I picked up a cheapo Marco Polo disc called Bartok Piano Transcriptions.
I hadn't known this, but Bartok transcribed keyboard music from the
17th and 18th centuries.  The music is perfectly enjoyable but, as a
transcription, bears no imprint of Bartok's own creativity that I can see.

The reasons he might be drawn to the music are clear enough.  I, myself,
am laboring slowly through his Mikrocosmos.  So I can testify to his
interest in polyphony and the interaction of linear music.  To my taste his
own music (that I listen to, not that I play) is more interesting than the
17th and 18th century fare:  I love his interesting rhythms, unusual scales
and tangy harmonies.  Still, that is a matter of taste.

What I don't understand is why these transcriptions would merit recording.
And also, from a historical and biographical point of view what a composer
would gain from transcribing keyboard music from organ or cemballo to
piano.

Ed