I NT RODUC T ION

Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach’s Passions-Cantate, Wq 233

Text Sources
(H 776; BR-CPEB D 2), sets a poetic retelling of the suf-
fering and death of Jesus Christ, with interpolated move- Excluding its passages of biblical origin, the poetic portion
ments based largely on poetic texts plus additional biblical of the Passions-Cantate’s libretto derives from the work of
texts and a chorale. Bach fashioned Wq 233 in the early multiple authors, the identification of whom mainly pro-
years of his Hamburg tenure from his first St. Matthew ceeds from insight provided by contemporary sources (see
Passion (H 782; CPEB:CW, IV/4.1), a setting presented also the discussion of text sources for the 1769 Passion in
in that city’s five main churches during Lent of 1769. CPEB:CW, IV/4.1, xii). One of these—a remark in ink
The oratorio that Bach crafted from this first of his by Georg Poelchau on the title page of a libretto (D-B,
twenty-one liturgical passions retained a majority of its Mus. T 1924) formerly appended to Bach’s house copy of
model’s musical material but nevertheless introduced sig- Wq 233 (D-B, Mus. ms. Bach P 337; source A)—both re-
nificant changes. Chief among these was the substitution lays the identities of three poets and narrows down the
of the biblical narrative with a poetic paraphrase of the contribution of one of them, noting that “the text is by Ma-
Passion story complete with new musical setting, this be- dame Karsch and Professor Ebeling, one aria by Eschen-
ing essential to transform the work from an oratorio Pas- burg.” (Der Text ist von Mad Karschin u Prof. Ebeling[,]
sion to a Passion oratorio (see table 1).1 Although Ham- eine Arie von Eschenburg.)2 The “one aria” mentioned is
burg tradition stipulated that only works of the former known to be the text for the tenor aria no. 7, “Wende dich
genre be presented to the congregations of Hamburg’s zu meinem Schmerze,” by scholar and literary critic Johann
main churches during the Lenten season, contemporary Joachim Eschenburg; this text had originally been used by
taste deemed the latter genre decidedly more fashionable. Bach’s predecessor Georg Philipp Telemann in his 1764 St.
Other major changes Bach introduced involved adding a Luke Passion.3 Prussian poet Anna Louisa Karsch was a
bipartite chorus (no. 15) after the soprano duet (no. 13), personal acquaintance of Bach’s with humble beginnings,
replacing all eight of the original chorales with a single who rose in prominence to become much beloved by Prin-
new one positioned toward the end of the work (no. 19), cess Anna Amalia of Prussia and other members of the
and exchanging the final movement—the chorale fantasy Prussian aristocracy for her patriotic odes and improvisa-
“Christe, du Lamm Gottes,” borrowed from the 1725 ver- tional talent.4 The theologian, historian, and music critic
sion of his father’s St. John Passion, BWV 245—with a Christoph Daniel Ebeling had resettled from Leipzig to
newly composed chorus (no. 22). Hamburg in 1769 to teach at that city’s Handlungs-Akade-
In the process of reworking his 1769 Passion into the mie and, later, its Johanneum. The nature of his contribu-
Passions-Cantate, Bach emended his composing score of tions to Bach’s Passions-Cantate is found in an announce-
the former work. Ultimately, most portions transmitting ment published in two Hamburg newspapers in February
interpolations were excised in such a way to preserve the
musical setting of the biblical narrative for use in future
liturgical Passions. The resulting fragmentary manuscript 2. A facsimile of this libretto is published in CPEB:CW, VIII/3.3,
but it is unlikely to have been a Hamburg libretto or to have had any
(D-B, SA 5155; source Q 2) thus represents the earliest connection to Bach. See critical report for more details.
source transmitting readings specific to Wq 233. 3. Miesner, 71. The autograph score of the 1764 Passion is in D-B,
Mus. ms. autogr. G. P. Telemann 19; a copy of the printed libretto is in
1. The entry for the 1769 Passion in NV 1790 (p. 59) mentions this D-B, T 2409 (3).
alteration specifically while only alluding to the others: “The Passions- 4. Herbert Lölkes, Ramlers “Der Tod Jesu” in Vertonungen von Graun
Cantate originated from this Passion after the omission of the evan- und Telemann: Kontext, Werkgestalt, Rezeption (Kassel: Bärenreiter,
gelist and various other changes were carried out.” (Aus dieser Paßion 1999), 40. On Karsch and her connections to Bach, see Darrell M. Berg,
ist, nach Weglassung des Evangelisten und verschiedenen gemachten “Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach and Anna Louisa Karsch,” in Frankfurt/
Veränderungen, die Paßions-Cantate entstanden.) Oder 2001, 41–68, esp. 50–54.

[ xi ]
 table 1. derivation of the individual movements in bach’s passions-cantate, wq 233
No. Type Incipit Origin Remarks

1a. Einleitung— Du Göttlicher! warum bist du newly composed

1b. Accompagnement
2. Chor Fürwahr, er trug unsre Krankheit H 782, no. 2 Text underlay and minor musical
revision in mm. 7–13; text
underlay revised in mm. 59–60
and mm. 87–91
3a. Recitativ— Seht ihn! Gebeugt liegt er und fleht newly composed
3b. Accompagnement—
3c. Recitativ
4. Arie Wie ruhig bleibt dein Angesicht H 782, no. 8
5. Recitativ „Nehmt mich; ich bin’s.“ newly composed
6a. Arioso Du, dem sich Engel neigen H 782, no. 10 Text changed in mm. 11–13;
changes visible in Q 2
6b. Recitativ Mit wildem Ungestüm newly composed
6c. Arioso (old version) O Petrus, folge nicht! H 782, no. 14 Vocal and instrumental lines
recomposed in mm. 1–4; vocal
line and text underlay changed in
mm. 11–14 and mm. 28–30;
changes visible in Q 2
6c. Accompagnement O Petrus, folge nicht! newly composed
(new version)
6d. Recitativ Nun stehen Zeugen auf newly composed
7. Arie Wende dich zu meinem Schmerze H 782, no. 18
8. Recitativ Der Jünger, der den Heiligen verriet newly composed
9. Arie Verstockte Sünder! solche Werke H 782, no. 20
10. Recitativ Gefesselt steht nun Jesus im Gerichte newly composed
11. Arie Donnre nur ein Wort der Macht H 782, no. 23
12a. Recitativ Noch wachet in Pilatus’ Brust newly composed
12b. Accompagnement— Nun sahe Gott der Mordsucht Flammen H 782, nos. 27a–b Eighteen newly composed mm.
12c. Arioso added before borrowed portions;
text altered at beginning of
borrowed portion
13. Duett Muster der Geduld und Liebe H 782, no. 28
14. Recitativ Die ihr durch des Messias Glauben newly composed
15a. Chor—15b. Chor Lasset uns aufsehen auf Jesum Christum newly composed
16a. Accompagnement O du, der Gott mit uns versöhnt newly composed
16b. Accompagnement Von Gott verlassen klagst du dich? H 782, no. 32
17a. Arie—17b. Chor— Der Menschen Missetat verbirget H 782, no. 33a–c
17c. Arie
18. Recitativ Nun sammlet sich die grauenvolle Macht newly composed
19. Choral Heiliger Schöpfer, Gott! newly composed
20a. Accompagnement Er ruft: „Es ist vollbracht!“ H 782, no. 34f Two newly composed mm.
added before borrowed portion;
text altered from earlier version;
changes visible in Q 2
20b. Arioso Mein tiefgebeugtes Herz wirft sich H 782, no. 35b

[ xii ]
 table 1. (continued)
No. Type Incipit Origin Remarks

21. Accompagnement Die Allmacht feirt den Tod H 782, no. 35a Transposed from E-flat to
F major; two oboes added;
significant alterations and
recomposition of instrumental
lines in mm. 1–5 and 8–13;
vocal line altered in mm. 18, 22,
25–28, and 32
22a. Chor—22b. Solo— Preiset ihn, erlöste Sünder! newly composed
22c. Duett—22d. Solo

1773, which mentions that a “deserving local scholar” (ein duet “Muster der Geduld und Liebe” (no. 13) in Wq 233.8
verdienter hiesiger Gelehrter) fashioned the recitatives for Furthermore, two accompanied recitatives in Wq 233 (nos.
the work—that is, the poetic paraphrase of the Passion 12b and 21) display features typical of poetic gospel para-
story that replaced the biblical narrative traditionally set as phrases found in the narratives of such oratorios.9 The
recitative.5 Of the three poets mentioned by Poelchau, this printed libretto for H 782 even includes oratorio-like des-
undoubtedly refers to Ebeling. ignations of allegorical figures in two movements thought
This information leads to the conclusion that the poetic to originate with Karsch.10 Anna Amalia, who commis-
texts in the Passions-Cantate for the movements inherited sioned and subsequently set an undetermined amount of
from H 782 likely stem from Karsch’s hand, with the ex- Karsch’s Passion cantata, revisited that libretto in 1766 (the
ception of Eschenburg’s single contribution. Indeed, many year before she bestowed the title of Capellmeister upon
of the texts exhibit a similar theological emphasis repre- Bach at his departure from the Prussian court), as docu-
sentative of an Enlightenment theology known as Neology, mented in a letter sent by Karsch to the Halberstadt poet
concentrating on Jesus’ humanity over his divinity, portray- Johann Wilhelm Ludwig Gleim.11 Indeed, Karsch’s libretto
ing him as a friend to mankind (“Menschenfreund”), and from 1761, which as such is not known to survive, remains
imploring the listener to emulate Jesus’ exemplary actions.6 the only Passion poetry to receive any mention in her
The narrative portions of Wq 233 thought to trace back to abundant correspondence with Gleim up through Bach’s
Ebeling, on the other hand, orient themselves toward an 1768 departure from Berlin for Hamburg.
older, more orthodox tradition than the Karsch texts, in- It cannot necessarily be concluded that Ebeling penned
stead dwelling more prominently on Jesus’ role as a divine every poetic text beyond the biblical paraphrases in Wq 233
savior offering salvation to the sinner.7 that are absent from the 1769 Passion. The single chorale
That Karsch’s poetic texts in Wq 233 derive from a Pas- stanza, for instance, originated with Friedrich Gottlieb
sion cantata libretto she is known to have penned in 1761 Klopstock as his altered version of the chorale “Mitten wir
seems likely based on several factors. First, the origins of im Leben sind” by Martin Luther, an intercession for the
Karsch’s Passion cantata are inextricably linked to Karl
Wilhelm Ramler’s own libretto for the Passion oratorio 8. See Lölkes, Der Tod Jesu, 64–65, 67, and Hill, “Passion Settings,”
Der Tod Jesu, itself a prime example of integrating Neol- 132–34 and 138–39.
ogy into an oratorio text and a work whose duet “Feinde, 9. Karsch herself specified arias, chorales, and recitatives as com-
die ihr mich betrübt” bears a striking resemblance to the ponents in her Passion cantata libretto. See “Mein Bruder in Apoll”:
Briefwechsel zwischen Anna Louisa Karsch und Johann Wilhelm Ludwig
Gleim, vol. 1, ed. Regina Nörtemann (Göttingen: Wallstein, 1996), 56.
Bach’s repurposing of a Passion oratorio narrative into an interpolation
for an oratorio Passion, as may have happened with Karsch’s Passion
5. Hamburgische Addreß-Comtoir Nachrichten (25 February 1773), 124 cantata from 1761 and Bach’s 1769 Passion, is documented to have oc-
and HUC (26 February 1773), 3–4; quoted in Wiermann, 382–83. curred in two of his later liturgical Passions. See Hill, “Passion Settings,”
6. Moira Leanne Hill, “Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach’s Passion Settings: 136–38 and 223.
Context, Content, and Impact” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 2015), 131– 10. Hill, “Passion Settings,” 136.
32. 11. See letter dated 30 January 1766 in Mein Bruder in Apoll, 266. See
7. Ibid., 160–61. also Berg, “Karsch,” 53.

[ xiii ]
dying (“Fürbitte für Sterbende”) first printed in 1757.12 The distinct work unto itself.16 For example, the author of a
identity of the poet for the final movement remains un- public inquiry published in the Hamburg press in 1773,
settled. The more traditional disposition of its theological requesting the establishment of regular Passions-Cantate
content argues in favor of Ebeling, while its form—per- performances, calls it “the excellent Passion that Capell-
haps modeled on the penultimate movement of Der Tod meister Bach composed for the Hamburg churches in the
Jesu—leaves open the possibility that the text originated year 1769” (der vortreflichen Paßions-Musick, die unser
with Karsch.13 Herr Capelmeister Bach im J. 1769 für die Hamburgischen
Kirchen componirte); this wording suggests that the or-
atorio is being considered as a version of Bach’s first St.
Date of Composition and Compilation
Matthew Passion.17 Although the ambiguity surrounding
At what point Bach began composing material that would the compilation date for Wq 233 cannot be resolved on
eventually be subsumed into Wq 233 remains unclear. the basis of the available sources, the terminus ante quem
Even though a central portion of its poetry originated for its existence as a discrete work can be set at October
in Berlin, no evidence survives to suggest he began set- 1770 with a reasonable amount of certainty, but it must at
ting it while still in residence there.14 As to the question least predate 19 March 1772, given the announcement of
of when Bach compiled his Passions-Cantate, the available the work’s premiere in a Berlin periodical on that date (see
evidence points to either 1769 or 1770. The earlier date ap- “Performance History” below).
pears prominently in the autograph inscription on the title
page of the composer’s house copy of the work: “Passions-
Dissemination
Cantate, von mir, C. P. E. Bach, Anno 1769 in Hamburg
in Musik gesetzt.” This same year is provided in AK 1805 The Passions-Cantate’s dissemination for the purposes of
(p. 30, no. 63), but the compiler of that catalogue likely had study and performance allowed the oratorio to achieve
no special knowledge about the work and was instead re- its desired effect of securing renown for Bach as a com-
peating the date given in the house copy. A date of 1770 poser of large-scale sacred works outside of Hamburg.
given in NV 1790 (p. 56: “PaßionsCantate. H. 1770.”), in- He distributed copies of his work in manuscript form to
formation likely supplied by Bach’s widow, Johanna Maria, maximize its potential impact while minimizing the risk to
is corroborated by a piece in a Hamburg periodical from himself financially. This choice differs from how he treated
October of that same year examining the composer’s con- his other two oratorios, both of which Bach distributed
tributions to sacred vocal music, in which the author refers in print. Still, it is worth noting that neither Die Israeliten
to the work as “a Passion from 1770” (eine Paßion 1770).15 in der Wüste (Wq 238) nor Die Auferstehung und Himmel-
The discrepancy between the two dates may stem from fahrt Jesu (Wq 240) was published immediately following
contrasting ways of understanding Wq 233, either as a its composition or premiere. The former, heard by Ham-
reworked version of a preexisting liturgical piece or as a burg audiences in late 1769, would first appear in print in
1775; the latter, written around 1774, saw publication only
late in Bach’s life, in 1787. There is some indication that
Bach planned to publish his Passions-Cantate, albeit in ar-
12. Klopstock, Geistliche Lieder, vol. 1 (Copenhagen and Leipzig, 1758),
ranged form. According to a review in the Hamburg press
1–3. In Wq 233, no. 19, the antepenultimate and penultimate lines devi- of a reduced version for voices and keyboard arranged and
ate from Klopstock’s version and hew more closely to Luther’s version. published by Bergedorf organist Albert Jacob Steinfeld in
The connection to Luther’s chorale, though not the link to Klopstock, 1789, “the late B[ach] himself had planned such a reduc-
is noted in BR-CPEB, 2:80.
tion, but unfortunately died before its realization.” (Der
13. Norbert Bolin, “In rechter Ordnung lerne Jesu Passion: C. Ph. E.
Bachs ‘Spinnhaus-Passion’ (H 776) Hamburg 1768?” Augsburger Jahr- sel[ige] B[ach] hatte selbst so einen Auszug vor, starb aber
buch für Musikwissenschaft (1988): 61–81, esp. 77. On the possibility of leider vor der Ausführung.)18
unused Karsch texts appearing in Wq 233, see Nagel, 30.
14. As Ulrich Leisinger has noted in CPEB:CW, IV/4.1, xii, the frag-
mentary autograph score of the St. Matthew Passion of 1769 (SA 5155) 16. According to Nagel, 31, the ambiguity of the date given in source A
dates to Bach’s Hamburg tenure. stems from uncertainty as to whether Bach was referring to the “Kern-
stück” adopted from the 1769 Passion or to the finished oratorio.
15. On dating the work to 1770, see Bolin, “Spinnhaus-Passion,”
78. The periodical reference is in Unterhaltungen (October 1770), 319; 17. Wiermann, 382.
Wiermann, 492. 18. HNZ (18 November 1789), 3; Wiermann, 345.

[ xiv ]
 Despite never having circulated in print during Bach’s Bach writes nothing of a fee charged for loaning out his
lifetime, Wq 233 achieved a remarkably extensive dissemi- manuscript, only one for having it copied in Hamburg. A
nation in manuscript form. Around three dozen scores copyist fee of five Reichsthaler was a bargain for a man-
survive, as well as nine sets of performing parts and at uscript the size of Bach’s house copy (source A), so the
least fourteen extant copies of Steinfeld’s posthumously composer probably earned little to no money from this ar-
published reduction, numbers which speak to the orato- rangement.21
rio’s popularity. As for the third method of dissemination, involving the
The Passions-Cantate propagated in three main ways. creation of sources by third parties from previously dis-
One involved Bach having the work copied in Hamburg tributed scores or their descendant materials independent
and sent to its destination. Another entailed the composer of Bach’s involvement, the composer himself must have
lending out one of his manuscripts to an interested party expected this to happen. In a letter to Johann Gottlob
to copy or have copied. A third method, in which scores Immanuel Breitkopf dated 24 February 1775, concerning
were prepared from sources that had already been dissemi- the publication of Die Israeliten, Bach dismissed the idea
nated, excluded Bach’s authorization or even knowledge. of a larger print run in words that could just as easily apply
The first two methods are recounted in contemporary to his Passions-Cantate: “The piece is in German, the ama-
correspondence. In a letter dated 4 September 1772, Niels teurs are few, the connoisseurs still fewer and most of those
Schiørring communicated from Hamburg to the poet who could make use of it will copy from one another.”22
Heinrich Wilhelm von Gerstenberg in Copenhagen that Sources representing two of these three outlined dis-
Bach “sends his greetings and asks you to forgive his lax- tribution methods certainly survive. A notable subset
ity in writing you, but he thinks all the more frequently of extant scores originated in Hamburg and can be as-
about you and apparently for your sake I am receiving his sumed to have been produced under Bach’s supervision.
Passion, which he is having copied and will look over him- Among these, some bear autograph marks indicating that
self.”19 Bach himself refers to this same method of dissemi- the composer himself checked his scribe’s work. Sources
nation, as well as another, in a letter to Johann Nikolaus proofread entirely by Bach include the score sent to Anna
Forkel from 20 April 1774: Amalia (D-B, Am.B. 85/I; source B 2), a score in Copen-
hagen (DK-Kk, Weyses Samling mu 6309.1235; source
My Passion Cantata is available. My copy is now lent out, not
to mention somewhat unclear and very tattered from much B 3), and the score sent to Vienna that had been copied by
circulation. If you command, I will have my copyist make a Johann Heinrich Michel, a tenor in Bach’s ensemble and
clean copy. The score will cost about 5 Reichsthaler . . . . My the composer’s prolific scribe, particularly starting in 1781
copyist needs work right now. I have given him a correct copy (A-Wgm, III 35444; source B 1). Another score (DK-Kk,
of my Passion to reproduce, since I tentatively have a buyer mu 6309.1631; source B 4) bears autograph corrections ex-
besides yourself. You are not under any obligation. I will ei- clusively on its first page. Some scores copied in Hamburg
ther give you this copy or lend you my original to be copied would have been prepared on demand for specific buyers,
when it is here again.20 whereas Bach had others copied in advance of any definite
sale, as described in the composer’s 1774 letter to Forkel
quoted above. Advance preparation is hinted at by the ex-
istence of six scores bearing the hand of a single Hamburg
19. CPEB-Briefe, 1:277–78: “Er läßt Sie sehr grüßen und er bittet scribe—called “cc” after a distinguishing mark added to the
Sie, seine Nachlässigkeit im Schreiben zu entschuldigen, aber er denkt
desto öfter an Sie und Ihretwegen bekomme ich wohl seine Passions-
bottom of each page—as well as another score copied in
Musik mit mir, die er abschreiben läßt und selbst durchsehen will.”
20. CPEB-Letters, 54 (slightly modified); CPEB-Briefe, 1:392–93 (see
also Nagel, 47–48): “Meine Paßions-Cantate steht zu Diensten. Mein 21. According to CPEB-Westphal, 61, the Leipzig music dealer
Exemplar ist jetzt verliehen, außerdem etwas undeutlich u. durch das Thomas offered Wq 233 in 1779 at a “Schreibepreiß 8 Thlr und
viele Herumschicken sehr zerlumpt. We Sie befehlen, so will [ich] communcationsPreiß 5 Thlr. in Summa 13 Thlr.”; likewise (ibid., 62),
es Ihnen, durch meinen Copisten sauber copiren laßen, es wird die the Hamburg music dealer Johann Christoph Westphal, beginning in
Partitur ohngefehr 5 Rt. kosten . . . . Gleich jetzo verlangt mein No- his 1777 catalogue, sold copies at 25 Marks. At a conversion rate of three
tenschreiber Arbeit. Ich habe ihm eine richtige Copie meiner Paßion Hamburg Marks to one Reichsthaler, this also amounts to copying
zum Abschreiben gegeben, weil ich halb u. halb einen Abnehmer, außer costs of eight (vs. Bach’s five) Reichsthaler.
Ihnen, dazu habe. Sie sind gar nicht gebunden. Ich will Ihnen entweder 22. CPEB-Letters, 78; CPEB-Briefe, 1:491: “Das Stück ist deutsch, der
diese Copie geben, oder mein Original, we es wieder zu Hause ist, zum Liebhaber sind wenig, der Kenner noch weniger u. die meisten, welche
Copiren leihen.” es brauchen können, schreiben sichs von einander ab.”

[ xv ]
Hamburg from one of these “cc” manuscripts (see sources Nagel’s two-manuscript hypothesis is supported by
B 3, B 4, D 3, D 14, D 29, D 33, and the related score D 2 Bach’s 1774 letter to Forkel quoted above, in which the
in the critical report).23 composer writes of his ability to have the Passions-Cantate
On the question of which scores were copied outside duplicated despite the absence of his personal copy, a feat
Hamburg directly from a score belonging to Bach as de- requiring access to two updated scores of the work. Thus,
scribed so clearly in the Forkel letter quoted above, spe- the evidence suggests Bach devised a two-manuscript sys-
cific instances cannot be cited with certainty. But based on tem that enabled him to efficiently disseminate his Passi-
its variants, the score copied by Carl Friedrich Christian ons-Cantate: one copy could be loaned out, whereas the
Fasch, Bach’s colleague in Berlin (D-B, SA 20; source D 9), other remained in Hamburg for making further copies.
comes under strong suspicion. Bach likely provided a printed libretto to parties who
More is known about which sources derive from previ- bought or borrowed a manuscript score of his Passions-
ously disseminated materials. All extant sets of perform- Cantate. The evidence for this lies in the remarkable simi-
ing parts fall into this category.24 So, too, do the numerous larities between extant librettos with regard to content
scores and performing parts shown by Nagel as having de- and layout, an agreement unachievable by merely extract-
rived from the score gifted to Anna Amalia (source B 2).25 ing the text from a musical source.28 That printed librettos
Some sources stem from the group of “cc” manuscripts or appear to have circulated alongside manuscript scores of
materials related to these (e.g., D 4, D 17, D 19, D 26, and Wq 233 accords with how Bach distributed copies of Die
D 29). Yet another family of sources (D 1, D 24, and D 35) Israeliten when that work was printed in 1775. For that ora-
originated in Vienna, copied directly or indirectly from the torio, Bach informed his publisher that “textbooks will be
score in Michel’s hand (source B 1).26 printed with each copy and given for free” and had these
Another significant aspect of the Passions-Cantate’s dis- produced in Hamburg (see CPEB:CW, IV/1, xv). Such
semination beyond the aforementioned methods concerns a distributed libretto in the case of the Passions-Cantate
the specific manuscript or manuscripts in Bach’s posses- likely would have resembled the booklet previously ap-
sion used for making copies in or outside of Hamburg. pended to P 337 (now D-B, Mus. T 1924). The wording
Nagel has identified a collection of variants in the sources on its title page, “PaßionsCantate in Musik gesetzt von
of Wq 233 treated without apparent preference by Bach, Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach,” turns up in similar or identi-
which are wholly unconnected to any recognizable chro- cal form in several other extant librettos (both printed and
nology suggestive of revision phases and for which no evi- handwritten) and in some musical sources.29
dence exists of corrections in Bach’s house copy. Based on
her finding that the sources reliably transmitted either one
Compositional Revisions
or the other set of these variant readings, she hypothesized
the existence of two distinct scores in Bach’s possession Abundant autograph entries plainly visible in Bach’s extant
that had served as models. One was the house copy (source house copy of his Passions-Cantate (source A) attest to the
A); the other has not survived, as it cannot be identified continued attention that the composer gave to this work,
among the extant sources (Nagel’s source α). Nagel sup- even if most introduced changes are comparatively minor
posed this source to have been the score used for the an- in nature. Some involve the addition of dynamic markings
nual Hamburg performances of Wq 233.27 and performance indications or the correction of errors.
Others affect the speech rhythm in the recitatives and ari-
osos—genres that lend themselves to alteration without
23. See also Nagel, 62 and 71–73.
necessitating larger structural changes. There are also com-
24. The original Hamburg performing parts were lost, although two
fragments for Bach’s arrangement for soprano and tenor of duet no. 13 positional changes in the broader sense.30
do survive (see “Music Sources” below and the appendix). On the ex- The most substantial change was the replacement of the
tant performing materials, see D 7 (made from B 2 or lost performing original no. 6c, an arioso on “O Petrus, folge nicht!” with a
parts copied from that score), D 8, D 14, D 18, D 19, D 22, D 23 (second
movement only), and D 29 in the critical report.
25. See filiation and stemmata in Nagel, 70–71 and the accompany- 28. See Hill, “Passion Settings,” 195–96.
ing source descriptions. The extant sources in question are D 5–D 8, 29. See BR-CPEB, 2:90–91, librettos nos. 2, 13–15, 17, 20, and 21.
D 21–D 23, D 25, and D 27. Musical sources include the score written by Johann Jakob Heinrich
26. D 1 was copied from B 1, not A (pace Nagel, 123). Westphal (D 4) and parts in Johann Christoph Kühnau’s hand (D 7).
27. See Nagel, 65–69. 30. See Nagel, 45–47.

[ xvi ]
more compelling accompanied recitative on the same text. poses further differentiation of her correction phases, she
Bach’s dissatisfaction with the original arioso is perhaps acknowledges the difficulty of establishing these based on
foreshadowed in his heavy revision of its opening mea- the small number of changes contained in some sources, as
sures when fashioning the Passions-Cantate from his 1769 well as the challenge of source contamination. Some of the
Passion (D-B, SA 5155, p. 9 [see plate 7]; source Q 2). An sources unavailable to or unidentified by Nagel can be cat-
autograph copy of this new movement was pinned to the egorized according to her schema, lending further weight
appropriate page of his house copy, such that copies made to her conclusions (see source descriptions in BR-CPEB,
thereafter integrated this revision.31 At least one individual 2:80–90).
who received a score from Bach with the older, arioso ver- Dating the revision phases of Wq 233 continues to
sion of “O Petrus” received an update by mail in the form of prove challenging, even if some variants can be placed in
an autograph sheet with the new accompanied recitative.32 a relative chronology with reasonable certainty. Bach must
The fact that the replacement movement is appended to have produced the autograph correction page appended to
scores predating this change implies that Bach circulated source B 2 before July 1773, as its revisions are included in
such sheets to others as well.33 performing parts bearing this date. The replacement move-
Bach carried out his revisions to Wq 233 in multiple ment on “O Petrus” apparently postdates the distribution
stages. One of the earliest sets of compositional changes, if of the correction page from B 2 as well as the first batch
not the earliest, is evident in an autograph correction page of revisions in the three major phases outlined above.
containing a dozen changes that was appended to source Nagel concluded, on the basis of her analysis of Bach’s
B 2 (see critical report). The inscription (possibly in the hand, that his Passions-Cantate revisions predate the late
hand of C. F. C. Fasch) on the back of this sheet reads period (1780s) when his writing exhibits a characteristic
“Changes to the Passion Oratorio, which E. Bach requests shakiness.36
be made in all copies of the work.” (Änderungen, in dem Bach’s continued modification and refinement of
Paßions Oratorio, welche der E. Bach in allen Abschriften Wq 233 is consistent with his modus operandi for repeat-
des Werkes zu machen bittet.) Source B 2 had these cor- edly revising his compositions, even over extended peri-
rections entered into it, as did most other early scores.34 In ods.37 As to the impetus for Bach to make changes, the
the absence of further examples of such sheets, the degree annual performances in Hamburg provided several op-
to which these early refinements were disseminated by portunities.38 Beyond this, it is possible that Bach’s careful
Bach remains unknown. proofreading of outgoing copies prompted some revisions,
Apart from the changes specified in the correction page based on correspondences between certain autograph cor-
described above, Nagel estimates that Wq 233 underwent rections in sources B 1 and B 3 to those in source A.
three to six revision phases, based on her groupings of se- Another revision—perhaps more an accommodation—
lect variants.35 A significant set of comparatively early cor- involved the virtuosic soprano duet “Muster der Geduld
rections affected simple recitatives for the most part. Other und Liebe” (no. 13). Steinfeld’s reduction of Wq 233 for
alterations largely impacted movements clustered toward keyboard and voices, published after Bach’s death (source
the end of the work. A final phase introduced a small E), includes a new composition on these words, said by
number of changes lacking any clear categorization and one reviewer to have been by Bach (Wiermann, 344).
which appear exclusively in source A. Though Nagel pro- This optional substitute, still a duet for two sopranos, is
assumed from its shorter length and simpler execution to
have been a concession to the less-than-ideal performance
31. Nagel, 65, notes that the new movement is integrated into rather
than appended to scores copied after a certain unspecified point. The conditions in Hamburg (see appendix).39 This same move-
new movement must also have been added to source α. ment, attributed to Bach though lacking any reference to
32. The loose sheet DK-Kk, mu 6310.0232, which contains the new
no. 6c along with changes to the vocal line of the bass aria “Donnre nur”
(no. 11), had formerly been appended to the score B 3. The second copy 36. Nagel, 46–48 and 65. The few instances of Bach’s late hand in
of no. 6c appended to source A likely represents an additional copy pre- P 337 relate to singers’ names, as on pp. 6 (“H. Delver”), 87 (“Kirchner”),
pared by Bach for dissemination. and 241 (“H. Delver”).
33. Nagel, 65. C. F. C. Fasch added the new movement at the end of 37. For more on this practice, see Rachel W. Wade, “Carl Philipp
his score (source D 9). Emanuel Bach, the Restless Composer,” in Hamburg 1988, 175–88.
34. Nagel, 64. Fasch’s score (D 9) is another such case. 38. Nagel, 45.
35. Nagel, 46–47, 63–64. 39. See Clark, 74–75 and Nagel, 129.

[ xvii ]
the Passions-Cantate, appears scored for string ensemble that scores copied from the missing source agree intimately
and two flutes (but no bassoons) in a collection otherwise with the early layers of A in their content and layout. That
transmitting Bach’s chamber works (D-B, Mus. ms. Bach this lost manuscript served as the model for A or vice versa
P 367). The composer’s authorship is corroborated by are both plausible, as is the possibility that both were cop-
Johann Jakob Heinrich Westphal’s note to the entry for his ied from another, even earlier lost single source or set of
copy of Wq 233 in his thematic catalogue of Bach’s works, materials.
which indicates that he also owned a now-lost copy of the In order to create a single, complete score of the Passions-
alternative duet: “Yet another composition on the duet Cantate, Bach would have needed to transfer the relevant
found therein comprising 4 sheets in score is appended. musical material from his score of H 782. Presumably this
The late Bach wrote this second composition in a very could have occurred either through the movements in
simple manner.”40 question being copied from it or through physical transfer
of the relevant pages. Source Q 2 represents the remnants
of Bach’s score of H 782 after the removal of most pages
Music Sources containing interpolations. Based on the original pagina-
The present edition of the Passions-Cantate is based on tion of this fragmentary source, the actual physical pages
Bach’s house copy (source A). Though this manuscript detached from it could not have been integrated either
was primarily copied in the hands of three other scribes, into A in its earliest form or into Bach’s other copy of the
it includes two autograph pages and extensive autograph oratorio in its original form (i.e., the predecessor of source
corrections, as well as two appended sheets in Bach’s α, Nagel’s “Manuscript B”).41 Conceivably they could have
hand, each with the new version of “O Petrus, folge nicht!” formed the basis for a single score of Wq 233 had Bach sup-
(no. 6c). Furthermore, this source alone transmits the lat- plemented these with new portions in his hand. However,
est version of the work, except for the potentially late al- the existence of such an autograph score would seem to
ternative version of no. 13. Bach’s remark on its title page contradict Bach’s assertion on the title page of A that “no
explicitly addresses the unusual nature of the score and es- original exists of this cantata in this arrangement” in his
sentially designates it the authorized source for this work: attempt to explain why the source is not autograph but still
“NB While this score is not in the author’s hand (for no transmits the most correct version.
original exists of this cantata in this arrangement, since the Indeed, the creation of source Q 2 through Bach’s dis-
author subsequently changed many things) it is however assembly of his score of H 782 may well have postdated
as correct as possible and most certainly more correct than its use in creating a full Passions-Cantate score. Perhaps
all other copies, because the owner, namely the author, has evidence for this possibility lies in the fact that the excised
looked through it very often.” (NB diese Partitur ist zwar portions noticeably omit the opening and closing passages
nicht von der Handschrift des Autors, (denn von dieser of a number of movements subsumed into Wq 233.42 Fur-
Cantate in dieser Einrichtung existirt kein Original, weil thermore, Bach is known to have compiled numerous li-
der Autor hernach vieles geändert hat) sie ist aber so cor- turgical Passions using assembly instructions in tandem
rekt wie möglich und ganz gewiß correkter, als alle übrigen with scores of works from which the borrowed movements
Exemplare, weil sie der Besitzer, nehmlich der Autor sehr derive.43 In any event, the likely terminus ante quem for the
oft durchgesehen hat.) disassembly of Q 2 coincides with Bach’s work on his 1773
Precisely what material served as the basis from which St. Matthew Passion.
A in its earliest inception was copied cannot be determined The present edition includes Bach’s replacement setting
using the surviving sources. In all likelihood, this first ver- of no. 6c in its main musical text, in keeping with the com-
sion of A shared a close relationship to the second copy of poser’s clear intention by its physical incorporation into
Wq 233 that Bach can be presumed to have owned—the source A and its dissemination to parties in possession of
now-lost source α or its predecessor—for the single reason

41. See Hill, “Passion Settings,” 194, n. 109.

40. Cat. J. J. H. Westphal (fol. 54r): “Noch ist eine andere Compo- 42. Ibid. Bach’s markings in the opening measure of arioso no. 14 (“O
sition des darinnen befindlichen Duetts beygelegt, welche in Part. 4 Petrus, folge nicht!”) in source Q 2, specifically crossing out the first
Bogen beträgt. Der seel. Bach hat diese 2te Composition ganz leicht measure and placing a sign at the top of the next, may be evidence for
abgefaßt.” See also Leisinger/Wollny, 70. My sincere gratitude to Ulrich this possibility.
Leisinger for sharing this information. 43. Hill, “Passion Settings,” 86.

[ xviii ]
the earlier version. In contrast, the alternative version of public performances include another in that same Berlin
duet no. 13, attributed posthumously to Bach, received no church as well as in Copenhagen, Cologne, and Potsdam,
such treatment by the composer and is published in the all in 1773. The Potsdam performance, a charity concert in
appendix. the afternoon of 6 April at the Hof- und Garnisonskirche,
Four scores that Bach himself examined, as evinced by stands out for having featured the virtuosi of the royal
autograph entries in their musical texts, have been used as court and a sizable number of participating musicians—
sources for comparison (sources B 1–B 4). Moreover, these sixty instrumentalists and eighteen singers.46
sources typify different revision stages of the Passions-Can- Apparently there had been plans to perform the ora-
tate: source B 2 communicates the earliest version and was torio in Hamburg in 1773 at the church of the newly con-
thus used in the present edition to document this version; structed Spinnhaus, a charitable correctional institution.47
sources B 3 and B 4, respectively, offer two subsequent re- However, these plans fell through because of “shortness of
vision stages; and source B 1 conveys the oratorio’s penul- time and other insurmountable obstacles” (wegen kürzte
timate form (Nagel, 61). The four B sources are also rep- der Zeit und andern Nicht ab zu ändern gewesenen
resentative copies of Bach’s house copy (source A) and of Hindernissen), according to a statement made the follow-
source α.44 ing year by the director of the Spinnhaus.48 The timing
None of the original performing parts for Wq 233 used of identical newspaper pieces appearing on the cusp of
in Hamburg have survived, with one exception: a Ham- the Lenten season of 1773 requesting the establishment of
burg manuscript, now in Kraków (Poland), in the hand annual performances of Bach’s Passions-Cantate seems to
of Otto Ernst Gregorius Schieferlein (Anon. 304), Bach’s imply their author’s desire for a performance already that
main copyist active until around 1781, transmits fragments year.49 Nevertheless, it was only on 17 March 1774 that
of an arrangement for soprano and tenor of duet no. 13, in- the work finally premiered to the Hamburg public in the
cluding corrections and alterations in Bach’s hand (PL-Kj, Spinnhauskirche.50
Mus. ms. Bach P 756; see appendix). This initial public performance in Hamburg was pre-
ceded by private concerts, as documented in two contem-
porary sources. One is Charles Burney’s travel diary, in
Performance History
which he describes having heard excerpts from the work
Despite the completion of the Passions-Cantate already in during a concert on 10 October 1772 organized for him
1769 or 1770, the oratorio’s initial public and private perfor- by Ebeling and led by the composer himself.51 The second
mances can be traced only to 1772. The first such event was a source is a newspaper piece from 25 February 1773 that
pair of concerts that year at Berlin’s Dreifaltigkeitskirche in mentions Bach’s Passions-Cantate having been “repeated
which the first half of the work was presented on 29 March various times in private concerts, always to the same ac-
and the second half on 12 April (see table 2 for documented clamation” (zu verschiedenen malen in Privat-Concerten
performances in Bach’s lifetime; the annual performances immer mit gleichem Beyfall wiederhohlt ward).52
in Hamburg’s Spinnhaus and Waisenhaus churches are
listed separately below). A newspaper announcement
published ten days before the first concert billed it as “an 46. Announcements and reports of the Potsdam concert in the Ham-
entirely new Passion oratorio” (ein ganz neues Passions- burg press appeared first in HUC (2 April 1773), 3; Wiermann, 444–45.

oratorium).45 This particular wording, along with the 47. Bolin, “Spinnhaus-Passion,” 68–71. The building was dedicated
on 17 December 1772.
lack of printed librettos prior to 1772, points to that year’s
48. Quoted in Ludwig Finscher, “Bemerkungen zu den Oratorien
performance being the first in Berlin. Other notable early Carl Philipp Emanuel Bachs,” in Hamburg 1988, 314.
49. Wiermann, 382–83; Easter Sunday fell on 11 April in 1773.
44. See discussion of “layers” (Schichten) in Nagel, 65–69. Source A 50. Announcements and reports of the performance in the Hamburg
served as the model for source B 1, whereas sources B 3 and B 4 were press appeared first in HUC (4 February 1774), 4; Wiermann, 386–88.
copied from Nagel’s source α or its earlier form, “Manuscript B.” The See also the invoice transcribed below and in CPEB-Briefe, 1:371–72.
relationship between A and B 2 is unclear; Nagel, 67 and 76, suggests This first performance followed what Clark calls “a more formal request
the latter may have served as the model for the former. to perform the cantata in the Spinnhaus church” in a document dated
26 January 1774 (D-Ha, Senatarchiv Cl VII, Lit Hc, No 13, fasc. 2); see
45. Berlinische privilegirte Zeitung (19 March 1772); Christoph Clark, 46–47 and 340.
Henzel, “Das Konzertleben der preußischen Hauptstadt 1740–1786 im
Spiegel der Berliner Presse (Teil 1),” JbSIM (2004): 216–91, esp. 281. 51. Burney 1775, 254–55.
Easter Sunday fell on 19 April that year. 52. Wiermann, 382.

[ xix ]
 table 2. documented performances of wq 233 in bach’s lifetime
Date Place Remarks

29 March 1772 (part I); Berlin Performance at Dreifaltigkeitskirche (Henzel, “Das Konzertleben (Teil 1),” 281);
12 April 1772 (part II) libretto: possibly BR-CPEB, 2:90, no. 3; associated source possibly D 8 (Nagel, 86)
10 October 1772 Hamburg Excerpts performed at private concert for Charles Burney, organized by Ebeling and
led by Bach (Burney 1775, 254–55)
Before 25 February 1773 Hamburg Excerpts or entire work presented at multiple private concerts (Wiermann, 382–83)
14 March 1773 (part I); Berlin Likely performed at Dreifaltigkeitskirche (Henzel, “Das Konzertleben (Teil 1),” 283);
28 March 1773 (part II) libretto: possibly BR-CPEB, 2:90, no. 4; associated source possibly D 8 (Nagel, 86)
4 March 1773 Cologne Performance for private concert series “in der musikalischen Akademie” (Nagel, 42);
libretto: BR-CPEB, 2:91, no. 14
6 April 1773 Potsdam Charity performance at the Hof- und Garnisons-Kirche (Wiermann, 444–46);
associated source possibly D 9
13 March 1773 et al. Copenhagen Performance on 13 March in Braueramthaus (Reichs Post-Reuter, 17 March 1773);
seven performances in the same year directed by Schiørring, according to draft of
letter to Bach by Gerstenberg (CPEB-Briefe, 1:321); relationship between these
groups of performances is unknown
30 March 1774 Berlin Performance at St. Petri by members of the “Concert der Music-Liebhaber” (Henzel,
“Das Konzertleben (Teil 1),” 286); libretto: BR-CPEB, 2:90, no. 5; J. F. Reichardt,
Briefe, 111–24; associated source possibly D 7 or its suspected lost predecessor (Nagel,
82–83), or D 8 (Nagel, 41 and 86); location sometimes erroneously given as St. Petri
in Hamburg (see Hill, “Passion Settings,” 179, n. 63)
4 April 1774 Riga Charity performance (Rigaische Anzeigen, 1774, 15. Stück)
1774 Halberstadt Libretto: BR-CPEB, 2:91, no. 12
1775 Potsdam Likely performed at St. Nicolai; associated source: D 27 (Nagel, 88–91)
1776 or before Ludwigslust (Schwerin) Performance in Hofkapelle; associated source: D 29 (Nagel, 42, 97–100)
21 March 1776 Cologne Performance directed by Capellmeister Schmittbaur, possibly for concert series “in
der Musikalischen Akademie” (Nagel, 42)
1 April 1776 Danzig Performed by “einigen Liebhabern der Tonkunst”; libretto: BR-CPEB, 2:91, no. 15
(Nagel, 43)
26 March 1777 Hamburg Concert at Konzertsaal auf dem Kamp (Wiermann, 451)
25 March 1778 Berlin Performance at Dreifaltigkeitskirche (Henzel, “Das Konzertleben (Teil 2),” 150);
associated source evidently D 7 (Nagel, 80–83)
1779 Ludwigslust (Schwerin) Performance in Hofkapelle; libretto: BR-CPEB, 2:91, no. 15; associated source: D 29
(Nagel, 42, 97–100)
29 March 1781 Berlin Performance in the Dreifaltigkeitskirche under Kühnau (Henzel, “Das Konzertleben
(Teil 2),” 165); associated source evidently D 7 (Nagel, 80–83)
1781; 1787 Potsdam Performances at St. Nicolai; associated source: D 27 (Nagel, 88–91)
21 March 1788 Königsberg Performance likely (Nagel, 44)

Hamburg unsurprisingly lays claim to the richest per- 1779, 2 March 1780, 22 March 1781, 14 March 1782, 3 April
formance history for the Passions-Cantate of any location, 1783, 18 March 1784, and 10 March 1785. After the hiatus
notwithstanding the delay of its initial public performance. in 1786, the locale for the performances of 14 March 1787,
After the oratorio’s successful premiere there in 1774, yearly 13 February 1788, and 18 March 1789 was switched to the
performances—with a second one in 1777 due to a concert Waisenhauskirche (the chapel of Hamburg’s orphanage).53
in the Konzertsaal auf dem Kamp—continued through the The Passions-Cantate’s performance history in Ham-
year following Bach’s death, with the apparent exception of burg materialized within a rich and longstanding tradition
1786. The performances at the Spinnhauskirche took place of public concerts at secondary churches and concert halls
on 17 March 1774 (with a rehearsal on 16 March), 23 March
1775, 14 March 1776, 6 March 1777, 12 March 1778, 4 March 53. Wiermann, 423–32.

[ xx ]
in that city. The establishment of regular performances The Passions-Cantate’s nearly uninterrupted fifteen-year
in Hamburg had been contingent upon finding a new history of performances in Hamburg remains unparal-
and dedicated venue. Local custom still forbade the per- leled elsewhere, but documented performances beyond
formance of Passion oratorios in the five main churches Hamburg still span an impressive chronological range
even as similar restrictions in other cities had been lifted in (1772 through 1814) and geographic spread, reaching from
keeping with contemporary thought and taste.54 Thus the northern and central Germany as far north as Copenhagen
construction of a new secondary church in the early 1770s, and as far east as Königsberg. Outside Hamburg, the work
a rebuilt and expanded chapel for the Spinnhaus, came at was most frequently heard in Berlin and Potsdam, with
an opportune time for Hamburg admirers of Bach’s Pas- no fewer than nine performances occurring there between
sions-Cantate. References to a longstanding tradition of 1772 and 1787.58 Carl Friedrich Zelter’s revival of the work
performing Telemann’s most beloved Passion oratorio in for his Berlin Sing-Akademie in 1814 represents the final
other secondary churches figured prominently in a request, documented performance of the work from this era.59
published in the Hamburg press in 1773, that the director The oratorio saw scattered performances elsewhere,
of the Spinnhaus consider establishing a parallel tradition including Cologne (1773 and 1776), Copenhagen (1773),
with Bach’s Passion oratorio: Halberstadt (1774), Riga (1774),60 Danzig (1776, 1792, and
1806), Ludwigslust near Schwerin (1776 and 1779), Colditz
Since the friends of the [oratorio] Seliges Erwägen by the late
(after 1785),61 Göttingen (1789 and perhaps also 1780),62
Capellmeister Mr. Telemann, who is seen in Hamburg as be-
ing most deserving, do not lack the repeated opportunity to Königsberg (1788), Braunschweig (1792),63 and Herrnhut
hear [this work] annually in various churches, this lifts from (date or dates unknown).64 Other sources point to par-
us the fear that our request will not be fulfilled for this rea- tial or whole performances of unknown date and location
son and even gives our hope greater basis that a positive re- beyond those otherwise attested.65 Thus, judged by the
action will be guaranteed on the part of the directors of the
Spinnhaus.55 58. Nagel, 40–45, 88, and 91; Henzel, “Das Konzertleben (Teil 1),”
281–86; and Henzel, “Das Konzertleben der preußischen Hauptstadt
Bach, in turn, came to associate Wq 233 with its initial 1740–1786 im Spiegel der Berliner Presse (Teil 2), JbSIM (2005): 139–
242, esp. 150 and 165. Beyond the performances noted in table 2, one
Hamburg venue, referring to it as his “Spinnhaus Passion” can be traced to Potsdam’s St. Nicolai church in 1797 (Nagel, 88–91).
in the invoice for the performance on 23 March 1775.56 The total number of performances in the area of Berlin and Potsdam
Why performances at the Spinnhaus ceased after 1785 increases if certain sources (D 7, specifically the batch of parts dating
to 1773; D 8; D 9; or librettos nos. 3 and 4 listed in BR-CPEB, 2:90)
and the venue shifted to the Waisenhaus in 1787 remains
are not associated with any Berlin concert described in table 2, or if
unknown. The performances at both churches took place they served for more performances than the ones described there. D 8
in the framework of religious services, featuring a ser- specifically shows signs of multiple uses (see description in Nagel, 85
mon partway through (possibly after no. 11, “Donnre nur and the critical report).
ein Wort der Macht”), and for these a purchased libretto 59. Zelter’s concert is attested by the performing parts in D 10; see
Nagel, 41–42.
served as the admission ticket.57
60. According to the Rigaische Anzeigen (1774, 15. Stück), 98, the per-
formance took place on 4 April 1774 for the benefit of the poor. See
54. See Nagel, 37 and 53, and Howard E. Smither, A History of the
Zane Gailíte, “Johann Gottfried Müthel, die Bach-Familie und die
Oratorio, vol. 3, The Oratorio in the Classical Era (Chapel Hill: University
‘Wahre Art, das Clavier zu spielen’ in Riga,” in Frankfurt/Oder 1998b,
of North Carolina Press, 1987), 347–55.
480–89, esp. 485.
55. HUC (26 February 1773), 3–4: “Da den Freunden des seligen
61. BR-CPEB, 2:91, libretto no. 10 (p. 91); Nagel, 43 and 112.
Erwägens des verstorbnen um Hamburg so verdienten Herrn Capell-
meister Telemanns die Gelegenheit es zu wiederhohltenmalen in 62. The libretto for the 1789 performance is BR-CPEB, 2:91, no. 11.
verschiedenen Kirchen jährlich zu hören nicht fehlt; so hebt dies die Nagel, 232, erroneously dates this libretto to 1780; the performance date
Furcht unser Bitten dieserwegen nicht erfüllt zu sehen, und giebt unsrer of 1778 on p. 43 is unsubstantiated. A Göttingen performance in 1780
Hofnung desto stärkere Gründe, uns eine gütige Aufnahme derselben in connection with Forkel’s establishment the previous year of an “aka-
von Seiten der Herren Vorsteher des Spinnhauses zu versprechen.” demisches Winter-Concert” appears likely given the express mention of
Wiermann, 383. Bach’s Passions-Cantate in that announcement; Nagel, 43 and 109. The
associated score and performing parts for one or both concerts would
56. Bolin, “Spinnhaus-Passion,” 71, n. 23. The invoice is transcribed
be D 19 from Forkel’s collection.
below and in CPEB-Briefe, 1:494.
63. BR-CPEB, 2:91, libretto no. 6; see Nagel, 43 for a likely connec-
57. Nagel, 36; Hill, “Passion Settings,” 185–86. No break between
tion to Eschenburg, who had lived in Braunschweig since 1767.
parts I and II is indicated in OT, but the Berlin librettos from 1773 and
1774 (BR-CPEB, 2:90, nos. 4 and 5) give no. 11 at the end of part I and 64. Sources D 22 and D 23; Nagel, 43 and 95–97.
beginning of part II . 65. See libretto no. 16 in BR-CPEB, 2:91, currently housed in

[ xxi ]
measures of performance frequency and geographic dis- given to each category of participating musician, includ-
tribution, Wq 233 achieved a considerable measure of suc- ing singers, town musicians and Expectanten (next in line
cess consistent with the title given to it by Bach’s widow, to become town musicians), Rollbrüder (a brotherhood of
Johanna Maria, in a letter to Sara Levy dated 5 Septem- musicians who were next in the hierarchy), and choirboys,
ber 1789, “the well-known Passion Cantata” (Die bekannte as well as money given to select individuals including the
Passions Cantate).66 choir’s director, a calcant to assist the organist, and others
whose work supported the performance.
Bach submitted a somewhat more detailed invoice for
Aspects of Performance Practice the performance on 23 March 1775:68
As no Hamburg performing parts for the Passions-Cantate
Als 1775 die Spinnhauß Passion gemacht wurde,
have survived save for two fragmentary exceptions dis-
so hielt ich einige Tage vorher beÿ mir eine
cussed below, an examination of the forces that took part Probe mit beÿnahe allen Musicis u. gab
in performances there relies on alternate sources, namely ihnen nachher Butterbrod etc. und Wein und
three invoices corresponding to public performances of the Kuchen.
work in Hamburg. For the performance on 17 March 1774, An Gelde kriegten
Bach submitted a summary receipt of his costs dated 23 8 Sänger 16 Mk
March 1774:67 8 R. Mus. 16 —
H. Lüders 8 — pro studio et labore
Sr. HochEdelgeb. der Herr Stoppel, Provi- — Wanscher 2 —   u. den Flügel.
sor am Spinnhause, zahlten für die zweymalige 3 Waldhörner
Aufführung der verlangten Passions-Cantate u. Pauken 6
in der Probe, d. 16ten März, u. bey dem Gottesdien- 2 Hoboisten 3
ste, d. 17ten ejusdem a.c. Neumann, Hoppe
150 Mark 8 Schillinge Martens, Böhme 6
1 Fagott 1—8
Ueber den richtigen Empfang dieses
Christian 1
Geldes quittiert gebührend
H. Holland 2
C. P. E. Bach,
— Knoph. 1
Hamburg, d. 23ten März Director.
H. Königslöwe 1—8
1774.
_______
Ward bezahlt, jeder Sänger bekam 4 Mk, Raths- 64 Mk. 8 ß
musices u. Expectant auch 4 Mk, Rollbruder 3 Mk,
der Calc. 2 Mk, Knoph 1 Mk, Chorkn. 1 Mk, The performing forces for 1775 consisted of eight sing-
Copialien 10 Mk, Director 12 Mk, H. Lüders ers, eight town musicians, three horn players, a timpanist,
pro studio et labore a part 6 Mk, H. two oboists, a bassoonist, six additional musicians listed by
Wreden a part 5 Mk. Ich versprach dabeÿ künftig name but not by instrument, and the choirboys’ director. A
die Aufführung mit 25 R. zu bestreiten, weil keine Probe harpsichord and instrument mover are again listed, but an
mehr nöthig seÿ. organ is not specified. The size of the 1775 ensemble was far
exceeded by that of the 1773 Potsdam performance noted
Bach’s list of costs associated with the performance of above, the periodical announcements for which boasted a
1774 does not enumerate how many of each type of per- total of sixty instrumentalists and eighteen vocalists.
former took part, but rather records a lump sum associ- The most detailed list of Bach’s performance forces for
ated with the performance along with the total payment the Passions-Cantate is given in the following undated in-
voice:69

Nuremberg, as well as sources D 14, D 28, D 30, D 36, and D 37; the 68. Rechnungsbuch, p. 159; transcribed in CPEB-Briefe, 1:494.
exact use(s) of sources D 17 and D 18 remain unknown, but these may
have served for performances in Colditz and Halberstadt. 69. Rechnungsbuch, p. 152; transcribed (partly incorrectly) in CPEB-
Briefe, 1:361–62. The likely date of the invoice is not 1774 (as given in
66. CPEB-Briefe, 2:1311. CPEB-Briefe, 1:362) but c. 1780; see Sanders, 148. See also Sanders,
67. D-Ha, 462 (Rechnungsbuch der Kirchenmusiken), p. 153; tran- 105–7 and the individual biographies in Sanders, 148–59, and Neu-
scribed in CPEB-Briefe, 1:371–72. bacher, 411–64.

[ xxii ]
 Oratorium, in der Spinhaußkirche The invoice also mentions payments to choirboys and to
von H. Cap. Bach Bach himself as director. Payments for a “Calcant” and for
a “Flügel” indicate that both an organ and a harpsichord
Mr. Holland 2 Mk
were used in this performance.
— Illert 2 Mk
Singers’ names added by Bach in A (see critical report,
Hofman 2 Mk
Michel 2 —
table 1) include longtime members of his vocal ensemble
Hartman 2 — like Friedrich Martin Illert, Johann Andreas Hoffmann,
Schierferlein 2 — Michel, and Peter Nicolaus Friedrich Delver, alongside fig-
Delver u. Seidel 2 — ures active for a shorter period of Bach’s Hamburg tenure,
Lau 2 — including Hardenack Otto Conrad Zinck, Carl Rudolph
Zwencke 2 — Wreden, Kirchner, Hartmann, Rauschelbach, and Ebe-
— Buckhofer 2 — ling. This list is complemented by names appearing only
6. Violin | Hartman Sen 2 — in the undated invoice: Holland, Otto Ernst Gregorius
| Hartman jun 2 — Schieferlein, Johann Matthias Seidel, Johann Christian
| Lüders - für Spielen, Besorgung und den Flügel 6 — Lau, and Christian Friedrich Gottlieb Schwencke.
| Königslow 2 — Given the documented weaknesses in this group of
— Ramcke 1 Mk 8
singers, particularly among the higher voices, it seems pos-
2 Bratschen — Hoppe 2 Mk
sible if not probable that the arrangement of the virtuosic
— Schröder 1—8
Violon Tanck 2 —
duet no. 13 for soprano and tenor transmitted in the frag-
2. Violonc. — Cario 2 — mentary performing parts (P 756) relates to this deficit.70
— Hartman 1—8 Having apparently outlived their usefulness, these parts
2 Flöten —Menges 2 — were later pruned for use of the blank staves on their ver-
—N N. 1—8 sos and are thus missing part of their original content.
2. Oboen Bolandt u Bolandt jun. 3— This loss notwithstanding, the surviving portions suffice
2. Bassons —Zwencke 2 — to reveal a version of the duet that achieved a significant
— N. N 1—8 reduction in the vocal ranges of both solo parts, as well as
3. Hörner 4 — 8 a simplification of what becomes the tenor part through
Paucken N. N. 1—8 voice exchange.71 As noted above, deficiencies in Bach’s vo-
Voigt zu stien 1— cal ensemble may have similarly motivated his later com-
Vorsänger 1—
position of a decidedly simplified aria for two sopranos on
Calcant 1—
this same text (see appendix).
NB Steincke 1—
________ Whereas in Hamburg Bach took steps toward lessening
61 Mk [8] the burden on the singers responsible for this duet, one
11 Rollbrüder sind dabeÿ nöthig Sua 56 Mk 8 [ß.] Berlin source (D 7) provided the opportunity for these
Für die Direct. 13 Mk 8 ß. vocalists to display their talent in the form of cadenzas
________ appearing in the performing parts for solo voices.72 These
u. 62 Mk. empfangen 75 Mk parts, written out by Kühnau and dated 1773, appear to be
NB Blos diese Rechnung, ohne Specification, wird in associated with an early performance of Wq 233 in Berlin.
einer Qvittung an den Herrn Provisor geschikt. Though not directly connected to Bach, they seem to have
been copied from source B 2 or from a set of parts derived
According to this invoice, there were twenty-one in- from it (see entry for 30 March 1774 in table 2 and corre-
strumentalists: ten town musicians and Expectanten, and sponding citations in Nagel).
eleven Rollbrüder. Possibly the continuo player was not in-
cluded in this number. In contrast to most of Bach’s Ham-
70. On the weaknesses of Bach’s vocal ensemble and his efforts to
burg church music, flutes and oboes were played by two
handle this issue, see Hill, “Passion Settings,” 106–13.
pairs of players instead of one.
71. Nagel, 128.
The instrumentalists and singers are listed by name in
72. See the source description in Nagel, 80–83. The cadenzas are
the invoice. The order of the singers is likely, as in other transcribed in Nagel, 246 (Anhang IV). Source D 26 also transmits
cases, according to voice part, beginning with the basses. cadenzas for both voices in duet no. 13.

[ xxiii ]
 of Steinfeld’s keyboard reduction, where the author urges:
Reception
“But one must hear this music particularly as it once was
Acclaim for Wq 233 was plentiful and varied. The first presented in Berlin after ten rehearsals by a Mara and
documented praise comes from Burney, who described the the best musicians.”76 These last two sources, considered
success of Bach’s compositional techniques and compared together, suggest that at least one Berlin or Potsdam per-
the Passions-Cantate to Handel’s most famous oratorio, formance was spectacular enough to have created a lasting
after hearing the former performed privately in Hamburg impression on the public consciousness.
on 10 October 1772: In 1774, Johann Friedrich Reichardt attended a perfor-
In the evening, M. Ebeling was so kind as to collect together mance of Bach’s Passion oratorio at St. Petri in Berlin. He
all the Hamburg performers and lovers of music, he could described the deep impression this experience left on him
muster, in order to treat me with a concert; and M. Bach was and lauded Bach as a composer in great length and detail:
there to preside. . . . M. Bach has set to music, a Passione, in the
In St. Peter’s church . . . a Passion by him [Bach] was per-
German language, and several parts of this admirable com-
formed, whose character was one of originality, fittingly strong
position were performed this evening. I was particularly de-
and novel expression, sustained strength, and passionate fire.
lighted with a chorus in it, which for modulation, contrivance,
One recognizes Bach’s original spirit in all his works. . . . No-
and effects, was at least equal to any one of the best chorusses
where, however, has his inexhaustible spirit unfolded itself as
in Handel’s immortal Messiah. A pathetic air, upon the sub-
much as here. In every recitative, in every aria, in every chorus
ject of St. Peter’s weeping, when he heard the cock crow, was
is novelty and invention, in the harmony as in the melody.
so truly pathetic as to make almost every hearer accompany
And nothing ignoble anywhere. Everything—save for but
the saint in his tears.73
one fast aria, whose playful wit does not really recommend
The musical preferences of Berlin audiences in gen- itself to the church—is noble, great, and in the most sublime
eral and those of the Prussian nobility in particular were sacred style; and everything is his own. . . . The expression in
regarded throughout the German-speaking region as this masterful Passion was most of the time so fitting and
so strong, and at the same time novel, that this can be taken
exemplary. Consequently their reception of the Passions-
as special and unmistakeable proof for the original genius of
Cantate played an especially significant role in helping es-
Bach. . . . I cannot describe to you in words the passionate fire
tablish Bach’s reputation as a composer of oratorios. Sev-
that burns throughout this work; I was at times heated to a
eral prose sources attest to the importance of the initial rage; and the expression of pain and mourning was just as
performances in Berlin and Potsdam. A series of reviews passionate and strong . . . a richness of new, great and sublime
appearing in the Hamburg press in 1774, concerning the characteristics, and you would find in it modulations that
Potsdam charity concert a year prior, make particular men- would perhaps be found in no other piece of music.77
tion that Frederick II accepted a libretto for the Passions-
Cantate offered to him—a gesture that was a high honor, Only two written sources exist with details of the re-
considering the agnostic king’s apathy towards music with ception of Wq 233 outside of Berlin and Hamburg. One
religious themes.74 In a draft of a letter by Gerstenberg to is Gerstenberg’s description of a 1773 performance in
Bach dating to September 1773, the poet, in his discussion Copenhagen, where portions of the oratorio enjoyed a
of the work’s success in Copenhagen, opines that Berlin
musicians could not have done better, even with thirty re-
hearsals.75 A similar description appears in a 1789 review 76. HNZ (18 November 1789), 3: “Doch man muß diese Musik
hören, vornehmlich so, wie sie einst in Berlin nach zehn Proben von
einer Mara und den besten Musikern vorgetragen wurde.”; Wiermann,
346. The year of this performance is not specified. The phrase “von einer
73. Burney 1775, 254–55. The “pathetic air” is no. 7, “Wende dich zu Mara” refers to the famous virtuoso soprano Gertrud Elisabeth Mara.
meinem Schmerze,” while the unnamed chorus is specified in a footnote She fell out of Frederick II’s favor in the late 1770s, ultimately fleeing
to the German edition of Burney’s travel diary as being no. 2, “Fürwahr, Berlin in 1780. See Arnold Niggli, Gertrud Elisabeth Mara: eine deutsche
er trug unsre Krankheit.” See Carl Burney’s der Musik Doctors Tagebuch Künstlerin des 18. Jahrhunderts (Leipzig, 1881).
seiner musikalischen Reisen, vol. 3, Durch Böhmen, Sachsen, Brandenburg,
77. Briefe eines aufmerksamen Reisenden die Musik betreffend, part 1
Hamburg und Holland (Hamburg, 1773), 312.
(Frankfurt and Leipzig, 1774), 111–12, 121, and 124: “Man führte . . . in
74. For the original reviews, see Wiermann, 444–45. On Frederick II’s der Petri Kirche eine Paßion von ihm auf, deren Charakter Origina-
attitude toward sacred music, see Lölkes, Der Tod Jesu, 54, and Ingeborg lität, passender starker und neuer Ausdruck, anhaltende Stärke und
König, Studien zum Libretto des Tod Jesu von Karl Wilhelm Ramler und heftiges Feuer war. Man erkennt Bachs Original-Geist an allen seinen
Karl Heinrich Graun (Munich: Musikverlag Katzbichler, 1972), 44. Werken . . . . Nirgend aber hat sich sein unerschöpflicher Geist so sehr
75. CPEB-Briefe, 1:321. ausgebreitet, als hier. In jedem Recitativ, in jeder Arie, in jedem Chor ist

[ xxiv ]
“sevenfold repetition” (siebenmahligen Wiederholung).78 The Passions-Cantate’s second and final review pub-
Six years later, Forkel in Göttingen lauded the work as lished by the Hamburg press during Bach’s lifetime ap-
one of those that “has already received general acclamation peared in 1775:
and is famously well-known” (schon allgemeinen Beyfall
This afternoon the well-known Passion Cantata set to music
erhalten haben und mit Ruhm bekannt sind).79
by our great Bach was performed with general acclaim in the
Laud for the work in the Hamburg press begins with local Spinnhaus church before a large gathering of people,
the aforementioned inquiry from 1773 requesting the es- and at the same time the wish of all true connoisseurs of
tablishment of an annual performance tradition in the music was renewed to have the frequent opportunity to hear
Spinnhauskirche. Two newspaper pieces from the follow- such a masterpiece in which new beauty is discovered during
ing year, announcing the Passions-Cantate’s Hamburg pre- each repeated performance.82
miere, note the public’s anticipation (“the requested and
splendid Passion Cantata composed by our Capellmeister Even the press announcements publicizing the oratorio’s
Bach with particular fame”).80 Each of the three reviews annual Hamburg performances invariably refer to the au-
appearing in the wake of this 1774 performance reserves dience’s positive reaction to the work or term it “the well-
even more specific praise for the work, as in a piece pub- liked Passion Cantata” (die beliebte Paßions-Cantate).83
lished one day after the Hamburg public premiere, where That a favorable public reaction to Wq 233 in Hamburg
the musicians of the royal court appear as arbiters of musi- continued through the 1780s is attested by the publication
cal taste: in 1789 of Steinfeld’s reduction for keyboard and voices.
The two reviews of this arrangement appearing in the
Today the . . . Passion Cantata of our Capellmeister Bach . . .
Hamburg press lavish praise both on the composer him-
was performed with the broad acclaim of a large group of
listeners. . . . It must be pleasant to all admirers of the musical self and his “Meisterstück.” Of Bach’s Passion oratorio, the
art to see this Passion continuously preserved for our city, first review’s author—likely Ebeling himself—remarked:
in praise of which one cannot say anything better than that This music [belongs] to those works . . . which will persist and
it was composed by a Bach, and which the famous virtuosi have esteem and acclamation when a large part of the current
of the Royal Prussian Chapel—as decisive connoisseurs— modern racket will long have been forgotten. Bach made him-
chose above [other Passions] and performed in Potsdam self immortal through this [work], just as through his Heilig
during Holy Week of the previous year for the benefit of the [Wq 217], his Israeliten [Wq 238], his Easter and Ascension
poor.81 music [Wq 240], his compositions for keyboard, etc. etc.”84

The second review brims equally with admiration of

Erfindung und Neuheit, sowohl in der Harmonie als im Gesange. Und Bach and his oratorio. Yet unlike the first appraisal, it in-
nichts unedles in allem. Es ist alles—bis auf eine geschwinde Arie, deren
cludes a negative critique of Bach’s text setting in certain
spielender Witz sich wohl nicht recht zur Kirche schicken möchte—ist
alles edel, groß, und im erhabensten Kirchenstile; und alles ihm eigen. . . . movements, deeming it inelegantly fragmented:
Der Ausdruck in dieser meisterhaften Paßion war die mehreste Zeit
so passend und so stark, und dabey neu, daß dieses als ein besonderer
und untrüglicher Beweis für das Originalgenie des Herrn Bachs gelten großen Menge von Zuhörern aufgeführt. . . . Es muß allen Verehrern der
kann. . . . Das heftige Feuer, so durch das Werk flammt, kann ich Ihnen Tonkunst angenehm seyn, diese Paßions-Musik unserer Stadt bestän-
gar nicht mit Worten beschreiben; Ich wurde zuweilen bis zur Wuth dig erhalten zu sehen, zu deren Lobe man nichts bessers sagen kann,
erhitzt; und der Ausdruck des Schmerzes und der Klage war eben so als daß sie von einem Bach componirt ist, und daß die berühmten Vir-
heftig und stark . . . einen Reichthum an neuen, grossen und erhabe- tuosen der Königl. Preußischen Kapelle, als entscheidende Kenner, sie
nen Zügen, und Modulationen würden Sie darinn finden, der vielleicht vor andern gewählt, und im vorigen Jahre in der Charwoche in Potsdam
in keinem andern musikalischen Werke anzutreffen wäre.” Cited in zum Besten der Hausarmen aufgeführt haben.” Wiermann, 387.
Nagel, 40–41. The “one fast aria” he deemed unsuitable to a church per-
82. HUC (24 March 1775), 3: “Heute Vormittag wurde in der hiesigen
formance is almost certainly no. 9, “Verstockte Sünder.” On the location
Spinnhaus-Kirche bey einer zahlreichen Versammlung die von unserm
of St. Petri, see Hill, “Passion Settings,” 179.
großen Bach in Musik gesetzte bekannte Paßions-Cantate mit allge-
78. CPEB-Briefe, 1:321 and Nagel, 44. meinem Beyfall aufgeführt, und zugleich bey allen wahren Kennern der
79. Wiermann, 382–83; Nagel, 109. Musik der Wunsch erneuert, daß sie Gelegenheit haben möchten, ein
80. HUC (4 February 1774), 4: “die verlangte, vorzügliche, und von solches Meisterstück, in welchem bey jeder wiederholten Aufführung
unserm Herrn Kapellmeister Bach mit besonderm Ruhm componirte neue Schönheiten entdeckt werden, öfters zu hören.” Wiermann, 390.
Paßions-Cantate”; Wiermann, 387. 83. See, for example, Wiermann, 402–3.
81. HUC (18 March 1774), 3: “Heute ward die . . . Paßions-Cantate 84. HUC (13 November 1789), 3–4: “diese Musik [gehört] zu denen
unsers Herrn Kapellmeisters Bach . . . mit allgemeinem Beyfall einer Werken . . . , welche fortdauern und Achtung und Beyfall haben wer-

[ xxv ]
 How gladly we would like to engage ourselves in the discus- narrative portions.87 Even Schwencke’s first Passion, Die
sion of the beauties of this masterpiece. But wherever there Nacht der Leiden Jesu / Der du in bangen Nächten, includes
is so much excellence, wherever sublime choruses alternate a seeming nod to his predecessor’s famous Passion orato-
with grand arias that possess doleful, moving melodies in rio in the form of a choral fugue with attached homopho-
such great diversity, wherever there are without exception ac- nic chorus—an inversion of the Passions-Cantate’s chorus
companied recitatives so rich in true declamation and expres- in unison with subsequent fugue, “Lasset uns aufsehen”
sion of affect—wherever innovation, power, and appealing
(no. 15)—whose text was, like its model’s, spliced together
melody work together with all the strengths of the harmony,
from two separate biblical verses.88
wherever inexhaustible genius and profound expertise that
have become second nature (and with how few composers
does that happen?) are combined with animated emotion in Acknowledgments
the greatest detail, one should write a book about it to analyze
all the beauties. If our Bach had lived even longer, he would This volume could not have come to fruition without the
have given his work a single perfection still missing from it by assistance of numerous institutions and individuals who
abolishing the too cumbersome dissection and breaking up of supported my work along the way. Above all, I owe an
the text of some arias into the components of its prose (a pe- enormous debt of gratitude to Jason B. Grant and Paul
culiarity distinct to this great man, which sometimes harms Corneilson for their indefatigable patience and encourage-
the expression all too much).85 ment, along with the expertise they offered throughout all
stages of this edition’s creation. This volume greatly ben-
Public performances of the whole Passions-Cantate efited from Ulrich Leisinger’s expert eye and sage sugges-
ceased in Hamburg after 1789, but the work’s influence tions, for which I am profoundly grateful. For making the
can be traced to the Passions composed and compiled by in-person examination of key sources possible, I owe dis-
Bach’s successor in that city, Christian Friedrich Gottlieb tinct gratitude to Roland Schmidt-Hensel of the Staats-
Schwencke. Much like Bach, Schwencke began with an bibliothek zu Berlin—Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Musik-
impressive original contribution in 1790, after which he abteilung mit Mendelssohn-Archiv; Jeppe Plum Andersen
turned to arrangements and pasticcios to fulfill his yearly of Det Kongelige Bibliotek in Copenhagen; Otto Biba of
obligations in this genre.86 His Passion oratorio from two the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in Vienna; and the
years later melds five selections from Wq 233 with excerpts Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Musiksammlung in
from another Passion, along with some newly composed that same city. Wolfram Enßlin of the Bach-Archiv Leipzig
has my particular thanks for bringing newly discovered
sources of the Passions-Cantate to my attention. This edi-
tion has also benefited from the support of additional
den, wenn ein großer Theil des jetzigen modernen Klingklangs längst colleagues over the years of its making, including Laura
vergessen seyn wird. Bach hat sich dadurch, so wie durch sein Heilig, Buch, Mark W. Knoll, Peter Wollny, Christine Blanken,
seine Israeliten, seine Oster- und Himmelfahrts-Musik, seine Clavier-
Christoph Wolff, and David Schulenberg. Finally, I am in-
Compositionen, etc. etc. unsterblich gemacht.” Wiermann, 344. On the
question of the review’s authorship, see Hill, “Passion Settings,” 349. debted to the following institutions, which have generously
85. HNZ (18 November 1789), 3: “Wie gerne mögten wir uns in die allowed for the publication of plates appearing in the pres-
Auseinandersetzung der Schönheiten dieses Meisterwerks einlassen. ent volume: the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preußischer
Aber wo des Vortreflichen so viel ist, wo erhabne Chöre, prachtvolle Kulturbesitz, Musikabteilung mit Mendelssohn Archiv;
Arien mit traurigen, rührendem Gesange in so großer Mannigfaltig-
keit abwechseln, wo die durchgehends begleiteten Rezitative so reich
the Biblioteka Jagiellońska in Kraków; and Yale Univer-
an wahrer Deklamazion und Ausdruck des Affekts sind—wo Neuheit, sity, The Irving S. Gilmore Music Library in New Haven.
Kraft und Reiz der Melodie mit aller Stärke der Harmonie vereinigt
wirken, wo unerschöpfliches Genie und tiefe Kunstkentniß, die zur Na- Moira Leanne Hill
tur geworden war, (bei wie wenigen Komponisten wird sie das?) aufs
genaueste mit lebhaftem Gefühl verbunden sind, da müßte man ein
Buch schreiben, um alle Schönheiten zu zergliedern. Wenn unser Bach 87. Ibid., 373. The movements from Wq 233 are nos. 2, 9, 11, 17, and
noch länger gelebt hätte, so würde er seinem Werke noch eine einzige 22. See D-Hs, A/70000, no. 18. Schwencke himself is known to have
ihm fehlende Volkommenheit gegeben, und die zu mühsame Zerglie- owned a score of Bach’s Passion oratorio as well as Steinfeld’s published
derung und Auflösung des Textes einiger Arien in seine prosaischen Be- reduction. See Hill, “Passion Settings,” 379 and Cat. Schwencke, 17,
standtheile (eine dem großen Mann eine Besonderheit, welche zuweilen no. 280.
dem Ausdruck alzusehr schadet) aufgehoben haben.” Wiermann, 346. 88. Hill, “Passion Settings,” 367. The music survives in D-B, Mus. ms.
86. Hill, “Passion Settings,” 366–83. autogr. C. F. G. Schwenke 2, and the libretto in D-Hs, A/70000, no. 16.

[ xxvi ]