Johann Sebastian Bach

by Christoph Wolff

  4. Jung 1985, p. 11.

  5. BD II, no. 56.

  6. BD II, no. 58.

  7. Jung 1985, pp. 5f.; Glöckner, Bachfest1985.

  8. NBR, no. 38.

  9. His collections included, for example, a viola da gamba by the famous Hamburg instrument builder Joachim Tielke, with marvelous ornamental inlay of ivory; see Günther Hellwig, Joachim Tielke, ein Hamburger Lauten-und Violenmacher der Barockzeit (Frankfurt, 1979), p. 97.

  10. NBR, no. 43.

  11. S. E. Hanks, New Grove, 9: 659.

  12. NBR, no. 395.

  13. NBR, no. 39f–g. Bach’s base salary was paid by the joint ducal treasury.

  14. Jung 1985, p. 36.

  15. Walther, Lexicon, p. 331.

  16. Jauernig 1950, p. 52, suggests that he may be related to the Hoffmann family of musicians from Suhl (Thuringia), who were in turn related to several Bach family members by marriage. The godmother of Bach’s daughter Maria Sophia, born in 1713, was the wife of Johann Christoph Hoffmann from Suhl, great-grandson of the old town piper of Suhl (NBR, no. 303, pp. 286f).

  17. Küster 1996, pp. 190f. Bach’s appointment in 1703 may have been facilitated by the younger Drese’s absence.

  18. Dimensions: height: 7 + 7.5 + 5m (ceiling); 4.75 + 3.5m (Capelle + cupola). Jauernig 1950, p. 60; Schrammek 1988, p. 99. See also Chapter 12, footnote 24, regarding the “echo tower” effect of the Capelle.

  19. Gottfried Albin Wette, Historische Nachrichten von der berühmten Residenz-Statt Weimar, vol. 1 (Weimar, 1737).

  20. In 1638, Compenius built the large instrument for Johann Bach at the Prediger Church in Erfurt. For details regarding the history of the Weimar palace organ, see Schrammek 1988.

  21. Schrammek 1988, pp. 103–5.

  22. Jauernig 1950, p. 73. J. Adlung (Anleitung zu der musikalischen Gelahrtheit, Erfurt, 1758, p. 425) reports that the carillon of the Weimar court organ extended through all keys of one manual.

  23. Jauernig 1950, p. 74.

  24. NBR, no. 312c.

  25. The full contractual payment for the organ, however, did not occur until September 15, 1714.

  26. For a student list, see NBR, pp. 315–16; for J. B. and J. L. Bach, see BDII, nos. 82 and 277.

  27. Schulze, Bach-Überlieferung, pp. 158–59; on the de Graaf connection, pp. 156–58.

  28. Also works by Dieupart and other French masters; see Horn 1986.

  29. NBR, no. 69.

  30. Chronology according to Wolff, Stinson 1996.

  31. Facsimile edition (Leipzig, 1981).

  32. NBR, no. 35.

  33. Kobayashi 1995, p. 304, dates BWV 199 to August 27, 1713; for BWV 54, see NBA/KB I/8 (Wolff), p. 89.

  34. Reported by P. D. Kräuter in 1713 (NBR, no. 312c).

  35. See Melamed-Sanders 1999; previously attributed to Reinhard Keiser. An extant libretto of the Passion points to a 1707 performance in Hamburg under Brauns.

  36. On March 22, 1714, Bach stood godfather for a son born to Weldig in Weissenfels (BD II, no. 68).

  37. BD II, no. 39, p. 36.

  38. NBR, no. 312c.

  39. See NBR, no. 59.

  40. NBR, p. 307.

  41. NBR, no. 350.

  42. Beißwenger, 1992, nos. I/A/2, I/F/2.

  43. NBR, p. 435. The possibility of the friend’s being Walther was suggested by Spitta I, p. 388.

  44. Primarily C. P. E. Bach and J. J. Quantz.

  45. NBR, p. 434.

  46. NBR, pp. 432–34.

  47. NBR, pp. 438–39.

  48. NBR, no. 306, p. 306.

  49. NBR, p. 440.

  50. NBR, no. 31.

  51. NBR, no. 236.

  52. NBR, no. 72.

  53. NBR, p. 440.

  54. Dresdner Gelehrten Anzeigen, 1798, no. 7 (BJ 1983: 103).

  CHAPTER 6

  1. NBR, no. 51.

  2. Der vollkommene Capell-Meister (Hamburg, 1739), p. 483.

  3. “The courier to the organist in Weimar” received “fee and waiting money” (NBR, no. 46a).

  4. NBR, no. 491

  5. BD, pp. 24f.

  6. Only ten miles south of Halle, up the Saale River and on the way to Weimar, Johann Friedrich Wender of Mühlhausen was at the time building his largest instrument ever (with sixty-six stops on four manuals and pedal) at the cathedral of Merseburg (see Kröhner 1995, p. 85). As Wender and Bach had known each other well since Arnstadt, Bach would have been aware of the Merseburg project. The cathedral organist and music director of the duke of Saxe-Merseburg was Georg Friedrich Kauffmann, a former student of Johann Heinrich Buttstedt in Erfurt and later among Bach’s competitors for the St. Thomas cantorate in Leipzig.

  7. Friedrich Chrysander (G. F. Händel, vol. 1, Leipzig, 1858; “Joh. Seb. Bach und sein Sohn Wilhelm Friedemann in Halle, 1713–1768,” Jahrbücher für musikalische Wissenschaft, vol. 2, Leipzig, 1867) was the first to suggest Bach’s involvement with the Halle organ project, and he even suggested that Bach wrote the specifications. Spitta (I, p. 521) points out that there is no evidence for the latter claim. There are, however, two related specification drafts, an anonymous one dated 1712 (Dispositio eines großen 16 füßigen Orgelwerckes) and a later one signed by Cuntzius; see BDI, p. 160. Vladimir Stadnitschenko (“Studien zur Vokalmusik Friedrich Wilhelm Zachows,” Ph.D. diss., University of Freiburg/Breisgau, 1998, pp. 242–44) identifies some important concordances between Bach’s Mühlhausen organ renovation plan and the Halle project, strongly suggesting that Bach indeed had some influence on the design of the Halle organ. Serauky 1939, pp. 479–83.

  8. NBR, no. 46b.

  9. NBR, no. 50.

  10. NBR, nos. 46a and 47.

  11. None of the pieces that have for various reasons been considered (BWV 21, 61, and 63) show any evidence of originating in conjunction with Bach’s Halle audition; for details, see Wollny 1994.

  12. Ibid., p. 31.

  13. NBR, no. 48.

  14. NBR, no. 306, p. 300.

  15. NBR, no. 50.

  16. See NBA/KBI/8 (Wolff), p. 114. On Franck’s poetry, see Schulze, WBK1: 105–7.

  17. List b is undated, but must have originated from late 1714 or early 1715 because it includes Christoph Alt, who died in 1715. His son Philipp Samuel as well as Gottfried Blühnitz, though both on list a, do not appear on list b; they may not have counted among the full-time members.

  18. Terry 1993, pp. 91f.

  19. Cf. Johann Gottfried Walther, Briefe, ed. Klaus Beckmann and Hans-Joachim Schulze (Leipzig, 1987), p. 72, where the town organist reports about his playing the violin at court. Eight choirboys were regularly paid by the court treasury for handling the liturgical chant (Choralsingen); see Jauernig 1950, p. 71.

  20. NBR, no. 394.

  21. See NBA/KBI/ 8.1–2 (Wolff), p. 104. In 1713–15, Schubart was officially paid by the court of Duke Ernst August for copying services (Musicalienschreiben).

  22. BD II, nos. 69, 80; NBR, no. 53.

  23. To the original four-part string score of the sonata (v, va 1–2, vc), Bach added a separate part for ripieno violin, either immediately before the first performance or for a later Weimar performance. For this version, the string ensemble required six players; recorder and organ would bring the minimum total number to eight. Still more would be needed if the continuo group were to include bassoon and/or violone.

  24. Twenty-two trees were needed for beams and timberwork; the entire project was completed by December 1714 with the finishing of a copper roof (Jauernig 1950, pp. 64f.).

  25. A pound of soap purchased in July 1712 helped grease the machinery; see ibid., p. 63.

  26. Ibid., pp. 63f.

  27. In 1718, “six red-painted benches” were newly acquired for the Capelle, apparently to replace old ones (ibid., p. 70).

  28. As quoted by Schrammek 1988, p. 99.

  29. Gottgefälliges Kirchen-Opffer (Darmstadt, 1711). On Lehms and Neumaster texts, see Schulze, WBK 1: 101–5.

  30. Geistliches Singen und Spielen (Gotha, 1711).


  31. The court paid the members of the court capelle for mourning clothes (BDII, no. 75).

  32. A calligraphic copy of the text has survived. On April 4, 1716, Franck, Bach, and two other court officials received, in conjunction with the preceding funeral service, unspecified shares of a substantial payment from the treasury of the Red Palace, totaling 45 florins 15 groschen (Glöckner 1985, p. 163).

  33. Cf. Dürr 1976, Hofmann 1993, Kobayashi 1995.

  34. On the early history of BWV 21, see BC A99a and Wolff 1996b.

  35. Cf. Dürr 1977, pp. 65 and 69; also Hofmann 1993, p. 29.

  36. NBR, no. 54.

  37. Cf. NBAIX/2; Beißwenger 1992; Kobayashi 1995; and Peter Wollny, book review in BJ1998: 209.

  38. NBR, no. 306, p. 300.

  39. This and the following quotations in NBR, pp. 441f. Quotations, like the others in this volume, are rendered in the 1820 English translation by A. F. C. Kollmann, which is reproduced in its entirety on pp. 419–82.

  40. See BWV 2, p. 530.

  41. In Birnbaum’s reply to Scheibe: “Harmony becomes far more complete if all the voices collaborate to form it” (NBR, no. 344, p. 347); cf. Epilogue.

  42. For a more thorough analysis, see Wolff, Essays, Chapter 7.

  43. NBR, no. 395.

  44. NBR, p. 436. Mozart also used the clavichord to check the results of his composing activities.

  45. NBR, no. 57.

  46. Jauernig 1959, pp. 102–4.

  47. Glöckner 1988, pp. 138.

  48. BD II, no. 81.

  49. Jauernig 1950, p. 99.

  50. See Glöckner 1985, pp. 159–64, for the events related to Prince Johann Ernst’s death, and Melamed 1993 for the possible performance on November 10 of the (lost) cantata “wir haben niest mit Fleisch und Blut.”

  51. BD II, no. 77 (for the correct identification of the document, see Glöckner 1985).

  52. Smend, 1985, p. 187.

  53. Duchess Eleonore Wilhelmine herself may also have contributed to furthering connections between her brother and Bach; in August 1718, Bach asked her to be godmother to his son Leopold Augustus (BD II, no. 94).

  54. NBR, no. 60.

  55. NBR, nos. 63–65.

  56. See Glöckner 1995.

  57. Cf. BC D 1.

  58. See Telemann’s autobiography, in Johann Mattheson, Grundlage einer Ehrenpforte (Hamburg, 1740), p. 364.

  59. NBR, no. 70b.

  60. NBR, no. 318.

  61. The oldest report appears in Birnbaum’s “Defense” (NBR, no. 67). The most detailed source is the Obituary (NBR, pp. 301–2). And Marpurg indicated in 1786 that he heard the story directly from Bach. For a comparative reading of the reports, see Breig 1998.

  62. NBR, no. 396, p. 408.

  63. Mattheson, Grundlage einer Ehrenpforte (Hamburg, 1740), p. 396.

  64. Fürstenau, 2:122. A medal bearing the image of King Augustus the Strong is listed in Marchand’s estate (Busch 1996, p. 175).

  65. NBR, pp. 300–2.

  66. Titon du Tillet, Le Parnass françois (Paris, 1732), p. 658: “Il ne dependoit que de lui de faire une fortune considerable, mais son esprit incertain et sa conduite des plus singulieres lui empêcherent des profiter de toutes les occasions favorables qui se presentoient”—quoted after Busch 1996, p. 175.

  67. NBR, no. 67; cf. also BD I, no. 6. Forkel apparently errs when he reports that Bach “was not the challenger in this case, but the challenged” (NBR, no. 459).

  68. Probably Guillaume Marchand (see D. Fuller, in New Grove 11:655).

  69. Fürstenau, 2: 101–21.

  70. NBR, no. 395.

  71. NBR, no. 68.

  72. The pertinent records, referred to (“vid. acta”) in the document cited, are lost. Points of contention might have been Bach’s participation and nonparticipation, respectively, in the bicentennial celebrations of the Lutheran Reformation in late October 1717 and in the upcoming Christmas services.

  73. The document regarding Bach’s arrest, unknown to Spitta, was found by Paul von Bojanowsky (Das Weimar Johann Sebastian Bachs, Weimar, 1903) and then first used in Albert Schweitzer’s 1905 biography. Terry 1993, p. 114, speculates (erroneously) that Bach wrote the Orgel-Büchlein in jail.

  74. See NBR, no. 315; NBR, no. 370; see also NBA/KBV/6.1, p. 187.

  75. NBR, nos. 71–73.

  76. Küster 1996, pp. 202f.

  CHAPTER 7

  1. NBR, no. 72.

  2. Court councillor and chamberlain Johann Christoph Laurentius, the highest paid official, earned 540 talers; only privy councillor von Zanthier (500) and court marshal von Nostiz (484) earned more than the capellmeister (see Hoppe 1986, p. 39).

  3. NBR, no. 70.

  4. That is, twice Stricker’s salary; Cöthen salary payments were made at the end of every month, not quarterly. Extra allowances brought Bach’s salary up to about 450 talers.

  5. On Bach’s Cöthen lodgings, see Hoppe 1994.

  6. Hoppe 1997, p. 65.

  7. Hoppe 1986, p. 148.

  8. Bunge 1905, p. 19; Hoppe 1997, p. 66 (facsimile from the diary). Zanthier later became princely court councillor and director of the administration of the principality of Anhalt-Cöthen.

  9. Spitta II, p. 1, took the dates from Leopold’s diary.

  10. Especially French and Italian music (including three operas by Lully and cantatas by Francesco Mancini); see Hoppe 1986, p. 27.

  11. Ibid., p. 28.

  12. Reprinted in Johann Adam Hiller, Lebensbeschreibungen berühmter Musikgelehrten und Tonkünstler neuerer Zeit (Leipzig, 1784), p. 135.

  13. Bunge 1905, p. 19.

  14. NBR, no. 152.

  15. See Michael Tilmouth, “Gottfried Finger,” New Grove 6: 565–66; Christoph Schubart, “Augustin Reinhard Stricker,” MGG 12 (1965): cols. 1603–5.

  16. BDII, no. 99.

  17. Based on information provided by Hoppe 1986 and BDII, nos. 86, 99, 108, 277.

  18. BD II, no. 91.

  19. The manuscript inventory of the music library at the neighboring ducal castle of Zerbst offers welcome insight into the rich and diversified vocal-instrumental repertoire maintained at a small court. The instrumental genres represented on twenty-four densely filled pages include concertos (for violins, flutes, recorders, oboes, and bassoons), overtures and symphonies for large orchestra, and sonatas for four, three, and two players. See Concert-Stube des Zerbster Schlosses. Inventarverzeichnis aufgestellt im März 1743,facsimile edition (Michaelstein, 1983).

  20. Auserlesene und theils noch nie gedruckte Gedichte, vol. 2 (Halle, 1719).

  21. NBR, no. 78.

  22. BD II, no. 96.

  23. BD II, no. 103.

  24. BD II, no. 92.

  25. Contrary to references in the older literature, neither the specifications nor the manual and pedal ranges of the old St. Agnus organ are known (Henkel 1985, pp. 5, 22).

  26. BD II, no. 116.

  27. On Spieß as composer, see Hoppe 1998, p. 34.

  28. Smend 1951/E, p. 34.

  29. Smend 1951/E, p. 189.

  30. BD II, no. 115.

  31. NBR, no. 76. The visiting musicians listed under the December 1718 date (Johann Gottfried Riemschneider, concertmaster [N. N.] Lienicke [surely a relative of the Cöthen chamber musician and member of the Lienicke family of musicians], Johann Gottfried Vogler, and Emanuel Preese) may have participated in the performance of the cantata BWV Anh. 5 and BWV 66a on the occasion of the prince’s birthday.

  32. OPERA PRIMA | Erster Theil: | Bestehet in 6. Italienischen |CANTATEN | à |VOCE SOLA | Worzu | Violino oder Hautbois Solo accompagniret | Von | Augustino Reinhardo Stricker, | HochFürstl. Anhaltscher Capellmeister in Cöthen (Cöthen, 1715); the collection is dedicated to Prince Leopold.

  33. According to Walther, Lexicon, p. 527. Riemschneider used to be a member of the Leipzig Collegium Musicum; see Andreas Glöckner, “Musikalisches Leben am Köthener Hof,” in WBK 2, p. 110.

  34. Händel-Handbuch, vol. 4: Dokumente zu Leben und Schaffen (Leipzig,
1985), p. 173; in 1739, Riemschneider became cantor at the cathedral in Hamburg.

  35. NBR, no. 152.

  36. Table 7.4 provides a summary of detailed financial information analyzed by Hoppe 1986.

  37. Still, this percentage rate is relatively high. In comparison, the neighboring princely court of Anhalt-Zerbst, with a total income of 107,618 talers, spent 1,322 talers (1.2 percent) for music (figures for 1723–24). See Hoppe 1986, p. 61.

  38. Based on expeditures for 1723–24; see ibid., pp. 43f.

  39. See ibid., pp. 31–33.

  40. Cited ibid., p. 34.

  41. In 1719, Leopold established a palace library and appointed his French tutor from childhood days, Gustave Adolphe Allion de Maiseroy, as first librarian; see ibid., pp. 36, 53.

  42. Among other things, many of which related to religious quibbles over Calvinist versus Lutheran dominance, Prince Leopold in particular never overcame the long-lasting negative effects of his decision to deprive Wilhelm Heinrich von Rath, his mother’s brother, of his power. Upon his accession in 1716, Leopold dismissed his uncle from the influential position as court and chamber councillor. Domestic and dynastic disputes overshadowed Leopold’s administration from beginning to end.

  43. NBR, no. 128.

  44. NBR, no. 117; BD II, no. 184.

  45. NBR, no. 117.

  46. A detailed description of the funeral rites, based on court documents, is in Smend 1951, pp. 164–67.

  47. NBR, no. 396 (pp. 407f.). Handel’s visits to his hometown are documented for May–June 1719, June 1729, and August 1750 (cf. Händel-Handbuch, 4: 82, 173,442).

  48. NBR, no. 77.

  49. Although no details are known, Immanuel Heinrich Gottlieb Freitag of the Cöthen court capelle probably played in 1720–21 in the margrave’s capelle.

  50. NBR, no. 84. The dedication is written in a French translation that was probably provided by the Cöthen court librarian, Gustave Adolphe Allion (see note 41). In French, “une couple d’années” refers to a period of two years. The date of the dedication (March 24, 1721) is exactly two years after Bach’s Berlin visit of March 1719.

  51. Hoppe 1986, p. 16.

  52. Guest lists are provided in Neu-verbessert und vermehrtes denckwürdiges Kayser Carls-Baad (Nuremberg, 1731), pp. 79f. For 1718 the guests listed, by name or title, in clude Prince Leopold and his brother (“with their princely household”), the cardinal of Saxe-Zeitz, and Princess Elisabetha von Lamberg; for 1720, again Prince Leopold “with his princely household” but without his brother, and then only “Her Royal Majesty, the Queen of Poland and Electoress of Saxony, with her high royal household”—possibly the first time for Bach to encounter Dresden royaly. For both years, general references are made to other high religious officials and secular dignitaries from many different provinces and countries.