With his departure from Weimar in 1718 Bach left behind him the distinctively Organ period of his musical fertility. Though his compositions were still by no means generally known, as a player he held an unchallenged pre-eminence.
89
He was appointed to Cöthen on August 1, 1717, and was inducted at Leipzig on May 31, 1723.
90
The date actually was November 1720. At Cöthen Bach had an inferior Organ and little scope for his attainments; his chief duties were in connection with the Prince’s band. The yearning to get back to the Organ, which eventually took him to Leipzig in 1723, shows itself in his readiness to entertain an invitation to Hamburg in 1720.
91
Three Organ movements by Bach upon Wolfgang Dachstein’s melody, An Wasserflüssen Babylon, are extant. See notes upon them and their relation to the Hamburg extemporisation in Terry, Bach’s Chorals, Part III.
92
As at Halle in 1713, Bach does not appear to have gone to Hamburg specially to compete for the post of Organist to the Church of St. James, vacant by the death of Heinrich Friese in September 1720. He was not able to stay to take part in the final tests, nor was he asked to submit to them, since his visit to Hamburg had given him an opportunity to display his gifts. In the result the post was given to Johann Joachim Heitmann, who acknowledged his appointment by forthwith paying 4000 marks to the treasury of the Church. See Spitta, ii. 17 ff.
93
Johann Kuhnau died on June 25, 1722.
94
On the title-pages of his published works Bach describes himself as “Capellm. und Direct. Chor. Mus. Lips.”
95
Forkel has practically nothing to say regarding the Leipzig period of Bach’s musical life. That a professed historian of music, setting before the public for the first time the life of one whom he so greatly extolled, and with every inducement to present as complete a picture of him as was possible, should have taken no trouble to carry his investigations beyond the point C. P. E. Bach and Agricola had reached in the Nekrolog of 1754 is almost incredible. The only reason that can be adduced, apart from the lack of a really scientific impulse, is that Forkel was almost entirely ignorant of the flood of concerted church music which poured from Leipzig from 1723 to 1744. His criticism of Bach as a composer is restricted practically to Bach’s Organ and Clavier works.
96
On November 19, 1728. Latterly his interest in music had waned. The fact, along with Bach’s concern for the education of his sons and his desire to return to the Organ, explains his abandonment of the more dignified Cöthen appointment.
97
The score of this work was in Forkel’s possession, but was missing from his library in 1818 and was assumed to be lost until, in 1873, Rust was able to show that Bach used for the occasion certain choruses and Arias from the St. Matthew Passion, which he was then writing, with the first chorus of the Trauer-Ode as an opening of the extemporised work. See Spitta, ii. 618; Schweitzer, ii. 208.
98
In 1723 he received the title Hochfürstlich Weissenfelsische wirkliche Kapellmeister and retained it till his death. He retained also his Cöthen appointment.
99
Augustus III. Bach had petitioned for the appointment in a letter dated July 27, 1733 (Spitta, iii. 38), forwarding a copy of the newly-written Kyrie and Gloria of the B minor Mass.
100
There does not appear to be any ground for the suggestion that the post of Hofcomponist to the Dresden Court was attached ex officio to the St. Thomas’ Cantorate. Bach applied for it in 1733, taking advantage of the recent accession of the new sovereign, Augustus III., in February 1733.
101
Friedemann was then at Halle.
102
May 7, 1747, according to Spitta, quoting Friedrich Wilhelm Marpurg’s Historisch-kritische Beyträge zur Aufnahme der Musik, which appeared in 5 vols. between 1754-1778. On the other hand, Spener, who first records the event, states briefly: “May 11,1747. His Majesty was informed that Kapellmeister Bach had arrived in Potsdam, and that he was in the King’s ante-chamber, waiting His Majesty’s gracious permission to enter, and hear the music. His Majesty at once commanded that he should be admitted” (Spitta, iii. 231 n.). If the Marpurg and Spener dates are reliable, it looks as though Friedemann’s story of his father, travel-stained and weary, being hurried incontinent into the presence of the King is a piece of picturesque embroidery.
103
Clearly this was a story that Wilhelm Friedemann prided himself on the telling, and Forkel’s remark suggests the need for caution in accepting all its details. Frederick’s courtesy to Bach, however, tends to discredit the story that ten years earlier (1737) Handel deliberately refused to meet the King at Aix-la-Chapelle owing to the peremptoriness of his summons. Mr. Streatfleld (p. 145) also shows that Frederick was not at Aix until 1741, when Handel was writing the Messiah in London.
104
Gottfried Silbermann, a pioneer of the modern pianoforte. Bach was already familiar with his Claviers with hammer action, and indeed had offered useful criticism of which Silbermann had taken advantage. See Spitta, ii. 46.
105
* The pianofortes manufactured by Silbermann, of Freiberg, pleased the King so much, that he resolved to buy them all. He collected fifteen. I hear that they all now stand, unfit for use, in various corners of the Royal Palace. [Robert Eitner, in 1873, found one of the pianos in Frederick the Great’s room at Potsdam]
106
According to another account, which Spitta (iii. 232) follows, Bach played before a large congregation in the Church of the Holy Spirit, Potsdam. The King does not appear to have been present. The extemporisation of the six-part Fugue took place in Frederick’s presence on the evening of that day.
107
Bach’s letter to Frederick accompanying the gift is dated 7th July 1747. He calls it “a musical offering, of which the noblest portion is the work of Your Majesty’s illustrious hand.” In addition to Forkel’s analysis it contains a Sonata for Flute, Violin, and Clavier, and a canon perpetuus for the same three instruments.
108
John Taylor (1703-72), oculist to George II. The operation took place in the winter of 1749-50. Taylor is said to have operated on Handel in 1751 (see the article on him in the Dict. Nat. Biography.). Streatfield (Handel, p. 212), however, does not mention Taylor, and his account suggests that Samuel Sharp, of Guy’s Hospital, was the operator in Handel’s case.
109
The actual date was July 28, at 8.45 P.M. Bach was working to the very moment of his collapse on July 18. Probably his last work was the Choral Prelude (Novello bk. xvii. 85) on the melody Wenn wir in höchsten Nöthen sein. Facing eternity, he bade his son-in-law, Altnikol, inscribe the movement with the title of the Hymn, Vor deinen Thron tret ich hiemit, whose first stanza filled his mind:
Before Thy throne, my God, I stand,
Myself, my all, are in Thy hand.
An addendum to the Genealogy, in C. P. E. Bach’s hand, gives July 30 as the date of his father’s death.
110
July 18.
111
See Genealogical Tables VII. and VIII.
112
The statement is misleading. Of the five sons of the first marriage, two were famous, two died in infancy, and the fifth abandoned a promising musical career for the law. Of the six sons of the second marriage, one was imbecile, three died in infancy, two were famous.
113
See Introduction, p. XXI, supra.
114
In view of Bach’s memorial of August 23, 1730 (infra), this seems to be the meaning of the resolution.
115
Steigt freudig in die Luft, first performed at Cöthen, set to a new text, Schwingt freudig euch empor.
116
The well-known portrait by C. F. Rr. Liszewski in the Joachimsthal Gymnasium, Berlin, was painted in 1772, twenty-two years after Bach’s death. It represents him at a table with mus
ic-paper before him and an adjacent Clavier. Pirro uses for his frontispiece a portrait by Geber, which bears no resemblance whatever to the Haussmann or Volbach pictures. Mention must also be made of a singularly engaging picture of Bach at the age of thirty-five. It hangs in the Eisenach Bach Museum and is by Johann Jak. Ihle. It is reproduced as the frontispiece of this volume.
117
His Versuch über die wahre Art des Klavier zu spielen was published (Part I.) in 1753.
118
Forkel’s meaning can be made clear in the following manner: place the thumb and fingers of either hand upon the notes C D E F G of the pianoforte so that the three middle fingers lie more or less flat upon the keys; then draw back the three middle fingers until they form an arch having their tips approximately in a straight line with the tips of the thumb and little finger upon the keys.
119
It must be remembered that Forkel is speaking of the Clavier and not of the Pianoforte.
120
The Harpsichord, as its name implies, was an instrument whose strings were plucked by a plectrum. Bach preferred the older Clavier, or Clavichord, which could be regulated, as the other could not, by nicety of touch. See note, p. 68, infra.
121
Schweitzer (i. 208) points out that Bach’s touch was modern, in that he realised that “singing tone” depends not only upon the manner in which the keys are struck, but, to a great extent, on the regulation of their ascent.
Of Handel’s touch, Burney writes (quoted by Rockstro, p. 349): “His touch was so smooth, and the tone of the instrument so much cherished, that his fingers seemed to grow to the keys. They were so curved and compact when he played, that no motion, and scarcely the fingers themselves, could be discovered.”
122
At the beginning of the seventeenth century, as Spitta points out (ii. 34), the art of fingering had not developed. Speaking generally, neither thumb nor little finger was employed. It was not until the beginning of the eighteenth century that a scientific method emerged, a development rendered necessary by the advance in the modes of musical expression. C. P. E. Bach, quoted by Schweitzer (i. 206), puts this concisely: “My late father told me that in his youth he had heard great men who never used the thumb except when it was necessary to make big stretches. But he lived in an epoch when there came about gradually a most remarkable change in musical taste, and therefore found it necessary to work out for himself a much more thorough use of the fingers, and especially of the thumb, which, besides performing other good services, is quite indispensable in the difficult keys, where it must be used as nature intends.”
123
According to Mr. Arnold Dolmetsch, Clavichords with special strings for each note (bundfrei) were known in Bach’s time.
124
In the Essay already referred to. For a discussion of Couperin’s method see Spitta, ii. 37 ff.
125
For instance, the Rondeau in B flat in Anna Magdalena’s Noten- buch (No. 6) (1725) is by Couperin.
126
No doubt the friend who prepared this trap for Bach was Johann Gottfried Walther. His compositions frequently were characterised by intricacy.
127
Mozart had the same gift. When visiting St. Thomas’ School in 1789, he heard with astonishment a performance of Bach’s Motet, Singet dem Herrn ein neues Lied. “At the conclusion he expressed his delight, and said, ‘Now that is something from which a man may learn.’ On being informed that Bach was Cantor to this school, and that his Motets were venerated there as reliques, he was eager to see them. No score being to be obtained, they handed him the separate parts, and it was interesting to observe his manner of reading them, holding some in his hands, some on his knees, placing some on chairs around him; seeming thoroughly lost to everything, and not rising till he had thoroughly satisfied his curiosity” (Holmes, Life of Mozart, ed. Dent, p. 251).
128
There were in Bach’s time three “Clavier” instruments in use. The oldest, the Clavichord, as a rule, had two strings to every note, set in motion by a “tangent” striking them from below. Its advantage was that it permitted the tone to be regulated by the touch. For that reason, though its tone was weak, Bach preferred it. The Clavicembalo, or Harpsichord, as it is called in the text, was in general known as the “Flügel,” the strings being plucked, or flipped by a quill or metal pin, after the manner of the modern mandoline. The third instrument was the “piano e forte,” or Hammerclavier. The Clavicembalo was also built with two keyboards, like an Organ, and a pedal-board provided with strings. It was for this instrument that the so-called Organ Sonatas of Bach were written. He possessed five Clavicembali, but not a single Clavichord at the time of his death. For that reason it has been questioned whether Forkel is accurate in stating that Bach preferred the latter instrument. See Schweitzer, i. 200 ff.
129
Peters bk. 207 p. 4.
130
The truth of this remark is very evident in the Orgelbüchlein.
131
Forkel writes as though he were in a position by personal knowledge to compare the gifts of Bach and his son. In fact he was born in 1749 and was less than two years old when Bach died.
132
On Bach’s use of the stops see Spitta, i. 394 ff., and Pirro’s L’Orgue de J.-S. Bach.
133
Johann Joachim Quantz, b. 1697; flute player and composer; taught Frederick the Great the flute; settled at Berlin as Kammer-musikus and Court Composer; d. 1773.
134
The Nekrolog sums up more briefly than Forkel, in a judgment which, without doubt, is the very truth: “Bach was the greatest Organ player that had yet been known.”
135
Johann Adolph Scheibe, a native of Leipzig, was an unsuccessful candidate for the Organistship of St. Thomas’ Church in 1729. Bach was one of the judges. In 1737 Scheibe published in the “Kritische Musikus” a criticism of Bach which, while doing justice to his powers as an organist, characterised his compositions as “turgid and confused in character.” Bach was incensed by the criticism and asked his friend, Professor Birnbaum of Leipzig, to answer it. Scheibe replied in 1739, with a wholly unjustified challenge of Bach’s general education and culture. In his “Phoebus and Pan,” performed in 1731, Bach had already had the satisfaction of representing Scheibe as “Midas” and calling him an ass. On the whole matter see Schweitzer, i. 178 ff. and Spitta, iii. 252. Scheibe conducted the Court orchestra at Copenhagen from 1742-49 and died there in 1776.
136
Georg Andreas Sorge, “Court and Town Organist to the Count of Reuss and Plau at Lobenstein,” in his dedication thus commended Bach: “The great musical virtue that Your Excellency possesses is embellished with the excellent virtue of affability and unfeigned love of your neighbour.” See Schweitzer, i. 155.
137
The following passage from the Autobiography of Hector Berlioz (ed. Dent, p. 11) is relevant: “My father would never let me learn the piano; if he had, no doubt I should have joined the noble army of piano thumpers…Sometimes I regret my ignorance, yet, when I think of the ghastly heap of platitudes for which that unfortunate piano is made the daily excuse — insipid, shameless productions, that would be impossible if their perpetrators had to rely, as they ought, on pencil and paper alone — then I thank the fates for having forced me to compose silently and freely by saving me from the tyranny of finger-work, that grave of original thought.”
138
Antonio Vivaldi, A. 1743; a master of form. That fact turned the attention of German composers to him; while the popularity of his Violin Concertos also attracted musicians, like Bach, whose work at Cöthen was in close association with the Court Kapelle or band.
139
Bach re-wrote sixteen Vivaldi Violin Concertos for the Clavier, four of them for the Organ, and developed one into a Concerto for four Claviers and a quartet of strings which Forkel enumerates ( infra, p. 132) as a composition of Bach’s (Peters bk. 260). Bach learnt f
rom Vivaldi “clearness and plasticity of musical structure.” See article Vivaldi in Grove; Spitta, i. 411 ff; Schweitzer, i. 192 ff. The Vivaldi Clavier Concertos are in Peters bk. 217; the Organ Concertos in Novello bk. 11. Not all these transcriptions are based on Vivaldi. See Schweitzer, i. 193.
140
Girolamo Frescobaldi, b. 1583, d. 1644; Organist of St. Peter’s, Rome.
141
Delphin Strungk, b. 1601, d. 1694; Organist of St. Martin’s, Brunswick; composed for the Organ.
142
Purcell should be added to those whom Forkel mentions as Bach’s models. See infra, p. 261.
143
* See Kirnberger’s “Kunst des reinen Satzes,” p. 157. [The work was published in two volumes at Berlin in 1771, 1551551
144
Transitus regularis= a passing note on the unaccented portions of the bar; transitut irregularis=a passing note on the accented part of the bar.
145
Spitta (iii. 315 ff. ) prints a treatise by Bach, Rules and Instructions for playing Thorough-bass or Accompaniment in Four Parts, dated 1738. Rule 3 of chap. vi. states: “Two fifths or two octaves must not occur next one another, for this is not only a fault, but it sounds wrong. To avoid this there is an old rule, that the hands must always go against one another, so that when the left goes up the right must go down, and when the right goes up the left must go down.”
146
Actually the third beat of the fourth bar from the end. P. bk. 1 p. 37 Fugue no. 9.
147
Forkel edited the Wohltemperirte Clavier for Hoffmeister in 1801.
148
The rule is not in the Rules and Instructions already referred to.
149
Suite No. 6, in D minor (P. bk. 204 p. 84).
150
* Many people hold the opinion that the best melody is one which the largest number of persons can understand and sing. But this cannot be admitted, for if it were true, popular airs which are sung up and down the country by all classes, even the lowest, must be accounted the finest and best. I should be inclined to state the proposition conversely: a melody which attracts everybody is invariably of the most ordinary kind. In that form the statement might, perhaps, pass as a principle.
Delphi Masterworks of Johann Sebastian Bach Page 44