Is 2 parts writing necessarily counterpoint?

Hello, I am a newbie in compostion, and I've been recommended to try out simple forms like minuet. I started looking at some pieces, and seeing the Bach minuet in G, it looks to be 2-part writing (except the first and last chords)

So far, I haven't studied counterpoint (only harmony and 4 part writing), and I tried to have a look at it from this point of view, which is a bit awkward cause with 2 parts, it seems we're always one note short from having a chord. From my naive point of view, it looks like most of the time, Bach is writing a chord but sacrificing the 5th (or sometimes the 3rd). The chords, although systematically incomplete in the piece are still identifiable (even if writing the figured bass I'm used to in order to understand a piece barely makes sense here). Analyzing it from this point of view yields remarkably simple harmonic choices, but it remains coherent with what I've learned.

Doing some research on 2 part writing, I found only resources talking about counterpoint. So my question: does it make sense to try to understand a 2-part piece with harmonic theory in a tonal context? Or is counterpoint the only right tool to use here? I know almost nothing about it, but this piece doesn't really look like counterpoint to me, and it seems to fit a tonal context rather than a modal one.

If the harmonic approach makes sense (and it seems to, tbh), what are the rules/guidelines to write with two parts? We just write the chords and choose a note to drop (preferably 5th, maybe 3rd?).

I'm sorry if this all sounds very dumb but I'm quite confused and I'm probably not using the right keywords to find explanations on the web.

Thanks in advance if you took the time to read!

Of course there is harmony in 2 part counterpoint. Yo have to see the chords not strictly in a vertical way (sorry the last one is blocked):

Ok, good to have confirmation. The point that got me a bit confused is that, precisely, I would have expected to find a less veritcal harmony to compensate the lack of voices. That doesn't really seem to be the case. although he could choose to complete the chord "horizontally", he always seem to leave the chord incomplete instead

the measures you circled illustrate it;  m2: G chord with missing 3rd, m3: C chord missing 5th, m4: G chord missing 5th, m5: A chord missing 5th, etc, etc... So the chords are actually laid out totally vertically on the first beat, and the rest of the measur is just melodic ornamentation, or re-using the notes laid out on the first beat. The harmony still seems totally vertical to me in that piece, and makes the deliberate choice to "lose" the 5th or the 3rd every time. Is it the proper way to write in 2 parts? Or can we also writ complete chords?

Sorry again for the beginner's concerns, I'm really only used to 4 part pieces so far 😞

This is a subject thats interested me too. How I see it is that counterpoint rules do apply but chords are generally expressed horizontally. Mostly one chord per bar but some bars will necessarily need more than one chord such as during a cadence. I try to have only consonant intervals on the upbeat, so thirds, sixths, fifths, and octaves. To get up to speed on counterpoint rules check out a youtube video on species counterpoint to get an idea. Also check out this link for examples of two part writing.

 https://www.pdfdrive.com/notenbuch-für-nannerl-notenbuch-für-wolfgang-e189172327.html

Yo have to see what happens horizontally and vertically, that way the chords are complete. Have in mind that what defines a chord in this style is the fundamental and the third. The 5th is avoidable, other notes ara passing tones.

Thank you very much for this clarification! that pretty much confirms my hypothesis that the chords are simply written without their 5th. I'm also happy to see that your chord analysis matches what I had done too, that confirms that the way I had to understand the harmony was not absurd. Thanks a lot for taking the time to explain me, it is really helpful 🙂 

If I may ask one more question, you mention that in this style, the 5th is optional. By style, do you mean 2 part writing or something else? And what about the 7th, is it ever used in this style, or would it be strange to introduce it? (I see in the score some notes that could technically be interpreted as seventh of dominant like the C in measure 8, but which are probably just passing notes, being on a weak part of the beat)

3 minutes ago, Coxi said:

Thank you very much for this clarification! that pretty much confirms my hypothes that the chords are simply written without their 5th. I'm also happy to see that your chord analysis matches what I had done too, that confirms that the way I had to understand the harmony was not absurd. Thanks a lot for taking the time to explain me, it is really helpful 🙂 

If I may ask one more question, you mention that in this style, the 5th is optional. By style, do you mean 2 part writing or something else? And what about the 7th, is it ever used in this style, or would it be strange to introduce it? (I see in the score some notes that could technically be interpreted as seventh of dominant like the C in measure 8, but which are probably just passing notes, being on a weak part of the beat)

 

 Y this style I meant baroque. Guide tones of a chord are the third. Encause it tells you if it’s minor or minor, and the seventh which tells you if it is dominant or not. But this you will see from romanticism on.

In baroque music the 7th is usually treated as a non chord tone, that is, an auxiliary note.

Ok I see. Thanks again for your answers!