Lukas-Passion BWV 246 - General Discussions

Brilliant Classics label

Wim Huisjes wrote (October 21, 1999):
< Brian Ratekin wrote: I understand the Brilliant Classics Mark and Luke passions don't include the texts. Do you know where I could find the texts with an English
translation? (Snip)
Don't know about the texts. Brilliant Classics did provide the texts of Schemelli's Gesangbuch, Mass in b (both with English translations), the motets, Lutheran masses and Easter Oratorium (without English translations). Not very consistent, so I'll have to wait and see what happens when Kruidvat comes around with the passions set. Since each reconstruction of the Luke and Mark passions will have a different text: if B.C doesn't provide them, we'll have a problem, though Simon Crouch mentioned a source where the text of the Goodman performance of St. Mark can be found. Maybe the text of the Luke passion comes close to the one Helbich uses on CPO. (Snip)

In praise of the St Luke Passion

Steven Langley Guy wrote (November 19, 1999):
I have not heard a recording of the St Luke Passion of J S Bach but I do have the Kalmus Study Score (No.902) of this work. Although it is clear that much of the work is devoted to recitatives and chorales there are some rather attractive movements in this little known work. Starting from the end, the Aria "Lasst mich ihn nur noch einmal kussen" for bass and strings also has 2 oboes, a Taille (tenor oboe in F) and a bassoon playing a chorale melody with mutes. Muted oboes were rare and the pear shaped mutes jammed into the bell of these instruments makes the oboes "whimper most pathetically" according to Anthony Baines. Bach (or the composer) recommends paper mutes may be possible ("piano, und zwar die Hobön mit Papier gedampft").

The aria for soprano "Dein Leib, das Manna meiner Seele" features strings and a solo oboe and quite a charming looking echo effect. The next aria for alto; "Du giebst mir Blut" has pizzicato strings (including the bass strings) and two solo flauti traversi. The middle part of the aria features the strings bowed provide a very hushed background to the singer and the two flutes. A solo bassoon and solo oboe with the strings feature in the tenor aria "Den Fels hat Moses' Stab geschlagen". The middle section is a real test for the bassoon (at least the instruments and players of the time) and reminds me of the kind of solos for "fagotto" (curtail) in the works of Schmelzer, Castello, Biber and Buxtehude. The next tenor aria "Das Lamm verstummt vor seinem Scherer" also has more gymnastics for the bassoon. Both of these parts are mostly separate from the continuo. In Part II of the St Luke there is an interesting trio for 2 sopranos and an alto featuring 2 violins and 2 flutes. Not a long piece but it looks nice in the score.

The choruses are short but effective, with fairly simple string and/or unison instrumental accompaniment.

I am not saying that the St Luke is a great work but it certainly isn't a bad work either and it would work fine for a German speaking audience. If it is by Bach it is certainly a formative piece and has characteristics of earlier composers. I know that CPO has a recording of this work and some have commented on it on the List.

Luis Villalba wrote (November 19, 1999):
(To Steven Langley Guy) Thanks for your interesting note.

May I ask you where do you buy your Kalmus study scores?

Steven Langley Guy wrote (November 20, 1999):
(To Luis Villalba) The Kalmus scores cover all Bach's cantatas (volumes 805 - 871 and includes most of the spurious works as well!), passions and vocal works as well as pretty much everything else! They are small little booklets - about the size of a copy of Readers' Digest. Each copy has around three or four cantatas (I have about ten copies from the cantata editions, which covers quite a lot!) They are, as far as I can tell, Urtext - they use original clefs and no editorial "pianos" or "fortes" clutter the scores. In the back pages of many of these scores are several photos of Bach's written scores. The inside cover has: Copyright 1968 by Edwin F. Kalmus, Publisher of music, Huntington Station, L.I. N.Y. I bought my copies various print music shops in Adelaide and Melbourne in Australia. Fine Music in Melbourne is where I bought quite a few and very cheap too! Only about $5 each - they had lots and were trying to get rid of them, they'd been sitting on the shelf for years. Good music shops all over Australia used to carry these scores but hardheaded (and heartless/thoughtless?) business decisions mean that music shops will only order in Kalmus scores if you specifically want them and you pay more money. If Fine Music in Melbourne is on-line they may take orders? I haven't been there for a few years. I'm sure better shops exist in Europe or the United States? Does AMAZON.COM do music scores? They seem to do just about everything else!

Sorry I couldn't be of more help. They are great little scores though! Good luck!

Carl Burmeister wrote (November 20, 1999):
(To Steven Langley Guy & Luis Villalba) Amazon does carry a number of Kalmus scores, but no JS Bach.

They do carry a number of Dover Scores of, which I have bought a few lately e.g. B Minor Mass (BWV 232), Christmas Oratorio (BWV 248). I've had the Brandenburgs and suites on Dover for more years than I like to count. There are a few Cantata collections which I haven't ordered yet and an SMP (BWV 244) was listed, but I ordered same and am still waiting (on their out of print service).

However, if you really want to get serious, I could suggest Sheet Music Plus at http://musicianstore.com click the sheet music plus tab and Classical Search. Under Bach I get 185 items Bach Scores. Not all cantatas are represented but there are more than a few. They don't appear to stock anything so be prepared to wait. Since my first order is still in process I can't offer any opinions one way or the other regarding service. I also notice they have a SJP (BWV 245) score but nothing for St. Luke.

Luke Passion/Jirasek/Orff/ACH!

Marie Jensen wrote (February 12, 2000):
J.S. Bach: St. Luke Passion recomposed by Jan Jirasek after an idea by Carl Orff. With Boni Pueri, Munich Oratorio Choir, Munich Symphony Orchestra, Clear, Zanasi, Cold, Kronauer conducted by Douglas Bostock

I don't know how "world wide" this new CD is distributed. It is a Danish/Czech co production (Classico/ Bon Art)

In the good old days Bach wrote a copy of a Luke Passion. In the 1930es Orff tried to reconstruct it, but the most of it ended in the flames of WW2. Recently Jirasek, a Czech composer, has completed a reconstruction.

That some of the notes were found in Bach's hand writing, does not make him the composer. I couldn't with my best will hear any Bach in it at all. Yes, I recognized some of the chorales from Bach's sacred works, but as we all know, they are not Bach compositions. Here they are sung with the famous winged monster breathing in their necks, with unlogic shifts in tempo or modern plastic tubes howling over them. Lots of updated Orff percussion is involved. Orff took out every aria. Only choruses, chorales and recitativos remained, the Bible story so to say.

If I should describe the music, it is a mix of mediocre baroque music, rococo Requiem drums, Carmina Burana style, and contemporary music kitsch performed by a large choir and orchestra (NON HIP) and lots and lots of recitativos (not on a JSB level)

That sounds pretty awful, but I have in fact listened to it more times thanks to the beautiful Bible text and it has a few good moments with interesting sound effects.

But using the name Bach is a sales gimmick! The booklet admits this, quoting Mendelssohn: "If this is Sebastian; I shall hang myself" Well I will not, just want to warn you.

PS. Just thought of other "Hommages á Bach" at his anniversaries for example Schostakovitch's 24 preludeand fugues, Kagel's St. Bach Passion, which also include lots of instruments and percussion or Noergaards.

Simon Crouch wrote (February 14, 2000):
< Marie Jensen wrote:
< In the good old days Bach wrote a copy of a Luke Passion. In the 1930's Orff tried to reconstruct it, but the most of it ended in the flames of WW2. Recently Jirasek, a Czech composer, has completed a reconstruction. >
Marie, this has got me puzzled! The St. Luke Passion was edited as part of the BG edition at the end of the nineteenth century and thus survives in full - So what needs to be re-constructed? Or was Orff just recomposing it for fun?

Also, as far as I know, the (partially autograph) manuscript still survives in Berlin. Is there some confusion with the St. Mark Passion, the libretto of which was destroyed in WW2? (the music, lost around the start of the nineteenth century). Or was this all referring to Orff's manuscript?

Marie Jensen wrote (February 16, 2000):
(To Simon Crouch) The Luke Passion here is based on the full Luke Passion in Staatsbibliothek Preussischer Kulturbesizts Berlin .I can see now, that I didn't put myself clearly. It was Orff's version that burned. Here are a few quotations from the booklet:

Wenzel Andreasen writes: …Of the 57 pages, only 23 were written by J.S. Bach himself, the rest were presumably copied by his son Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach. The unerring and regular handwriting of the pages written by J.S. Bach more than suggest that also in this case it was most likely a copy…

Jirasek writes: …After studying the piano reduction of Bach's original version of the piece I realized what my task should be. Bach's version involved recitatives, chorales, arias etc. Orff's version was shorter, more compressed, more compact. He focused just on the story of the passion and had eliminated all redundant parts. In other words, almost everything which did not relate directly to the story, was not incorporated into the new version…

…Unfortunately, the overwhelming part of Orff's version got burned during World War 2. All I could use were his handwritten comments in the piano reduction of Bach's original…

…I also realized that Orff finished the St. Luke Passion in 1932, five years before he had written his famous Carmina Burana. Recomposing the piece in 1995 I was able to take in consideration all the orchestral innovations of the later Orff...

I hope this will help.

Reconstructions, reconstructions / Lucas Passion by Bach ????

Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (February 18, 2001):
(To Leo Ditvoorst) But don't they also include the "Lucas Passion"?

Leo Ditvoorst wrote (February 18, 2001):
(To Yoël L. Arbeitman) Also, but this "Lucas passion" has nothing to do with Bach.

If you buy the "passions" box from Brilliant you can replace it by something else, eg. some st. Mathew recording you own already.

Pablo Fagoaga wrote (February 18, 2001):
(To Leo Divoorst) Exactly. The only relation between Bach and this passion is the fact that Schmieder included it in BWV as number 246. As far as I know (not too far), the belief that this passion was composed by JSB had a strong argument, that is the fact that there was a manuscript by JSB. Later research, and it's musical "weakness" convinced scholars that this probably was a mere transcription Bach did of another composer's work for study, or may be performance in the Leipzig period.

Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (February 18, 2001):
< Pablo Fagoaga wrote: As far as I know (not too far), the belief that this passion was composed by JSB had a strong argument, that is the fact that there was a manuscript by JSB. >
Pablo, how wonderful that a non-native speaker (but a great speaker/writer) of English can create such an addition to my phraseology. AFAIK is common, but I have never heard the wonderful qualification you make: "not too far" which we can abbreviate as NTF !!!! I sincerely love it!

< Later research, and it's musical "weakness" convinced scholars that this probably was a mere transcription Bach did of another composer's work for study, or may be performance in the Leipzig period. >
But this is the same story with Cantata BWV 53, nicht wahr? (I don't know how to say that in English at all). And, if Bach learned from it and copied it, then we need it. Good enough for Bach, good enough for us!

Pablo Fagoaga wrote (February 18, 2001):
(To Yoël L. Arbeitman) About the language, I take it as a compliment. Curiously, in spite of the fact that I grew up in touch with personal computers, I feel I'll never get used to this "abbreviated" internet dialect. My fear is that in a few years I'll have a complete inhability to even suspect the topic of the messages I receive!!!

About "good enough for Bach, good enough for us", I agree 100%. I think it's important and extremely interesting to take a look to Bach's influences and environment. If listening to Chuck Berry helps you understand where the Beatles came from, why not to do this with Bach??

Take, for instance, Buxtehude, or Pachelbel, or Reinken or Kuhnau (personally, I "discovered" Buxtehude relatively recently, and he's just outstanding!!) Therefore, I think that BWV 53, Luke's Passion, etc, HAVE TO be included in "Bach's world", just with the explanation about the fact they're not Bach compositions. Because if you absolutely discard from the scene this works just because the identity of the composer, I don't get the point of recording or listening to the 6 Organ Concertos, or the 16 Harpsichord ones, don't you think ??

Just to see how good Bach could be in the technique of adaptation, does´'t seen to be enough. Give me a brake!

Then AGAIN, I'm complaining about Teldec's inclusion/exclusion criteria in Bach 2000 (don't get me wrong, it's a great deal, but it culd hace been perfect). On one had, they include twenty and something works with even identified composers, just for the sake of technical curiosity, and, a moment after, they discard other works on such dubious grounds as taking as good the assumption that Bach never had a bad day!! This happens many times with cantatas, and other vocal works (not to mention fields like keyboard music!).

Only remembering the weekly "compose-rehearse-perform" routine Bach sometimes had, I think it's logical to assume that when parody didn't work well, there was the possibility that he "turned" into a human being for a while!! So: dubious works and other people compositions, be welcome!!

Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (February 18, 2001):
(To Leo Ditvoorst) I don't quite understand what you mean by "you can replace it by something else". Why would I want to replace it by something I already own. There is some mis-communication here.

How Wonderful Aryeh’s Ref. sites are

Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (April 30, 2001):
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Vocal/BWV246.htm

How wonderful it is that when each one of us gets around to listening to the various works, in this case I am finally listening to the Brilliant Classic Markus Passion reconstruction, one can just read up on the item on the website. I have copied here the Lukas discussion, but I have not gotten to listen to that yet. It is to the Markus which I am listening. And, as these sets have no notes, it is good indeed that we have the site davka (precisely, ausgerechnet) for these works. The lack of text and translation doesn't bother me as the German is very clear and obvious here in the Markus. In the Lukas discussion, I see at the end a conversation between myself and Leo with some misunderstanding which time has made clear, more or less. Let me recommend at this occasion the Hyperion Robert King Pergolesi Stabat Mater (also at Berkshire). It is a gem.

“Bach or not Bach”

Steven Langley Guy wrot(May 20, 2001):
< Donald Satz wrote: There have been many compositions attributed to Bach which have been proven to not come from his pen and an even greater number where authorship is not clear. >
I understand that there are some doubts about the St. Luke Passion. Perhaps it wasn't really by Bach? It looks like a nice work (I have the score but I've never heard it) even though it has a much more modest vision than the St. John or the St. Matthew (BWV 244). The score includes flauti traversi and oboes so it can't be very old!

Any thoughts?

Pablo Fagoaga wrote (May 20, 2001):
[To Steven Langley Guy] More than "perhaps", I understand that St. Luke Passion's authorship is definitely NOT Bach, according to the uniform opinion of scholars, which I have to endorse because of their intellectual authority.

It is said that the position is based on musicological aspects, that apparently reveal an extremely weak composition technique, and poor musical resources.

Ok, let's take it (I can't argue on such a deeply informed and technical view).
The strong argument to define St. Luke's as a work by Bach is the existence of manuscript by JSB.

But the fact that the manuscript is partly made by Carl Phillip Emanuel Bach admits the possibility that the Bach's just joined efforts, to produce faster a mere copy of a third party work.

Some interesting notes about authorship come in the Oxford Composer Companion, stating that probably the copy was made to perform on Good Friday (1730) at the Nikolaikirche (Leipzig). With an interesting point of view, Simon Heighes proposes that maybe, the instrumental introduction to the second part of the work, and the orchestation of the subsequent recitative were written by JSB, due to the fact that Leipzig's liturgical practice, which needed the Passion the be divided into two halves.
Bach took a "one piece" work, and he wrote an instrumental intro to smooth the "cut" he made to the work, and disguise the continuity of the original.

Of course, "truth"...is gone.

Johan van Veen wrote (July 21, 2001):
[To Steven Langley Guy] There is a common view that this isn't by Bach. In the 19^th century Mendelssohn and Brahms were convinced it wasn't a work by Bach. The music isn't as bad as some people say. In fact it's quite a nice work, if you don't compare it to Bach's Passions. There is a fine recording on CPO, which puts the work in the best possible light.

These are the details:
Mona Spägele, soprano; Christiane Iven, contralto; Harry van Berne, Rufus Müller (Evangelist), tenor; Marcus Sandmann, Stephan Schreckenberger (Jesus), bass; Alsfelder Vokalensemble; Barockorchester Bremen/Wolfgang Helbich (CPO - 999 293-2)

There is a very interesting essay on this work in the booklet. I'll quote two passages from it.

"Our only source for the St. Luke Passion is a score copy begun by Johann Sebastian Bach and completed by his son Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach. Today the manuscript is housed in the Berlin State Library. Since neither the title page nor the superscription mentions the composer by name, we can understand why this score in Bach's hand (his son's participation was not recognized until much later on) was attributed to him. Another factor suggesting Bach's authorship was the »J. J.« (Jesu juva = Jesus, help!) at the beginning of the copy; this was the petition for divine assistance with which he usually began his manuscripts.

The Breitkopf music publishing house presumably obtained the manuscript from Wilhelm Friedemann Bach's estate. The Bach collector Franz Hauser acquired it during the nineteenth century and asked his friend Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy to state his opinion of it. Mendelssohn wrote that »I am sorry that you gave so much money for the St. Luke Passion. It was not too much to pay for it as a manuscript of unquestioned authenticity, but it is just as certain that this music is not by him....You ask for what reason the Luke is not by Sebastian Bach? For internal reasons...; if that is by Sebastian, then I'll be hanged, and yet it is unmistakably his handwriting. But it is too clean; he copied it...« This judgment of 1838 is the one that has ended up prevailing. Later Hauser's son, the chamber singer Joseph Hauser, had the family collection with him in Karlsruhe, where Johannes Brahms found occasion to look at the manuscript. As Mendelssohn before him, Brahms did not let himself be fooled by the fact that the manuscript was in Bach's hand. He too firmly rejected the nation of Bach's authorship for artistic reasons. It was impossible to overlook the vast divide separating this work of modest design from the St. John Passion and St. Matthew Passion (BWV 244). Nevertheless the Bach biographer and researcher Philipp Spitta was of another opinion. He regarded the St. Luke Passion as a work of the Thomaskantor's youth, and his support of its authenticity secured it a place in the old complete edition of Bach's works.

When Max Schneider demonstrated that Bach's son had collaborated on the copy (more than half of the score is in his hand), the doubts about its authenticity became a certainty. Although the St. Luke Passion was listed in Wolfgang Schmieder's catalogue of Bach's works as BWV 246 as late as 1950, today the general consensus is that this composition is a work not by Bach but by a contemporary of his, one who most likely lived and worked in Central Germany, and that Bach copied out and performed this composers work. The repeated abjection that it is an extremely weak composition takes Bach's genuine passions as its yardstick and is unjustified. After all, the Thomaskantor himself was willing to invest the time and energy required for two performances of the St. Luke Passion. We should not forget this fact in our evaluation of it."

"The identity of the composer of the St. Luke Passion is a question that has often been considered. He must have been a musician active in Central Germany around 1735 and was probably born shortly before 1700. In my research I have come up with a number of bits of evidence suggesting the possibility that its composer may have been the still little-known Eisenach court music director Johann Melchior Molter (1696- 1765). Molter, the son of a Kantor, was born in Tiefenort bei Eisenach and attended the Eisenach Preparatory School before entering the service of the Margrave Carl-Wilhelm of Boden-Durlach in Karlsruhe in 1717. Studies in Venice and Rome during 1719-21 brought him into direct contact with Italian musicians such as A. Vivaldi and A. Scarlatti. He was appointed to the post of court music director in Karlsruhe in 1722. After the disbandment of the court orchestra at the end of 1733 as a result of the outbreak of the Polish War of Succession, Molter was appointed to the then vacant music director's post in Eisenach. He began his service in Eisenach during Easter 1734 and held this post until the dissolution of the Eisenach court in the summer of 1741.

The St. Luke Passion exhibits many parallels and points of relation to other compositions known to be by Molter, not only to eleven church cantatas discovered in Regensburg some years ago and a two-part passion oratorio extant in Sondershausen, all doting to his Eisenach years, but also to other works of his. All of this makes his authorship at leasseem possible. These resemblances have been overlooked for the simple reason that Molter's sacred works have managed to elude researchers up until now.

This almost direct juxtaposition of old-fashioned traditional elements and modern elements is also found in Molter's passion oratorio dating to around 1735. Elegant instrumentations with, for example, a solo instrument and string pizzicato occur repeatedly in his arias and in the clearly recognizable technique combining different tonal and motion layers (oboes, strings, chorus, continuo) in the introductory passion chorus. It is precisely the introductory measures ascribed to Bach at the beginning of the second part that correspond especially well to Molter's orchestral style of strong Venetian stamp. Linguistic and formal points of relation also exist between the madrigal texts in the St. Luke Passion and those by Gottfried Loos (1686-1741), the Eisenach court poet who wrote for Molter."

Lukas Passion

Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (June 6, 2001):
I am not sure whether the Major Vocal Works of Bach are discussed these days on the Bachrecordings list or the Bachcantatas list as I have seen the passions discussed last on the cantatas list (where IMVHO they form an integral part more than on the non-vocal list). Be that as it may, as I cannot follow the schedule, I have just had my first experience of the Attributed to JSB Lukas Passion on the licensed to Brilliant Classics set and found it wonderful. No wonder JSB loved it enough to copy it.

Of the various great singers in it, I find the following (www.Operissimo.com). Georg Jelden, Elizabeth Künstler and Charlotte Lehmann are all three in the Penderecki Lukas Passion (see below). Charlotte Lehmann alone is listed as being on a Corona recording of the Bach Lukas Passion which may be this very one "licensed from Bayer-Records", according to the only information on the Brilliant Classics set. She is also listed as the teacher and ACTUALLY the discoverer of Thomas Quasthoff.
Two recordings (and a bio) are given for:
Jelden Georg tenore
1985
Studio View
Rec Sold out
Penderecki Krysztof
Lukas-Passion BWV 246
Collegium Musicum Tübingen
Tenor
Carus CD 53103/5
=====================
1967
Studio View
Rec Sold out
Händel Georg Friedrich
Deborah

NDR Hannover Sisera

SDG LP SDG 610 401/402
======================
There are no entries for Schaibe, Nicolson, and Schmid. I assume that it is Nicolson who as Tenor II sings the tenor arias as Jelden is the evangelist. If this is indeed the case (the voices sound similar enough to my poor ears), it is amazing that he is not better known. The tenor arias (there are only three other arias, two for soprano, one for alto) are the great musical moments of this work which is fine as a whole and a
major delight for me. I do not have any reason to believe in any double chorus here and must assume that tenor II and bass II are simply non-evangelist and non-Jesus (roles already accounted for). Forgive me if I am miscalculating.

Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (June 4, 2001):
While I rather suspect that Operissimo has confused the Pseudo-Bach Lukas Passion with the same title by Penderecki, the fundamental questions in this post remain. The unlikihood of three such soloists in the Penderecki work are, I believe, obvious.

Markus and Lukas passions Brilliant set again

Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (December 9, 2001):
Some time ago, maybe 8 months ago, when we were for a while discussing the Markus Passion reconstruction as done by SH and contained in that supercheap set from Brilliant Classics together with the non-Bach Lukas Passion, I distinctly recall everyone having the same experience as I myself, to wit that it was a shame that no notes and esp. no libretto, no German words of the two passions were included whatsover. I recall not a dissenting voice.

By chance, the subject came up elsewhere, in a most unlikely place where the poster insisted that his set came with booklets in each of the passions and that he had texts to the Lukas and Markus passions.

Does anyone else share this bounty? Please do tell,

Tom Hens wrote (December 10, 2001):
[To Yoël L. Arbeitman] At least as sold in the Netherlands and Belgium (in downmarket chain drugstores), all the vocal works in the Brilliant series came with booklets with the full texts (no translations), and the St. Mark also has notes by Simon Heighes explaining his reconstruction. I believe that in the compact reissue of the complete set in cardboard sleeves all these booklets have been combined into one book.

Yoël L. Arbeitman wrote (December 10, 2001):
[To Tom Hens] Thank you, Tom.
The set of the 4 passions in a box which I have had no texts and no notes at all. Obviously neither was necessary for Markus and Matthäus.The person with whom I was disputing this matter is sending me the necessary texts.

Eitan Loew wrote (January 30, 2002):
[To Yoël L. Arbeitman] The other day I've purchased the same disk of the St. Luke Passion BWV 246 (Brilliant Classics, 99369/8-9) and there was a booklet; however – it contains the German text only, no notes.

I wonder if somebody can enlighten me - who reconstructed this lost Passion? what musical material did he use?

I have also St. Mark Passion BWV 247 reconstructed by Ton Koopman. In the booklet there Koopman explains his work, including his decision to write the recitatives himself. Who knows about the St Luke? By the way, the recitatives here sound very "non-Bach" to me.

Also, how come that the BWV list numbers had been allocated for these Passions, while it was not done for hundreds of other Bach lost works?

By the way, in the same booklet Christoph Wolff tells about a fifth Passion
composed in 1717 for the Duke of Sachsen Gotha. Anybody knows more about it?

Thanks for any information,

Marten Breuer wrote (January 30, 2002):
< Eitan Loew wrote: By the way, in the same booklet Christoph Wolff tells about a fifth Passion composed in 1717 for the Duke of Sachsen Gotha. Anybody knows more about it? >
If I am not mistaken, it was Forkel who in the first biography on Bach's life mentioned a Passion composed in 1717 but the music is completely unknown. However, it is assumed that those parts of the second version of the St. John Passion that were newly introduced might be taken from the 1717 Passion.

Johan van Veen wrote (January 30, 2002):
[To Eitan Loew] That is not a reconstruction, but a Passion which once was thought to be composed by Bach, something has been proven to be wrong. It is now called 'apocryphal St Luke Passion'.

Here are the notes to the recording on CPO (Alsfelder Vokalensemble and Barockorchester Bremen, directed by Wolfgang Helbich).

In his post as the Thomaskantor in Leipzig, Johann Sebastian Bach performed not only his own compositions but also the works of other masters. Among these latter works were cantatas by Georg Philipp Telemann and Johann Ludwig Bach, masses by J. Baal and J. H. von Wilderer, the St. Mark Passion by Reinhard Keiser, and, at least twice, the St. Luke Passion by an unknown author.

Our only source for the St. Luke Passion is a score copy begun by Johann Sebastian Bach and completed by his son Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach. Today the manuscript is housed in the Berlin State Library. Since neither the title page nor the superscription mentions the composer by name, we can understand why this score in Bach's hand (his son's participation was not recognized until much later on) was attributed to him. Another factor suggesting Bach's authorship was the »J. J.« (Jesu juva = Jesus, help!) at the beginning of the copy; this was the petition for divine assistance with which he usually began his manuscripts.

The Breitkopf music publishing house presumably obtained the manuscript from Wilhelm FriedeBach's estate. The Bach collector Franz Hauser acquired it during the nineteenth century and asked his friend Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy to state his opinion of it. Mendelssohn wrote that »I am sorry that you gave so much money for the St. Luke Passion. It was not too much to pay for it as a manuscript of unquestioned authenticity, but it is just as certain that this music is not by him....You ask for what reason the Luke is not by Sebastian Bach? For internal reasons...; if that is by Sebastian, then I'll be hanged, and yet it is unmistakably his handwriting. But it is too clean; he copied it...« This judgment of 1838 is the one that has ended up prevailing. Later Hauser's son, the chamber singer Joseph Hauser, had the family collection with him in Karlsruhe, where Johannes Brahms found occasion to look at the manuscript. As Mendelssohn before him, Brahms did not let himself be fooled by the fact that the manuscript was in Bach's hand. He too firmly rejected the nation of Bach's authorship for artistic reasons. It was impossible to overlook the vast divide separating this work of modest design from the St. John Passion (BWV 245) and St. Matthew Passion (BWV 244). Nevertheless the Bach biographer and researcher Philipp Spitta was of another opinion. He regarded the St. Luke Passion as a work of the Thomaskantor's youth, and his support of its authenticity secured it a place in the old complete edition of Bach's works.

When Max Schneider demonstrated that Bach's son had collaborated on the copy (more than half of the score is in his hand), the doubts about its authenticity became a certainty. Although the St. Luke Passion was listed in Wolfgang Schmieder's catalogue of Bach's works as BWV 246 as late as 1950, today the general consensus is that this composition is a work not by Bach but by a contemporary of his, one who most likely lived and worked in Central Germany, and that Bach copied out and performed this composers work. The repeated abjection that it is an extremely weak composition takes Bach's genuine passions as its yardstick and is unjustified. After all, the Thomaskantor himself was willing to invest the time and energy required for two performances of the St. Luke Passion. We should not forget this fact in our evaluation of it.

In 1971 a page that had fallen out or had been taken out of the score was brought to light in Japan. This page containing the chorale for bass and basso continuo at the conclusion of the first part is in Bach's hand and also has a masterful instrumental accompaniment that he added to it. The hand of the page paints to a date around 1745, a fact indicating that Bach's first Leipzig performance of the St. Luke Passion in the 1730s was followed by a second performance during his late period or at least by plans for a second performance. In any case, its shows that he valued the score. The few instrumental measures introducing the second part of the work are also regarded as being an addition on his part. These measures have served as the basis for the suggestion that the passion originally did not contain the two-part division, »Before the Sermon« and »After the Sermon«, that was customary in Leipzig. Whether this suggestion is correct will have to be left open for the time being.

As in the case of the St. John Passion and St. Matthew Passion (BWV 244), the text for the St. Luke Passion consists of three layers of material; the dramatically recited biblical narrative and its various roles (Gospel of St. Luke 22;1 -23;53), a striking number of chorale strophes including citations from liturgical compositions such as the Te Deum, litany, and Lord's Prayer (thirty-two numbers), and free poetry in the form of eight do capo aria texts, with four in the first part and four in the second part. They are set as a chorus, terzetto, and six solo arias (two for soprano, one for alto, and three for tenor). As in Bach's passions, the aria and chorale inserts offer a meditative commentary on the gospel narrative.

While the gospel setting and its turbo choruses as well as the chorales exhibit a certain old-fashionedness, the eight »madrigal« numbers clearly point to the hand of a composer who was a generation younger than Bach and Telemann, to someone who must have been the same age as Quantz, Hasse, and the Graun brothers. It has thus been conjectured that the St. Luke Passion might be a sort of pastiche, i. e., that the introductory chorus, the terzetto, and the arias were inserted into an older work sometime before Bach copied out the score. But when one reflects on the impact of the work, its overall unity becomes evident. The composer drew on older models with which he was familiar for the traditional parts (gospel narrative and chorales) while lending the free parts a modern design. The fact that he belonged to the younger generation is reflected, for example, in the assignment of two flutes and string pizzicato to the »Du gibst mir lut« aria, in the concertante parts of the oboe and bassoons and of the bassoon solo in the »Den Fels hat Moses Stab geschlagen» and »Das Lamm verstummt vor seinem Scherer«, in the continuo rests in the »Weh und Schmerz in dem Gebären« terzetto, and, last but not least, in the sextuplets in the dazzling »Selbst der Bau der Welt erschüttert« soprano aria (sung by the tenor on this recording).

The serious simplicity and the tone of warmhearted, almost pietistic religiosity heard in the chorales are moving. The chorales, in their fullness and richness, figure predominantly in the work and reflect the heartfelt participation of the congregation in the events of Good Friday. Just as the melody »Herzlich tut mich verlangen« to strophes by Paul Gerhardt runs through the whole of Bach's St. Matthew Passion (BWV 244), so too the hymn »Jesu, meines Herzens Freud« by Johann Flittner (1660) recurs in the St. Luke Passion: No fewer than four strophes are heard, two in the first part and two in the second part.

The numerous chorales in the St. Luke Passion represent a problem of a special kind. In the score of the two Bachs only four strophes and four liturgical pieces have a complete text; in the other cases father and son were content to insert text markers such as »Freu dich sehr o etc.« Most of the strophes are easy enough to identify on the basis of these short tags, but not all of them. Although a great deal of research effort has been put into their rediscovery, they have not yet been found in any hymnal of the period (e.g., in the Leipzig, Gotha, or Eisenach hymnbooks). It is not impossible that they were penned by the poet of the madrigal pieces in the St. Luke Passion. If this is so, then in these cases he would have written, instead of arias, meditative quasi-chorale strophes for assignment to certain set melodies. As is well known, there is a similar case in the St. John Passion (BWV 245): The text »Durch dein Gefängnis, Gottes Sohn«, set by Bach as a chorale to the melody »Machs mit mir, Gott, nach deiner Güt« is actually an aria text. There was presumably a copy of the printed text of the original performance in the score copied out by the two Bachs, and the Thomaskantor took the texts in question from this copy while preparing the no longer-extant performance materials.

Franz Hauser, aware of the chorale problem in the St. Luke Passion, commissioned a few pastors among his friends to do the necessary follow-up research. In most cases, their research led to satisfactory solutions. The ministers supplied their own poetry for the strophes that could not be , and on the whole their efforts are not bad. The chorales concerned were included in the printed edition in this form. For lack of better textual alternatives, these are the texts that have been sung an the present recording.

The identity of the composer of the St. Luke Passion is a question that has often been considered. He must have been a musician active in Central Germany around 1735 and was probably born shortly before 1700. In my research I have come up with a number of bits of evidence suggesting the possibility that its composer may have been the still little-known Eisenach court music director Johann Melchior Molter (1696- 1765). Molter, the son of a Kantor, was born in Tiefenort bei Eisenach and attended the Eisenach Preparatory School before entering the service of the Margrave Carl-Wilhelm of Boden-Durlach in Karlsruhe in 1717. Studies in Venice and Rome during 1719-21 brought him into direct contact with Italian musicians such as A. Vivaldi and A. Scarlatti. He was appointed to the post of court music director in Karlsruhe in 1722. After the disbandment of the court orchestra at the end of 1733 as a result of the outbreak of the Polish War of Succession, Molter was appointed to the then vacant music director's post in Eisenach. He began his service in Eisenach during Easter 1734 and held this post until the dissolution of the Eisenach court in the summer of 1741. The St. Luke Passion exhibits many parallels and points of relation to other compositions known to be by Molter, not only to eleven church cantatas discovered in Regensburg some years ago and a two-part passion oratorio extant in Sondershausen, all doting to his Eisenach years, but also to other works of his. All of this makes his authorship at least seem possible. These resemblances have been overlooked for the simple reason that Molter's sacred works have managed to elude researchers up until now.

This almost direct juxtaposition of old-fashioned traditional elements and modern elements is also found in Molter's passion oratorio dating to around 1735. Elegant instrumentations with, for example, a solo instrument and string pizzicato occur repeatedly in his arias and in the clearly recognizable technique combining different tonal and motion layers (oboes, strings, chorus, continuo) in the introductory passion chorus. It is precisely the introductory measures ascribed to Bach at the beginning of the second part that correspond especially well to Molter's orchestral style of strong Venetian stamp. Linguistic and formal points of relation also exist between the madrigal texts in the St. Luke Passion and those by Gottfried Loos (1686-1741), the Eisenach court poet who wrote for Molter. If Molter did in fact compose the St. Luke Passion, then it was the inaugural music for his Eisenach post and was premiered at St. George's City and Court Church in Eisenach on Good Friday, April 23, 1734. The gifted tenor Johann Ebert (his participation would explain the no fewer than three tenor arias) and the organist Johann Bernhard Bach would have been among the performers. It is through Johann Bernhard Bach that Johann Sebastian Bach could have learned about the work in Leipzig and expressed the wish to see the score. Molter would have then sent his score together with a copy of the printed text (such texts were obligatory for Fisenach vocal performances) to Leipzig, and Bach and his son would hove completed their copy of the score before C. P. E. Bach left home in the autumn of 1734. The first Leipzig performance of the St. Luke Passion would presumably hove token place on Good Friday, April 8, 1735. The Bach scholar Alfred Diirr also regards this date as possible.

We should not fail to mention, however, that the dating of the copy to the summer of 1734 contradicts the findings of Bach philology about the development of C. P. E. Bach's manuscript hand. These investigations suggest a Leipzig performance date of Good Friday 1730. If this is so, then Molter could not have been the composer of the St. Luke Passion. Thus, despite the almost surprising parallels to Molter's oeuvre, his authorship is not certain here - especially since stylistic-compositional points of contact cannot be said to settle this question. They always leave the question open as to whether the similarities are only general features of the period or special features marking a personal style.

Whoever may have been the composer of the St. Luke Passion, one thing remains certain: the unpretentiously simple work that the genial author of the St. John Passion and St. Matthew Passion (BWV 244) honored with a repeat performance deserves a solid place in the early music repertoire.

Klaus Häfner
Translated by Susan Marie Praeder

Eitan Loew wrote (February 2, 2002):
[To Johan van Veen] Thank you Johan for the interesting article (it explains why the music sound non=Bach to me), and thank you Marten as well.

Lukas-Passion text

Anthony J. Olszowy wrote (November 19, 2002):
[To Bradley Lehman] Speaking of, peripherally, libretti, does anyone know where I can get my hands on an Englished text of the spurious St. Luke Passion? The Brilliant Classics series have just been made available in this part of Canada, and I picked up the Passions box at what was, for these parts, a phenomenally great price. I have translations of the other three passions from other recordings, but I have no other recording of the St. Luke. Aryeh's web site re: the Cantatas doesn't seem to have a link to a full one (unless I've missed something), and I've been utterly beguiled by this text--I guess I'm in good company, if Bach was too.

Bradley Lehman wrote (November 20, 2002):
[To Anthony J. Olszowy] I too am looking for a copy of that libretto. On the back of the Brilliant Classics box it says the recording was licensed from Bayer Records, so I went hopefully to their web site: but all they have is a simple advertisement as part of their shopping cart system. Ah well, it was nice to see the original cover art anyway:
http://www.bayermusicgroup.de/shop/corona31013.htm

It's also disappointing that all of Rübsam's Bach recordings are out of print from Bayer. As I'd noted here recently, not all of them were licensed over to Naxos. (To my knowledge, the only ones that were not were the English Suites, where he did a remake.)

Here are two other enjoyable Bayer discs, both containing (different) performances of the Saint-Saens "Danse Macabre" on organ along with other pieces that show a sense of humor. Organ and percussion, a nifty combination.
http://www.bayermusicgroup.de/shop/br150016.htm
http://www.bayermusicgroup.de/shop/br150009.htm
In the "C-Dur & Walpurgisnacht" album the web site doesn't say so, but there's an actress declaiming part of Goethe's "Faust" and some Brecht....

Aryeh Oron wrote (November 20, 2002):
[To Anthony J. Olszowy & Bradley Lehman] If you look at the page:
http://www.bach-cantatas.com/Vocal/BWV246.htm
you will be able to see that SLP has four complete recordings, of which I have three. Two of them (Rehm & Bostock) include only the original German text. The third, conducted by Helbich, includes an English translation.

I could not find any German text of SLP over the web, and Z. Philip Ambrose's site include translation of only two movements. See:
http://www.uvm.edu/~classics/faculty/bach/BWV246.html

Therefore, I consider putting both the complete German text and full English translation in the Bach Cantatas Website. But since I have tasks of higher priority, it will have to wait for a while. I shall send a message to the BCML & BRML when it is ready.

Roy Johansen wrote (November 20, 2002):
[To Aryeh Oron]You can find the German libretto here, starting about one-third down the page: http://home.arcor.de/klangkirche/2000/20000409.htm

Anthony J. Olszowy wrote (November 19, 2002):
[To Aryeh Oron] As always, you are a great public servant!!

St Luke Passion

John Pike wrote (September 9, 2003):
I have been listening to Wolfang Helbich's recording of this apocryphal Bach Passion. The remaining manuscript is in Bach's hand but, apart from one short insert, it is now thought that the music is not by Bach but by a contemporary whose talents Bach obviously admired so that he copied down the music and probably performed it. It is a fine recording and, although the music does not have the hallmarks of Bach's genius, it is nevertheless interesting, reverential and sometimes beautiful music. I can well imagine that it influenced Bach to compose his own masterpieces in this genre, and can fully understand why Bach would have wanted to perform it. Recommended.

David Glenn Lebut Jr. wrote (September 10, 2003):
[To John Pike] I thought the same thing when I had it. The are two other recordings of the work as well. Have you heard them, and if so, what are your thoughts?

Johan van Veen wrote (September 10, 2003):
[To John Pike] I agree. In particular the tenor aria at the end, "Lass mich ihn nur noch einmal küssen", is extremely moving.

John Pike wrote (September 10, 2003):
[David Glenn Lebut Jr.] Hello, David. No, I'm afraid I haven't got the other recordings. Maybe I will someday, but there are lots of other things on my shopping list!

Apocryphal St. Luke Passion

Jimmy Satiawan wrote (February 2, 2004):
I just bought the CD of St.Luke Passion (Bach). And it subtitled "apocryphal"? What does it mean? Why not "reconstructed" as in St.Mark Passion?

Johan van Veen wrote (February 2, 2004):
[To Jimmy Setiawan] It is not reconstructed, because all the music exists. So what should be 'reconstructed'?

It is 'apocryphical' because the general view is that it was not composed by Bach.

It was included in the Schmieder catalogue on the basis of the view that it was composed by Bach. The manuscript is in Bach's handwriting which suggests he performed it.

But even in the 19^th century there was widespread doubt about Bach's authorship. Mendelssohn was convinced it was not by Bach:
The manuscript was bought by his friend Franz Hauser, who asked Mendelssohn Bartholdy to state his opinion of it. Mendelssohn wrote that "I am sorry that you gave so much money for the St. Luke Passion. It was not too much to pay for it as a manuscript of unquestioned authenticity, but it is just as certain that this music is not by him....You ask for what reason the Luke is not by Sebastian Bach? For internal reasons...; if that is by Sebastian, then I'll be hanged, and yet it is unmistakably his handwriting. But it is too clean; he copied it..."

Brahms also thought it was not by Bach.

Thomas Braatz wrote (February 2, 2004):
According to the NBA KB II/9 (2000), the only portion of this almost entirely anonymously composed passion that is considered to be authentically composed by Bach (and the only portion which is printed out as music in the NBA) is the chorale “Aus der Tiefen rufe ich” designated as BWV 246/40a.

In a letter dated January 19, 1833 to Franz Hauser who owned this manuscript which was copied out in clear copy (not a composing autograph!) by J. S. Bach and C.P.E. Bach (J. S. Bach copied approximately only the 1^st 3^rd and C.P.E. the remainder of the passion), Felix Mendelssohn aptly expressed his assessment of musical quality of this work as follows:

“Du fragst aus welchem Grunde der Lucas nicht von Sebastian Bach sein soll? Aus inneren. Es ist mir zwar fatal, daß ich’s behaupten muß, denn sie gehört dir, aber guck’ einmal den Choral oder, wie es sonst heißt, „Tröste mich und mach’ mich satt’ an; wenn das von Sebastian ist, so lass’ ich mich hängen, und doch ist’s unleugbar seine Handschrift Aber es ist zu reinlich, er hat es abgeschrieben. Von wem sonst? Fragst du. Von Telemann oder M. Bach oder Locatelli oder Altnickel oder Jungnickel oder Nickel schlechtweg, was weiß ich? Aber nicht von dem.“

[“You’re asking me why the St. Luke Passion is not by J. S. Bach? For inner reasons (reasons having to do with the quality of the composing rather than the appearance of the notes on the page.) It really hurts me to have to say this because I know that you own this manuscript, but do take a look at the chorale, or whatever it is otherwise called: “Comfort me and make me feel satisfied.” If this composition is by J. S. Bach, I’ll have myself hanged, and yet, it is in his own handwriting. But the copy is much too clean; he must have copied this directly from somewhere else. But whose composition is this then, you might ask. By Telemann, or M. Bach, or Locatelli, or Altnickel or {here Mendelssohn plays with the name “Altnickel” which refers to Johann Christoph Altnickol – one of Bach’s pupils who married one of Bach’s daughters – the name ‘old nickel’ is now transformed jokingly to ‘new nickel’ or ‘nickel’} Newnickel, or just plain old Nickel, how should I know? But certainly it is not by J. S. Bach.”]

David Glenn Lebut Jr. wrote (February 3, 2004):
[To Jimmy Setiawan] The only known movement in the work that has come down to us that we call the Lukaspassion BWV 246 that can definitely demonstrated to be by Bach is the Tenor Choralsatz "Aus der Tiefe rufet ich". The rest of it is in a copy in both Sebastian and Emanuel Bach's hand. However, it is doubtful that it is by Bach himself.

Juozas Rimas wrote (February 3, 2004):
Interesting, though, how Mendelssohn's gut feeling is sufficient proof of apocryphalness. There must be a certain "saint cow syndrome" with regards to J.S.Bach and other great composers. When a doubtful work is of poor quality, your heart doesn't allow the mind to produce a thought that it still MIGHT be by the great one and you much more willingly search for proof that it's not by him to faithfully prevent the average sky-high level of composing from falling even by an iota.

I tried to start a thread here about "disappointing Bach" but there were no replies so I understood J. S. Bach has a strong immunity against frank confessions to oneself that you weren't particularly amazed by a composition, not only by a performance. I know that the feeling is almost always mistaken, as it is nicely described in the Forkel's words in Aryeh's old signature (simplified: you don't "dig things" at first but gradually you appreciate the beauty which then never dies out), but with some pieces (very few indeed), even definitely by Bach and even after many listens, I couldn't say to myself frankly that they were as imaginative as I'm used to expect and not just masterful.

SLP S. 246

Bachcl43 wrote (August 21, 2004):
Hello-I just listened to the Lukas Passion, for the very first time. (It's part of a boxed set including the others (the Markus a reconstruction.) Knowing at the outset that it's not by JSB--anonymous-- makes it somewhat tricky to evaluate, but I was really rapt with absorption in this music. (Dir. Gerhard Rehm). Found it to be terrific- I may try to briefly comment on it another time--it's late where I am.

Lukas-Passion BWV 246

AryOron (on behalf of Owen) wrote (April 30, 2006):
I received the following message off-list from Owen, who is not a member of the BCML. He allowed me forwarding his message to you.

You are invited to comment.

I am a musical ignoramus in that I can only barely read music. However, I have "listened" to music for some 40+ years and am quite good at picking composers by their style even if I do not know the work.

I have owned a copy of the St Luke for some 30 yrs but for some reason it drowned in the cantatas and never rose to the surface once I discovered that it was not by JS Bach.

Recently I have been slowly transferring my LP collection onto my PC for future CD creation. Unfortunately my LP copy of the St Luke was "missing" for reasons that are not clear. So I decided to pick up a copy and have the Volume 10 Bach edition: Passions.Of these the St Matthew a(BWV 244) nd the St John (BWV 245) are clearly inferior to my old Harnoncourt versions.

However the St Luke was a revelation. Clearly it is not by JS Bach as the counterpoint is minimal, the orchestration clumsy at times and in its harmonies it seems more to be very early classical than late baroque. But it IS a gem. several of the choruses are superb and there is a degree of emotion expressed by the music which JSBach even in the St Matthew (BWV 244) could not approach.

The point of this note is that I believe that JS Bach himself loved the work and used it as an ideal to equal, if possible, and perhaps even surpass. Obviously as JS Bach reached a level unequalled by all other composers (IMHO) many would assume that he did indeed surpass the work. Yet when I first heard the opening chorus, the chorus: "aus der Tiefe rufe ich", the aria: "lasst mich ihn nur noch eunmal kussen" and the closing chorus, and even now weeks later, I am NOT convinced that JSBach in his own mind felt that he had surpassed this work in its greatest moments. Certainly his own music made most of the St Luke seem almost banal but not in its brightest and greatest moments.where it reaches a peak of emotion that even JS merely approaches, say in: "mache dich mein herze lang" (from memory sorry!!).

Another possibility, is that he discovered it late in his career when the new classical era was starting to begin its labour pains and he saw it as a worthy, if premature, child of this era with its emphasis upon harmony at the expense of counterpoint and that this, plus the emotional quality of several of its pieces had a particular appeal to him and thus it was considered worthy of imitation. It had to be late in his career because of its construction and also because he did not use any of its "better moments" for his own use, which implies that it was late in his life and that the composer was still alive.

Remember it is only an opinion and one formed because I was trying to see why JSBach thought it worthy of copying.

I have no idea what you may think of this note and I suppose that it doesn't really matter anyway, but I thought that I would pass it on as my humble opinion.

Owen

Thomas Braatz wrote (April 30, 2006):
From "Bach-Dokumente II" Item 439 (Verbot einer Passionsaufführung) [Injunction against performing a Passion to take place in Leipzig on Good Friday (March 27, 1739)]

"According to order issued by the City Council of Leipzig, I approached Mr. Bach personally and told him that the Passion music which he had planned for this year could not be performed until he had received permission from the council to do so. Whereupon he responded: "It has always been the custom here to perform the Passion music on Good Friday, but this wasn't really a task which I ever enjoyed doing because I really don't get anything out of it. Besides, it's just an extra burden for me. I will, however, report this to the superintendent that an injunction against this performance has been issued. If, as I surmise, the reason for this injunction is due to a problem with the text, it should be pointed out that there have been a few performances in previous years using the same text." All of these comments are being respectfully reported by the assistant scribe for the undertaker, signed Andreas Gottlieb Bienengräber [this family name does not mean "one who buries the bees" but rather "one who digs a plot of land"] March 17, 1739."

Current status of scholarship regarding BWV 246 "The Passion according to St. Luke" as given in the NBA KB II/9 pp. 69-80

Major Points for Consideration:

1. This Passion is not by J. S. Bach (although still listed as a work of doubtful authenticity)

2. The only part that shows J. S. Bach's hand as a composer in reworking and arranging a mvt. is BWV 246/40a "Aus der Tiefen" which Bach undertook for a repeat performance between 1743 and 1746.

3. The first performance of BWV 246 took place in Leipzig in 1730 on Good Friday.

4. Although the original sources from which Bach copied his score have never been located, we do have a substantial portion of this score in Bach's own handwriting. Of the 30 pages which were copied in 1730, pp. 3-23 were done by J. S. Bach and the remainder by C.P.E. Bach. The only title in J. S. Bach's handwriting appears on the 1^st page of the score: J. J. Passio D. J. C. secundu à 4 Voci: 2 Hautb. | 2 Violini Viola e Cont. This is a clean copy of the score with almost no mistakes or corrections.

5. There are 9 copies of the score from the 18^th and 19^th centuries. These are all based upon Bach's own copy. Many of these state that they are based upon the Bach 'autograph' which could mean two things: 1. The copyists and/or collectors correctly recognized that the score was mainly in Bach's own handwriting; 2. They assumed incorrectly that the latter meant that Bach had also composed this music.

Historical Background on the Issue of Authenticity

Johann Friedrich Doles (1715-1797), Cantor of St. Thomas Church and School from 1755-1789, had no qualms whatsoever in passing this work off as a Bach original composition when he performed it in Leipzig. After Doles there were several different owners of the manuscript until it eventually came into the hands of Franz Hauser (1794-1870), an avid collector of Bach manuscripts who was also a friend of Felix Mendelssohn-Bartholdy. The latter, in a letter probably addressed to Hauser and dated January 19, 1833, stated: "You ask me what reasons I might have to think that the St. Luke Passion may not be by J. S. Bach? There are very personal reasons why I feel this way. It is really very awkward for me to have to say this to you as the owner of this score, but, for instance, just look at the chorale, or whatever else it is called, "Tröste mich und mach' mich satt". If this was composed by J. S. Bach, I'll go and hang myself, and even if it happens undeniably to be in his handwriting. The score is too clean and free from errors; he must have copied it from another source. Who else might have composed this? Perhaps it is simply by Telemann, J.M. Bach, or Locatelli or Altnickel or Jungnickel or even Nickel [old nickel, new nickel or any kind of nickel you might have - here Mendelssohn is probably facetiously playing with the name "Altnickol" (Johann Christoph Altnickol was J. S Bach's son-in-law) who was responsible for a number of copies of Bach's manuscripts.]

Hauser nevertheless had a number of copies of the original made and distributed or sold them. In his list of manuscripts, however, he noted that "it seems to be a copy of a composition by another composer."

In a letter to Julius Schubring early in 1, Johannes Brahms decisively rejected Bach's authorship of this work: "there are errors in voice-leading, mistakes in declamation and illogical modulations. There is an uneven quality present and a lack of overall unity." Brahms was unable to say who might have been the original composer. The only reason for printing it (in the BGA) would be because it had been copied in Bach's own handwriting. Other BGA editors and Bach scholars, Moritz Hauptmann, Wilhelm Rust, Robert Franz and Julius Rietz were likewise very negative and critical in their observations.

In the 1880s, however, a great controversy arose with Philipp Spitta speaking in favor of the authenticity of this work just as the BGA was still preparing it for future publication. Spitta's reasons were as
follows:

1. C.P.E. Bach had mentioned in J. S. Bach's obituary that the latter had composed 5 Passions, of which two were complete, the third (St. Mark Passion) would need to be reconstructed. Spitta surmised that the fourth was based upon a Picander text from 1725 and that would mean that the fifth was the St. Luke Passion.

2. A Breitkopf catalogue entry from 1761 had such a Passion for sale in Bach's own handwriting and it even had a J. J. at the beginning proving that it must be a Bach original composition [What Spitta did not realize is that Bach also had copied 11 cantatas by Johann Ludwig Bach where the J. J. also appears in Bach's handwriting.]

3. The chorales Spitta considered a strong point in favor of Bach's composing this work.

4. The use of an obbligato bassoon might be compared to some early cantatas from the Weimar period.

Spitta's doubts:

1. Spitta did have some doubts, however, about the quality of the composition which simply did not fit into the style of Bach's compositions in his Leipzig period; but Spitta thought that it might have been a very early work.

2. The text contained far too many chorales and not enough 'freer' verse.

The critical response to Spitta's conjectures came swiftly from Erich Prieger, in his "Echt oder Unecht? Zur Lucas-Passion" Berlin, 1889. Prieger brought forth strong counter arguments against all of Spitta's contentions. Compared to other early works by Bach (BWV 71 and BWV 131), Prieger contended, this Passion was "expressionless". Prieger could not understand why Bach in 1730 would leave untouched numerous objectionable passages from his early years as a composer.

Another sharp attack on Spitta's notions came from Bernhard Ziehn in his "Betrachtungen über den Choralsatz, nebst Vor-, Zwischen-, und Nachbemerkungen, im Anschluß an die vorgeblich Bach'sche Lukas-Passion" Allgemeine Musikzeitung, No. 27-39, 1891. Ziehn compares the irregularities in the composition of the chorales of the St. Luke Passion with those of other composers of the time and with the chorales that are definitely known to be composed by Bach. The results of Ziehn's investigation show:

1. Irregularities can be observed in all three categories

2. Nowhere except in the "Lukas-Passion" can there be found such a large number of simply 'stupid mistakes' revealing 'such a deplorable lack of knowledge about the rules of composition'.

The BGA editor for the "Lukas-Passion", Alfred Dörffel in the BGA 45/2, cites some of the argumentation on both sides, but finds it impossible to state conclusively that this composition is not by Bach.

After the publication of the "Lukas-Passion", speculation about the possible source continued with such potential composers as Johann Hermann Schein and Heinrich Schütz even being mentioned around the turn of the century.

The death knell for potential performances of the "Lukas-Passion" was sounded with the pronouncement by Albert Schweitzer (Leipzig, 1908) that no practicing musician in his right mind would ever be tempted to perform this work, whether its authenticity could be proven or not.

In 1911 Max Schneider succeeded in proving that a part of the score was copied by C.P.E. Bach and not his father. From this point onward it became clear to Bach scholars that this work could no longer be considered as being by J.S. Bach.

One last attempt to revive the argumentation of J.S. Bach's authorship was attempted by Andreas Glöckner in 1977, but his arguments have subsequently been refuted, leaving only BWV 246/40a as a 'reworking' or 'arrangement' by Bach that can be considered a genuine change and addition to whatever existed as a source from which Bach worked.

Douglas Cowling wrote (May 1, 2006):
[To Thomas Braatz] Terrific summary, Thomas.

This should be posted to the Passion link.

Lukas Passion BWV 246: Recording | General Discussions

Back to the Top

Last update: ýMay 1, 2006 ý14:49:31