Bach’s Manuscripts
Discussions - Part 1

Bach manuscripts

Jim Morrison wrote (July 17, 2002):
I was just chatting over email with a friend of mine and he asked me which of Bach's works do we lack autograph manuscripts for and I couldn't (with a red-face he could see) name them for him. Is there a list of them somewhere on the internet or in some easily accessible reference book? I'm actually away from home now and have been for a few weeks and so can't look on my own shelves. I know some of the chamber works are problematic and some of the early organ works, but what else? Just how rare are scores written in Bach's hand? How many works have been passed down written out by others? And just why should this be? Where would Bach's own scores have gone? I've read that his sons are partly to blame for not saving work, but are they in fact mainly to blame? Did they simply throw away his works after he died, like so much scrap paper? Or did fires and floods take some of them as well? Or did perhaps Bach happen not to keep scores of his works? Was it common practice of the day not to preserve works of dead composers?

Thomas Braatz wrote (July 17, 2002):
Jim Morrison inquired:
< I was just chatting over email with a friend of mine and he asked me which of Bach's works do we lack autograph manuscripts for and I couldn't (with a red-face he could see) name them for him. Is there a list of them somewhere on the internet or in some easily accessible reference book? >
No, not that I am aware of. Information of this sort in contained in the KB of the NBA and it would take a lot of time to create such a list.

< I'm actually away from home now and have been for a few weeks and so can't look on my own shelves. I know some of the chamber works are problematic and some of the early organ works, but what else? >
Within the last few months I gave information on one of the Bach cantatas (I can't recall which one) for which not a single note or mark of articulation is in Bach's own handwriting. Yet, there is no doubt that this work is by Bach. There are numerous ways of determining this in addition to analyzing the work for its style.

< Just how rare are scores written in Bach's hand? >
Most of them are in libraries or archives and a few are in private hands.

< How many works have been passed down written out by others? And just why should this be? Where would Bach's own scores have gone? I've read that his sons are partly to blame for not saving work, but are they in fact mainly to blame? Did they simply throw away his works after he died, like so much scrap paper? Or did fires and floods take some of them as well? Or did perhaps Bach happen not to keep scores of his works? Was it common practice of the day not to preserve works of dead composers? >
Scores of original works in Bach's day were a valuable commodity. You can read about this in most Bach biographies where he spent nights copying out clandestinely works that his uncle had accumulated. There was great value attached to such music in handwritten form. W.F. Bach would extract an exorbitant price from anyone who would be allowed to take a peak at his father's cantata scores. I have reported on this subject earlier. C.P.E. Bach, also, was not always as careful as he should have been with his father's manuscripts, but W.F. Bach was definitely the worst offender in this regard.

Remember that Bach's style of music quickly fell out of favor with the general public, so the preservation of his manuscripts did not have such a high priority as it might have had beginning with the time of Mendelssohn who began collecting Bach's autograph scores wherever he could.

Juozas Rimas wrote (July 17, 2002):
< Thomas Braatz wrote: Within the last few months I gave information on one of the Bach cantatas (I can't recall which one) for which not a single note or mark of articulation is in Bach's own handwriting. Yet, there is no doubt that this work is by Bach. There are numerous ways of determining this in addition to analyzing the work
for its style. >
Incidentally, are there any online articles about determining authenticity?

As it leaves it me puzzled every time I see many Bach's works (or the ones attributed to him) with a simple marking "spurious", "doubtful" or even just "?" (like here in many places www.kunstderfuge.com/bachworks.htm )

If the reasearcher cannot even approximately tell the real author, maybe the judgement exclusively based on its style would be too bold?

Bart Hengeveld wrote (July 17, 2002):
< Jim Morrison wrote: I was just chatting over email with a friend of mine and he asked me which of Bach's works do we lack autograph manuscripts for and I [snip] >

The following links may be relevant to your question:

http://www.bachdigital.org/
http://www.sbb.spk-berlin.de/

Jim Morrison wrote (July 18, 2002):
Thanks for the help.

I just got back into town (and had quite a few discs from three separate orders from two countries waiting on me at the post office-hmmm, this CD buying thing may be getting out of control again) and have been able to look at some of my Bach books in the autograph issue and it turns out in the back of that incredibly useful and seems to be indispensable Oxford Companion to Bach there's sequential BWV list that includes among other things an indication if there is an autograph of the score along with its location. Looks like most of the vocal music survives in autograph and almost all in one place: the Berlin Staatsbibliotheck. Any idea how they acquired so much of Bach's autographs?

I was surprised to see how little of the organ works are in autograph.

Looks like there exist autographs of the Inventions, some of the French Suites, but none of the English Suites, both Books of the WK, KdF, and little else of the keyboard compositions. That surprised me. None of his first publication, the Six Partitas 825-830, or French Ouverture, the Italian Concerto, the Goldberg Variations, etc. Don't ask me why, but I thought that since he's had things like the Partitas and the Goldberg's published that he also would have saved the autographs as memorabilia.

I still don't understand at all what happened to Bach's scores. Was it common practice to throw away the manuscripts? Did they recycle the paper? Was space so short they couldn't keep them? Were there no music libraries to give them to? Were they destroyed by fire or flood or war? Did his sons simply toss them in the garbage after he died, or did Bach himself get rid of them? What was Bach's attitude towards his own scores? Did he save his own music? I don't have the Wolff bio with me to see if he has anything to say on the subject. Maybe there's something in there on the issue.

Seriously, I work in a library and issues of preservation and the disappearance of texts interests me. Can anyone direct me to a book or essay that talks about how Baroque composers felts about their musical scores and just what are the processes under which world class musical scores like those of Bach's are 'lost'? Who losses them? Where do they go? etc.

Thomas Braatz wrote (July 18, 2002):
Jim Morrison asked:
< Looks like most of the vocal music survives in autograph and almost all in one place: the Berlin Staatsbibliotheck. Any idea how they acquired so much of Bach's autographs? >
C.P.E. Bach lived and worked in Berlin for many years (at the court of King Frederick the Great.) At his father's death, CPE acquired many of the autograph scores, which he took along with him to Berlin. W.F. Bach, the eldest son of J.S.Bach, also spent the final years of his life in Berlin. Between both brothers almost all of Bach's autograph scores were distributed. A key institution involved in acquiring the manuscripts after the deaths of both brothers was the Berliner Singakademie with Carl Zelter, a composer and conductor of this organization, who spearheaded the endeavor to collect all available manuscripts by J. S. Bach. Zelter was the teacher of Mendelssohn, and thus this special interest in Bach's music (and the scor) was passed on directly to Mendelssohn, who gave his support to the performances of Bach's works and the establishment of the BGA, for which all the autograph scores would be necessary. Eventually most of the holdings of the Berliner Singakademie were !
passed over to the BB (Berliner Staatsbibliothek).

< I was surprised to see how little of the organ works are in autograph. >
In Wolff's recent Bach biography, p. 48, Wolff surmises that the fact that these early organ works were primarily in organ tablature form, a system of musical notation that was already going out of fashion in Bach's time, meant that there was little interest in preserving them. They could no longer be easily read and understood by the newer generation of organists that favored the current notational system.

< I still don't understand at all what happened to Bach's scores. Was it common practice to throw away the manuscripts? >
As Wolff explains on p. 45 - these handwritten scores were a valuable commodity and were treated as such (once again, the story about young J.S. copying by moonlight from his uncle's collection of compositions that were kept locked behind a grillwork doors through which J.S.'s small hands could reach in order to extract them. "Christoph was right to be enraged about the unauthorized copying and the potential loss of value that his collection suffered thereby." This is somewhat like owning a one-of-a-kind postage stamp which has great value, but when copies are available the collector's value of the stamp decreases considerably, because now many now can say that they possess the sought-for item.

< Did they recycle the paper? >
I believe that I have read somewhere recently that the story about the only existing copy of the Brandenburg Concerti was recovered after it had been used for wrapping up some fresh meat (a story I had read as a boy and used to believe) is a myth that was perpetuated for a long time without full knowledge of the facts. Almost every aspect of the history of the autograph score for the Brandenburgs is known and it is in reasonably good condition. The musical calligraphy is an outstanding effort by J.S.Bach. It eventually also came to the BB, where it is today.

< Was space so short they couldn't keep them? >
No, not for something considered as having great value.

< Were there no music libraries to give them to? >
Why should they be donated to a library if private collectors were offering more money in the form of ready cash?
Anna Magdalena did present her set of original performing parts to the St. Thomas School soon after Bach's death, but her sons would still occasionally perform some of the cantatas while they were still alive.

< Were they destroyed by fire or flood or war? >
Yes, just recently I discussed the provenance of a cantata where the original score was lost/destroyed? during WW II. Perhaps, however, some soldier picked it up as a souvenir and it is resting somewhere in an attic. Who knows? But in cases like this, the BGA will have had access to this manuscript for its authoritative edition. The NBA can then rely more heavily on the results contained in the BGA.

< Did his sons simply toss them in the garbage after he died, or did Bach himself get rid of them? What was Bach's attitude towards his own scores? Did he save his own music? >
I think, as long as they were alive, both sons would have recognized the value of the scores, but W.F. was less judicious in selecting the individuals to whom he entrusted the scores, even if it was only to take a peek at them for a day or two.

During Bach's lifetime, it was customary for cantors of churches (particularly those related to Bach in some way) to exchange their own compositions. J.S. Bach performed these cantatas by others in his church while his works would be performed elsewhere. It is conceivable that a few cantatas may have been lost in this way.

In the case of some of J.S. Bach's own printed works, he may not have felt a strong compulsion to maintain the original score, since he was personally engaged in proofing what the engraver's presented to him for correction. With each subsequent correction, the original score became less and less important to maintain, particularly after the actual printing when the whole world had access to his most recently corrected versions.

Jim Morrison wrote (July 18, 2002):
[To Thomas Braatz] Thomas! Great post, thanks. You're shed quite a lot of light on
this issue for me.

One thing I'm still in the dark about though is how Bach's autographs move from being valuable commodities that are too special to be donated to a preservation institution and are in fact leant, displayed, and sold for money to so quickly becoming virtually worthless pieces of paper that their owners don't bother to maintain or keep track of.

I understand that it's hard to figure out just what makes people lose items and definitive answers will be hard to come up. I guess I'm really just expressing some amazmemt over how many autographs we don't have.

Thanks again,

PS: Just put on what seems like it's going to be another fantastic Robert Hill Bach disc: The harpsichord music of the Young J. S. Bach II (not bach the second! but set two of the two issue sets) which contains the still unheard and rarely recorded BWV 990 which seems to a set of variations on a Saraband (sound familiar?) along with 912a, a different version of the Toccata in D Major.

Bach Manuscripts in UK

Katie wrote (July 28, 2002):
Does anyone know if there are any original Bach manuscripts on public display anywhere in the UK, preferably London area?

Charles Francis wrote (July 28, 2002):
[To Katie] I looked at the WTC II manuscript some years ago in the British Library:
http://www.music.qub.ac.uk/~tomita/wc2l.html

Katie wrote (July 28, 2002):
[To Charles Francis] Thanks for your reply - much appreciated. The WTC is a manuscript that I would certainly like to see very much.....but I thought you had to have a special pass to gain access to collections in the British Library? I've looked on the website at the bit about the Exhibition Galleries that are open to the public, and it mentions The Messiah (possibly worth a visit for that), but not Bach.... Did you have special access when you saw it?

Arthur wrote (July 29, 2002):
[To Katie] I have not been in the Brtish Library for many, many years. In fact when I was there it was called the British Museum, and to get to the Music Room, one had to walk past the Rosetta Stone.

In those days one could see almost anything. But even then, the Handel manuscripts would not be brought out unless the reader had a valid reason to examine the originals. One was expected to use a microfilm instead. More and more libaries are refusing permission to view the origibnals, since so many manuscripts are deteriorating due to pollution.

If you go, it would best be wise to inquire ahead.

I really missed something when I was at the British Museum. I was looking through a sheaf of autograph manuscripts of Suessmayr (Mozart's student who finished the Requiem). One reason why Constanza wanted to use him to complete the Requiem was because his handwriting was like Mozart's and she could fool the Count into thinking that Mozart had completed the work. Anyway, a few years later, someone went through the sheaf of Suessmayrs manuscripts, and discovered ...

There, unidentified. were some minuets in Mozart's own hand. Mozart autographs! And I missed them.<darn>

Alain Naigeon wrote (August 1, 2002):
[To Charles Francis] But wasn't Bach the kind of guy who might have loved chocolate ?

S.D.G.l. -- what (if anything) does it mean?

Uri Golomb wrote (June 2, 2003):
A response to just one point from Thomas Braatz's latest (I might respond to other points later -- time permitting....)

"If we can assume from the J.J.s and SDGs that Bach most often wrote on the score that he believed that the music he was creating was for the glory of God, then we can easily assume that he did not envision an operatic performance in."

I always wondered about those SDGs [Soli Deo Glorias]: were they unique to Bach? Was Bach the only one who used these indications? So I asked some people who've studied contemporaneous manuscripts. I didn't get a conclusive answer on how widespread they were, but I did see incontrovertible evidence that they were not unique to Bach: the Cambridge scholar Geoffrey Weber, who performed some of Reinhardt Keiser's music, has shown me a facsimile of psalm-settings by that composer, which featured the same insignia -- sometimes in full ("Soli Deo Gloria"), sometimes in initials (SDGl). What does that prove? Not much -- only that one composer has on some occasiosn used it. This is already enough, however, to prove that Bach wasn't completely unique.

Here are some follow-up questions -- and I don't have the answers to any of them:
1) How many other composers, besides Bach and Keiser, used this insignia? My guess is "quite a lot", but at the moment it's only a guess.
2) Keiser signed at least some of his sacred music that way. Did he sign all or most of it in this manner? What about his operas and other secular music? Ditto for all other composers who used it: was it only in their sacred music (all/most/some of it), or in their secular music as well? (As far as I remember, Bach did use it in some/most/all secular music as well -- someone correct me if I'm wrong. Also, I think -- I'm not sure -- that Bach was farily conscienteous about this; he used it in virtually all his manuscripts, at least those of sacred music. Was that indeed the case? And if so -- how unusual was that?)
3) Keiser was an opera composer. How different was his sacred music from his secular music, and his operas in particular? Ditto for any other composer who used "J. J." and "S.D.G.l." in sacred music: Was there a big difference between their sacred and secular style? If they wrote operas, were their catnatas and passions any less dramatic than their operas (assuming the latter were indeed dramatic)?
4) What about non-composers? Did priests sign their letters and/or sermons in that way? What about theologians? University professors? State officials? Playwrites? Bussiness-men? Laywers? If it was a convention -- how widespread was it? The whole of Europe? The whole of Germany? Just the Luthern part of Germany? Specific towns and districts? Some families, but not others? Without answering at least some of these questions, we cannot impute any significance on Bach's insignia.

And why didn't anyone bother to ask these questions? I know why I did bother: I happen to know that Orthodox Jews begin their letters and official documents with the Jewish equivalent of Jesu Juva (the Hebrew, or rather Arameic, initials for "with the help of Heaven", roughtly translated). The practice is not restricted to rabbis, or to religious texts: my religious neighbour puts it on signs on the noticeboard. Such a line does not prove that the writer is personally devout -- it only proves that he belongs to a certain community or social milieu, where such a signature is standard practice. It can be as meaningful as a heartfelt decleration -- or as meaningless as opening a letter to an official you never met, and don't really care for, with the words "Dear sir/madam".

I'm not saying Bach wasn't devout, and didn't write music for the glory of God. He probably was, and he probably did. (Not necessarily more devout than, say, Graupner -- a better composer, yes, but not necessarily more devout in his personal beliefs). All I'm saying is that his insignia, on their own, don't prove it -- and the more Reinhardt Keiser there were at the time (and I repeat: I don't know how many of them there were), the less meaningful do Bach's insignia become.

Tom's other premise is that, if Bach wrote for the glory of God, he didn't want his music to be performed dramatically. I'm sorry, but I find this a non sequitour. The music was a sermon; it was meant to convince and enthrall. Yes, Bach had to promise that his music "not appear operatic in nature but, much rather, that it rouse the listeners to devotion". But two things can be said:
a) the injunction can be interpreted as an objection to over-sensuous music, rather than an objection to dramatic thrust and power. The two often go hand-in-hand, but they're not identical. One has to investigate what the term "opernhafftig" meant to Bach and his contemporaries.
b) I'm not sure he kept his obligation. I'm not at all sure that his music was any less dramatic and theatrical than that of contemporaneous opera. Robert Marshall, who I'm sure has heard and/or studied more Baroque opera than I have, says that Bach's music is more dramatic than that of most contemporaneous opera composers. I'm inclined to believe him. It's certainly no less dramatic than anything I've heard so far in Händel's operas (they can be very dramatic sometimes -- but no more dramatic than Bach's most highly-charged moments).

Perhpas I am missing something because I'm a non-believer myself, but I don't see anything inherently sacriligeous about using all the persuasive devices of the theatre in order to make religious precepts more convincing, more persuasive, more emotionally immediate and appealing, to a congregation. Yes, some churches have preached austerity and containment; but not all churches, and not all the time.

Here's something worth remembering: there is absolutely no difference in style between Bach's sacred and secular cantatas, except that he did not use chorales in the latter. He didn't write operas, but he called some of his secular cantatas "Dramma per musica". He wrote music for the seductive "Vollust" (the personification of earthly desires) in his Hercules cantata (BWV 213), then turned it into a lullaby for Jesus in his Christmas Oratorio (BWV 248), and if anything made it even more sensuous in its new setting. And that's not the only example. Did he expect the same music to be performed in a radically different manner in church and in a secular setting? Or did he expect his secular cantatas to be performed in the same restrained manner as his sacred music? Remember: the music itself is the same.

You cannot assume that Bach's music was not operatic. You have to prove it by comparing it to the operas he knew -- something which I haven't done (Bach didn't know Händel's operas) -- and showing what tricks they use, and Bach doesn't. In what way is Bach's music any less dramatic or theatrical than that of his contemporaries? This is not a rhetorical question: as I said, the few excerpts I heard from German Baroque opera are not enough for me to make my own judgement on this. But anyone who claims that Bach's music is not operatic -- or, for that matter, anyone who claism that it was -- has to substantitate that claim. Listening ot Bach's music, I find it very difficult to believe that anyone at the time wrote anything substantially more dramatic. But that's just a hypothesis.

One other thing: I don't object to understated Bach performances (unlike Brad...) Not all of Bach's music is high drama, and much of it works very well indeed in lyrical, reserved performances. Much of it can, in my view, work both ways; and some of it does work best in a truly theatrical rendition. Gestures can be gently underlined, rather than highlighted in broad strokes. For me, at lesat, thats' often enough: I don't object to broad strokes and grand gestures, but I don't always feel a need for them, either. It depends on the specific work (and, admittedly, on the listener's taste as well). What I do mind is the cold, stultifying, and mechanical -- and there's much too much of it in Bach performance, especially from those performers who assume that there's absolutely nothing operatic in any of Bach's music.

Thomas Braatz wrote (June 2, 2003):
[To Uri Golomb] The New Grove articon Johann Adam Reincken points out that his “Hortus Musicus” which Bach respected highly by arranging 3 of the fugues and a few other pieces for harpsichord, has at the very top of the cover page which depicts a monumental structure the words “Soli Deo Gloria.” Both the structure and fugues contained within are based upon the ‘trias harmonica’ which is 1:1 = unison; 2:1 = octave; 3:2 = fifth – a kind of musical trinity at the top of which the crowning three words: “Soli Deo Gloria” sit. (This according to Ulf Grapenthin (1991).

Now the association of such an esoteric meaning that can be attached to SDG along with its usual religious significance makes it more likely that Bach attached meaning/significance to what others might think is simply a convention among composers of Bach's time, as, for instance, the following:

In the MGG in any article by Friedrich Blume:

„Inwieweit in der tiefen und verwickelten Sinngebung von Bachs Kirchenmusik ein absichtliches Bekenntnis oder einfach die Freude an der handwerklichen Leistung des großen Könners zu erblicken ist, kann strittig sein. Es stimmt bedenklich, daß die Zeitgenossen gerade auf diese charakteristische Problematik nie hinweisen. Die Tatsache vollends, daß Bach seinen Handschriften stets das »J. J.« (»Jesu juva«) oder »S. D. G.« (»Soli Deo Gloria«) zusetzt, bedeutet nicht mehr als einen Handwerksbrauch; viele Musiker-Handschriften des 17.-18. Jahrhunderts zeigen die gleiche Gewohnheit, und Haydn fängt noch in den 1780er Jahren jedes Symphonie-Manuskript. mit »In Nomine Domini« an und beschließt es mit »Finis Laus Deo«.“

[It can be a matter of dispute to determine to what extent Bach’s church music, in its deep and profound significance, is to be understood as an intentional confession [of faith] or simply [an expression] of joy over the physical accomplishment on the part of a great artist. It makes one wonder that his contemporaries never directly mention these otherwise characteristic uncertainties. The fact that Bach always [‘always’ is not true; Friedrich Blume failed to investigate thoroughly before coming to this conclusion, see below] adds “J.J.” or “S.D.G.” to his manuscripts, does not signify anything more than a convention among those of the trade [For Blume, Bach is simply a ‘tradesman’]; many manuscripts by musicians [and composers] of the 17th to 18^th century show the same custom [of affixing these terms], and even Haydn, in the 1780s still began each symphony manuscript with “In Nomine Domini” and ended it with “Fini Laus Deo.”]

It appears that Blume also provided incomplete information about the centuries when this occurred:

Here is an example from the early 19^th century:

MGG article about Carl Maria von Weber:
„Was er auch tat, er fühlte sich immer in der Verantwortung stehend, als Künstler gegenüber Gott (»Soli Deo Gloria« schrieb er nach alter Sitte an das Ende jeder seiner großen Part.)“

[No matter what he did, he always felt [strongly] his responsibility, as an artist [musician, composer] toward God (he wrote, according to an old custom, „Soli Deo Gloria“ at the end of each one of his large scores.)]

A while back I had checked all the NBA KBs for instances of Bach’s use of “J.J.” and “SDG” Of course, there are not autograph scores for all of the existing works that have come down to us

There were 149 instances of which

85% had “J.J.”

49% had “Fine | SDG”

6% had “SDGl”

BWV 1045, a fragment, had “J.J.”

SDG was found in BWV 213 214 207 248 243 245 234 236

and JJ in BWV 214 206 215 204 201 248 243 245 244 234 236 238 225 226

The absence of JJ or SDG in the autograph scores of Bach’s instrumental works is rather remarkable.

Johan van Veen wrote (June 2, 2003):
Thanks for your interesting message. I have inserted some comments below.

< Uri Golomb wrote:
< A response to just one point from Thomas Braatz's latest (I might respond to other points later -- time permitting....)

"If we can assume from the J.J.s and SDGs that Bach most often wrote on the score that he believed that the music he was creating was for the glory of God, then we can easily assume that he did not envision an operatic performance in church."

I always wondered about those SDGs [Soli Deo Glorias]: were they unique to Bach? Was Bach the only one who used these indications? So I asked some people who've studied contemporaneous manuscripts. I didn't get a conclusive answer on how widespread they were, but I did see incontrovertible evidence that they were not unique to Bach: the Cambridge scholar Geoffrey Weber, who performed some of Reinhardt Keiser's music, has shown me a facsimile of psalm-settings by that composer, which featured the same insignia -- sometimes in full ("Soli Deo Gloria"), sometimes in initials (SDGl). What does that prove? Not much -- only that one composer has on some occasiosn used it. This is already enough, however, to prove that Bach wasn't completely unique. >
I think you are right in assuming that Bach wasn't unique. This idea has come from those who consider Bach the 'fifth Evangelist', a concept Bach would probably have rejected.

Bach was simply a believer, as almost everyone in those days. There were hardly people who were really non-believers, and it is just inconceivable that any composer would have been appointed cantor or chapelmaster without being a true believer. It is quite possible that adding initials like "J.J." or "S.D.G." to scores was a kind of 'convention'. That can't be used as an argument to doubt the sincerity with which it was used. Why can't 'conventions' have a real meaning to those who use them? Everyone has habits - things you do without thinking about them every time. Does that mean they have no real significance?

< Here are some follow-up questions -- and I don't have the answers to any of them:
1) How many other composers, besides Bach and Keiser, used this insignia? My guess is "quite a lot", but at the moment it's only a guess.
2) Keiser signed at least some of his sacred music that way. Did he sign all or most of it in this manner? What about his operas and other secular music? Ditto for all other composers who used it: was it only in their sacred music (all/most/some of it), or in their secular music as well? (As far as I remember, Bach did use it in some/most/all secular music as well -- someone correct me if I'm wrong. Also, I think -- I'm not sure -- that Bach was farily conscienteous about this; he used it in virtually all his manuscripts, at least those of sacred music. Was that indeed the case? And if so -- how unusual was that?)
3) Keiser was an opera composer. How different was his sacred music from his secular music, and his operas in particular? Ditto for any other composer who used "J. J." and "S.D.G.l." in sacred music: Was there a big difference between their sacred and secular style? If they wrote operas, were their catnatas and passions any less dramatic than their operas (assuming the latter were indeed dramatic)?
4) What about non-composers? Did priests sign their letters and/or sermons in that way? What about theologians? University professors? State officials? Playwrites? Bussiness-men? Laywers? If it was a convention -- how widespread was it? The whole of Europe? The whole of Germany? Just the Luthern part of Germany? Specific towns and districts? Some families, but not others? Without answering at least some of these questions, we cannot impute any significance on Bach's insignia. >
Intriguing questions to which I unfortunately don't have the answers. But generally speaking I very much doubt whether secular works were treated differently from sacred works. As far as I know people didn't see a fundamental difference between 'sacred' and 'secular' - hence the frequent borrowings of material from 'secular' cantatas for sacred works and vice versa.

Let us remember how Luther considered music in itself as a gift from God and a tool to keep the devil away - and he wasn't specifically talkinabout 'sacred' music. It is even not always possible to make a clear distinction between 'sacred' and 'secular'. Take Telemann's cantata 'Alles redet itzt und singet' for example: it is a cantata in praise of nature, which one would consider 'secular' at first, but there are references to God as creator in it and ends with an encouragement to praise God. So what is this: a religious cantata or a secular work? I would say: both, because there is no fundamental difference between the two categories.

< I'm not saying Bach wasn't devout, and didn't write music for the glory of God. He probably was, and he probably did. (Not necessarily more devout than, say, Graupner -- a better composer, yes, but not necessarily more devout in his personal beliefs). All I'm saying is that his insignia, on their own, don't prove it -- and the more Reinhardt Keisers there were at the time (and I repeat: I don't know how many of them there were), the less meaningful do Bach's insignia become. >
I don't think anything will make them less meaningful, only make Bach less unique, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

< Tom's other premise is that, if Bach wrote for the glory of God, he didn't want his music to be performed dramatically. I'm sorry, but I find this a non sequitour. The music was a sermon; it was meant to convince and enthrall. Yes, Bach had to promise that his music "not appear operatic in nature but, much rather, that it rouse the listeners to devotion". But two things can be said:
a) the injunction can be interpreted as an objection to over-sensuous music, rather than an objection to dramatic thrust and power. The two often go hand-in-hand, but they're not identical. One has to investigate what the term "opernhafftig" meant to Bach and his contemporaries.
b) I'm not sure he kept his obligation. I'm not at all sure that his music was any less dramatic and theatrical than that of contemporaneous opera. Robert Marshall, who I'm sure has heard and/or studied more Baroque opera than I have, says that Bach's music is more dramatic than that of most contemporaneous opera composers. I'm inclined to believe him. It's certainly no less dramatic than anything I've heard so far in Handel's operas (they can be very dramatic sometimes -- but no more dramatic than Bach's most highly-charged moments). >
I have been able to listen to operas by Mattheson and Keiser - nice works which deserve to be performed, but as far as drama is concerned, I think that Bach's Passions are surpassing these operas by far. One should compare Bach's works with music of the same style (more or less) - a comparison with Hasse, for instance, would be nonsense: his works belong to a later style. If Bach would have written operas the audiences which were used to listen to operas by Hasse probably wouldn't have liked them: not because they were not dramatic enough, but because they were old-fashioned stylistically.

< Perhpas I am missing something because I'm a non-believer myself, but I don't see anything inherently sacriligeous about using all the persuasive devices of the theatre in order to make religious precepts more convincing, more persuasive, more emotionally immediate and appealing, to a congregation. Yes, some churches have preached austerity and containment; but not all churches, and not all the time. >
I am a believer myself, but I don't see anything sacrilegious in using theatrical devices as well. It all depends on which devices are used, and how they are used. Let's not forget that theatrical devices have always been used. It's use dates from the middle ages, when stories like that of the Resurrection of Christ were 'played' in church to audiences which couldn't read and didn't have a bible. There is a well-known piece from the middle ages, the 'Ludus Danielis', which - in a 'medieval way' - is very dramatic. So what Bach did wasn't new at all.

And Lutheranism has always put a high value on the congregation living through historical events, like Christ's Passion. That is the reason Bach's Passions end with the burial of Christ and don't explicitly mention the resurrection (implicitly they do).

< Here's something worth remembering: there is absolutely no difference in style between Bach's sacred and secular cantatas, except that he did not use chorales in the latter. He didn't write operas, but he called some of his secular cantatas "Dramma per musica". He wrote music for the seductive "Vollust" (the personification of earthly desires) in his Hercules cantata (BWV 213), then turned it into a lullaby for Jesus in his Christmas Oratorio (BWV 248), and if anything made it even more sensuous in its new setting. And that's not the only example. Did he expect the same music to be performed in a radically different manner in church and in a secular setting? Or did he expect his secular cantatas to be performed in the same restrained manner as his sacred music? Remember: the music itself is the same.

You cannot assume that Bach's music was not operatic. You have to prove it by comparing it to the operas he knew -- something which I haven't done (Bach didn't know Handel's operas) -- and showing what tricks they use, and Bach doesn't. In what way is Bach's music any less dramatic or theatrical than that of his contemporaries? This is not a rhetorical question: as I said, the few excerpts I heard from German Baroque opera are not enough for me to make my own judgement on this. But anyone who claims that Bach's music is not operatic -- or, for that matter, anyone who claism that it was -- has to substantitate that claim. Listening ot Bach's music, I find it very difficult to believe that anyone at the time wrote anything substantially more dramatic. But that's just a hypothesis. >
It is my guess that the rhetorical devices used by actors/singers in theatre and opera were the same as used by singers in the church and as applied by composers in their music. And I guess they were the same as used by ministers in their sermons. As far as I know rhetorics were part of the theological education.

If sermons were 'dramatic' - and I strongly believe they were - why shouldn't the 'sermons on music' be dramatic as well?

< One other thing: I don't object to understated Bach performances (unlike Brad...) Not all of Bach's music is high drama, and much of it works very well indeed in lyrical, reserved performances. Much of it can, in my view, work both ways; and some of it does work best in a truly theatrical rendition. Gestures can be gently underlined, rather than highlighted in broad strokes. For me, at lesat, thats' often enough: I don't object to broad strokes and grand gestures, but I don't always feel a need for them, either. It depends on the specific work (and, admittedly, on the listener's taste as well). What I do mind is the cold, stultifying, and mechanical -- and there's much too much of it in Bach performance, especially from those performers who assume that there's absolutely nothing operatic in any of Bach's music. >
I agree here. As much as German music of the 17^th and 18^th centuries was influenced by the Italian style, there is still difference between German and Italian music, partly due - as far as religious music is concerned - to the difference in function between music in a Roman-Catholic and a Lutheran liturgy. Take for example Schütz: he has been strongly influenced by the 'seconda prattica' in Italy, but it would be wrong IMO to perform his sacred music the same way as Monteverdi's.

And how 'dramatic' music or its performance is thought to be indeed partly depends on the listener: if someone doesn't have an ear for the small details in Bach's music he will probably consider a piece or its performance dull. But the use of a simple chorale melody, played on the oboe, in an aria can be as eloquent as anything inthe ears of him who knows what the chorale is about. And the original audiences knew those chorales better than probably any of us.

Uri Golomb wrote (June 2, 2003):
Johan van Veen wrote:
< It is quite possible that adding initials like "J.J." or "S.D.G." to scores was a kind of 'convention'. That can't be used as an argument to doubt the sincerity with which it was used. Why can't 'conventions' have a real meaning to those who use them? Everyone has habits - things you do without thinking about them every time. Does that mean they have no real significance? >
I would only say this: you cannot judge the sincerity of the convention from the convention itself. It is just an outward sign. Two people may share the same habit -- the use of a phrase like S.D.G.l., a courtesy greeting like raising your hat (if you have one) towards an acquaintance; signing your letters with "sincerely yours", whatever; For one of them, it is both a social convention and a genuine exprsesion of faith/respect/sincerity. for the other, it is an empty gesture. Yet the gesture might well appear identical to an outsider. In order to know how sincere it is, you have to know other things about that person.

So I'm not saying that the conventionality of the gesture is, in itself, proof of its insincerity. I'm only saying that the gesture, on its own, does not prove much one way or the other. You can use Bach's devoutness to prove the sincerity of his S.D.G.l. insignia. You cannot do the reverse (use the insignia as evidence for unusual devoutness).

I know the Ludus Danielis -- in fact, as a teenager I took part in a (shortened and re-worked) summer school production of that play... There were no operas at that time, but that play was probably one of the most vividly theatrical things available to people then, inside or oustide the church. As far as I'm aware, church attitudes towards theatrical devices have changed back and forth, from time to time and place to place, and probably even from one person to another within the same congregation.

There is no doubt that rhetoric was part of a musician's education in the 17th and 18th centuries. There is much debate on exactly how the study of rhetoric influenced musical composition and performance, but undoubtedly it had some impact. These 20th century debates on what rhetoric meant to 18th century musicians have had much impact on Bach performance: Harnoncourt, for example, believes in a "strong" version of Musik als Klangrede (a phrase from Mattheson's Capellmeister, which is also the title of one of Harnoncourt's books), and his gestural performance manner is closely linked to this belief. For a more sceptical view on the significance of rhetoric, see, for instance, the following interview with Joshua Rifkin: http://homepages.kdsi.net/~sherman/rifkin.html (towards the middle of the interview). Rifkin represents an opposite pole to Harnoncourt in this respect, and many other musicians occupy something of a middle ground.

Dick Wursten wrote (June 2, 2003):
Rhetorics

Johan van Veen reacted on Uri Golombs mail about SDGI etc....

I liked this discussion. The questions are raised in a proper way and with as broad a context as possible (much broader of course than my background, thats the disadvantage). Ik picked out one point I know something of myself, hope others will pick up other points they know about... and share their insights.

Johan van Veen guesses that
"rhetorical devices used by actors/singers in theatre and opera were the same as used by singers in the church and as applied by composers in their music. And I guess they were the same as used by ministers in their sermons. As far as I know rhetorics were part of the theological education."
Well indeed:

And indeed: Both sermons and cantatas were rhetorical compositions (only the 'means' were different). A good 'preacher' should be a word-artist as a good cantor should be a music-artist. That means they should be able to use all layers of their 'language' in function of the scope of their 'performance' (sorry for the use of this profane term for cultual practice) in order to 'touch' the audience in all its faculties. So the shared scope of their performances would be: instructing the brains, moving the feelings and bending the will of the 'audience' all three under the supervision of and in the direction of 'Gods Word'.

Classic Aristotelian rhetorics comprised the 'art of' (the ability of) 'instruire' (=instruct, teach) 'movere' (= to move.. the will, if I remember my classes correctly) delectare (enjoy, delight, please) the audience. There must be also a set of criterions to measure the propriety of these arts to the subject. I don't remember them...

IMO the scope, the aim of both the verbal as the musical 'sermon' (in general, but also in particular. it can vary per performance, per subject) defines which of these rhetorical figures should be used preferably and at what length it should be used. This is even a moral matter, because in the communication between men manipulation is always possible, because of the different position of the participants in relation to the subject matter (f.i. the preacher has studied the subject, decides what to speak and about what to keep his mouth shut. He conrols the matrix.... The audience is silent and mostly passive and can be moved in non-desirable directions as well, but this goes off topic....so I stop)

Finally: Could not rhetoric be the 'middle-term' between dramatic and bureaucratic performance...?

Santu de Silva wrote (June 2, 2003):
[To Uri Golomb] I would suggest that, while Bach's writing "s.d.g." etc does in fact indicate that he was religious--and we have independent evidence of this--it is impossible to infer what his opinion would be concerning particular secular-vs-sacred issues, esp. staging, operas,manner of performance, etc.

Nor would I necessarily respect Bach's wishes about any number of things, much as I adore and respect him and his musical judgements. [I'm on the fence about women in choirs; I have nothing against women, and I believe that their presence in choral ensembles adds a great deal. But I do like to hear the cantatas and choral works sung by boy's choirs as well. Heck, some of my best friends are women.]

For instance, should convicted felons be allowed to sing in Bach Cantatas? To all of us, this is a silly question, since we have our own opinions about it, and many would say it is not a topic appropriate to a list about Bach. But the question remains: if Bach were to be asked, what would he have said?

Fortunately, the cowards among us can adopt essentially a "didn't ask, didn't tell" policy. History is mercifully silent about Bach's opinion of his works being performed in heathen lands, for instance. We can only surmise, with that infallible internal Bach compass that so many of us have been blessed with, that we know what he would
have wished. the problem is that each of our infallibel Bach compasses often points in
completely different directions. [With that rascal Wagner, of course, history has told us all too much about him. What would he say about UN security council resolutions concerning weapons inspections? I can guess. Wagner was a failed Texas oil baron who got misplaced by the stork.]

At any rate, I'm alarmed at the ease with which Tom Braatz leaps to conclusions based on relatively little evidence. Conjecture is important, and often useful. But it has to be clearly labeled as conjecture, especially in a time when speculative musicology has had both very good, and very bad consequences.

Restoring/preserving the Bach Manuscripts

John Pike wrote (August 23, 2003):
The Freunde der Staatsbiblothek zu Berlin (Friends of the State Library of Berlin) which owns 80% of the remaining Bach manuscripts, is trying to raise money for the costly process of restoring the manuscripts.

Bach wrote with very acidic ink which burns holes in the paper he used and the Staatsbibliothek needs to store the manuscripts at oC to halt the deterioration. Ultimately, they hope to properly restore the manuscripts, and they are currently raising the money required.

If you contribute more than 260 Euro, they will send you a complimentary facsimile copy of the manuscript for Cantata BWV 190 ("Singet dem Herrn ein neues Lied!") discussed on the BCML a week or so ago. There is a limited edition of this of 400 copies (I received no. 288 in the series a few months ago), paid for by the Staatsbibliothek with other funds.

If you would like to contribute, please use the contact below and please
forward this e mail to anyone else whom you think might contribute.

Dr. Dr. h.c. Helwig Hassenpflug,
Stellvertretender Vorsitzender,
Freunde der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin E.V.
Unter den Linden 8
D - 10117 Berlin
Tel. +49 (0)30 266 1273
Fax. +49 (0)30 266 1436
E mail: freunde@sbb-spk-berlin.de
Internet: www.freunde-sbb.de <http://www.freunde-sbb.de/>

Their bankers details are: Deutsche Bank 24, Berlin, BLZ 100 700 24, Konto-Nr. 439 39 22 00 (presumably you would need to specify that donations were for the Bach manuscripts).

I hope you can help them.

Charlie Ervin McCarn wrote (September 1, 2003):
John Pike wrote:
< Bach wrote with very acidic ink which burns holes in the paper he used and the Staatsbibliothek needs to store the manuscripts at -40oC to halt the deterioration. Ultimately, they hope to properly restore the manuscripts, and they are currently raising the money required. >
Paper is also a problem, from what I've been told. I know someone who owns an original performing part that has continuo figures and dynamic markings in Bach's handwriting. He told me that he is grateful that the part that he has was written out at a time when Bach was using paper that was all rag content and that therefore has none of the acid content in it that makes a lot of the manuscripts so fragile.

Bach Manuscripts

John Pike wrote (February 11, 2004):
For the past 4 years, the German State Library in Berlin has been restoring the Bach manuscripts which they hold there (80% of the remaining Bach manuscripts). This work cost 1.8 million Euros and is now complete. Before restoration, the manuscripts had to be stored at -40oC because the ink Bach used was highly acidic and was burning holes in the paper. It was therefore nigh on impossible to see the manuscripts.

Since my wife and I contributed a little to the cost of restoration, we have been invited to a "party" in Berlin to celebrate the completion of the work. This will include a very rare opportunity to see some of the restored manuscripts. We are looking forward to it!

Jack Botelho wrote (February 11, 2004):
[To John Pike] Thanks for this, what will certainly be a wonderful opportunity to see some of Bach's work first hand! Please let us know more about the particulars of this restoration if you wish, and which of the manuscripts were on view when you return! I wish you a safe and pleasant jourmey, one which many of us would only be able to dream of!

More tidbits from the web: Bach manuscripts heading to Net

Peter Bright wrote (February 27, 2004):
Sounds like a very worthwhile exercise: (http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/TechNews/2004/02/26/361885-ap.html):

Bach manuscripts heading to Net

The Johann Sebastian Bach Archive in Leipzig will restore and digitalize original scores by the composer, with the idea of giving people access to the works via the Internet, officials said Thursday.

The project will restore 44 original compositions from Bach's second Leipzig cantata cycle, as well as scores, manuscripts and books about Bach from the 17^th to 19^th centuries.

It will be paid for by a $137,500 grant from the Hamburg-based Ebelin and Gerd Bucerius ZEIT Foundation, the archive said.

At the same time, the archive plans to electronically catalogue its holdings, considered to be the most important in the world, and make them available on the Internet as well.

cmNEWS~ GET Bach: Archive puts composer's manuscripts on the Internet

Barry Murray wrote (February 28, 2003):
I thought the following article might interest some members.

GET Bach: Archive puts composer's manuscripts on the Internet Minneapolis Star Tribune (subscription) - Minneapolis, MN, USA Berlin -- The Johann Sebastian Bach Archive in Leipzig will restore and digitalize original scores by the composer, with the idea of giving people access to ...
<http://www.startribune.com/stories/457/4630960.html>

NO tax credit for composer's heirs
MLive.com - MI,USA
... was entitled to all the foreign tax credits it has been given for six music contracts covering works by Mancini, Johnny Mercer, Richard A. Whiting and composer ...
< http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/entertainment/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-2/107780154826391.xml >

Wolff lecture on Bach manuscripts

John Pike wrote (March 22, 2004):
http://athome.harvard.edu/dh/wolff.html

A most interesting lecture video by Christoph Wolff on rediscovering the lost Berlin Sing-Akademie Archive in Kiev. It contains 5000 manuscripts, mostly by CPE Bach, but some by JS Bach himself.

Restoration of Bach Manuscripts

John Pike wrote (April 2, 2004):
Some of you will know that the 1.8 million Euro project to restore the Bach manuscripts at the Staatsbibiothek in Berlin is now complete. The Staatsbibiothek holds 80 percent of the remaining Bach manuscripts and 3825 pages needed to be restored (about 50 percent of their holding). The remainder was in good condition and did not need restoration.

Those people who contributed to the cost of restoration (including my wife and me) were inviterd to a party in Berlin on Wednesday to celebrate the completion of this work. It was a once-in-a-lifetime experience, attended by the German Bundespresident. The main speaker was one of the world's leading Bach Scholars, Christoph Wolff, Professor at Harvard and Director of the Bach Archive in Leipzig. He spoke under the heading "Dead Ppers, Living Music" about the importance of resoring old manuscripts. We were treated to fine performances of Cantata 182 "Himmelskoenig Sei Wilkommen" and the Motet BWV 226 "Der Geist hilft unser Schwachheit auf" by a young Leipzig choir and orchestra, many of whom are at the conservatoire. We were later able to see the original manuscripts of the St Matthew passion (BWV 244), St John Passion (BWV 245), Christmas Oratorio (BWV 248), B Minor Mass (BWV 232), Magnificat (BWV 243), the Motet Singet den Herrn ein neues Lied", Cantata BWV 51 "Jauchzet Gott in allen Landen", the Anna Magdalena notebook, the Art of Fugue (BWV 1080) and a couple of other cantatas. Quite an experience! The next day, we visited the Maxim Gorky Theatre, former home of the Berlin Singakademie and site of the Mendelssohn performance of the St Matthew Passion (BWV 244) i1829.

Olle Hedström wrote (April 2, 2004):
[To John Pike] Thanks for your interesting report on the restoration of Bach's manuscripts.

I would like to recommend the following recording in which there is an interesting documentary:
"The saving of the Bach's manuscripts" It's a DVD which also includes Il Giardino Armonico, who plays J.S. Bach, Carl Philip Emanuel Bach and Vivaldi:

THE ITALIAN BACH IN VIENNA, TDK DV-BACON.

Trivia Bach's oldest surviving manuscript [BeginnersBach]

Steven Foss wrote (November 7, 2005):
Since Jack was talking about Weimar, I thought, and thoughts on what may have been written (The solo keyboard Concertos, which may have been inspiration for the later Italian Concerto), I thought I might add some trivia, or what is the earliest authenticated work of J S Bach.

After leaving his job as Violinist and Lackey (there are records of salary payment to Bach from March to August 1703, otherwise he had been unemployed since Easter of 1702) for Duke Johann Ernst, (seventy years earlier Sebastian's grandfather had worked for the same man?), Bach went to Arnstadt

While at Arnstadt the chorale prelude Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 739, was written or at least is ascribed to this period (around 1705).

The autograph of this prelude is also the oldest surviving Bach autograph.

JSB

Jean-Pierre Grivois wrote (March 9, 2006):
My question is: on how many cantatas manuscripts did JSB wrote the 3 letters SDG (Soli Deo Gloria)? I saw this information somewhere but I cannot find it again. Could somebody help me ?
Thanks.

Fiume wrote (March 9, 2006):
[To Jean-Pierre Grivois] Look in this web http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Scores/Manuscripts.htm

Jean-Pierre Grivois wrote (March 10, 2006):
[To Fiume] Thanks a lot !

Earliest Music Manuscripts by JSB Discovered

Craig Schweickert wrote (August 31, 2006):
Earliest Music Manuscripts by Johann Sebastian Bach Discovered

Researchers of the Bach-Archiv Leipzig have discovered the two earliest music manuscripts by Johann Sebastian Bach at the Herzogin Anna Amalia Bibliothek, Weimar; this was announced jointly by Hellmut Seemann, President of the Klassik Stiftung Weimar, and Prof. Christoph Wolff, Director of the Bach-Archiv Leipzig. In the course of a systematic search of archival material and library holdings in central Germany conducted by the Bach-Archiv since 2002 Dr. Michael Maul and Dr. Peter Wollny came upon two hitherto unknown manuscripts from Bach's youth containing copies of organ works by the composers Dietrich Buxtehude and Johann Adam Reinken; they were written in and shortly before 1700 and thus represent the earliest known documents in Bach's own hand, which makes them important sources for the musical development of the young composer.

***

The manuscripts, whose exceptional significance came to light only now, contain copies of the chorale fantasias "Nun freut euch, lieben Christen gmein" by Dietrich Buxtehude (1637-1707) and "An Wasserflüssen Babylon" by Johann Adam Reinken (1643-1722) prepared by the barely 15-year-old grammar school boy Bach at Ohrdruf and at Lüneburg. The Reinken copy, dated by Bach himself, contains the first documentary proof for the assumption that at Lüneburg Bach studied with the organist Georg Böhm (1661-1733); this is indicated by the note Bach added at the end of his copy: "â Dom. Georg: Böhme | descriptum ao. 1700 | Lunaburgi."

The two compositions are written in organ tablature notation, which uses letters and other symbols instead of the common musical staff notation. Transmitted jointly with them are two additional fantasias on the chorales "An Wasserflüssen Babylon" and "Kyrie Gott Vater in Ewigkeit", which turn out to be hitherto unknown works by Johann Pachelbel (1653-1706). The latter two tablatures are in the hand of Bach's student Johann Martin Schubart (1690-1721) and probably derive from a now lost Bach manuscript. Schubart became Bach's successor as organist at the court of Weimar in 1717; from his estate the four tablatures eventually found their way into the Herzogin Anna Amalia Bibliothek.

The significance of this discovery can hardly be overestimated. Technically highly demanding, these organ works document the extraordinary virtuosic skills of the young Bach as well as his efforts to master the most ambitious and complex pieces of the entire organ repertoire. Moreover, it becomes clear that even before 1700 the young Bach was familiar with and oriented himself by the North German organ school. Obviously his decision to leave Ohrdruf for Lüneburg was governed by the intention to learn, through Georg Böhm, more about the highly influential oeuvres of the senior organ masters at Hamburg and Lübeck and to gain access to the great Hanseatic instruments.

The long-term research project of the Bach-Archiv, which aims at a systematic exploration of the documents relating to the musical members of the Bach family, is supported by the Ständige Konferenz Mitteldeutsche Barockmusik and the Alfried Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach Foundation.

The manuscripts will be on exhibition at the Herzogin Anna Amalia Bibliothek from September 1, 2006, during the Weimar /Kunstfest/. From September 21, 2006, they will be on display in the exhibition "Expedition Bach" at the Bach-Archiv Leipzig, together with other documents and autographs discovered recently, such as Bach's congratulatory aria "Alles mit Gott und nichts ohn' ihn", which turned up last year also at Weimar.

See: http://www.bach-leipzig.de/

Continue on Part 2

Scores of Bach Cantatas: Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Bach’s Manuscripts: Part 1 | Part 2