This article establishes a dialogue between twenty-first-century music theory and historical modes of enquiry, adapting the new Formenlehre (Caplin, Hepokoski/Darcy) to serve a historically oriented hermeneutics. An analytical case study of the first movement of Haydn's Symphony No. 92 (1789) traces the changing functional meanings of the opening ‘caesura prolongation phrase’. The substance of the exposition consists largely of things functionally ‘before-the-beginning’ and ‘after-the-end’, while the recapitulation follows a logic of suspense and surprise, keeping the listener continually guessing. The analysis calls into question Hepokoski and Darcy's restriction of the mode of signification of sonata-form movements to the narration of human action. The primary mode of signification of the recapitulation is indexical: it stands as the effect of a human cause. This account matches late eighteenth-century concepts of ‘genius’.

Despite its apparent lack of an early performance history, the Mass in B minor proves fertile ground for an investigation of J. S. Bach's expectations of choral performance, not merely on account of the work's sheer number of choruses but because of their individual origins and stylistic diversity. By systematically exploring each movement with an understanding of how eighteenth-century vocal concertists and ripienists traditionally functioned, we may be better placed to assess whether or not this ‘great’ work carries any implications of vocal forces that are exceptionally ‘great’ (numerically) in Bach's terms. Key underlying strands of argument concerning the size and distribution of Bach's choir are reviewed in an Appendix, alongside newly introduced items of evidence.

The discovery of a satirical list from 1732 helps us revisit Handel's affairs during the early 1730s. Placing the composer among elite guests at the opening night of Vauxhall Gardens in 1732, the new document predates his known links with the venue by six years, offers a rare description of him as subservient to John James Heidegger and possibly alludes to his medical condition prior to 1737. It also invites an exploration of hidden affinities between English oratorio and John Henley's much-abused Oratory, including a hypothesis about the strictures applied to Esther by the Bishop of London. Much more important, it helps launch a re-examination of Handel's role in the ‘Second Academy’ as a court composer in an entrepreneurial milieu.

In 1711 the opera L'Anagilda was performed in the private theatre of Francesco Maria Ruspoli, an important Roman patron of the Arcadian Academy. L'Anagilda's librettist (Girolamo Gigli) and composer (Antonio Caldara) were both associated with this society, but the opera contrasts with the basic goal of Arcadian aesthetics – namely, to reform literature and opera by imitating the structure of ancient Greek tragedy and the stylistic purity of Italian renaissance poets. Rather, Gigli and Caldara created an opera infused with comedy, interspersed with fantastic intermezzos and formulated according to a genre not endorsed by Arcadian literary critics, the mock heroic. This article explores topics related to one central question: why would Gigli and Caldara openly flout the literary precepts of Arcadia? Gigli was a career satirist whose works eventually caused him to be exiled from his native Siena, all of Tuscany and the Papal States, and to be expelled from three major literary academies, the Intronati, the Cruscanti and the Arcadians. Since he continually criticized the organizations to which he belonged for their narrow-mindedness, prejudice and hypocrisy, I contend that L'Anagilda represents a critique of Arcadia. Yet in the process, Gigli also shows the Arcadians that there is more than one path to verisimilitude and the imitation of classical models. Despite the mock-heroic characteristics of the libretto, Gigli adheres to some Arcadian structural requirements, and Caldara's score heightens the characterizations and the overall verisimilitude of the opera.

Although the common way to perform late eighteenth-century flute or oboe concertos today is for the soloist to rest during tutti passages, this is probably not what most composers had in mind. Recent research has shown that keyboard and violin soloists played an important role as orchestral members during the ritornellos of their concertos, the former providing a continuo part and the latter doubling the orchestral first violins. But what about concertos for flute or oboe? Were these soloists also to play during the tuttis, and if so, what? Primary source evidence (supported by statements in contemporary treatises) reveals that many eighteenth-century composers expected woodwind soloists to participate during all or some orchestral ritornellos. Printed and manuscript parts of the period reveal several types of soloist participation, suggesting that the practice was widespread yet also flexible. Reinstatement of the soloist in the tuttis, performing all of the music that eighteenth-century composers asked them to perform, would alter the way these concertos sound, in turn forcing a change in how they are perceived.

John Lawrence Geib has remained an often-cited but poorly known builder of keyboard instruments since the eighteenth century. Although historians have noted his patent for an escapement mechanism used on early English square pianos after 1787, little has been written about him, and much of that has now proven to be incomplete or untrue. A letter written by Geib to Benjamin Franklin has recently been made public. It outlines his early years in London and provides the foundation for further research into the remaining records and extant instruments. This information allows one to draw a more complete and historically correct picture of Geib and to place him in perspective with the other builders operating at the time. This article gives new details about his principal invention – the escapement mechanism – and the nature of his business during his early years in London. A full reproduction of the patent is included as an appendix.