A Trumpeter’s Guide To Samuel Barber’s Capricorn Concerto
A TRUMPETER’S GUIDE TO SAMUEL BARBER’S CAPRICORN CONCERTOJason Allen Crafton, B.M., M.M.Dissertation Prepared for the Degree ofDOCTOR OF MUSICAL ARTSUNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXASAugust 2010APPROVED:Keith Johnson, Major ProfessorEugene Migliaro Corporon, CommitteeMemberJohn Holt, Committee MemberTerri Sundberg, Chair of the Division ofInstrumental StudiesGraham Phipps, Director of GraduateStudies in the College of MusicJames C. Scott, Dean of the College ofMusicJames D. Meernik, Acting Dean of theRobert B. Toulouse School ofGraduate Studies
Crafton, Jason Allen. A Trumpeter’s Guide to Samuel Barber’s Capricorn Concerto.Doctor of Musical Arts (Performance), August 2010, 37 pp., 20 examples, references, 25 titles.Samuel Barber’s Capricorn Concerto for flute, oboe and trumpet with strings is animportant though seldom performed work. The concerto is teeming with performance choicesthat are indicative of both historical and contemporary influences. At present, there are limitedresources available to performers regarding Capricorn.The first section of this study presents an historical and contextual examination ofCapricorn both in terms of Barber’s own compositional output and that of his influences andcontemporaries. The second section includes a performance analysis of the work, while the thirdsection includes an analysis of existing recordings. Implications for the performer are outlined inlast section.The guide provides performers with pertinent background, analytical and performanceinformation in order to facilitate informed, high-level performance.
Copyright 2010byJason Allen Craftonii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSI would first like to express my appreciation to John Gracie, Anthony Plog, SusanSlaughter and John Wilds for taking the time to answer my questions. Your contributions havemade this study much more than I could have ever made it on my own, and for that I thank youdeeply.My sincere thanks go also to the performers assisting me in my recital: AnastasiaMarkina, Julee Kim Walker and Nicholas Arbolino. Your willingness and passion for this project,not to mention your outstanding talent, will not soon be forgotten.In addition my thanks go to all the members of the faculty at the University of NorthTexas who impacted me during my three years in Denton. Special thanks go to LenoraMcCroskey, whose tireless efforts on my behalf can never be properly repaid.I must also thank my all teachers and mentors who have guided me over the last tenyears, especially Andrew Classen, Robert Murray, Scott Meredith, John Holt and Adam Gordon.My most heartfelt thanks go to my major professor, Keith Johnson. Your guidance,encouragement and wisdom gave me the strength complete this degree. I hope to display thesame level of patience and professionalism throughout my career.Most importantly I would like to thank my family; specifically my mother, whose supportand love for me have never faltered.iii
TABLE OF CONTENTSPageACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .iiiBACKGROUND .1State of Research .2Context .3PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS.6Movement I.6Movement II .9Movement III .12Programmatic Content .14RECORDING COMPARISON .16Movement I.16Movement II .18Movement III .19PERFORMANCE PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS.20Movement I.20Equipment Selection, Movements I and III .23Movement II .24Equipment Selection, Movement II .25Movement III .26CONCLUSION .27APPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES .28John Gracie .29Anthony Plog .31Susan Slaughter .33John Wilds .34iv
BIBLIOGRAPHY.35DISCOGRAPHY .37v
BACKGROUNDSamuel Barber’s Capricorn Concerto for flute, oboe and trumpet with strings is animportant though seldom performed work. The concerto is teeming with performance choicesthat are indicative of both historical and contemporary influences. Capricorn represents a rarityfor trumpet players; a piece of music widely recognized as being of high quality written by asignificant composer. The increasing standardization of the orchestral repertoire has led to manyworthy pieces of music being excluded from regular performance; Capricorn is such a work. Theintent of this study is to not only reintroduce Capricorn into the trumpet and orchestral repertoirebut to investigate performance techniques utilized by trumpeters since its composition.The composition of Capricorn began with Samuel Barber’s service in the United StatesArmy during World War II. Barber, originally assigned to duty as a clerk, was granted a positionat the Office of War Information (OWI) in New York City. The main benefit of this position wasthat Barber was allowed to compose music at his home in Mount Kisco, New York and return tothe city upon its completion. The house itself, home to Barber, his partner Gian-Carlo Menottiand the poet Robert Horan, was named ‘Capricorn’ by its inhabitants due to the large amount ofsunlight it received during the winter months.1 Barber, who required peace and quiet to compose,was ecstatic to once again work in his isolated country home. It was in these surroundings thatBarber composed Capricorn in the spring and summer of 1944. The work was premiered onOctober 8, 1944 at Town Hall in New York City by the Saidenberg Little Symphony in aprogram containing both eighteenth and twentieth century compositions. 2 The ensemble, under1Barbara Heyman, Samuel Barber: The Composer and His Music, (Oxford University Press,1992), 239.2Heyman, Samuel Barber: The Composer and His Music, 241.1
the direction of Barber’s colleague at the OWI, Daniel Saidenberg, had been formed to“introduce as many contemporary works as possible” and to serve as “an incentive to nativecomposers.”3Capricorn received mixed reviews from contemporary critics. Noel Straus’ review in theNew York Times described Capricorn as “modernistic in its method of treatment” but with“nothing particularly original to import.”4 However, Lou Harrison’s review in Modern Musicpraised the work without reservation as “brilliant” and Barber for his “tremendous technicalgrasp.”5State of ResearchAt present, there are limited resources available to performers regarding Capricorn.Fortunately, a number of recordings exist from a range of periods featuring such world-renownedmusicians as Howard Hanson, Christopher Hogwood, Leonard Slatkin and Reinhold Frederich.Each recording represents a unique set of performance choices which, when compared with oneanother, can highlight relevant aesthetic trends.While sources concerning the life and work of Samuel Barber are plentiful, there are fewspecifics regarding the Capricorn Concerto. The most notable source for information on Barberis Barbara Heyman’s Samuel Barber: The Composer and His Music, which provides the mostthorough discussion of Capricorn. Heyman devotes several pages to not only the concerto itselfbut the circumstances of its composition and the debate over its programmatic content (or lack3Daniel Saidenberg, “New Little Symphony,” New York Times, December 29, 1940.4Noel Straus, "Saidenberg Leads Little Symphony," New York Times, October 9, 1944, 17.5Lou Harrison, "Forecast and Review" Modern Music 22 (November 1944): 31.2
thereof). Heyman also discusses the formal and harmonic principles used by Barber throughoutthe workWalter Simmons’ book, Voices in the Wilderness, is a survey of the lives of six Americanneo-romantic composers. Simmons places Capricorn in what he describes as Barber’s“adolescent” compositional period, lasting from 1942 to 1952.6 Though Simmons describesCapricorn as “one of Barber’s weakest works,”7 he discusses it through the lens of severalpublished reviews of the premiere.The most complete source dealing directly with the Capricorn Concerto is found in adissertation by Russell Friedewald entitled A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the PublishedMusic of Samuel Barber. This work examines the harmonic, melodic and formal principlesutilized by Barber in Capricorn. In addition to the inclusion of a brief formal and harmonicoutline, Friedewald describes Capricorn as “a sharp contrast to Barber’s first (so-called NeoRomantic) Period.”8ContextBarber has long been considered one of America’s greatest neo-romantic composers.Capricorn represents an aspect of his compositional style that owes much to the languages ofStravinsky and Copland. In addition Barber pays tribute to J.S. Bach’s Brandenburg ConcertoNo. 2 in a variety of ways. The most obvious similarity is the instrumentation of the worksthemselves. Both Barber and Bach wrote for solo ensembles of flute, oboe and trumpet6Ibid., 281.7Walter Simmons, Voices in the Wilderness: Six American Neo-Romantic Composers, (Lanham,Maryland: Scarecrow Press, 2004), 286.8Russell Friedewald, “A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the Published Music of SamuelBarber,” (Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Iowa, 1957), 207.3
accompanied by strings (Bach also included violin in his solo ensemble). Closer examinationreveals further similarities between the two works. Barbara Heyman describes such similaritiesas:.contrasting ripieno and concertante episodes, the returning rondo theme, alternation ofcontrapuntal and homophonic styles, fugue, “walking-bass” pizzicato accompaniments,and figurations of triadic patterns and measured trills.9Barber describes the influence of the Brandenburg Concerto No. 2 on Capricorn in a decidedlyless technical manner:It is hard to explain, and you may find this music new for me, but it is in a sensedecorative, slightly baroque a la Brandenburg Concerto, less romantic.While a more in depth examination of these similarities (as they related to performancepractice) will take place later in this study, the significance of Capricorn in terms of Barber’srepertoire lies in its departure from his earlier compositional style. Since Capricorn’s premieremany have pointed to the influence of Bach, Stravinsky and even fellow Americans AaronCopland10 and Henry Cowell.11 Contemporary reviewer Lou Harrison drew several comparisonsbetween Capricorn and the music of Igor Stravinsky, specifically its sectional construction(referring to the lack of transitions between sections). 12 While Stravinsky’s influence seems topermeate the rhythmic and harmonic language of Capricorn, Barber, in a letter to his uncleSidney Homer four years after the composition of the work, referred to Stravinsky as a musicianand composer with “very definite limitations.” He further states that “Strawinsky is not a great9Heyman, Samuel Barber: The Composer and His Music, 242.10Charles Mills, “Over the Air,” Modern Music 23 (Winter 1946): 74.11Heyman, Samuel Barber: The Composer and His Music, 243.12Harrison, Lou, "Forecast and Review," Modern Music 22 (November 1944): 31.4
composer.his lack of lyricism and utter inability to work in more than small periods weighheavily against him.”13 This would seem to indicate that Barber did not consciously useStravinsky’s harmonic and rhythmic language as a basis for one of his own works; however thepresence of so many Stravinsky-like characteristics calls his comments into question. In additionto showing Neo-Classical influence (Bach’s Brandenburg Concerto No. 2), Capricorn containsmuch of the “shifting additive rhythms, pandiatonic harmony, crisp, dry sonorities, anddiminutive gestures”14 so common to Stravinsky’s works.Barber wrote very few works for winds and even fewer featuring wind soloists. The onlyother example of a published solo work15 by Barber is the first movement of his unfinished oboeconcerto, Canzonetta for oboe and strings. 1613Letter, Barber to Sidney Homer, 8 February 1948.14Simmons, Voices in the Wilderness: Six American Neo-Romantic Composers, 286.15Barber’s 1954 composition Adventure for flute, clarinet, horn and harp with ‘exotic’instruments was never published.16Barbara B. Heyman. "Barber, Samuel," Grove Music Online. Oxford Music Online. 18 May.2010 e/grove/music/01994 .5
PERFORMANCE ANALYSISThe purpose of this study is to create a performance analysis for trumpet players. Such astudy should discuss the harmonic, melodic, and formal construction of the work.Movement IThe first movement of Capricorn centers around four motives stated within the firstthirteen bars of the work (Ex. 1).Example 1. Motives.These motives serve as vehicles for melodic development and variation and to unify contrastingsections of the movement.17 Centered around an A tonality, the first movement can be dividedinto three primary sections. The first section, outlined below, exposes the four motives that serveas the basis for the rest of the movement.17Friedewald, “A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the Published Music of Samuel Barber,” 209.6
Example 1a. Outline of section 1, movement I.18BarSubjectKey1-6Motive AA minor7Motive Bambiguous8Motive Cambiguous13Motive Dambiguous17-40A’A minor41-45B’E46-53C’C# minorThe fugue subject that appears from mm. 17-40 is derived from Motive A and appears inthe trumpet in mm. 26-27 (Ex. 2). This fugal material is treated in the standard manner byBarber, with the initial exposition of the subject by the oboe given a real answer (a 5th above) bythe flute. The subject later appears in inversion and stretto in both the string (mm. 29-37) andsolo parts (mm. 37-40).19Example 2. Movement I, mm. 25-27. Motive A bracketed.This use of motivic content as a basis for the work and as a means of formal articulationis an example of the influence of J.S. Bach. Composer Philip Glass explains Bach’s influence ontwentieth century composers in the following manner:18Coke,“An Analysis of Some of the Purely Instrumental Works of Samuel Barber between theYears 1930 to 1950,” (M.A. Thesis, California State College at Long Beach, 1968), 67.19Friedewald, “A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the Published Music of Samuel Barber,” 210.7
the techniques you learn through the study of Bach work very well with contemporarymusic. If you take a look at the way fugues are written, the key of the piece and thestructure of the melody will determine how the fugue is written, in other words thecontent and form are linked very close together. That’s a very modernist idea, you don’thave that idea so much in the classical and even the romantic periods. You have it in the[baroque] period and you have it in the modernist period. So the idea of form and contentfor Bach was almost identical, so therefore certain procedures of baroque music.turn upin contemporary music.20Performers will notice this methodology used throughout the first movement of Capricorn. Infact, this technique is also employed by Barber in his Serenade for string quartet and his FirstSymphony, with both pieces constructed from motivic material presented in the opening bars.21The next section of the piece, outlined below, is based on several combinations of thefour primary motives and the fugue subject from section 1. 22Example 3. Outline of section 2, movement ipleBarber utilizes these motives in a completely different manner than in the first section. Here thelyricism of the previous section is contrasted with rhythmic and melodic gestures similar incharacter to those found in the introduction. The statement by the soloists of the hybrid A/C20Michael Lawrence, Bach and Friends, DVD, 2010.21Nathan Broder, Samuel Barber, (New York: G. Schirmer Inc., 1954), 57.22Friedewald, “A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the Published Music of Samuel Barber,” 210.23Coke,“An Analysis of Some of the Purely Instrumental Works of Samuel Barber between theYears 1930 to 1950,” 60-61.8
motive in m. 54 is answered by a variant of the fugue subject from the previous section. In thismanner, Barber is able to articulate and define the form of the first movement through motivicmeans; without this motivic unity the movement would likely lose any semblance of coherence.While the form of the movement could be described as a rondo or even an arch form, themusic can only be fitted loosely into these categories. The organization of this movement isbased on motivic development rather than classical forms such as rondo. Thus, Barber is able tocreate continuity between sections of contrasting musical content.24The third section of the work, outlined below, is constructed in much the samemanner as the previous two sections.Example 4. Outline of section 3, movement DA minorThis section opens with the restatement by the trumpet of the fugue subject seen in section 1.Followed by a final statement of material, based on Motive D, from the introduction by thesoloists.Movement IIThe second movement of Capricorn is constructed in a three part form with all materialderived from the A section.2624Friedewald, “A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the Published Music of Samuel Barber,” 208.25Coke, “An Analysis of Some of the Purely Instrumental Works of Samuel Barber between theYears 1930 to 1950,” 61.26Friedewald, “A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the Published Music of Samuel Barber,” 213.9
Example 5. Outline of movement II.27SectionBarKeyA1-29Eb-GbA (Codetta)24-29to EbB30-39EbA’40-57EbThe first section of the second movement (mm. 1-29) is in ternary form. In this sectionBarber presents the primary melodic material at both the Eb and Gb pitch levels. 28 Barber alsocreates shifts in timbre by alternating primary and secondary melodic lines among the solovoices (Ex. 6 and 6a).Example 6. Movement II, mm. 1-3.Example 6a. Movement II, mm 8-12.27Coke, “An Analysis of Some of the Purely Instrumental Works of Samuel Barber between theYears 1930 to 1950,” 62.28Friedewald, “A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the Published Music of Samuel Barber,” 214.10
Barber continues to articulate both form and musical contrast via motivic development inthe second movement. The B section (mm. 30-39), with its melodic emphasis on ascending 3rds,is based on the primary theme stated in the A section.Example 7. Movement II, mm. 31-36.The third section of the movement is a restatement of the primary theme from the firstsection. This theme and its countermelody are shuffled between the three solo voices, appearingin the flute in mm. 40-43, trumpet in mm. 44-46 and oboe in mm. 47-51.29 The movement endswith a brief coda section similar in construction to the codetta found at the conclusion of the Asection but without the accompaniment of the countermelody.29Friedewald, “A Formal and Stylistic Analysis of the Published Music of Samuel Barber,” 214.11
Movement IIIThe third movement of Capricorn opens with Barber’s most obvious allusion to Bach’sBrandenburg Concerto No. 2. The trumpet fanfare that opens the movement is reminiscent of thetrumpet figure that opens the 3rd movement of the second Brandenburg (Ex. 7 and 7a).Example 7. J.S. Bach, Brandenburg Concerto No. 2, movement III, mm. 1-7.Example 7a. Capricorn Concerto, movement III, mm. 1-5.This melodic material is also of formal significance, as it serves as the basis of the reoccurringsection which defines the movement’s rondo form.30Example 8. Form of movement III31Section30Ibid. , 214.31Ibid., 214-216.BarKeyA1-31C majorB32-60ambiguousA’61-70C majorC71-114E major12
SectionBarKeyA’’115-150D151-168C majorA’’’169-178C majorOne of the most interesting aspects of this movement occurs in section D (mm. 151-168).Throughout Capricorn Barber utilizes motive as means to unify diverse musical material.However, the material found in mm. 151-168 has no basis anywhere else in the work and is thusnew material (Ex. 9). 32 In a work where much of the music is derived from previous material thissection stands apart.Example 9. Movement III, mm. 151-155.While Barber’s exact reasoning will likely never be known, it is probable that this section isincluded to both create contrast between the last two sections (D and A’’’ in the outline above)and place emphasis on the last statement of the trumpet fanfare and it’s strong cadence in Cmajor.32Ibid., 217.13
Programmatic ContentBarber never revealed any specific programmatic content for Capricorn. He did makeseveral statements alluding to the existence of programmatic material. Prior to the premiere hestated that the title of the pieces was “.just a word, but perhaps its meaning will get across whenyou hear the music.” Several years later, in a letter to his uncle Sidney Homer, he writes “Thereis no program for Capricorn Concerto. Just cheerful noises.”33 While this statement seems toshut the door on the existence of programmatic content in Capricorn, they are far from adefinitive statement. The appearance of an article in the now defunct Philadelphia EveningBulletin (January of 1947) claims to expose the true meaning of the work. The article is based ona facsimile of the copyist’s score containing markings alluding to a possible program for thework. No source for this facsimile was given, and no further evidence has been found to supportthis assertion.34 The article itself states that:the string section represents the house proper, while the solo flute, oboe and trumpetrepresents the two wings and a guest room, or, in that order, Barber, Menotti, andHoran.3533Heyman, Samuel Barber: The Composer and His Music, 244.34Ibid., 244-245.35“Musical Architecture,” Philadelphia Evening Bulletin, 18 January, 1947. (Anon.)14
Example 10a. Movement I, mm. 41-43, Orchestra (House).Example 10b. Movement II, mm. 36-39, Oboe (Menotti).Example 10c. Movement II, mm. 4-6, Trumpet (Horan).Example 10d. Movement III, mm. 45-47, Flute (Barber).While the accuracy of this information is questionable, it is possible that Capricorn hassome degree of programmatic content.15
RECORDINGS COMPARISONThere are several excellent recordings of Capricorn. Each recording represents a uniqueset of performance choices, influenced by both the performers and the historical era in which therecording was made. By comparing recordings, performers determine standard and non-standardinterpretations of the work and become aware of a wider spectrum of musical possibilities. Therecordings being studied, the ensembles, conductors and soloists are listed below.Example 11. Examined recordings.Ensemble (year of recording)ConductorTrumpet SoloistAbbreviation DurationSt. Louis Symphony (1996)Leonard SlatkinSusan SlaughterStL14:44Budapest Strings (2001)none listedReinhold FriederichBpS14:12Pacific Orchestra (1983)Keith ClarkeAnthony PlogPSO18:13Royal Scottish National Orchestra (2005)Marin AlsopJohn GracieRSNO14:14Kammerorchester Basel (2006)Christopher Hogwood Reinhold FriederichKoB15:23Saidenberg Little Symphony (1946)Daniel SaidenbergHarry FreistadtSLS14:21San Diego Chamber Orchestra(1995)Donald BarraJohn WildsSDCO15:12Eastman-Rochester Philharmonic (1959)Howard HansonSidney MearsERP15:11Movement IThe tempo choices in the first movement of Capricorn, as recorded by the ensemblesabove, are outlined below. While comparison of tempi is a somewhat superficial basis on whichto compare recordings, it is an important first step in exploring musical and performance issues.All tempi listed below should be understood as being approximate, that is taking normalfluctuations in tempo into account. Also, no effort has been made to correct the effect of tempithat differ drastically from the primary sample when calculating average tempi and performance16
duration. Performers (and statisticians) should thus note that the data below is meant only as asimple means of comparison to aid and inform performers in the development of their ownpersonal performance concepts. Analysis of the tempi found in the recorded examples of theCapricorn are of interest to performers in several ways as performers must be prepared to playall sections of Capricorn at both the slowest and fastest recorded tempos (at least). Examples inbold represent the extant recordings that are closest to the average recorded tempo or duration,thus representing (in terms of tempo) the most standard interpretation of each particular sectionor movement.Example 12. Movement I tempo chart.Durationm. 1, Allegro nonTroppo q 96m. 17, Andante 276:506:277:017:136:59q 76q 90q 80q 91q 87q 95q 90q 86q 86moto e 132e 105 e 120 e 74 e 118 e 108 e 110e 108 e 96e 105m. 54, Allegro q 96q 94q 92q 90m. 158, Andante conmotom. 164, Allegro, conprimaq 95q 82q 88q 96q 93q 87e 105 e 96e 70 e 106 e 92e 100 e 92e 100 q 95q 83q 78q 90q 83q 88q 81q 86q 78q 83The range of tempi in the first movement raises few technical issues. The variation inthese tempi is not so great as to require changes in performance technique (i.e. switching fromsingle to multiple tonguing) and thus does not demand much attention from the performer.17
However, there are other situations that warrant consideration. Variations in tempo show the needfor analysis of multiple recorded performances. Analysis of Ex. 12 reveals that the recording bythe Pacific Symphony Orchestra (PSO) is nearly two minutes longer than most of the recordings.Anthony Plog, trumpet soloist on the recording, outlines possible reasons for the variation intempi:the session we did was a three hour session, no rehearsal before, just run through themovement and then start recording (I did a recording of L'Histoire [du Soldat] with theLA Chamber Orchestra the same way). Not the best way to learn a piece, but things wentwell for everybody I remember thinking at the session that some of the tempi weremuch slower than I knew from [a previous] performance. That was of course theconductors idea, and since we had only three hours to rehearse and record, I doubt thatanyone thought we should spend any time discussing tempi.36Movement IIExample 13. Movement II tempo chart.Durationm. 1, Allegrettoq 13:182:553:162:573:09e 120 e 110e 108 e 120 e 105 e 116 e 114 e 116 e 114e 72e 62e 55m. 40, Tempo Ie 123 e 112m. 30, Molto menomosso, tranquilloe 56e 58e 58e 67e 57e 69e 60e 116 e 110 e 110 e 116 e 112 e 116 e 114As indicated in Ex. 13 the second movement of Capricorn is the most homogeneous interms of tempo. Variations between recordings are slight.36 AnthonyPlog, personal E-mail, March 26, 2010.18
Movement IIIExample 14. Movement III tempo chart.Durationm. 1, Allegro conbrioq 465:154:514:485:014:59q 105q 109q 96q 110q 108 q 114q 110q 100q 106q 66q 40q 63q 53q 60q 58q 58q 110q 96q 109q 107 q 105q 112q 100q 106m. 151, Andante, unpoco mossoq 67m. 169, Tempo Iq 112q 56The recorded tempi of movement III can be interpreted in a manner quite similar tomovement I. While there are variations in tempo, none (with the exception of the aforementionedrecording by the PSO) require much serious attention from performers.19
PERFORMANCE PRACTICE IMPLICATIONSCapricorn presents performers with a number of challenges in terms of balance,technique and musicianship. In order to perform the work successfully musicians must work withthese musical goals in
Barber wrote very few works for winds and even fewer featuring wind soloists. The only other example of a published solo work15 by Barber is the first movement of his unfinished oboe concerto, Canzonetta for oboe and strings.16 5 13 Letter, Barber to Sidney Homer, 8 February 1948.
swan to near extinction. The last known breeding trumpeter swans vanished from Wisconsin in the late 1800s. Bringing the trumpeter swan back again A growing interest in preserving the trumpeter swan has led to full-scale efforts to restore this species to native habitats in the Midwest.
The North American Trumpeter Swan Survey (NATSS) is a cooperative, range-wide survey to monitor the status of trumpeter swans (Cygnus buccinator) in North America. It was first conducted in 1968 and has been repeated at five-year intervals since 1975. The NATSS is
celebratory concerts in Kodak Hall at Eastman Theatre on March 20 and 21. The concerts also featured the talents of legendary trumpeter and bandleader Doc Severinsen of The Tonight Show Band, as well as trumpeter Allen Vizzutti and tromb
Independent Personal Pronouns Personal Pronouns in Hebrew Person, Gender, Number Singular Person, Gender, Number Plural 3ms (he, it) א ִוה 3mp (they) Sֵה ,הַָּ֫ ֵה 3fs (she, it) א O ה 3fp (they) Uֵה , הַָּ֫ ֵה 2ms (you) הָּ תַא2mp (you all) Sֶּ תַא 2fs (you) ְ תַא 2fp (you
work/products (Beading, Candles, Carving, Food Products, Soap, Weaving, etc.) ⃝I understand that if my work contains Indigenous visual representation that it is a reflection of the Indigenous culture of my native region. ⃝To the best of my knowledge, my work/products fall within Craft Council standards and expectations with respect to
akuntansi musyarakah (sak no 106) Ayat tentang Musyarakah (Q.S. 39; 29) لًََّز ãَ åِاَ óِ îَخظَْ ó Þَْ ë Þٍجُزَِ ß ا äًَّ àَط لًَّجُرَ íَ åَ îظُِ Ûاَش
Collectively make tawbah to Allāh S so that you may acquire falāḥ [of this world and the Hereafter]. (24:31) The one who repents also becomes the beloved of Allāh S, Âَْ Èِﺑاﻮَّﺘﻟاَّﺐُّ ßُِ çﻪَّٰﻠﻟانَّاِ Verily, Allāh S loves those who are most repenting. (2:22
The Certificate in Russian Language is six- month programme of 16 Credits. The programme aims at providing beginners with basics of Russian Language. The objective of the programme is to introduce learners to the basics of Russian grammar and phonetics so that they can read, write, listen and speak Russian in an accurate manner. The programme is bilingual (Russian/English) in medium and has .
