sources - Nottingham eTheses - The University of Nottingham

and 2 in unison (in the context of the Brno performances, with a tiny pit band perhaps
boasting as few as four violins in toto, this was perhaps just as well), while the flutes
often play a 2 or have similar figuration in thirds. Parallel passages in ŠVS also
sometimes assist in the reconstruction of missing parts. Only relatively rarely is it
necessary to add editorial completions (see below, §2.4).
The vocal lines
Whilst the reconstruction of the orchestral component of the score, though not without
its difficulties, is fairly straightforward, the vocal lines are more problematic. No
vocal parts corresponding to OP are extant, and the two main surviving sources for the
vocal lines (ŠFS and ŠVS) were heavily altered, both before and after the première:
ŠVS was in use until KPU appeared in 1908, while ŠFS contains not only all of
Janáček’s revisions, but also those made by Kovařovic in 1916. The many changes
were made, as described above, by a combination of very thorough scratching out and
paste-overs (the latter often on both sides of a folio, making the original difficult to
read even with the aid of fibre-optics). Determining which version of the vocal line
‘fits’ the 1904 score thus requires careful scrutiny and comparison of both the Štross
scores, taking into account the orchestral context reconstructed from OP.
Of further help in reconstructing the voice parts is LB, the manuscript libretto
used by the prompter at early performances. Like the OP strings, this was in use for a
short enough time that it provides a very clear picture of the opera in its 1904 form. It
contains no music but, as observed above, its notation of the words is quite precise,
with detailed indications of word repetitions many of which Janáček later removed. In
Fig. 2.10, the notation of the repeated phrase in LB provides confirmation of the vocal
line in a way that the orchestral parts (which could fit either version) cannot:
54