1–4 twice “Rapid!”, twice “a Tempo”

b. 28 Vl. II

b. 42 “trem. (Doppelgr.)” {“trem. double stop”}

b. 61 “Drängend” {“pressing on”}

b. 77 Hr. 2 instead of Fg. 2

b. 133–140 Tamtam

b. 166 Trp.: “sempre p”

b. 189 Addition of the word “immer” {“sempre”}

b. 214 “moderato” instead of “Andante”

b. 252 “poco rit”

b. 255 “unmerklich belebend” {“imperceptibly more animated”} — later in b. 258

b. 286 Va.: “poco cresc.”

b. 288 “Frisch / Piu mosso (subito) / aber immer noch nicht so schnell / wie zu Anfang” {“Briskly / Piu mosso (subito) / but still never as fast / as at the beginning”}

b. 295 2nd & 4th Hr.

b. 352 “Zurückhaltend” {“Ritenuto”}

b. 356 “Etwas langsamer (ohne zu schleppen)” {“somewhat slower (without dragging)”}

b. 372, 374 Vc.: Akzente

b. 436 “Etwas drängend” {“pressing on somewhat”}

b. 464 “Plötzlich etwas einhaltend” {“suddenly somewhat restrained”}

b. 469 “Allmählig fliessender” {“gradually more flowing”}

b. 479 “Nicht schleppen” {“dont drag”}

b. 487 “vorwärts (unmerklich!)” {“onwards (imperceptibly!)”}

b. 500 “Tempo I!!”

b. 547 “Nicht eilen!” {“Dont hurry!”}

b. 557 until the end of the movement (strings partly new, clarification of the harmonics)

after the end of the movement “folgt längere Pause” {“a prolonged pause follows”} und “N.B für den Setzer: immer in 2 Zeilen weiter auszuschreiben!” {“Note for the engraver: always to be written out on two staves!”} (refers to the divided violins).

There follows an empty page of manuscript paper and a page with the “King David” watermark, on the recto of which “zu 60080” and “Peters music publishers / Mahler. Sinfonie”, on the verso autograph “2. Abtheilung / Nro 3 / Scherzo” {“2nd Part / No.3 / Scherzo”} (the “h” in “Abtheilung” struck out by the Peters music publishers editor).

Third Movement

The first page was written twice by Alma and the second copy was pasted over the first, but only stuck at the corners, so that one can see what is underneath. The following text is in Mahler’s hand on the underlying page:

“(Anmerkung für den Setzer:

bezüglich der Orchesterstimmen) Corno obligato in die 1. Hornstimme,

1. Horn in die 3. Hornstimme,

3. Horn in die 5. Hornstimme zu legen”


“(Note for the engraver:

re. the orchestra parts) put the Corno obligato in the first horn part,

the first horn in the third horn part,

the third horn in the fifth horn part.”

in addition, the cymbal stroke (in b. 4, also copied retrospectively thus in Aut), “pizz.” in the violins and for all “poco rit. … a Tempo” (likewise subsequently copied into the autograph); on the overlaid page only the p, cresc. hairpin, and f above the first clarinet.

Further autograph additions of importance

b. 11–35 Trgl.

b. 54–55 two cresc. hairpins in each case on the first note of Vl. I and Vl. II

b. 62–81 Cym., Trgl., Glsp.

b. 84–86 deletion of the Corno obligato with brown pencil, these notes copied into the first trumpet with red ink, also the additions “mit Dämpfer” und “Dämpfer ab”; everything exactly as in Aut

b. 86 Va. last note a corrected from d, also thus in Aut

b. 110–112 Trgl.

b. 115 Cym.

b. 116–118 timpani struck through with brown pencil, of which the origin is puzzling, since no stave was provided for it in Aut

b. 143–150 new version of Va., translation of their pizz. notes to Vl. II, in b. 150 to Vl. I

b. 170–179 the staves of Fg. and Timp. struck through with brown pencil, also thus in Aut

b. 183 Vl. I sf

b. 230–234 Slurs in Vc. and Cb., also thus in Aut

b. 255 Slur in Vl. I

b. 264 2nd – 5th Hr.: the beginning of the three notes shifted from the first to the second beat

b. 270–273 Vl. II and Va.

b. 348 Vc. and Cb.: a crotchet A shifted from the first to the second beat

b. 367–368 Fg., also thus in Aut

b. 429 tempo description altered

b. 448 “tempo I”

b. 462–492 all percussion incl. Glsp. and Holzklapper; the cymbal stroke at the reprise originally already in b. 492 as opposed to b. 4, “m. Tellern” {“crash cymbals”}

b. 516–525 Glsp.

b. 532 3rd Cl. “nimmt Cl in Es” {“changes to E-flat clarinet”}

b. 546–563 all percussion

b. 550–571 Clarinet in E-flat

b. 563 “Frisch” {“Briskly”}

b. 578 Cym.

b. 582–595 Strings: several slurs

b. 610 3rd Cl.: “nimmt Cl in B” {“changes to clarinet in B-flat”}

b. 614 “das Tempo unmerklich etwas einhaltend” {“the tempo imperceptibly somewhat restrained”}

b. 633 “(allmählig wieder zum Tempo I / zurückkehrend” {“gradually returning again to the tempo primo”} added

b. 633–635 Fg., Cfg.: erasure of the notes in b. 633 and 634, addition of f in b. 635

b. 645–654 2nd – 5th Hr. overall dynamic

b. 661 Trgl.

b. 662 Str.: “subito”, also thus in Aut

b. 685–696 Glsp.

b. 702 corno obl.: “sempre ff”

b. 731 “à Tempo”

b. 737 “Rit. …”

b. 743 “molto rit. …”

b. 745 “à Tempo moderato”

b. 772 “Piu mosso”

b. 779 “Drängend” {“pressing on”}

b. 785–790 Trgl.: dynamic

under b. 793 “Anmerkung für den Setzer: / II. Vl, Viola u Celli / dieselbe Orthografie / wie I Vl” {“Note for the engraver: Vl. II, Viola and Celli / the same notation / as Vl. I”}

b. 799 “Noch rascher” {“still more hastily”} at the end “folgt längere Pause” {“a prolonged pause follows”}

Fourth movement

b. 3 Vl. I: 4th note b-flat’ corrected from g’

b. 10 Tempo description, “(Anmerkung für den Setzer: Celli in 2 Zeilen / 2. Stimme im Bassschlüssel)” {“Note for the engraver: celli on two staves / 2nd voice in bass clef”}

b. 21 –32 tempo markings

b. 29–30 cres. hairpins, in addition: “molto”

b. 38–41 Alteration of dynamic; see Reilly in Kaplan 1992, p. 50–51

b. 46–47 Vl. dynamic

b. 50 “subito”

b. 57 Vl. in each case, 1st gracenote

b. 75 Vl. II: 3rd note g corrected from b-flat’

b. 78 Vc. crotchets and crotchet rests corrected from minims

b. 80–81 Vl. II Alteration of the rhythm of the melody, concerning this see also Reilly in Kaplan 1992, p. 55

b. 87 Cb.: “arco” altered to “pizz.”

b. 95 “viel Bogen”, “viel Ton!” {“many bow changes”, “big sound!”} The tempo instruction in b. 96 reads “sehr zurückhaltend!” {“molto ritenuto”}

Fifth Movement

b. 16 “Etwas” {“Somewhat”} corrected from “Wieder” {“Again”}

b. 88–91 Vl. I: grace notes and octave raising; added under the notes “Anmerkung für den Setzer: I. Vl. Oktave ohne Faullenzer (sic) ausschreiben!” {“Note for the engraver: “Write out the 1st violin octaves without abbreviation marks!”}

b. 100 “Nicht eilen!” after “Grazioso”

b. 177 “(Nicht eilen)”

b. 178 Vc. “sempre f”

b. 181 Vc., Cb. “mf”

b. 191 “Grazioso”

b. 228 “poco rit. …”

b. 233 “à Tempo / Nicht eilen”;

b. 307 “Nicht eilen”

b. 373 “Grazioso”

b. 413 “Nicht eilen” struck out and replaced by “poco rit”

b. 415 “à Tempo / Nicht eilen”

b. 428–459 Strings: several slurs

b. 583 (not 584!) “Unmerklich etwas einhaltend” {“Imperceptibly somewhat restrained”}

b. 606 “Grazioso”

Korr2: Brush-proof of the Second Revision (p. 342) (February-March 1904)

Arnold Schoenberg Center, Vienna, Call Mark SCO M 23, Vol. I and Vol. II

How the proof sheets came into Schoenberg’s possession is unknown.

The sheets — single-sided printed proofs on relatively dark, now brittle and tanned paper — are bound in dark blue paper covers which each bear a paper label with the written legend “Mahler / Symphonie No. 5 / Partitur: I Satz” (correctly 1. Abteilung) and “II. Satz / u. III.” (correctly: 2. and 3. Abteilung). (“Mahler / Symphony No. 5 / Score: 1st movement” (correctly: 1st part) and “2nd movement / and 3rd” (correctly: 2nd and 3rd parts)). Binding and writing originate from the music engraving company, whose stamp, “C. G. Röder / Leipzig / <date> / Notenstecherei” are found at the beginning of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th movements. The dates read:

1st movement “<a one digit unreadable number> FEB 04”

2nd movement “12 FEB 04”

3rd movement “27 FEB 04”

4th (and 5th) movement “–5 MRZ 04”

By means of these dates and the accompanying correspondence (Klemm 1979, documents K14 – K19) this is beyond doubt identified as the second correction, and its process can be understood in all detail.

Mahler entered the corrections with red, orange-red, blue and black pencils. There are, moreover, entries in red ink by a staff-worker of the music engraving company and several annotations with question marks in black pencil. The passage for the C clarinet in bars 265–314 of the first movement was transposed for D clarinet by Mahler in his own hand on a pasted-over stave in black ink; this correction was omitted from EA-Stp and EA-Dp (as, curiously, were several others). On the back of the last page of the second movement Mahler’s estimate of the durations (lead pencil):

35 Minuten (1st and 2nd movements; 5 corrected from 0)

Scherzo 17 (3rd movement)

Adagio 10 (4th movement)

14 (5th movement)

76 (total duration)

Apart from that two further durations are found; At the end of the 3rd movement “15 Min” and after the Adagietto “9 Minuten”.

There are additional meaningful entries in the 4th movement

b. 74 “a tempo”

b. 96 “vorw(ärts)”

b. 99 and 101 “rit.”

These are illustrated in NMR 45, p. 7 and 8

KlA: First Edition of the Four-handed Piano Arrangement by Otto Singer (p. 343) (September 1904) Plate No. 8988

Published shortly before 8th September 1904, on which day Mahler received a copy of the newly printed piano arrangement (Klemm 1979, p. 102, note 34/3). The first edition differs from later reprints by the mistake in the secundo part in b. 138 of the 1st movement (corrected by a pasting over). This was corrected in reprints, whereas the repetition of bars 1–145 of the 2nd movement, which agrees with EA-Stp, was retained even later.

EA-Stp: First Edition of the Study Score (p. 343) (September 1904) Plate No. 9015

Published shortly before 8 September 1904, on which day Mahler received four copies of the newly printed study score (Klemm 1979, p. 102, note 34/3). EA-Stp differs from the otherwise unaltered reprint of 1913 only by two details on the title pages (on the inner title “Lith. Anst. v. C. G. Röder G.m.b.H, Leipzig” is specified, and on the outer title Mahler’s name appears in black instead of red printing). The printing of the “Göhler” new edition of 1919 has another Plate No.  8951 and 246 pages of score, whereas EA-Stp has 251 pages.

W-Stp: Mahler’s Copy of EA-Stp (p. 343) (September/October 1904)

Library of the Universität für Musik und darstellende Kunst, Vienna, Bruno Walter Bequest, Call mark B. W. II. 38390

This is one of the four scores of EA-Stp (plate number 9015), that Mahler received from the company on 8 September 1904 (Klemm 1979, p. 102, note 34/3). Mahler rehearsed the symphony between 17 and 26 September with the court opera orchestra for the purpose of “small retouchings”. On 27 September he returned the corrected wind and percussion parts, on 28 September “the corrected strings and a small score, in which complete alterations are entered with red ink” (Klemm 1979. p. 42, doc. 42). Since the conducting score could not be ready until the first performance, Hinrichsen sent this small score to Cologne together with the orchestral parts, so that Mahler could conduct the first performance from it: “The simplest is naturally for you to conduct from the small score and for me to take it with me from Cologne on to Leipzig.” (3 Oct. 1904, Klemm 1979, p. 43) But Mahler kept the score after the premiere and it was only on 1 November that he sent it to Leipzig for the corrections to be made.

The score, which has been bound in a red paste-board and unfortunately trimmed in the process, contains on the frontispiece the autograph sketch of an orchestra line up. Mahler’s entries are almost completely incorporated in the printing of EA-Dp and St-EA. It is not known how the score came into Bruno Walter’s possession.

Indications of performance times originate from Bruno Walter, namely on the fly-leaf: “63 Min. reine Musik / 3 Min. nach II / 3 Min nach III = 69 gesamt.” (63 min. purely music / 3 min. after II / 3 min. after III = 69 total.) Furthermore at the end of each movement: “12, 13½–14, 15–15½, 7½ und 14.” Possibly these details refer to Mahler’s last rehearsals and the premiere itself. All Bruno Walter’s (relatively few) entries were effected with lead pencil. They mostly concern specific pointers for the conductor; a few times they direct themselves to the semantic content of the music (e.g. in the first movement, in b. 263: “Bild der nickenden Pferdeköpfe”) (Picture of the nodding horse’s head.).

St-EA: First Edition of the printed orchestra parts (p. 343) (November/December 1904)

EA-Dp: First Edition of the Conducting Score (p. 344) (Early December 1904). Plate  No. 8951

Published shortly before 23 November 1904, on which day Peters music publishers sent Mahler a first copy (Klemm 1979, p. 104, note 53/2). On 26 November a second copy followed; Mahler gave one to Hermann Behn in Hamburg on 10 March 1905 (facsimile of the title page with dedication in Kaplan, p. 61). Mahler’s handwritten alterations in W-Stp already appear in print almost entirely in EA-Dp.

W-Dp: Mahler’s Conducting Score (p. 344) (Strasbourg, May 1905)

Library of the Universität für Musik und darstellende Kunst, Vienna, Bruno Walter Bequest, Call mark B. W. II. 38389

The score, which is at present bound in a black paste-board (and was trimmed in the process), is part of the performance materials that Peters music publishers delivered through the Strasbourg music and piano shop of S. Wolf for the performance there on 21 May 1905, as is apparent from a circular stamp on the inside title (“S. Wolf / Musik-Pianos / STRASSBURG”). Mahler used this score for the rehearsals and concert and wrote outside on a pasted-on label “V. Symph / Mahler” (blue pencil) and inside “Mahler” (brown pencil).

Mahler revised for the most part in red ink, and occasionally with blue and brown pencils. Also in this score, and clearly recognizable as such, are found entries in pencil by Bruno Walter. The majority of the entries by far (in red ink) agree with those in St1 (also evidence that these parts were played from in Strasbourg). They were put there by a copyist. A (smaller) part of the alterations obviously originates from the rehearsal stage (blue pencil).

There follow three scores which to some extent form a trio. These are three copies of EA-Dp in which Mahler — probably in November 1905 — ordered to be entered by one and the same copyist (assumed to be in Vienna) essentially the alterations which he had made in W-Dp.  Mahler obviously checked this work and made further additions in his own hand. All the aforesaid entries were made in red ink. These alterations were transferred to the parts by the forces in the respective performance places (this can be verified in the remaining preserved Amsterdam materials). Then autograph entries are found in the scores for Trieste and Amsterdam which emerged during the rehearsal work (blue and brown pencils). The majority of these alterations are reactions to the practical conditions of the performance, to the ability of the players and perhaps also to the acoustical factors. Mahler has allowed only a few of them to influence later editions of the text permanently.

Tr-Dp: Mahler’s Conducting Score (p. 344) (Trieste, November 1905)

Library of the Conservatorio Giuseppe Tartini, Trieste, Call mark 3327

The copy of EA-Dp, which is bound in an old dark-brown linen cloth, bears on the fly-leaf the entry in pencil: “Schott / La sinfonia maledetta” — possibly a reference to the enthusiasm which Mahler’s extensive alterations engendered in the man who had to transfer them into the orchestral parts. By “Schott” is meant Enrico (Heinrich) Schott of the Philharmonic Society of Trieste, who assisted Mahler there (GMA p. 268). The alterations which are entered in graceful red ink originate from the same copyist whose handwriting is found with the same entries also in Ant-Dp and M-Dp.  Mahler then entered further alterations in red ink with a bluer hue. The copyist appears not to have completely finished, since on the last four pages is found only Mahler’s handwriting.

If the red ink is the clear mark of work at the writing desk, then blue pencil and — according to the calligraphy — even more brown pencil indicate entries which were done in the course of rehearsal work. Tr-Dp is full of such alterations, which are in part connected to the less than first class level of the orchestra there (although Mahler wrote to Alma that it was “completely passable, excellently prepared, and full of enthusiasm and fire”, GMA p. 268). Thus Mahler retracted a succession of thinnings out of the orchestration with “bleibt”, he even strengthened them sometimes (e.g. in the third movement, from b. 136) or changed “solo” in the low strings from b. 572 of the second movement to “2 desks / 3 desks / 2 desks”. Technical problems may also have induced him to substitute for the upward scale in the 2nd violins, 3rd mvt, b. 130, the same downward scale as in the first violins (from the second beat), to name but a few examples. Several entries also point to the “conductor” Mahler (“reminders” such as often “Nicht schleppen”, e.g. in b. 157 of the 2nd movement, or in b. 592 of the 3rd movement). Obviously, these alterations were not transferred to later versions. Tr-Dp is consequently without meaning for the edition of a “final version”, but it is an extremely interesting record of Mahler’s flexibility in the adaptation of his compositions under exceptional circumstances.

Ant-Dp: Conducting Score for the Performance in Antwerp (p. 345) (March 1906)

Library of the Koninklijk Vlaams Muziekconservatorium, Antwerp

This score, which was rediscovered in 1990, was prepared in a similar manner by the same copyist as Tr-Dp and used in Antwerp for the revision of the orchestral parts (at least partly with the help of the Belgian composer and conductor Lodewijk de Vocht, who played at that time second violin in the orchestra of the “Society of new Concerts in Antwerp”, see NMR 25, p. 9). Mahler never conducted from it, and no autograph entries are found. (Mahler must therefore have used his own score in Antwerp). Thus Ant-Dp is without any relevance for the present edition.

M-Dp: Mahler’s and Mengelberg’s Conducting Score (p. 345) (Amsterdam, March 1906)

Willem Mengelberg Stichting, Gemeentemuseum Den Haag

This is Mengelberg’s personal copy, which Mahler requested in November 1905 in order to enter “extensive and important retouchings…”, adding “you can have these copied into the orchestral parts in a timely manner”. (GMB No.346) The same copyist was also at work here as in Tr-Dp and Ant-Dp.  Mahler’s handwriting is found in red ink — as in Tr-Dp — either in the case of a few lesser small corrections and additions to the copyist’s work, or in the known blue and brown pencil entries, which obviously originate during the rehearsal work for the performance which Mahler conducted on 8 March 1906 (however considerably less than in Trieste).

Mengelberg conducted the work several times after Mahler’s departure until 1 April and naturally required the score for that purpose. Mahler therefore asked for M-Dp only later, in September 1906, in order to “enter into my copy the retouchings which I made in my Fifth when I was with you, and which have proven themselves so excellent” (Reeser p. 71). Mengelberg complied with the request; Mahler transferred what appeared to him worthy of being preserved into (GM-Dp), and sent M-Dp back again in the middle of October (Reeser p. 72). That Mahler acted selectively with the transferral of the new Amsterdam versions is proven by St1. Part of the alterations — in the hand of a Viennese copyist — are found added there (the performances in Rome and St Petersburg were also played from this material). As an example of this can be mentioned the addition of the trombones in b. 339–340 of the Scherzo, which suddenly appears for the first time in M-Dp, then was transferred to St1 (by a copyist). Those alterations which are not entered in St1 (and probably not in (GM-Dp)), should thus not be kept, as suggested in NSNC on p. 87, and are therefore also not accepted in the present edition. It follows from all this that M-Dp does not represent a direct source for the present edition.

Mengelberg’s numerous entries (metronome markings, remarks on conducting technique, performing practice, analysis, or on programmatic or semantic content) can remain unnoticed in connection with an edition of the symphony; they are quite comprehensively described in Wilkens (p. 75–83).

St1: The Orchestral Parts used by Mahler in Performances in the Years 1905–1907 (p. 346). Plate No. 8952

At present distributed in three locations (see the list below for details):

— IGMG, Call mark N/V/23 and N/V/24

— UE Archive, deposited in the music collection of the Wiener Stadt- und Landesbibliothek (without call mark)

— Archive of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, Vienna, call mark A 312d

The reason for this division could not be established. The bassoon part in the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde belonged to the conductor Harold Byrns, later to a W. Schmidt in Traunstein, who sold it in 1987 via Stargard to the present owner.

The set of parts — or parts of it — were demonstrably used for the following performances: 21 March 1905 Strasbourg, 1 April 1907 Rome, and 9 November 1907 St Petersburg. Performances in Trieste (1 December 1905), Vienna (7 December 1905) and Breslau (20 December 1905) were with great probability in each case played from newly prepared orchestral materials. For Antwerp there is a report on the preparation of the materials (in NMR 25, March 1991, p. 9); the set from Amsterdam has survived.

All those autograph alterations which are to be found in W-Stp were entered into the printed parts to begin with in Leipzig by copyists (and in a few cases also by the publisher’s reader, Paul Schäfer); after which Mahler had the alterations which are noted in W-Dp entered by his Viennese copyist. Only afterwards during the rehearsals and between the performances did Mahler himself revise further. Thus, for example, he added several of the Retuschen made in Amsterdam (see above in the section on M-Dp).

St1 was furnished by Mahler with his stamp, every part numbered in blue pencil (each wind part was provided with the respective instrument name) and kept in a folder, which is preserved in the UE Archive. A label is pasted on the folder with the autograph inscription (blue pencil): “5. Symph / Mahler”. The folder was made for this purpose (probably at the Röder music engraving factory): if one bring together all the parts — at present divided among three locations — the width of the linen back of the folder fits precisely.

By way of entries are found: the handwriting of at least two copyists (Ink; probably in Leipzig and Vienna), of the publisher’s reader (lead pencil), of Mahler (lead pencil, blue and brown pencils, black and blue ink) and of orchestra musicians (lead pencil, occasionally blue pencil). It is largely possible to classify the entries without problem.

St1: comprises all together 67 parts:

Part Desk Location Entries

Vl. I 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

2 UE Archive Cover: “F.”, Ende Scherzo: “Fine”

3 UE Archive Beginning of Scherzo: “Pepiku copak delá kàca?”

Czech: “Pepi, what’s the duckling doing?”

4 IGMG N/V/23 Cover: “X Pult”

5 UE Archive —

6 UE Archive —

7 UE Archive Cover: “A St.” and “F.H.”

8 UE Archive Cover: “VIII. Pult / Asbaho u Weber.”

9 UE Archive Cover: “Möckel”

Vl. II 1 IGMG N/V/23 End of 5th mvt, performance time: “1 St 12 M

(blue pencil)

2 IGMG N/V/23 —

3 UE Archive —

4 UE Archive Cover: “H”

5 UE Archive Cover: “V Pult”

6 UE Archive Cover: “IV Pult”

7 UE Archive Cover: 2 stamps: “Hof-Pianofortefabrik / „C. M. SCHRÖDER”” and the same text again in cyrillic script; in addition an illegible signature (probably cyrillic)

8 UE Archive Cover: stamp as on the 7th desk

Va. 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

2 UE Archive Cover: “4. Pult”, beginning of 1st mvt: “3. Pult”

3 UE Archive —

4 UE Archive Cover: “5. Pult”, End of Scherzo: “Schluß”

5 UE Archive Cover: “III”;

Beginning of Scherzo: “Dämpfer bereit legen!” (prepare mute!) End of 5th mvt: Performance duration: “71 Min”

6 UE Archive Cover: “6. Pult” and “I”

7 UE Archive Cover: “Stamp as on Vl. II/7th desk; “Petters” (last three letters questionable)

Vc. 1 IGMG N/V/23 Cover: “S — H”;

bottom of p. 9: “schnell” (= “turn quickly”) in Russian (“skoryi”);

bottom of p. 13: “schnell”

2 IGMG N/V/23 bottom of p. 13: “Soli / V.S.” (= verte subito)

3 UE Archive —

4 UE Archive Bottom of p. 13: “schnell” in Russian (“skoryi”);

one of the pasted over staves has the well-known Eberle music publishers coat of arms, which indicates that the copyist’s revisions were done in Vienna.

5 UE Archive —

6 UE Archive 5th mvt, fig.17: “6 Celli”

Cb. 1 IGMG N/V/23 On an empty page at the end: “Musikfest Straßburg Wolf”, underneath: “St Petersburg J. Malý” (see Ill. 7, p. 384)

2 UE Archive At the beginning, performance duration (in cyrillic script): “1 St. 10 m.”, at the end of the 2nd mvt. “27 m.”, after the 3rd mvt “17 m.” and after the Adagietto “7 m.”; at the top of the last page of music: “Ludolphi-Slovachevsky, Kaiserl. Oper / 27. Oct. 1907. S. Petersburg.”

3 UE Archive —

4 UE Archive —

5 IGMG N/V/23 —

Fl. 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

Fl. 2 IGMG N/V/23 —

Fl. 3 IGMG N/V/23 —

Fl. 4 IGMG N/V/23 p.6: “Pugno” (Raoul Pugno played Rachmaninov’s 2nd Piano Concerto in the St Petersburg concert.)

Ob. 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

Ob. 2 IGMG N/V/23 —

Ob. 3 IGMG N/V/23 —

Cl. 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

Cl. 2 IGMG N/V/23 p.14/15 (between 4th and 5th mvts.): “p. Ancarini / R. Acc. S. Cecilia / Roma / 30/3/907”

Cl. 3 IGMG N/V/23 —

Fg. 1 A-Wgm Cover: “Eigentum Harold Byrns” (Property of Harold Byrns)

Fg. 2 IGMG N/V/23 p.4 (between 1st and 2nd mvts.): M. Gadotti / Accad. di S. Cecilia / Roma / 1907″ (see Ill. 4)

Fg. 3 IGMG N/V/23 p.10 and 11 (twice) “Tacet Adagietto”

Hr. 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

Hr. 2 IGMG N/V/23 —

Hr. 3 IGMG N/V/23 —

Hr. 4 IGMG N/V/23 —

Hr. 5 IGMG N/V/23 —

Hr. 6 IGMG N/V/23 —

Tr. 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

Tr. 2 IGMG N/V/23 —

Tr. 3 IGMG N/V/23 —

Tr. 4 IGMG N/V/23 —

Trb. 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

Trb. 2 IGMG N/V/23 —

Trb. 3 IGMG N/V/23 —

Tb. IGMG N/V/23 —

Timp. IGMG N/V/23 —

Perc. 1 IGMG N/V/23 —

Perc. 2 IGMG N/V/23 p.5: “S.-Petersburg I Kapter. 1907. / V. Matassov” (in cyrillic script; see Ill. 5)

Perc. 3 IGMG N/V/24 —

Harp IGMG N/V/23 The harp passage b. 465–500 in the 2nd mvt. is copied by hand on an insert sheet, with Mahler’s entries and the name “Kland” at the end (see Ill. 6).

The firm C. M. Schröder; belonged to the worldwide network of music dealers developed through the publisher Peters music publishers for the sale or rental of its products (see Foreword). The three parts with the St Petersburg “Schröder” stamp (Violin II, desks 7 and 8; Viola, desk 7) indicate an enlargement of the orchestral complement in comparison with Strasbourg and Rome. They contain the same entries as all the other parts, which Mahler had already worked on during the train journey to Russia (letter to Alma of 22. 10. 1907, GMA p. 339); Mahler revised the “Schröder parts” after his arrival in St Petersburg (letters to Alma, GMA p. 338 and 346).

(GM-Dp): Gustav Mahler’s Reference Score (p. 348) (1905–1907)

Wellesz-Stp: Copy of EA-Stp From the Possession of Egon Wellesz (p. 348) (London, ~1940)

Although Mahler’s reference score (GM-Dp) is not at present accessible, all the available facts should be summarised here. Mahler sent this score in December 1905 (probably after the performance in Breslau on the 18th) to Wilhelm Gericke (1845-1925) with the request that he “return it as soon as possible” (GMUB p. 64). When Mahler asked Mengelberg for M-Dp in September 1906, in order “to enter (the Amsterdam retuschen) in my copy” (Reeser p. 71) he certainly meant by this (GM-Dp). It is known, moreover, that in 1908 in Vienna, before his departure for New York (which took place in November) Mahler entrusted it to a copyist called N. Forstig, in order for the revisions to be transferred to specific orchestra materials for a performance by the Wiener Concertverein (2nd March 1909 under Ferdinand Löwe). Mahler wrote from New York to Carl Moll that he should take the score and “kindly store it in your safebox until I return.” (GMB No. 405) After Mahler’s death, (GM-Dp) remained with Alma, who let Georg Göhler have it prior to the 13th June 1913, since he wanted to publish a “final version” (K 91; Klemm 1979, p. 95, n.58). Although Alma did not want to comply with Hinrichsen’s request to let him have this score (K 90 and 91), it nevertheless arrived at the Peters music publishers company and served there as the basis for the “Göhler” edition. In October 1919 “the privy councillor” (Henri Hinrichsen) had the score “in custody” (Klemm 1979, K108); on 13th December 1919 the publisher’s reader sent (GM-Dp) to the Röder engraving company for calculation with the instruction that the copy be “handled with the greatest of care and be sent back to me as soon as possible.” (Klemm 1979, p. 95. n.63)

The next news concerning the whereabouts of the score came to Erwin Ratz in 1961: During a visit to Vienna in autumn 1961, Egon Wellesz said that he had borrowed the score in the 1940s from Albi Rosenthal and transferred Mahler’s retouchings into his own copy of EA-Stp (Albi Rosenthal had emigrated to Oxford in 1942 and audited Wellesz’s musicology lectures). Wellesz explicitly stated that this concerned the “Hinrichsen copy” (letter from Ratz to Wellesz, 4 November 1961, IGMG). This means that one of Henri Hinrichsen’s sons had brought the score to England (see Preface). Wellesz also recorded Mahler’s entry at the beginning of the score: “Collated and found to be correct as a model for the necessary new printing. / Gustav Mahler / December 1907.” (Letter from Wellesz to Ratz, 9 November 1961, IGMG) Albi Rosenthal must have had the commission to sell the score, since Donald Mitchell reports that it was offered to him a long time ago, but that he did not have the means for its purchase at that time (verbal communication). Robert Threlfall is also sure that Max Hinrichsen had told him in the 1950s that he had been in possession of (GM-Dp) (communication by letter). Probably it was sold to a private collector — Albi Rosenthal cannot now (autumn 2001) remember any more (verbal communication).

The value of (GM-Dp) for the critical new edition has at any rate to to be put into context. The state of its redaction corresponds with the greatest probability with that of the “Göhler edition” of 1919. This can be verified in Wellesz-Stp: it is found in a Viennese private collection, and the IGMG posesses a photocopy.

St-Konzertverein: Set of parts, revised 1908/1909 (p. 350)

Archive of the Wiener Konzerthausgesellschaft, Call mark OM 258

This is the set of parts which Mahler had prepared by his Viennese copyist, N. Forstig (“in St Andrä-Wördern by the city railway”) after November 1908 for a performance of the work by the Wiener Konzertverein, which took place on 2 March 1909 under the direction of Ferdinand Löwe. (See above in the section on (GM-Dp); the Wiener Konzertverein is to some extent the forerunner of today’s Vienna Symphony Orchestra). The set of parts was kept in the Archive of the Wiener Konzerthausgesellschaft (another successor organization of the Wiener Konzertverein) and used until the recent past. The material originally comprised 7/5/4/3/3 string parts and was later enlarged by one of each part, whereby in the first violin the additional part originates from the handwritten set of parts of the “Göhler Version”. All the old parts bear the stamp “WIENER / KONZERT-VEREIN”; two entries indicate that this is the material prepared by Forstig: at the end of the first flute part “Amens 2. März 1909. Wien”, at the end of the second flute part “A.K. 2. III. 1909”.

The existence of this source definitively refutes all the speculations of Sander Wilkens (Wilkens, p. 109–114), that St2 was the set of parts prepared for the Wiener Konzertverein. Moreover, the handwriting of Forstig as well as those of the Viennese copyists of the years 1905–1907 as also of those of the New York copyists from 1910/11 can now be distinguished (concerning this see also my essay Unnoticed Sources to Mahler’s Fifth Symphony in NMR 45, Autumn 2001, p. 5–12).

St2: Set of Parts Revised by Mahler in Winter 1910/11 in New York (p. 351). Plate No. 8952

Distributed in two locations:

— IGMG, call mark N/V/21 and N/V/22

— UE Archive, deposited in the music collecton of the Wiener Stadt- und Landesbibliothek (without call mark)

This set of parts was requested by Mahler, in a letter which was written in Vienna and received by Peters music publishers on 1 June 1910, and prepared for a planned performance in New York during the 1910/11 season. Mahler thought of a “new edition”. He wanted to contribute to the costs for this, but in a noble gesture Henri Hinrichsen refused (Mahler’s letter in Klemm 1981/82, p. 85f, Hinrichsen’s reply of 2 June 1910 in Klemm 1979, p. 51, Doc.68). The performance in New York came to nothing; perhaps the cause for this is the fact that Mahler finished the revision later than intended: its completion was not mentioned before the well-known letter to Georg Göhler of 8 February 1911. That this really refers to the material of St2, which Mahler requested from Hinrichsen in June 1910 and which he then revised in new York, follows from the number of string parts. Mahler expressly asked for 10/9/8/8/6 string parts to be sent — a complement which is still typical today for American orchestras (for comparison: in the “European” set of parts, St1, there are 9/8/7/6/5 string parts; the material for the Vienna Konzertverein comprises 7/5/4/3/3 string parts; Göhler performed his version of 1913 with 8/8/6/5/5 string parts). As emerges from the following list, the number of the extant string parts in St2 corresponds exactly with Mahler’s request. A further detail confirms the fact that New York was the place of revision: the copyist consulted there by Mahler always writes over cue notes the English form “Violin” instead of “Violine” or “Violino”.

The parts of St2 bear no stamp and, with the exception of the respective first string desks, no desk numbers. They were never played from. In Leipzig the publisher’s employees brought them to the state of the redaction of W-Stp.  Mahler’s alterations from Strasbourg (May 1905) to St Petersburg (November 1907) were thereafter entered by the New York copyist (= state of the redaction of (GM-Dp); compared with St1 this naturally amounts to many a difference, since it is certain that (GM-Dp) and St1 did not completely agree — see list 1 further below). Mahler himself even later reached for his pencil and revised further.

St2 comprises 73 parts altogether:

Vl. I: 1st desk (so marked by Mahler with “I”) in IGMG N/V/21 as well as 5 further parts (without indications of desk) in IGMG N/V/22; 4 further parts (without indications of desk) in the UE Archive (altogether 10).

Vl. II: 1st Desk (so marked by Mahler with “I”) in IGMG N/V/21 as well as 5 further parts (without indications of desk) in IGMG N/V/22; 3 further parts (without indications of desk) in the UE Archive (altogether 9).

Va: 1st Desk (so marked by Mahler with “I”) in IGMG N/V/21 as well as 5 further parts (without indications of desk) in IGMG N/V/22; 2 further parts (without indications of desk) in the UE Archive (altogether 8).

Vc: 1st Desk (so marked by Mahler with “I”) in IGMG N/V/21 as well as 4 further parts (without indications of desk) in IGMG N/V/22; 3 further parts (without indications of desk) in the UE Archive (altogether 8).

Cb: 1st Desk (so marked by Mahler with “I”) in IGMG N/V/21 as well as 3 further parts (without indications of desk) in IGMG N/V/22; 2 further parts (without indications of desk) in the UE Archive (altogether 6).

Complete wind parts, timpani, percussion and harp in IGMG N/V/21 (altogether 32 parts)

This set of parts is the main source for the present edition.

Missing Sources (p. 335)

Sketchbook, sketches for the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th movements

(Pc): Particell of the entire symphony

(P–E): Draft of the orchestra score for the entire symphony

(St–UA): Orchestral parts for the world premiere (Sep/Oct 1904)

(GM–Dp): Mahler’s conducting score ‘zum Collationiren’ (1905–1907)

Mahler’s Score with the New York revisions (Winter 1910/1911)

Posthumous Editions (p. 335)

Orchestral Parts from 1913 (“autographed”)

Reprint of the Study Score (1913)

New Edition of the Full Score (November 1919)

Piano Reduction for two hands by Otto Singer (1921)

Piano Reduction for two pianos by August Stradal (July 1926)

KGAR: Complete Edition, Volume 5, edited by Erwin Ratz (1964)

KGAF: Complete Edition, Volume 5, Improved Edition, edited by Karl Heinz Füssl (1989)

KGAK: Complete Edition, Volume 5, Critical New Edition, edited by Reinhold Kubik (2002)

If you have found a spelling error, please, notify us by selecting that text and tap on selected text.

Spelling error report

The following text will be sent to our editors: