Nineteenth-century harmonic theory: the Austro-German legacy

doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521623711.027

25 - Nineteenth-century harmonic theory: the Austro-German legacy

from D - Tonality

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 March 2008

David Bernstein

Edited by

Thomas Christensen

Show author details

Thomas Christensen: Affiliation:
University of Chicago

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Today most scholars agree that Rameau was the founder of modern harmonic theory. As we have seen in the previous chapter, Rameau attempted to synthesize in his many writings a multiplicity of ideas – both old and new, speculative and practical – into a unified theory of tonal harmony grounded upon a single underlying principle, the corps sonore (see Chapter 24, pp. 759–71). If he did not succeed in creating a truly systematic and stable theory of harmony owing to his many differing and often contradictory theoretical arguments and intellectual borrowings, he nonetheless bequeathed to the nineteenth century a number of compelling and richly suggestive ideas that would inspire theorists in their own efforts.

In this chapter, we will look at the evolution of harmonic theory in the nineteenth century. This is of course a vast and complex topic. Given the profound changes in harmonic language between 1800 and 1900 – a period covering the end of Viennese Classicism and closing with Schoenberg’s first tentative steps beyond the tonal system – it is not surprising that theorists expended extraordinary energy and efforts in their attempts to rationalize this shifting practice. As it is impossible here to describe all of these efforts in detail, we will limit our scope to the development of Austro-German harmonic theory, a tradition which arguably encompasses some of the most innovative and influential writings on this topic for the entire century. Within this tradition, three individual trajectories can be traced back by differing routes to Rameau’s own theory: scale-degree (Stufen) theory, fundamental-bass theory, and function theory.

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge History of Western Music Theory , pp. 778 - 811

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521623711.027 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Arend, M. “Harmonische Analyse des Tristanvorspiels,” Bayreuther Blätter 24 (1901)Google Scholar

Baron, C. K. “At the Cutting Edge: Three American Theorists at the End of the Nineteenth Century,” International Journal of Musicology, 2 (1993)Google Scholar

Beach, D. and Thym, J. as The Art of Strict Musical Composition, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1982Google Scholar

Bent, I. as “A Particularly Remarkable Passage in a String Quartet in C by Mozart, k. 465 (‘Dissonance’),” in Music Analysis in the Nineteenth Century, 2 vols., ed. Bent, I. (vol. I: Fugue, Form and Style, vol. II: Hermeneutic Approaches), Cambridge University Press, 1994, vol. IGoogle Scholar

Bent, I. as “The Harmonic Style of Richard Wagner, Elucidated with Respect to the Leitmotifs of ‘Tristan and Isolde,’” in Music Analysis in the Nineteenth Century, 2 vols., ed. Bent, I. (vol. I: Fugue, Form and Style, vol. II: Hermeneutic Approaches), Cambridge University Press, 1994 vol. I (1994)Google Scholar

Bernstein, D. W. “Georg Capellen on Tristan und Isolde: Analytical Systems in Conflict at the Turn of the Twentieth Century,” Theoria 4 (1989)Google Scholar

Bernstein, D. W. “Georg Capellen’s Theory of Reduction,” Journal of Music Theory, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1957– 37 (1993)Google Scholar

Bernstein, D. W. “Schoenberg Contra Riemann: Stufen, Regions, Verwandschaft, and the Theory of Tonal Function,” Theoria 6 (1992)Google Scholar

Bernstein, D. W. “Symmetry and Symmetrical Inversion in Turn-of-the-Century Theory and Practice,” in Music Theory and the Exploration of the Past, ed. Hatch, C. and Bernstein, D. W., University of Chicago Press, 1993Google Scholar

Bewerung, H. as Harmony Simplified, London, Augener, 1896Google Scholar

Bruckner, A.Vorlesungen über Harmonie und Kontrapunkt an der Universität Wien, ed. Schwanzara, E., Vienna, Österreichischer Bundesverlag für Unterricht, Wissenschaft, und Kunst, 1950Google Scholar

Burnham, S. “Method and Motivation in Hugo Riemann’s History of Harmonic Theory,” Music Theory Spectrum (The Journal of the Society for Music Theory), University of California Press, 1979– 14 (1992)Google Scholar

Capellen, G. “Die Unmöglichkeit und Überflussigkeit der dualistischen Molltheorie Riemanns,” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 97 (1901)Google Scholar

Capellen, G. “Harmonik und Melodik bei Richard Wagner,” Bayreuther Blätter 25 (1902)Google Scholar

Capellen, G.Ist das System S. Sechters ein geeigneter Ausgangspunkt für die theoretische Wagnerforschung?, Leipzig, C. F. Kahnt, 1902Google Scholar

Capellen, G.Die Zukunft der Musiktheorie (Dualismus oder “Monismus”?) und ihre Einwirkung auf die Praxis, Leipzig, C. F. Kahnt, 1905Google Scholar

Capellen, G.Ein neuer exotischer Musikstil an Notenbeispielen nachgewiesen, Stuttgart, C. Grüninger, 1906Google Scholar

Carter, R. as Theory of Harmony, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1978Google Scholar

Christensen, T. “The Rule of the Octave in Thorough-Bass Theory and Practice,” Acta Musicologica, International Musicological Socety, Basel, Bärenreiter et al., 1928– 64 (1992)Google Scholar

Christensen, T. “The Schichtenlehre of Hugo Riemann,” In Theory Only 6 (1982)Google Scholar

Christensen, T.Rameau and Musical Thought in the Enlightenment, Cambridge University Press, 1993Google Scholar

Dahlhaus, C. “Schoenberg and Schenker,” in Schoenberg and the New Music: Essays by Carl Dahlhaus, trans. Puffett, D. and Clayton, A., Cambridge University Press, 1987Google Scholar

Dahlhaus, C.Untersuchungen über die Entstehung der harmonischen Tonalität, Kassel, Bärenreiter, 1968Google Scholar

D’Alembert, J. “Réflexions sur la théorie de la musique” (1777), in Œuvres et Correspondances inédites de d’Alembert, Geneva, Slatkine, 1967Google Scholar

Dineen, P. “Schoenberg’s Concept of Neutralization,” Theoria 2 (1987)Google Scholar

Dunsby, J. “Schoenberg and the Writings of Heinrich Schenker,” Journal of the Arnold Schoenberg Institute, 2/1 (1977)Google Scholar

Ellis, A. J. as On the Sensations of Tone as a Physiological Basis for the Theory of Music, 2nd edn., London, Longmans and Green, 1885; reprint New York, Dover, 1954Google Scholar

Erpf, H.Studien zur Harmonie und Klangtechnik der neueren Musik, Leipzig, Breitkopf und Härtel, 1927Google Scholar

Federhofer, H.Akkord und Stimmführung in den musiktheoretischen Systemen von Hugo Riemann, Ernst Kurth und Heinrich Schenker, Vienna, Österreichische Akadamie der Wissenschaften, 1981Google Scholar

Filmore, J. C. as “The Nature of Harmony,” in New Lessons in Harmony, ed. Filmore, J. C., Philadelphia, T. Presser, 1887

Gjerdingen, R. as Studies on the Origin of Harmonic Tonality, Princeton University Press, 1990Google Scholar

Goehr, A. “The Theoretical Writings of Arnold Schoenberg,” Perspectives of New Music, 14 (1975)Google Scholar

Gossett, P. as Treatise on Harmony, New York, Dover, 1971Google Scholar

Grave, F. K. “Abbé Vogler’s Theory of Reduction,” Current Musicology 29 (1980)Google Scholar

Grave, F. K. and Grave, M. G., In Praise of Harmony: The Teachings of Abbé Georg Joseph Vogler, Lincoln, University of Nebraska Press, 1987Google Scholar

Halm, A.Harmonielehre, Leipzig, G. J. Göschen, 1902Google Scholar

Harrison, D.Harmonic Function in Chromatic Music: A Renewed Dualist Theory and an Account of Its Precedents, University of Chicago Press, 1994Google Scholar

Hauptmann, M.Die Natur der Harmonik und der Metrik, Leipzig, Breitkopf und Härtel, 1853Google Scholar

Heathcote, W. as The Nature of Harmony and Metre, London, S. Sonnenschein, 1888Google Scholar

Helmholtz, H.Die Lehre von den Tonempfindungen als physiologischer Grundlage für die Theorie der Musik (1863), 4th edn., Braunschweig, F. Vieweg, 1877Google Scholar

Hostinský, O.Die Lehre von den musikalischen Klängen: Ein Beitrag zur aesthetischen Begründung der Harmonie-Lehre, Prague, H. Dominicus, 1879Google Scholar

Hyer, Brian, “Reimag(in)ing Riemann,” Journal of Music Theory, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1957– 39 (1995)Google Scholar

Hynais, C. “Die Harmonik Richard Wagners in Bezug auf die Fundamentaltheorie Sechters,” Neue musikalische Presse 10 (1901)Google Scholar

Bent, I. as “Prelude No. 8 (in D minor)” from Thirty-two Preludes for Organ or Piano, together with an Aesthetic, Rhetorical and Harmonic Analysis, in Music Analysis in the Nineteenth Century, 2 vols., ed. Bent, I. (vol. I: Fugue, Form and Style, vol. II: Hermeneutic Approaches), Cambridge University Press, 1994, vol. IGoogle Scholar

Imig, R.Systeme der Funktions-Bezeichnung in den Harmonielehren seit Hugo Riemann, Düsseldorf, Gesellschaft zur Förderung der systematischen Musikwissenschaft, 1970Google Scholar

Jadassohn, S.Melodik und Harmonik bei Richard Wagner, Berlin, Verlagsgesellschaft für Literatur und Kunst, 1899Google Scholar

Jelensperger, D.L’Harmonie au commencement du 19me siècle, Paris, Zetter, 1830Google Scholar

Karg-Elert, S.Polaristische Klang- und Tonalitätslehre, Leipzig, Leuckhart, 1931Google Scholar

Kirnberger, J. P.Die Kunst des reinen Satzes, 2 vols., Berlin, Decker and Hartung, 1771–79; facs. Hildesheim, G. Olms, 1968 and 1988Google Scholar

Kistler, C.Harmonielehre, 3rd edn., Heizbronn, C. F. Schmidt, 1899Google Scholar

Knecht, J. H.Elementarwerk der Harmonie, Munich, Falter, 1814Google Scholar

Kurth, E.Die Voraussetzungen der theoretischen Harmonik und der tonalen Darstellungssysteme, Bern, M. Drechsel, 1913Google Scholar

Kurth, E.Romantische Harmonik und ihre Krise in Wagners “Tristan”, 3rd edn. Berlin, M. Hesse, 1923; facs. Hildesheim, G. Olms, 1968 and 1988Google Scholar

Lefèvre, G.Traité d’harmonie, Paris, E. Niedermeyer, 1889Google Scholar

Lester, J.Compositional Theory in the Eighteenth Century, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1992Google Scholar

Lewin, D. “A Formal Theory of Generalized Tonal Functions,” Journal of Music Theory, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1957– 26 (1982)Google Scholar

Louis, R. and Thuille, L., Harmonielehre, 7th edn., Stuttgart, C. Grüninger, 1907Google Scholar

Mayrberger, K.Die Harmonik Richard Wagners an den Leitmotiv aus “Tristan und Isolde” erläutert, Bayreuth, Bayreuther Patronaterverein, 1881Google Scholar

Mayrberger, K.Lehrbuch der musikalischen Harmonik, Pressburg [Bratislava], G. Heckenast, 1878Google Scholar

Mickelsen, W. C., trans. and ed., Hugo Riemann’s Theory of Harmony: a Study (trans. of Geschichte der Musiktheorie im IX.–XIX. Jahrhundert, vol. III), Lincoln, University of Nebraska Press, 1977Google Scholar

Morgan, R. P. “Schenker and the Theoretical Tradition,” College Music Symposium 18 (1978)Google Scholar

Oettingen, A. von, Harmoniesystem in dualer Entwickelung, Dorpat, W. Gläser, 1866Google Scholar

Orel, A.Ein Harmonielehrekolleg bei Anton Bruckner, Berlin, Verlag für Wirtschaft und Kultur, 1940Google Scholar

Polak, A. J.Die Harmonisierung der indischer, türkischer und japanischer Melodien; neue Beiträge zur Lehre von den Tonempfindungen, Leipzig, Breitkopf und Härtel, 1905Google Scholar

Rameau, J.-P.Traité de l’harmonie reduite à ses principes naturels, Paris, Ballard, 1722Google Scholar

Richter, E. F.Lehrbuch der Harmonielehre, Leipzig, Breitkopf und Härtel, 1853Google Scholar

Riemann, H. “Das Problem des harmonischen Dualismus,” Neue Zeitschrift für Musik 17 (1905)Google Scholar

Riemann, H. “Die Natur der Harmonik,” Sammlung musikalischer Vorträge 4/40 (1882)Google Scholar

Riemann, H. “Ideen zu einer ‘Lehre von den Tonvorstellungen,’” Jahrbuch der Musikbibliothek Peters 21 (1914)Google Scholar

Riemann, H. “Neue Beiträge zu einer Lehre von den Tonvorstellungen,” Jahrbuch der Musikbibliothek Peters 23 (1916)Google Scholar

Riemann, H.Grosse Kompositionslehre, 2 vols., Berlin, Spemann, 1902–03Google Scholar

Riemann, H.L. van Beethovens sämtliche Klavier-Solosonaten: Ästhetische und formal-technische Analyse mit historischen Notizen, 3 vols., Berlin, M. Hesse, 1917–19Google Scholar

Riemann, H.Musikalische Logik, Leipzig, C. F. Kahnt, 1874Google Scholar

Riemann, H.Musikalische Syntaxis, Leipzig, Breitkopf und Härtel, 1877Google Scholar

Riemann, H.Vereinfachte Harmonielehre, oder die Lehre von den tonalen Funktionen der Akkorde, London, Augener, 1893Google Scholar

Rummenhöller, P. “Der deskriptive Theoriebegriff Gottfried Webers,” in Musiktheoretisches Denken im 19. Jahrhundert, ed. Rummenhöller, P., Regensburg, G. Bosse, 1967Google Scholar

Saslaw, J. “Gottfried Weber and Multiple Meaning,” Theoria 5 (1990–91)Google Scholar

Saslaw, J. and Walsh, J. P., “Musical Invariance as a Cognitive Structure: ‘Multiple Meaning’ in the Early Nineteenth Century,” in Music Theory in the Age of Romanticism, ed. Bent, I., Cambridge University Press, 1996Google Scholar

Schenker, H. “Rameau or Beethoven? Creeping Paralysis or Spiritual Potency in Music?,” in The Masterwork in Music, vol. III (1930), Drabkin, W., trans. Bent, I. et al., Cambridge University Press, 1997Google Scholar

Schenker, H.Counterpoint, 2 vols. (1910–22), trans. and ed. Rothgeb, J., trans. Thym, J., New York, Schirmer, 1987Google Scholar

Schoenberg, A.Coherence, Counterpoint, Instrumentation, Instruction in Form (Zusammenhang, Kontrapunkt, Instrumentation, Formenlehre), trans. and ed. Neff, S., trans. Cross, C., Lincoln, University of Nebraska Press, 1994Google Scholar

Schoenberg, A.Harmonielehre (1911), 3rd edn., Vienna, Universal, 1922Google Scholar

Schoenberg, A.Structural Functions of Harmony, ed. Searle, H., New York, Norton, 1954; rev. ed. Stein, L., New York, Norton, 1969Google Scholar

Schoenberg, A.The Musical Idea and the Logic, Technique, and Art of Its Presentation (Der musikalische Gedanke, und die Logik, Technik, und Kunst seiner Darstellung), bilingual, ed. and trans. Carpenter, P. and Neff, S., New York, Columbia University Press, 1995Google Scholar

Schreyer, J.Harmonielehre, Dresden, Holz and Pahl, 1905Google Scholar

Schröder, H.Die symmetrische Umkehrung in der Musik, Leipzig, Publikationen der International Musikgesellschaft, 1902Google Scholar

Sechter, S.Die Grundsätze der musikalischen Komposition, 3 vols., Leipzig, Breitkopf und Härtel, 1853–54; vol. I trans. and ed. Müller, C. as The Correct Order of the Fundamental Harmonies: A Treatise on Fundamental Basses, and their Inversions and Substitutes, New York, W. A. Pond, 1871Google Scholar

Seidel, E. “Die Harmonielehre Hugo Riemanns,” in Beiträge der Musiktheorie des 19. Jahrhunderts, ed. Vogel, M., Regensburg, G. Bosse, 1966Google Scholar

Simms, B. “New Documents in the Schoenberg–Schenker Polemic,” Perspectives of New Music 16 (1977–78)CrossRef Google Scholar

Smith, C. J. “The Functional Extravagance of Chromatic Chords,” Music Theory Spectrum (The Journal of the Society for Music Theory), University of California Press, 1979– 8 (1986)Google Scholar

Spies, C. “Vortrag/12 tk/Princeton,” Perspectives of New Music 13 (1974)Google Scholar

Thompson, D. M.A History of Harmonic Theory in the United States, Kent, OH, Kent State University Press, 1980Google Scholar

Tittel, E. “Wiener Musiktheorie von Fux bis Schoenberg,” in Beiträge zur Musiktheorie des 19. Jahrhunderts, ed. Vogel, M., Regensburg, G. Bosse, 1966Google Scholar

Vogel, M. “Arthur v. Oettingen und der harmonische Dualismus,” Beiträge zur Musiktheorie des 19. Jahrhunderts, ed. Vogel, M., Regensburg, G. Bosse, 1966Google Scholar

Vogel, M.Der Tristan-Akkord und die Krise der modernen Harmonielehre, Düsseldorf, Gesellschaft der systematischen Musikwissenschaft, 1963Google Scholar

Vogler, G. J. “Summe der Harmonik,” Betrachtungen der Mannheimer Tonschule 3 (1780–81); 4 (1781)Google Scholar

Vogler, G. J.Zwei und dreisig Präludien für die Orgel und für das Fortepiano, Munich, Falter, 1806; partial trans.Google Scholar

Vogler, G. J.Handbuch zur Harmonielehre und für den Generalbass, Prague, K. Barth, 1802Google Scholar

Vogler, G. J.Tonwissenschaft und Tonsezkunst, Mannheim, Kurfürstliche Hofbuchdruckerei, 1776; facs. Hildesheim, G. Olms, 1970Google Scholar

Warner, J. as The Theory of Musical Composition, 2 vols., Boston, J. Wilkens and R. Carter, 1842–46; revised trans. by Bishop, J., London, R. Cocks, 1851Google Scholar

Wason, R. and Marvin, E. West as “Riemann’s ‘Ideen zu einer Lehre von den Tonvorstellungen’: An Annotated Translation,” Journal of Music Theory, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1957– 36 (1992)

Wason, R. W. “Progressive Harmonic Theory in the Mid-Nineteenth-Century,” Journal of Musicological Research 8 (1988)CrossRef Google Scholar

Wason, R. W. “Schenker’s Notion of Scale-Step in Historical Perspective: Non-Essential Harmonies in Viennese Fundamental Bass Theories,” Journal of Music Theory, New Haven, Yale University Press, 1957– 27 (1983)Google Scholar

Wason, R. W.Viennese Harmonic Theory from Albrechtsberger to Schenker and Schoenberg, Ann Arbor, UMI Research Press, 1985Google Scholar

Weber, G. “Ueber eine besonders merkwürdige Stelle in einem Mozart’schen Violinquartett aus C,” in Versuch einer geordneten Theorie der Tonsetzkunst, vol. III, Mainz, B. Schott, 1830–32, vol. IIIGoogle Scholar

Weber, G.Versuch einer geordneten Theorie der Tonsetzkunst, 3 vols., Mainz, B. Schott, 1817–21; 2nd edn., 4 vols., 1824; 3rd revised edn., 4 vols., 1830–32Google Scholar

Weitzmann, C. F.Die neue harmonielehren im Streit mit der alten, Leipzig, C. F. Kahnt, 1861Google Scholar

Werts, D. “The Musical Circle of Johannes Mattheson,” Theoria 1 (1985)Google Scholar

Zeleny, W.Die historischen Grundlagen des Theoriesystems von Simon Sechter, Tutzing, H. Schneider, 1979Google Scholar

Ziehn, B.Harmonie- und Modulationslehre, Berlin, C. Friedrich, 1887Google Scholar