Printer Friendly

C.P.E. Bach sources at the library of congress.

ABSTRACT

In the course of the first three decades of the twentieth century, Oscar Sonneck and Carl Engel assembled for the Music Division in the Library of Congress a major collection of manuscripts and early printed editions of the music of Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach. This article provides an inventory of these sources, as well as an examination of the provenance of several groupings of manuscripts that reflect common origins. These manuscript sources document the work of copyists closely associated with Bach, including J. F. Hering, Anon. 302, and Anon. 303, who presumably supplied copies of Bach's music to meet the demand stemming from private music making in eighteenth-century Berlin. The manuscripts also provide evidence of the wider interest among eighteenth-century musicians and collectors, reflected in the collection assembled by Friedrich Wilhelm Rust. Additionally, these materials document the collecting activities of several nineteenth-century musicians, including Eduard Grell, Franz Commer, Erich Prieger, and Ludwig Scheibler, and an obscure figure from Chatellerault, France, by the name of Lasserre.

**********

The story of the Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach sources at the Library of Congress consists of several different threads, each spun out of the interests and motivations of musicians and collectors over nearly three hundred years. As a whole, this collection of C. P. E. Bach materials documents the acquisition practices and strategies of a fledgling American research library at the beginning of the twentieth century. At the same time, separate groupings of materials help to fill out a picture of eighteenth-century performance history in northern Europe, and documents the music collecting of private individuals in the nineteenth century. Besides the eighty-five examples at the Library of Congress of Bach's music printed during his lifetime, which in all but a few instances were authorized by the composer, the collection includes only one autograph manuscript, of a single keyboard fantasia. (1) The library also holds three autograph letters from C. P. E. Bach. More interestingly, the Library of Congress holdings include seventy-four individually classed copyist manuscripts (and five manuscripts misattributed to Bach) offering evidence of how individuals within and beyond C. P. E. Bach's immediate circle of colleagues engaged with the composer's music. These materials document the strong interest in C. P. E. Bach's music during his lifetime reflecting a fame that far surpassed that of his father's and providing a useful counterweight for balancing our perspective on the waxing and waning reputations of composers over time. (2)

A body of literature on these manuscript sources has developed steadily over time, but it remains dispersed among a variety of publications. (3) This article consists of two parts, each seeking to describe the sources at the Library of Congress documenting C. P. E. Bach's music in an effort to organize the existing information on these materials and to propel further research. The first, narrative portion of the article places primary emphasis on describing groupings of manuscripts that share common characteristics. The physical characteristics of manuscripts provide the indicators of the earliest origins of the objects, including similar paper, consistent copyists, and coherent numbering schemes. Later additions, including new numbering schemes and owners' marks provide evidence of subsequent transmission of the objects. As later owners often acquired groups of materials, identifying these later owners helps confirm observations about commonalities in the physical characteristics of the manuscripts, and also offers clues about the earlier sources from which these successive owners might have acquired their collections. While the narrative portion focuses exclusively on manuscript sources, the second portion of the article contains a checklist of all early manuscript and printed C. P. E. Bach sources held at the Library of Congress.

"ON AN EQUAL FOOTING WITH ... THE GREAT EUROPEAN LIBRARIES" (4)

On about 1 August 1902, Oscar Sonneck began his duties as the second chief of the Music Division at the Library of Congress. He would conduct his initial work while still in Europe, armed with letters of introduction to European libraries and book dealers from the ambitious Librarian of Congress, Herbert Putnam. Putnam had served as the Librarian of Congress since April of 1899, and had embarked on a mission proposed in 1896 by him and nine other witnesses before the Joint Congressional Committee on the Library of Congress to create more than a repository of copyright records or a legislative library, but a true national library.

Sonneck embraced Putnam's charge and sought "to provide a reasonably comprehensive collection of all material bearing in any way on music in America, and more particularly on American music." In this, Sonneck held the view, as described in 1908, that "American music, as the product of American brains and American industry, is deemed to be of paramount importance in our national library; yet the peculiar development and status of music in America, being mainly a reflex of music in Europe, compel the Library of Congress to collect the musical product of European brains and industry in the same manner as European libraries do or would like to do." (5) Sonneck further stated that "the Library of Congress does not at present and as a rule enter into competition with European institutions with reference to music, published or manuscript, before 1700. Any such attempt would clearly tend to scatter the scarce and costly works of the old masters still further and give undue prominence to a selfish museum of costly relics policy over the best interests of the scholar." (6) For music and books on music that appeared after 1700, however, Sonneck's ambition acknowledged no such boundaries. He states this explicitly in regard to books on music: "In the interest of the American scholar, the Library acquires the originals extensively because extremely few of these books have been reprinted and because it is still entirely feasible to form a representative collection at a reasonable cost. Beginning with the eighteenth century, the Library of Congress aims at a collection of music and books on music sufficiently comprehensive to ultimately relieve the American scholar of the necessity of consulting European libraries, except for research not bearing directly or indirectly on music in America as a reflex of music in Europe." (7) Later in the same essay Sonneck observes a result of this strategy: "[the Library of Congress collection] is growing rapidly into something really useful to the historian, and we already possess quite a few things--particularly in manuscript or of English imprint--that are not frequently found. We appear to have, for instance, some symphonies by that master of strange epicurean tastes, Anton Filtz, not mentioned in Hugo Riemann's bibliography. We have about thirty of the forty-five cembalo concertos of C. P. E. Bach, and we were able to supply some of Haydn's unpublished divertimenti to the editors of the complete edition of his works now in process of publication." (8)

Sonneck pursued his collecting activities largely through the compilation of "want lists" drawn, as seen above, from the standard reference tool of his time for the history of music, Hugo Riemann's Musik-Lexikon. (9) Sonneck sought to make available a comprehensive reference collection of the literature about music and the existing musical repertory. In this he would in general acquire only a single copy of a composition, even if additional variant sources might become available. One can see this with examples of C. P. E. Bach's concertos, where Sonneck turned down offers to acquire additional manuscripts of compositions for which the library already held copies. Rachel Wade has described how the C. P. E. Bach concerto sources at the Library of Congress exemplify this phenomenon:
   [The Berlin-based antiquarian dealer Leo] Liepmannssohn [probably]
   offered the [Friedrich Wilhelm] Rust collection to Oscar Sonneck of
   the Library of Congress before listing it in any catalog, a not
   uncommon practice. Sonneck accepted all but the manuscript copy of
   W. 14, probably because this concerto was known to exist in an
   early edition. A few months later Liepmannssohn must have offered
   the Lasserre group to Sonneck, who, in line with his policy,
   accepted everything but the manuscript copies of the published
   concertos W. 11, W. 25, W. 43/1 and W. 43/6, and the copies of W.
   12 and W. 17, since he had just acquired those two concertos in the
   Rust collection. (10)


On the one hand, the practice of preferring original printed editions suggests a concern for authorized readings of the musical text--something that he could not, in his estimation, acquire in expensive autograph manuscript sources. On the other hand, this may only have represented an expediency. The case of the collection of Friedrich Wilhelm Rust documented in multiple Liepmannssohn sales catalogs does suggest that the dealer did offer to Sonneck a presale option on the concerto manuscripts now at the Library of Congress as these are not listed in either of the two relevant catalogs. (11) Indeed, a supplement to the original catalogs that included Rust's collection offers for sale the manuscripts of the concertos published during Bach's lifetime that Sonneck seems to have declined. (12) Perhaps more tellingly, the inclusion in the catalogs of copies of printed editions of C. P. E. Bach's music from Rust's collection that the Library of Congress eventually acquired, suggests that Sonneck was willing to delay the purchase of printed editions in order to take advantage of the availability of manuscripts of unpublished works that would be presumably far more scarce. (13) In any event, an annotated copy of Alfred Wotquenne's 1905 thematic catalog of the music of C. P E. Bach in the Library of Congress collection demonstrates the comprehensiveness of the effort of successive generations of staff at the Library of Congress to collect the composer's oeuvre. (14)

The building of the collection under Carl Engel, Sonneck's successor and chief of the Music Division from 1922 to 1934, reflects a new perspective on the abilities and objectives of the Library of Congress. (15) Acquisitions under Engel now included the active pursuit of monuments of European music and the willingness to acquire duplicate sources, as reflected in the purchase of manuscripts of C. P. E. Bach keyboard sonatas (as discussed later). Active pursuit of manuscripts and early editions of C. P. E. Bach's music at the Library of Congress virtually ceased after the tenure of Sonneck and Engel, reflecting perhaps both the success of building this collection and a waning of scholarly interest in C. P. E. Bach in the mid-twentieth century. Notable gaps still exist in the collection of eighteenth-century sources of Bach's music, though this seems consistent with Sonneck's apparent tendency to delay purchase of published items in favor of taking opportunities to purchase manuscript copies of unpublished music as it became available. Thus, the original printed editions of C. P. E. Bach's music represent the most evident gaps in the Library of Congress collection, including the concertos Wq. 11 and Wq. 25, the pieces for flute and clavier Wq. 81 and Wq. 82, the accompanied sonatas Wq. 89-91, and the sonatinas for cembalo concertato, flutes, and strings Wq. 106-108. Sonneck's strategy may still prove justified in that these works did appear in editions which the library might still acquire as copies become available in the antiquarian market.

The existing collection, however, has attained a relevence that Sonneck might not have imagined. With the publishing of the complete works of C. P. E. Bach well under way, access to this music will no longer present the challenge it did in the early twentieth century, and scholarship can now more successfully consider the music in the broader context of eighteenth-century life. This article seeks to contribute to a growing body of scholarship that has sought to contextualize compositions not only musically, but also within society. In the latter such instances, the nonautograph manuscript sources offer a lens onto the musical interests and practices of previous centuries, and the manuscript musical sources at the Library of Congress offer entree into musical and social settings that otherwise may lack documentation in other contemporaneous accounts.

FRIEDRICH WILHELM RUST COLLECTION

The first acquisition of manuscript sources of C. P. E. Bach's music by the Library of Congress resulted from the offer by the Berlin music antiquarian dealer Leo Liepmannssohn of items from the collection of Friedrich Wilhelm Rust. Rust, born in 1739 in Worlitz, near Dessau, had begun his study of violin and keyboard before entering the university in Halle-Wittenberg in 1758. While in Halle he studied with Wilhelm Friedemann Bach, and served as a substitute organist for him there. Following this, Prince Leopold Friedrich Franz von Anhalt-Dessau allowed Rust to continue his studies with C. Hockh, the concertmaster at the Zerbst court. In 1763 and 1764 the prince financed his studies in violin with Franz Benda and keyboard with C. P. E. Bach in Berlin and Potsdam. From 1769 Rust gave regular subscription concerts in Dessau in which he juxtaposed his own compositions with those of his contemporaries. In 1775 he founded the Gesellschaftliches Theater, and assumed the music director position at the Anhalt-Dessau court. He died in Dessau in 1796. (16)

As described above, the Library of Congress acquired the items from Rust's collection in two installments from the Berlin dealer Leo Liepmannssohn. First, the library purchased the concerto manuscripts seemingly through a presale offer. These remain easily identifiable, as Rust consistently wrote his name and a numbering scheme on the title pages of items in his collection. Most of the concertos were copied by the scribe identified by Yoshitake Kobayashi as Anon. 337. (17) Table 1 lists the library's concerto manuscripts from Rust's collection.

While Rust had close contact with C. P. E. Bach, Rachel Wade doubts the authority of the readings in the concerto manuscripts in Rust's collection. These items most likely served as performance materials for Rust's subscription concerts in Dessau. (18) After Liepmannssohn published his catalog of items from Rust's collection, Sonneck identified several additional manuscripts to acquire, including two collections of keyboard music predominantly by Bach (US-Wc M20 .A2 M68, and M20 ,A2 M684), an individual Bach keyboard sonata (M23 .B13 W62 (19) Case), the printed edition of the concerto Wq. 11 (M1010 .A2 B13 W11), and possibly a manuscript of the Fantasia and Fugue in C Minor, Wq. 119/7 (M25 .B Case). (19)

LASSERRE COLLECTION

The second collection of C. P. E. Bach manuscript materials also came to the Library of Congress through Liepmannssohn, all stemming from a collection assembled by an individual in provincial France about whom little is currently known beyond the information contained in his stamp of ownership: "M.r LASSERRE NOTAIRE | CHATELLERAULT (VIENNE)." (20) As Rachel Wade writes:
   The Lasserre collection differs completely from the Rust collection
   in copyists, watermarks, format of the title page, and other
   details. Furthermore, the Library of Congress acquired the Lasserre
   group some ten months after receiving the Rust collection, for the
   Rust sources uniformly bear the date of accession "Aug 23 1906"
   stamped on the back of the cover, while those of Lasserre are
   stamped "June 26 1907." Thus, it seems unlikely that the two
   collections were united before being sold by Liepmannssohn. (21)


While the identity of Lasserre remains to be traced, Lasserre's musical interests appear fairly constrained. The Library of Congress holds only manuscripts from Lasserre's collection of the music of C. P. E. Bach bearing traces of Lasserre's stamp. Even examples of music by the brothers Carl Heinrich and Johann Gottlieb Graun, colleagues of Bach's at the court of Frederick the Great, held at other institutions still exhibit a seemingly limited scope in Lasserre's collecting. (22) The presence of a cadenza in the Concerto in G, Wq. 34 (US-Wc M1010 .A2 B13 W34) with the tempo indications peu vite and peu lent, suggests that Lasserre may have actively used these manuscripts in performances. (23) Beyond Lasserre's interest in the music of composers affiliated with Frederick the Great, at least one other manuscript, now held at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin (Mus. ms. 5553), of a sonata for piano and violin by Karl Eckert bears the dedication: "Dem Herrn Grafen Redern | zum 9ten December 1837 gewidmet | von | Carl Eckert" bears Lasserre's stamp and offers the only indication of holdings of nineteenth-century music. The presence of all of known items from Lasserre's collection in Liepmannssohn's 1889 Katalog 75 strongly suggests that Lasserre acquired these manuscripts from Liepmannssohn at that time. (24)

In some instances the Library of Congress manuscripts offer clear evidence of the identity of their owners prior to Lasserre. By identifying these relationships it becomes possible to also distinguish lines of transmission that date from the eighteenth century, though this proves not nearly as simple as that of tracing the transmission of manuscripts belonging to Friedrich Wilhelm Rust where items bear his signature, and his heirs kept the collection intact for nearly a century after his death. That numerous of the Library of Congress's C. R E. Bach manuscripts show evidence of previously belonging to Eduard Grell and Franz Commer aids in focusing the consideration of the provenance of these manuscripts.

FRANZ COMMER COLLECTION

Franz Commer (1813-1887), an editor of early music and a composer, amassed a significant collection of music, (25) as reflected in part by the catalog prepared for its sale by Liepmannssohn. (26) Of the two C. P. E. Bach manuscripts at the Library of Congress from Commer's collection, only the concerto (US-Wc M1010 .A2 B13 W20) offers indication of ownership by Lasserre. No trace of Lasserre's stamp is present on this item, but the acquisition number 105720 places the item among the other concertos from Lasserre's collection purchased from Liepmannssohn. Additionally, the "No. 1" that appears in red pencil on the title page of the manuscript appears consistent with numering on other manuscripts that also belonged to Lasserre. The other Commer manuscript (US-Wc ML30.4c no. 1444), came to the Library of Congress through the bequest of Dayton C. Miller, who amassed an extensive collection of flutes, flute music, flute iconography, and literature on the flute. (27) Miller acquired this item from the auction of Erich Prieger's collection in 1924 (discussed below); (28) presumably Prieger acquired the item in 1889 from the sale of Commer's collection by Liepmannssohn, (29) as other items from that sale formed portions of his collection auctioned in 1924. That both of these items appear only in the Liepmannssohn catalog combining the collections of Commer, Grell, and Redern offers indication of the difficulties of using these catalogs to determine from whose collection individual items originated. In the case of Commer, this can be achieved, perhaps in every instance, because of the presence of a stamp reading "F. COMMER" in an oblong oval. (30)

Both of the C. P. E. Bach manuscripts at the Library of Congress from Franz Commer's collection reflect strong connections to Berlin musical life in the mid-eighteenth century. The copyist of the concerto, Anon. 402, produced numerous manuscripts for Johann Philipp Kirnberger and his patron Princess Anna Amalia of Prussia, likewise, the work of the copyist of the sonata, known as "Palestrina II" from the studies of the Amalien-Bibliothek by Eva Renate Wutta (nee Blechschmidt), appears frequently in Anna Amalia's library and among other manuscripts from this period. (31) Rachel Wade proposes that the concerto manuscript may originally have been among the items acquired by the Konigliche Institut fur Kirchenmusik from Johann Nikolaus Forkel, based on the knowledge that Forkel had received music materials from Kirnberger, and the fact that the same concerto exists in a copy in the Amalien-Bibliothek also prepared by Anon. 402. (32) No evidence on the manuscript proves or contradicts this hypothesis.

EDUARD GRELL COLLECTION

In addition to the one concerto manuscript from Franz Commer's collection, the C. P. E. Bach manuscripts at the Library of Congress that clearly come from Lasserre's collection appear to have two further distinct groupings, possibly aligning with the other individuals whose collections Liepmannssohn sold along with Commer's. At the very least, several manuscripts of concertos and trio sonatas clearly derive from the collection of Eduard Grell (1800-1887), a Berlin composer, conductor, organist, teacher, and director of the Sing-Akademie zu Berlin from 1853 to 1876.

In addition to Lasserre's stamp, numerous items also bear a cipher in pencil containing the letters "Gr." followed by a three- or four-digit number. This "Gr." numbering appears with a high degree of frequency in manuscripts held at the Library of Congress, and presumably refers to Eduard Grell, seemingly added in preparation for the sale of his music collection by Liepmannssohn in 1887 alongside the collection of Franz Commer and Wilhelm Redern. The significance of the "Gr." numbers remains elusive, though; the numbers do not refer to the numbering in the sales catalogs, and appear on items that originated not just in Grell's collection but also in Franz Commer's collection and possibly in Redern's collection as well. In fact, in some instances the presence of a "Gr." number on items with Commer's stamp have led individuals to presume that Grell acquired those items from Commer. That Grell died in 1886 and Commer died in 1887 would preclude the possibility that Grell acquired items from the estate of Commer. Rather, the frequent addition in pencil of the time signature and key signature on the title pages, which conforms with the descriptive practices found in Liepmannssohn's catalogs, make it seem most likely that someone working at Liepmannssohn on the sale of these collections applied the "Gr." numbers indiscriminately.

While occasionally objects from Grell's collection also bear a stamp reading: "ZU ED. GRELL'S BIBLIOTHEK GEHORIG" or Grell's signature, Peter Wollny has observed that a different marking might allow one to distinguish items from Grell's collection. Most manuscripts presumed to be from Grell's collection-have a consistent numbering pattern where the abbreviation "No" appears in the lower center to right-hand side of the title pages followed by a two- or three-digit number and a period. The distinctive cursive script of the capital "N" easily distinguishes this numbering scheme. (33) Based on the evidence at the Library of Congress, I believe that Wollny has correctly identified this number scheme as Grell's.

Born in Berlin in 1800 into a musical family, Grell studied composition with Carl Friedrich Zelter and Carl Friedrich Rungenhagen, successive directors of the Sing-Akademie zu Berlin. In 1829 he began teaching at what would become the Konigliche Institut fur Kirchenmusik, and held the position of organist at the Domkirche from 1839, prior to which he held the same position at St. Nicholai beginning in 1818. Grell became director of the Sing-Akademie in 1853, succeeding Rungenhagen. Until recently, Grell's work had not garnered significant attention since shortly after his death. (34) His student Heinrich Bellermann produced two substantial publications: a biography and a collection of Grell's essays. These place great emphasis on Grell's promotion of a cappella music, and the compositions of Palestrina in particular. However, the materials from Grell's collection now held at the Library of Congress would seem to challenge the image of him promoted among his followers, and that gained traction among his contemporaries. (35)

While the significance of Grell's Bach collection has received passing mention, with particular reference made to the continuing need for an examination of the early provenance of the items, the enormity and broad scope of his entire music collection remains unconsidered. (36) Two closely related book dealers described Grell's musical estate in two catalogs shortly following his death. (37) However, these catalogs do not list all of the contents of Grell's collection. Two later catalogs from Liepmannssohn, including the aforementioned Katalog 75, list numerous more items traceable to Grell's collection, but not clearly distinguished in the catalogs from items formerly in the similarly large collections of Franz Commer and Wilhelm von Redern also being offered for sale. The ambiguity of the contents of Grell's collection have complicated the assessment of its significance or its bearing on Grell's approach to music.

The C. P. E. Bach manuscripts from Grell's collection at the Library of Congress consist of three groups: five concertos (of which three are misattributed to Bach), two choral compositions, and eleven trio sonatas (table 2).

Lasserre appears to have purchased the concertos and trio sonatas from Grell's collection through Liepmannssohn in 1889; they came to the Library of Congress in 1907 through Liepmannssohn. The two manuscripts of C. P. E. Bach's vocal compositions that come from Grell's collection came to the Library of Congress in a large purchase from Liepmannssohn in 1908 of vocal music from the collection of Julius Stockhausen, the singer and close colleague of Johannes Brahms. Stockhausen presumably also acquired these manuscripts from the 1889 Liepmannssohn sale of Grell's collection.

In addition to those items held by the Library of Congress, portions of Grell's estate also came into the possession of the Prussian Royal Library prior to the Liepmannssohn sale, either through a bequest or a presale option offered by Liepmannssohn; these items do not appear in any of the sales catalogs listing Greffs collection. The presence of items in the hand of Johann Friedrich Hering among J. S. Bach manuscripts accessioned by the Prussian Royal Library (41) in 1887, a copyist frequently found among items from Grell's collection at the Library of Congress (as discussed below), offers one possible indication of their origin in Grell's collection. One of these, D-B, Mus. ms. Bach P 597, has been tentatively assigned a Grell provenance. (42) Significantly, the characteristic numbering pattern appears clearly on the title page of an important early copy of J. S. Bach's Mass in B Minor in Hering's hand: D-B, Mus. ms. Bach P 572, also accessioned in 1887, the year following Grell's death. (43)

THE COPYIST J. F. HERING IN GRELL'S COLLECTION

In no instance in the Library of Congress manuscripts is Grell's numbering struck through; however, Grell's numbering scheme appears to replace an earlier scheme found in the upper right-hand corner of the title pages of five of the trio sonatas. A similar case of the cancelation of an earlier numbering scheme is not evident in the other Bach trio sonatas or the concerto manuscripts from the Rust and Commer collections, however the canceled numbering scheme is present in at least thirty-seven other manuscripts of trio sonatas of eighteenth-century Berlin origin at the Library of Congress. Like Lasserre items at Harvard and the University of Michigan, these other trio sonatas consist almost entirely of compositions by Johann Gottlieb Graun and Carl Heinrich Graun, as well as one sonata by Johann Philipp Kirnberger. However, the Graun and Kirnberger manuscripts show no trace of Lasserre's stamp, even though they were acquired by the Library of Congress through Liepmannssohn at approximately the same time as it acquired items from Lasserre's collection. Peter Wollny's article in which he identifies the copyist Anon. 300 as Johann Friedrich Hering significantly advanced knowledge about these sources, (44) while Christoph Henzel's accounting of sources for the compositions of Johann Gottlieb and Carl Heinrich Graun provides substantially more detail on these manuscripts. (45) However, a detailed study of this complex of sources is currently lacking, even though Strunk had specifically highlighted these manuscripts as early as 1933. (46)

As seen elsewhere in this group of manuscripts, the C. P. E. Bach items bear clear indication that the individual who numbered the items (or had the items numbered) in the upper right-hand corner had acquired or commissioned items in groups, as exhibited by close groupings of distinct copyists. One fairly consistent characteristic among all of these triosonata manuscripts that indicates the relationship between these sonatas is the recurring presence of materials in the hand of Johann Friedrich Hering, an individual who maintained close contact with C. P. E. Bach. In addition to serving as an agent in Berlin for the sale of C. P. E. Bach's publications after Bach had moved to Hamburg, Hering appears to have also provided instruction in thoroughbass. Otherwise, little else is known about Hering or the extent of the collection of music he amassed for himself rather than on commission. (47) A numbering sequence found on the lower left-hand side of these title pages that appears to be in Hering's hand offers one indication that these items comprised a portion of Hering's personal collection (see table 3 and fig. 1).

If the numbering on the lower left is Hering's, the numbering in the upper right would presumably represent an intermediate owner between Hering and Grell. Beyond the sophisticated repertoire Hering copied for himself, Andrew Talle has demonstrated that Hering prepared manuscripts of simpler repertoire, presumably for students. (48) In the instance of the C. P. E. Bach manuscripts at the Library of Congress, these practices may converge. Hering's students included Otto von Voss senior, a member of a well-established noble Prussian family and eventually a prominent official in the Prussian government during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. (49) Otto von Voss senior built a noteworthy music collection, that in part supported an active musical salon in Berlin during the first decade of the nineteenth century; his son Otto von Voss junior continued to refine, expand, and catalog the collection. (50) In her study of the von Voss collection, Bettina Faulstich elaborates on the relationship of Hering with the noble family, noting that a member of the von Voss family served as a witness to Hering's last will and testament dated September 1810, and that a significant body of material in the von Voss collection came from the Hering estate. (51) While writing before its rediscovery, (52) she also observes that references to manuscripts in Hering's hand appear in relation to the holdings of the Sing-Akademie zu Berlin's expansive collection. (53) She concludes that the presence of manuscripts in Hering's hand in both the von Voss family's collection and the Sing-Akademie's collection demonstrates the large extent of the collection sold after Hering's death. (54) Certainly, Hering possessed a substantial collection of music, but the relationship between these two later collections may not be complementary as much as it may be overlapping, and, in fact, Eduard Grell's possession of Hering manuscripts may help explain the relationship of the von Voss family and Sing-Akademie collections.

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

Faulstich's study of handwritten catalogs of the von Voss collection documents a habit of refining the collection through deaccessioning items, possibly because of duplication. (55) The case of the Hering copy of the Mass in B minor, D-B, Mus ms. Bach P 572, may represent one such instance in that the von Voss family very likely owned this volume and clearly owned its two companion volumes (D-B, Mus. ms. Bach P 23, and Mus. ms. Bach P 14), but also owned a newer copy as well (D-B, Mus. ms. Bach P 9-10). The three volumes of the Hering copy of the Mass also give evidence of the numbering scheme in the upper right-hand corner of the title pages consistent with the examples at the Library of Congress. (56) The logic for withdrawing redundant trio sonatas might lend credence to the hypothesis that the von Voss family once owned the Library of Congress trio sonata, if the practice of withdrawing items from their collection resulted from duplication. Manuscripts now held at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin with clearly documented von Voss provenance do in some instances duplicate the content of materials held at the Library of Congress. To date, no record of Hering's collection or sale of it have been located, and no evidence has surfaced to confirm that the von Voss family owned these items, but the manuscripts I have studied lead me to concur with the same supposition formulated by Peter Wollny. (57)

That Hering died in 1810 would seem to preclude the possibility that Grell, who was ten years old at the time, might have acquired these items directly from Hering's estate. If they came from Hering's own collection, they must have had an additional intermediate owner. Alternatively, Hering may have prepared the items on commission for a client from whose collection they eventually came into Grell's possession. Elias Kulukundis, in the source description of Grell's manuscript copy in his edition of the concerto Wq. 15, proposes that the Library of Congress's copy of the concerto from Grell's collection may have come from the collection of the Berliner Sing-Akademie. (58) While this concerto manuscript does not reflect a relationship to the Hering collection, the presence of items in Hering's hand are found in the Sing-Akademie as preserved at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, (59) and it is from the Sing-Akademie that Grell may have also acquired the trio-sonata manuscripts.

THE COPYISTS ANON. 302, ANON. 303, AND F. BAUMANN

Another group of manuscripts of C. P. E. Bach concertos and sonatas displays a consistent numbering scheme, strikingly rendered in a dark black ink with a thickly drawn "N." followed by successive numbers. The numbering appears to restart with different composers and different genres by the same composer. Among the C. P. E. Bach concerto manuscripts bearing this distinctive numbering sequence, two different groups appear. The first group reflects the work of several professional Berlin copyists closely associated with C. P. E. Bach, including two known primarily by the rubrics Anon. 302 and Anon. 303 employed by Paul Kast in his catalog of the Bach manuscripts at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin. (60) Another Berlin copyist, identified as F. Baumann, also appears consistently among this first group of concerto manuscripts. (61) The second group reflects at least in part the work of amateur copyists, working under the supervision of a copyist referenced by Rachel Wade as copyist "K." (62) The groupings become discernible not only by the presence of specific copyists, but also in the different papers used among the two groups, as outlined in table 4. Additional manuscripts at the Biliotheque nationale de France from Lasserre's collection also bear the same numbering pattern, (63) as well as at least one from the recovered collection of the Berliner Sing-Akademie. (64)

In the earlier of the two groups, the copyist Anon. 302, who worked for Bach between 1745 and 1759, copied many of the parts of the concerto manuscripts. (67) That Anon. 302 produced many of these manuscripts offers strong evidence for dating of the items. In addition, Anon. 302 and his fellow copyists used a paper for these manuscripts shown to date from the 1740s and perhaps the early 1750s. (68) Finally, David Schulenberg, in his edition of the concertos Wq. 4-6, observes that the versions of the concertos contained in the manuscripts produced by Anon. 302 document intermediate versions of the compositions as Bach continued to revise them, which he dates to approximately 1755. (69)

These manuscripts also present numerous instances of music and title pages in the hand of F. Baumann. Copies by Baumann, whose name appears on the title page of a Graun manuscript in his hand at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, (70) appear frequently in the collection of Sara Levy (nee Itzig) and in the music collections of other members of the Itzig family. However, while the Itzig family developed its collection beginning in the 1780s, Christoph Henzel has argued that those items in Baumann's hand in the collection of Sara Levy and Benjamin Itzig date from earlier in the century. Likewise, the Library of Congress manuscripts date from the mid-1750s. While the Itzig manuscripts reflect the work of a variety of copyists, no manuscripts among Levy's collections or in the collections of other members of the Itzig family reflect the work of Anon. 302. (71) The one example of material in the hand of Anon. 303 among this grouping of manuscripts includes a later addition of woodwind and horn parts, reflecting perhaps active use and adaptation of the materials over a period of years, perhaps in direct response to Bach's changes in the scoring of the composition. (72)

The second portion of these concerto manuscripts, not in the hand of Baumann and Anon. 302, reflect work of distinctly inferior quality. Except for the work of the copyist "K," this group of manuscripts gives no indication of having been produced by professional copyists. For instance, as Elias N. Kulukundis and David Schulenberg have observed, portions of the manuscript for the Concerto in A Minor, Wq. 26, contained extensive enough errors that the copyist "K" crossed out portions of music and recopied this material himself. (73)

Regardless of the inconsistencies between these two groups of manuscripts, not only their sequential numbering but also their subsequent transmission clearly reflect their integrity as a cohesive collection. Leo Liepmannssohn's Katalog 75 listed these manuscripts as components of lot number 96 on page four of the catalog. The items correspond not only in description to the items held at the Library of Congress, these manuscripts also bear the exact numbering in Liepmannssohn's catalog. Small notes in the upper left-hand corner of several of the Bach manuscripts reflect the numbering of the separate manuscripts listed in the Liepmannssohn catalog (fig. 2). Though Liepmannssohn's numbering of the manuscripts does not maintain the earlier numbering pattern listed above ("N. 8" has become "4."), the grouping of these manuscripts together by Liepmannssohn in his sale catalog indicates an obvious cohesiveness. The lack of individual pricing for the manuscripts, listed for sale as a group at the price of 60 marks, suggests that Liepmannssohn sold these as a single lot. Faint traces of Lasserre's stamp on the Library of Congress manuscripts suggest that he acquired these at that sale and, as Wade reports, several manuscripts that match those at the Library of Congress but turned down by Sonneck became incorporated into the holdings of the Bibliotheque nationale de France. (74) The subsequent listing of items from Lasserre's collection by Liepmannssohn alongside the remaining items from Friedrich Wilhelm Rust's collection in Katalog 169 reflects the point at which these concerto manuscripts became separated from each other.

A second group of C. P. E. Bach manuscripts at the Library of Congress, mostly in the hand of Anon. 303, who worked for or with Bach between 1745 and 1764, (75) and uniformly copied on paper from a Dutch paper mill operated by Daniel Gottlieb Schottler, (76) bear a numbering sequence in the same dark black ink with the same distinctively formed numbers seen in the concertos (see table 5 and fig. 3). These items, like the concertos described above, are found in Liepmannssohn's Katalog 75, in this instance listed as part of a single group under number 143. Moreover, Liepmannssohn references the existence of a thematic index, and explains that the referenced numbers are the only items in this sequence in his possession. (77) The "Arioso con Variazioni" that would represent "N. 3" in this sequence, however, is listed separately in Liepmannssohn's catalog as number 93; the copies of Wq. 62/9, Wq. 65/22, and Wq. 62/16 do not appear to be listed elsewhere in Liepmannssohn's catalog. Unlike the concertos, which Liepmannssohn sold as a single lot, Liepmannssohn sold the sonatas separately. Thus, while seven of these items eventually came to the Library of Congress, others would eventually become part of the collection of the Schleswig-Holsteinische Landesbibliothek in Kiel, Germany. (78) The same library also holds the thematic index of the items in this group referenced by Liepmannssohn, which consists of a single leaf with the heading "Catalogus der Sonaten von Hl. Bach" and corresponds exactly to this grouping of sonatas. (79)

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]

The manuscripts at the Library of Congress from this set can be traced further to the sale of the collection of Erich Prieger. In 1924, the Cologne auction house Lempertz' Buchhandlung und Antiquariat offered for sale the collection of the musicologist Prieger. (82) Prieger, like Lasserre, added many items to his collection as mid-nineteenth-century collections came up for sale. As seen in the instance of the trio sonata from Commer's collection mentioned above, Prieger acquired at least some items from Liepmannssohn's sale of the collections of Commer, Grell, and Redern. The Library of Congress acquired the items from lots number 203, 204, and 205 from the sale, in which Lempertz distributed the sonatas copied by Anon. 303 between lots 204 and 205.

The individual who placed the distinctive numbering on these Bach concertos and sonatas left no trace of his or her identity. The absence from these items of Franz Commer's oval stamp, or Eduard Grell's numbering pattern also leaves no clue of who may have possessed these prior to Lasserre and Prieger. The possibility exists that Wilhelm von Redern may have owned these manuscripts, but this relies mostly on the negative evidence of the absent characteristics common to items from Grell's and Commer's collections. While Liepmannssohn published separate catalogs of materials from the collections of Commer (83) and Grell, (84) delineating the previous owners of the items in the composite Katalog 75 through a process of elimination is not easily achieved because of the various incongruencies of information between each catalog. However, two manuscripts of keyboard sonatas by Johann Adolf Hasse in the Library of Congress point to Grell as the intermediate owner of the Anon. 302 and Anon. 303 items described here, as both of the Hasse sonata manuscripts possess the "Gr." number apparently applied by Liepmannssohn. One of these bears the distinctive numbering pattern in dark ink also found on the Anon. 302 and Anon. 303 manuscripts described above. The other has the numbering pattern common to Grell's collection. (85)

One other group of concertos at the Library of Congress may offer evidence of the origins of these materials. This group, again displaying the distinctive numbering pattern in dark ink on their title pages, contains keyboard concertos by Bach's Berlin contemporary and colleague in Frederick the Great's Kapelle, Christian Friedrich Schale. (86) No copyists or watermarks in this group correspond with the other manuscripts; the only consistent trace of relationship between these manuscripts is the numbering scheme. Otherwise the common owner of these manuscripts left no hint of his or her identity on these manuscripts at the Library of Congress. However, the presence of Schale's music among these items offers a link to the vibrant musical life cultivated in private musical societies, in which Schale maintained a prominent role both as member of Johann Philipp Sack's Musikubende Gesellschaft and as director of the Musikalische Assemblee, comprised of his colleagues in the king's Kapelle. (87) Bach maintained close contact with the musicians involved in these socieities, and his music enjoyed frequent performance in these settings. The presence among these manuscripts of two of Bach's primary copyists from this period legitimates their authority, and suggests that they were prepared at Bach's behest or on commission for use in Berlin, where they remained until late in the nineteenth century.

ERICH PRIEGER

As already mentioned, the Library of Congress acquired several lots from the auction of Erich Prieger's collection in 1924. In addition to the keyboard sonatas in the hand of Anon. 303, the lots 203, 204, and 205 contained a number of sonata manuscripts seemingly originating from the Leipzig publisher Johann Gottlob Immanuel Breitkopf. In the eighteenth century, Breitkopf, in addition to producing printed editions of music (prepared with moveable music type), offered for sale from a series of printed catalogs a diverse array of music in manuscript copies. (88) In this the publisher sought to take advantage of the consistent but small demand for a wide variety of compositions, but to do so without the high cost of preparing and warehousing printed copies.

As described above, Lempertz interspersed the Anon. 303 manuscripts with other, unrelated manuscripts to form lots 204 and 205. By contrast, lot 203 from Lempertz's sale of Erich Prieger's collection represents a cohesive grouping of sonata manuscripts, as becomes immediately obvious from their identical oblong format and occasional instance of matching black, marbled paper covers. The manuscripts also contain the work of three copyists who collaborated in completing the copies. Two of the copyists remain anonymous, but Michael Maul and Peter Wollny recently identified the third and most prominent copyist among these manuscripts as Carl Friedrich Barth, a copyist formerly and erroneously referred to as the "Doles schreiber" (89) (table 6). The designations for the other two copyists derives from Darrell M. Berg's description of a collective volume of C. P. E. Bach manuscripts held by the Beethoven-Archiv in Bonn, containing manuscripts also sold in the Prieger auction as lots 199 and 201. (90)

Carl Friedrich Barth, born in Glauchan, Germany, in 1734, matriculated at the Thomasschule in Leipzig in 1746. There he sang under Johann Sebastian Bach and Johann Gottlob Harrer, eventually becoming the first prefect. Following Harrer's death in October 1755, Barth assumed responsibility for directing music in the St. Thomas and St. Nicholai churches until Johann Friedrich Doles's appointment as Thomaskantor in January 1756. After eleven years at the Thomasschule, Barth entered the University of Leipzig, where he studied theology and philosophy. His first and only professional appointment did not come until June of 1770, when he became Kantor at the Borna Stadtschule, where he remained until his death in March of 1813. Between the time of his entry into the university in 1756 and his appointment in Borna in 1770, Barth presumably earned income through teaching and preparing copies of music on commission, possibly for Breitkopf. (91) The presence in one of these manuscripts of a paper identified by Yoshitake Kobayashi as common in Breitkopf copies further supports the supposition that the items were prepared for the publishing firm. (92) In the description of lot 203 formed by these sonatas, the Lempertz catalog notes that these manuscripts contain annotations by Ludwig Scheibler (1848-1921) indicating the variant early readings represented in these sonatas. (93) The presence of manuscripts from Scheibler's collection in the Prieger auction reflects the common practice, already seen with Liepmannssohn, of dealers combining collections in sales.

The third grouping of sonata manuscripts, distributed between Prieger lots 204 and 205, contains fewer obvious indicators of common origin. Like the Berlin manuscripts containing the work of Anon. 303, several of these items contain annotations in the hand of Erich Prieger on the manuscripts themselves and on wrappers seemingly supplied by Prieger. Whether these manuscripts were copies prepared for sale by Breitkopf is difficult to discern. Several contain a two-digit number in blue pencil of undetermined significance (see table 7, and fig. 4). Of the thirteen sonatas found in the manuscripts listed in tables 6 and 7, eight of these are advertised in Johann Gottlob Immanuel Breitkopf's 1763 Catalogo de' Soli, Duetti, Trii ... Parte TVta, offering additional support for the notion that these manuscripts were copied on commission for sale by Breitkopf. (94)

[FIGURE 4 OMITTED]

This accounts for the majority of the C. P. E. Bach manuscript sources at the Library of Congress. The manuscripts not described above do not lend themselves as easily to contextualization in that they do not form a part of an obviously larger whole within the holdings at the Library of Congress and, therefore, their origin and transmission is less easily explained by related sources in Washington. However, all manuscripts and eighteenth-century printed editions of C. P. E. Bach's music held at the Library of Congress are described individually in the second portion of this article.

FURTHER RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES

The materials examined here, assembled from several sources primarily by Oscar Sonneck and Carl Engel in the first decades of the twentieth century for the Library of Congress collection, represent only portions of larger eighteenth- and nineteenth-century collections distributed through bequests and sales over two centuries. Important information has begun to emerge about these and related materials through composer-centered research, including that of Christoph Henzel in the Graun-Werkverzeichnis and that of the editors of Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach: The Complete Works. However, research on these sources may yield the most insight when the objects are placed within the context of their origin and dissemination. Unlike similar collections that remained largely intact, and thus more easily studied, (95) scholars will need to look more broadly to understand the needs and uses the C. P. E. Bach sources and similar eighteenth-century Berlin sources at the Library of Congress--for which Peter Wollny and Christoph Henzel have already established a model. (96) The existing scholarship on the close connections to C. P. E. Bach that several of these sources exhibit will pave the way for broader insights as the identities of copyists and early owners take shape. As intended, the collection that Oscar Sonneck began has created an opportunity for substantive historical research in the United States. However, rather than freeing American scholars from reliance on European libraries, this collection will yield the more important result of strengthening the bonds of the Library of Congress with its counterparts in Europe.

INVENTORY: C. P. E. BACH SOURCES AT THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS

This inventory provides citations to all instances of C. P. E. Bach's music held at the Library of Congress (US-Wc) that appeared during the eighteenth century. Detailed descriptions of manuscripts are provided, while only basic bibliographic details are provided for printed editions. References to the thematic catalog by Alfred Wotquenne (Wq.) are provided for each item or each composition within a composite volume. (97) The Wq numbers are generally more succinct than the numbering found in the thematic catalog by Eugene Helm, especially for published collections; Helm's catalog includes a concordance of Wq. and H. numbers. (98) RISM numbers are provided for all items where available. Most manuscript items are discussed in the main body of this article, and other literature referencing these sources is cited there. In those instances where an item is not discussed in this article, references to relevant literature are cited in this inventory. Source descriptions in Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach: The Complete Works (CPEB:CW) are referenced for those works that have appeared in volumes published to date; the lack of a reference for manuscript sources indicates that the volume in which a composition will appear has not yet been published. All items described here belong to the "Case" collection in the Music Division; this is indicated in the call numbers by the inclusion of the word "Case" or the inclusion of ".A2" between the class number and the Cutter number. The manuscripts have been microfilmed; the microfilms have the call number Microfilm 88/20,085. The Music Division serves microfilm or other surrogates for items as a policy, except in those instances where physical characteristics of an object must be consulted, such as foliation or watermarks. All discernible watermarks are listed for the manuscripts described here, as are known copyists, and plausible dates of manuscripts.
COPYRIGHT 2014 Music Library Association, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2014 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:Carl Philipp Emanuel
Author:Boomhower, Daniel F.
Publication:Notes
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jun 1, 2014
Words:8395
Previous Article:Aaron Copland's soviet diary (1960).
Next Article:C.P.E. Bach sources at the library of congress.
Topics:

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters