Chapter XXI: Part III (1)

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 music-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
from 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, 1776.]

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.

151 Forkel alludes to the _Goldberg Variations_ (P. bk. 209).

152 P. bks. 205, 206.

153 P. bks. 203, 204.

154 P. bk. 207.

155 Bach wrote three Suites (Partita) and three Sonatas for Solo Violin.
They date from about 1720 and are in the keys of G minor, B minor, A
minor, D minor, C major, and E major (P. bk. 228). The six
Violoncello Suites date from the same period and are in G major, D
minor, C major, E flat major, C minor, and D major (P. bks. 238a,
238b).

156 Reinhard Keiser, b. 1673, d. 1739; scholar of the Leipzig
Thomas-schule; settled at Hamburg, 1694; composed a number of
Operas, and for a time had a great vogue.

157 It was precisely his agreeable operatic Arias that expressed
Handel’s genius in the eyes of his generation. With rare exceptions
that branch of his work is obsolete and his cult survives mainly in
the _Messiah,_ which supports his quite posthumous reputation as
“musician in ordinary to the Protestant religion.” See Mr. R. A.
Streatfield’s _Handel,_ Introduction.

158 Schweitzer advances the opinion, which may perhaps be challenged,
that inevitable and natural as Bach’s melodies are, they do not give
the impression of “effortless invention.” Bach, he holds, worked
like a mathematician, who sees the whole of a problem at once, and
has only to realise it in definite values. Hence, he agrees with
Spitta, Bach’s way of working was quite different from Beethoven’s.
With Beethoven the work developed by means of episodes that are
independent of the theme. With Bach everything springs with
mathematical certainty from the theme itself. See Schweitzer (i.
211) on Bach’s methods of working.

159 Johann Sebastian Bach’s _Vierstimmige Choralgesänge_ were published
in 1765 and 1769. C. P. E. Bach was concerned only with the first
volume. Forkel perhaps refers to an edition of the _Choralgesänge _
issued by Breitkopf in four parts at Leipzig in 1784, 1785, 1786,
and 1787, and edited by C. P. E. Bach.

160 Forkel indicates the period 1720-1750. But in 1720 Bach had already
completed the _Orgelbüchlein_ and the greater part of his Organ
works.

161 * There are people who conclude that Bach merely perfected harmony.
But if we realise what harmony is, a means to extend and emphasise
musical expression, we cannot imagine it apart from melody. And
when, as in Bach’s case, harmony is actually an association of
melodies, such a view becomes the more ridiculous. It might perhaps
be reasonable to say of a composer that his influence was restricted
to the sphere of melody, because we may get melody without harmony.
But there cannot be real harmony without melody. Hence the composer
who has perfected harmony has influenced the whole, whereas the
melodist has left his mark only on a fraction of his art.

162 As has been pointed out already (supra, p. 14) Bach’s earliest
church Cantatas date from the Arnstadt period.

163 The statement certainly needs a caveat. No composer of his period
studied his text more closely or reverently than Bach. No one, on
the other hand, was more readily fired by a particular word or image
in his text to give it sometimes irrelevant expression.

164 Of Bach’s church Cantatas 206 have survived. In only 22 of them
does Bach fail to introduce movements based upon the Lutheran
Chorals.

165 We must attribute to Forkel’s general ignorance of Bach’s concerted
church music his failure to comment upon a much more remarkable
feature of the recitatives, namely, their unique treatment of the
human voice as a declamatory medium, a development as remarkable as
Wagner’s innovations in operatic form a century later.

166 It was not the imperfections of the choir but the indifference of
Bach’s successors at St. Thomas’, Leipzig, that was chiefly
responsible for the neglect of his Cantatas in the latter half of
the eighteenth century. Johann Friedrich Doles (1716-89) was the
only Cantor who realised the greatness of his predecessor’s
concerted church music.

167 The _Trauer-Ode_ was performed on October 17, 1727. Bach finished
the score two days before the performance! A parallel case is that
of Mozart, who finished the overture of _Don Giovanni_ on the
morning of the first performance of the Opera, and actually played
it unrehearsed that evening.

168 It has been pointed out already that Bach used the _St. Matthew
Passion_ music, set to other words, for the occasion. No. 26 (“I
would beside my Lord be watching”) was sung to the words “Go,
Leopold, to thy rest”!

169 Of the 206 surviving Cantatas, 172 were written for the Leipzig
choir.

170 Forkel’s knowledge is very incomplete.

171 Elsewhere Forkel mentions only one of the secular Cantatas.

172 There is a tradition that Bach wrote a comic song, _Ihr Schönen,
höret an,_ which was widely current about the time of his death
(Spitta, iii. 181 n.). The Aria, _So oft ich meine Tabakspfeife,_ in
A. M. Bach’s _Notenbuch_ of 1725, should be mentioned. See B. G.
xxxix. sec. 4.

173 Bach’s method has come down to us in treatises by two of his pupils,
C. P. E. Bach’s _Essay_ and Kirnberger’s _Die Kunst des reinen
Satzes in der Musik,_ to which reference has been made already.

174 Supra, p. 60.

175 Bach wrote eighteen Preludes for Beginners. They are all in P. bk.
200.

176 Most of these movements, which Bach called indifferently
“Inventions” (ideas) and “Praeambula” (Preludes), were written in
1723. They are in P. bk. 201.

177 Heinrich Nikolaus Gerber, who was Bach’s pupil from 1724 to 1727,
particularly emphasises this feature of Bach’s teaching.

178 See on the whole matter Spitta, iii. 117 ff. Bach’s method is
illustrated by his _Rules and Instructions_ (1738) printed by
Spitta, iii. 315 ff., and also by the _Einige höchst nöthinge
Regeln_ at the end of A. M. Bach’s _Notenbuch_ (1725).

179 Mozart wrote as follows to a correspondent who asked him what his
method of composition was: “I can really say no more on this subject
than the following; for I myself know no more about it, and cannot
account for it. When I am, as it were, completely myself, entirely
alone, and of good cheer—say, travelling in a carriage, or walking
after a good meal, or during the night when I cannot sleep; it is on
such occasions that my ideas flow best and most abundantly. _Whence_
and _how_ they come, I know not; nor can I force them. Those ideas
that please me I retain in memory, and am accustomed, as I have been
told, to hum them to myself. If I continue in this way, it soon
occurs to me how I may turn this or that morsel to account, so as to
make a good dish of it, that is to say, agreeably to the rules of
counterpoint, to the peculiarities of the various instruments, etc.
All this fires my soul, and, provided I am not disturbed, my subject
enlarges itself, becomes methodised and defined, and the whole,
though it be long, stands almost complete and finished in my mind,
so that I can survey it, like a fine picture or a beautiful statue,
at a glance. Nor do I hear in my imagination the parts
successively, but I hear them, as it were, all together. What a
delight this is I cannot tell!…When I proceed to write down my
ideas, I take out of the bag of my memory, if I may use that phrase,
what has previously been collected into it in the way I have
mentioned. For this reason the committing to paper is done quickly
enough, for everything is, as I said before, already finished; and
it rarely differs on paper from what it was in my imagination”
(Life, ed. Dent, p. 255).

Wagner, writing in 1851 to Uhlig, who could not understand how the
libretto of _Young Siegfried_ could be set to music, expresses the
same idea as Mozart: “What you cannot possibly imagine is a-making
of itself! I tell you, the musical phrases build themselves on
these verses and periods without my having to trouble at all;
everything springs as if wild from the ground” (Life, trans. Ellis,
iii. p. 243).

Schumann writes in 1839: “I used to rack my brains for a long time,
but now I scarcely ever scratch out a note. It all comes from
within, and I often feel as if I could go on playing without ever
coming to an end” (Grove, vol. iv. p. 353).

180 Angela Berardi’s _Documenti armonici. Nelli quali con varii
discorsi, regole, ed essempii si dimonstrano gli studii arteficiosi
della musica_ was published at Bologna in 1687.

181 Giovanni Maria Buononcini, b. c. 1640, d. 1678; Maestro di Capella
at Modena; published his _Musico prattico_ at Bologna in 1673, 1688.

182 Johann Joseph Fux, b. 1660, d. 1741; Kapellmeister at Vienna;
published his _Gradus ad Parnassum_ at Vienna in 1725.

183 See supra, p. 74.

184 * I speak here only of those pupils who made music their profession.
But, besides these, Bach had a great many other pupils. Every
dilettante in the neighbourhood desired to boast of the instruction
of so great and celebrated a man. Many gave themselves out to have
been his pupils who had never been taught by him.

185 See Spitta, i. 522; Schweitzer, i. 214 for farther details regarding
Vogler, who died circ. 1765.

186 Gottfried August Homilius, b. 1714, d. 1785; pupil of Bach, circ.
1735. Cantor of the Kreuzschule, Dresden.

187 Christoph Transchel (1721-1800) taught music at Leipzig and Dresden;
Bach’s pupil and friend, circ. 1742. See Spitta, iii. 245.

188 Johann Gottlieb (or Theophilus) Goldberg, clavicenist to Count
Kaiserling (infra, p. 119) for whom Bach wrote the so-called
_Goldberg Variations._ He was born circ. 1720 and was a pupil of
Bach from 1733-46.

189 Johann Ludwig Krebs, b. 1713, d. 1780; Bach’s pupil, 1726-35. Bach
said of him that he was “the best crab (Krebs) in the brook (Bach).”

190 Johann Christoph Altnikol, d. 1759.

191 Johann Friedrich Agricola, b. 1720, d. 1774; pupil of Bach circ.
1738-41; Director of the Royal Chapel, Berlin.

192 Pier Francesco Tosi, b. circ. 1650; singing master in London. His
_Opinioni de’ canton antichi e moderni, o sieno osservazioni sopra
il canto figurato_ was published at Bologna in 1723.

193 Johann Gottfried Müthel, b. circ. 1720, d. circ. 1790; pupil of Bach
in 1750 and resident in his house at the time of his death; organist
of the Lutheran Church, Riga.

194 Johann Philipp Kirnberger, b. 1721, d. 1783; Bach’s pupil, 1739-41.

195 Louisa Amalia, of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel, wife of Frederick the
Great’s brother, and mother of his successor, Frederick William II.
(1786-97).

196 The second work was published in 1773 at Berlin. For the first, see
supra, p. 74.

197 Johann Christian Kittel, b. 1732, d. 1809; one of Bach’s latest
pupils; Organist of the Predigerkirche, Erfurt. He is said to have
possessed a portrait of his master and to have rewarded his pupils
for good playing by drawing the curtain which usually covered the
picture and permitting them to look upon it. It is, perhaps, the
portrait, recently discovered by Dr. Fritz Volbach, which is
reproduced at p. 92 of this volume.

198 Nothing seems to be known of him.

199 Johann Martin Schubart succeeded Bach at Weimar in 1717. He was
born in 1690 and died in 1721. See Spitta, i. 343.

200 In addition to those mentioned by Forkel, the following pupils of
Bach are known: Johann Gotthilf Ziegler, of St. Ulrich’s Church,
Halle; J. Bernhard Bach, of Ohrdruf; Heinrich Nikolaus Gerber,
Organist at Sondershausen; Samuel Anton Bach, of Meiningen; Johann
Ernst Bach, of Saxe-Weimar; Johann Elias Bach, Cantor at
Schweinfurt; Johann Tobias Krebs, organist at Buttelstädt, and his
sons, Johann Ludwig, Johann Tobias, and Johann Carl; Johann
Schneider, organist of St. Nicolas’, Leipzig; Georg Friedrich
Einicke, Cantor at Frankenhausen; Johann Friedrich Doles, Bach’s
second successor in the Cantorate of St. Thomas’; Rudolph Straube,
who afterwards settled in England; Christoph Nichelmann, cembalist
to Frederick the Great; Christian Gräbner, and Carl Hartwig.

For full information upon Bach’s pupils see Spitta, i. 522 ff., ii.
47 ff., iii. 116 ff., 239 ff., and the relative articles in Grove’s
_Dictionary._

201 Forkel does not do justice to his friend. C. P. E. Bach is
recognised as the immediate precursor of Haydn and as the link
between the latter and J. S. Bach.

202 Mozart had a very particular regard for him. See Schweitzer i. 220
on his brothers’ abilities as composers.

203 Spitta (iii. 262) quotes a characteristic anecdote. To some one who
praised his skill on the Organ Bach replied: “There is nothing
wonderful about it. You merely strike the right note at the right
moment and the Organ does the rest.”

204 See supra, p. 19. Bach himself certainly was the challenger.

205 When Handel was at Venice in 1708, Domenico Scarlatti, hearing a
stranger touching the Harpsichord at a masquerade, exclaimed, “That
must either be the famous Saxon or the Devil” (Rockstro’s _George
Frederick Handel,_ p. 48). Streatfield (p. 145) mentions a similar
event which took place in 1737. Hearing a stranger playing a Fugue
in one of the Flemish churches, the organist embraced him, saying,
“You can be no other but the great Handel.”

206 Heinrich Lorenz Hurlebusch was organist of three churches in
Brunswick. His visit to Bach took place in 1730, seemingly. See
Schweitzer, i. 154.

207 Schweitzer prints an appreciation of Hurlebusch which suggests that
he was a man of distinct ability and “a paragon of politeness.”

208 Antonio Caldara, b. circ. 1670; vice-Kapellmeister at Vienna,
1716-36; d. 1736.

209 Johann Adolph Hasse, b. 1699, d. 1783; Kapellmeister and Director of
the Opera, Dresden.

210 Johann Gottlieb Graun, b. circ. 1698, d. 1771; conductor of the
royal Kapelle, Berlin.

Carl Heinrich Graun, b. 1701, d. 1759; like his brother, in
Frederick the Great’s service.

211 Georg Philipp Telemann, b. 1681, d. 1767; Cantor and Musik-direktor
in Hamburg.

212 Johann Dismas Zelenka, b. 1679 or 1681, d. 1745; Court Composer at
Dresden.

213 Franz Benda, b. 1709, d. 1786; Concertmeister to Frederick the Great
upon the death of J. G. Graun.

214 On Telemann’s influence on Bach see Spitta, ii. 437.

215 Handel’s second visit to Halle took place in June 1729. His
mother’s illness detained him. See Streatfield, p. 110.

216 Handel’s third visit took place in July-August 1760. He was laid up
by a severe accident in the course of it, and appears to have not
recovered from it at the time of Bach’s death.

217 Faustina Bordoni, b. 1693, d. 1783; m. Hasse in 1730. She was one
of the most famous singers of the day.

218 The original has “Liederchen.”

219 See supra, p. 37. Compare Handel’s case. He received a royal
pension of £600 per annum, and though he was twice a bankrupt, left
£20,000.

220 The Duke was the nephew of, and succeeded, Duke Wilhelm Ernst in
1728.

221 The Canonic Variations on the melody are published by Novello bk.
19, p. 73. For the Mizler Society, see supra, p. xxiv.

222 Spitta (iii. 294) regards the statement as incorrect and holds that
the work was engraved before Bach joined Mizler’s Society in June
1747. Pirro (p. 215) supports Spitta and regards the Variations as
having been engraved at Nürnberg “vers 1746.”

223 The first of Bach’s works to be engraved was the Mühlhausen Cantata,
_Gott ist mein König,_ (parts only). It was published in 1708, when
Bach was twenty-three years old. Forkel refers to Partita I. in the
first Part of the _Clavierübung_ (P. bk. 205 p. 4). It was engraved
in 1726, when Bach was forty-one years old. In 1731 he republished
it, with five others that had appeared in the interval, in the first
Part of the _Clavierübung_ (P. bks. 205, 206).

224 Forkel’s rather casual critical axioms seem to be as follows:
“Publication postulates excellence”; “An amended MS. implies that
the original text was not a finished work of art.”

225 It was the first work engraved by Bach himself, though the parts of
the Cantata _Gott ist mein König_ had been published by the Town
Council at Mühlhausen in 1708.

226 The work was published at Leipzig “in Commission bey Boetii Seel,
hinderlassenen Tochter, unter den Rath-hause.” The Suites, or
Partitas (P. bks. 205, 206), are in B flat major, C minor, A minor,
D major, G major, E minor.

227 In 1801 Hoffmeister and Kühnel unsuccessfully attempted to publish
Bach’s works by subscription.

228 The Partita in B minor (P. bk. 208 p. 20).

229 The work was published in 1735. The Italian Concerto in F major is
published by Novello and P. bk. 207.

230 The work appeared in 1739. It was intended to contain works for the
Organ only; the four Duetti are incongruous and seem to have crept
in by mistake. See the scheme of the work discussed in Terry,
_Bach’s Chorals,_ Part III. The Choral Preludes are in Novello’s
ed., bk. xvi.

231 The work was published circ. 1747-50. Five of the six movements
certainly, and the sixth with practical certainty, are adaptations
to the Organ of movements out of Bach’s Church Cantatas. See Parry,
_Bach,_ p. 535. The Chorals are in Novello’s ed., bk. xvi.

232 See supra, p. 65.

233 Thus the pedal sounds above the part given to the second manual and
is often the topmost part. See Novello’s ed., bk. xvi. 4.

234 Published circ. 1742; the so-called “Goldberg Variations.” They are
in P. bk. 209.

235 Variation No. 10 is a Fughetta in four parts.

236 Ten of the Variations are marked “a 2 Clav.,” that is, for two
keyboards or manuals: Nos. 8, 11, 13, 14, 17, 20, 23, 25, 26, 28.
Nos. 5, 7, 29 are marked “a 1 ovvero 2 Clav.”

237 The movement is constructed upon two merry folk-songs, _Kraut and
Rüben haben mich vertrieben,_ and _Ich bin so lang nicht bei dir
gewirt_.

238 See supra, p. 101.

239 In fact Bach wrote the early _Aria variata alla maniera Italiana_
(Peters bk. 215, p. 12) for the Clavier. For the Organ he wrote
four sets of Variations upon as many Choral melodies (Novello bk.
xix.). But all except the Goldberg Variations are youthful works,
and in his maturity Bach clearly had no liking for the form. The
theme of the Goldberg Variations, moreover, is itself a youthful
idea; at least it dates back to as early as 1725, and is found in A.
M. Bach’s _Notenbuch_ (No. 26, Aria in G major).

240 There is no reference to these corrigenda in the B. G. edition.

241 The work has been referred to already in connection with Bach’s
membership of Mizler’s Society (supra, p. 112). It was composed
presumably circ. 1746 and in point of technical skill is the most
brilliant of Bach’s instrumental works. Forkel states that it was
engraved after June 1747, when Bach joined Mizler’s Society. Spitta
(iii. 295) is of opinion that it was already engraved by then. It
is in bk. xix. of Novello’s edition.

242 Supra, p. 25.

243 The presentation copy of the work, which Bach sent to Frederick
along with a dedicatory letter (July 7, 1747), is in the Berlin
Amalienbibliothek and proves that only the first third of the work,
as far as the “Ricercare a sei voci” (see B.G. XXXI. (2)) was sent
then. The latter and the remaining canons were dispatched
subsequently probably by the hand of C. P. E. Bach. The six-part
Ricercare was a particular compliment to the King. Frederick had
desired Bach on his visit to play a Fugue in six parts but left it
to the player to select his theme. Bach now employed the thema
regium for the purpose. The first reissue of the work was by
Breitkopf and Haertel in 1832. Peters (bk. 219) brought it out in
1866. See Schweitzer, i. 417 IV. and Spitta, iii. 191 ff. and 292.

244 In C minor (P. bk. 237 p. 3).

245 The statement is inaccurate. The work was written for the most part
in 1749 and the greater part of it was prepared for engraving by
Bach himself during his last illness. None of his elder sons was
with him at his death, and the blunders that disfigure the engraved
copy show that they clumsily finished their father’s work. It is in
P. bk. 218.

246 Friedrich Wilhelm Marpurg, b. 1718, d. 1795.

247 The work was published shortly after Bach’s death, but had no sale.
C. P. E. Bach then commissioned Marpurg to write a preface, and the
new edition was published at the Leipzig Fair, Easter, 1762. In
four years only about thirty copies were sold. See Spitta, iii. 197
ff. and Schweitzer, i. 423 ff.

248 In 1756. See C. P. E. Bach’s advertisement in Felix Grenier, p.
232.

249 The work contains six Fugues and four canons upon the same theme; an
unfinished Fugue “a tre soggetti,” the first four notes of the third
of which spell B A C H; and the Choral Prelude “Wenn wir in höchsten
Nöthen sein.”

250 Schweitzer explains: “His purpose in this work being a purely
theoretical one, Bach writes the Fugues out in score, and calls them
‘counterpoints’ ”

[ 251 B A C H in German musical notation]

252 Supra, p. 27. The movement is in N. bk. 17 p. 85. It is not
certain that Bach intended the Prelude or the unfinished Fugue to be
included.

253 C. P. E. Bach was only concerned with the first volume. Erk, in his
edition of the _Choralgesänge,_ conjectures that Kirnberger was
responsible for the second.

254 The four volumes were published at Leipzig between 1784-87. Spitta
states that C. P. E. Bach was the editor. Erk joins Kirnberger with
him in that position. As C. P. E. Bach died in 1788 Kirnberger’s
association with the work is probable, especially if he had already
been responsible for the 1769 volume.

255 Bach’s Clavier school consisted of eighteen Preludes for beginners
(all in B.G. XXXVI.); the two-part and three-part Inventions; and
the _Well-tempered Clavier._ The six Preludes mentioned by Forkel,
and which alone he knew, were published by him for the first time.
Seven more are found in Wilhelm Friedemann’s _Clavierbüchlein_ (B.G.
XLV. (1)), and the remaining five have survived in texts handed down
by others of Bach’s pupils. The eighteen are in P. bk. 200.

256 The Autograph was written at Cöthen and is dated 1723. It also
contains the fifteen Symphonies, or three-part Inventions mentioned
in paragraph 3. Both Inventions and Symphonies are in F. bk. 201.
According to Spitta (ii. 57 n.) the Inventions were published at
Leipzig in 1763. See also Schweitzer, i. 328 ff.

257 See the previous note.

258 The second Part was compiled in 1744 and Bach’s Autograph of it,
though not the earliest Autograph, is in the British Museum. See
Schweitzer, i. 331 ff. and Spitta, ii. 161 ff. The whole work is in
P. bks. 1, 2; or 1a, 1b; or 2790a, 2790b.

259 No. 20. Spitta (ii. 164) attributes it to the years 1707 or 1708.
Schweitzer (i. 332) also regards it as a youthful piece written,
moreover, for the pedal Clavicembalo.

260 Nos. 15 and 16. Spitta, admitting that the two do not rank with the
most interesting in the collection, finds no indication of their
being of different date from the best movements.

261 No. 1. Here Spitta (ii. 165 n.) challenges Forkel.

262 Nos. 11 and 12. In regard to No. 12 (F minor) Spitta holds Forkel
to be in error. As to No. 11, he expresses the same opinion as in
note 3, supra.

263 The date 1744 places the second Part among Bach’s latest
compositions. On the other hand, like the first Part, it contained
work of earlier date.

264 Chromatic Fantasia and Fugue in D minor (P. bk. 207 p. 4). It
probably dates from circ. 1720-23.

265 The MS. was discovered in 1876 and is now at Dresden. It was written
circ. 1738 and disproves Forkel’s conjecture that the fugue did not
belong to the Fantasia and is only partially by Bach. The Fugue
contains forty-seven bars. As the Autograph is a fair copy the
Fugue cannot be called unfinished. See Spitta, iii. 182. The
Fantasia is in P. bk. 207 p. 50; the Fugue in P. bk. 212 p. 88. See
B.C. xxxvi., xxxviii., and xlii. for other Clavier Fantasias.

266 The true explanation seems to be that the Prelude of the first Suite
(A major) is based upon a Gigue by Charles Dieupart (d. circ. 1740),
a popular teacher and composer in England. The words fait pour les
Anglois, which head the A major Suite in an early MS., have been
wrongly interpreted as applying to the whole set of six. They
merely indicate Dieupart’s borrowed Gigue. See Grove, vol. i. 701,
and Parry, _J. S. Bach,_ p. 463. A copy of the work exists, of date
1724-27, made by one of Bach’s pupils. But the composition of the
Suites may certainly be assigned to the Cöthen period. They are
published in P. bks. 203, 204.

267 The French Suites undoubtedly date back to the Cöthen period, since
they figure, though incomplete, in the _Notenbuch_ of A. M. Bach
(1722). They are published in P. bk. 202.

268 Forkel’s incomplete catalogue may be compared with the
Bachgesellschaft volumes III., XIV., XXV. (1), XXXI. (2), XXXVI.,
XLIL, XLIII. (1 and 2), XLV. (1). See generally Schweitzer, ch. 15,
and Pirro, pp. 218 ff.

269 P. bks. 205, 206, 208, 212 (fragment in F minor), 214, 215, 1959.

270 P. bks. 200, 210, 211, 212, 214, 215, 1959.

271 For the most part these youthful works will be found in B.G. XXXVI.

272 P. bk. 207 p. 16.

273 In C minor (P. bk. 200 p. 10).

274 In P. bks. 232, 233.

275 Suite in A major (P. bk. 236), Sonata in E minor (P. bk. 236), Fugue
in G minor (P. bk. 236), four Inventions (P. bk. 2957), Sonata in G
minor (BG. ix. 274; not in P.), Sonata in C major for 2 Violins and
Clavier (P. bk. 237).

276 There are six Sonatas for Flute and Clavier, in B minor, E flat
major, A minor, C major, E minor, E major (P. bks. 234, 235).

277 There are three Sonatas for Clavier and Gamba, in G major, D major,
G minor (P. bk. 239).

278 Forkel omits two Sonatas for Violin, Flute, and Clavier, in G major
and C minor (both in P. bk. 237).

279 As Forkol mentions in secs. 4, 5, 6 the Concertos for two, three,
and four Claviers, perhaps he had in mind here seven Concertos for
Clavier and Orchestra (P. bks. 248-254). A Concerto for Clavier,
Violin, Flute, and Orchestra (P. bk. 255 p. 4) in A minor also
should be mentioned. Also an Overture, in G minor, for Clavier and
Strings (B.G. XLV. (1) p. 190; not in P.)

280 P. bk. 257 p. 4.

281 P. bk. 256 p. 4.

282 There are, in fact, three Concertos for two Claviers and Orchestra:
two in C minor and one in C major. Forkel refers to only one of the
former and regards it as antiquated by comparison with the one in C
major. Spitta (iii. 144) attributes the C major to 1730. Forkel’s
C minor in its original form was a Concerto for two Violins, now
lost. The other C minor Concerto is identical with the Concerto in
D minor for two Violins and is in P. 257b. Spitta (iii. 138) dates
it 1736. See Schweitzer, i. 413.

283 In D minor and C major (P. bks. 258, 259). The tradition is that
Bach wrote these two Concertos in order to play them with his elder
sons. Spitta (iii. 144) finds the tradition trustworthy. Hence the
two works must have been written by c. 1733 at latest, before the
sons left home. See also Schweitzer, i. 414.

284 In A minor (P. bk. 260). This is not an original composition, but
is an arrangement by Bach of a Vivaldi Concerto for four Violins.
Spitta (iii. 149) assigns it to the same period as the Concertos for
three Claviers, c. 1733. See B.G. XLIII. (1) infra.

285 The pedal on the small German Organ had only the compass of an
octave.

286 The Great Preludes and Fugues are, with one exception, in B.G. XV.
The Prelude and Fugue in E flat was published by Bach in the third
Part of the _Clavierübung._ Its Fugue is known as the “St. Anne’s.”

287 From the figures printed by Forkel the twelve can be identified as
follows (the references in parentheses are to the Novello edition of
Bach’s Organ works):

Prelude and Fugue in C minor, the “Great” (bk. vii. 64).
Prelude and Fugue in A minor, (bk. vii. 42).
Prelude and Fugue in G major, (bk. viii. 112).
Prelude and Fugue in E minor, (bk. viii. 98).
Prelude and Fugue in B minor, (vii. 52).
Prelude and Fugue in C major, (bk. ix. 156).
Prelude and Fugue in D minor, (bk. ix. 150).
Prelude and Fugue in C major (bk iii. 70).
Tocatta and Fugue in D minor (bk. x. 196).
Tocatta and Fugue in F major (bk. ix. 176).
Prelude and Fugue in G minor (bk. viii. 120).
Prelude and Fugue in E minor (bk. ii. 44).

288 The Passacaglia in C minor (Novello bk. 10 p. 214) was written
originally for the Clavicembalo and pedal. It belongs to the later
Weimar period, i.e. circ. 1715. See Spitta, i. 588 and Schweitzer,
i. 280.

289 They are all printed in Novello bk. 19, and are three in number, on
the melodies “Christ, der du bist der helle Tag”, “O Gott, du
frommer Gott,” and “Sei gegrüsset, Jesu gütig.” The pedal is only
required in one movement of the first, in none of the second, and
considerably in the third. Without question all three date from
Bach’s earliest period, but whether they were written at Arnstadt or
Lüneburg cannot be stated.

290 The fullest collection of these miscellaneous Organ Choral Preludes
is in B.G. XL. Not counting variant readings they number fifty-two,
besides two fragments and thirteen of doubtful authenticity, of
which two are sets of Variations. The Novello edition contains
fifty-two in bks. 18 and 19. To these must be added the “Eighteen”
Preludes on Choral Melodies, which Forkel nowhere mentions, as well
as the third Part of the _Clavierübung,_ the _Schübler Chorals,_ and
the Variations on _Vom Himmel hoch,_ to which he has already made
reference in the first section of this chapter. As he does not
mention it specifically, it is to be inferred that Forkel was
ignorant of the existence of the _Orgelbüchlein_; otherwise he could
hardly have failed to introduce it in this section. All Bach’s
Choral Preludes, miscellaneous and in collections made by himself,
are in Novello’s edition, bks. 15-19. A useful key to their
melodies is provided by bk. 20. For more detailed information see
Terry, _Bach’s Chorals,_ Part III.

291 The large number of MSS. of many of the miscellaneous Preludes is
made evident in the introduction to B.G. XL.

292 The Sonatas in E flat major, C minor, and D minor are in N. bk. 4; E
minor, C major, G major in N. bk. 5.

293 The so-called “Sonatas” were actually written for a Clavicembalo
with two manuals and a pedal. Bach’s Autograph of them belonged to
his second son and an earlier copy of them to Wilhelm Friedemann.
Both are now in the Berlin Royal Library. Friedemann went to
Dresden as Organist in 1733 and Spitta is of opinion that the whole
of the six Sonatas were in existence by or soon after 1727. If so,
they must be regarded as the outcome of Bach’s early years at
Leipzig. See Spitta, iii. 212 ff. and Schweitzer, i. 278.

294 None are extant. Spitta, iii. 213 n., conjectures that Forkel
refers to the Trios in D minor and C minor (N. bks. 2 p. 54, 12 p.
108) and the Pastorale in F major (N. bk. 12 p. 102.) His incomplete
knowledge of the Organ works is revealed by Appendix V. infra.

295 This is a pure conjecture and Schweitzer scouts it (i. 416 n.).

296 The oldest copy of them dates from circ. 1720; they belong therefore
to the late Cöthen period. The 1720 MS. is in A. M. Bach’s
handwriting and was discovered in 1814 at Petrograd among old papers
about to be sent away to a butter dealer. The Sonatas are in P. bk.
228.

297 They also date from the Cöthen period and are in P. bk. 238a, 238b.

298 Forkel omits to mention the Brandenburg Concertos (P. bks. 261-266);
the Overtures in C major (P. bk. 267), B minor (P. bk. 268), D major
(P. bk. 269), D major (P. bk. 2068); and the Violin Concertos in A
minor (P. bk. 229), E major (P. bk. 230), and (for two Violins) in D
minor (P. bk. 231). In B.G. XXI. (1) is a Symphonic movement, in D
major, for Violin and orchestra. A Sinfonia in F major (B.G. XXXI.
96) is another version of the first Brandenburg Concerto. The
Clavier Concertos have been mentioned supra.

299 The set of five is complete only for Christmas Day, Feast of the
Circumcision, Whitsunday (one of the five is of doubtful
authenticity), Purification of the B.V.M., and Feast of St. Michael
the Archangel. See Terry, _Bach’s Chorals,_ Part II. 2 ff.

300 In giving the number of _Passions_ as five, Forkel repeats the
statement of the _Nekrolog._ The number corresponds with the five
sets of Church Cantatas which Bach is known to have written. It is,
however, exceedingly doubtful whether Bach wrote more than four
_Passions._ Only those according to St. Matthew and St. John have
come down to us from C. P. E. Bach, who was left the Autographs of
both by his father. The _St. John Passion_ was first performed in
1724 and the _St. Matthew Passion_ in 1729. Picander, Bach’s
librettist, certainly wrote two other Passion texts, one of which
was written for Good Friday 1725, and the second, based on St.
Mark’s Gospel, was actually performed at St. Thomas’, Leipzig, on
Good Friday 1731. Spitta (ii. 505) gives good reason to hold that
Bach’s music for this Passion was adapted from the _Trauer-Ode,_
which he had written in 1727 in memory of Queen Christiane
Eberhardine. But of the 1725 _Passion_ there is no trace. If it
ever existed, its loss probably may be assigned to Wilhelm
Friedemann’s carelessness, to whom presumably it was assigned in the
division of Bach’s property after his death. But even so, we have
no more than four _Passions._ There exists, however, a fifth
_Passion according to St. Luke,_ which is undoubtedly in Bach’s
Autograph, and which Spitta is inclined to attribute to Bach
himself. It is published by Breitkopf and Haertel, but is generally
regarded as being by another composer than Bach, who probably copied
it for use at Leipzig. On the whole matter see Spitta, ii. 504 ff.,
Schweitzer, chap. xxvi., and the Bach-Jahrbuch for 1911
(Publications of the New Bachgesellschaft XII. (2)).

301 Other than the _Passions,_ the only Oratorios are the _Christmas
Oratorio_, (1734), the _Easter Oratorio_ (c. 1736), and _Ascension
Oratorio_ (c. 1735).

302 Besides the B minor Mass (1733-? 38) Bach wrote four miscalled
“short” Masses, in F major, A major, G minor, and G major. They all
belong to the Leipzig period (c. 1739).

303 Besides the setting of the Sanctus in the B minor Mass there are
four detached settings, in C major, D major, D minor, and G major.
Of these only that in D major is probably by Bach (c. 1723).

304 The music for Saints’ Days is included in the church Cantatas. For
the Birthday Odes see supra, Chap. IIA.