## Bethena-Edited

Expand Messages
• Sorry, but I m replacing this file already. I left out a rather important point. My measure #118 should show 2 on first right hand note. Also added measure # s
Message 1 of 17 , Aug 22, 2012
• 0 Attachment

Sorry, but I'm replacing this file already. I left out a rather important point. My measure #118 should show 2 on first right hand note. Also added measure #'s since this piece has a complex structure.

Roger

• many thanks,Roger,for your generous work. speaking of measure 132,right hand,you wrote: 4-1 /2 /1 would nt it be less torsion of the hand with: 4-2 /3 /2 ?
Message 2 of 17 , Aug 22, 2012
• 0 Attachment

speaking of measure 132,right hand,you wrote:
4-1 /2 /1
would'nt it be less torsion of the hand with:
4-2 /3 /2 ?

would be happy to hear your comment on that (I tried both and cant make up my mind)
thks again
• Isadore, I can play it 5-2/3/2 (but not 4-2/3/2) which is about as easy as what I have written but I m trying to keep everything as simple as possible so the
Message 3 of 17 , Aug 23, 2012
• 0 Attachment

I can play it 5-2/3/2 (but not 4-2/3/2) which is about as easy as what I have written but I'm trying to keep everything as simple as possible so the question is whether it's easier to push the hand forward to play 4-1 (there is torsion only if you bend the wrist to the right instead of going straight forward) or cross back over to play 5-2. I decided there was less chance of mishap just going forward.

Even if you can play it 4-2 you may want to try 5-2 to let the hand relax a little more.

Roger

--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "isidore" <isidoor2@...> wrote:

speaking of measure 132,right hand,you wrote:

4-1 /2 /1   would'nt it be less torsion of the hand with:  4-2 /3 /2 ?

would be happy to hear your comment on that (I tried both and cant make up my mind

•     ok, first, I apologize for this silly mistake of course I can’t play 2-4,neither I have big hands but not that big. I meant 2-5, sorry.   Now although
Message 4 of 17 , Aug 24, 2012
• 0 Attachment

ok, first, I apologize for this silly mistake
of course I can’t play 2-4,neither
I have big hands but not that big.
I meant 2-5, sorry.

Now although my fingering seemed obvious to me, I must admit I occasionally slip on it. this is why your work is so interesting to me, as an alternative to my "obvious fingering" that never works.
You are also right that there is no torsion with 1-4 if properly done.
Again, many thanks
• Bill, you say that William Behagg was a finisher . I presume that means a woodwork finisher. Since Bahnsen was mainly a piano manufacturer this raises the
Message 5 of 17 , Aug 29, 2012
• 0 Attachment

Bill, you say that William Behagg was a "finisher".  I presume that means a woodwork finisher.  Since Bahnsen was mainly a piano manufacturer this raises the possibility that William was employed by Bahnsen.  So one could imagine several reasons why his widow's photograph might have been put on the cover.

Roger

--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "jazzpianist" <perfbill@...> wrote:
>
> Just the same, she lived only four short blocks from what is now the Scott Joplin house in St. Louis on Delmar. I don't know how close to her he was living in 1905, but in 1903 they were practically neighbors. In 1901 the Behaggs lived at 1836 N. 18th, about a mile from the Joplin house, with William working as a finisher. However, the period we are talking about is when she was a widow - 1903 forward. The online 1905/1906 directories are useless since they cover business, so I don't know where she was. Consider also that she was a widow, may have been a customer of the Bahnsens, and perhaps there was some benefit to her from the publication of the piece.
>

• Timothy Bahnsen had keeled over quite dramatically next to the family Christmas tree on Christmas eve of 1900, and by 1905 the firm had been sold to Henry
Message 6 of 17 , Aug 29, 2012
• 0 Attachment
 Timothy Bahnsen had keeled over quite dramatically next to the family Christmas tree on Christmas eve of 1900, and by 1905 the firm had been sold to Henry Detmer of Chicago.  To connect any single woodworker to the Bahnsen firm,without any further clear connection would be a bit of a stretch.  We do know, according to Dr. Berlin, that the woman on the cover of Bethena is NOT Freddie.  My own suspicion, based on both my own research and examining the photograph, is that the woman pictured is Timothy's niece, who had married about six months before the piece was published.  Unfortunately, unless I can find a wedding photo of the couple, I have no proof.It is very curious, I think, that, while negotiations were going on for the sale of the firm to Detmer, that the company should branch out into music publishing, something they'd not done previously.    I strongly suspect they intended to spin the publishing side of the business off as a seperate company, because two of the pieces bear the imprint of "Bahnsen Music Co." rather than "T Bahnsen Piano Mfg. Co", which would have allowed for continued publication by the spun off "Bahnsen Music Co." after the sale of the piano firm to Detmer.BryanC --- On Wed, 8/29/12, ragantango wrote:From: ragantango Subject: [EliteSyncopations] Re: Bethena-Edited - The Search For BethenaTo: EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.comDate: Wednesday, August 29, 2012, 12:17 PM  Bill, you say that William Behagg was a "finisher".  I presume that means a woodwork finisher.  Since Bahnsen was mainly a piano manufacturer this raises the possibility that William was employed by Bahnsen.  So one could imagine several reasons why his widow's photograph might have been put on the cover.Roger--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "jazzpianist" wrote:>> Just the same, she lived only four short blocks from what is now the Scott Joplin house in St. Louis on Delmar. I don't know how close to her he was living in 1905, but in 1903 they were practically neighbors. In 1901 the Behaggs lived at 1836 N. 18th, about a mile from the Joplin house, with William working as a finisher. However, the period we are talking about is when she was a widow - 1903 forward. The online 1905/1906 directories are useless since they cover business, so I don't know where she was. Consider also that she was a widow, may have been a customer of the Bahnsens, and perhaps there was some benefit to her from the publication of the piece. >
• Since I had originally raised the speculation that the Bethena portrait may be of Freddie -- my reasoning is in the book -- I ll explain why I now doubt that
Message 7 of 17 , Aug 31, 2012
• 0 Attachment
Since I had originally raised the speculation that the Bethena portrait may be of Freddie -- my reasoning is in the book -- I'll explain why I now doubt that speculation. I do not have a photo of Freddie, but I have photos of most of her ten siblings. These photos do not absolutely rule out the possibility of my original speculation -- one can never know the results of genetic connections -- but the photos do not support it. Not having positive support, I've abandoned my original idea.

Ed

--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, Bryan Cather <catt967@...> wrote:
>
> Timothy Bahnsen had keeled over quite dramatically next to the family Christmas tree on Christmas eve of 1900, and by 1905 the firm had been sold to Henry Detmer of Chicago. Â To connect any single woodworker to the Bahnsen firm,without any further clear connection would be a bit of a stretch. Â
> We do know, according to Dr. Berlin, that the woman on the cover of Bethena is NOT Freddie. Â My own suspicion, based on both my own research and examining the photograph, is that the woman pictured is Timothy's niece, who had married about six months before the piece was published. Â Unfortunately, unless I can find a wedding photo of the couple, I have no proof.
> It is very curious, I think, that, whileÂ negotiationsÂ were going on for the sale of the firm to Detmer, that the company should branch out into music publishing, something they'd not done previously. Â  Â I strongly suspect they intended to spin the publishing side of the business off as a seperate company, because two of the pieces bear the imprint of "Bahnsen Music Co." rather than "T Bahnsen Piano Mfg. Co", which would have allowed for continued publication by the spun off "Bahnsen Music Co." after the sale of the piano firm to Detmer.
> BryanC
>
• Ed, Of course, the really intriguing and mystifying thing about the cover of Bethena is that if that picture wasn t Freddie, then who in the world was it?
Message 8 of 17 , Aug 31, 2012
• 0 Attachment
Ed,

Of course, the really intriguing and mystifying thing about the cover of Bethena is that if that picture wasn't Freddie, then who in the world was it?

Sadly, we may never know. The only ones who knew took the secret to their graves.

It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the publisher simply thought it was a pretty face to put on the cover.

Regards,
Fred M. Cain

--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "Ed" <edberlin36@...> wrote:
>
> Since I had originally raised the speculation that the Bethena portrait
> may be of Freddie -- my reasoning is in the book -- I'll explain why I
> now doubt that speculation. I do not have a photo of Freddie, but I have
> photos of most of her ten siblings. These photos do not absolutely rule
> out the possibility of my original speculation -- one can never know the
> results of genetic connections -- but the photos do not support it. Not
> having positive support, I've abandoned my original idea.
> Ed
>
>
> --- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, Bryan Cather <catt967@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Timothy Bahnsen had keeled over quite dramatically next to the family
> Christmas tree on Christmas eve of 1900, and by 1905 the firm had been
> sold to Henry Detmer of Chicago. Â To connect any single woodworker
> to the Bahnsen firm,without any further clear connection would be a bit
> of a stretch. Â
> > We do know, according to Dr. Berlin, that the woman on the cover of
> Bethena is NOT Freddie. Â My own suspicion, based on both my own
> research and examining the photograph, is that the woman pictured is
> Timothy's niece, who had married about six months before the piece was
> published. Â Unfortunately, unless I can find a wedding photo of the
> couple, I have no proof.
> > It is very curious, I think, that, whileÂ negotiationsÂ were
> going on for the sale of the firm to Detmer, that the company should
> branch out into music publishing, something they'd not done previously.
> Â Â I strongly suspect they intended to spin the publishing side
> of the business off as a seperate company, because two of the pieces
> bear the imprint of "Bahnsen Music Co." rather than "T Bahnsen Piano
> Mfg. Co", which would have allowed for continued publication by the spun
> off "Bahnsen Music Co." after the sale of the piano firm to Detmer.
> > BryanC
> >
>
• I am not planning to research this topic ‹ I have enough research lines of mine to pursue right now ‹ hence I pass my suggestion on, for the benefit of
Message 9 of 17 , Aug 31, 2012
• 0 Attachment
I am not planning to research this topic — I have enough research lines of mine to pursue right now — hence I pass my suggestion on, for the benefit of whoever wants to pursue it. For each reasonable candidate, a search could be tried through findagrave.com and similar Web sites. Chances are that the person's grave bears a photo. Ancestry.com also has threads where people post family photos.

Marcello

El 31/08/12 13:45, "FredC" <fredmcain2003@...> escribió:

Ed,

Of course, the really intriguing and mystifying thing about the cover of Bethena is that if that picture wasn't Freddie, then who in the world was it?

Sadly, we may never know. The only ones who knew took the secret to their graves.

It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the publisher simply thought it was a pretty face to put on the cover.

Regards,
Fred M. Cain

--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "Ed" <edberlin36@...> wrote:
>
> Since I had originally raised the speculation that the Bethena portrait
> may be of Freddie -- my reasoning is in the book -- I'll explain why I
> now doubt that speculation. I do not have a photo of Freddie, but I have
> photos of most of her ten siblings. These photos do not absolutely rule
> out the possibility of my original speculation -- one can never know the
> results of genetic connections -- but the photos do not support it. Not
> having positive support, I've abandoned my original idea.
> Ed
>
>
> --- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, Bryan Cather <catt967@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Timothy Bahnsen had keeled over quite dramatically next to the family
> Christmas tree on Christmas eve of 1900, and by 1905 the firm had been
> sold to Henry Detmer of Chicago. Â To connect any single woodworker
> to the Bahnsen firm,without any further clear connection would be a bit
> of a stretch. Â
> > We do know, according to Dr. Berlin, that the woman on the cover of
> Bethena is NOT Freddie. Â My own suspicion, based on both my own
> research and examining the photograph, is that the woman pictured is
> Timothy's niece, who had married about six months before the piece was
> published. Â Unfortunately, unless I can find a wedding photo of the
> couple, I have no proof.
> > It is very curious, I think, that, whileÂ negotiationsÂ were
> going on for the sale of the firm to Detmer, that the company should
> branch out into music publishing, something they'd not done previously.
> Â Â I strongly suspect they intended to spin the publishing side
> of the business off as a seperate company, because two of the pieces
> bear the imprint of "Bahnsen Music Co." rather than "T Bahnsen Piano
> Mfg. Co", which would have allowed for continued publication by the spun
> off "Bahnsen Music Co." after the sale of the piano firm to Detmer.
> > BryanC
> >
>

• Fred, I would refer you back to my earlier post, #12984 or http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/EliteSyncopations/message/12984 as one possibility, but one
Message 10 of 17 , Aug 31, 2012
• 0 Attachment
Fred, I would refer you back to my earlier post, #12984 or http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/EliteSyncopations/message/12984 as one possibility, but one that would have to be explored in more detail. The timing and close proximity to Joplin of this particular Bethena are enough to at least consider a possibility. The name wasn't just picked out of mid air, and as that post will tell you, it also was not all that common in the United States at that time.

Hope that will help a little.

Bill E.

--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "FredC" <fredmcain2003@...> wrote:
>
> Ed,
>
> Of course, the really intriguing and mystifying thing about the cover of Bethena is that if that picture wasn't Freddie, then who in the world was it?
>
> Sadly, we may never know. The only ones who knew took the secret to their graves.
>
> It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the publisher simply thought it was a pretty face to put on the cover.
>
• Answered one of my own questions. I just took a little side trip from my continuing composition of female biographies to check on the Behagg family. They were
Message 11 of 17 , Aug 31, 2012
• 0 Attachment
Answered one of my own questions. I just took a little side trip from my continuing composition of female biographies to check on the Behagg family. They were from Germany and all white. Now I'm not sure if I can tell for certain whether the Bethena on the cover is black or perhaps dark and Germanic. So without a pic of Bethena Behagg, I simply don't know.

A further look (I'm guessing this was done before) for Daniel E. Davenport shows that he was a white porter, later bartender, living at 2339 Chestnut Street about that time. He oddly does not appear in the 1900 census. While not directly in the same neighborhood, this is a mile or so from Bethena and less from Joplin's digs of the time (estimated). But where was he bartending? I don't know. Davenport disappears after the 1904 directory, but again, since the on-line 1905 and 1906 edition are the business directories, he may have still been in town.

So another question - why dedicate this piece to a bartender and his wife? Since they were white (even though St. Louis appears to have been fairly tolerant of integration) did THEY know this Bethena or her late husband? Was she mulatto or white with olive skin? Was she perhaps the elusive Mrs. Davenport (who I was not able to locate in a directory)?

Maybe this gets us a little closer, because with an uncommon name like Bethena, SOMEBODY knew one and SOMEBODY thought of the name, be it Bahnsen, Joplin or Davenport.

While often going in speculative directions without acknowledging just how speculative they are, I am sometimes able to create scenarios from them that lead me in certain directions until that "aha" clue emerges, and everything else falls into place. It has worked at least three dozen times while I've been researching the lady composers. But this time, I'm not mentally up to the task.

Anybody?

Bill E.

--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "jazzpianist" <perfbill@...> wrote:
>
> Fred, I would refer you back to my earlier post, #12984 or http://launch.groups.yahoo.com/group/EliteSyncopations/message/12984 as one possibility, but one that would have to be explored in more detail. The timing and close proximity to Joplin of this particular Bethena are enough to at least consider a possibility. The name wasn't just picked out of mid air, and as that post will tell you, it also was not all that common in the United States at that time.
>
> Hope that will help a little.
>
> Bill E.
>
> --- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "FredC" <fredmcain2003@> wrote:
> >
> > Ed,
> >
> > Of course, the really intriguing and mystifying thing about the cover of Bethena is that if that picture wasn't Freddie, then who in the world was it?
> >
> > Sadly, we may never know. The only ones who knew took the secret to their graves.
> >
> > It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the publisher simply thought it was a pretty face to put on the cover.
> >
>
• Close examination of the photo gives the impression of a wedding portrait...hence my speculation that it may be Timothy s neice, who d been married less than a
Message 12 of 17 , Aug 31, 2012
• 0 Attachment
 Close examination of the photo gives the impression of a wedding portrait...hence my speculation that it may be Timothy's neice, who'd been married less than a year before the piece was published.  As I mentioned, until I can find her photo, I cannot confirm this.BryanC --- On Fri, 8/31/12, FredC wrote:From: FredC Subject: [EliteSyncopations] Re: Bethena-Edited - The Search For BethenaTo: EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.comDate: Friday, August 31, 2012, 1:45 PM  Ed, Of course, the really intriguing and mystifying thing about the cover of Bethena is that if that picture wasn't Freddie, then who in the world was it? Sadly, we may never know. The only ones who knew took the secret to their graves. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the publisher simply thought it was a pretty face to put on the cover. Regards, Fred M. Cain --- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "Ed" wrote: > > Since I had originally raised the speculation that the Bethena portrait > may be of Freddie -- my reasoning is in the book -- I'll explain why I > now doubt that speculation. I do not have a photo of Freddie, but I have > photos of most of her ten siblings. These photos do not absolutely rule > out the possibility of my original speculation -- one can never know the > results of genetic connections -- but the photos do not support it. Not > having positive support, I've abandoned my original idea. > Ed > > > --- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, Bryan Cather > wrote: > > > > Timothy Bahnsen had keeled over quite dramatically next to the family > Christmas tree on Christmas eve of 1900, and by 1905 the firm had been > sold to Henry Detmer of Chicago. Â To connect any single woodworker > to the Bahnsen firm,without any further clear connection would be a bit > of a stretch. Â > > We do know, according to Dr. Berlin, that the woman on the cover of > Bethena is NOT Freddie. Â My own suspicion, based on both my own > research and examining the photograph, is that the woman pictured is > Timothy's niece, who had married about six months before the piece was > published. Â Unfortunately, unless I can find a wedding photo of the > couple, I have no proof. > > It is very curious, I think, that, whileÂ negotiationsÂ were > going on for the sale of the firm to Detmer, that the company should > branch out into music publishing, something they'd not done previously. > Â Â I strongly suspect they intended to spin the publishing side > of the business off as a seperate company, because two of the pieces > bear the imprint of "Bahnsen Music Co." rather than "T Bahnsen Piano > Mfg. Co", which would have allowed for continued publication by the spun > off "Bahnsen Music Co." after the sale of the piano firm to Detmer. > > BryanC > > >
• I know where TImothy and Alvina are buried, tho Ive not been out there. BryanC ... From: Marcello Piras Subject: Re: [EliteSyncopations]
Message 13 of 17 , Aug 31, 2012
• 0 Attachment
 I know where TImothy and Alvina are buried, tho Ive not been out there.BryanC --- On Fri, 8/31/12, Marcello Piras wrote:From: Marcello Piras Subject: Re: [EliteSyncopations] Re: Bethena-Edited - The Search For BethenaTo: "Elite Syncopations" Date: Friday, August 31, 2012, 2:04 PM  I am not planning to research this topic — I have enough research lines of mine to pursue right now — hence I pass my suggestion on, for the benefit of whoever wants to pursue it. For each reasonable candidate, a search could be tried through findagrave.com and similar Web sites. Chances are that the person's grave bears a photo. Ancestry.com also has threads where people post family photos.Marcello  El 31/08/12 13:45, "FredC" escribió:Ed,Of course, the really intriguing and mystifying thing about the cover of Bethena is that if that picture wasn't Freddie, then who in the world was it?Sadly, we may never know. The only ones who knew took the secret to their graves.It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the publisher simply thought it was a pretty face to put on the cover.Regards,Fred M. Cain--- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "Ed" wrote:>> Since I had originally raised the speculation that the Bethena portrait> may be of Freddie -- my reasoning is in the book -- I'll explain why I> now doubt that speculation. I do not have a photo of Freddie, but I have> photos of most of her ten siblings. These photos do not absolutely rule> out the possibility of my original speculation -- one can never know the> results of genetic connections -- but the photos do not support it. Not> having positive support, I've abandoned my original idea.> Ed> > > --- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, Bryan Cather > wrote:> >> > Timothy Bahnsen had keeled over quite dramatically next to the family> Christmas tree on Christmas eve of 1900, and by 1905 the firm had been> sold to Henry Detmer of Chicago. Â To connect any single woodworker> to the Bahnsen firm,without any further clear connection would be a bit> of a stretch. Â> > We do know, according to Dr. Berlin, that the woman on the cover of> Bethena is NOT Freddie. Â My own suspicion, based on both my own> research and examining the photograph, is that the woman pictured is> Timothy's niece, who had married about six months before the piece was> published. Â Unfortunately, unless I can find a wedding photo of the> couple, I have no proof.> > It is very curious, I think, that, whileÂ negotiationsÂ were> going on for the sale of the firm to Detmer, that the company should> branch out into music publishing, something they'd not done previously.> Â Â I strongly suspect they intended to spin the publishing side> of the business off as a seperate company, because two of the pieces> bear the imprint of "Bahnsen Music Co." rather than "T Bahnsen Piano> Mfg. Co", which would have allowed for continued publication by the spun> off "Bahnsen Music Co." after the sale of the piano firm to Detmer.> > BryanC> >>
• The questions around Bethena are numerous:  Why did the T. Bahnsen Piano Mfg Co. suddenly decide to publish music, while it was in the process of being
Message 14 of 17 , Aug 31, 2012
• 0 Attachment
The questions around "Bethena" are numerous:  Why did the T. Bahnsen Piano Mfg Co. suddenly decide to publish music, while it was in the process of being sold?  Why would Joplin choose to work with them, instead of the assorted other, established publishers in St Louis?  Both seem rather odd, to me at least. The dedication is to "Mr & Mrs Dan Davenport"......a couple, not an individual, which I believe unique in Joplin's dedications  Might the Davenports be the folks who connected Joplin with the Bahnsen firm?  We know Dan Davenport worked as a porter, but for whom?  Joplin's choice to work with Bahnsen makes sense in terms of proxemity (Bahnsen was closer than the other publishers) until you remember that Bahnsen wasn't in the publishing business until "Bethena"  Of all the single pieces of music in Joplin's body of work, "Bethena" is high on the list of the ones that pose perplexing questions.

BryanC
--- On Fri, 8/31/12, Bryan Cather <catt967@...> wrote:

From: Bryan Cather <catt967@...>
Subject: Re: [EliteSyncopations] Re: Bethena-Edited - The Search For Bethena
To: EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, August 31, 2012, 4:58 PM

 Close examination of the photo gives the impression of a wedding portrait...hence my speculation that it may be Timothy's neice, who'd been married less than a year before the piece was published.  As I mentioned, until I can find her photo, I cannot confirm this.BryanC--- On Fri, 8/31/12, FredC wrote:From: FredC Subject: [EliteSyncopations] Re: Bethena-Edited - The Search For BethenaTo: EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.comDate: Friday, August 31, 2012, 1:45 PM  Ed, Of course, the really intriguing and mystifying thing about the cover of Bethena is that if that picture wasn't Freddie, then who in the world was it? Sadly, we may never know. The only ones who knew took the secret to their graves. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the publisher simply thought it was a pretty face to put on the cover. Regards, Fred M. Cain --- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, "Ed" wrote: > > Since I had originally raised the speculation that the Bethena portrait > may be of Freddie -- my reasoning is in the book -- I'll explain why I > now doubt that speculation. I do not have a photo of Freddie, but I have > photos of most of her ten siblings. These photos do not absolutely rule > out the possibility of my original speculation -- one can never know the > results of genetic connections -- but the photos do not support it. Not > having positive support, I've abandoned my original idea. > Ed > > > --- In EliteSyncopations@yahoogroups.com, Bryan Cather > wrote: > > > > Timothy Bahnsen had keeled over quite dramatically next to the family > Christmas tree on Christmas eve of 1900, and by 1905 the firm had been > sold to Henry Detmer of Chicago. Â To connect any single woodworker > to the Bahnsen firm,without any further clear connection would be a bit > of a stretch. Â > > We do know, according to Dr. Berlin, that the woman on the cover of > Bethena is NOT Freddie. Â My own suspicion, based on both my own > research and examining the photograph, is that the woman pictured is > Timothy's niece, who had married about six months before the piece was > published. Â Unfortunately, unless I can find a wedding photo of the > couple, I have no proof. > > It is very curious, I think, that, whileÂ negotiationsÂ were > going on for the sale of the firm to Detmer, that the company should > branch out into music publishing, something they'd not done previously. > Â Â I strongly suspect they intended to spin the publishing side > of the business off as a seperate company, because two of the pieces > bear the imprint of "Bahnsen Music Co." rather than "T Bahnsen Piano > Mfg. Co", which would have allowed for continued publication by the spun > off "Bahnsen Music Co." after the sale of the piano firm to Detmer. > > BryanC > > >

Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.