Purcell, Michelangelo Rossi and J. S. Bach: Problems of Authorship

Purcell, Michelangelo Rossi and J. S. Bach: Problems of AuthorshipAuthor(s): Gloria RoseSource: Acta Musicologica, Vol. 40, Fasc. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1968), pp. 203-219Published by: International Musicological SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/932582 .

Accessed: 13/06/2014 04:31

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

International Musicological Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toActa Musicologica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.78.108.60 on Fri, 13 Jun 2014 04:31:57 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=inmuso

http://www.jstor.org/stable/932582?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


H. Besseler: Falsdie Autornamen in den Handsd4riften Straflburg und Montecassino 203

Paginierung vorhanden sind5. Der Kodex stammt aus Neapel oder Umgebung und

enthailt geistliche und weltliche Musik, wobei die franzdsischen Texte oft fehlerhaft sind.

Auch die Komponistennamen treffen nicht immer zu. F. 103 = p. 347 ist Le serviteur hault guerdonnt ,,Duffay" zugeschrieben, offenbar ein Fehler.

In Band VI der Gesamtausgabe Dufays wurde 1964, S. XIV, bereits darauf hin- gewiesen, daB es sich um einen jiingeren Komponisten handeln mul. Denn Dufays eigener Stil entwickelte sich im Spaitwerk zu einer Feingliedrigkeit, die gelegentlich zum 2/4 und 4/s-Rhythmus griff, wie in den Nummern 80 Ma plus mignonne und 81

Puisque vous estez campieur. Diese Werkgruppe ist fiir Dufays Spaitstil charakte- ristisch 6.

Dagegen wird in Le serviteur hault guerdonnd, Nr. 92 der Ausgabe, eine viel brei- tere, harmonisch betonte Kunst angewandt. Sie hat noch hiber 1500 hinausgewirkt, denn ihr letztes Dokument ist der Druck in Petruccis Canti C, f. 135v-136.

Ein Blick auf die ailteste, noch schwarz geschriebene Handschrift Porto7 lii3t den wirklichen Sch6pfer von Le serviteur hault guerdonn' erkennen. Denn sowohl Nr. 1 als auch Nr. 19 dieser Sammlung haben den Namen ,,Ro. de Anglia". Kein Zweifel kann sein, da6 dieser identisch ist mit Robert M o r t o n.

Dieser war bis ins 16. Jahrhundert hinein als Komponist beriihmt, und es besteht kein Zweifel daran, daB von den vier anonymen Saitzen in Porto Nr. 10 Le Serviteur hault guerdonnei Robert Morton angehdrt.

Damit ist der Irrtum des Schreibers von Montecassino, der hier ,,Duffay" genannt hat, in befriedigender Weise aufgekliarts.

5 A. PIRRO, Un manuscrit musical du XVe siecle au Mont-Cassin, in: Miscellanea di Studi Cassinensi, Bd. 1, 1929, S. 206 ff. " H. BESSELER, Guillelmi Dufay Opera Omnia, in: CMM 1, I-VI, 1952-1966. 7 B. MEIER, Die Handschrift Porto 714 als Quelle zur Tonartenlehre des 15. Jahrhunderts, in: MD VIII, 1953, S. 175-195. 8 E. L. KOTTICK, The Chansonier Cordiforme, in: JAMS 20, 1967, S. 10-27; im Inventar S. 25 ist die Zuschreibung von Le Serviteur etc. an Dufay zu streichen.

Purcell, Michelangelo Rossi and J. S. Bach: Problems of Authorship

GLORIA ROSE (IOWA CITY)

There is a rather well known and very fine Toccata in A major which begins: Ex. 1

A a ,

1'. ? lU~lNONE



204 G. Rose: Purcell, M. Rossi and J. S. Bach: Problems of Authorship

This Toccata was included in the old Bach-Gesellschaft edition, among the "doubt- ful compositions" of J. S. Bach; I it was included in the Purcell Society edition as a work of Henry Purcell;2 and it has been named as a possible composition of Michel- angelo Rossi. 3

At present the A major Toccata rests in the limbo of pieces with unknown or un- certain authors. It has not seriously been considered as a work of Bach ever since the attributions to Purcell were made known.4 It is not included in the most recent edition of Purcell's works for harpsichord.5 And it is not included, nor even mentioned, in the most recent edition of Michelangelo Rossi's works for keyboard.6

Starting from the beginning-the sources-we find that the A major Toccata was soon attributed to different composers.

In two English sources at the British Museum, the A major Toccata is ascribed to Purcell. In Add. MS. 31446, foll. 5v-9r, it is headed "Toccato-by Mr Hen: Purcell -"; at the end of the piece "Mr Henry Purcell" is written. These attributions are in the same hand as the music. This manuscript probably dates from the beginning of the 18th century, or possibly from the end of the 17th century.7 In Add. MS. 34695, foll. 41v-45r, the A major Toccata is headed "Toccato, by Mr Hen: Purcell." Here "by Mr Hen: Purcell." appears in a lighter ink, and is probably in a different hand from that of the music. This manuscript may date from around 1700-1710, and the A major Toccata in it shows evident signs of having been copied from the A major Toccata in Add. MS. 31446.

1 Werke, vol. 42, ed. Ernst Naumann (Leipzig [1894]), pp. 250-254. 2 Works, vol. 6, harpsichord music, ed. William Barclay Squire (London and New York, 1895), pp. 42-46. " J. A. WESTRUP, Purcell (London 1937), p. 238; FRANKLIN B. ZIMMERMANN, Henry Purcell, 1659- 1695: An Analytical Catalogue of His Music (London and New York 1963), p. 425; HOWARD FERGUSON, Purcell's Harpsichord Music, in: Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association, 91st Ses- sion (1964-1965), p. 5. SUZANNE DEMARQUEZ, Purcell (Paris 1951), p. 148 says, mistakenly, that "J. A. Westrup thinks it [the Toccata in A major] can be given to Michele-Angelo Rossi on the strength of one manuscript". Prof. Westrup said only that "in one manuscript it is attributed to Michele Angelo Rossi". 4 In the BG edition itself, a note was added to a later impression of vol. 42 (p. 250) that "H. Purcell has recently been indicated as the composer". Purcell's authorship was readily accepted by RICHARD BUCHMAYER, Drei irrtiimlich J. S. Bach zugeschriebene Klavier-Kompositionen, in: SIMG II (1900-- 1901), pp. 253-278. But Buchmayer, by his own admission (p. 272), knew very little of Purcell's music. The rest of Buchmayer's article, dealing with Continental and largely German music, is well informed and very circumspect. ERICH VALENTIN, Die Entwicklung der Tokkata im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert (bis J. S. Bach) (Miinster 1930), p. 141, n. 54, indicates several other scholars who accepted Purcell's authorship, and adds: "There is really no doubt of recognizing this work for Purcell." WOLFGANG SCHMIEDER, Thematisch-systematisches Verzeichnis der musikalischen Werken von Johann Sebastian Bach (Leipzig 1950), p. 645, lists the Toccata in A major as a work "by Henry Purcell". 5 Eight Suites and Miscellaneous Keyboard Pieces, ed. Howard Ferguson (London 1964). 6 Works for Keyboard, ed. John R. White (American Institute of Musicology, 1966). The A major Toccata is also missing from the list of Rossi's works in MGG. Was the A major Toccata omitted in both these cases by intention, or by oversight? It should certainly have been named, since there is a manuscript in which it is ascribed to Rossi. 7 I wish to thank Miss Pamela Willetts of the Department of Manuscripts, The British Museum, for confirming my judgment about the date of this source and the others at the British Muesum. Miss Willetts very kindly sent me further information about these sources, after I had left London.



G. Rose: Purcell, Al. Rossi and J. S. Bach: Problems of Authorship 205

In a third source at the British Museum, the A major Toccata is ascribed to Rossi. Add. MS. 24313 gives it on foll. 16v-20v, without a specific attribution, but as the last of the "Toccatas of Michela Angelo Rossj", a designation which appears on fol. Iv in the same hand as the entire manuscript. 8 Like the other two manuscripts (Add. 31446 and Add. 34695), Add. 24313 was prepared by an English scribe; it seems to date from the late 17th century, or possibly the early 18th century.

There is a fourth source at the British Museum, Add. MS. 39569, which contains

part of the Toccata in A major.9 This manuscript seems to have been prepared by a French scribe, and the date of 1702, for what this tells us, is stamped on its front and back covers. The first section only of the A major Toccata appears on foll. 4v-

5r, as the "Prelude" to the "2..m Suitte en A ~ -". On fol. 6r, at the end of the Gigue which concludes this Suite, "Maister King" is named. But in this manuscript composers are named more often at the beginning than at the end of their pieces; and many of the individual suites are comprised of pieces written by various com-

posers. "Maister King" ist not, therefore, unequivocally meant as the composer of this Prelude, i.e. of the Toccata in A major.

On the other hand, the attributions both to Purcell and to Rossi, in the sources mentioned above, are unequivocal. It is for stylistic reasons that Purcell's authorship of the A major Toccata has been questioned or rejected.10 These stylistic reasons are certainly valid, for the A major Toccata is very different from the keyboard works known to have been composed by Purcell. It is also very different from any other music composed by Purcell. There are certain features of style in Purcell's music which are highly characteristic and individual: the syncopated rhythms, especially in triple meter; the dotted-note rhythms (both J7 and r,.); the cross- relations, resulting from parts moving independently; the suspensions with unex-

pected resolutions.11 Purcell's music is full of unexpected turns of melody, rhythm

s I do not agree with Dr. Zimmerman's statement (loc. cit.) that "the evidence for the ascription to Rossi is shaky. On the title-page of Br. Mus. Add. 24313, the awkward, and rather careless copyist has written: 'Toccatas of Michel Angelo Rossi' [actually 'Michela Angelo Rossj']; however, the position of the piece at the end of the volume does not establish that it belongs with the title- page." The scribe of Add. 24313 did not have a very neat musical hand, but he was not particularly careless. As for "the position of the piece at the end of the volume", the scribe undoubtedly meant his designation on fol. lv to cover all toccatas in the volume. The only hint of evidence to the contrary is an extra calligraphic pattern after the penultimate piece. This may indicate, though I think it would be special pleading, that the penultimate piece was originally the last piece in the volume. Whatever we may now think, the scribe of Add. 24313 regarded the A major Toccata as a work of Michelangelo Rossi.

9 This was first pointed out by Howard Ferguson, in his edition of Purcell's Miscellaneous Keyboard Pieces (London 1964), p. 36. 10 See n. 3 above. Yet the A major Toccata is still attributed to Purcell in such recent writings as F. E. KIRBY, A Short History of Keyboard Music (New York and London 1966), p. 108; FRIEDRICH BLUME, Barock, in: MGG I (1949-1951), col. 1324; trans. M. D. Herter Norton, as Renaissance and Baroque Music (New York 1967), p. 149, n. 15; and WILLI APEL, Geschichte der Orgel- und Klavier- musik bis 1700 (Kassel etc. 1967), p. 743. The A major Toccata is also attributed to Purcell in a recent recording of harpsichord music, played by Ralph Kirkpatrick: Deutsche Grammophon Gesell- schaft LPM 39122. 11 For further discussion, with music examples, see J. A. WESTRUP, Purcell (London 1937), pp. 239- 257. This is still the best discussion of Purcell's musical style.




and harmony, which give it a characteristic charm, an inspired waywardness. Another

English composer of the Restoration period, for example Purcell's teacher John Blow,

might be mistaken for Purcell. But the A major Toccata has none of the charac- teristics of Purcell, or of the Restoration group of composers.

Purcell scholars are now generally agreed that the A major Toccata is not in the

style of Purcell. 12 It seems, however, to have escaped notice that the A major Toc- cata is also very different from the keyboard works of Michelangelo Rossi. These

(or most of them) have been available in a modern edition since 1902.13 Their style does not resemble the A major Toccata in the harmonies, the melodies, the counter-

point, the cadences or the general texture. Even in structure, only two of Rossi's fourteen toccatas are at all like the A major Toccata.

The A major Toccata stays quite firmly in one key at a time: the tonic, the dominant, or the relative minor, with many secondary dominant and dominant seventh harmonies. The modulations are well prepared and relatively gradual. In the toccatas of Michelangelo Rossi, the modulations are more frequent, more distant and more sudden-so sudden that they are sometimes abrupt changes of key, rather than modulations. As a result of these shifting harmonies, there are frequent acci-

dentals, many of which alter a note within a few beats:

Ex. 2 M. Rossi ,,Toccata prina"[=E

The melodies of the A major Toccata are logical, well directed, orderly, and

strongly conditioned by the harmony; they move in conjunct motion, or they outline the notes of a chord. In the ' -sections, the melodic motion usually begins on the second 16th note of the bar or half bar, as at the very beginning of the composition (see Ex. I above). This melodic motion continues for another bar or half bar, when it comes to rest on a downbeat. Then, on the 16th note immediately following this downbeat, there starts again the same pattern of melodic motion.14 In the A major Toccata the melodic motion is not only regular, but continuous. Apart from two short sections, the pattern of continuous 16th notes proceeds almost unbroken

throughout the entire composition. The insistent character of the A major Toccata

12 But REINHOLD SIETZ, Henry Purcell (Leipzig 1955), pp. 187 and 229, does not question Purcell's

authorship of the A major Toccata; he mistakenly describes it as being "in J. S. Bach's own copy", and relates it to "Pasquini's type of toccata". More recently, in reviewing Dr. Ferguson's edition of Purcell's harpsichord music (Die Musikforschung XX [1967], pp. 115-116), Dr. Sietz says that Purcell's authorship of the A major Toccata is "now conclusively denied". '3 L'arte musicale in Italia, ed. Luigi Torchi, vol. 3 (Milan [1902]), pp. 273-340. This volume was

reprinted in 1959. 14 Cf. ALBERT SCHWEITZER, J. S. Bach, (first publ. Paris 1905), Eng. trans. by E. Newman (London 1938 reprint) I, 375: "Bach's themes are mostly conceived as beginning with a large up-beat. The unaccented notes do not follow, but lead up to, an accented note."



G. Rose: Purcel!, M. Rossi and i. S. Bach: Problems of Authorship 207

derives mainly from this continuous rapid motion of notes with the same rhythmic value.

In contrast to the regularity of rhythmic unit and rhythmic pattern in the A major Toccata, the toccatas by Michelangelo Rossi show a great variety of rhythmic units and patterns. There are passages of running 16th notes, but also there are passages of winding 32nd notes, or steady 8th notes, or sustained half notes, or piquant dotted notes. These different patterns may follow one another in fairly rapid suc- cession. Because of the frequent changes of key and the resulting accidentals, the

melody itself has a fluid character. The melody, especially in the bass line, may give a wide leap to an unexpected note, settling on a new harmony:

Ex. 3 M. Rossi ,,Nona toccata"

I _____"_F _-_//_I /

The A major Toccata is basically in four parts, although the texture is frequently thinned out to three parts and sometimes to two parts. Usually there are at least two parts of equal importance being heard simultaneously. The melodic motion is shared by the two hands; or a figure may pass, in rapid imitation, from one hand to the other. The texture is genuinely contrapuntal, and often dense, throughout the composition. There are only occasional passages in which the melodic interest is centered in one part only.

The toccatas by Michelangelo Rossi are basically in four or in three parts; but (unlike the A major Toccata) their fugal sections are seldom, and then only momen- tarily, in more than three parts. In Rossi's toccatas, the melodic interest is frequently centered in one hand. There are many passages in which one hand carries the melodic interest, while the other hand plays sustained notes:

Ex. 4 M. Rossi ,Toccata terza"

In Rossi's toccatas one part is usually of main interest, while the other parts are of secondary importance. The whole texture is thinner and lighter than in the A major Toccata.




Rossi's fugal subjects are very short, often just a few notes:

Ex. 5 M. Rossi ,Toccata seconda" Ex. 6 M. Rossi,Toccata terza"

Compare with these the subject in Ex. 11 below, from the A major Toccata. In the A major Toccata, the cadences are reached gradually and firmly. Every

main cadence consists of the progression: dominant seventh to tonic. In two of the main cadences, the dominant seventh is preceded by a diminished seventh chord on the leading tone of the dominant:

Ex. 7 A major Toccata

In the final cadence of the composition, the dominant leading tone in the bass (without the diminished seventh chord) precedes the dominant seventh.

The cadences in Michelangelo Rossi's toccatas are sudden and scarcely prepared. Some of the cadences consist of the dominant seventh to tonic progression; but more of them lack the seventh in the dominant chord, and others move from the sub- dominant to the tonic. The most frequent cadential progression is dominant to tonic, with a 4-3 suspension. Written-out trills are also found very commonly at cadences:

Ex. 8 M. Rossi ,Toccata seconda"

Rossi's "Toccata seconda" starts with an opening typical of his toccatas. (The opening chords are probably meant to be played slowly and arpeggiated, on the

analogy of instructions in the toccatas of Frescobaldi and Pasquini.) It shows the

shifting harmonies, the varied rhythmic patterns, and the bass leap to a new chord, all of which are typical of Rossi's toccatas:

Ex. 9 M. Rossi ,,Toccata seconda"

Aii I



G. Rose: Purcell, M. Rossi and J. S. Bach: Problems of Authorship 209

This example is far removed from the A major Toccata. On stylistic grounds altogether, Michelangelo Rossi is no more likely than Purcell to be the composer of the A major Toccata.

Returning to the sources, we may notice that Add. 34695 is virtually identical with Add. 31446 in the the A major Toccata, having the same mistakes, the same instructions to turn the page at the same point, and other factors in common. Since Add. 34695 appears to be the later of the two, we may infer that its scribe copied the A major Toccata from Add. 31446. These are the two manuscripts with the attribution to Purcell.

But Add. 24313 (which has the attribution to Rossi) shows a number of different

readings; here the scribe would seem to have copied the A major Toccata from another source. Can we trace this other source?

It would seem that we cannot trace it. All the o t h e r toccatas found in Add. 24313, but n o t this A major Toccata, are also to be found in Rossi's Toccate e Corenti, which was reprinted at Rome in 1657 (the original date of publication is unknown). In Bologna, the Civico Museo Bibliografico Musicale, there is a copy of Rossi's 1657 publication (BB/258) which includes some additional manuscript pieces ascribed to Rossi, bound into the beginning and the end of the volume. These manuscript pieces include four toccatas similar in style and structure to the printed toccatas of Rossi; they do not include the Toccata in A major, nor anything similar to it. Thus Add. 24313 is the only known source in which the A major Toccata is attributed to Michelangelo Rossi. The English scribe of Add. 24313 must therefore have copied the A major Toccata from a source which has not been traced.

There remains the attribution to J. S. Bach. According to Ernst Naumann, the A major Toccata (BWV Anh. 178) was contained "in the collective volume of Fr. Knuth (in the property of the deceased W. Rust)".15 Unfortunately, this volume has been lost for some time; nor does there survive a complete list of its contents.16 It is only possible to say that the volume contained, in addition to the A major Toccata, several keyboard works definitely composed by J. S. Bach.17 Judging from Naumann's commentary, it would appear that most of these works, including the A major Toccata, were anonymous in the Knuth manuscript. We do not even know whether the A major Toccata was to be found among the works known to be by

15 J. S. BACH, Werke, vol. 42 (Leipzig [1894]), p. xxxi. "o Information very kindly supplied by Prof. Dr. Georg von Dadelsen, in a letter to me of 7 April 1966. The Johann-Sebastian-Bach-Institut in Gattingen has been unable to locate this manuscript. 17 The contents of the manuscript--concerning J. S. Bach only-may be reconstructed from Ernst Naumann's Critical Commentary in the BG, vol. 36 (Leipzig [1890]), pp. xx-lxxii. According to Naumann, the manuscript included the works now numbered as BWV 912, 915, 894, 900, 918, 961 and 948. The last three of these may not have been written by J. S. Bach, according to Schmieder, op. cit.




J. S. Bach, or in another part of the manuscript. Nor can we tell from Naumann's

commentary whether Knuth was the copyist or only the owner of this manuscript. He did copy some works by J. S. Bach, and owned others.18

Now it seems likely that this manuscript, whether copied or merely owned by Knuth, was of German origin. The pieces in it may or may not have been entirely by German composers. Certainly French and Italian pieces for keyboard were freely copied and circulated in Germany in the 18th century. But this was not the case with English pieces. Very little of Purcell's music, and none of it instrumental, seems to have travelled in the 18th century to the German-speaking countries."9 It would be remarkable if a toccata by Purcell had got into the Knuth manuscript. This is a further argument, if further argument were needed, for believing that the A major Toccata is not by Purcell.

The attribution of the A major Toccata to J. S. Bach has been rejected for over

sixty years, and has never been reconsidered.20 Nevertheless, the A major Toccata did once exist in a manuscript which included authentic works by J. S. Bach. Moreover, the A major Toccata, which is incompatible in style with Purcell and with Michel-

angelo Rossi, is not incompatible in style with J. S. Bach. Attributions cannot, in my opinion, be decided on grounds of style alone. But

equally, style cannot be left out of consideration in deciding attributions. The hand-

writings, the watermarks, the form of the clefs are factors of which the scientific

investigation can be of the utmost value. But the style of a composition is also a factor about which we need to reach a judgment. How far can the factor of style take us in the present case?

The factor of style precludes any English Restoration composer, and likewise any Italian composer of Michelangelo Rossi's generation. The A major Toccata, with its driving movement, its harmonic stability, its contrapuntal richness and its re-

gularity of rhythmic pattern, is quite unlike the Italian keyboard idiom as exem-

plified by Frescobaldi or by Michelangelo Rossi himself. On grounds of style, and of structure too,21 the A major Toccata belongs to a German school of keyboard music, of a date very late in the 17th century or quite early in the 18th century.

How can this fact be reconciled with the evidence of the manuscript sources? It is here that we run into the crucial difficulty of this whole difficult investigation. The

handwriting, the clefs and the general notation of Add. 24313 (the manuscript with the attribution to Rossi) suggest a date around 1680-1690; the watermark is similar to some others from the 1630's to the 1690's;22 and indeed, we might most naturally

18 PAUL KAST, Die Bach-Handschriften der Berliner Staatsbibliothek (Trossingen 1958), P 654, P 836, P 838 and P 1007.

19 See ZIMMERMAN, op. cit., pp. 453, 465 and 474. 20 Cf. ZIMMERMAN, Op. cit., p. 425: "the ascription to Bach . . . is impossible". Dr. Zimmerman does not say why, nor does anyone else. 21 Cf. ERICH VALENTIN, Geschichtliche Einfiihrung, in: Die Tokkata (Das Musikwerk; Cologne 1958), pp. 8-9. 22 The watermark is a version of the Post or Pillar design (Nos. 3485-3535 in EDWARD HEAWOOD, Watermarks, Mainly of the 17th and 18th Centuries, Hilversum 1950; also Nos. 525-531 in: W. A. CHURCHILL, Watermarks in Paper in Holland, England, France, etc., in the XVII and XVIII Centuries




expect the toccatas actually by Rossi in this manuscript to have been copied not so very much later than they were first published (which we know to have been before 1657).

We therefore have a style which suggests early 18th century Germany, and a manuscript copy which looks too early for that, by a decade or two. The argument from style rests on comparison with a very large number of works, and is too broadly based to be disregarded. The argument from Add. 24313 rests on the appearance of one manuscript, and here it is only scientific to admit the possibility that we are mistaken. The argument from Add. 24313 is not conclusive; it is possible that there is some quite simple explanation of which we are unaware. It is possible, for instance, that an elderly scribe of old-fashioned habits copied Add. 24313 on left-over paper at a date early in the 18sth century.

Where would that leave us? One candidate for the authorship of the A major Toccata might be Georg Muffat. He is represented by twelve toccatas in Add. 39569 (the manuscript which contains the first section, only, of our A major Toccata).23 Another candidate, but less plausible, might be Froberger, who (on the evidence of Mattheson) was in London in 1662, and might have left compositions there. Neither of these conjectures is impossible on grounds of style, but they are quite unsupported on other grounds. Moreover, I think, on grounds of style, that the A major Toccata comes from a slightly later period.

There is one work quite similar in style to the A major Toccata, though much shorter, in the British Museum manuscript Add. 31221, foll. 77v-78r. This is an 18th-century German manuscript containing organ pieces by Johann Pachelbel; some of the pieces are dated 1701, 1702 or 1705. The work in question is a Toccata in G major, headed "Toccata di W H P", and the attribution undoubtedly refers to Wilhelm Hieronymus Pachelbel, the son of Johann.24 But "W H P" is very close in appearance to "M H P". An English copyist in the early 18th century might have mistaken "W H P" for an attribution to "M H P", i. e. Mr Henry Purcell. If, therefore, the Toccata in A major could be found attributed to "W H P" in any extant source, then the question of its authorship might be regarded as answered in favor of W. H. Pachelbel.

But no such source is known at present. I have inquired at libraries which hold original sources of music by W. H. Pachelbel: none of them has a copy of the A major Toccata under that (or any other) attribution. We have also to remember that W. H. Pachelbel, having been born like J. S. Bach himself in 1685, would likewise have

and Their Interconnection, Amsterdam 1935); it is 58 mm. x 33 mm.; the chain lines are 25 mm. apart. 23 The scribe of Add. 39569 probably copied these twelve toccatas from Muffat's Apparatus musico- organisticus (Salzburg 1690), where they appear in the same order. The Ciaccona and the Passacaglia from the Apparatus musico-organisticus are also included in Add. 39569 (here called Chaconne and Passacaille), so that this manuscript presents a copy of the complete contents of Muffat's publication. 24 Another copy of this work, attributed to Johann Pachelbel, was formerly preserved in the Institut fiir Kirchenmusik, Berlin. The work is printed in the Denkmiiler der Tonkunst in Bayern, Jahrg. IV, Bd. 1, ed. Max Seiffert (Leipzig 1903), pp. 150-151; and in WILHELM HIERONYMUS PACHELBEL, Werke far Orgel und Clavier, ed. H. J. Moser and T. Fedtke (Kassel 1957), pp. 12-14.




been too young to have even a youthful composition in Add. 24313 (the manuscript attributing the A major Toccata to Rossi), unless this manuscript is indeed somewhat later than it looks.

In fact, the A major Toccata is not known to survive now in any German source.25 Its only external link with Germany is the missing Knuth manuscript. If this manuscript should ever reappear, perhaps it might yield further clues about the authorship of the A major Toccata. For instance, if the Knuth manuscript were found to contain some works by Johann Christoph Bach, we might consider this earlier Bach as a possible composer of the Toccata in A major. It has been quite well established that the Prelude and Fugue in E flat major (BWV, Anh. 177) was composed by Johann Christoph Bach.26 This earlier Bach (1642-1703) was a composer of considerable stature, and it should be kept in mind through the whole of this discussion that the A major Toccata is a work of high artistic quality.

To sum up with regard to the existing attributions, I do not really think it possible that either Purcell or Michelangelo Rossi composed the Toccata in A major. Both of these men had strong musical personalities, as their works so clearly show. The composer of the A major Toccata also had a strong musical personality, but not the same one. The A major Toccata, as we have seen, is related stylistically not so much to English or Italian music of the 17th century as to German music of the early 18th century. The date of Add. 24313 has not been established with so much

certainty, on the other hand, as to preclude the authorship of J. S. Bach. And on musical grounds, the A major Toccata c o u l d have been written by J. S. Bach.

The A major Toccata is similar in many respects to the toccatas of J. S. Bach.27 J. A. Fuller Maitland, believing that the A major Toccata was written by Purcell, mentioned "its undoubted prophesies of Bach-idioms" and thought that Bach's Toc- cata in D major "is most like the Purcell example; so like indeed as to account in some measure for the inclusion of Purcell's Toccata among works of Bach."28 It will be remembered that Bach's Toccata in D major (BWV 912) begins in a very similar manner (compare this with Ex. 1 above):

Ex. 10

There are further similarities between the two toccatas in several of their sections and at their final cadences. It is interesting and perhaps significant that this D major Toccata of Bach was also included in the missing Knuth manuscript.

Still more striking resemblances can be seen between our A major Toccata (first in each group below) and the following toccatas by J. S. Bach:

25 Dr. Friedrich W. Riedel has verified this, in a letter to me of 20 October 1966. The A major Toccata is not mentioned in Dr. Riedel's valuable book, Quellenkundliche Beitrige zur Geschichte der Musik far Tasteninstrumente in der 2. Hilifte des 17. Jahrhunderts (Kassel and Basel 1960). 26 BUCHMAYER, op. cit., pp. 254-265. The work was published in the BG, vol. 36, pp. 88-90. 27 Cf. VALENTIN, Geschichtliche Einfiihrung, in: Die Tokkata, p. 10. 2" J. A. FULLER MAITLAND, The Toccatas of Bach, in: SIMG XIV (1912-1913), pp. 579, 580.




Ex. 11 A major Toccata, BWV Anh. 178

Ex. 12 D minor Toccata, BWV 913

Ex. 13 E minor Toccata, BWV 914



Ex.. 1 A mah- 0 T- a a I a 1 A 1

..... . . . .I ..... .. ................


ad A &0 IV -




Ex. 17 D mindr Toccata, BWV 913






IMcO


OP I- ii t

I

TiOii

.-... ., -... . . 1... J. . I. '..

.. .. .. . .. .. . .I I. I I.. . .. .. I... .. I. I. t I. I.. .. . .. . I . . .. . .. .. . .. .. . Ex 3AmjrTcctBVAh 7





Ex. 25a A major Toccata, BWV Anh. 178

Ex. 25b A major Toccata, BWV Anh. 178

Ex. 26 G major Toccata, BWV 916

All four of these toccatas by Bach date from around 1710 or a little before.29 In 9-)-

addition, Richard Buchmayer has pointed out the resemblance between the fugal

This Suite may have been composed by Telemann, but it was certainly known to Bach (see the discussion below). Buchmayer, like Fulner Maitland, believed that the Toccata in A major was composed by Purcell; but he went so far as to say: "That Joh. Seb. Bach knew the work is very likely."" I am inclined to suggest that Bach not only knew the work but wrote it. If he did not, then we must find its author in another composer of comparable ability, writing in a style remarkably similar to that of the young J. S. Bach.

29 SCHMIEDER, (op. cit., pp. 521-524) gives ca. 1710 as the date of BWV 912, 913 and 914; and ca. 1709 as the date of BWV 916. 30 BUCHMAYER, op. cit., p. 273. 31 Ibid.




The situation in which we find ourselves over the A major Toccata is complicated by a series of unlucky accidents of which the disappearance of the Knuth manuscript is the most frustrating. But it is a situation which in one form or another is continually arising. In every such case, a stylistic analysis has to be undertaken, and one of the factors to be weighed is the quality of the composition.

Composers working at more or less the same time and place are bound to reveal, when their style is analysed, a similarity of idiom. The difference shows very largely in the quality which genius, and only genius, achieves. The idioms are similar, but the effect is different. This, for example, is what Ludwig Landshoff implied when he wrote concerning the Trio Sonata in C major, BWV 1037: "Above all, however, against Goldberg's authorship speaks the work itself." 32 Alfred Di-rr also approaches this position when he points out that "the inspiration in Goldberg's other works does not throughout reach the height of BWV 1037, yet often enough there are movements which do not rank below this Trio."13

This leaves open the question of whether a composer capable of good movements in isolation is also capable of a sustained work so good as this. Dr. Diirr has ably demonstrated certain features of Goldberg's style, for example his predilection for chromatic melodies and for contrapuntal textures. However, Goldberg's chromatic melodies are awkward and aimless, and his diatonic melodies are commonplace, as J. S. Bach's never are. Dr. Diirr, on the basis of his detailed stylistic analysis, concludes that BWV 1037 "does not present a single feature which could place the authorship of Goldberg in question."34 But in this he does not seem to be taking sufficiently into account one such feature: the consistently high quality and in- exhaustible beauty of the work.35

The C major Trio Sonata was attributed both to Goldberg and to J. S. Bach as early as 1761-1764.36 Because of its high quality, Dr. Diirr conjectures that Bach may have helped Goldberg, or that Goldberg "- out of modesty or mystification -

may have taken the claim not for himself but for Bach." 37 Would it not be the more natural conclusion that the work was written by J. S. Bach?

The song "Bist du bei mir" (BWV 5o8) was until recently known only from the 1725 keyboard book for Anna Magdalena Bach. Just as this volume of the Neue

32 Preface to vol. I of his edition, Joh. Seb. Bach: Trio-Sonaten (Frankfurt 1936), Peters Ed. 4203a. 33 ALFRED DiiRR, Johann Gottlieb Goldberg und die Triosonate BWV 1037, in: Bach-Jahrbuch XL (1953), p. 79. 34 Ibid., p. 78. 35 My husband, Robert Donington, asks me to add the following footnote: "In concerts over many years, the Donington Consort have played this C major Trio Sonata more frequently than any other single piece. Professional musicians will not need to be told that this is the most severe test of quality to which any piece of music can be submitted. Our pleasure in the C major Trio Sonata has never diminished, and there is not one weak passage in it, so soon as the right style of performing it has been found. After such close acquaintance with the C major Trio Sonata, and after weighing Dr. Diirr's extremely interesting comparisons with the greatest care, I myself still feel sure, both from its quality and from its style, that it is by J. S. Bach." I wish to acknowledge my husband's very generous help. By discussing with me the issues involved in this paper, and by criticizing the paper itself, he has contributed a great deal to it. 36 DiiRR, op. cit., p. 53.

37 Ibid., p. 79.




Bach-Ausgabe was going to press, it was pointed out to the editor, Georg von Dadelsen, that "Bist du bei mir" had been found, attributed to "Mr. Stbltzel", in a manuscript previously preserved at the Singakademie in Berlin--but lost since 1945.38 Professor von Dadelsen concludes, in his Critical Commentary, that "Aria Nr. 25 probably derives from St6lzel."39 This guarded statement has already begun to be

exaggerated, by less scholarly writers, to an unqualified "G. H. Stailzel".40 We know only that the song was attributed to St6lzel in this one source. Faulty

attributions commonly occur, however, and the other pieces in this manuscript have not been investigated to see whether the attribution to St6lzel can be substantiated. I have myself been able to discover only that one aria in this manuscript may be the same as an aria ascribed elsewhere to St6lzel: "Er ist die Ursach meines Leidens"

may correspond to "Es ist die Ursach meines Leidens", which appears as the final aria in Stblzel's cantata "Der arme Sylvio wolt niichst halb traurig doch auch halb erfreut".41 But not only is the Singakademie manuscript lost; we have not even got musical incipits for the arias in it.4" We cannot be sure, therefore, that "Er ist die Ursach meines Leidens" is actually the same as the aria in Stblzel's cantata.

The Singakademie manuscript contained five arias, under the heading "Airs divers

comp. par Mr. Stiiltzel". All five of these arias were set for soprano, one or more

stringed instruments, and basso continuo. "Bistu bei mir", as it was called in the

Singakademie manuscript, was set there for soprano, two violins, viola and b. c.; "Bist du bei mir" in the Anna Magdalena book is set for soprano and b. c. "Er ist die Ursach meines Leidens" was set in the Singakademie manuscript for soprano, violin, viola and b. c.; "Es ist die Ursach meines Leidens" is part of a cantata by St6lzel for soprano and b. c. It is therefore possible that all five arias in the Sing- akademie manuscript were originally composed for soprano and b. c. It is even possible that St6lzel took five arias, not necessarily his own, and composed additional

string parts for them; and that he then signed the arias or turned them over person- ally to a copyist. The copyist, in ascribing them, may not have known or minded who wrote the original melodies.

On musical grounds, St6lzel's authorship of "Bist du bei mir" is not convincing. Attractive as Stalzel's music is, it does not show any hint of the harmonic richness,

38 GEORG VON DADELSEN, Kritischer Bericht to the NBA, Ser. V, Bd. 4 (Kassel 1957), p. 124. 39 Ibid., p. 73. 40 ALBERT FULLER, Program Notes to the recording, Pages from The Notebook of Anna Magdalena Bach, Brunswick AXA 4545 or Decca DL 9426: "It ['Bist du bei mir'] is a high point of personal and touching expression, so short yet so powerful . . . Is it not strange that it cannot be assigned to the pen of anyone closer to us than that dim, unknown figure, G. H. Stblzel?" 41 FRITZ HENNENBERG, Das Kantatenschaffen von Gottfried Heinrich Stilzel, unpublished dissertation (Leipzig, Karl-Marx-Universitdit, 1965) II, p. 314. Dr. Hennenberg does not comment on this point of resemblance. Elsewhere in his dissertation (I, p. 283, n. 193) he refers briefly to the problem: "Recently it has been supposed that StBlzel contributed also to the second keyboard book for Anna Magdalena Bach (1725), namely an aria (BWV 5o8)"; a reference then follows to the critical commentary of Prof. von Dadelsen. 42 Information very kindly supplied by Prof. von Dadelsen, in a letter to me of 14 February 1968. In his critical commentary to the NBA, Ser. V, Bd. 4, p. 124, Prof. von Dadelsen presented every- thing that is now known about the Singakademie MS.




the melodic distinction and the depth of feeling which characterize "Bist du bei mir". The grave beauty of this little song is a fact which must also be taken into account. Again, it seems probable to me that this small masterpiece was the work of the greater of the two composers whose names are associated with it: J. S. Bach.

On the other hand, style has perhaps been trusted too confidently in the Suite in A major, BWV 824. This has been attributed both to Telemann and to Bach. The work is certainly closer to Telemann than to Bach in style.43 Its phrases are usually two or four bars long, and they are clearly distinct: a phrase comes to rest rhyth- mically, harmonically, or both, before the next phrase begins. In Bach's music the phrases are seldom separated in this way: a phrase will overlap or will lead straight into the next phrase, so that the movement is more continuous. Bach's phrasing does not follow the bar lines, but proceeds along a richly varied course of its own.44 Telemann's phrasing generally does follow the bar lines, and it is altogether simpler and more conventional.

The Suite in A major contains numerous passages which are exact repetitions of the preceding passage; this is another feature typical of Telemann's music. The Courante of the Suite in A major shows a characteristic pattern of Telemann's: two parts move in 10ths, while a third part strikes a repeated note:

Ex. 28 Suite in A major, BWV 824, Courante

This pattern occurs in many of Telemann's Fantaisies pour le clavessin; 3. Dou- zaines:

Ex. 29 G. P. Telemann Fantasia No. 1

Also characteristic of Telemann's keyboard style are the leaping octaves in the bass, while the right hand plays the melody:

Ex. 30 Suite in A major, BWV 824, Allemande




Ex. 31 G. P. Telemann Fantasia 2 of Dozzina 3

Nevertheless, the Allemande of this Suite in A major was attributed to Bach in two

manuscripts of the latter 18th century;45 and these manuscripts do not seem to have been copied from the Clavier-Baichlein vor Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, where the entire Suite is included anonymously.46 Thus the authorship cannot be regarded as settled, and those who favor Telemann do so on stylistic grounds.47 This is all set forth clearly by Wolfgang Plath in the Critical Commentary of the NBA; but he ascribes the Suite, w i t h o u t a question-mark, to "G. Ph. Telemann ".48

As Dr. Diirr has pointed out so well, it is the very manifoldness of Bach that often makes it difficult for us to decide, on stylistic grounds, whether or not a work was

composed by him.49 Yet a whole musical work will remain greater than the sum of its parts; and from this whole we gain a total impression of the work. This total

impression can also help in ascertaining the authorship. It is only realistic to acknowledge that we are not able to establish the authorship

of every musical work. So long as there are sources with missing and conflicting attributions, there will remain uncertainties of authorship. By all means let us in-

vestigate the alternatives; but let us also be willing, in cases of uncertainty, to leave the question open.

43 Stylistic points have been considered, though sometimes with scientifically questionable method and results, by WERNER DANCKERT, "Die A dur-Suite in Friedemann Bachs Klavierbuch: Grundsiitz- liches zur Stilkritik", in: Zeitschrift ftr Musikwissenschaft VII (1924-1925), 305-312. 44 The phrasing and accentuation in Bach's keyboard music have been perceptively treated by SCHWEITZER, op. cit., I, pp. 312-315 and 365-380. 45 WOLFGANG PLATH, Kritischer Bericht to the NBA, Ser. V, Bd. 5 (Kassel etc. 1963), pp. 41-42, 109.

4 Ibid., p. 109.

4 Danckert freely admitted this (op. cit., p. 312). Dr. Plath advances two additional but very in- conclusive grounds for deciding in favor of Telemann's authorship (op. cit., p. 110). 4s NBA, Ser. V, Bd. 5 (Kassel etc. 1962), p. 78; Kritischer Bericht to the NBA, Ser. V, Bd. 5 (Kassel etc. 1963), p. 109. 49 DiiRR, op. cit., p. 78.



Purcell, Michelangelo Rossi and J. S. Bach: Problems of Authorship

Documents

Transcript of Purcell, Michelangelo Rossi and J. S. Bach: Problems of Authorship