Scarlatti: (7) Domenico Scarlatti

(7) (Giuseppe) Domenico Scarlatti

Domenico Scarlatti family tree(b

Naples, 26 Oct 1685; d Madrid, 23 July

1757). Composer,harpsichordist, and singer; sixth child of (1) Alessandro Scarlatti and Antonia
Anzaloni. He never used his first Christian name (which could have led to confusion with his nephew
Giuseppe): his name is always given in Italy as Domenico (or the familiar Mimo) Scarlatti, and in
Portugal and Spain as Domingo Escarlate (Escarlati or Escarlatti).

1. Life.
(i) Apprenticeship.
There is no specific information on Domenico Scarlattis introduction to music. In so large a family of
musicians, his uncle Francesco and brother Pietro, if not his father, would soon have noticed and
nurtured his special gifts; biographers have speculated that he finished his musical education under
Gaetano Greco or Bernardo Pasquini. Burney states that while Alessandro was living in Naples he
entrusted Domenico to Francesco Gasparini in Rome (BurneyH, vol.2, 635), but Kirkpatrick suggests
that Burneys chronology is confused and attributes greater importance to Domenicos contact with
Gasparini in Venice between 1705 and 1709, when he was more experienced. In any case, the young
mans precocious talent had already blossomed: when he was only 15 his father had arranged for his
appointment as organist and composer of the Cappella Reale in Naples, with a special additional
payment for the post of clavicembalista di camera, suggesting that Domenicos particular talent was
already evident. When in 1702 Alessandro went to Florence, he chose to take his son, intending that
this would seal Domenicos relationship with Ferdinando de Medici. At the end of the period of leave
allowed by the Spanish viceroy, Alessandro sent Domenico back to Naples alone, but if he had meant
him to take over the position he himself had relinquished, then he miscalculated, as Domenico had
insufficient experience and the opera season for which he was responsible was not a success.

(ii) The young eagle.

A letter from Alessandro to Ferdinando de Medici, dated 30 May 1705, is informative and gives a fair
picture of the subordinate position in which this authoritarian father continued to keep his son: I have
forcibly removed him from Naples where, though there was room for his talent, his talent was not for
such a place. I am removing him also from Rome, because Rome has no shelter for music, which lives
here as a beggar. The rest of the letter contains a straightforward assessment of Domenicos talent: an
eagle whose wings are grown; he must not remain idle in the nest, and I must not hinder his flight. The
young man was sent to Venice, escorted only by his own ability, and his father wrote that, in his
judgment, he has advanced much since he shared with me the honour of serving Your Highness

personally, three years ago. There is a clear indication of Alessandros hopes for a position in Florence
when he writes: He goes, like a wayfarer, to meet every opportunity that may present itself for him to
become known, and which is awaited in vain in Rome today. The granprincipe (heir to the grand duke)
replied that Domenico had truly such a wealth of talent and spirit as to be able to secure his fortune
anywhere, but especially in Venice, where ability meets with every esteem and favour, and confined
himself to recommending Domenico to a Venetian patrician.
It is surprising that so few traces have survived of Domenicos activities in Venice; all that remains are
two unsupported anecdotes, one of which ties in with another eloquent account of his remarkable skill
on the harpsichord. Handels biographer Mainwaring refers to a competition promoted in Rome by
Cardinal Ottoboni to compare Scarlattis keyboard skills with those of Handel, who had recently arrived:
Scarlatti recognized his rivals superior ability on the organ, while listeners were divided on the outcome
of the harpsichord competition. The two musicians were on excellent terms and long continued to
demonstrate mutual esteem in his biography, Mainwaring attributed to Handel a fine picture of
Scarlatti the man (besides his great talents as an artist, he had the sweetest temper, and the
genteelest behaviour). Mainwaring also recounts a meeting between the two young composers in
Venice, during Carnival: [Handel] was discovered there at a Masquerade, while he was playing on a
harpsichord in his visor. Scarlatti happened to be there, and affirmed that it could be no one but the
famous Saxon, or the devil. This anecdote anticipates a series of similar legends about Paganini, Liszt,
and other virtuosos reputed to have entered into a pact with the devil; it was not just one but a thousand
devils that Roseingrave later evoked when he told Burney about his first encounter with Scarlatti, to
describe the effect on him of the astounding virtuosity displayed by the severe-looking young man who
followed him at the harpsichord.
In 1707 Scarlatti witnessed his fathers failure in Venice; this may have raised doubts as to the wisdom
of his fathers self-promotional strategy. As far as is known, there was no immediate reaction, and the
son dutifully kept to his fathers way of working; but Alessandros plans allowed no room for Domenico
to develop his vocation for the harpsichord, which had already been so clearly demonstrated.

(iii) High professionalism.

A comparison of the early sources suggests that Domenico Scarlattis career was less static than his
biographers have painted, particularly in the years before he took on his most important positions in
Rome: maestro di cappella to Maria Casimira, the exiled former Queen of Poland, and assistant and
then later successor to the head of the Cappella Giulia. Alessandros plan of detachment from his sons
career had failed in Naples but in Rome it was successful beyond expectation; the Queen of Poland
Alessandro had described himself as in her service when in 1708 he composed Il trionfo della fede
employed Domenico as her maestro di cappella, after giving him the oratorio La conversione di
Clodoveo and the pastoral La Silvia to compose, both to librettos by C.S. Capece, a member of the
Arcadian Academy who served as her secretary. This marked the beginning of a close collaboration,
guaranteeing that the operas, which Maria Casimira had staged in a small theatre in a room in her
palace, and the serenatas, performed in summer on a bridge across the Strada Felice joining Palazzo

Zuccari to the palace opposite, were generally along the same lines. Some of the credit for their
success belongs with Filippo Juvarra, who designed the sets: with inventive use of perspective he
overcame the sites narrow dimensions which would otherwise have made it impossible to create
operatic marvels of the kind that audiences were accustomed to see in the stagecraft of the great
theatres. Even if there were considerable differences of style and quality between his fathers supposed
models and Scarlattis known work (as Boyd has pointed out), the duties of maestro di cappella to an
exiled queen meant that Alessandros experiences under Christina of Sweden were repeated, with
rather more consistent application.
When, on 19 November 1713, Paolo Lorenzani, director of the Cappella Giulia at S Pietro, died, he was
succeeded by his assistant Tommaso Baj, and Scarlatti was appointed to Bajs post; when, on 22
December 1714, Baj died, Scarlatti took his place as maestro di cappella. This guaranteed income
came at a fortunate moment, as financial ruin had obliged Maria Casimira to leave Rome and take
refuge in France. Scarlattis early Neapolitan works include sacred music, and he had composed
sacred pieces for the Basilica Liberiana when his father was its maestro; the new, important post led
him to intensify his work in this direction. The original Stabat mater for ten voices is usually assigned to
this period and is recognized as his most significant contribution to sacred polyphony.
The direction of the Cappella Giulia imposed heavy demands on Scarlatti (Rostirolla has found traces of
an important output of sacred music composed there by Domenico) but did not exhaust his capacity for
work. June 1714 saw the beginnings of his relationship with the Marquis de Fontes, the Portuguese
ambassador, for whom he composed an Applauso genetliaco in celebration of the birth of one of the
Portuguese infantes. This first connection with a Portuguese patron led, five years later, to Scarlattis
move to Lisbon. At the same time Scarlatti did not neglect opera: when he lost his position with the
Queen of Poland, he continued to have his operas staged at the Teatro Capranica, where his fathers
last operas were being staged at just the same time.
Alessandros declaration that he would not impede the eagles flight is consistent with a strange
document from 1717 in which he conceded, apparently with some reluctance, his sons independence
from paternal authority. Clearly, important changes were pending: on 3 September 1719 an entry in the
Vatican Diario declares that as Sig. Scarlatti maestro di cappella in St Peters has departed for
England, Sig. Ottavio Pitoni, formerly at St John Lateran, is appointed maestro. It has never been
established whether he did in fact intend to travel to London, or indeed whether he actually went;
Francesco Scarlatti had been there since April of that year, and it should be noted that both Handel and
Roseingrave were active there. On 30 May 1720 Narciso, a new version of Amor dunombra e gelosia
dunaura, modified and conducted by Roseingrave, was performed in London; had Scarlatti been there,
he would surely have been involved in the performance.

(iv) Lisbon.
While an actual visit to England remains a vague hypothesis, a new interpretation of the mysterious
reference seems acceptable after the discovery of a sensational vocal and harpsichord performance by

Domenico heard at Rome by James Stuart in the salons of the Princess Albani, followed by a
Scarlattian Serenata sung at Albano for the the Old Pretender. Edward Corp has considered the
possibility that Scarlatti would be called to the London opera house in the case of Jacobite restoration,
but did not take into account the climate of absolute trust in the success of the expedition, which,
strengthened by the support of the powerful Spanish fleet, was considered a sort of Catholic crusade
moving from Scotland to London in order to allow the Stuart to reach the throne. Scarlatti probably
intended to arrive in England before London was conquered, but a horrible storm ravaged the initial
stage of the crossing, which had to carry 5000 soldiers in Scotland: the sea was populated with dead
bodies, and the desertion of large number of survivors made the disaster total. It is not unlikely that the
Lusitanian post had already been proposed to Domenico by one of the Portuguese ambassadors to
Rome: after the emergency, Lisbon offered to the musician a sumptuous remedy. Probably Scarlatti
knew that London would not be his final destination when he left Rome: it is now known, from
documents discovered and published by Gerhard Doderer, that he was impatiently awaited in Portugal,
where Joo V had appointed him mestre of the royal chapel. He arrived in Lisbon on 29 November
1719 to a great welcome: having sung at court accompanied by the queen herself, afterwards he
demonstrated his skill to the sovereigns several times. Lisbon promised only a more lucrative
continuation of the Roman routine, although there were no regular performances of opera; but fulfilling
work as a teacher awaited the new mestre de capela and after various notices of his successful early
appearances Scarlatti was asked to take charge of the completion of the musical education of Joos
brother Don Antonio.
In Lisbon, Scarlatti was impressed with the talent of Carlos Seixas, whom Don Antonio had suggested
as a pupil. Portuguese legend holds that Scarlatti recognized the young man, then 16, as his superior;
however improbable that may be, it is likely that it was Seixas who set him on a new path, the
combination of elements of art and folk music. Meanwhile, another royal pupil was showing exceptional
musical talent: Maria Barbara, who later, as Queen of Spain, was an indulgent and generous
protectress and patron of Scarlatti, was beginning to surprise the amazed intelligence of the most
excellent Professors with her Mastery of Singing, Playing and Composition. Now, besides having to
compose sacred works or revive ones already given in Rome, Scarlatti had the extra pleasure of
composing harpsichord pieces in the service of Mara Brbara and Don Antonio. This raises the issue of
the chronology of the sonatas, and it may be appropriate here to bring into question the widely
accepted rejection of Kirkpatricks approximately chronological theories. When Scarlatti arrived in
Lisbon he had more than sacred music in his baggage: in addition there were almost certainly some 50
keyboard pieces that had been written or sketched before he left Italy. There was no opera in Lisbon,
but there were performances of sacred works and serenatas (some composed by Astorga) for
celebrations of royal birthdays or namedays. A notice in the Gazeta di Lisboa in 1722 and a Vatican
document attribute the title of Abbate to Scarlatti; this was apparently in connection with an
ecclesiastical benefice and has no further historical significance.
The accounts studied by Doderer make no reference to Scarlattis presence in Lisbon between the end
of December 1719 and 24 June 1720. On 16 April 1720 a musician called Dominicus Scarlatti is listed
as present in Palermo at a meeting of the Unione dei musici di S Cecilia; further research has revealed

that he was simply another musician of the same name. Contemporary accounts (by Quantz and
Hasse) confirm Mimos presence in Rome and Naples in 1724 and 1725 in spite of his obligations
asmestre of the Portuguese royal chapel. Two appearances in Paris have been documented in the
same years with important testimonies of the appreciation of the local cultural and artistic lite of
Domenicos great cleverness and generosity.
The death of Alessandro caused a long state of deep depression, and a document discovered by
Doderer shows that the search for recovery was made possible at the end of January 1727, thanks to
the liberality of Joo V:
Sig. Domenico Scarlatti M.ro di Cappella of his Majesty the King left here for Rome, to restore his
health with the benefit of that air, since he has not been able to recover from his indispositions, his
Majesty having provided him with 1000 scudi for the journey, for the esteem in which he holds his
qualities.
This discovery does not apply to the reimbursement of the costs of a journey cited by Walther on the
basis of a reference in no.122 of the Hallische Zeitungen, no longer traceable. It is feasible to connect it
to a return to Portugal (expected in October 1728) coinciding with Mara Brbaras wedding.
Scarlatti did not reach Lisbon at once after being cured; he was absent from the performance of
theFesteggio armonico that he composed in celebration of the betrothal of his pupil to Ferdinando, the
Spanish infante, on 11 January 1728. The wedding itself took place a year later, on 19 January 1729, in
a pavilion specially built on the Rive Caya to allow both Joo V and Philip V to attend without setting
foot on foreign soil; it has been suggested (by Clark, after Walker) that Scarlatti was continuously on the
move between 1719 and 1728, but for unknown reasons he did not attend this celebration. He was in
Rome on 15 May 1728 when he married the 16-year-old Maria Catalina Gentili. He had expected to
return to Portugal with his young wife soon after that, but he was not able to leave Italy before the end
of September 1729. The dedication to Joo of Essercizi indicates that it was by his royal command
that Scarlatti was allowed to follow his pupil to her new country.

(v) Spain.
The systematic moves of the Spanish court round the principal cities of the kingdom have been detailed
by Kirkpatrick and, following the various stages of this itinerary, Clark has tried to isolate the folk
elements in some of the sonatas that reflect the tunes sung by the carriers, muleteers, and common
people to which Scarlatti, a southern Italian, must have been susceptible. The curtailment of his duties,
now that he was no longer mestre de capela to the Portuguese court, sparked a profound change in his
activities: happy to be freed from that routine, he now became involved in the highly cultivated, private
entertainments that Ferdinando and Maria Barbara held in their apartments, sheltered from the jealousy
and resentment of Elisabetta Farnese, Philip Vs second wife. One of those taking part in these
entertainments was Farinelli, risking losing the favour of the queen who had brought him to Spain and
had succeeded, through the great singers virtuosity, in her intention of rousing Philip V from his

lethargy and depression. Farinellis presence may have been the stimulus for the cantatas which Boyd
assigns to Scarlattis maturity.
Shortly after moving to Spain, Scarlatti had returned at least once to Lisbon; a manuscript diary
indicates that the musician Scarlatti was accompanied by his lovely wife and two children and that he
continued to receive his large salary. The Abbate Scarlatti image was vanquished, and the term
musico less than ever implied castrato: in 19 months of marriage the hermosa Catalina had given
her mature husband two children. She had six altogether, and died on 6 May 1739; after a brief period
as a widower Scarlatti married Anastasia Ximenes, a young woman from Cdiz who between 1743 and
1749 gave birth to a further four children, giving Domenico parity with his fathers progeny. If this
represents rivalry with the ghost of Alessandro, on a musical level the younger Scarlattis prolific output
of sonatas corresponded in number and quality to the older composers cantatas.
At the end of the 1730s the first printed publications began to promote Europe-wide circulation for a
small number of sonatas. A token of gratitude to Joo V, who had appointed him a Knight of the Order
of Santiago, the collection of 30 Essercizi is prefaced by a conventionally eulogistic dedication: the
contrast between the laudatory hyperbole and the subsequent note to the reader is striking:
Do not expect, whether you are an amateur or a professional, to find any profound intention in these
compositions, but rather an ingenious jesting with art by means of which you may attain the mastery in
harpsichord playing. It was not self-interest or ambition which led me to publish them, but obedience.
Perhaps they may please you, in which case I may more willingly obey further commands to gratify you
in a simpler and more varied style.
The publication had been preceded by preparatory work in Paris which led to later issues. Jean Duron
argues with good reason for the priority of the Parisian initiative, but ends up referring to annes
approximately 1740 because evidence of a connection between the authorization to print (22 August
1737) and the date of actual publication of Boivin-Leclercs Opera Prima is lacking. The operation of
some obscure publishing piracy characterized the almost simultaneous appearance of two rival
collections of sonatas that must have animated with polemical battles the lively musical life of London in
those years. Kirkpatrick paid little attention to the Parisian initiatives and gave reasonable chronological
priority to the Essercizi, because the dedication to the King of Portugal proves that the volume had
been published after Scarlattis admission to the order of Santiago (8 March 1738). Excluded from this
undertaking, Roseingrave felt stripped of the role of high priest of the English Cult and lent himself to
the shady manoeuvres of Benjamin Cooke, a publisher who entrusted him with the revision not only of
the text of Essercizi (which he had managed to get hold of by some subterfuge), but also of 12 more of
Domenicos sonatas and of a Fugue Composd by Sig.r Alex: Scarlatti. Furthermore Cooke prevailed
upon Roseingrave to add a piece of his own composition [...] by way of Introduction to the following
Movement and collected in two booklets these supplementary items with the contents of the rival
volume, much more elegantly engraved and printed. Domenicos dedication to Joo V gave
the Essercizi incontrovertible official standing, and the protest of Adam Scola, the publisher, against the
vile worms that gnaw the Fruit of others[] ingenious Labour and Expence is fully justified. Prozhoguin

raises a question about dating the Essercizi based on the use of the Julian calendar and on the British
tradition of making the new year coincide with the start of the fiscal year (March 25). This would move to
1740 (Gregorian) the publication of the volume, with a delay justified by the progressive deterioration of
diplomatic relations between Spain and England. Avison took the unusual course of complementing
some of the pieces from Roseingraves collection with others also by Scarlatti, apparently in his
possession, in orchestral versions as 12 concertos. Even if all the evidence suggests that
the Essercizi turned out to please, the promised publications in a simpler and more varied style never
appeared; none of the subsequent publication ventures seems to have been guided by the composer.
In 1746, when the death of Philip V saw Ferdinando and Maria Barbara accede to the throne, Farinellis
influence led them to find a place for opera, which could count on the personal connections of the
darling of the opera stage as well as powerful support from Vienna of Metastasio, who was an intimate
friend of Farinelli. Scarlatti, however, was not invited to return to opera composition and the last part of
his life seems to have been spent on the immense task of overseeing the compilation of the double
series of manuscripts in which form his collected sonatas have come down to us. In the volumes copied
between 1752 and 1757 the use of the number 30, on an almost systematic basis (repeating the
formula of the Essercizi), suggests the existence of some planned publishing scheme, abandoned on
the deaths of the composer and his royal patrons. One charming legend has this work as the happy
consequence of Scarlattis known weakness for gambling: the queen and Farinelli (who told Burney that
he helped his friend in similar predicaments) are supposed to have offered the money to pay off the
composers debts in exchange for written copies of the sonatas which Scarlatti had largely improvised
in the princely apartments. The survival of the treasure that has come down to us in the royal
manuscripts, inherited by Farinelli on Maria Barbaras death, would thus be due to another, special act
of obedience.
The impression of Scarlattis final years is of a contrast between a striking show of vitality which saw
him continue to father children up to the (for the period) advanced age of 64, and a creative mood of
introspection which produced the final polished versions of the sonatas that constitute his legacy. It was
tempting to imagine that it might have been Antonio Soler who compiled the volumes and assisted the
composer, but recent discoveries have encouraged gueda Pedrera Acabo to identify in Joseph
Alaguero the court scribe who achieved the copying of all primary sources.
The autograph letter written to the Duke of Huescar in 1752 matches this twilight mood: as well as
complaints about theatrical composers who knew nothing of counterpoint yet received such praise, the
letter courteously contrasts Scarlattis health, which prevents him from leaving his house, with that of his
noble addressee, great, strong and magnanimous, and full of health, betraying a poignant serenity in
keeping with the impression of an elderly composer weighing up a lifetimes experience. This sense of
detachment from the world also has a suitably religious aspect, and there is a beautiful manuscript from
1754 (copied out with extreme care to make the calligraphy match that of models from the past) of
a Missa quattuor vocum which shows Scarlatti adhering scrupulously to the old style neglected by the
opera composers. If 1754 is the year of its composition, the significance of this attractive piece is as a
proud demonstration of a specific skill, and any contradiction with the almost contemporary Salve

regina for soprano, strings, and continuo, which beautifully sums up the synthesis of contrapuntal
learning and melodic and harmonic practice at the basis of Scarlattis technique, is only apparent.
Almost all the manuscript sources of the piece describe it as the last work of Dom.co Scarlatti made in
Madrid shortly before his death, but other swansongs, covering most of the century, from Pergolesi to
Mozart, may have suggested such a legend, which nevertheless is stylistically plausible. The indication
on a manuscript of the last series of pieces in the collection similarly reads: last sonatas for harpsichord
by D. Scarlatti composed in 1756 and 1757, the year in which he died.
In his penultimate year, Scarlatti had received a visit from Dr LAugier, a friendly Viennese doctor who
travelled to hear the national melody in all parts of the world with philosophical ears; Burney took down
his testimony, which the doctor considered a living history of modern music. Scarlatti gave a warm
welcome to his guest, who was better placed than anyone to appreciate the introduction into the
sonatas of many passages in which he imitated the melody of tunes sung by carriers, muleteers,
and common people. The sweetest temper and genteelest behaviour which Handel attributed to his
colleague characterize the recorded conversations, even when the arguments grew heated. Scarlatti
was outspoken in his criticism of the cembalo music by certain contemporary composers as not
uniquely appropriate to the harpsichord. His insistence in defending his own artistic work, which he
knew was open to criticism, is significant:
Scarlatti frequently told M. LAugier, that he was sensible he had broke through all the rules of
composition in his lessons; but asked if his deviations from these rules offended the ear? and, upon
being answered in the negative, he said, that he thought there was scarce any other rule, worth the
attention of a man of genius, than that of not displeasing the only sense of which music is the object.
The contradiction with the reprimand for modern theatrical composers is only apparent: similar
arguments should be related to the sort of superiority complex that had led Alessandro Scarlatti to
compose inhuman music which he deliberately made inaccessible to any Professor. For all the
differences in their human approaches, both father and son agreed with Horace that Non cuivis homini
contigit adire Corinthum not everyone deserves to get into Corinth.

Roberto Pagano

2. Instrumental works.
Any discussion of Domenico Scarlattis instrumental output must focus on his keyboard sonatas: not
only because of the pre-eminence of the Essercizi and sonatas in his work but because even in their
most developed form these pieces relate to a single stylistic model, identified by Ralph Kirkpatrick as
the basso continuo. The practice of improvising an accompaniment on a bass line was the stock-intrade of every professional musician; in the case of Scarlatti, a keyboard player of astounding virtuosity
and immense creativity, the habit of condensing, of translating contrapuntal implications into harmonic
structures, meant that routine formulas were gradually left behind.

Such a statement cannot be justified without reference to the principal manuscript sources which, with
the Essercizi, have preserved the corpus of Scarlattis work for posterity. This is a double sequence of
volumes which Farinelli inherited from the Queen of Spain, in the compilation of which the composer
must have been involved during his final years. Two volumes, bound like the 13 to be described below,
were compiled in 1742 and 1749. The Spanish and Portuguese coats of arms, stamped on the cover of
the binding of these collections and the subsequent ones (now in I-Vnm) indicate that they were
intended for Queen Maria Barbara in person.

(i) Venice 1742.

The volume dated 1742, which probably contains only sonatas composed before Scarlatti moved to
Portugal, arranges the material in no discernible order but immediately establishes the formal model,
used in every separate piece, which Scarlatti continued to follow almost invariably: this, broadly, is a
binary structure with repeats, typically linked to the dance suite. The volume opens with 15 pieces
stylistically fairly close to the Essercizi; then a Fuga is followed by some less sophisticated, and less
quintessentially Scarlattian sonatas. These include genuine remnants from some suites: a Gavota, a
Capriccio, a Gigha, and Scarlattis only known set of variations. There are also what are clearly
transcriptions of polyphonic motets (K69, 87), of Italian concertos (K37), or reminiscences of his
fathers toccata style (K67, 72). The influence of violin style looms large, something which the composer
apparently assimilated during his Venice years; these are among those keyboard pieces inspired by
other existing instrumental (or vocal) styles, which led Bukofzer to speak of transfer. The most
developed of them see the introduction of procedures (crossed hands, acrobatic leaps) that Scarlatti
used fairly systematically in his mature harpsichord music. It would be inappropriate to refer simply to
transfer in the case of the numerous sonatas in more than one movement presented as melody and
bass which can be, and were intended to be, performed by more than one instrument. In this case the
texts retain unmistakable violin references.
The contradiction inherent in the titling of the volume which promises exclusively Sonate per cembalo
is only apparent: performance on harpsichord alone is still possible, as is demonstrated by other
sonatas (the Capriccio K63 and particularly the Gavota K64) created in the spirit of basso continuo but
then overloaded by the overt notation of chords very different from Scarlattis later ideas, as a mature
composer, when he arrived at a characteristic keyboard style. Curiously, the volume contains five of
the Essercizi although these pieces had been available in printed form for four years.

(ii) Pairwise arrangement.

Some of the sonatas in this volume follow the archaic scheme whereby the principal piece is followed
by a short minuet; it is possible to see here the germ of a conception that later underwent considerable
development in the internal organization of the subsequent collections, beginning with that of 1749.
Here the Sonata K100 displays an odd structure: at the end of an Allegro, which has all the
characteristics of an independent Scarlatti sonata, the indication volti subito introduces an Allegrissimo
with identical characteristics: these would be two distinct sonatas were it not that the composer

demonstrated unambiguously his intention to group them together, instructing the copyist to give the
pairing a single number (3) within the volume. Kirkpatrick gave each piece a separate number in his
catalogue (K99 and 100), justifying his decision by the separate appearance of the sonatas in other
sources. This explicit pairing anticipates the principle later adopted, Kirkpatricks pairwise
arrangement, whereby most of the sonatas subsequently copied were grouped into 192 pairs and four
groups of three. Contrasting or complementary elements lie behind the groupings: often a cantabile or
demonstrably rhythmic sonata is followed by a brilliant one, and the major mode may follow the minor
(always with the same tonic). Even when, in subsequent volumes, some pairs seem to be formed from
the juxtaposition of stylistically dissimilar elements, the overall intention to group the pieces which the
copyist cannot have conceived and carried out without the composers consent holds true. It seems
that Scarlatti was influenced by the contemporary circulation of harpsichord sonatas in two or three
movements those by Alberti, for instance, with which he was certainly familiar. The new volume shows
an emphasis on virtuosity and justifies Kirkpatricks term flamboyant to describe the style of these
sonatas.

(iii) Venice: Los trece libros.

Between 1752 and 1757 a single amanuensis assembled, from sketches or originals that are now lost,
no fewer than 28 beautifully copied volumes. This was the period during which a monk in the Escorial
was a pupil of Scarlattis; Solers references to copying the composers work and to the trece libros de
clavicordio added strength to the hypothesis that he himself was the copyist (the more likely in that one
of his biographers praises Solers diligence and tirelessness, attributes essential to carrying out so
demanding a task). These 13 volumes, with the two previous, unnumbered ones, make, together with a
copy of the Essercizi, the corpus of the Venetian manuscripts; the fact that they were intended for Maria
Barbara implies that their internal organization is definitive.
The reference to Maria Barbara and Ferdinando prompts the suggestion that the prevalence of
undemanding sonatas in the first two volumes is explained by their having been written for teaching
purposes at the highest level. The third and fourth present a splendid assortment of sonatas whose
perfect balance between musical sophistication and virtuoso demands reveals Scarlattis stylistic
maturity. Here more than ever is that ingenious jesting with art to which Scarlatti referred in the preface
to his Essercizi: a game in which the inspired composer and his excellent pupil are equal partners. The
following three volumes may reveal a step backwards in terms of quality, a return to more elementary
dimensions and educational concerns, hinting at the arrival of a less gifted pupil (perhaps Ferdinando).
The eighth volume heralds what Kirkpatrick called the final glorious period. Given the recourse to
sonatas which clear stylistic considerations indicate were composed earlier but were deemed suitable
for the creation of groups of two or three, the evident maturity of the final collections does not
necessarily support the theory that the sequence in the manuscripts follows the chronology of their
composition: the most striking novelties concern the enlarged keyboard (increasing with each new
volume, up to the five octaves and a tone of K485, copied in 1756), but the previous versions of some
sonatas, in secondary sources, reveal that some originally designed for instruments with a more limited
range were inserted, in versions adapted in the light of new possibilities.

(iv) Parma.
The other series of 15 volumes (I-PAp) duplicates 444 sonatas in the Venetian manuscripts and
provides further pieces not in those collections (including the group of 12 exceptionally beautiful
sonatas which come at the end of a secondary manuscript source, with the description Last Sonatas
for Cembalo by D. Domenico Scarlatti, composed in the year 1756 and 1757, in which he died). The
elimination of the melody and bass sonatas and of pieces judged too close to the archaic practice of
ambiguous instrumentation shows that some filtering had been carried out on the contents of the 1742
and 1749 volumes; the omission of the last sonatas is motivated by the desire not to compromise the
standard 30 pieces per volume, which makes the trece libros a perfect sequel to the Essercizi.

(v) The clavicordio.

Both the Venice and Parma manuscripts specify a cembalo, and every Spanish reference to a
clavicordio generates confusion, given the ambiguity of this term, which could indicate equally the
clavichord proper or the harpsichord (clavicordio de plumas), or even Cristoforis instrument
(clavicordio de piano). Since the surviving evidence links Scarlattis miraculous playing to the
harpsichord, not to the clavichord nor the Florentine arpicembalo che fa il piano e il forte, it is
appropriate to consider Scarlattis keyboard music as written principally for the harpsichord. When he
specifically intended the organ (K287 and 288), the manuscript is absolutely clear about the type of
instrument (da camera, with two manuals, Flautato and Trombone), and the pieces abandon the
customary binary structure. There are other keyboard instruments on which the sonatas can be played,
reflecting the variety of choices characteristic of a much more casual approach than fanatics of
historical performance would allow. The clavichord, which was fairly commonly found throughout Spain,
can render the cantabile qualities of some Adagios effectively but robs almost all the Allegros of their
vivacity. Scarlatti was familiar with the clavicordio de piano and in Florence as early as 1702 and 1705
had been able to try out the prototypes that Bartolomeo Cristofori built for Ferdinando de Medici; he
certainly played the other model, which the Tuscan prince had presented to Cardinal Ottoboni. Don
Antonio of Braganza, the uncle of Maria Barbara and a pupil of Scarlatti in Lisbon, had travelled in Italy
in 1714 and was the dedicatee of the 12 Sonate da cimbalo di piano e forte detto volgarmente di
martelletti by Ludovico Giustini, the first sonatas published specifically for the instrument. Three
Clavicordios de piano, echos en Florencia appear in the queens inventory of instruments (the fact that
two of them had been transformed into harpsichords has given rise to a variety of theories). For all its
limited volume, Cristoforis instrument met and overcame the lack of colour in the harpsichord of which
Maria Barbara had complained. In any case, it is known that Scarlatti used hammer-action instruments
in Portugal and Spain, and this must be taken into account. It is going too far to transform the greatest
harpsichordist in history into the pianos first great advocate (D. Sutherland, EMc, vol.23 (1995), 243
56),; all the more so since the discovery of a detailed inventory of Farinellis instruments has brought to
light one that sensationally prefigures the Grand Pleyel beloved of Wanda Landowska.
The inventory attached to Farinellis will clarifies which and how many various devices were capable of
forming different series of sounds on an instrument which Giovenale Sacchi, his biographer, described

in vague terms. The document confirms that the harpsichord was invented by the maker of this will,
indicates that it was built in Madrid by Don Diego Fernndez and provides details of enormous interest:
it plays the pianos and fortes with a quill, is an eight-foot instrument and uses three types of string, of
copper, steel, and gut, which play together, separately and mixed, according to the attached plan of its
various registers. All this would be extraordinary enough if it did not also have, hidden in the feet of the
legs that support the instrument at each end of the keyboard, springs to engage the registers with ten
stops to a pedal so that they can be operated separately or together, with movable lead knobs used to
engage one or two registers while the feet are operating the others. The registers are: (1) full register
[ottavina]; (2) Archlute, full register; (3) Left hand harp, half register with gut strings; (4) Left hand, half
register [ottavina]; (5) Archlute and Ottavina, full register; (6) Harp and harpsichord, full register; (7)
Harpsichord sounding as flute, full register; (8) Right hand, half register Ottavina; (9) Right hand, harp,
half register with gut strings; and (10) Harp, full register with gut strings. Sacchi relates that:
By chance the queen, in talking with Farinelli, mentioned that she would like to have a harpsichord with
more various tones [voci], and asked him if he had ever seen such a one. He replied that he had not.
But then, leaving the queen without saying anything further, he consulted Fernndez, whose talent he
knew, and after they had designed the work together and executed it, he arranged for it to be found as
a surprise by the queen in her apartments.
This revolutionary instrument was thus the product of a passing dissatisfaction on the part of Maria
Barbara and the inspiration of a hugely talented courtier and a great craftsman. If this is the harpsichord
finally made expressive by its variety of registers, the devoted Scarlatti would hardly have missed the
opportunity to celebrate its invention with a pair of pieces such as these; but the fact that a four-staff
layout thereafter disappears from the sources shows that the composer returned to composing and
organizing his work for his own harpsichord, one with an ever larger range but solidly anchored to the
standard sound. It was up to the imagination and skill of the performer to reflect, in strictly idiomatic
terms, allusions, ranging from the obvious ones to the guitar and certain fanfares that he imaginatively
idealized, but also draw together musical references to Christmas melodies that, as a child, Scarlatti
had heard Neapolitan bagpipers play. So, while Cristoforis and Fernndezs instruments remain
legitimate and interesting options, Scarlattis sound world is firmly rooted in the instrument on which the
young virtuoso had called up the thousand devils which so astounded Roseingrave, and which now
allowed the aging maestro to interpret the songs of Iberian muleteers and carriers in the variety of
approaches that give the sonatas their exceptional vitality.
The part played by melody in Scarlattis keyboard interests is marginal, given the prevalence of
harmonic and rhythmic ideas in his harpsichord music. The internal structure of the sonatas is a
confirmation of what is almost disavowal of melody, paradoxical for a Neapolitan but enormously
significant for a composer for whom the harpsichord held no secrets. It is misleading to focus on the
role of thematic elements when analysing the sonatas: Scarlattis approach is based rather on following
the conventional harmonic span of each binary piece. This was implicit in Kirkpatricks shift of interest
towards the variety of accessory elements in the sonatas, in which he proposed a distinction between
the closed sonata (in which both halves begin with the same thematic material) and the open sonata

(in which the thematic material that opens the first half is not used to open the second). It is significant
that his principal new idea was a form of abstraction, linked more closely with tonal polarity than with
the pedantic enumeration of themes; this was the crux, which Kirkpatrick defined as the meeting
point in each half of the thematic material which is stated in parallel fashion at the ends of both halves
with the establishment of the closing tonality. The unconventional aspect invoked by Scarlatti in his
conversations with LAugier should not be ascribed solely to the surprising effects scattered like spices
in the texture of the sonatas but also to the fact that so many openings, seemingly promising thematic
development, give way immediately to as many original and happy freaks, based principally on lively
rhythmic ambiguities and harmonic manipulations (including those acciaccaturas for which von Blow
implied a Shakespearean reference when he invoked a madness not without method). There was in
Scarlatti a sort of manic obsession which can be linked to the Christian parable of the talents. As
LAugier told Burney:
He used to say, that the music of Alberti, and of several other modern composers, did not, in the
execution, want a harpsichord, as it might be equally well, or perhaps, better expressed by any other
instrument; but, as nature had given him ten fingers, and, as his instrument had employment for them
all, he saw no reason why he should not use them.
There is an implicit criticism here of transcriptions of music not idiomatically suited to the harpsichords
capabilities. In 1756 the compilation of the manuscripts was almost complete, and Scarlatti could look
with a certain detachment at the transfers of his youth, even if possibly some instrumental
transcriptions of vocal music in the pathetic style and elegantly decorated (K208, for example) escaped
his censure. Now song and melody were reserved for voices, and the composition of his gentle Salve
regina in the same year confirms such a decision. When the harpsichord reclaims its melodic rights it
comes in the incipits of some of the mature sonatas (K544, 546), but the charm lasts only a few bars:
soon harmonic dialectic takes over and fingerwork fills the space left empty by Alberti and his imitators.

Roberto Pagano

3. Vocal works.
Scarlattis first opportunity to engage in opera came with the appointment of his uncle, Nicola
Barbapiccola, as impresario of the Teatro S Bartolomeo, Naples, for the 17034 season, when the
young composer was called upon to provide three operas, one of them an extensive revision of
Pollarolos Irene. His main contribution to the genre, however, was made with the seven operas he
composed for Queen Maria Casimira in Rome between 1710 and 1714, of which two survive complete
in their original form and a third in the version produced (as Narciso) in London in 1720. Too often
dismissed as pale imitations of his fathers operas, they show several quite original traits coupled with a
keen dramatic sense. In ensembles, for instance, the individual lines are often distributed in an easy,
conversational style, and the prescribed da capo is sometimes jettisoned in the interests of natural
expression. In the arias it is not uncommon for a characters indecision or conflicting emotions to be
conveyed through frequent changes of tempo and dynamics (and sometimes of instrumentation). Some

arias are designated alla francese, and in others the voice is doubled throughout at the unison or
octave with no other accompaniment a Venetian trait rarely, if ever, to be found in Alessandro
Scarlattis works. The satirical farce La Dirindina, intended as intermezzos for one of the two public
operas that Domenico wrote for Rome, is also unlike anything ever attempted by the elder Scarlatti.
Scarlatti seems not to have been employed as an opera composer after leaving Rome in 1719,
although he evidently continued to take an interest in the genre and occupied his own box at Farinellis
productions for the Spanish court. His interest in vocal composition did not, however, come to an end
with his appointment as music-master to Princess Maria Barbara in Lisbon. Of the several serenatas he
composed for the Portuguese court (and before that for his Italian patrons), only two survive, both
incomplete, but Contesa delle stagioni especially, written to celebrate the birthday of Queen Marianna
on 7 September 1720, contains some of his finest, and grandest, writing for voices and instruments.
The chamber cantata, of which just over 50 fully authenticated examples by Scarlatti survive, was
another genre which he cultivated with considerable success. Those he wrote in Italy (most of them
probably in Rome) are mainly accomplished, though conventional, examples of the type of solo cantata
in which his father had excelled. Of more interest are two manuscripts (in A-Wn and GB-Lbl) containing
in all 18 cantatas dating almost certainly from Scarlattis Iberian years; some at least may have been
sung by Farinelli at the Spanish court. They show Scarlatti adopting many of the features
predominantly major keys, a slow rate of harmonic change, numerous written ornaments (particularly
the slide) and Lombardic rhythms associated with operas by such composers as Conforto, Hasse,
and Jommelli that were performed at the court.
It is difficult to arrive at even an approximate chronology for Scarlattis church music. Only a single
work, the expressive Salve regina for soprano, strings, and continuo composed during the composers
last year, is dated in the sources, but this is quite probably for private devotions rather than a church
composition. Most, if not all, of the other sacred pieces were presumably written during those periods
between 1708 and 1728 when Scarlatti was employed as a church musician. Among the earliest,
perhaps, are four works that have remained in the archive of S Maria Maggiore ever since Scarlatti
wrote them in 17089. The antiphon Cibavit nos Dominus, possibly intended for the feast of Corpus
Christi in 1708, is one of Scarlattis most successful stile antico pieces; other works in this style include
a four-part mass which may have been Scarlattis contribution to the re-stocking of the royal palace
library in Madrid after the fire of 1734. Also among the S Maria Maggiore works is a mass, La stella,
notable for its stylistic dichotomy; the Credo and subsequent sections again exemplify the stile antico,
while the Kyrie and Gloria employ a kind of stile misto that Scarlatti was to use to even greater effect in
the best-known of all his sacred works, the Stabat mater for ten voices and continuo.
It should occasion no surprise that Scarlattis vocal music shows little of the harmonic daring and few of
the happy freaks that characterize his mature harpsichord sonatas. The keyboard music of this period
Scarlattis perhaps more than most sprang directly from the composers fingers in the act of
improvising. Vocal composition, on the other hand, was essentially a considered art, subject to the
demands of a text and governed by the rules and traditions of good composition. The apparent gulf

between Scarlattis vocal and keyboard styles can be observed also in the music of other composers
such as Byrd and Frescobaldi.

Malcolm Boyd

4. Reception.
Scarlattis sonatas were circulated irregularly and only in part during their composers lifetime. In
England, Roseingrave and others laid the foundations for what Newton later described as the English
Cult of Domenico Scarlatti, a phenomenon that developed after the Essercizi, Roseingraves response,
and Avisons transcriptions had been published, and music which had had a halo of myth and which
later in the century was performed and valued by Kelway, Worgan, and Clementi, and imitated by Arne,
Avison, William Jackson, and others, began to be disseminated. But the earliest publishing ventures
with Scarlattis sonatas took place in Paris, where in August 1725 a dazzling performance by Domenico
had been warmly welcomed by the local cultural and artistic lite, admired for the cleverness of the
virtuoso and the generosity of the man. Jean Duron has reconstructed the story of the first French
editions, among which is to be counted the first opera prima published by Domenico. Durons
description of the editorial strategy is convincing: it must have come as a shock to open a volume
of Pices choisies pour le clavecin ou lorgue and discover music so different from that by Dandrieu,
Dornel, Daquin, or Corrette, to which keyboard players of the generation after Couperin and Rameau
were accustomed.

Title page of Scarlattis XLII Suites de pieces pour le clavecin

Rowe Music Library, King's College, Cambridge

Although it has been said that there was no Italian Scarlatti cult, Abb Santini was able to acquire
copies of hundreds of the sonatas and introduce famous pianists to them, including Cramer and Liszt;
these musicians took great pleasure in reading old music direct from manuscript at the home of the
Roman collector especially pieces by Domenico Scarlatti, whose Cats Fugue, such an original and
unusual masterpiece, was always one of the favourite pieces of that select and intelligent band of
listeners. As a result, some knowledge of Scarlattis music and his style spread through the Italian
musical world, of which evidence can be found in references made by such musicians as Rossini and
Verdi.
In the first decades of the new century, it was Vienna that saw ventures destined to bring about a fuller
knowledge of Scarlattis work. The collection of the diplomat Joseph DuBeine included about 100
Scarlatti sonatas, distributed in various volumes which on his death in 1814 were auctioned and
acquired by Archduke Rudolph, Beethovens pupil par excellence. Between 1803 and 1807 eight
volumes of sonatas were printed, partly from DuBeines collection. Clementi, a leading figure in the
English Cult of Domenico Scarlatti, was regularly in Vienna at that period in his capacity as music

dealer; he seems to have been responsible for inventing the story of the Cats Fugue (K30), according
to which the unusual theme came from a kittens random steps up the keyboard. It was also in Vienna,
in 1839, that the publisher Haslinger and his pupil Czerny completed the publication of as many as 200
sonatas.
In Germany, knowledge of Scarlattis music may have been encouraged more by the circulation of
foreign publications than by that of the VI Sonate per il cembalo solo published by Haffner about 1753.
Did Bach know Scarlattis music? Assumptions that two pieces by Bach were derived from Scarlatti
models were ruled out by Kirkpatrick, but it has been suggested that the Goldberg Variations 30 in
number are a response to the 30 Essercizi; Bach may well have encountered the publication or one of
its reprints (it is worth remembering that the term Clavier-bung, used by several composers before
Bach, is the equivalent of Essercizi per il gravicembalo). Other German musicians demonstrated their
admiration for Scarlatti: Quantz, who met him in Rome in 1724, had been amazed by the perfection of
his playing, and Hasse remembered for Burney, half a century later, a wonderful hand, as well as
fecundity of invention, when he heard him in Naples, on a visit to his elderly father. Scarlatti found no
favour with two important exponents of German Romanticism: Mendelssohn took offence at an
observation by Rossini after hearing one of his Charakteristische Stcke: a sent la sonate de
Scarlatti! Schumann repeated a remark by a brilliant composer (Mendelssohn?) that compared with
the most gifted German composers Scarlatti was like a dwarf among the giants. There is nationalism in
the opposite direction in a letter from Verdi to Ricordi (November 1864): after bemoaning the exclusion
of the so-called Cats Fugue from the Scarlatti items in an anthology of old music: with so strange a
subject a German would have created chaos, but an Italian made something as clear as the sun. Hans
von Blow prepared an edition of 18 sonatas, but in comparing Scarlatti with Bach ruled that he was
not a genius but a talent of great significance; he illustrates the reasons that led him to eliminate the
acciaccaturas, which he thought created cacophony on the piano and offended the eye and ear
(precisely the freedoms of which Scarlatti boasted to LAugier), and he also retouched many harmonic
errors. Nevertheless, von Blow paradoxically recognized Scarlattis role as a precursor of Beethoven,
since with him humour and irony set foot for the first time in the realm of sound. Brahms collected
Scarlatti manuscripts and studied the sonatas in depth: some passages in the Second Piano Concerto
seem to be influenced by the demanding K299, and the quotation of K273 as the incipit of the
song Unberwindlich is a clear act of homage.
As for the Iberian peninsula, the manuscripts studied by Boyd and Doderer make it clear that the
sonatas were not used exclusively by the composers royal pupils; the existence of Spanish copies
which assign to the organ pieces far from the austere idiom normally connected with the instrument
reveals an unusual and unexpected circulation of the composers legacy.
A decisive step in bringing about a proper knowledge of Scarlattis work was taken at the beginning of
the 20th century with the publication by Ricordi of all the sonatas then known (545 of the 555 pieces
later catalogued by Kirkpatrick). This was done by Alessandro Longo, who took account of the Venetian
sources, some of the early editions and certain of the Viennese manuscripts, but not the parallel series
of manuscripts now in Parma (whose existence was unknown) nor a pair of important volumes in

England. Longos work is certainly dated; its principal defects derive from insufficient knowledge of
stylistic issues and matters of instrumental technique and performing practice. Further, he followed his
own whims in regrouping the pieces into arbitrary suites according to key. The credit for re-establishing
certain characteristics of the texts goes to Walter Gerstenberg, who in 1933 carried out a rigorous
comparison of the principal sources, although he neglected to give sufficient emphasis to the grouping
into twos and threes, already discovered and pointed out in 1722 by Dent. Gerstenbergs scrupulous
cataloguing delivered the matter to the basic investigation of Ralph Kirkpatrick, whose Domenico
Scarlatti (1953) is the fruit of ten years of careful research, enriched with the practical experience of an
illustrious harpsichordist. Thanks to Kirkpatrick, Scarlatti ceased to be an eccentric, late product of the
Baroque need for marvels and his music received the kind of critical attention which would see
Schumanns unjust verdict set aside. A new chronological ordering, realized through a regrouping of the
sonatas by genre, was proposed by Giorgio Pestelli (1967), whose contribution had considerable value
in establishing an appropriate historic and stylistic context for Scarlatti. From 1970 the writings of Joel
Sheveloff have enlivened the critical debate with interventions of remarkable polemical force and
exemplary attention to detail, with a perceptive interpretation of the sources. The most telling
contribution using Spanish sources has come from Malcolm Boyd, who has also provided a determined,
well-documented re-evaluation of the composers vocal music. Gerhard Doderers contributions are
concerned primarily with the documentation of biographical data regarding Scarlattis time in Portugal,
and also information on the instruments Scarlatti favoured.
The critical editions of the sonatas which Kirkpatrick hoped for are now a reality. Kenneth Gilbert was
responsible for completing the first (Paris, 197184), with a concise, balanced preface that focussed on
the interpretation of the sources. 1978 saw the beginning of a new Ricordi critical edition, under Emilia
Fadini, characterized by a more accurate graphical reflection of the sources and a critical system based
on detailed comparisons. The Venetian manuscripts are accessible to scholars in a facsimile edition
(1985), as are the Essercizi (1967, 1977).
In 2007 the 250th anniversary of Domenicos death gave rise to conferences and editorial initiatives,
among which the international congress Domenico Scarlatti: Musica e Storia, held in Naples by the
Centro di Musica Antica Piet de Turchini, was particularly successful. The Comunidade de Madrid
published 24 Documentos sobre Scarlatti, anastatically reproduced, transcribed into modern spelling
and annotated by Jaime Tortella Casares. Domenico Scarlatti en Espaa, an anthology of contributions
read at the Symposia FIMTE 20067, was edited by Luisa Morales. Ut Orpheus (Bologna)
commemorated the anniversary with DOMENICO SCARLATTI ADVENTURES, a volume of articles
signed by Sutcliffe (c0-editor with Massimiliano Sala), Timms, dAlvarenga, Prozhoguin, Fadini,
Sheveloff , Decker, and other younger Scarlattians.

Roberto Pagano

Bibliography
General

BurneyH

SartoriL

A. Longo: Domenico Scarlatti e sua figura nella storia della musica (Naples, 1913)

E.J. Dent: Randbemerkungen zu Domenico Scarlatti, Der Auftakt, (Prague 1922), 3258

L. Bauer: Die Ttigkeit Domenico Scarlattis und der italienischen Meister in Spanien (diss., U. of
Munich,1933)

C. Valabrega: Il clavicembalista Domenico Scarlatti: il suo secolo, la sua opera (Modena, 1937, 2/1955)

R. Newton: The English Cult of Domenico Scarlatti, ML, Vol.20 (1939), 13856

S.A. Luciani: Postilla Scarlattiana, RaM, Vol.44 (1940), 20003

N.A. Solar Quintes: Documentos sobre la familia de Domenico Scarlatti, AnM, Vol.4 (1949), 13754

R. Kirkpatrick: Domenico Scarlatti (Princeton, 1953)

H. Keller: Domenico Scarlatti, ein Meister des Klaviers (Leipzig, 1957)

J. Krpti: Domenico Scarlatti (Budapest, 1959)

A. Leahu: Domenico Scarlatti (Bucharest, 1966)

K. Eckersley: Aspects of Structure and Idiom in the Music of 18th-Century England, with Special Reference
to the Scarlatti Arrangements of Charles Avison (diss., U. of Oxford, 1980)

R. Pagano: Scarlatti, Alessandro e Domenico: due vite in una (Milan, 1985)

R. Pagano: Venni a Roma cristiana e non Cristina , Hndel e gli Scarlatti a Roma: Rome 1985, 26584

G. Rostirolla: Domenico Scarlatti e la Congregazione dei musici di Santa Cecilia, Hndel e gli Scarlatti a
Roma: Rome 1985, 191249

P. Santi: Domenico Scarlatti fra i due nazionalismi, Metamorfosi nella musica del Novecento: Bach,
Hndel, Scarlatti: Cagliari 1985, 3758

J. Sheveloff: Domenico Scarlatti: Tercentenary Frustrations, MQ, Vol.71 (1985), 399436;

Vol.72(1986), 90118

M. Boyd: Domenico Scarlatti, Master of Music (London, 1986)

B. Kenyon de Pascual: Domenico Scarlatti and his Son Alexandros Inheritance, ML, Vol.69 (1988), 239

G. Doderer: Aspectos novos em torno da estadia de Domenico Scarlatti na corte de D. Joo V (1719
1727)/New Aspects Concerning the Stay of Domenico Scarlatti at the Court of King John V (17191727):
preface to Domenico Scarlatti: Libro di tocate per cembalo (facs., Lisbon, 1991), 752

C.F. Vidali: Alessandro and Domenico Scarlatti: a Guide to Research (New York, 1993)

S. Cappelletto: La voce perduta: vita di Farinelli, evirato cantore (Turin, 1995), 20921

M.T. Fernndez Talaya: Memoria con las ltimas voluntades de Domenico Scarlatti, msico de cmara de
la reina Mara Brbara de Braganza, RdMc, Vol.21 (1998), 15568

D. Sutcliffe: Domenico Scarlatti and Eighteenth-Century Musical Style (forthcoming)

Keyboard works
W. Gerstenberg: Die Klavierkompositionen Domenico Scarlattis (Regensburg, 1933)

C. Hopkinson: Eighteenth-Century Editions of the Keyboard Compositions of Domenico

Scarlatti,Transactions of the Edinburgh Bibliographical Society, Vol.3 (1948), 14560

R. Benton: Form in the Sonatas of Domenico Scarlatti, MR, Vol.13 (1952), 26475

M. Bogianckino: Larte clavicembalistica di Domenico Scarlatti (Rome, 1956; Eng. trans., 1967)

G. Pestelli: Le sonate di Domenico Scarlatti: proposta di un ordinamento cronologico (Turin, 1967)

J. Sheveloff: The Keyboard Music of Domenico Scarlatti: a Reevaluation of the Present State of Knowledge
in the Light of the Sources (diss., Brandeis U., 1970)

S. Choi: Newly Found Eighteenth Century Manuscripts of Domenico Scarlattis Sonatas and their
Relationship to other Eighteenth and Early Nineteenth Century Sources (diss., U. of Wisconsin, 1974)

J. Clark: Domenico Scarlatti and Spanish Folk Music, EMc, Vol.4 (1976), 1921

J.J. Rey: Manuscritos de msica para tecla en la Biblioteca del conservatorio de Madrid, RdMc,
Vol.1(1978), 22133

B. Johnsson: Eine unbekannte Sonate von Domenico Scarlatti, Mf, Vol.34 (1981), 30910

E. Badura-Skoda: Domenico Scarlatti und das Hammerklavier, sterreichisches Musikzeitung,

Vol.40(1985), 5249

Domenico Scarlatti e il suo tempo: Siena 1985 [Chigiana, new ser., Vol.20 (1985)] [incl. L. Hautus:
Insistenza e doppio fondo nelle sonate di Domenico Scarlatti, 1124; M. Boyd: Scarlatti Sonatas in Some
Recently Discovered Spanish Sources, 5767; M.C. de Brito: Scarlatti e la musica alla corte di Giovanni
V di Portogallo, 6979; R. Pagano: Piena utilizzazione delle dieci dita: una singolare applicazione della
parabola dei talenti, 81107; J. Sheveloff: Uncertainties in Domenico Scarlattis Musical Language, 143
71; E. Fadini: La grafia dei manoscritti scarlattiani: problemi e osservazioni,183206]

Domenico Scarlatti 13 recherches: Nice 1985 [incl. R. Pagano: Alessandro et Domenico Scarlatti:
biographie assortie de quelques considrations musicales, 815; E. Fadini: Hypothses propos de
lordre des sonates dans les manuscrits vnitiens, 4351; J. Clark: La porte de linfluence andalouse
chez Scarlatti, 637; W. Dowd: Le clavecin de Domenico Scarlatti, 8895]

A. Howell: Organos, Organeros and Organistas of Spain during the Scarlatti Years, American
Organist,Dec 1985, 917

P. Williams, ed.: Bach, Handel, Scarlatti: Tecentenary Essays (Cambridge, 1985) [incl. S. Daw: Muzio
Clementi as an Original Advocate, Collector and Performer, in Particular of J.S. Bach and D. Scarlatti,61
74; G. Pestelli: Bach, Handel, D. Scarlatti and the Toccata of the Late Baroque, 27791; L.F. Tagliavini:
Remarks on the Compositions for Organ of Domenico Scarlatti, 3215]

G. Doderer: Algunos aspectos nuevos de la msica para clavecin en la corte lisboeta de Juan V,Musica
antiqua, no.8 (March 1987), 2631

M.A. Ester-Sala: Dos sonatas de Domenico Scarlatti: un tema abierto, RdMc, Vol.12 (1989), 5935

J.V. Gonzlez Valle: Fondos de msica de tecla de Domenico Scarlatti conservados en el Archivo capitular
de Zaragoza, AnM, Vol.45 (1990), 114

G. Pestelli: Una nuova fonte manoscritta per Alessandro e Domenico Scarlatti, RIM, Vol.25 (1990),10018

B. Sachs: Scarlattis tremulo, EMc, Vol.19 (1991), 913

D. Sutherland: Domenico Scarlatti and the Florentine Piano, EMc, Vol.23 (1995), 24356

A. Pedrero-Encabo: Los 30 essercizi de Domenico Scarlatti y las 30 tocatas de Vicente Rodrguez:

paralelismos y divergencias, La investigacin musical en Espaa: Madrid 1997 [RdMc,
Vol.20 (1997)],37391

A. Pedrero-Encabo: Una nuova fonte degli Essercizi di Domenico Scarlatti: il manoscritto Orfe
Catal, Fonti Musicali Italiane, Vol.17 (2012), 15173

Other works

A. Cametti: Carlo Sigismondo Capeci (16521728), Alessandro e Domenico Scarlatti e la Regina di Polonia
a Roma, Musica doggi, Vol.13 (1931), 5564

S.A. Luciani: Unopera inedita di Domenico Scarlatti, RMI, Vol.48 (1946), 4335 [on Tolomeo et
Alessandro]

A. Della Corte: Tetide in Sciro: lopera di Domenico Scarlatti retrovata, RaM, Vol.27 (1957), 2819

A. McCredie: Domenico Scarlatti and his Opera Narcisso, AcM, Vol.33 (1961), 1929

M. Viale-Ferrero: Filippo Juvarra, scenografo e architetto teatrale (Turin, 1970)

L. Hautus: Zu dem Domenico Scarlatti zugeschriebenen Capriccio fugato a dodici, Mf, Vol.24 (1971),2945

F. Degrada: Una sconosciuta esperienza teatrale di Domenico Scarlatti: La Dirindina, Il palazzo incantato:
studi sulla tradizione del melodramma dal Barocco al Romanticismo (Fiesole, 1979), 6797

F. Piperno: Anfione in Campidoglio, Studi corelliani III: Fusignano 1980, 151209

B.E. Borton: The Sacred Choral works of Domenico Scarlatti (diss., U. of Cincinnati, 1983)

T.E. Griffin: The Late Baroque Serenata in Rome and Naples: a Documentary Study with Emphasis on
Alessandro Scarlatti (diss., UCLA, 1983)

M. Alonso-Gomez: La messe en r majeur pour choeurs et orchestre dite de Arnzazu, Domenico Scarlatti
Nice 1985, 10911

E. Andreani: Autour de la musique sacre de Domenico Scarlatti, Domenico Scarlatti Nice 1985, 96108

M. Boyd: Domenico Scarlattis cantate da camera and their Connexions with Rome, Hndel e gli Scarlatti a
Roma: Rome 1985, 25163

M.C. de Brito: Scarlatti e la musica alla corte di Giovanni V di Portogallo, Domenico Scarlatti e il suo
tempo: Siena 1985 [Chigiana, new ser., Vol.20 (1985)], 6979

E. Simi Bonini: Lattivit degli Scarlatti nella Basilica Liberiana, Hndel e gli Scarlatti a Roma:
Rome1985, 15373

M. Marx-Weber: Domenico Scarlattis Stabat mater, KJb, Vol.71 (1987), 1322

O. Termini: LIrene in Venice and Naples: Tyrant and Victim, or the rifacimento Process Examined,Antonio
Caldara: Essays on his Life and Times, ed. B.W. Pritchard (Aldershot, 1987), 365407

M. Boyd: Die Kirchenmusik von Domenico Scarlatti, KJb, Vol.72 (1988), 11725

K. Eckersley: Some Late Chamber Cantatas of Domenico Scarlatti: a Question of Style, MT,
Vol.131(1990), 58591

M. Boyd: The music very good indeed: Scarlattis Tolomeo et Alessandro Recovered, Studies in Music
History Presented to H.C. Robbins Landon, ed. O. Biba and D.W. Jones (London, 1996), 920

F. Degrada: Tre lettere amorose di Domenico Scarlatti, Saggiatore musicale, Vol.4 (1997), 271316

Malcolm Boyd
See also from The New Grove Dictionary of Opera: DIRINDINA; NARCISO; and TETIDE IN SCIRO.