Johann Sebastian Bach

by Christoph Wolff

  Bach’s organ and harpsichord transcriptions (BWV 592–596 and 972–987) from Antonio Vivaldi’s L’Estro armonico, Op. 3 (1711), and of concertos by Alessandro and Benedetto Marcello, Giuseppe Torelli, and others, as well as compositions by the prince himself, signal the adoption in 1713–14 of the most modern Italian concerto type—not coincidentally, right after the prince’s return. Compositions by Bach that are directly indebted to the Vivaldi-style ritornello concerto include the Toccata in F major for organ, BWV 540 (its canonic beginning modeled after Vivaldi’s Double Violin Concerto in D minor, transcribed in BWV 596), and the opening prelude of the English Suite in G minor, BWV 808. Works such as the “Dorian” Toccata for organ, BWV 538, the Toccata in C major, BWV 564, and the Prelude in G major, BWV 541, reflect compositional principles of an older Italian concerto type, suggesting an earlier origin. That older style is represented by Tomaso Albinoni’s Concertos Op. 2 (1700), with which Bach was familiar. (Also, a fragmentary continuo part for one of Albinoni’s concertos, BWV Anh. I 23, written in Bach’s hand around 1710 or earlier, was probably prepared for a performance with the court capelle.)

  All these keyboard works demonstrate a remarkable ability to expand on their models or to synthesize different models. Bach’s orientation was neither exclusively Italianate nor exclusively modernist. In the very early Weimar years, for instance, he copied Nicolas de Grigny’s Premier Livre d’Orgue (1700);28 also, a work such as the Pièce d’Orgue in G major, BWV 572, exemplifies a sovereign exercise in French style. Similarly, Bach’s (lost) copy of Frescobaldi’s Fiori musicali (1635), which bore the date 1714, is evidence of his continuing interest in the great keyboard masters of the more distant past. Taken together, Bach’s Weimar keyboard music shows little uniformity, less dependence on specific stylistic models than his earlier works, and a greater tendency toward a more efficient and more individualized application of different compositional principles and techniques.

  One particular seminal project not only spans the entire Weimar period, from 1708 to 1717, but also extends beyond it in both directions: the Orgel-Büchlein (Little Organ Book). Near the beginning of his tenure as court organist, Bach apparently intended to compile a large collection of short organ chorales that would enhance the core melodies of the Lutheran hymnbook. To this end, he prepared a bound volume (its title was added only after 1720)29 with room for 164 settings of as many chorale melodies, all of whose headings he entered at the outset. Altogether they constitute virtually the entire “classic” Lutheran hymn repertory up to about 1675. Bach was focusing here on the melodies of his childhood days, with no attention paid to the more recent chorale melodies. The collection does not follow any specific hymnal, although the structure and sequence of the liturgical rubrics are fairly standardized in the Lutheran tradition. Most every hymnbook begins with the seasonal chorales for the ecclesiastical year (the first invariably being “Nun komm der Heiden Heiland,” Martin Luther’s poetic translation of the Ambrosian “Veni redemptor gentium”) and continues with the topically organized hymns for all seasons (see Table 5.2, left-hand column). Of the two hymnals in use at Weimar during Bach’s years there—Auserlesenes Weimarisches Gesangbuch of 1681 (second edition 1713) and Schuldiges Lob Gottes, oder: Geistreiches Gesang-Buch of 1713—the second comes closest to the Orgel-Büchlein in its order and contents. Bach, however, could have worked basically from memory and ordered the collection according to his own plan.

  Each of the Orgel-Büchlein’s ninety pages in oblong-quarto format, about 6 by 7.5 inches, was ruled with six staves, and, depending on the length of the cantus firmus (the plain chorale melody), the composition had to fit on exactly one or two pages (see illustration, p. 128). This type of miniature organ chorale harks back to the style of the chorale partita, whose individual movements are closely defined in character and in motivic design. Bach also integrates into this new collection a number of preexisting settings, perhaps with minor refinements, for quite a number of the entries represent fair copies without any trace of compositional activity. He probably selected them from a portfolio of chorales that he had begun to compile much earlier and from which other, later collections might have benefited as well. The typical Orgel-Büchlein chorale combines tight motivic construction and refined contrapuntal devices (including strict canon) with bold expressive language and subtle musico-theological interpretation; in each, manual and pedal lines converge elegantly into a paradigmatic organ score.

  The opening setting, “Nun komm der Heiden Heiland,” BWV 599, a compelling chorale harmonization in broken manner (style brisé), with a regular, emphatic, and affective distribution of dissonant notes, is followed by a tightly constructed elaboration of “Gott durch deine Güte,” BWV 600, where the soprano and tenor parts engage in strict canonic imitation (half-note motion) while the alto and bass parts present contrapuntal lines in, respectively, quarter-and eighth-note motion. The extraordinary variety of compositional approaches systematically explored in the Orgel-Büchlein includes many instances in which motivic inventions function as interpretive devices. For example, in “Durch Adams Fall ist ganz verderbt,” BWV 637, descending chromatic phrases in the middle voices combine with falling leaps by diminished and augmented intervals in the bass to signify Adam’s fall into sin, the doctrinal topic of this Lutheran teaching hymn of 1524.

  Bach worked on the ambitious Orgel-Büchlein project over many years,30 with the obvious intention of eventually filling the entire book in much the same way as he filled the opening sections from Advent to Easter. However, the project remained incomplete as new compositional undertakings took precedence and Bach lost interest in this type of organ chorale setting. The title supplied after 1720 specifically addresses what by then had become the pedagogical—and now primary—function of the collection, “in which a beginner at the organ is given instruction in developing a chorale in many diverse ways, and at the same time in acquiring facility in the study of the pedal.” Bach kept the material for teaching purposes, adding only one complete setting after 1726, starting a second one, and revising a few older ones. But ultimately, almost three-quarters of the album leaves remained unfilled, with titles followed only by empty staves31 (see Table 5.2).

  From the beginning, Bach’s Weimar appointment as court organist included as well the title “chamber musician”32—a designation not borne by Johann Effler, his predecessor as court organist, nor by any other member of the court capelle at the time. Although we have no appointment letter defining the specific functions of either title, we can be sure that they do not reflect a clear division of responsibilities, such as church versus chamber, sacred versus secular music, organ versus harpsichord, or keyboard versus violin. The same applies to the “concertmaster” title Bach later acquired. All members of the court capelle had to participate in both church and chamber music. The additional designation was apparently intended to elevate the court organist above the members of the court capelle to a rank just below that of vice-capellmeister and, at the same time, to broaden the scope of his activities, as the higher salary also indicated. Since Bach, after his Mühlhausen experience, would have wanted to bear responsibility for vocal-instrumental ensemble music, as chamber musician he possessed the right and obligation to play a leadership role (though subordinate to the capellmeister and vice-capellmeister) in performing with and composing for the court capelle for both sacred and secular occasions.

  Vocal works that clearly belong to the Weimar period before 1714 include the sacred solo cantatas “Widerstehe doch der Sünde,” BWV 54, and “Mein Herze schwimmt im Blut,” BWV 199, both on texts by the Darmstadt court poet Georg Christian Lehms that were published in 1711.33 The texts articulate general theological themes (resistance to sin and reconciliation with God, respectively), making them suitable as generic church music beyond any specific liturgical occasion within the ecclesiastical year. Both pieces, but especially BWV 199, demand a high level of vocal technique and required professional singers, who were available at the Weimar
court. BWV 199, an extended eight-movement cantata scored for soprano (Chorton range: b–g”), oboe, strings, and continuo, may have been sung by the falsettist Weldig, while BWV 54, a three-movement cantata scored for alto (Chorton range: f–c") and string ensemble, would have been sung by the alto of the capelle. The soprano cantata presents a set of alternating recitatives and arias (one aria combined with a chorale), highly differentiated, in which the solo voice links with a variety of instrumental accompaniments (solo oboe, solo viola, strings only, and full complement of oboe and strings). Striking features of the alto cantata include the sequence of dissonant chords that open the work and the concluding fugal movement with its chromatic subject. With pieces like BWV 54 and 199, Bach was continuing to write “organists’ music” as before, with a view toward creating works without a restricted liturgical schedule and therefore more opportunities for re-performance. The cantata “Gleichwie der Regen und Schnee,” BWV 18, based on a text by Erdmann Neumeister of 1711, most probably dates from before 1714 as well. Scored for four-part chorus and the uncommon, exquisite accompaniment of four violas and continuo, it has a specific place in the liturgical calendar—Sexagesimae Sunday—and may therefore be the first of the so-called Jahrgangs-Kantaten, or annual-cycle cantatas, that has survived.

  TABLE 5.2. Orgel-Büchlein: Plan and Realization

  Bach’s privileged post of court organist and chamber musician appears to have entailed special, if loosely defined, responsibilities for the court capelle, allowing him opportunities to perform his own compositions as well as works by others. Regrettably, virtually all musical sources related to Bach’s function as chamber musician and, later, as concertmaster in charge of instrumental music have vanished, which makes it impossible to assess Bach’s activities and creative output in the instrumental sphere. The most reliable, if seriously abridged, picture of his instrumental ideas can be gathered indirectly from the instrumental movements of the Weimar cantatas. Only a single source can be traced directly to Weimar chamber music: a Fugue in G minor for violin and continuo, BWV 1026, in a copy made around 1714 by the Weimar town organist Johann Gottfried Walther. This oldest extant chamber composition by Bach is a sophisticated and highly virtuosic yet isolated single movement whose genesis and context remain obscure. Nevertheless, its lengthy double-stop passages, other virtuosic devices, and the idiomatic treatment of the violin demonstrate Bach’s impressive technical accomplishments as a violinist and suggest that he continued to develop his violin technique. Moreover, it lends credence to a long-held assumption that Bach began work on the sonatas and partitas for unaccompanied violin, BWV 1001–1006, in Weimar (as evidenced by earlier versions of the pieces). These works seem conceptually indebted to Johann Paul von Westhoff’s 1696 publication of solo violin partitas, the first of its kind; and since Westhoff, one of the preeminent violinists of his time, played in the Weimar court capelle until his death in 1705, Bach would have met him in 1703.

  Additional evidence of Bach’s involvement in instrumental chamber music may be found in the performing parts for the Concerto in G major for 2 violins and orchestra by Georg Philipp Telemann, jointly copied by Bach and the violinist Johann Georg Pisendel, a student of Vivaldi’s and later concertmaster at the Dresden court. Pisendel traveled through Weimar in 1709, when from all appearances he and Bach performed this concerto with the court capelle. Telemann, then capellmeister at the neighboring court of Saxe-Eisenach, may well have participated in such a performance, or Bach and Pisendel could have played the work with the Eisenach capelle as well. At any rate, Bach had an opportunity to establish closer professional and personal contacts with Telemann during the latter’s Eisenach years, and he invited Telemann in 1714 to become godfather to his second son, Carl Philipp Emanuel. Carl received his middle name from Telemann, who pursued his godchild’s musical career with great interest and, toward the end of his long life, helped arrange for his godson to succeed him as music director in Hamburg in 1768.

  The general instrumental and vocal repertoire performed by the Weimar court capelle remains a mystery. Apart from a mere reference to the performance of “much fine Italian and French music,”34 we lack all specifics. Moreover, none of the works written for the capelle by the two Dreses, capellmeister and vice-capellmeister, have survived, as the court’s music library went up in flames along with the entire Wilhelmsburg in 1774. Similarly, a substantial part of Bach’s oeuvre written in the employ of the dukes of Saxe-Weimar would also have remained in the possession of the court when he left Weimar, and we can assume that the works that originated in Bach’s Weimar period have been severely decimated, resulting in a picture that is full of gaps. All the more important are the few sources that shed light on what must have been a rich and varied musical scene at the ducal court (see also Table 6.5 and the related discussion). These include a set of parts for a St. Mark Passion, presumably by Friedrich Nicolaus Brauns, music director of the Hamburg cathedral,35 and copied by Bach for a performance that took place at the palace church in 1711–12, if not a year earlier, presumably on Good Friday. That Bach was able to obtain this material directly or indirectly from Hamburg is evidence of his nonparochial outlook, not to mention well-functioning connections.

  Relationships with neighboring courts, such as Saxe-Eisenach, where Telemann served, played an important role in Bach’s life during his Weimar years. In February 1713, he received a most attractive invitation to the ducal court of Saxe-Weissenfels. For Duke Christian’s thirty-first birthday on February 23, Bach was commissioned to compose the festive Tafel-Music for the banquet to be held at the ducal hunting lodge near Weissenfels, after completion of the chase. Since the text for this elaborate cantata, titled “Frohlockender Götter-Streit” (Jubilant Dispute of the Gods), BWV 208, was written by the Weimar court poet, Salomo Franck, the work could be considered an import from Weimar by the Weissenfels court, and in all likelihood the dukes of the related Weimar dynasty participated in the Weissenfels hunt and birthday. The musical arrangements for the festivities were probably made by Adam Immanuel Weldig (Bach’s Weimar colleague and landlord), who had just moved to Weissenfels,36 where he remained until his untimely death three years later. Bach’s performance at the hunting lodge, an undoubted success, not only led to a repeat performance of the “Hunt” Cantata in 1716, but more important, established a long-term association with Duke Christian of Weissenfels that culminated in a titular capellmeistership bestowed on Bach in 1729. Bach’s guest performance in Weissenfels did not remain unrewarded in Weimar, either, for the court had gained credit abroad by the performance of its musician. Only three days after the event, Bach received by ducal command a salary increase of 15 florins, effective immediately37—bringing his annual cash compensation to 215 florins, now above that of the capellmeister.

  The Hunt Cantata, BWV 208, not only marked Bach’s first documented collaboration with Salomo Franck as librettist, it is his first known secular cantata and, at the same time, his first work of truly large-scale proportions. A dramatic dialogue among four mythological figures—Diana, Pales, Endymion, and Pan (assigned to the vocal parts SSTB)—with an opulent instrumental accompaniment and a large continuo group (including 2 bassoons, a violone, and a violono grosso), the work unfolds in fifteen movements. It contains multiple examples of the three main vocal forms (recitative, aria, and chorus) handled in a host of excitingly different ways, while the forces for which they are scored are variously combined, increasing the sense of musical diversity. The accompaniments to the arias, for example, range from simple continuo writing, both with and without ensemble ritornellos, to colorful and delicately contrasting textures that feature, in turn, 2 horns, 3 oboes, 2 recorders, and solo violin. Sung by the four vocal soloists, the choruses are also textured in a wide variety of ways, from tunefully homophonic to elaborately polyphonic. This dramatic cantata has not, however, survived entirely in its original format. The autograph score, lacking the opening sinfonia, begins immediately with a short recitative. The missing instrumental
introduction must have resembled, at least in scoring and key, the early (five-movement) sinfonia version BWV 1046a of the Brandenburg Concerto No. 1—if it was not in fact that very work.

  If the cantata BWV 208 is indicative of Bach’s remarkable accomplishments and reputation in the realm of courtly musical entertainment outside of Weimar, then we can be sure that he would have reached a similarly unchallenged stature at the Weimar court by early 1713 as well and would have done, or would soon do, similar things there. We can surmise that he prepared and composed instrumental and vocal music for the Weimar court capelle more heavily than the surviving musical sources bear out. Indeed, Philipp David Kräuter expressly refers to his learning experience with Bach as including “composing concertos and overtures”38 it is inconceivable that the teacher himself did not also compose such works. Bach’s consummate skill and innovative approach in handling instrumental ensemble pieces is manifest in the great variety of instrumental movements he composed for his sacred cantatas in Weimar before and after 1714. Some of them, like the sinfonias of BWV 12 and 21, may have their actual origin in chamber works written for the court capelle.

  Given the broad scope of activities and opportunities in Weimar, it is difficult to see why Bach should have found it tempting in late 1713 to seriously consider a new position, that of organist and music director at Our Lady’s (or Market) Church in Halle on the Saale. Two possible reasons that could have motivated Bach to leave Weimar come to mind. The first is the new and very large organ, with sixty-five stops on three manuals and pedal, that was under contract to the organ builder Christoph Cuntzius for the spacious Our Lady’s Church. (Bach, along with Johann Kuhnau and Christian Friedrich Rolle, examined the organ after its completion in 1716.)39 The Obituary makes a relevant point in this regard: “Despite all this knowledge of the organ, he never enjoyed the good fortune, as he used to point out frequently with regret, of having a really large and really beautiful organ at his constant disposal.”40 The Halle organ would indeed have been enormously attractive to Bach, and he may have derived belated if vicarious pleasure when his son Wilhelm Friedemann, some thirty years later, took that very position. The second reason relates to political or organizational problems emerging at the Weimar court and court capelle, possibly foreshadowing those that contributed to his eventual departure for Cöthen.