Erik Kjellberg (Ed.)

UG Varia Musicologica 18.qxd 25.03.
2010 13:28 Seite 1
In this volume fifteen musicologists from five countries present new

findings and observations concerning the production, distribution and 18 Erik Kjellberg (ed.)
use of music manuscripts and prints in seventeenth-century Europe.
A special emphasis is laid on the Düben Collection, one of the largest
music collections of seventeenth-century Europe, preserved at the
Uppsala University Library.
The papers in this volume were initially presented at an international

Th e D i s s e m i n a t i o n o f M u s i c
Erik Kjellberg (ed.)

conference at Uppsala University in September 2006, held on the
occasion of the launching of The Düben Collection Database in Seventeenth-Century Europe
Catalogue on the Internet. For the first time, the entire collection had
been made acessible worldwide, covering a vast number of musical C e l e b ra t i n g t h e D ü b e n C o l l e c t i o n
and philological aspects of all items in the collection.
18
in Seventeenth-Century Europe
aria Musicologica
18
Erik Kjellberg is professor of Musicology at Uppsala University since
1985. He has published many studies on music in Sweden – notably
aria
from the seventeenth century – based on extensive archival research.
In addition he is the author of books and articles on jazz.
usicologica
ISBN 978-3-0343-0057-5
This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00) Pe t e r L a n g

www.peterlang.com
UG Varia Musicologica 18.qxd 25.03.2010 13:28 Seite 1
In this volume fifteen musicologists from five countries present new

findings and observations concerning the production, distribution and 18 Erik Kjellberg (ed.)
use of music manuscripts and prints in seventeenth-century Europe.
A special emphasis is laid on the Düben Collection, one of the largest
music collections of seventeenth-century Europe, preserved at the
Uppsala University Library.
The papers in this volume were initially presented at an international


conference at Uppsala University in September 2006, held on the
occasion of the launching of The Düben Collection Database in Seventeenth-Century Europe
Catalogue on the Internet. For the first time, the entire collection had
been made acessible worldwide, covering a vast number of musical C e l e b ra t i n g t h e D ü b e n C o l l e c t i o n
and philological aspects of all items in the collection.
18
aria Musicologica
18
Erik Kjellberg is professor of Musicology at Uppsala University since
1985. He has published many studies on music in Sweden – notably
aria
from the seventeenth century – based on extensive archival research.
In addition he is the author of books and articles on jazz.
usicologica
This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00) Pe t e r L a n g

The Dissemination of Music
This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

Varia Musicologica
Herausgegeben von
Peter Maria Krakauer
PETER LANG
Bern • Berlin • Bruxelles • Frankfurt am Main • New York • Oxford • Wien

The Dissemination of Music

Celebrating the Düben Collection
Proceedings from the International Conference

at Uppsala University 2006
PETER LANG
Bern • Berlin • Bruxelles • Frankfurt am Main • New York • Oxford • Wien

Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Bibliothek
Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie;
detailed bibliographic data is available on the Internet at ‹http://dnb.ddb.de›.
British Library and Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data:

A catalogue record for this book is available from The British Library,
Great Britain, and from The Library of Congress, USA.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

The dissemination of music in seventeenth-century Europe : celebrating the Düben
collection : proceedings from the International Conference at Uppsala University
2006 / Erik Kjellberg (ed.).
p. cm. – (Varia musicologica ; vol. 18)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
1. Dissemination of music–Europe–History–17th century–Congresses. 2. Uppsala

universitet. Düben collection–Congresses. 3. Music–Europe–17th century–
Congresses. 4. Music–Manuscripts–Europe–17th century–Congresses.
I. Kjellberg, Erik.
ML240.2.D57 2010
780.26–dc22
2010010201
This volume was financed by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (The Bank of Sweden

Tercentenary Foundation) and Vetenskapsrådet (Swedish Research Council).
Cover illustration: Uppsala Cathedral and Gustavianum.

Photograph by Tommy Westling. 2006.
ISSN 1660-8666
ISBN 978-3-0351-0068-6
© Peter Lang AG, International Academic Publishers, Bern 2010

Hochfeldstrasse 32, CH-3012 Bern, Switzerland
info@peterlang.com, www.peterlang.com, www.peterlang.net
All rights reserved.

All parts of this publication are protected by copyright.
Any utilisation outside the strict limits of the copyright law, without
the permission of the publisher, is forbidden and liable to prosecution.
This applies in particular to reproductions, translations, microfilming,
and storage and processing in electronic retrieval systems.
Printed in Germany

Contents
Foreword 7
ERIK KJELLBERG
Uppsala University
The Düben Family and the Düben Collection 11
KIA HEDELL
Uppsala University
The Missa super Im Mayen and the Düben Collection
in relation to the German Church Collection in Stockholm 33
JULIANE PEETZ
Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universität, Greifswald
The large Tablature Books in the Düben Collection 49
BARBARA WIERMANN
Hochschule für Musik und Theater, Leipzig
Vokal-instrumentale Werke in der Sammlung Düben –
Überlieferung und Aneignung 73
FRIEDHELM KRUMMACHER
Christian-Albrechts-Universität, Kiel
Vokalmusik der Dübensammlung im Repertoire der Zeit.
Fragen und Beispiele im Rückblick 107
KONRAD KÜSTER
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg/Br.
Fame, Politics, and personal Relationship:
Whom did Düben know in the Baltic Area? 149
PETER WOLLNY
Bach-Archiv, Leipzig
A Source Complex from Saxony in the Düben Collection 173
LARS BERGLUND
Uppsala University
The Roman Connection. The Dissemination and
Reception of Roman Music in the North 193

6 Contents
ALEKSANDRA PATALAS
Jagiellonian University, Kraków
Ut oratio sit Domina. The Dispute between
Romano Micheli and Marco Scacchi 219
STEPHEN ROSE
Royal Holloway, University of London
The Composer as Self-Publisher in Seventeenth-Century
Germany 239
WERNER BRAUN
Universität des Saarlandes
Zeitereignisse in Meders Oper Die beständige Argenia (1680) 261
JAN OLOF RUDÉN
Stockholm
Ensemble Music copied by the Swedish Student
Nils Tiliander in Greifswald, Rostock and Wittenberg
1698–1699 279
KERALA J. SNYDER
Eastman School of Music, University of Rochester
Beyond Sources and Works.
A fresh Look at Buxtehude’s Legacy 305
ERIK KJELLBERG
Uppsala University
The Düben Database project 325
CARL-JOHAN BERGSTEN
Göteborg University
The Düben Database structure 329
ANDERS EDLING
Uppsala University Library
The use of the Düben Collection as seen in the
Correspondence of the Uppsala University Library 335
Index 345

Foreword
The Düben Collection preserved at the Uppsala University Li-

brary in Sweden is the fons et origo of the present volume. In
2006 a long-term computer project focusing on this important
music collection from the 17th century reached its final stage
and was launched on the Internet. To celebrate this event an
invitation was sent to a number of scholars, who assembled in
Uppsala 7–9th September 2006 for a symposium bearing the
same name as this volume, and the papers are herewith made
available. They represent important additions to knowledge of
the Düben Collection in particular and to problems of music
dissemination in Europe during the 17th century in general.
The references given in each article illustrate the on-going
scholarly discourse over the years.
Since database and computer techniques have been a pre-
requisite for the project and also for the symposium, some re-
flections on these tools may well be warranted. Who could have
foreseen the impact of the computer on modern society some
twenty years ago? Internet has become everyone’s door to near
and distant worlds in time and space – a medium that has
stretched our ability and curiosity almost beyond belief. How-
ever, as is often the case with new inventions, different opinions
have accompanied the rapid and widespread use of computer
techniques in the ensuing years. Instant access to all kinds of
information may encourage superficiality. And the slim-lined
technology may suggest uniformities that seldom occur in ‘real
life’. So the critics could argue. But the computer in itself is no
enemy to man. It has proven to be an indispensable tool in our
daily routines and its enormous capability invites us to think
and re-think along new lines. The computer may be regarded as
an untiring and humble servant, maybe even a dear friend.

8 Foreword
As early as the 1960s successful attempts were made to com-

bine musicology and computer techniques in the field of docu-
mentation and style analysis. Important pioneers were Barry S.
Brook and Jan LaRue in the States.
However in spite of the promises computer techniques
seemed to make, it took some years before these promises were
fulfilled on a larger scale. Only with more flexible and more or
less standardised programmes was it possible for the computer
to serve individuals in the musical community – whether
scholar, composer, or performer. The journal ‘Computing in
Musicology’ (from 1986) bears witness to the rapid progress in
a number of musicological disciplines.
Music is disseminated in many possible ways and for differ-
ent reasons, depending on practical or economical resources on
the one hand and ideological or political on the other. It is in-
teresting and even important to ask how music is made avail-
able in a particular era. The present volume is devoted to the
17th century. Fifteen scholars contribute to the main theme.
Their contributions may be divided into five areas:
1) The history and general make-up of the Düben Collection at
the Uppsala University Library (Kjellberg, Hedell, Peetz,
Wiermann,)
2) Certain or possible links between Sweden and Europe that
account for the assemblage of a large international repertoire
during this period (Küster, Wollny, Berglund)
3) Questions of sociological and aesthetic nature and specific
source problems (Krummacher, Snyder, Rose)
4) Examples of musical-cultural relations outside the Düben
Collection (Braun, Patalas, Rudén)
5) The database project and the use of the Düben Collection in
modern times (Kjellberg, Bergsten, Edling).
***

Foreword 9
This volume was financed by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (The

Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation) and Vetenskapsrådet
(Swedish Research Council). Cynthia Zetterqvist has kindly
assisted with language supervision of the articles by Swedish-
speaking contributors. The editor gratefully acknowledges the
inclusion of this report in a series by the renowned publisher
Peter Lang.
Stockholm in November 2009
Erik Kjellberg
Editor

ERIK KJELLBERG
The Düben Family and the Düben Collection
The ‘Düben Collection’ derives its name from the Düben family,
a musical dynasty from Germany whose members served as
musicians and/or Hofkapellmeisters at the Swedish royal court
from 1620 to the 1710s. The collection is preserved at the Upp-
sala University Library and contains considerably more than
two thousand compositions by more than two hundred com-
posers – and many unidentified – from Germany, Austria, Italy,
France, England, Poland, the Baltic countries, and Sweden. To a
large extent the collection consists of manuscripts notated as
parts or in tablature, but printed music is also represented. The
historical importance of the Düben Collection has long been
acknowledged and the musical works and genres represented
have been the subject of a substantial number of editions and
musicological studies dating back to the late 19th century.
A highly comprehensive relational database, The Düben Col-
lection Database Catalogue (DCDC), was launched in Septem-
ber 2006. Although the first important steps towards catalogu-
ing the collection were taken in the 1880s, together with an
inventory of other music kept at the Uppsala University Li-
brary, the database represents the first full-scale, in-depth in-
ventory of the Düben Collection in its entirety. From now on all
sources and all works in manuscript can be accessed from any-
where in the world via the Internet.1
1 Cf. Erik Kjellberg, ‘The Düben Database Project’ in the present volume.

12 Erik Kjellberg
The Family
Gustav Düben (c. 1628–1690) was the main creator of the collec-
tion during his appointment as Hofkapellmeister at the Swed-
ish royal court from 1663 to 1690, but the earliest parts date
from as far back as the 1640s (or even earlier) when Gustav’s
father, Andreas Düben (c. 1597–1662), held the same position
from 1640 to 1662. The most recent manuscripts in the collection
were added in the 1710s during the tenure of Gustav’s son, An-
ders von Düben (1673–1738) and thus the collection embraces
three generations of the Düben family.2
There were several reasons for this huge assembly of music
and – fortunately – for its preservation. We must begin in the
early 1620s when a Hofkapelle was set up at the Swedish royal
court in conjunction with the marriage between King Gustavus
Adolphus (who reigned from 1611 to 1632) and the German
Princess Maria Eleonora from Berlin (1599–1655). The musicians
were mostly recruited from Germany under the leadership of
Bartholomeus Schultz (Praetorius), a former musician at the
Brandenburger court in Berlin. Among the more than twenty
musicians brought from Germany to Sweden was Andreas
Düben from Leipzig and it was through his engagement to the
Swedish royal court that the Düben family gained a foothold in
Sweden.
Although this new ensemble was imported to add splendour
to the royal wedding and as a manifestation of the glory of the
Swedish kingdom, it should also be seen as a conspicuous ex-
ample of a musical and cultural modernisation in line with
2 The family came from Sachsen with Michael Düben (died c. 1550),
schoolmaster and burgher from Leipzig, as its earliest known member. See
Bengt Kyhlberg, ‘Düben’, Sohlmans musiklexikon 2nd ed. vol. 2, Stockholm
1975, and Bengt Kyhlberg, ‘När föddes Gustav Düben? Anteckningar
kring några oklara punkter i familjens biografi’, Svensk tidskrift för
musikforskning, 55:1 (1974). See also the biographical entries on the family
members by Kyhlberg and Bertil van Boer (‘Düben’) in The New Grove Dic-
tionary of Music and Musicians, London, 2nd ed. 2002.

other initiatives in a politically emerging country. In fact Gus-

tavus Adolphus’s daughter, the future Queen Christina (who
reigned from 1644 to 1654) epitomised the Europeanising of a
previously rather uncultured country in the north. Political and
cultural ambitions went hand in hand and furthered each
other’s interests. With the peace treaty of 1648, Sweden’s fame
resounded all over the continent. In 1660, in addition to the pre-
sent mainland, Sweden reigned over large territories stretching
from North Germany and the Baltic countries to the whole of
Finland.
The Age of Greatness (‘Stormaktstiden’) came to an end with
the death of Charles XII in 1718, and the disintegration of politi-
cal power resulted in a new agenda. Music often heralds a shift
in cultural interests and consequently the change in taste brought
forth new ideals and new talents – the days of the Düben family
were over. Although members of the family continued to hold
administrative posts they were ousted from the centre of the
musical scene by the young Hofkapellmeister Johan Helmich
Roman (1694–1758), the first accomplished Swedish-born com-
poser and an important musician and musical organiser.
For a century the Düben family had played a central role in
the establishment of a professional musical culture in Sweden,
and it may come as no surprise that the family was closely al-
lied to inner circles at the Swedish royal court. Acknowledge-
ments of the family’s privileged position were bestowed upon
members of the third Swedish generation – not only Anders
Düben the Younger but also Joachim (1671–1730), his elder
brother by two years, and their sister Emerentia (1669–1743),
Queen Ulrika Eleonora’s favoured lady-in-waiting. In fact all
three of them were raised to the nobility in 1707, an honour
which was manifested in the inclusion of a ‘von’ in the family
name.
Anders von Düben left his post as Hofkapellmeister and
turned towards administrative and political spheres. He died in
1738 at the height of his career, a wealthy man and marshal of
the court. It was in the late 1720s that Anders von Düben de-
cided to donate the vast repertoire of music from his and his

14 Erik Kjellberg
ancestors’ musical activities in Stockholm and elsewhere to

Uppsala University. Two large chests with thousands of music
manuscripts and prints were transported from Stockholm to
Uppsala in the winter of 1732/33. This collection was later be-
stowed with the label ‘Dübensamlingen’ (the Düben Collec-
tion).
The donation of 1732/33 and an academic controversy
The early history of the Düben Collection was summarised

some sixty years ago by the Swedish musicologist and librarian
Folke Lindberg (1911–1988). In the preface to his unpublished
catalogue of vocal compositions in the collection and based on
his archival research, Lindberg briefly discussed the music in
the holdings of the Uppsala University Library, and made spe-
cial mention of the history of the donation of the Düben Collec-
tion. This remains the main text on the subject and thus of par-
ticular relevance in the present context.3 Furthermore, his
catalogue has been the obvious starting-point for later research-
ers and musicians; without Lindberg’s work the recently
launched computer project would have been a far more compli-
cated proposition.
In 1713, several years before his donation of music, Anders
von Düben had offered Uppsala University (at that time known
as the Uppsala Academy) five ‘Turkish’ portraits4 and in the
minutes of a meeting in March 1732 there is note to the effect
that he had donated some official congratulations from Ger-
many (Hessen) to the newly crowned Swedish King Fredrik 1.
There are few details concerning these two donations. How-
3 Folke Lindberg, Katalog över Dübensamlingen i Uppsala Universitets

Bibliotek. Vokalmusik i handskrift, med en inledning, Uppsala 1946. (Ms.)
4 Lindberg, op.cit., p. 6 referring to Claes Annerstedt, Uppsala Universitets
historia, vol. 2:2, 1648–1718, Uppsala 1909, p. 371.

ever, when it comes to the donation that interests us here, the

circumstances are much better known. Minutes from the board
meetings of the Academy together with other documents and
entries in the university archives reveal the following story.
The musicologist Bengt Kyhlberg (1915–1968) has proved
that Anders von Düben was planning to donate the huge
amount of music in his possession no later than 1728. 5At that
time a controversy arising from the appointment of a new Di-
rector Musices in Uppsala complicated the state of affairs. Part
of the problem concerned the way musical matters were organ-
ised in Uppsala. For a long time there had been a close connec-
tion between the university and the ecclesiastical sphere and
anyone who was appointed Director Musices was also expected
to serve as organist at Uppsala Cathedral. Since 1719 Eric Bur-
man had served in both capacities but in 1724 he was nomi-
nated Professor of Astronomy (i.e. advanced mathematics) and
had to resign from his duty as organist. He was succeeded by
Anders Zellbell, a member of a well-known Swedish family of
musicians, but unfortunately Zellbell died the following year.
In the very same year a new organist appeared, Heinrich Chris-
topher Engelhardt from Karlskrona, a provincial town in south-
ern Sweden. Engelhardt was not only eager to succeed Zellbell
as organist but was also eager to obtain the position of Director
Musices. The church council approved and confirmed Engel-
hardt’s application but Eric Burman refused to relinquish the
prestigious post of Director Musices, and since the university
board (the senate) was reluctant to grant Engelhardt his wish, a
rather tense controversy arose. In 1728 Engelhardt was finally
installed as organist, but at that time Burman had the support
of a group of students who were also beneficiaries of music
scholarships – a long-standing tradition at the university. The
student Peter Schönfeldt came forth as their spokesman, de-
manding that Eric Burman should be allowed to continue as
5 For a description of situations and incidents in Uppsala see Bengt

Kyhlberg, ‘Stormaktstidens chorus musicus’, Akademiska kapellet i Uppsala
under 350 år, Uppsala 1977, p. 10.

16 Erik Kjellberg
Director Musices, since he had served very well both as organ-

ist and as Director Musices, teaching music theory and giving
regular concerts in his home with a Collegium Musicum en-
semble.6
The situation that had developed was discussed at several
meetings of the university senate, and it also reached the ears of
Anders von Düben, marshal of the royal court in Stockholm
and former Kapellmeister. He decided to act in favour of Bur-
man and handed in a proposal to the Chancellor of Justice.
From a letter we learn that von Düben had promised the Acad-
emy (the University) a vast collection of music, but if Burman
was forced to resign as Director Musices this promise would be
retracted. Interestingly enough, the young and newly ap-
pointed Kapellmeister Johan Helmich Roman supported von
Düben’s desideratum in their joint letter (May 20th, 1729) to the
Academy.
Contexts and questions
If we pause here and focus for a moment on Johan Helmich

Roman, we could speculate that this support illustrated his
friendship not only with Anders but also with the Düben family
(after all, Roman and his father had both served as musicians in
the Hofkapelle in Stockholm for many years). Roman himself
must have had scant interest in this court repertoire which – at
least for representative purposes – must have been considered
outmoded and therefore not a serious loss. Furthermore, in
1728 – the previous year – Roman himself had donated a new,
printed collection of his twelve flute sonatas to Eric Burman
and the Uppsala Academy music library.7 Surely both actions
6 Uppsala universitets arkiv: konsistorieprotokoll, 27th January 1728.

7 Eva Helenius Öberg, Johan Helmich Roman. Liv och verk genom samtida ögon.
Stockholm 1994, p. 59, 62.

could be interpreted as illustrations of his own taste, compe-

tence and reputation.
We return to the situation at the university. After further de-
tours, in which Burman himself was particularly active, the
situation was resolved in favour of Engelhardt due to the sud-
den death of Burman in 1729. So in the end, although the aca-
demic controversy delayed the course of events it did not pre-
vent von Düben from donating his collection of music to
Uppsala University.
One may ask why von Düben chose Uppsala as the recipient
and why he wished to donate this out-of-date repertoire in the
first place. A qualified guess might be that he was well aware of
his, and his ancestors’, importance and was eager to make a
monument to them through the preservation of his father’s and
to some extent his own industrious work. The custom of collect-
ing objects of all kinds – books, paintings, tapestries, furniture,
weapons, jewellery – was passed down from generation to gen-
eration among the privileged classes during the Renaissance
and Baroque era. In Sweden, for instance, the huge collections
assembled during the 17th century by Queen Christina and the
Brahe, Wrangel and De la Gardie families and others are exam-
ples of this phenomenon. Collecting and preserving objects of
the most varied kinds was seen as a manifestation of the
owner’s worldly, spiritual and cultural awareness and educa-
tion and was a form of personal propaganda. Musical instru-
ments of high quality were esteemed as valuable, tangible ob-
jects, often with symbolic connotations, and the same was
sometimes true of printed music. But music in manuscript was
mostly seen as transitory material, sometimes inventoried and
occasionally preserved by institutions or probably more often
by musicians once the music had been performed. Thousands
of manuscripts were lost, however, or simply thrown away. In
the light of this fact the donation of the Düben Collection could
perhaps be interpreted as a kind of historical oversight or mere
chance.
But again, why Uppsala? Anders von Düben was a friend of
Jöns (Johannes) Steuch(ius)(1676–1742), who was appointed

18 Erik Kjellberg
Archbishop of Uppsala in 1730. Steuchius was well aware of

Düben’s offer and he was eager to promote it. von Düben’s
brother, the councillor (riksråd) Joachim von Düben (1671–
1730), was the brother-in-law of Jöns since they were both mar-
ried to daughters of the famous theologian and poet and former
Archbishop of Uppsala, Haquin Spegel (1645–1714). On the
death of Jöns Steuchius’s father, Archbishop emeritus Matthias
Steuchius (1644–1730), he and Joachim met at the funeral in
Uppsala in 1730, but Joachim also died later that same year.
Folke Lindberg interprets this web of relationships as a deci-
sive factor in the donator Anders von Düben’s choice of Upp-
sala. This may be the case, but let us cast the net a little wider.
Uppsala was the ecclesiastical centre of Sweden, the seat of the
Swedish archbishop. A number of coronations had taken place
in Uppsala Cathedral since the 16th century, imbuing the city
with prestige, and in addition the city had long been a well-
known place of work for court musicians residing in Stock-
holm. They performed on important occasions (primarily coro-
nations) at Uppsala Cathedral, and they occasionally acted as
tutors for music students as part of their academic education in
excercitia. From time to time the court also resided at the castle
in Uppsala. Given his social standing at the time of the dona-
tion, Anders von Düben was assuredly aware of the contempo-
rary – and historical – prestige a large donation conferred upon
the donor. One can speculate as to whether he knew of the do-
nations of medieval manuscripts or the war booties of music
prints donated to the Uppsala University Library by Gustavus
Adolphus in the 1620s and 1630s, at the time when his grandfa-
ther settled in Stockholm as organist of the German Church and
as a musician in the newly established Hofkapelle at the royal
court.8
Let us return to the early 1730s. In November 1732 the con-
sistory in Uppsala discussed whether it was appropriate to re-
mind Anders von Düben of his promised donation. A few
8 See Åke Davidsson, ‘Kring Uppsalaakademiens förvärv av musikalier på

1600-talet’, Nordisk tidskrift för bok- och biblioteksväsen 1969.

weeks later things began to happen. Archbishop Jöns Steuchius,

who also served as pro-chancellor of the University, reported in
a letter that he had recently come to know that the marshal of
the Court, Anders von Düben, was offering the University Li-
brary two well-wrapped chests of ‘rara och helt curieuse musi-
calier’ (unique and priceless music). von Düben had proposed
that the chests be transported from Stockholm to Uppsala as
soon as possible. The board decided that the transport should
be carried out by farmers on duty at the Academy (the Univer-
sity), since no skipper would dare to use his ship that late in the
autumn.
Letter from the council of the Academy (the University) in Uppsala to

Anders von Düben, November 14th, 1732
Summary:
Through the Archbishop and the Chancellor of the Academy, the Council
of the Academy has been made aware of von Düben’s support of studies
and affiliated sciences and that to this end he is donating his large collec-
tion of unique and priceless music. The Academy hereby acknowledges
with gratitude the donation which will be preserved and honoured. How-
ever the transport of the collection from Stockholm to Uppsala cannot be
effectuated at this time of year since no skipper would be prepared to
make the journey by sea so late in the autumn. The Academy will arrange
transport as soon as possible. In the meantime the music will have to re-
main in von Düben’s house.9
9 ’Til Hofmarsk: Bar. Düben. Det har högwördigste Ärche Biskopen och Pro
Cancellarien nyl. gifwit Consistorio Acad: wid handen, huruledes tit: af
sin priswärda ömhet och wårdande om studier och dertil hörande wackra
wetenskaper gunstigast täckts til denna K. Acad:s Bibliotheque förära en
ansenl. sambling af rara och helt curieusa Musicalier, hwarföre hos tit.
Cons: Acad: ei underlåta bordt härmed sin hörsammaste tacksejelse afläg-
ga, som det och tillika försäkrar at en angenäm present til tit: ewerdel. lof
och minne wid denna Academine skola uptaga och förvara. Hwad åter
öfwerförslen hit öfwer til Upsala widkommer, som knapt någon skeppare
lärer sådan effter så sent på hösten tiltro sig fara siöledes här emellan med
fartyg, så ber Consistorium Acad: hörsammast, at förenämde Musicalier

20 Erik Kjellberg
But Düben arranged things his own way. In minutes dated

January 27th, 1733, the members of the council were informed
of a letter from Anders von Düben to the effect that he had al-
ready sent the two chests to Uppsala with the private tutor of
his children, Mr. Hegardt. Also, since he himself had not had
time to make an inventory of the contents he urged the Univer-
sity, or rather the Director Musices, to proceed with this work
as soon as the chests reached Uppsala and then send a copy of
the inventory to him. That this would be done by Engelhardt
with the assistance of Professors Hermansson and Frondin was
promised in the letter of thanks that was immediately des-
patched from the Academy. von Düben’s tutor Hegardt and his
two servants should be rewarded four ducats for their expenses
during the transfer from Stockholm to Uppsala.10
For the time being the two chests were housed in the upper
gallery of Gustavianum, i.e. the university building (including
the library) next to the cathedral. Some months later (in April
1733) it was reported that large rats had damaged the frames of
several pictures stored near the chests and it was assumed that
the rats had come out of the still unopened chests of music. It
was decided that the chests should be carried to the lower
rooms in the building.
Work on the inventory seems to have started in May and
many ‘extraordinarily strange things’ were reported to have
been found. But soon Engelhardt proved reluctant to proceed
with the task. Contrary to his request it was decided that no
extra payment should be made since the board considered that
he would profit from the music in his capacity as Director Mu-
sices. In the meantime it was decided that special cabinets with
iron grids should be made since there was very little light in the
library rooms during the cold and dark winter months. It was
not until the following year (April 1734) that these cabinets
första åkeföre igenom Academie böndren hit förde blifva.’ Uppsala uni-
versitets arkiv: Literae Consistorii Academici ad varios, 1729–1738, p. 570.
10 Uppsala universitets arkiv: konsistorieprotokoll 27 Januari 1733, § 3, cf.
Lindberg, Katalog, p. 8.

were made and placed in the galleries. During the autumn of

that year Professors Hermansson and Frondin reported that the
catalogue of the collection was more or less complete except for
Engelhardt’s share of the work. It was deemed necessary to
remind him again, but in fact the catalogue seems to have been
completed late in 1735 without the assistance of Engelhardt.11
Thus a more or less complete catalogue of the Düben dona-
tion seems to have existed, but neither Lindberg nor the promi-
nent Uppsala librarian Åke Davidsson (1913–2004) were able to
bring it to light. There is scant mention of the music stored at
the University Library: in 1785, for example, the two cabinets of
music are mentioned en passant and as late as 1914 the univer-
sity historian Claes Annerstedt briefly referred to von Düben’s
donation, but there is still no mention of an inventory.12
The Revival in the 1880s
However, by the time that Annerstedt drew attention to it,

knowledge of this remarkable collection of 17th century music
manuscripts was already spreading.
1. Anders Lagerberg
The foundation of a modern revival was laid in 1881 when the

retired librarian Anders Lagerberg (aged 68) was asked to make
an inventory of the music stored at the Uppsala University Li-
brary (Carolina Rediviva). He accepted the assignment and
immediately began work and completed the inventory ten
years later. His unique catalogue is meticulously handwritten
11 Lindberg, Katalog, p. 8–10.

12 Claes Annerstedt, Uppsala Universitets historia, Vol. 3:2, 1719–1792, Uppsala
1914, p. 487.

22 Erik Kjellberg
and well-bound in six volumes for use at the manuscript de-

partment of the University Library. By 1888 three volumes were
finished, including the catalogue of vocal music in manuscript
which must have formed a substantial part of the Düben Collec-
tion. It seems that Lagerberg was permitted to take certain
manuscripts home. In a letter he wrote (in Swedish):
On the large bookshelf in the middle of the room in front of the entrance to the
Oriental room, quite far down among five or six bound folios there is a similar
volume bound in red parchment – called liber ruber by G. Düben. I could spend
my time profitably with this volume today if it could be brought to my home by a
messenger, and if the porter Eriksson could be asked to fetch it from me this after-
noon and put it back in the library.
It should be added that previous to Lagerberg’s work the uni-

versity archives of printed books, including music prints from
the 16th and 17th century, had been catalogued in the early 19th
century by Pehr Fabian Aurivillius (1756–1829).13 Approxi-
mately a hundred years later the Spanish diplomat Rafael Mit-
jana (1869–1921), while resident in Sweden, devoted his time to
making a meticulously laid-out catalogue but only of the music
prints.14 Mitjana’s catalogue was published in 1911 and was
supplemented in the 1950s by the Uppsala librarian Åke
Davidsson in a series of internationally well-known catalogues
of all music prints in Swedish libraries before about 1700. It
should be noted however that the efforts of the bibliographers
Aurivillius and Mitjana were directed towards printed vocal
music, in particular with sacred texts, as was Folke Lindberg’s
remarkable work on the manuscripts in the Düben Collection.
However, Åke Davidsson also listed e.g. the collections of
prints of instrumental music from these early centuries pre-
13 Pehr Fabian Aurivillius, Catalogus librorum impressorum Bibliothecae regiae

academiae Upsalinesis. Upsala 1814.
14 Rafael Mitjana, Catalogue critique et descriptif des imprimés de musique des
XVIe et XVIIe siècles conservés à la Bibliothèque de l’Université d’Upsala. Tome
1. Musique religieuse. Upsala 1911.

served at the University Library in his supplementary cata-

logues.15
The extensive and admirable bibliographic descriptions in
these pioneering works do not systematically address and solve
the important question of the provenance of prints, although
Mitjana and Davidsson established the Düben provenance for
some dozen collections and individual works respectively. The
reason for this can partly be explained by the close connection
between the Düben Collection and the manuscripts, in particu-
lar the huge stocks of (sacred) vocal music. Bruno Grusnick also
limited his work to the vocal music in manuscript. As for my-
self, I made my first trembling under-graduate steps into this
overwhelmingly abundant collection in the late 1960s with a
supplementary inventory of the instrumental music in manu-
script.16 Some years later I pursued the question further as to
which of the many prints from this era housed at the University
Library should (presumably or with certainty) be regarded as
part of the collection, i.e. had been donated to the university by
Anders von Düben. This in turn led me to further considera-
tions and observations on the relation between prints and
manuscripts, and from there to possible connections with other
archives, in particular the German Church Collection and pre-
served inventories.17 In the present volume Kia Hedell and Bar-
bara Wiermann in particular have made further important ad-
vances in this direction.
15 Åke Davidsson, Catalogue critique et descriptif des imprimés de musique

des 16e et 17e siècles conservés à la Bibliothèque de l’Université Royale
d’Upsala. Tome II, Uppsala 1951. The title is supplemented by the author
with the following information as to its contents: ‘Musique religeuse II,
Musique Profane, Musique Dramatique, Musique Instrumentale,
Additions au Tome I [= Mitjana’s Catalogue Upsala, 1911]).
16 Erik Kjellberg, Instrumentalmusiken i Dübensamlingen. En översikt. Uppsala
1968.
17 Erik Kjellberg, Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden. Studier kring
deras organisation, verksamheter och status ca 1620–ca 1720, vol. 2, Uppsala
1979, p. 299–309, 820–824.

24 Erik Kjellberg
The greatest proportion of Lagerberg’s handwritten cata-

logue was made up of the manuscripts in the Düben donation,
which subsequently became known as the Düben Collection
and whose exact contents have never been clearly defined. In
principle Lagerberg’s catalogue is in alphabetical order, and
composers from various centuries are listed side by side. We do
not know how the manuscripts and prints in the Düben donation
were organised and shelved in Uppsala before Lagerberg started
work on it, and it was not part of his instructions and also be-
yond his competence to organise the catalogue according to the
provenances of all the manuscripts and prints in the library.
2. Carl Stiehl
At this point Music Director Carl Stiehl (1826–1911) from Lübeck

entered the history of the Düben Collection. In a letter to the
Uppsala Library dated 17th August 1886 Stiehl asked if the prints
of Buxtehude’s sonatas op. 1 and 2 (the only two that are pre-
served) could be sent to Lübeck.18 I am not sure whether this loan
was approved, but in 1888 Stiehl visited Uppsala and on his re-
turn he reported his findings to the council (the senate) of
Lübeck, who commissioned him to undertake an extensive jour-
ney to Denmark and Sweden to search out music from the 17th
and 18th centuries, in particular by composers from Lübeck.
Stiehl undertook his trip in the summer of 1888 and reported his
findings in the August issue of the Lübeckische Blätter.19 He
started in Copenhagen and proceeded in turn to Helsingör,
Lund, and Stockholm where, assisted by the Swedish music
publisher Julius Bagge (1844–1890), he spent two days catalogu-
ing the famous ‘German Church Collection’, i.e. the music kept
in the German Church in Stockholm, or rather what remained
in the church after the donation of the printed volumes to the
18 Uppsala universitets arkiv. D5. fol. 269.

19 Carl Stiehl, ‘Bericht des Musikdirector Stiehl‘, Lübeckische Blätter, 30 (1888),
nr 65, p. 398–401.

Royal Swedish Academy of Music fifteen years earlier. In July

1888 Carl Stiehl arrived in Uppsala where he was met with
‘Liebenswürdigket, Zuvorkommenkeit und Ünermüdlichkeit in
der Beschaffung des Materials’, and he also expressed his grati-
tude to Professor Annerstedt, the librarian Dr. Lagerberg and
the amanuensis Lewenhaupt. Stiehl bought a copy of the Auriv-
illius catalogue of the prints before identifying some sensational
items among the manuscripts. Stiehl proudly writes:
Der musikalischen Welt und selbst den besten Kennern der einschlägigen
Literatur, wie Professor Spitta, unbekannt schlummerten hier 105 Cantaten von
Dietr[ich] Buxtehude und 7 sonaten von seiner Hand den Todesschlaf und
harrten ihrer Auserstehung entgegen.
Other composers from Lübeck whose works are found in

manuscript include several pieces by Franz Tunder, but Johann
Theile and Nathanael Schnittelbach are also mentioned. Stiehl
spent ten hours a day for eight days working on the manu-
scripts and the result was a fifty-page catalogue in folio. Stiehl
left Uppsala on July 20th but despite the limited time at his dis-
posal he was able to make a rough overall assessment of the
17th century Buxtehude manuscripts in Uppsala. From various
observations of the manuscripts (autographs, copies, dedica-
tions and so on) he clearly understood that there must have
been a close connection between Gustav Düben and Dietrich
Buxtehude.
Among other things, vocal works with texts translated into
Swedish led Stiehl to believe that many of Buxtehude’s work
must actually have been performed in Stockholm. He advoca-
ted further study by prominent German musicologists on the
new findings, mentioning Otto Kade and Robert Eitner by
name. The seeds of Buxtehude research and performance had
been planted.
Stiehl concluded his travel report with brief mentions of the
castle of Skokloster and the library in Linköping. No music of
interest was preserved in Linköping (due to earlier fires), nor
could Skokloster (in the possession of the family Brahe) boast of

26 Erik Kjellberg
any hidden treasures except possibly some rare printed books

from Lübeck which Stiehl carefully annotated. In the library of
the cathedral school in Västerås he noted several music prints
which needed to be catalogued.
Soon after his return to Lübeck Stiehl made a proposal to
Lagerberg in Uppsala. He asked him to send one of the two
extant copies of Buxtehude’s Lauda Sion and Tunder’s Ein kleines
Kindlein is uns geboren in exchange for some copies of the
Zeitschrift der Geschichte für Schleswig Holstein. In his supplemen-
tary annotations the librarian Åke Davidsson mentioned sev-
eral letters in the university archive concerning a possible ex-
change that were sent between Lübeck and Uppsala from
August to November 1888, with Stiehl and the town librarian
Dr. Curtius in Lübeck on the one hand and Anders Lagerberg
and Claes Annerstedt in Uppsala on the other. In the end Stiehl
received the manuscripts from Uppsala in return for some
books: G. Weber, Theorie der Tonsetzkunst (4 volumes, 1830–
1832) and F. Rochlitz, Für Freunde der Tonkunst (3 volumes,
Leipzig 1830). In a letter dated November 7th, Dr. Curtius con-
firmed that he had received the Buxtehude manuscript. Unfor-
tunately this manuscript was lost during the Second World
War.
Carl Stiehl’s importance for the revival of the collection is
well-known and was finally established through his article in
Monatshefte für Musikgeschichte, the official publication for the
Gesellschaft für Musikforschung, established in 1868 by one of the
pioneers of modern music bibliography, Robert Eitner. In his
famous Quellen-Lexikon (10 volumes, 1900–1910) Eitner relied
heavily on Stiehl for information on the Uppsala findings. 20
In this article Stiehl made one of the earliest assessments of
the family Düben, recapitulating some of his observations and
including an inventory of the manuscripts by Buxtehude and
Tunder.
20 Carl Stiehl, ‘Die Familie Düben und die Buxtehude’schen Manuscripte auf
der Bibliothek zu Upsala’, Monatshefte für Musikgeschichte, 3 nr 1 (1889), p.
2–9.

The Swedish perspective
However, we should not forget the Swedish musicologist To-

bias Norlind (1879–1947), who a few years later – at the age of
20 – made his debut on the international musicological arena
with his extensive and rather remarkable article: ‘Die Musik-
geschichte Schwedens in den Jahren 1630–1730’ in the first issue
of Sammelbände der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft.21 Despite the
fact that Norlind had received his musicological training in
Germany (studying with Adolf Sandberger and Oskar
Fleischer) he did not refer to Stiehl although he must certainly
have known of Stiehl’s articles as well as Lagerberg’s catalogue
(for many years the scholar Norlind’s reference methods have
often been very hard to unravel). In his article Norlind devoted
a considerable part of nearly fifty pages to Gustav Düben as a
collector and a composer – but his whole approach is influ-
enced by a national, even chauvinistic, perspective typical of
that time. Although he acknowledges the importance of foreign
influences during the period in question, he devotes consider-
able energy to tracing and evaluating music that was written, or
was presumed to be written, by Swedish composers.
Ever since the early 1900s the Düben Collection has been ap-
proached with various assumptions and questions – this vol-
ume bears witness to a sustained interest.
The Düben Collection label (‘Dübensamlingen’) seems to
have been attached relatively recently, maybe as late as the
1960s. In his seminal work, Från Tyska kyrkans glansdagar, Tobias
Norlind only makes brief mention of the ‘Dübenbiblioteket’ (the
21 Tobias Norlind, ‘Die Musikgeschichte Schwedens in den Jahren 1630–

1730’, Sammelbände der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft, 1 (1899–1900), p.
165–212.

28 Erik Kjellberg
Düben library), and does not discuss the collection as a unit.22

This may seem a little surprising since he devotes many pages
to extensive discussions of the contents and context of the Ger-
man Church Collection (Tyska kyrkans samling) in Stockholm
and of several other collections in Swedish schools and
churches. In a slightly earlier, extensive article on the Düben
family, the collection is a more or less implicit feature of discus-
sions on contributions from 17th century Swedish composers.23
Carl-Allan Moberg (1896–1978) was one of the first to pre-
sent the collection on a larger scale. His monograph from 1942,
Från kyrko- och hovmusik till offentlig konsert, includes a brief but
important discussion of some of the historical aspects of ‘den
Dübenska samlingen’.24 An experienced scholar, and some
years later the first appointed professor in musicology in Swe-
den (at Uppsala University from 1947 to 1960), it obviously
seemed natural to Moberg to discuss the collection in a ‘Swed-
ish context’, and by that time the collection had attracted con-
siderable attention in the international musicological com-
munity. Moberg encouraged his students to obtain more
knowledge of its contents and most undergraduate students
were trained in the basics of edition technique. The assignment
consisted of choosing a work of moderate size and writing out a
score from the parts, including a written continuo part. Well
over two hundred transcriptions were made, admittedly of a
very uneven quality, which are kept on the shelves of the li-
brary at the Department of Musicology. In all probability it was
Moberg who urged Folke Lindberg to choose as the subject of
his licentiate thesis the vocal works in the catalogue (1946).25
I would like to draw attention to two questions of impor-
tance to Moberg and to some extent also to Norlind and which
22 Tobias Norlind, Från Tyska kyrkans glansdagar, 1–3. Stockholm 1944–1945.

23 Tobias Norlind, ‘Familjen Düben’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 23
(1942).
24 Carl-Allan Moberg: Från kyrko- och hovmusik till offentlig konsert. Uppsala-
Wiesbaden 1942, p. 50.
25 See Amders Edling’s article in this volume.

were passed on to students of my own generation. The first one

was whether the collection should be regarded as part of Swed-
ish music history? The answer to that – it was said – depended
to no small extent on whether composers and musicians from
abroad but resident in Sweden could or should be regarded as
Swedish composers and if so, how should ‘Sweden’ be delim-
ited? The geographical and political borders of Sweden in the
17th century differed from today’s borders. The other main
question that Moberg formulated in 1942 and again in 195725,
concerned the status of the collection. Should these works be
regarded as remnants of a repertoire that was actually per-
formed in Stockholm – at the court or at the German Church
where Gustav Düben also served as organist? The question is
still relevant and awaits further exploration.
The international character of the collection may have made
Swedish musicologists of earlier generations rather hesitant in
their interest and evaluation. The exploration of Swedish music
history (and composers in Sweden), not least in terms of creativ-
ity and originality, dominated much of their thinking. If compo-
sitional activities are evaluated as the core in the construction of
a national music history, it would seem reasonable to locate the
more important emergence of a Swedish music history to the
18th rather than the 17th century. Of course foreign influences
were admitted into the national canon, but had to be by-passed
or made to fit in with national criteria in some broad sense.
The scene has changed as a result of the redefinition of inter-
est, and nowadays the international agenda is just as natural
and relevant as any earlier, nationalistically defined position.
An all-inclusive European outlook, matched by a scrutinising
philological perspective, was demonstrated by Musikdirektor
Bruno Grusnick (1900–1992) from Lübeck, who as early as the
1930s became involved in the collection, in particular the manu-
scripts of Buxtehude. He seems to have been encouraged by his
friend Carl-Allan Moberg, and his two seminal articles from
25 Carl-Allan Moberg, ‘Drag i Östersjöområdets musikliv på Buxtehudes tid’,

Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 39 (1957).

30 Erik Kjellberg
1964 and 1966 gave modern research a solid foundation. The

1960s also witnessed some other important studies, in particu-
lar by Jan Olof Rudén and Friedhelm Krummacher. Their work
paved the way for a modern and many-sided approach to the
problems and challenges that this remarkable collection pre-
sents.26
26 Bruno Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung. Versuch ihrer chronologischen

Ordnung’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning Teil I–II, 46 (1964); Teil II–III,
48 (1966). Friedhelm Krummacher, Die Überlieferungen der frühen evangeli-
schen Kantate, Berlin 1965. Jan Olof Rudén: Vattenmärken och musikforskning.
Presentation och tillämpning av en dateringsmetod på musikalier i handskrift i
Uppsala universitets Dübensamling, Uppsala 1968. For the RISM project
started in the 1960s Rudén also made a much-utilized card catalogue of
the Uppsala music archives (before 1800), including the Düben manu-
scripts.

Literature
Annerstedt, Claes, Uppsala Universitets historia, vol 2:2, 1648–1718, Uppsala

1909.
Annerstedt, Claes , ibid., vol 3:2, 1719–1792, Uppsala 1914.
Aurivillius, Pehr Fabian, Catalogus librorum impressorum Bibliothecae regiae
academiae Upsalinesis, Upsala 1814.
Davidsson, Åke, Catalogue critique et descriptif des imprimés de musique des 16e et
17e siècles conservés à la Bibliothèque de l’Université Royale d’Upsala. Tome II–
III [2 separate volumes, cf. footnote 15], Upsala 1951.
Davidsson, Åke, ‘Kring Uppsalaakademiens förvärv av musikalier på 1600-
talet’, Nordisk tidskrift för bok- och biblioteksväsen, 56( 1969), p. 66–107.
Grusnick, Bruno, ‘Die Dübensammlung. Ein Versuch ihrer chronologischen
Ordnung’ Teil I–II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 46 (1964),p. 27–82;
Teil II–III, ebd., 48 (1966), p. 63–186.
Helenius Öberg, Eva, Johan Helmich Roman. Liv och verk genom samtida ögon.
Stockholm 1994.
Kjellberg, Erik, Instrumentalmusiken i Dübensamlingen. En översikt. Uppsala:
Institutionen för musikvetenskap 1968. (Ms)
Kjellberg, Erik, Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden. Studier kring
deras organisation verksamheter och status, ca 1620–ca 1720, Uppsala: Uppsala
universitet 1979.
Krummacher, Friedhelm, Die Überlieferung der Choralbearbeitungen in der frühen
evangelischen Kantate: Untersuchungen zum Handschriftenrepertoire evange-
lischer Figuralmusik im späten 17. und beginnenden 18. Jahrhundert (Berliner
Studien zur Musikwissenschaft, 10), Berlin: Merseburger 1965.
Kyhlberg, Bengt, article ‘Düben’, Sohlmans musiklexikon 2nd ed. vol 2,
Stockholm 1975.
Kyhlberg, Bengt, ‘När föddes Gustav Düben? Anteckningar kring några
oklara punkter i familjens biografi’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 55:1
(1974), p. 7–18.
Kyhlberg,Bengt, ‘Stormaktstidens chorus musicus’, Akademiska kapellet i
Uppsala under 350 år, Uppsala: Uppsala universitet 1977, p. 1–12.
Kyhlberg , Bengt and van Boer, Bertil, article ‘Düben’ The New Grove Diction-
ary of Music and Musicians, London: Macmillan, 2nd ed. 2002.
Lindberg, Folke, Katalog över Dübensamlingen i Uppsala Universitets Bibliotek.
Vokalmusik i handskrift, med en inledning, Uppsala: Institutionen för musik-
vetenskap 1946. (Ms)
Mitjana, Rafael Catalogue critique et descriptif des imprimés de musique des XVIe et
XVIIe siècles onservés à la Bibliothèque de l’Université d’Upsala. Tome 1.
Musique religieuse, Upsala 1911

32 Erik Kjellberg
Moberg, Carl-Allan, Från kyrko- och hovmusik till offentlig konsert, Uppsala-
Wiesbaden 1942.
Moberg, Carl-Allan, ‘Drag i östersjöområdets musikliv på Buxtehudes tid’,
Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 39 (1957), p. 6–88.
Norlind, Tobias, ‘Die Musikgeschichte Schwedens in den Jahren 1630–1730’,
Sammelbände der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft, 1 (1899–1900), p. 165–212.
Norlind, Tobias, Från Tyska kyrkans glansdagar, 1–3. Stockholm: Musik-
historiska museet 1944–1945.
Norlind, Tobias, ‘Familjen Düben’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 23 (1942),
p. 5–46.
Rudén, Jan Olof, Vattenmärken och musikforskning. Presentation och tillämpning
av en dateringsmetod på musikalier i handskrift i Uppsala Universitetsbiblioteks
Dübensamling, Uppsala: Institutionen för musikvetenskap 1968. (Ms);
Internet: http://www.ordommusik.se/duben/index.htm
Stiehl, Carl, ’Bericht des Musikdirector Stiehl‘, Lübeckische Blätter, 30 (1888),
nr 65, p. 398–401.
Stiehl, Carl, ‘Die Familie Düben und die Buxtehude’schen Manuscripte auf der
Bibliothek zu Upsala’, Monatshefte für Musikgeschichte, 3:1 (1889), p. 2–9.

KIA HEDELL
The Missa super Im Mayen and the Düben

Collection in relation to the German Church
Collection in Stockholm
In the summer of 1732 Anders von Düben – formerly conductor

of the court orchestra, then marshal of the court – promised the
University of Uppsala to donate two chests of music to the uni-
versity library. 1 The two chests arrived in Uppsala about six
months later and were put in the library, but von Düben did not
have time to make an inventory before the chests were delivered.
He asked the university if the director musices in Uppsala could
make one, and if he, Anders von Düben, could have a copy of it.
Work on the inventory took a long time. In March 1736 there is
mention of a catalogue of the music collection, but unfortunately
it has not been preserved.2 At the end of the 19th century the
collection was re-catalogised by the librarian Anders Lagerberg
and the Lagerberg catalogue is the basis of later Düben cata-
logues – including the Lindberg catalogue of vocal music from
1946, Erik Kjellberg’s catalogue of instrumental music from 1968,
the RISM card catalogue compiled by Jan Olof Rudén in the
1960s, and the most recent one, the web-based catalogue
launched on the Internet in September 2006.3
1 See Erik Kjellberg’s article ’The Düben Family and the Düben Collection’
in the present volume.
2 Folke Lindberg, Katalog över Dübensamlingen i Uppsala Universitets Bibliotek.
Vokalmusik i handskrift, Uppsala 1946, 6ff. Several of the manuscripts in the
Düben Collection have a lead pencil number. These numbers, written in a
style resembling 18th century handwriting, may belong to the inventory
projects of the 18th century.
3 Anders Lagerberg, Förteckning öfver Universitets-Bibliotheks Musik-Samling
Ordnad och Upprättad af A Lagerberg 1888; Lindberg, op. cit.; Erik Kjellberg,

34 Kia Hedell
The Chronological Boundaries of the Düben Collection
Unfortunately, we cannot be completely sure which pieces were

actually stored in the two chests, and in this respect the reper-
toire from the beginning of the 18th century is the most prob-
lematic. In his catalogue of vocal music in manuscripts Folke
Lindberg put a question mark in front of pieces by the compos-
ers Charles-Simon Favart, Baldassare Galuppi, and Domingo
Miguel Bernabe Terradellas, all born in the early 18th century.
In addition to these, there are other pieces in the Lindberg cata-
logue that are doubtful in the Düben Collection context. This is
the case with works by composers such as Christoph Willibald
Gluck and Giovanni Battista Pergolesi, and the vocal works by
George Frederick Handel listed in the catalogue probably be-
long to the post-Düben era in the history of the Swedish court
orchestra. Anders von Düben’s predecessor as conductor of the
court orchestra, the Swedish-born violinist, oboist and com-
poser Johan Helmich Roman, lived in England for several years
and during that time he was in contact with a number of com-
posers who were working there, including Handel.4 The pieces
by Roman listed in the Lindberg catalogue may also not have
been part of the original Düben Collection.
On the other hand, there are works in the Uppsala Univer-
sity Library that probably belonged to the collection but for one
reason or other were not included in the 19th and 20th century
catalogues. This is the case with parts of the French repertoire
from the early 18th century, including extracts from French
operas or other works from the same time composed in a
French style. One example is a comédie-ballet, the Narva Ballet,
Instrumentalmusiken i Dübensamlingen. En översikt, Uppsala 1968, and the

RISM card catalogue at the Uppsala University Library, Department of
Manuscripts and Music. Erik Kjellberg and Kerala Snyder (ed.), The Düben
Collection Database Catalogue (DCDC) available on <www.musik.uu.se>.
4 Ingmar Bengtsson/ and Bertil H. van Boer, ‘Roman, Johan Helmich’, Grove
Music Online ed L Macy, <http://www. grove music.com> (Accessed 15th
March 2007)

Missa super Im Mayen 35
compiled by Anders von Düben to celebrate the Swedish vic-

tory over the Russian enemy at Narva in November 1700. The
Narva ballet was performed in February 1701 at the Wrangel
Palace, which served as the royal palace after the destruction of
the old castle in 1697.5
The manuscripts from the early 18th century are in the mi-
nority in the Düben Collection. The majority of the copies in the
collection date from the period 1663–1690, e.g. from the years
when Gustav Düben was employed as conductor of the court
orchestra. Among the manuscripts dated earlier than the 1660s
there are some that can be traced to an Italian ensemble that
visited Queen Christina’s court from 1652 to 1654. The leader of
the ensemble, Vincenzo Albrici, is well-represented in the
Düben Collection with some forty vocal works and three in-
strumental works – some composed while he was in Sweden,
while the majority were written in the following decades dur-
ing service in Dresden and other European cities. There is also a
tablature volume (Imhs 409) in the Düben Collection which is
dated 1651–1655. This volume includes about two hundred
dances, which were presumably part of the repertoire of the
violin band at the Swedish court. Finally, there is a volume in
German keyboard tablature (Imhs 408), the so-called ‘Gustav
Düben’s practising book’, with instrumental music mostly writ-
ten by composers belonging to the ‘virginalist’ generation:
Sweelinck, Bull, Byrd, Philips and others, as well as the Italian
composers Anerio, Frescobaldi and Striggio. The first folio
bears the inscription ‘Gustavus Düben Holmensis’, i.e. Gustav
Düben from Stockholm, and the date Anno 1641.6
5 For a recording of the Narva ballet, see Musik på Tre Kronor (instrumental
ensemble Corona artis and vocal soloists; conductor and organist Hans
Davidsson). Musica Sveciae MSCD 306–307 (recorded in 1995).
6 For further discussion concerning the tablature volumes in the Düben
Collection, see Juliane Peetz, ‘The large tablature books in the DübenCol-
lection’, in the present publication.

36 Kia Hedell
‘The Oldest Manuscript in the Düben Collection’
In his impressive attempt to make a chronological list of the

manuscripts from Andreas Düben’s and Gustav Düben’s time
in the Düben Collection, Bruno Grusnick7 singled out one
manuscript as the oldest in the entire collection.8
The title of this manuscript is Missa quinque vocum super Im
Maÿen (Vmhs 69:9). It is a complete setting of the mass – Kyrie,
Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Agnus Dei – for five voices. Three of the
parts – Cantus, Altus and Tenor secundus – are preserved in
the collection, but the other two – Tenor primus and Bassus –
are missing. There is no mention of a composer in the parts and
both Folke Lindberg and Grusnick list this mass as anonymous.
Grusnick dates the manuscript ‘without doubt’ to the 16th cen-
tury; in the RISM card catalogue it is dated to the first half of
the 17th century. The visual impression of the written music is
archaic with its carefully written notes and initials and names of
instruments in red ink. The watermark depicts a fish in a deco-
rated double circle, a kind of watermark that (according to Nils
J Lindberg) was used in paper-mills in Danzig and nearby re-
gions in the late 16th and early 17th century.9
This mass was in fact composed by the Slovene composer
Jacobus Gallus (Handl), active in the 16th century.10 Gallus was
born in 1550 and died in 1591 and during his short life he lived
in various parts of Austria, Moravia and Bohemia. In the 1580s
7 Bruno Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung. Ein Versuch ihrer chronologi-

schen Ordnung’, Teil I–II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 46 (1964), S.
27–82; Teil II–III, ebd., 48 (1966), S. 63–186.
8 Grusnick, op. cit., Teil II–III, p. 68
9 Nils J Lindberg, Paper Comes to the North: Sources and Trade Routes of Paper
in the Baltic Sea Region 1350–1700: A Study Based on Watermark Research,
Marburg 1998: A 174 (cf. watermark no 362)
10 See work list in Allen B Skei/Danilo Pokorn, ‘Handl, Jacobus’, Grove Music
Online ed L Macy (Accessed 15th March 2007), http://www.grovemusic.com.
I am grateful to Mattias Lundberg and Peter Wollny for valuable remarks
concerning the Gallus manuscript in the Düben Collection.

he was employed as cantor in Prague, where he remained until

his death. His reputation has been high, in spite of the fact that
he was sometimes criticised during his lifetime for the complex-
ity of his music. Twenty masses are known to have been com-
posed by Gallus, sixteen of which are parody masses, and all
sixteen are published in the collection Selectiores quaedam mis-
sase. The collection is divided into four volumes with four
masses in each. Volume 1 consists of masses in seven and eight
parts, volume 2 of masses in six parts, volume 3 of masses in
five parts, and volume 4 of masses in four parts. Gallus bor-
rowed his models from sacred motets and also from madrigals,
Lieder and, in one case, a French chanson. Three of his masses
are based on a German Lied. A majority of the composers of the
models come from the Franco-Flemish area (Clemens non papa,
Crequillon, and Verdelot, for example) and in some cases Gal-
lus used his own motets as models.11
The Missa super Im Mayen was printed in the third volume of
the collection Selectiores quaedam missase, in Prague in 1580,
which means that the manuscript in the Düben Collection is
probably from 1580 at the earliest. Several sets of the printed
partbooks have survived in different libraries world-wide.12 In
other words, the parody mass in Uppsala is not unique. From
surviving printed partbooks we can add the missing Tenor
primus and Bassus parts to the manuscript in Uppsala and thus
make the mass complete.
11 Allen B Skei/Danilo Pokorn, ‘Handl, Jacobus’, Grove Music Online ed.

L Macy, <http://www.grovemusic.com> (Accessed 15th March 2007); Edo
Skulj, Clare vir. Ob 450-letnici rojstva Iacobusa Gallusa [Zum 450. Geburtstag
von Jacobus Gallus (1550–1591)], Ljubljana 2000. German summary (p. 165–
171) available on <www.uni-leipzig.de> (Accessed 15th March 2007.)
12 Complete sets of printed part books are preserved in libraries in Vienna,
Dresden and Wroclaw. See RISM H1978: Handl, Jacob 1580c: Selectiores
quedam missae... Missarum V. vocum, liber I. New editions of this mass are
included in Denkmäler der Tonkunst in Österreich, 1. Teil, Bd. 78, Wien 1935
(ed. Paul Amadeus Pisk) and Monumenta artis musicae sloveniae XX, Ljubl-
jana 1991 (ed. Edo Skulj).

38 Kia Hedell
Gallus’ Missa super Im Mayen is indeed old-fashioned in the

Düben context. This parody mass is based on the secular Lied Im
Mayen by Orlando di Lasso, which can be found in Newe Teutsche
Liedlein, a collection of German songs first printed in 1567. With
some minor differences the text of Orlando di Lasso’s Lied is the
same as the one Ludwig Senfl used in different settings of the
tenor Lied Im Maien some 30 years earlier (1534).13
In his mass, Jacobus Gallus more or less freely takes over the
harmonic disposal from the Lasso Lied with certain harmonic
landmarks. The modal center is clearly A, and like the Lied, all
movements end on a strong cadence on E. The technique of
melodic and rhythmic repetition, which is prominant in Lasso’s
Lied, is frequently used in the mass. In the first measures of the
mass movements (especially in Kyrie, Gloria, Credo and Agnus
Dei) the references to the Lied are strong. (fig. 1a–b)
Fig. 1a. Orlando di Lasso: Lied Im Mayen, measure 1–4.
13 The text reads in the Lasso print as follows:

‘Im Mayen im Mayen hört man / die Hanen kreen / frey dich du schön
brauns megetlin / hilf mir den habern seen / bist mir vil lieber dann der
knecht / ich thu dir deine alte recht / bum medle bum / ich frey mich
dein gantz umb und umb / wo ich freundlich zu dir kum / hinderm
ofen und umb und umb / frey dich du schöns brauns megetlin / ich
kum ich kum ich kum.`
The text quoted from Orlando di Lasso, Newe Teutsche Liedlein... Munich,
[1567] 1569, Tenor part, Uppsala University Library, signum Utl. Vok. tr.
473. Repetitions of single words are omitted in the transcription above.

Fig. 1b. Jacobus Gallus: Missa super Im Mayen, Kyrie, measure 1–5.
The end of the mass movements resemble also more or less

clearly to the last measures (measure 24–28) of the Lied. A re-
current motif consisting of a rapid motion of descending thirds
is directly taken over from the song (measure 24–26; see fig. 2
a–b).
Fig. 2a. Orlando di Lasso: Lied Im Mayen, measure 24–28.

40 Kia Hedell
Fig. 2b. Jacobus Gallus: Missa super Im Mayen, Agnus Dei, measure 13–18.
The model is perhaps most obvious in Credo; every different

section within this movement (except the three-part Crucifixus)
attach melodically in their first and last measures very close to
the Lied. In Sanctus, Gallus uses on the other hand the model in
a more flexible way. The first two measures of the Lied (‘Im
Mayen, im Mayen’) are presented in an augmented and a
rhythmically varied form, and the first syllable of the word
‘Sanctus’ in the Altus part is extended over three measures,
reminding of the treatment of a cantus firmus melody in a tenor
mass. (fig. 3, measure 1–4) The chiselled melodic line, the pres-
ence of imitation and the slow harmonic rhythm in the first
measures of Sanctus contribute to a lighter and more airy im-
pression compare to the compact cordal structure in the corres-
ponding section of the Lied.

Fig. 3. Jacobus Gallus: Missa super Im Mayen, Sanctus, measure 1–8.
The whole mass is framed by two short movements, Kyrie and

Agnus Dei. Thus, the mass begins and ends with mass move-
ments that, when it comes to their dimensions, attach to the
lenght of the Lied.
The Missa super Im Mayen – a ‘Museumsstück’

or not?
Bruno Grusnick describes the Missa super Im Mayen as a ‘Mu-

seumsstück’ in the context of the Düben Collection, and accord-
ing to Grusnick Gustav Düben certainly never performed this
piece. Grusnick finds support for this theory in the fact that
there are no parts from a later date or any version of this mass
written in keyboard tablature in the collection. According to
Grusnick one possibility is that the manuscript once belonged
to Gustav Düben’s grandfather, Andreas Düben, who worked
as organist in Thomaskirche in Leipzig from 1595 until his
death in 1625.14 It is simple enough to regard the Gallus mass as
an anachronism from the perspective of the Düben Collection,
14 Grusnick, op. cit., Teil II–III, p. 68.

42 Kia Hedell
but the question is how court musicians in Stockholm in the

17th century regarded this piece of music. It is true that there is
no equivalent to the Missa super Im Mayen among the masses in
the Düben Collection, but the Düben Collection is not the only
collection that was used by the court musicians.
In the year 1874 the old music library of the German Church
in Stockholm was donated to the Royal Swedish Academy of
Music and is now kept in the Music Library of Sweden in Stock-
holm. The history of the German Church goes back to the 1550s,
when a parish of German citizens in Stockholm was established
with a fairly well-defined structure. Regular accounts from the
German parish are preserved from 1569. In the year 1571 the
Swedish king Johan III announced that German inhabitants and
other foreigners who did not understand Swedish had the right
to build their own churches. The collection of music from the
German Church comprises forty-eight volumes and frequently
several prints are bound together in the same volume.15
Thus the German Church Collection is a considerable size. In
some respects it is a parallel to the Düben Collection: both collec-
tions were used by court musicians and the majority of the music
in both collections is vocal, but there are also differences. Unlike
the Düben Collection, the German Church Collection consists
almost exclusively of printed partbooks instead of manuscripts
and the emphasis is also on music from earlier times compared
with the Düben Collection. Twenty-five of the forty-eight vol-
umes were either acquired before Sweden’s so-called ‘Stor-
maktstiden’ (=Age of Greatness, 1611–1718) or, if the year of ac-
quisition was not noted, they bear a printer’s date earlier than
1611. These twenty-five volumes contain more than two thousand
six hundred compositions by about two hundred and seventy-
five known composers and some who are anonymous. A large
proportion consists of sacred vocal music – masses and, above all,
motets. The secular vocal music consists of chansons, madrigals
and German Lieder and the instrumental music is limited to
15 Kia Hedell, Musiklivet vid de svenska Vasahoven: med fokus på Erik XIV:s hov
(1560–68), Uppsala 2001, p. 179ff.

hand-written dances. The composer who is by far the most fre-

quently represented in both printed and hand-written music is
Orlando di Lasso. Of the works printed in the 17th century, half
of them were printed between 1600 and 1620. Among the prints
from the Düben era in the German Church Collection there are
several well-known composers, such as Johann Gletle, Andreas
Hammerschmidt, Johann Rosenmüller and Wolfgang Briegel.
Briegel’s Musicalisher Leben-Brunn is the newest book in the collec-
tion; it was printed in Darmstadt in 1680.16
The music in the German Church Collection belonged to the
German Church and was performed by the church musicians
but also, as mentioned above, by the royal court musicians. The
connections between the royal court and the German Church
Collection have been known for a long time. Of the twenty-five
volumes with music from the period up to 1611, seven can be
more or less closely connected to royal musical activities. Some
of the volumes have the names of court musicians written in
them, some contain music composed by royal musicians, some
are bound together by royal book-binders, etc.17 As Erik Kjell-
berg has shown, the connections between the German Church
Collection and music at the royal court are even more obvious
during Sweden’s Age of Greatness. Pieces from eleven prints in
the German Church Collection, printed after 1660, are found in
manuscript copies in the Düben Collection. The printed vol-
umes in the German Church Collection have probably func-
tioned as models for the copies in the Düben Collection. On one
of these copies, the collection of Geistliche Concerten from 1641–
1642, Gustav Düben has written a title page in the same manner
that he normally did on the volumes and parts in the Düben
Collection. The set of parts of the Geistliche Concerten is di-
vided between the German Church Collection and the Düben
Collection; parts 1, 2, and 3 are preserved in the German
Church, part 4 in the Düben Collection, which strengthens the
16 RISM card catalogue of the German Church Collection, in the Music Li-
brary of Sweden, Stockholm.
17 Hedell, op. cit., p. 200–201.

44 Kia Hedell
close connection between the two collections.18 Any discussion

concerning the repertoire performed by the royal court musi-
cians should therefore not only include the Düben Collection but
at least parts of the German Church Collection as well. Both An-
dreas Düben and Gustav Düben were employed as organists at
the German Church parallel to their engagements at court. In the
account books of the German Church there is also evidence that
court musicians participated in musical activities in the church
on a regular basis during the 17th and early 18th centuries and
possibly also during the late 16th century.19
Bearing these facts in mind, a relevant question concerning
the Gallus mass is how this mass relates to the repertoire repre-
sented repertoire, whether it was performed or not, which was
certainly available to court musicians in the 17th century. While
the parody mass genre is an exception in the Düben Collection,
there are several parody masses in the German Church Collec-
tion, both in manuscripts and prints. One of them, a Missa super
Lauda Jherusalem, is worth a special mention. It was composed
by the Swedish court musician Bertil Kellner, active as trum-
peter, fiddler and musicus at the royal Vasa court in Sweden
from 1576 to 1594.20 The mass is preserved in a hand-written
volume in the German Church Collection.21 It was copied by the
court cantor Torstenius Rhyacander in the year 1598 and in the
copy Rhyacander mentions his colleague and friend Wolfgang
Burchard, cantor of the German Church – further proof of the
connections between the royal court and the German Church.22
It is worth mentioning that Orlando di Lasso’s motet Lauda Je-
rusalem, the model for Kellner’s parody mass, is found in one of
18 Erik Kjellberg, Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden: Studier kring

deras organisation, verksamheter och status ca 1620–ca 1720, vol.1, Uppsala
1979, p. 309–323.
19 Kjellberg, op. cit., p. 221ff.
20 Hedell, op. cit., p.196.
21 Music Library of Sweden, Stockholm, the German Church Collection,
signum: TyKy 15.
22 Hedell , op. cit., p. 196. Kellner’s mass is also preserved in a handwritten
copy in the Västerås City Library (sign. Molér 68).

the prints in the German Church Collection. This is also the case
with Lasso’s Lied Im Mayen, the model of the Gallus mass.23
While no other works by Gallus have been preserved in the
Düben Collection, there are six motets in manuscript and a
printed collection of ‘moralias’ (madrigals) by Gallus in the
German Church Collection.24 The Missa super Im Mayen by Gal-
lus clearly fits better in the German Church Collection than in
the Düben Collection.
The Origin of the Gallus Manuscript Collection in the

Düben
Could it be that the Missa super Im Mayen once belonged to the

German Church Collection and was only later added to the
Düben Collection? Could it be that it is not in fact a ‘Museum-
sstück’ that once belonged to Gustav Düben’s grandfather in
Leipzig, as Grusnick suggests, but was kept in the German
Church Collection for practical use in the German Church in
Stockholm?
The possibility exists, even though there is no trace of the
Missa super Im Mayen in the old inventories of the German
Church Collection. In 1690 the librarian Johannes Fichtelius
mentions that ‘1 teil Jacob Handel’ was kept among the old
books in the music library25, but this note probably refers to the
printed collection of moralias by Gallus which is still preserved,
and not to a set of single sheets of hand-written music. This
23 RISM card catalogue of the German Church Collection, in the Music Li-
brary of Sweden, Stockholm: Lauda Jerusalem in manuscript (TyKy 15);
Lauda Jerusalem in print Selectissimae cantiones, P. 1., Nuremberg 1587
(TyKy10); Im Mayen in print Teutsche Lieder, Nuremberg 1583 (TyKy 37).
24 Moralia, printed in Nuremberg 1596.
25 Gunnar Larsson, ’Stockholm – stormaktstidens musikcentrum’, Kultur och
samhälle i stormaktstidens Sverige, ed. Stellan Dahlgren et al., Stockholm
1967, p. 166–168.

46 Kia Hedell
could mean that by 1690, the year of Gustav Düben’s death, the
Missa super Im Mayen had already been transferred from the
German Church Collection to the Düben Collection. The fact
that only whole volumes are preserved in the German Church
Collection today in no way refutes this theory; the inventory of
1690 mentions fifty-four sets of handwritten parts of single
works in the German Church Collection. The Missa super Im
Mayen could therefore be the surviving part of a collection of
music in manuscript, once used in the German Church but later
destroyed. On the other hand, the physical appearance of the
Missa super Im Mayen also argues against the manuscript ever
having been a part of the German Church Collection. Most of
the music in the Düben Collection is written on single sheets of
paper and in this respect the Missa super Im Mayen fits well in
the Düben context. Furthermore, the watermark on the paper,
the fish in a decorated double circle, and its link to the Danzig
or Baltic regions, may indicate a connection to a group of
manuscripts in the Düben Collection originating from Danzig.26
Even if the manuscript with the Gallus mass has not been a
part of the German Church Collection, it reminds us of how im-
portant it is not to limit a discussion about the repertory in use in
court context in the 17th century only to the Düben Collection. In
the eyes of the Düben Collection, the Gallus mass also forms a
link back to music history during the pre-Düben days – it brings,
through Orlando di Lasso and Jacobus Gallus, a piece of renais-
sance spice to the Baroque flavour in the Düben Collection.
26 This group of manuscripts contains music by the composers Bütner, Er-

ben, Förster, Rittlinus, Strutz, Vesi and others. Many of them are copied by
the hand ‘Befastru’. See Grusnick, op. cit, Teil I–II, p. 66–67. This suggests
that the two missing parts of the Gallus manuscript in the Düben Collec-
tion might be preserved in Gdansk. However, the Missa super Im Mayen is
not among the works listed in Biblioteka Gdanska Polskiej Akademii
Nauk. Danuta Popinigis/Danuta Szlagowska, Musicalia gedanenses; Re-
kopisy muzyczne z XVI i XVII wieku w zbiorach Biblioteki Gdanskiej Polskiej
Akademii Nauk. Katalog, Gdansk 1990.

Literature
Bengtsson, Ingmar and Boer, Bertil H. van, ‘Roman, Johan Helmich’, Grove
Music Online ed. L. Macy (Accessed 15th March 2007), <http://www.grove
music.com>
Ordnung’ Teil I–II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 46 (1964); Teil II–III,
ebd., 48 (1966).
Hedell, Kia, Musiklivet vid de svenska Vasahoven: med fokus på Erik XIV:s hov
(1560–68) (Studia musicologica Upsaliennsia), Uppsala 2001.
Kjellberg, Erik, Instrumentalmusiken i Dübensamlingen. En översikt, Uppsala:
Kjellberg, Erik, Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden: Studier kring
deras organisation, verksamheter och status ca 1620–ca 1720. Uppsala: Uppsala
universitet 1979. (Ms)
Lagerberg, Anders, Förteckning öfver Universitets-Bibliotheks Musik-Samling
Ordnad och Upprättad af A Lagerberg, [Uppsala] 1888.
Larsson, Gunnar, ’Stockholm – stormaktstidens musikcentrum’, Kultur och
samhälle i stormaktstidens Sverige, ed. Stellan Dahlgren et al, Stockholm:
Wahlström & Widstrand 1967.
Lindberg, Folke, Katalog över Dübensamlingen i Uppsala Universitets Bibliotek.
Vokalmusik i handskrift med en inledning, Uppsala: Institutionen för musik-
vetenskap 1946. (Ms)
Lindberg, Nils J., Paper Comes to the North: Sources and Trade Routes of Paper in
the Baltic Sea Region 1350–1700: A Study Based on Watermark Research, Mar-
burg: International Association of Paper Historians 1998.
Popinigis, Danuta and Szlagowska, Danuta, Musicalia gedanenses; Rekopisy
muzyczne z XVI i XVII wieku w zbiorach Biblioteki Danzigiej Polskiej Akademii
Nauk. Katalog, Gdansk: Wydawnictwo Akademii Muzycznej 1990.
Skei, Allen B. and Pokorn, Danilo, ‘Handl, Jacobus’, Grove Music Online ed.
L. Macy <http://www.grovemusic.com> (Accessed 15th March 2007).
Skulj, Edo, Clare vir. Ob 450-letnici rojstva Iacobusa Gallusa [Zum 450. Geburtstag
von Jacobus Gallus (1550–1591)], Ljubljana 2000. German summary.
<http://www.uni-leipzig.de/~musik/web/institut/agOst/docs/mittelost/hef
te/Heft7_BildUndText.pdf_175-193.pdf (Accessed 15th March 2007)

JULIANE PEETZ
The large Tablature Books in the

Düben Collection
The heart of the Düben Collection – that is what one could call
Gustav Düben’s large tablature volumes. They are indeed very
special, and they also present a picture of the person Gustav
Düben and his attitude to work and to collecting music. I want
to show some aspects that we can learn from these volumes,
and I hope that this may inspire future researchers to delve
deeper into this subject. My aim is to give an overview that can
open the door to further investigations. First I am going to in-
troduce each volume separately, pointing out different aspects
in each of them, so that we may be able to draw some conclu-
sions afterwards.
Table 1. Overview of the tablature volumes in the Düben Collection.

Shelf Title Date Hand Com- Comments
number piled
Imhs 408 1641x GD, No Contains mostly
one English and Ger-
other man organ music
Imhs 409 1649– GD, No Contents overlap
1655 others with collection of
(Rudén) suites in Kassel
Vmhs 77 Libro I di 1663x GD No ‘Libro Rubro’
Motetti e
Concerti
Vmhs 78 Libro 6 di 1665x GD No Classed as No. 2
Sinfonia e by Lagerberg
Ariae
Vmhs 79 Libro III di 1664x Several Yes
Motetti e
Concerti

50 Juliane Peetz
Vmhs 80 Libro 4 di 1665x GD, No

Motetti e one
Concerti other
Vmhs 81 Libro 5 di 1665x Same as Yes
Motetti e vmhs
Concerti 79
1. Imhs 408
The first volume that appears in the collection contains instru-

mental music only and has the date ‘1641’ on its title page, di-
rectly below the name of Gustav Düben: ‘Gustavus Düben |
Holmensis | 1641’. Below that, on the title page, the sentence
‘Lust und Liebe zum Dinge macht alle Arbeit geringe’ appears
and finally, at the bottom of the page, are found the name ‘C. L.
Zengell’ and an almost illegible ‘schripsit’, apparently added by
a different hand (see Figures 1 and 2).
Figure 1. Imhs 408, title on fol. 1r.
Figure 2. Bottom of the same page.

The large Tablature Books 51
This combination has been the cause of a number of specula-

tions: who wrote or compiled this volume, and for what pur-
pose? There is obviously a connection to Gustav Düben and
Caspar Zengel. The first person to offer an explanation for this
was Tobias Norlind in his book Från tyska kyrkans glansdagar in
the year 1944, in which he introduced the idea that Zengel was
the young Gustav Düben’s teacher, and that he had written the
volume for him to use for instrumental practice.1 At that time
Norlind still thought that Gustav Düben had been born in 1624,
whereas more likely he was born in 1628 or 1629. He stated that
Düben began his instrumental studies early, being ‘only’ seven-
teen in 1641.2 As we now know he was even younger, only
twelve or thirteen. Norlind also assumed that Andreas Düben
supervised the teaching of his son.3
These theories went unchallenged for a long time, and when
Grusnick wrote the first part of his article on the chronological
order of the Düben Collection in 1964, he adhered to Norlind’s
reasoning. He also added that in the beginning Gustav Düben’s
own handwriting was very similar to his teacher’s, pointing out
only two differences: the capital G and the quarter-note.4 Not
until 1974, when Bengt Kyhlberg wrote his essay on music in
Uppsala during the period from 1600 to 1660, was Norlind
proved wrong. Kyhlberg pointed out that Zengel died in 1631
and could not possibly have been Düben’s teacher. Zengel had
a son, Caspar Zengel the Younger, who studied in Uppsala
from 1633, and if he had been in Stockholm at that time he
might have been involved in the decoration of the title page,
but there is no evidence at all that he was Düben’s teacher.5
1 Tobias Norlind, Från Tyska kyrkans glansdagar. Bilder ur svenska musikens

historia från Vasaregenterna till Karolinska tidens slut. Bd. II: Stormaktstidevar-
vets begynnelse 1600–1660, Stockholm 1944, p. 150–151.
2 Norlind, op.cit., p. 151.
3 Norlind, op.cit., p. 152.
4 Bruno Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung. Versuch einer chronologischen
Ordnung‘, Teil I–II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 44 (1964), p. 71–72.
5 Bengt Kyhlberg, Musiken i Uppsala under stormaktstiden, vol. I: 1620–1660,
Uppsala 1974, p. 208.

52 Juliane Peetz
In their article for The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Mu-
sicians, Bengt Kyhlberg and Bertil van Boer finally overthrew
Norlind’s theories, except for one: that Andreas Düben had
supervised his son’s education. They also suggested that An-
dreas Düben had compiled the volume for his son.6
Interestingly enough, although it had now been proved that
the music could not have been written down by Zengel, since
then nobody has ever made a suggestion as to who actually did
write it. That Andreas Düben compiled it seems logical, as the
collection of 17th century harpsichord and organ music corre-
sponds to Andreas Düben’s repertoire as an organist, but he did
not write the tablatures.
The closest we come to a suggestion as to who might have
been the copyist is Grusnick’s comment from 1964 that in the
beginning Gustav Düben’s handwriting was very similar to the
one in the first volume.7 I would like to show that it is in fact the
same, although the idea of Gustav Düben himself being the
copyist has usually been rejected because of his tender age at
that time.
6 Bengt Kyhlberg and Bertil H. van Boer: Düben. (2) Gustaf Düben. Grove
music online (accessed 2006-08-18).
7 Grusnick, op. cit., p. 71.

Figures 3 and 4. Two examples from Imhs 408.
The two differences that Grusnick points out are the quarter-
note and the capital G.
Quarter-note from Imhs 408 Düben’s quarter-note from 16498.
Capital G from Imhs 408. Düben’s capital G from 1649 (Vmhs 85:63).
8 Taken from the tablature source to Scacci’s Tota pulchra es (Vmhs 85:63),
dated September 23 , 1649, which Grusnick points out to be the earliest
known tablature written by Gustav Düben’s hand; see Tafel XIV in Grus-
nick, ‘Die Dübensammlung. Versuch einer chronologischen Ordnung‘,Teil
II–III, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 46 (1966), p. 68–69.

54 Juliane Peetz
Concerning the capital G Grusnick also states that Düben used

his teacher’s version in the beginning, and that both versions
appear until 1664, when the older version finally disappears.9
There is really no distinct difference between the quarter-notes;
if one examines Düben’s later tablatures both versions can al-
ways be found, and contrary to Grusnick’s assumption one is
actually a variant of the other. Similarities can be found in
nearly all the other letters, such as the capital A, H and B as
well as the small e, b, d and a.
Figure 5. from Imhs 408

– please compare to …
9 Grusnick, ’Die Dübensammlung’, Teil I–II, p. 71.

… Figure 6. Düben’s hand

in 1649, from Vmhs 85:63.
In my opinion a young boy would be able to write like this at

the age of thirteen, if he was instructed to be as careful as possi-
ble, and if he worked under strict supervision. Sometimes the
letters almost seem as though painted. In some places someone
has corrected some copying mistakes; it is not likely that any-
one, especially not Düben himself, would correct his teacher’s
mistakes. It looks far more like the corrections of a teacher in his
student’s work.
Figure 7. Example from Imhs 408 with corrections by a different hand.

56 Juliane Peetz
Contrary to common theories there are no signs that this book

was at any time used for performance. It can be compared to a
tablature book in Skara that was written by Gustav Düben from
1659 to 1660,10 probably for the purpose of teaching his stu-
dents. This book was clearly intended to be played from. The
format is much smaller and in several places fingerings have
been written in the tablatures. No such fingerings are found in
imhs 408, and no other traces of anybody having played the
music either.
Figure 8. From the tablature book in Skara, with fingerings.
Seemingly, the first volume of instrumental music in the Düben

Collection was mainly written by the young Gustav Düben. He
started it in 1641 (the only earlier date in the volume, 1637, is to
be seen as a copying mistake, as the date 1643 appears in the
title of the same piece), under the supervision of his father,
copying from the sources that were given to him. He also con-
tinued to add pieces later on. The book may have been intended
for practice in the art of copying music rather than for perform-
ance.
10 Jan Olof Rudén, ’Ett nyfunnet komplement till Dübensamlingen’, Svensk

tidskrift för musikforskning, 45 (1965), p. 55.

The problem of the ‘Zengell schripsit’ on the title page still

exists. It might only refer to the sentence ‘Lust und Liebe zum
Dinge macht alle Arbeit geringe’; it is not written by Gustav
Düben’s hand. It is possible that Caspar Zengel the Elder men-
tioned this sentence once, being a colleague of Andreas
Düben’s, and that Andreas Düben or one of his colleagues
wrote it down in Gustav’s book as a quotation to encourage
him, but these are mere speculations. It is also not clear who
added the ‘schripsit’ but, as mentioned earlier, it certainly does
not refer to the tablatures.
2. Imhs 409
The second volume in the collection is another book of instru-

mental music, but this time it is no longer keyboard music. It
contains a large number of French and German dance move-
ments for instrumental ensemble; the volume is dated to be-
tween 1649 and 1655 by Rudén, based on the paper’s water-
mark (Foolscap, type Narr/5/AG – FP) and some original dates
from the volume.11 Most of the pieces have been copied by Gus-
tav Düben, but some are by a Stockholm copyist named ‘B-
Sthlm.’, a hand that appears quite often in the collection, as well
as several other copyists.12
As Peter Wollny pointed out in his essay from 2001 on recep-
tion of the French style in Thuringia, this volume shows a re-
markable overlap with a collection of suites in Kassel, Ger-
many.13 He also assumes that the contact between Kassel and
11 Rudén, Jan Olof: Vattenmärken och musikforskning. Presentation och

tillämpning av en dateringsmetod på musikalier i handskrift i Uppsala
Universitetsbiblioteks Dübensamling, Uppsala 1968, p. 132 and appendix I, p.
9–10.
12 Idem.
13 Peter Wollny: ‘Zur Thüringer Rezeption des französischen Stils im späten
17. und frühen 18. Jahrhundert‘, Ständige Konferenz Mitteldeutsche Barock-

58 Juliane Peetz
Stockholm was the musician and composer David Pohle, who

was constantly travelling during the years 1648–1660 and can
be traced to the courts of Stockholm, Kassel and several courts
in Saxony during this period.14 One of the pieces by David
Pohle in the Düben Collection might be of interest in this con-
text; it is a version of his Benedicam Dominum, appearing in a set
of parts together with an organ tablature (Vmhs 32:4). The set of
parts is clearly of Middle German origin, while the tablature is
very similar in appearance to the ones in the first volume of
instrumental music, Imhs 408, including the capital G and the
quarter-notes (see comparison above).
Figure 9. First page from David Pohle’s Benedicam Dominum (Vmhs 32:4).
musik in Sachsen, Wilhelm Seidel, Peter Wollny (ed.), Sachsen-Anhalt und

Thüringen e. V. Jahrbuch 2001, p. 141.
14 Ibid., p. 142.

This might imply that this tablature was copied by Gustav

Düben after he had finished the first volume, but before he
started on the second, which means before or in 1649 (the tabla-
ture that Grusnick names as the oldest by Gustav Düben’s
hand15 (Vmhs 85:63 from 1649) seems to be from approximately
the same time, if not later; compare Figure 9 with Figure 6).
Maybe Düben received the piece from Pohle himself, perhaps
together with some other music – possibly some of the suites
from Kassel.
This could explain how Düben obtained the music for his
volume; some musicologists have even speculated that he
might have brought some of the pieces home with him from his
study trips. He had in fact been to Germany in 1645 and proba-
bly also in 164716 and it is possible that he included some of the
music which he brought home at that time. Even the role of the
group of French musicians hired by Queen Christina between
1647 and 1652 to play ballet music has to be taken into consid-
eration; between 1649 and 1651 this troupe was expanded and
more French musicians moved to Stockholm. This would fit the
possible time of the volume’s origin as given by Rudén. In any
case, it seems that this is the first volume containing music that
was collected by Gustav Düben himself and not by his father.
3. Vmhs 77
In the year 1663 Gustav Düben became Hofkapellmeister; he had

already been the unofficial leader of court music for some time.
He then started to produce a new volume, the famous ‘Libro
rubro’ or Red Book, a thick volume containing ‘Motetti e Con-
certi’. All the tablatures in this book were copied by Gustav
15 See footnote 8.
16 Erik Kjellberg: Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden. Studier kring deras
organisation, verksamheter och status ca.1620 – ca. 1720. Uppsala 1979, p. 403.

60 Juliane Peetz
Düben himself, written into a ready-bound book on the same

kind of paper. For some unknown reason most of them lack the
texts of the vocal parts while in some the texts have been writ-
ten in afterwards.
The purpose of this volume is not clear; it seems as though
Düben was trying to build up a repertoire for his ensemble to
be used at court. Maybe the purpose was to store and organize
his own collection of music, which by that time already
amounted to quite a large number of manuscripts. Several sets
of parts have a number on their title pages which refers to the
page in the ‘Libro rubro’ where the piece can be found. This
might have been a way to organise the collection before he
started giving sets of parts their own signatures, the so-called
‘Ink numbers’.
Figure 10. Vmhs 40:15, title page; one example of a reference to the tablature
score in Volume 77.

It is still not obvious why Düben made a tablature volume with

pieces that he already possessed as sets of parts. It may have
been a safer way of storing music that didn’t take up much
space and was less likely to get lost than a set of loose parts.
Only fourteen of the fifty-one pieces in the volume do not exist
in a set of parts with ink numbers, whereas all the others do. It
may be that sets of parts to these fourteen pieces existed at one
time, but have since been lost. The contents of this book give us
an idea of the kind of music that Düben wanted to add to the
repertoire of the court orchestra. A large proportion of the
pieces are by Arnold and Zeutschner and some are by Albrici
and Foggia, forming a mixture of German and Italian music.
4. Vmhs 79
The next volume in chronological order after the Red Book

bears the title ‘LIBRO III. Di Motteetti [sic] | è. concerti. | /1664.
| G. D’. There is no Volume 2 (the one marked Volume 2 is ac-
tually Volume 6; see below). In all likelihood it existed at one
time, but has since been lost. Volume 3 is very different from
the first one; it is approximately the same size and appears the
same from the outside, but unlike the first one it is not written
in a ready-bound book by Düben alone. Instead it is a compila-
tion of several thin volumes, written by various copyists (all of
whom were Düben’s assistants in Stockholm). The year 1664
given on the title page is to be seen as the compilation date,
which means that the single copies must have been made before
that, possibly at about the same time that Düben himself was
working on his Red Book.
Even if this volume was compiled from several smaller books,
there is still a connection: most of them are written on the same
kind of paper, or, more accurately, on two variants of paper from
the same paper-mill; the watermark has the motive of a couple

62 Juliane Peetz
drinking a toast above the inscription ‘ALLE MODE PAPIER’. It

seems as though the copyists had clear instructions what to copy
and were provided with paper for that purpose and they may
even have worked under the supervision of Gustav Düben. Most
of the thin books have been marked with a number, probably
before compilation, to show the bookbinder the correct order.
5. Vmhs 80
Volume 4 is more like the Red Book; this time Gustav Düben and
one of his assistants copied directly into a ready-bound book.
This volume gives us a chance to find out how Gustav
Düben worked when he copied the tablatures. Let’s compare
two examples:
Figure 11. Unfinished tablature from Vmhs 80, fol. 68–69.

Figure 11 shows an unfinished tablature of Christoph Bern-

hard’s Surgit Christus, where only the continuo part is notated
throughout the piece; the other voices appear sporadically, in
solo passages or only showing the melody. The other parts,
mainly the instrumental parts, are indicated at significant
places, such as beginnings and endings of sections. One can
imagine that Düben had an overview of all the parts (he might
have spread them out on the table), notating the continuo and
melody parts first, marking the other parts at significant places,
and then filling in the missing parts afterwards – we recognize
this way of notating music from other composers.
It is a nice thought, but unfortunately not true; this example
is the exception to the rule, being the only tablature in the
whole collection that shows this kind of structure. The mark-
ings of ‘etc.’ in the third line imply that Düben did not intend to
fill in the missing parts.
The second example fits more easily in the collection:
Figure 12: Change of ink colour; the lowest line is written in darker ink
In Figure 12 we can see how it usually looks when the ink col-
our changes. It changes halfway down the page (in this case
even in the middle of a word in the text), not at the end of a
section, and the continuo part has not been filled in in advance.
The same can be seen in cases where a work is incomplete, end-
ing abruptly. It seems as though the tablatures were written one
measure at a time or sometimes one line at a time, from the

64 Juliane Peetz
highest instrumental part to the continuo. That leaves us with

the astonishing fact that these copyists, like Gustav Düben,
must have had an enormous awareness of how much space
they would need for the other parts, while writing down the
first. Could it be possible that they were copying from other
tablatures or scores? Maybe this was the case, but it is not very
likely, considering the almost total lack of original scores of this
type of music. No other tablatures with the same music have
been preserved.
6. Vmhs 81
Volume 5 is very similar to Volume 3, and was even written by

the same copyists; it is also a compilation of several smaller
books. Unlike Volume 3 these are not written on the same kind
of paper but on several different kinds. Here the compilation
date may be the end of 1665, which would mean that the last
piece, dated 1666, was written in after the compilation. This is
what Grusnick assumes,17 and taking into account the appear-
ance of the volume and the method of compilation I agree with
him. Just as Volume 3 and the Red Book may have been pro-
duced at about the same time, this volume and Volume 4 seem
to be some kind of pair, taking the dates into consideration. In
this volume we find an example of a correction which may in-
dicate that Düben himself supervised his assistants.
17 Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung‘. Teil I–II, p. 82.

Figure 13. Vmhs 81, fol. 61v.
One of Düben’s assistants began to write down Weckmann’s

Gegrüßet seist du Holdselige in one of the books (see Figure 13),
but this piece had already been included in Volume 79! Some-
body must have told the copyist that he should stop writing
this piece, since it had already been copied, and who would
have this kind of information, if not Gustav Düben himself?
Other signs of Düben’s supervision can be found in smaller
corrections, additions to the title (often ascriptions) or even the
addition of instruments, mostly extra viola parts, in the opening
instrumental passages of several pieces.

66 Juliane Peetz
7. Vmhs 78
The last volume was classed by Lagerberg as Volume 2 in the

series of tablature volumes when he added the shelf numbers
and he wrote the title on the front cover. On the rear cover an-
other title by Düben’s hand is found that marks it as Volume 6.
Lagerberg seems to have filled in the original letters, which are
quite faint, but Düben’s hand can be clearly identified. This
number is to be seen as the correct one, not only because it was
written by Gustav Düben, but also from the dates given inside
the volume.
Figure 14. Vmhs 79, title on the rear cover (upside-down).
Grusnick states that this volume was not given an original title
by Gustav Düben,18 and he considers that the title on the rear
cover shows that Düben planned to write a different book with
‘Sonate é Ariæ’ before he started to fill it, because unlike the
other volumes there is no mention of the ‘Motetti e Concerti’.
But Grusnick also states that it has to be Volume 6 because of
the dates.19 If this book was indeed planned as Volume 6 in a
series of books of ‘Sonate é Ariæ’, this would mean that five
other such volumes must once have existed but have since been
18 Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung‘, Teil II–III, p.108, footnote 77.

19 Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung‘, Teil I–II, p. 81.

lost which seems rather unlikely, considering the short period

of time involved and the immense effort the production of such
volumes demanded.20 It might be the case that he called this
volume ‘Sonate é Ariæ’ because it only contained pieces scored
for smaller ensembles (the other volumes contain much larger
pieces with double choirs and several instruments, which are
totally lacking in this volume), and that it was still meant to be
Volume 6 in the series of tablature volumes with vocal music.
This volume has a strange appearance; on the outside it
looks exactly like the others, but inside only half the pages have
been used. The tablatures are written into what seems to be a
ready-bound book, copied by Gustav Düben, on exactly the
same kind of paper as we find in the Red Book, but half of the
book is blank, and all these pages seem to have been bound into
the book at a later date. They are a different size and their wa-
termark is not found elsewhere in the collection (it seems to be
from a later time, maybe from the beginning of the 18th cen-
tury). Were there originally more pieces, that may have fallen
out, and somebody has replaced the missing pages with new
paper? The index only lists the pieces that are found in the first
half of the book so it appears to be complete. Why these empty
pages?
It is possible that the pages were blank in the original book;
maybe Düben cut them out to use them for a different purpose
(though not for copying music apparently – the watermark
does not appear anywhere else except in the tablature vol-
umes). This is a common feature of Düben’s later tablature vol-
umes, which are thin volumes containing at most fifteen or
twenty pieces, usually less. In these volumes unused sheets
have often been cut out and used for other purposes since pa-
20 Grusnick compares this title on the rear cover with another one that is
found on the rear cover of Vmhs 80, which says ‘LIBRO. II. DI| Scherzi
Francese | 166’ (Grusnick as footnote 18); but contrary to the rear cover title
of Vmhs 78 this one is partly erased and a new title was written on the
front cover by Gustav Düben himself. The only thing that this case proves
is that the book of Vmhs 80 was already bound by 1663.

68 Juliane Peetz
per was expensive. This may explain the unusual appearance of

this book but does not explain why the missing pages have
been replaced with new paper at a later date.
8. Why tablature books?
The tablature volumes containing vocal music seem to be in

two groups of three. Each group consists of one volume written
by Gustav Düben, one by Gustav Düben and an assistant and
one compiled by his assistants, all three copied at about the
same time. In the first group Volume 1 was copied by Gustav
Düben alone, Volume 2 is missing and Volume 3 is a compila-
tion from 1663–1664. The second group consists of Volume 4
copied by Gustav Düben and an assistant, Volume 5 which is a
compilation and Volume 6 copied by Gustav Düben alone dur-
ing the period 1665–1666. The books that were bound before
Düben started to fill them (the ones that are not compiled) seem
to have been in his possession by 1663 at the latest, when he
became Hofkapellmeister.21
Why did Gustav Düben take such trouble to collect music in
the form of large, unwieldy tablature volumes during such a
short period of time? One reason may be that this was how he
had learned to collect music, at the age of thirteen, when he
copied the music that he was given by his father into a tablature
book. Since this was keyboard music the organ tablature was
the most appropriate way to notate it. But this volume also con-
tains some vocal pieces, notated without text, possibly for the
purpose of accompanying singers from the organ. In his next
volume, by which time Düben was twenty-three years old, he
continued to copy the music in this way and when he became
21 Volume Vmhs 80 bears an extra title on the rear cover to prove this; see
footnote 20. As these bound books have the same watermark and appear-
ance they must have been produced at the same time.

Hofkapellmeister he may have felt more secure collecting music

the same way he had done as a boy. The first volume is quite
similar in appearance to the instrumental volumes, since the
tablatures are notated without texts.
But this can’t be the whole answer, and there is another
closely related question. Why did Gustav Düben suddenly stop
producing large volumes in 1666/67? None of the later tabla-
tures are compiled in large volumes, but are bound together in
thin books instead, containing not more than twenty pieces,
mostly less. Maybe Düben realized that smaller books were
more practical; instead of thick books which were mainly a
means of storing music he could also use the thinner volumes
for performance! It is noticeable that most of the thin books are
far more worn (especially the corners of the pages), even
though they contain less pieces. Some of them even show signs
of having been used for performance. We don’t know whether
Düben led the ensemble from a continuo instrument or whether
he conducted from the front; maybe it varied depending on the
occasion. Either way, a score in the form of an organ tablature
would be a very useful aid in leading the ensemble, and for this
purpose a thin volume would be far more practical than a thick
one. The later books often have a kind of ‘theme’; the pieces are
often arranged according to scoring (a book could contain
pieces for three voices and continuo only, for example), per-
formance opportunity, composer and so on.
One interesting volume may strengthen the theory that
Düben used the tablatures when leading the ensemble. There is
one volume (Vmhs 84:70–91), that contains pieces by Johann
Melchior Gletle and Erasmus von der Mihl: three pieces by von
der Mihl, the rest by Gletle. All the pieces have in common that
the texts are in Latin (mostly psalms), and they are scored for
five voices (2S, A, T, B) and two or five instruments, but only
two of them are notated in the tablature, and all are very short.
Gletle’s pieces are copied from one print: Expeditionis musicae
classis II. Psalmi Breves Breviores, Brevissimi (Augsburg 1668).
One exemplar of this print, a set of parts, was owned by Düben,
and some of the pieces also exist as handwritten sets of parts.

70 Juliane Peetz
Why would Düben copy these pieces in tablature, if not to use,

when he already owned both a printed copy and a handwritten
set of parts? This volume also shows that Düben used a certain
system when figuring the basso continuo. The early tablature
volumes do not contain continuo figures. In this volume, as
well as in many others, the continuo part has figures when the
harmonies are not obvious from the score, in particular in solo
passages, which would help the continuo player to accompany
from the tablature score. It seems probable that this volume was
used at Vespers or on similar occasions.
Figure 15. From Vmhs 84:70–91, showing continuo figures in the solo passage
to the right, but not in the tutti passage to the left.
In all probability Düben stopped making thick books because

he found thin ones more useful. But how can this help us to
understand why he made the thick books in the beginning?It
seems as though his intention changed; at first he needed to
create a repertoire for the court chapel, and that meant that he
had to study a considerable amount of music himself. Maybe he
used the books as a kind of study score, besides the fact that
tablature books were an excellent way of storing large amounts
of music, as mentioned before; the five volumes of vocal music
alone contain two hundred and sixty-eight pieces. I think
Düben used the large volumes at the beginning of his career to
organise the collection in a practical way; as soon as he had
achieved this aim he could concentrate on performance, using
his copying activity to enlarge the repertoire that he already

possessed. When the thick volumes were finished he no longer

needed the help of his copyists to write tablatures and they
could instead concentrate on producing sets of parts for per-
formance. After 1667 the tablature volumes are almost all cop-
ied by Düben himself and he continued to make thinner tabla-
ture volumes in this way all his life.
In other words, Düben’s way of producing large thick vol-
umes or thinner ones reflects his professional career: the first
steps of a thirteen-year-old boy towards assisting his father at
the church organ, the first stage of collecting music as a twenty-
year old who had just finished his education, the first years as
Hofkapellmeister, trying to build up a repertoire for the ensem-
ble, and, finally, the established professional who had found a
method that suited him best, a method he continued to use for
the rest of his career. The volumes present a picture of a both
pedantic and flexible collector, who could be persistent and
very hard-working when trying to achieve his aim as well as
making others under his command work equally hard towards
this aim, but who at the same time was able to adjust to a new
situation and to change his methods of working accordingly.
Literature

Ordnung’, Teil I–II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 44 (1964), p. 27–82;
Teil II–III; ebd., 46 (1966), p. 63–186.
Kjellberg, Erik, Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden. Studier kring deras
organisation, verksamheter och status ca. 1620 – ca. 1720. Uppsala: Uppsala
universitet 1979.
Kyhlberg, Bengt, Musiken i Uppsala under stormaktstiden I 1620–1660. Uppsala:
Uppsala universitet 1974.
Kyhlberg, Bengt and van Boer, Bertil H.: art. ‘Düben’. (1) ‘Andreas Düben’. (2)
‘Gustaf Düben’. Grove music online <http://www.grovemusic.com>, Oxford
University Press 2006 (2006–08–18)

72 Juliane Peetz
Norlind, Tobias, Från Tyska kyrkans glansdagar. Bilder ur svenska musikens his-
toria från Vasaregenterna till Karolinska tidens slut. Bd. II: Stormaktstidevarvets
begynnelse 1600–1660. Stockholm: Musikhistoriska museet 1944.
Rudén, Jan Olof: ‘Ett nyfunnet komplement till Dübensamlingen’, Svensk
tidskrift för musikforskning, 45 (1965), p. 51–58.
Rudén, Jan Olof: Vattenmärken och musikforskning. Presentation och tillämpning
av en dateringsmetod på musikalier i handskrift i Uppsala Universitetsbiblioteks
Dübensamling, Uppsala: Uppsala universitet 1968. (Ms); Internet: http://
www.ordommusik.se/duben/index.htm
Wollny, Peter: ‘Zur Thüringer Rezeption des französischen Stils im späten 17.
und frühen 18. Jahrhundert’, Ständige Konferenz Mitteldeutsche Barockmusik
in Sachsen, Wilhelm Seidel, Peter Wollny (ed.), Sachsen-Anhalt und Thü-
ringen e. V. Jahrbuch 2001.

BARBARA WIERMANN
Vokal-instrumentale Werke in der Sammlung

Düben — Überlieferung und Aneignung
Die Musiküberlieferung des 17. Jahrhunderts ist gekennzeichnet

durch eine Parallelität von Musikdrucken und Musikhandschrif-
ten, wie sie in anderen Jahrhunderten in dieser Art kaum zu be-
obachten ist. In den Regionen nördlich der Alpen entstanden in
dieser Zeit umfassende Sammlungen an Musikalien wie die
Sammlung Breslau,1 die Hamburger Sammlung Thomas Selles2
und die Sammlung Gustav Dübens, die sich sowohl aus Drucken
als auch aus Handschriften zusammensetzen. Die Bestände zei-
gen deutlich, auf welch vielfältigen Wegen Musik verbreitet
wurde. Sie dokumentieren gleichzeitig die enge Verzahnung
beider Überlieferungsformen. Betrachtet man die drei erwähnten
Sammlungen in der Abfolge ihres Entstehens, zeichnet sich je-
doch auch ab, wie die handschriftliche Überlieferung allmählich
die gedruckte Überlieferung verdrängte. Dieses erstmalig von
Friedhelm Krummacher ausführlicher beschriebene Phänomen
hängt unter anderem mit einer zunehmenden Komplexität der
musikalischen Faktur der Werke zusammen,3 die immer schwie-
1 Emil Bohn, Bibliographie der Musik-Druckwerke bis 1700, welche in der Stadt-
bibliothek, der Bibliothek des Academischen Instituts für Kirchenmusik und der
Königlichen und Universitäts-Bibliothek zu Breslau aufbewahrt werden, Berlin
1883; ders., Die musikalischen Handschriften des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts in
der Stadtbibliothek zu Breslau, Breslau 1890.
2 Jürgen Neubacher, Die Musikbibliothek des Hamburger Kantors und Musikdirek-
tors Thomas Selle (1599–1663). Rekonstruktion des ursprünglichen und Beschrei-
bung des erhaltenen überwiegend in der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Ham-
burg Carl von Ossietzky aufbewahrten Bestandes, Neuhausen-Stuttgart 1997.
3 Friedhelm Krummacher, Die Überlieferung der Choralbearbeitungen in der
frühen evangelischen Kantate. Untersuchungen zum Handschriftenrepertoire
evangelischer Figuralmusik im späten 17. und beginnenden 18. Jahrhundert, Ber-
lin 1965, S. 45–50.

74 Barbara Wiermann
riger in Drucken darstellbar wurde. Der Umbruch lässt sich in

der jüngsten der drei erwähnten Sammlungen, der Sammlung
Gustav Dübens am deutlichsten nachvollziehen.
Die Mischung von Drucken – mit in der Regel vom Autor für
die allgemeine Verbreitung freigegebenen Werkfassungen –
und Handschriften – als in der Regel für lokale Aufführungen
entstandene Materialien – in einer Musikaliensammlung bietet
Chancen für zahlreiche musikgeschichtliche Fragestellungen,
insbesondere für Fragen der Rezeption und der Aufführungs-
praxis.4 Im Folgenden soll beispielhaft anhand dreier Fallstu-
dien zur Dübensammlung gezeigt werden, wie gedruckte und
handschriftliche Überlieferung ineinander greifen.
Die erste Fallstudie widmet sich dem in der Dübensamm-
lung enthaltenen geistlichen Vokalrepertoire italienischer Kom-
ponisten, das in seiner Zeit gedruckt zugänglich war. Anhand
der von Düben handschriftlich zusammengetragenen Werke
werden beispielhaft einige Charakteristika der Rezeption und
Aneignung italienischer Musik in den Regionen nördlich der
Alpen herausgearbeitet, wobei den Besetzungstraditionen be-
sondere Aufmerksamkeit geschenkt wird.
Die zweite Fallstudie betrachtet Werke deutscher Komponis-
ten, insbesondere Stücke, die Düben und sein Zirkel aus deut-
schen Drucken entnahmen. Anhand eines Vergleichs zwischen
dem in gedruckter Form zugänglichen Repertoire und dem dann
für Handschriften ausgewählten Repertoire soll versucht wer-
den, Kriterien herauszuarbeiten, nach denen der schwedische
Kapellmeister Werke für seine Sammlung zusammenstellte.
In der dritten Fallstudie steht eine Handschrift, das Libro rub-
ro, im Mittelpunkt der Untersuchungen, die Werke aus Dru-
cken und Kompositionen mit lediglich handschriftlicher Über-
lieferung vereint. Anhand des Libro rubro wird unter anderem
nachvollzogen, nach welchen Merkmalen Düben, unabhängig
von ihrer Vorlage, Werke eines Tabulaturbandes kombinierte.
4 Vgl. z. B. die Untersuchungen zur Aufführungspraxis in Breslau, in: Barbara

Wiermann, Die Entwicklung vokal-instrumentalen Komponierens im protestanti-
schen Deutschland bis zur Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts, Göttingen 2005, S. 339–372.

Vokal-instrumentale Werke in der Dübensammlung 75
Das italienische Repertoire der Sammlung Düben
Das Musikleben nördlich der Alpen wurde im 17. Jahrhundert

stark durch die Rezeption italienischer Musik bestimmt. So
verwundert es nicht, dass rund ein Fünftel der geistlichen Vo-
kalwerke der Dübensammlung, das sind über 260 Werke, auf
italienische Komponisten zurückgehen. Die von Düben zu-
sammengetragenen Stücke weisen, was ihren Entstehungszeit-
punkt, ihre Gattung, ihre Besetzung anbetrifft, eine breite Viel-
falt auf. Die älteste Komposition stammt aus der Zeit um 1615,
die jüngsten Werke entstanden in den späten 1660er Jahren.
Düben sammelte unter anderem kleine geistliche Vokalkonzer-
te, gemischt besetzte Konzerte und große mehrchörige Werke.
Die italienische Musik gelangte über unterschiedlichste Wege in
die Dübensammlung, die bislang nur in Ansätzen rekonstruiert
werden konnten. Einige bereits von Grusnick identifizierte
Handschriftengruppen kamen direkt aus Italien.5 Für zahlreiche
Handschriften mit Werken italienischer Komponisten lässt sich
eine nordeuropäische Provenienz ausmachen. So gelangten
verschiedene Werke des Italieners Simone Vesi über Danzig
nach Stockholm.6 Mit den Kompositionen Vincenzo Albricis
und Marco Giuseppe Perandas, die am Dresdener Hof wirkten,
5 Zu nennen wären unter anderem die Stimmen des Foggia-Schreibers aus-

schließlich mit Werken von Foggia (Vmhs 23:1 bis 23:6 und 23:8 bis 23:11
sowie 43:1); die Stimmen des Bicilli-Schreibers mit Werken von Bicilli, Car-
darelli, Corsi und Melani (Vmhs 4:12, 4:13, 4:14, 10:17, 12:13 und 28:10) und
Stimmen des Romani-Schreibers mit Kompositionen von Romani, Rosen-
müller, Sances und zwei Anonyma (Vmhs 33:1, 33:2, 33:6, 44:14, 44:19 und
46:9), vgl. Bruno Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung. Ein Versuch ihrer chrono-
logischen Ordnung’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, Teil I–II, 46 (1964), S.
67 und Teil II–III, 48 (1966), S. 70.
6 Es handelt sich um die Werke Beatus vir (Vmhs 38:14), Credidi propter
(Vmhs 39:12), Laudate pueri (Vmhs 37:11). Die Handschriften wurden von
einem Danziger Schreiber erstellt, der bei Grusnick den Kunstnamen ‘Be-
fastru’ erhalten hat, Grusnick ’Die Dübensammlung‘, Teil I–II, S. 65f). Sie
gehen mit großer Wahrscheinlichkeit auf Vesis Druck Messa e salmi (Vene-
dig 1646) zurück.

76 Barbara Wiermann
kamen umfassende Bestände gebürtiger Italiener aus Mittel-

deutschland gen Norden. Einzelne italienische Werke fanden in
kleineren Sammlungen ihren Weg nach Schweden.7
Die Kompositionen, die heute in handschriftlicher Form in
der Dübensammlung vorliegen, haben keineswegs alle eine
durchgehend handschriftliche Überlieferung. Für ca. 110 italie-
nische Werke der Dübensammlung konnten bisher Konkordan-
zen in Drucken bestimmt werden.8 Die Kompositionen lassen
sich in vier Gruppe einteilen:
a) Werke aus italienischen Drucken, auf die Düben und sein
Kreis Zugriff hatten, und aus denen sie selbst kopierten.
b) Werke aus deutschen Sammeldrucken oder Einzeldrucken
mit italienischem Repertoire, auf die Düben und sein Kreis
Zugriff hatten, und aus denen sie selbst kopierten.
c) Werke, die an anderer Stelle aus italienischen oder deut-
schen Drucken kopiert wurden und dann als Handschriften
in die Dübensammlung integriert wurden.9
d) Werke, die alleinig über eine handschriftliche Überlieferung
in die Dübensammlung gelangten, obwohl sie auch in zeit-
genössischen Drucken vorliegen.10
7 Vgl. Peter Wollny, ‘Beiträge zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Sammlung Dü-

ben’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 87 (2005); ders. ‘Eine anonyme Leip-
ziger Hochzeitsmusik aus dem 17. Jahrhundert’, in: Über Leben, Kunst und
Kunstwerke: Aspekte musikalischer Biographie. Johann Sebastian Bach im Zent-
rum, hrsg. von Christoph Wolff, Leipzig 1999, S. 57.
8 Vgl. den RISM Zettelkatalog von Jan Olof Rudén (Uppsala Universitäts-
bibliothek, Handschriften- und Musikabteilung) und Grusnick, ‘Die Dü-
bensammlung‘,, Teil I–III. Den ersten Versuch zu einer systematischen Be-
stimmung der Konkordanzen zwischen Drucken und Handschriften der
Dübensammlung unternahm Erik Kjellberg in Kungliga musiker i Sverige
under stormaktstiden. Studier kring deras organisation, verksamheter och status
ca 1620–1720, Uppsala 1979, Bd. I, S. 299–309 und Bd. II, S. 825–831. Siehe
auch Geoffrey Webber, A Study of Italian Influence on North German Church
and Organ Music in the Second Half of the Seventeenth Century, with a Special
Reference to the Collection of Gustav Düben, Oxford 1988, S. 217–225.
9 Vgl. Fußnote 6.
10 Dies gilt zum Beispiel vermutlich für die folgenden Werke von Bonifazio
Graziani, die bereits um 1667 in den Tabulaturband Vmhs 78 Eingang

In Tabelle 1 sind die Werke aufgeführt, für die aufgrund ver-

schiedener Indizien anzunehmen ist, dass Düben oder Mitglieder
seines Kreises sie direkt aus italienischen Drucken kopierten.11
Alle Abschriften, Tabulaturen und Stimmen, wurden von Düben
selbst oder von Stockholmer Schreibern angefertigt. Es existieren
in der Sammlung keine auswärtigen Stimmen, die für eine Inta-
volierung herangezogen werden konnten. Fast alle Drucke liegen
in der Dübensammlung oder der Sammlung der Deutschen Kir-
che Stockholm vor, wodurch anzunehmen ist, dass Düben Zu-
griff auf sie hatte. Lediglich für Giovanni Antonio Grossis Orfeo
pelegrino ne sacre cantici (Mailand 1659)12 und Giovanni Legrenzis
Psalmi a 5 (Venedig 1659) sind heute keine Exemplare in genann-
ten Sammlungen mehr nachweisbar. Dennoch darf angenommen
werden, dass die Drucke Düben über einen längeren Zeitraum-
zugänglich waren. Aus beiden Sammlungen kopierte er immer-
hin jeweils vier Werke; diese wurden nicht systematisch, am
Stück in eine Handschrift übertragen, sondern über verschiedene
Handschriften verteilt. Offensichtlich sind die Abschriften zu
unterschiedlichen Zeiten entstanden.13
Es ist festzuhalten, dass im Vergleich zu seiner umfassenden
Sammlung an Handschriften mit Werken italienischer Kompo-
nisten Düben nur Zugriff auf eine überschaubare Anzahl an
italienischen Drucken hatte, von denen zwölf heute identifi-
zierbar sind. Auf der Grundlage dieser Drucke entstanden
fanden, aber erst 1673 in dem Druck Motetti a due, tre, quattro, e cinque voci
op. XII (Rom) erschienen: Quanta pericula (Vmhs 78:17), Quando consolabor
(Vmhs 78:21).
11 Die Konkordanzen gehen im Wesentlichen zurück auf Grusnick, op. cit.
und Webber, op. cit.
12 Die zweite Auflage des Drucks, Antwerpen 1667, kann Düben nicht als
Vorlage gedient haben, da die Handschriften teilweise bereits auf das Jahr
1666 datiert sind.
13 Die Tabulaturbände Vmhs 81 und Vmhs 78 stammen aus den Jahren 1665
bzw. 1666/67. Die Handschriften zu den Werken Legrenzis sind wie folgt zu
datieren Vmhs 82:6 – 1667, Vmhs 84:21 und 84:94 – 1671, Vmhs 84:6b – 1668.
Das Entstehungsdatum von Vmhs 86:13 ist unbekannt. Angaben nach Grus-
nick, op. cit. und Erik Kjellberg und Kerala J. Snyder, (Hrsg.), The Düben Collec-
tion Database Catalogue (http://www.musik.uu.se/duben/Duben.php).

78 Barbara Wiermann
Handschriften zu 53 Werken der Dübensammlung. Dabei han-

delt es sich, wie in Tabelle 1 ersichtlich, zumeist um Tabulatu-
ren. Nur zu wenigen Werken gibt es Tabulaturen und Stim-
mensätze bzw. nur Stimmensätze. Es ist also davon auszuge-
hen, dass aus den Drucken musiziert wurde und die Hand-
schriften nur als ergänzendes Material für Direktion und Con-
tinuospiel dienten. Die zwölf Drucke wurden von Düben in
unterschiedlichem Ausmaß genutzt. Aus den Sammlungen von
Giovanni Carisio und Stefano Fabri wurden elf bzw. neun Wer-
ke von Düben intavoliert. Aus den Sammeldrucken von Flori-
dus de Sylvestris übernahm Düben jeweils fünf bis sechs Werke
und aus den Einzeldrucken von Giovanni Antonio Grossi und
Giovanni Legrenzi jeweils vier Werke. Aus den übrigen Dru-
cken kopierte er nur ein bis zwei Stücke.14
Anhand eines Vergleichs zwischen den von Düben für Auf-
führungszwecke und für seine Handschriftensammlung aus-
gewählten Werken und dem in den Drucken vorliegenden Ge-
samtrepertoire soll im Folgenden versucht werden, musikali-
sche Präferenzen des Stockholmer Hofkapellmeister aufzuspü-
ren und einige Charakteristika des von ihm zusammengestell-
ten Repertoires zu beschreiben.
Hervorzuheben ist zunächst Dübens spezielles Interesse an
Werken, die mit hohen Stimmen besetzt sind. Dies zeigt sich
besonders augenfällig anhand der Sacri concerti von Giovanni
Carisio. In dem Druck sind 19 Werke Carisios und drei Werke
Giovanni Battista Trabattones enthalten.15 Die sieben Werke
von Carisio à zwei Stimmen, die sich aufteilen in sechs Kompo-
sitionen à zwei Cantus und ein Stück für Cantus und Alt, hat
Düben vollständig kopiert. Von den acht Werken à drei Stim-
men übernahm er lediglich die zwei Stücke für drei Cantus. Die
übrigen dreistimmigen Kompositionen, die auch tiefere Stim-
men verwenden, ließ er unberücksichtigt. Von den vier Kom-
14 Zu den Werken Vesis vgl. Fußnote 6.

15 Für den Inhalt des Druckes siehe Rafael Mitjana, Catalogue critique et des-
criptif des imprimés de musique des XVIe et XVIIe siècles, Tome I, Musique reli-
gieuse I, Upsala 1911, Sp. 56f.

positionen à fünf Stimmen wählte Düben nur eines aus – dieses

in der Besetzung zwei Cantus, Alt, Tenor, Bass –, ebenso wie er
von den drei Werken Trabattones lediglich eines übernahm
(Alt, Tenor, Bass). Die vorgenommene Auswahl belegt eine
deutliche Vorliebe für kleine Besetzungen und hohe Stimmen.
Bei den in Tabelle 1 zusammengestellten Werken, die von
Düben und seinem Kreis aus italienischen Drucken kopiert
wurden, ist ferner der hohe Anteil an reinen Vokalkonzerten
auffällig. Lediglich neun Werke, das ist weniger als ein Viertel
der Stücke, weisen eine gemischte Besetzung auf. Streng ge-
nommen wurden sogar nur zu acht Werken in vokal-instru-
mentaler Besetzung Handschriften erstellt: Das Konzert Per
regidos montes von Carlo Cechelli ist ursprünglich ein Vokal-
konzert; die Streicherstimmen wurden von Düben ergänzt. Die
Dominanz reiner Vokalwerke kann allerdings nicht auf eine
Selektion durch Düben zurückgeführt werden. Vielmehr ist sie
durch die Düben vorliegenden italienischen Drucke bereits
vorgegeben: in acht Sammlungen sind ausschließlich Vokal-
werke enthalten, nur in vier Drucken sind auch einzelne ge-
mischt besetzte Stücke veröffentlicht.16
In Tabelle 2 sind die Werke italienischer Komponisten zu-
sammengestellt, die Düben vermutlich aus deutschen Sammlun-
gen und Sammelwerken kopiert hat. Mit Ausnahme des vierten
Teils der geistlichen Konzerte von Ambrosius Profe und der 1666
in Köln erschienenen Sammlung von Messen Giacomo Carissi-
mis sind alle aufgeführten Drucke in der Sammlung Düben oder
dem Bestand der Deutschen Kirche Stockholm erhalten. Ob Dü-
ben auch die vierte Sammlung Profes und die Kölner Sammlung
mit Werken Carissimis zwischenzeitlich vorlagen oder ob er die
Werke über Zwischenquellen bezog, muss offen bleiben.17
16 Folgende Drucke enthalten einzelne Kompositionen in gemischter Beset-

zung: Tarditi, Concerti il XXXV di Motetti (Venedig 1663); Grossi, Orfeo pel-
legrino ne sacre cantici (Mailand 1659); Legrenzi, Psalmi a 5 (Venedig 1657);
Vesi, Messa e salmi (Venedig 1646).
17 Mit Sicherheit erhielt Düben Carissimis Messe Militia est vita hominis super
terram (Vmhs 44:03), die auch in dem Druck (Köln 1666) erschienen ist, über
Danzig. Ebenso hatte Carissimis Werk Suscitavit Dominus vermutlich einen

80 Barbara Wiermann
Ein Vergleich der in Tabelle 1 und Tabelle 2 zusammenges-

tellten Kompositionen zeigt deutliche Unterschiede zwischen
dem Repertoire aus italienischen Drucken und dem Repertoire
aus deutschen Veröffentlichungen. Während aus den italieni-
schen Drucken relativ aktuelle Werke in die Sammlung Düben
kamen, übermitteln die deutschen Sammeldrucke, insbesonde-
re die Veröffentlichungen Profes ältere Stücke, die in den 1620er
und 1630er Jahren komponiert und erstmals publiziert wurden.
Das älteste Werk Factum est silentium von Alessandro Grandi
wurde 1616 erstmals gedruckt.18 Die von Havemann zusam-
mengetragenen Werke stammen aus den 1630er und 1640er
Jahren. Schon vor diesem Hintergrund liegen stilistische Unter-
schiede der Kompositionen auf der Hand. Besonders offensicht-
lich weichen die Besetzungen der Werke voneinander ab. Wäh-
rend, wie bereits beschrieben, unter den Stücken aus italieni-
schen Drucken Werke für Singstimmen dominieren, handelt es
sich bei den Werken italienischer Komponisten, die über
deutsche Drucke nach Schweden kamen, mehrheitlich um vo-
kal-instrumentale Stücke. Der Unterschied ist keineswegs auf
eine bewusste Auswahl Dübens zurückzuführen. Vielmehr
findet sich in den deutschen Sammeldrucken von Profe und
Havemann, wie in Tabelle 3 festgehalten, ein wesentlich höhe-
rer Anteil gemischt besetzter Kompositionen als in den vor-
nehmlich durch Vokalwerke geprägten italienischen Veröffent-
lichungen. Wie an anderer Stelle gezeigt werden konnte, wählte
der Breslauer Organist und Kaufmann Ambrosius Profe für
seine Veröffentlichungen gezielt vokal-instrumentale Stücke
aus, wobei die italienischen Vorlagen, aus denen er seine Sam-
meldrucke zusammenstellte, Kompositionen unterschiedlicher
Besetzung enthielten.19 Profes Sammlungen sind ein Beleg da-
für, dass in Deutschland um 1650 ein besonderes Interesse an
vokal-instrumentalen Werken bestand. Diese Annahme wird
von dem 1666 erschienen Druck unabhängigen Überlieferungsweg, da die

Handschrift bereits auf das Jahr 1664 datiert ist (Vmhs 79:41 und 12:05).
18 Alessandro Grandi, Il quatro libro de motetti (Venedig 1616).
19 Wiermann, op. cit., S. 49–54.

ebenso bestätigt durch den Druck Missa a quinque (Köln 1666)

mit Messkompositionen Giacomo Carissimis. Die in dieser
Sammlung enthaltenen Sätze sind in ihrer Originalform reine
Vokalwerke; sie wurden durch den Herausgeber für das
deutsche Publikum durch Instrumentalstimmen ergänzt.
Ein Vergleich zwischen den in Tabelle 1 aufgeführten Wer-
ken und den in Tabelle 2 zusammengestellten Konzerten italie-
nischer Komponisten, die der schwedische Kapellmeister aus
deutschen Sammlungen und Sammeldrucken kopierte, offen-
bart zusätzlich Unterschiede in den Überlieferungsformen.
Während die Stücke aus italienischen Drucken, wie bereits er-
wähnt, zu großen Teilen allein als Tabulaturen in die Düben-
sammlung eingingen, existieren zu den Werken aus deutschen
Sammlungen zu einem wesentlich höheren Prozentsatz Tabula-
turen und Stimmen, bzw. nur Stimmen. Die zahlreich vorhan-
denen handschriftlichen Aufführungsmaterialien lassen den
Rückschluss zu, dass die deutschen Sammeldrucke nicht zum
Musizieren genutzt wurden. Sie dokumentieren, dass die Auf-
führung gerade gemischt besetzter Kompositionen aus Drucken
zunehmend problematisch wurde. Dadurch dass nur selten für
jede Stimme und jedes Instrument einzelne Stimmbücher vor-
lagen, häufig jedoch Instrumental- und Vokalstimmen in einem
Stimmbuch kombiniert waren, wurde das gemeinsame Musi-
zieren aus Drucken deutlich erschwert, bzw. zum Teil auch
gänzlich ausgeschlossen.
Die Anfertigung von Stimmenmaterial ist zum Teil an eine
Bearbeitung der Werke gekoppelt. Zu Claudio Monteverdis
Konzert Resurrexit de sepulchro ergänzte Düben einen fünfstim-
migen Streichersatz, zu Giovanni Pietro Finattis Konzert Jubila-
te, cantate einen Ripienchor. Dabei nahm Düben nur bei an sich
bereits vokal-instrumentalen Werken Besetzungserweiterungen
vor; reine Vokalwerke hingegen ließ er unangetastet.20
Die in Tabelle 2 zusammengestellten Titel zeigen deutlich,
dass die Rezeption italienischer Musik über Deutschland zu
20 Diese Regel lässt sich unabhängig von Fragen der Überlieferungswege in

der gesamten Dübensammlung nachvollziehen.

82 Barbara Wiermann
Verzerrungen führte. In deutschen Drucken wurde Düben mit

einer Werkauswahl konfrontiert, die dem Geschmack Profes
und Havemanns sowie den potentiellen Erwartungen der Käu-
fer ihrer Veröffentlichungen nördlich der Alpen entsprach, die
besonders bezüglich der Besetzung eigene Vorlieben hatten.
Die verschobene Wahrnehmung des italienischen Repertoires
durch eine deutsche Vermittlung bestätigt sich auch bei der
Betrachtung einer kleinen Handschriftengruppe, auf die ers-
tmals Peter Wollny aufmerksam machte.21 Die in Tabelle 4 zu-
sammengestellten Handschriften wurden vermutlich um 1645
von einem Studenten der Leipziger Universität geschrieben. Bei
vier von fünf Stücken handelt es sich um gemischt besetzte
Werke italienischer Komponisten. Sie sind ein weiterer Beleg
dafür, dass nördlich der Alpen aus dem italienischen geistli-
chen Repertoire in überdurchschnittlicher Anzahl vokal-
instrumentale Stücke rezipiert wurden. Die von dem Leipziger
Studenten vorgenommene Werkauswahl erstaunt nicht vor
dem Hintergrund, dass er als Schüler offensichtlich als Schrei-
ber Thomas Selles tätig war und in Hamburg intensiv mit reich
besetzter Musik in Kontakt kam.22
Die bisherigen Beobachtungen zur Rezeption des italieni-
schen Repertoires durch Düben sollen abschließend in einen
erweiterten Kontext gestellt werden, indem die Stücke berück-
sichtigt werden, die ausschließlich handschriftlich überliefert
sind. In der Sammlung Düben sind ca. 160 Werke italienischer
Komponisten, für die sich keine zeitgenössischen Veröffentli-
chungen nachweisen lassen. Dabei handelt es sich um rund 65
reine Vokalkonzerte und 95 vokal-instrumentale Werke. Auf
den ersten Blick scheint die Dominanz reiner Vokalwerke also
nur für das gedruckte italienische Repertoire zu gelten. An die-
ser Stelle ist jedoch offensichtlich eine neue Süd-Nord-
Differenzierung notwendig. Eine hohe Anzahl der gemischt
besetzten Werke stammt von den in Deutschland tätigen Italie-
nern Vincenzo Albrici und Marco Gioseppe Peranda (zusam-
21 Wollny, Leipziger Hochzeitsmusik, S. 57.


men 47 Werke). Sie passten ihren Kompositionsstil zumindest

hinsichtlich der gewählten Besetzungen deutschen Traditions-
linien und Vorlieben an. Damit relativiert sich das Verhältnis
rein vokaler und gemischter Werke im handschriftlich überlie-
ferten Repertoire, wobei unter den Stücken in Italien tätiger
Komponisten weiterhin das vokale Konzert dominiert.
Das Repertoire deutscher Komponisten aus Drucken
Im Repertoire deutscher Komponisten ist der Anteil der Hand-

schriften, die auf Drucke zurückgehen, wesentlich geringer als
im italienischen Repertoire. Die Tatsache, dass hier Werke domi-
nieren, die lediglich als Handschriften überliefert sind, lässt sich
zum einen dadurch erklären, dass Düben in Regionen nördlich
der Alpen engere Kontakte hatte, als er sie nach Italien unter-
hielt. Damit waren ihm in Deutschland im umfangreicheren Ma-
ße unpublizierte Werk zugänglich, als er sie über offizielle Ver-
triebswege aus Italien erhalten konnte. Zum anderen lässt sich
das Übergewicht des lediglich handschriftlich überlieferten Re-
pertoires aus Deutschland durch die spezifischen Entwicklungen
des dortigen Musikdruckgewerbes erklären: Während und nach
dem Dreißigjährigen Krieg ist nördlich der Alpen, besonders
aber in den protestantischen Teilen Deutschlands, eine deutliche
Abnahme des Musikdrucks zu beobachten, die in dieser Art in
Italien keine Parallelen zu haben scheint.23
In Tabelle 5 sind die deutschen Drucke zusammengestellt, aus
denen Werke in die Sammlung Düben gelangten. Gelegenheits-
drucke blieben dabei unberücksichtigt. Titel, die in Kursiven
wiedergegeben sind, befinden sich heute in der Dübensammlung
oder in den Beständen der Deutschen Kirche Stockholm. Wie bei
den diskutierten italienischen Drucken scheint es auf der Hand
zu liegen, dass Düben und sein Kreis diese Drucke unmittelbar

84 Barbara Wiermann
als Vorlagen für ihre Kopien nutzten. Für das Liber secundus sac-
rarum cantionum (1661) von Georg Arnold sowie die Scelta musi-
cale (1669) und das Theatrum musicum (1669) von Samuel Capri-
cornus ist anzunehmen, dass Düben für einen überschaubaren
Zeitraum Zugriff auf die Drucke hatte. Er nutzte die Gelegenheit,
um zahlreiche Werke systematisch zu intavolieren und gleichzei-
tig entsprechende Stimmensätze anzufertigen. Für eine kleine
Gruppe der in Tabelle 5 aufgeführten Sammlungen, wie zum
Beispiel Capricornus Geistliche Harmonien (1659) kann unter an-
derem aufgrund der geringen Anzahl berücksichtigter Werke
angenommen werden, dass Düben oder seine Mitarbeiter sie
nicht unmittelbar als Vorlage nutzten, sondern die entsprechen-
den Stücke aus Zwischenquellen kopierten.
Bei den Kompositionen, die Düben aus deutschen Drucken
übernahm, handelt es sich überwiegend um ein sehr aktuelles
Repertoire. Wie sich in Tabelle 5 deutlich zeigt, sind aus älteren
Drucken, wie den Musicalischen Andachten von Andreas Ham-
merschmidt (1641) oder den Kernsprüchen (1648) von Johann
Rosenmüller in der Sammlung Düben nur einzelne Werke
überliefert. Drucke, die in den 1660er, 1670er Jahren oder sogar
1680er Jahren veröffentlicht wurden, nutzte der schwedische
Kapellmeister in weit größerem Ausmaß. So übernahm er zum
Beispiel aus Wolfgang Briegels Musikalischer Lebens-Brunn
(1680) 22 Werke. Offensichtlich war Düben an der neuesten
Musiksprache interessiert.
Was die regionale Verteilung der von Düben verwendeten
Drucke anbetrifft, sind sie ein Spiegel der Entwicklung des
deutschen Musikdrucks um die Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts. Die
Mehrzahl der Drucke (24) stammt aus Süddeutschland, wo der
Notendruck bis zum Jahrhundertende noch florierte. Deutlich
geringer ist der Anteil mitteldeutscher Drucke (10 Veröffentli-
chungen), da in dieser Region die Drucktätigkeit nach dem
Dreißigjährigen Krieg sich nicht mehr richtig erholte. Kaum
vertreten sind Drucke aus Norddeutschland (4 Titel), wo in der
zweiten Hälfte des 17. Jahrhunderts kaum noch ein nennens-

wertes Musikdruckgewerbe existierte.24 Die unterschiedliche

Situation der drei Regionen spiegelt sich auch in Umfang und
Gestaltung der publizierten Materialien. In Tabelle 5 zeigt sich,
dass die Veröffentlichungen aus Süddeutschland in der Regel
mehr als 20 und bis zu 80 Werke umfassen, während die Dru-
cke aus Mitteldeutschland, so zum Beispiel die Veröffentli-
chungen von Constantin Dedekind, Werner Fabricius und To-
bias Zeutschner aus zehn oder weniger Werken bestehen. Dü-
bens Sammlung wurde durch das Angebot geprägt. Es entstan-
den deutlich mehr Handschriften nach süddeutschen Drucken
als nach mittel- oder norddeutschen Veröffentlichungen.
Ein genauerer Blick auf das in Drucken vorliegende und von
Düben zusammengetragene deutsche Repertoire offenbart
deutliche Unterschiede zu den Werken aus Italien. Unter den
deutschen Sammlungen findet sich keine Veröffentlichung, die
lediglich Vokalwerke bereitstellt. In allen Drucken sind zumin-
dest reine Vokalwerke und gemischt besetzte Stücke kombi-
niert, wie zum Beispiel in Georg Arnolds Liber primus sacrarum
cantionum (1651) mit neun Vokalwerken und zwölf gemischten
Konzerten, in Christoph Bernhards Geistliche Harmonien (1665)
mit acht Vokalkompositionen und zwölf gemischten Konzerten,
in Melchiors Gletles Expeditiones musicae classis I (1667) mit 18
Vokalwerken und 18 Konzerten in gemischter Besetzung oder
Konstantin Steingadens Flores hyemnales (1661) mit drei Vokal-
konzerten und 21 vokal-instrumentalen Stücken. Die Mehrzahl
der in Tabelle 5 zusammengestellten Drucke umfassen jedoch
nur vokal-instrumentale Kompositionen, wobei es sich bei den
Instrumentalstimmen auch um ad-libitum-Zusätze handeln
kann. Betrachtet man die von Düben vorgenommene Auswahl,
ist festzuhalten, dass er aus den Drucken, die Vokalkonzerte
und gemischte Konzerte vereinen, keines der reinen Vokalstü-
cke kopierte. Dieser Werkbestand war für ihn nicht von Interes-
se. An dieser Stelle zeigt sich neben der allgemein für die Re-
gionen nördlich der Alpen zu beobachteten Vorliebe für ein
24 Zur Entwicklung des Musikdrucks um die Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts in

Deutschland, vgl. Wiermann, op. cit., S. 45–47.

86 Barbara Wiermann
vokal-instrumentales Repertoire auch eine persönliche Neigung

Dübens für Kompositionen in gemischter Besetzung.
Die vokal-instrumentalen Werke, die Düben aus deutschen
Drucken zusammentrug, weisen unterschiedlichste Besetzun-
gen auf, die wiederum regionale Traditionen und Möglichkei-
ten spiegeln. Die nord- und mitteldeutschen Drucke bestehen
überwiegend aus kleinen geistlichen Konzerten. Die Werke von
Constantin Dedekind sind mit einer Vokalstimme, einem In-
strument und Basso continuo besetzt. Die Stücke von Christoph
Bernhard sind für ein bis drei Stimmen, zwei Instrumente und
Generalbass. Die einzige Ausnahme bildet die Sammlung Musi-
kalische Kirchen- und Hausfreude von Tobias Zeutschner, in der
Werke für fünf Stimmen, fünf Instrumente und Basso continuo
vereint sind. Im Gegensatz dazu wird in den süddeutschen
Drucken Musik in großen Besetzungen präsentiert. Die Stücke
von Wolfgang Briegel, Johann Fischer, Samuel Capricornus,
Georg Arnold, Melchior Gletle und Erasmus Mihl erfordern bis
zu fünf Stimmen und fünf Instrumente. Zusätzlich wird der
Einsatz von Ripienstimmen angeregt.
Die unterschiedlichen Besetzungstypen haben weniger musi-
kalische als praktische Gründe. Der Druck von klein besetzten
Werken war weniger aufwendig und kostengünstiger. Die meis-
ten Drucke aus Bremen, Dresden und Leipzig bestehen lediglich
aus bis zu sechs Stimmbüchern. Im Gegensatz dazu setzen sich
die süddeutschen Drucke aus mindestens acht Stimmbüchern
zusammen. In zahlreichen Fällen wurden nicht nur die obligaten
Vokal- und Instrumentalstimmen gedruckt, zusätzlich liegen die
ad-libitum-Ripienstimmen vor. So besteht der Druck Jubilus
Bernhardi (1660) von Samuel Capricornus aus 14 Stimmbüchern,
sein Opus musicum (1655) sogar aus 18 Stimmbüchern.
Vor dem Hintergrund, dass Düben die zuvor besprochenen
gemischt besetzten Werke italienischer Komponisten, die er aus
den Sammeldrucken Profes und Havemanns übernahm, bevor-
zugt vollständig als Stimmensätze kopierte, wäre für das an
dieser Stelle diskutierte deutsche Repertoire ähnliches anzu-
nehmen. Eine systematische Durchsicht der nach deutschen
Drucken erstellten Materialien macht jedoch deutlich, dass Dü-

ben die Mehrzahl der gedruckten Stimmbücher zunächst nur

durch Tabulaturen oder Basso-continuo-Stimmen ergänzte.
Dies zeigt sich ganz deutlich an den Werken aus Briegels Musi-
kalische Trostquelle (1679) und seinem Musikalischer Lebens-Brunn
(1680). Von zwölf Werken aus der Musikalische Trostquelle liegen
zu acht nur Tabulaturen vor, zu vier nur Basso-continuo-
Stimmen bzw. Tabulatur und Basso-continuo-Stimmen. Voll-
ständiges Stimmenmaterial gibt es zu keinem der Werke. Von
den 22 Werken, die Düben aus dem Musikalischer Lebens-Brunn
übernahm, gibt es zu Dübensammlung lediglich eine Tabulatur,
zu zwei Tabulatur und Basso-continuo-Stimme und zu acht
eine Tabulatur und einen Stimmensatz. Vergleichbare Beobach-
tungen lassen sich für die Werke von Dedekind, Fischer und
Steingaden machen. Hier ist davon auszugehen, dass die Dru-
cke zum Musizieren eingesetzt wurden, und die angefertigten
Tabulaturen und Basso-continuo-Stimmen ergänzendes Materi-
al darstellten. Letztlich war es die starke Standardisierung der
Werke, die eine übersichtliche Aufteilung in die Stimmbücher
erlaubte und damit eine reibungslose Nutzung des gedruckten
Materials ermöglichte. Durch diese Standardisierungen unter-
scheiden sich die süddeutschen Drucke wesentlich von den
Veröffentlichungen Profes und Havemanns. 25 Lediglich im Zu-
sammenhang mit Bearbeitungen war zusätzliches Material
notwendig. Bei fünf der acht Werke aus Briegels Musikalischer
Lebens-Brunn, für die komplette Stimmensätze vorliegen, wur-
den Instrumental- oder Ripienstimmen ergänzt oder andere
Eingriffe in das Stück vorgenommen.26
25 Bei Drucken, die nicht in Dübens Besitz waren, wie Georg Arnolds Liber
primus cantionum sacrarum (1651) und seinem Liber secundus cantionum sac-
rarum (1661) wurden selbstverständlich trotz standardisierter Besetzung
durchgehend Stimmensätze angefertigt. Gleiches gilt zum Beispiel für die
Werke aus den Sammlungen Scelta musicale (1669) und Theatrum musicum
(1669) von Capricornus.
26 Hierbei handelt es sich um folgende Konzerte: Lieblich und schöne sein, ist
nichts (Vmhs 70:19b), Singet fröhlich Gott (Vmhs 46:3), Süsser Jesu, höchster
Hort (Vmhs 5:5), Wo der Herr nicht das Haus bauet (Vmhs 70:19), Wohl dem,
der den Herren fürchtet (Vmhs 70:19a). Folgende Werke haben vollständige

88 Barbara Wiermann
Das Libro rubro
Während bisher auf relativ allgemeiner Ebene das Verhältnis

zwischen Drucken und Handschriften in der Dübensammlung
betrachtet wurde, soll nun abschließend anhand eines Tabula-
turbandes, nämlich anhand des Libro rubro, beispielhaft nach-
vollzogen werden, wie Düben Inhalte, die aus unterschiedli-
chen Vorlagen stammen, kombinierte.
Das Libro rubro wurde in den Jahren 1663/1664 angelegt.27
Für die meisten Werke existieren zusätzliche Stimmen, die in
demselben Zeitraum entstanden. Die Tabulatur umfasst 51
Werke, von denen für 21 Konkordanzen in Drucken bestimmt
werden konnten.28 Damit ist der Anteil an Stücken mit gedruck-
ten Vorlagen im Vergleich zu den anderen Tabulaturbüchern
verhältnismäßig hoch. Die Hauptquellen für das Libro rubro
sind Georg Arnolds Liber secundus sacrarum cantionum (acht
Stücke) und Georg Zeutschners Musikalische Kirchen- und Haus-
freude (sechs Stücke). Sechs Werke des Libro rubro gehen auf
handschriftliche Stimmensätze von außen zurück.29 Welche
Vorlagen Düben für die anderen Werke nutzte, ist ungeklärt.
Betrachtet man die Besetzung der zusammengetragenen
Werke, so fällt der hohe Anteil an Kompositionen in vokal-
Stimmensätze, ohne dass Stimmenergänzungen an den Werken vorge-

nommen worden wären: Dies ist der Tag (Vmhs 5:1), Liebe Seele, nun dich
schwinge (Vmhs 5:5), Vanitas vanitatum (Vmhs 5:6).
27 Vgl. Grusnick, ’Die Dübensammlung‘, Teil II–III, S. 79–81.
28 Zusätzlich zu den bei Grusnick, op. cit. angegebenen Konkordanzen han-
delt es sich um die Kompositionen von Georg Arnold, die zu großen Tei-
len auf seine Sammlungen Liber primus sacrarum cantionum (1651) und Li-
ber secundus sacrarum cantionum (1661) zurückgehen.
29 Es handelt sich um folgende Werke: Francesco Foggia, Laetantes canite diem
(Vmhs 23:10), Excelsi luminis cultores (Vmhs 23:6), Laeta nobis refulget dies
(Vmhs 43:1 bzw. 3:5), ferner das anonyme Werk Super flumina Babylonis
(Vmhs 46:4), Kaspar Försters Konzert Redemptor Deus, qui es vita (Vmhs
22:15, geschrieben von dem Danziger Kopisten mit dem von Grusnick
vergebenen Kunstnamen Befastru, vgl. Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung‘,
Teil I–II, S. 64–66.

instrumentaler Besetzung auf. Es handelt sich um 44 Werke im

Gegensatz zu sieben reinen Vokalwerken. Anhand der Kompo-
sitionen von Arnold und Zeutschner soll im folgenden darges-
tellt werden, wie Düben das Repertoire für das Libro rubro zu-
sammenstellte und wie er mit Besetzungsvorgaben aus den
Drucken, den obligaten und ad-libitum-Anteilen im Libro rubro
und den dazugehörigen Stimmensätzen umging.
Tabelle 6 gibt den Inhalt von Georg Arnolds Liber secundus
sacrarum cantionum (1661) wieder. Der Druck ist nach steigender
Besetzung aufgebaut. Bei den Werken 1–15 handelt es sich um
Kompositionen für vier Stimmen in unterschiedlicher vokal-
instrumentaler Kombination. Die folgenden Stücke sind für
fünf bis sieben Stimmen mit verschiedenen ad-libitum-
Anteilen. In Werk Nr. 17 Adeste quotquot amatis Mariam kann auf
alle Streicherstimmen verzichtet werden. Die Werke Nr. 24 O
dulcissime Jesu, Nr. 25 O Jesu bone und Nr. 27 Pater alme quam
decorus können ohne instrumentale Mittelstimmen aufgeführt
werden. In den Kompositionen Nr. 20 bis Nr. 23 ist die Bass-
Viola instrumentale ad-libitum-Stimme. Im Tonhöhenverlauf
orientiert sie sich am Basso continuo, hat jedoch eine selbst-
ständige rhythmische Gestaltung.
Düben übernahm aus Arnolds Liber secundus sacrarum can-
tionum lediglich ein Werk à 4 – Omnipotens & misericors Deus
(Nr. 6) für zwei Cantus, 2 Violinen und Basso continuo in das
Libro rubro. Die weiteren sieben Werke, die Eingang in den Ta-
bulaturband fanden, sind für größere Besetzungen. Für die
Mehrzahl der Werke sind im Libro rubro alle Vokal- und In-
strumentalstimmen intavoliert. Die einzigen Ausnahmen bilden
die Werke Nr. 20 Benedic Domine und Nr. 24 O dulcissime Jesu,
bei denen Düben auf die Viola-Stimmen verzichtet. In den Ta-
bulaturen fehlen jegliche Hinweise darauf, dass einzelne Be-
standteile der Besetzungen nicht obligat sind. Tabelle 7 gibt
den Inhalt von Tobias Zeutschners Druck Musikalische Kirchen-
und Hausfreude (1661) wieder, der, mit einer Ausnahme, wiede-
rum nach steigender Besetzung aufgebaut ist. Die Werke Nr. 1
Benedicta sit Sancta Trinitas und Nr. 3 Gott sey mir gnädig sind für
drei bzw. vier Vokalstimmen, zwei Violinen und Continuo. Die

90 Barbara Wiermann
Kompositionen Nr. 2 sowie Nr. 4 bis Nr. 7 sind für vier bis fünf
Vokalstimmen, fünf Instrumente und Generalbass. Die Werke
Nr. 8 bis Nr. 10 erfordern noch größere Besetzungen. Mit Aus-
nahme von Nr. 1 Benedicta sit Sancta Trinitas für drei Vokal-
stimmen, zwei Violinen und Basso continuo wählte Düben für
sein Libro rubro nur Werke für vier bis fünf Vokalstimmen, zwei
Violinen, drei Tromboni und Continuo aus.30 Zeutschners Wer-
ke erscheinen im Libro rubro in ihrer vollständigen Besetzung.
Die Möglichkeit einer Reduzierung der Stimmen wird allein für
die Komposition Nr. 2 Es ist kein ander Heil erwähnt. Für die
Nummern 5, 6, und 7 regt Düben im Index des Bandes bzw. im
Titel der jeweiligen Komposition eine alternative Instrumenta-
tion mit Violen anstelle von Tromboni an. Einen entsprechen-
den Hinweis gibt Zeutschner im Vorwort seines Druckes ledig-
lich für das Werk Te Deum laudamus.31
Eine Durchsicht der zu den Werken des Libro rubro dazuge-
hörigen Stimmensätze bestätigt zunächst einmal Dübens Ab-
sicht, die Stücke in möglichst vollständiger Besetzung festzu-
halten und aufzuführen. Für alle Kompositionen von Georg
Arnold liegt Stimmenmaterial für alle Vokal- und Instrumental-
stimmen einschließlich der ad-libitum-Stimmen vor. Für die
Werke Nr. 20 Benedic Domine und Nr. 23 Estote fortes existieren
auch Stimmen für die Basso viola, die in der Tabulatur trotz
eigenständiger Rhythmik unter den Basso continuo subsumiert
wurde. Darüber hinaus erweiterte Düben bei Stücken, die im
Druck und in der Tabulatur geringstimmig sind, die Besetzung
durch zusätzliche Stimmen. Wie in Tabelle 6 aufgeführt, er-
gänzte er zu den Werken Nr. 20 Benedic Domine und Nr. 23 Esto-
30 Das Te Deum laudamus (Nr. 10) für 5 Vokalstimmen, 2 Violinen, 3 Trombo-

ni, 2 Clarinen und Basso continuo und das Werk Gott sey mir gnädig (Nr. 2)
für vier Vokalstimmen und zwei Violinen wurden zu anderer Zeit kopiert,
finden sich also an anderen Stellen der Dübensammlung. Allein das Werk
Resonent organa (Nr. 9) lässt sich nicht als Abschrift in der Dübensamm-
lung nachweisen.
31 ‘III. In dem Te Deum laudamus aber müssen sie [die Tromboni] nothwen-
dig darbey seyn / jedennoch aber können statt derer ein paar Viol.d.brac’,
oder Tenor-Geigen nebst einem Violon gebraucht werden.’

te fortes jeweils zwei Violen. Damit haben mit Ausnahme der

Konzerte Omnipotens & misericors Deus (à 4) und Nulla scientia
alle Werke, die Düben aus dem Liber secundus sacrarum cantio-
num übernahm, eine vergleichbare Besetzung mit ein bis drei
Vokalstimmen, vier bis fünf Streichern und Basso continuo. Das
Konzert Nulla scientia hat durch den fünfstimmigen Vokalchor
an sich eine aus dem Rahmen fallende Struktur. Düben erwei-
terte den Klangreichtum des Werks durch eine zusätzliche Ca-
pella mit Vokalstimmen, Streichern und Bläsern.
Ein Blick auf die Stimmen zu den Werken von Zeutschner
führt zu einem vergleichbaren Ergebnis. Alle Stimmensätze
umfassen Vokal- und Instrumentalstimmen einschließlich der
ad-libitum-Stimmen, die teils als Viola-Stimmen teils als Trom-
bone-Stimmen wiedergegeben werden. Ferner ergänzte Düben
drei Streicherstimmen zu dem Konzert Benedicta sit Sancta Trini-
tas (Nr. 1), das im Libro rubro das einzige Werk Zeutschners mit
geringerer Stimmenzahl war. Damit zeichnen sich alle Werke
Zeutschners, die im Libro rubro abgesetzt sind, in ihrem Auffüh-
rungsmaterial durch eine einheitliche Besetzung von drei bis
fünf Vokalstimmen, fünf Instrumenten und Basso continuo aus.
Für die Werke Es ist kein ander Heil (Nr. 2) und Laudate Dominum
omnes gentes (Nr. 7) sind zusätzlich einzelne Ripienstimmen
überliefert, zwei Cantus und Tenor Ripieno, bzw. Alto und Te-
nor Ripieno. Da von einer geschlossenen Verstärkung der Vo-
kalstimmen auszugehen ist, liegt die Annahme nahe, dass das
Fehlen der übrigen Ripienstimmen auf Überlieferungslücken
zurückzuführen ist.
Die Werke von Georg Arnold und Tobias Zeutschner im
Libro rubro und den dazugehören Stimmensätzen entsprechen
in ihrer vollständigen und zum Teil erweiterten Besetzung der
Mehrzahl der Werk aus dem ersten Tabulaturband Dübens. Für
sieben weitere Kompositionen des Libro rubro bilden ein bis vier
Vokalstimmen kombiniert mit vier bis fünf Instrumenten und
Basso continuo die Originalbesetzung. Für elf weitere Stücke
stellten Düben und seine Schreiber in den Stimmensätzen zu-
sätzliche instrumentale [Mittel]-stimmen bereit. Düben bearbei-
tete auf diese Weise sowohl Werke deutscher als auch italieni-

92 Barbara Wiermann
scher Komponisten, so zum Beispiel Stücke von Monteverdi

und Foggia.32 In allen Fällen handelt es sich bei den ergänzten
Instrumentalstimmen um Streicherstimmen. Hier ist nochmals
eine Vorliebe Dübens für Streichinstrumente zu beobachten, die
sich bereits im Zusammenhang mit den Werken Zeutschners
zeigte, für die er, wie beschrieben, einen Austausch der Trom-
boni durch Violen anregte. In einem Punkt unterscheiden sich
die Ergänzungen von Düben von den originalen, in Drucken
bereitgestellten instrumentalen Mittelstimmen. Während Ar-
nold, Zeutschner und ihre Zeitgenossen meist Mittelstimmen in
der Region von Alt und Tenor, also in C3- und C4-Schlüsselung,
vorlegten, ergänzte Düben fast durchgehend Stimmen in C1-
und C2-Schlüsselung mit entsprechend höher liegendem Ge-
samtambitus. Wenn diese Stimmen den vokalen Alt und Tenor
verstärken, ist der Tonverlauf oktaviert. Diese hoch angesiedel-
ten Mittelstimmen sind ein Phänomen, welches sich im gesam-
ten Bestand der Dübensammlung beobachten lässt.
Im Libro rubro und den dazugehörigen Stimmenmaterialien
zeichnet sich eine klare Tendenz zur Standardisierung ab, die die
Besetzungsgröße, die Instrumentation und die Textur der Werke
betrifft. Diese Standardisierung steht im klaren Kontrast zur zu-
nehmenden Individualisierung und wachsenden Komplexität
der Musiksprache der Werke, die nur noch als Handschriften
überliefert werden. Standardisierung von Besetzungen und mu-
sikalischen Strukturen ist ein Phänomen, das in erster Linie mit
der Entwicklung des Musikdrucks zum Beispiel in italienischen
Veröffentlichungen des frühen 17. Jahrhunderts und vornehm-
lich der mittel- und süddeutschen Produktion nach dem Dreißig-
jährigen Krieg in Verbindung gebracht wird. Anhand des Libro
rubro konnten Wechselwirkungen zwischen gedruckten und nur
handschriftlich überlieferten Werken aufgezeigt werden, die in
einem größeren Kontext weiter zu untersuchen wären.
32 Siehe Monteverdi, Ressurexit de sepulchro (Vmhs 29:23) und Foggia, Laetan-

tes canite diem (Vmhs 23:10).

Tabelle 1. Werke, die von Düben und seinen Schreibern aus italienischen
Drucken kopiert wurden.
Komponist Titel Besetzung Quelle Druck, aus dem
alle mit BC Vmhs die Quelle
kopiert wurde
Abbatini Dilatatae CC 78:84 R. Floridus cano-
sunt tribula- (Tabu- nicus de Sylve-
tiones cordis latur) stris a Barbarano
mei cantiones ...,
Venedig 16493
Antonelli Amor Jesu CATB 2:8 (Stim- Floridus modulo-
dulcissimi men) rum hortus ...,
Rom 16472
Benevoli Cognoscam CCB 80:7 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
te Domine nicus de Sylve-
stris a Barbarano
cantiones...,
Venedig 16493
Benevoli Fortitudo CCB 80:24 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
mea nicus de Sylve-
stris a Barbarano
cantiones...,
Venedig 16494
Carisio Benedicam CC 81:138 Sacri concerti,
Dominum (Tab) Venedig 1664
10:18 (St)
Carisio Hic est panis CC 78:1 (Tab) Sacri concerti,
Venedig 1664
Carisio Jesu dulcis CC 81:154 Sacri concerti,
memoria (Tab) Venedig 1664
10:19 (St)
Carisio Laetetur CC 10:20 (St + Sacri concerti,
arctos jubilet Tab) Venedig 1664
orbis
Carisio Non potest CCC 78:3 (Tab) Sacri concerti,
arbor bona 10:18 (St) Venedig 1664
fructus
Carisio O Domine CC 78:13 (Tab) Sacri concerti,
Jesu Christe Venedig 1664
Carisio O sacramen- CCC 78:4 (Tab) Sacri concerti,
tum pietatis Venedig 1664

94 Barbara Wiermann

kopiert wurde
Carisio Sub umbra CC 81:155 Sacri concerti,
crucis (Tab) Venedig 1664
Carisio Surrexit CA 86:70 (Tab) Sacri concerti,
pastor bonus Venedig 1664
Carisio Veni sancte CCATB 78:6 (Tab) Sacri concerti,
spiritus 10:21 (St) Venedig 1664
Carissimi Viderunt te CB 53:10 (St) Floridus modulo-
Domine rum hortus ...,
Rom 16472
Cechelli O admirabile CCAA 12:10 (St) Floridus modulo-
commercium rum hortus ...,
Rom 16472
Cechelli Per rigidos CCB, 2 Vl 80:21 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
montes 12:11 nicus de Sylve-
(St+Tab) stris a Barbarano
cantiones...,
Venedig 16494
Cesti Beatus vir CB, 2 Vl 83:69 (Tab) Tarditi: Concerti
il XXXV di Mo-
tetti, Venedig
1663
Cossoni Morior mise- CCB 83:11 (Tab) Motetti, Venedig
ra dum sine 1665
planctu
moror
Cossoni O suavis CCB 78:82 (Tab) Motetti, Venedig
animarum 1665
vulnerator
Durante Anima Chri- CCB 81:75 (Tab) Floridus modulo-
sti rum hortus ...,
Rom 16472
Durante Cantate CC 19:17 (St) R. Floridus cano-
Dominum nicus de Sylve-
stris a Barbarano
cantiones...,
Venedig 16494
Fabri Beati omnes CCATB 80:91 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
qui timent Rom 1660
Dominum


kopiert wurde
Fabri Confitebor CCATB 80:1 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
tibi Domine Rom 1660
Fabri Credidi CCATB 80:87 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
propter quod Rom 1660
locutus sum
Fabri De profundis CCATB 80:16 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
clamavi Rom 1660
Fabri Domine ne CCAB 83:11 (Tab) Floridus modulo-
in furore 21:2 (St) rum hortus ...,
Rom 16472
Fabri Laetatus CCATB 80:85 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
sum Rom 1660
Fabri Laudate CCATB 80:14 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
pueri Rom 1660
Fabri Magnificat CCAB 80:4 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
Rom 1660
Fabri Magnificat CCATB 80:11 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
Rom 1660
Fabri Nisi Domi- CCATB 80:89 (Tab) Salmi concertati,
nus aedifica- Rom 1660
verit domum
Fabri Si Deus pro CCB 80:19 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
nobis nicus de Sylve-
stris a Barbarano
cantiones ...,
Venedig 16494
Foggia Hodie appa- CCT 80:9 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
ruerunt nicus de Sylve-
voluptates stris a Barbarano
cantiones ...,
Venedig 16493
Foggia Quare suspi- CCB 53:10 (St) Concentus eccle-
ras in dolore siastici, Rom
anima mea 1645
Giovannoni Spargite CATB 24:3 (St) Floridus modulo-
flores pangi- rum hortus ...,
te carmina Rom 16472

96 Barbara Wiermann

kopiert wurde
Graziani Media nocte CAT 80:23 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
nicus de Sylve-
stris a Barbarano
cantiones ...,
Venedig 16494
Graziani O bone Jesu CCT 83:8 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
nicus de Sylve-
stris a Barbarano
cantiones ...,
Venedig 16493
Grossi Ave suavis CATB 81:74 (Tab) Orfeo pellegrino
dilectio ne sacre cantici,
Mailand 1659
Grossi Jubilet aether CB, 2 Vl 81:9 (Tab) Orfeo pellegrino
astrani ne sacre cantici,
Mailand 1659
Grossi O sanctissi- AA, 2 Vl 78:69 (Tab) Orfeo pellegrino
me Jesu ne sacre cantici,
Mailand 1659
Grossi Venite adve- CCTB 78:70 (Tab) Orfeo pellegrino
nae ne sacre cantici,
Mailand 1659
Leardini Miserator CATB 79:97 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
Domini nicus de Sylve-
stris a Barbarano
cantiones ...,
Venedig 16494
Legrenzi Beati omnes CCB, 2 Vl 86:13 (Tab) Psalmi a 5,
54:30 (St) Venedig 1657
Legrenzi Laudate CCB, 2 Vl 82:6 (Tab) Psalmi a 5,
Dominum Venedig 1657
Legrenzi Magnificat CTB, 2 Vl 84:94 (Tab) Psalmi a 5,
84:21 (Tab) Venedig 1657
Legrenzi Nisi 3 Vok, 2 84:6b (Tab) Psalmi a 5,
Dominus Instr Venedig 1657
Ruggieri Ad arma CCB 83:9 (Tab) Motetti a due e tre
canite tuba voci, Venedig
1664


kopiert wurde
Ruggieri Ego sum 3 Vok 84:22 (Tab) Motetti a due e tre
panis vitae voci, Venedig
1664
Tarditi,O. Ego dormio CC 78:13 (Tab) Concerto il
XXXV di motetti,
Venedig 1663
Tarditi, P. Laudabo CCT 83:7 (Tab) R. Floridus cano-
nomen nicus de Sylve-
stris a Barbarano
cantiones ...,
Venedig 16493
Trabattone O dulcedo ATB 78:5 (Tab) Carisio, Sacri
amoris concerti,
Venedig 1664
Vesi Magnificat CCATTB, 2 80:42 (Tab) Messa e salmi,
Vl Venedig 1646
Tabelle 2. Werke italienischer Komponisten aus deutschen Drucken.

Kompo- Titel Besetzung Quelle Druck, aus dem die
nist Vmhs Quelle
kopiert wurde33
Rovetta Kyrie CCATTBB, 33:12 (St) Profe, Geistliche
2 Corn Concerte I, 16412
Grandi Factum est CATB, 2 Vl 24:14 (St) Profe, Geistliche
silentium Concerte I, 16412
Rovetta Domine in CC/TT, B 33:10 (St) Profe, Geistliche
virtute 83:04 (Tab) Concerte II 16413
Monte- Pascha con- CCATTB, 2 77:17 (Tab) Profe, Geistliche
verdi celebranda Vl Concerte II, 16413
Honorio O bone Jesu CCB 78:83 (Tab) Profe, Geistliche
Concerte III, 16424
33 Titel, die nicht in Kursiven stehen, sind heute weder in der Sammlung
Düben noch in der Sammlung der Deutschen Kirche Stockholm überlie-
fert.

98 Barbara Wiermann
Kompo- Titel Besetzung Quelle Druck, aus dem die

nist Vmhs Quelle
kopiert wurde33
Bernardi Non habe- CATBBB 4:10 (St) Profe, Geistliche
mus vinum Concerte IV, 16464
Rigatti Ave regnator C, 5 Strch 32:15 (St) Profe, Geistliche
coelorum 77:11 (Tab) Concerte IV, 16464
Rovetta Dixit Domi- CATB, 2 Vl 33:8 (St) Profe, Geistliche
nus 33:9° (St) Concerte IV, 16464
Monte- Resurrexit de CCATTB, 2 29:23 (St) Profe, Corollarium,
verdi sepulchro Vl, (+ 5 77:8 (Tab) 16496
Strch =
Cappella)
Capello Pax vobis T, 4 Strch 81:20 (Tab) Havemann, Gei-
stliche Concerte I,
16593
Cocci Intuimini CC, 2 Vl 83:74 (Tab) Havemann, Geist-
mortales liche Concerte I,
16593
Cocci O stella luci- TT, 2 Vl 83:75 (Tab) Havemann, Geist-
dissima liche Concerte I,
16593
Finatti Jubilate, CCATB, 2 21:04 (St) Havemann, Geist-
cantate Vl 81:24 (Tab) liche Concerte I,
(+ Ripien) 16593
Grandi Ave mundi C, 2 Vl am Druck Havemann, Geist-
spes salvator angebun- liche Concerte I,
den 16593
Rovetta Salve Regina TB 33:15 (St) Havemann, Gei-
stliche Concerte I,
16593
Vesi Laudate C, 5 Strch 43:15 (St) Havemann, Gei-
pueri stliche Concerte I,
16593
Caris- Kyrie Missa CCB, 2 Vl 83:66 (Tab) Carissimi, Missa a
simi quinque ... Köln
1666
Caris- Turbabantur ATB, 2 Vl, 83:68 (nur Carissimi, Missa a
simi impii Va Titelblatt) quinque ... Köln
1666

Tabelle 3. Anzahl vokaler und gemischt besetzter Werke in deutschen Antho-

logien italienischer geistlicher Musik und ihre Übernahme durch Gustav
Düben.
Anthologien Anzahl der Werke in Anzahl der Werke, die
rein vokaler oder ge- Gustav Düben für
mischter Besetzung seine Sammlung
kopierte
Havemann, Geistliche Con- 10 rein vokal 1
certe I, 16593
19 gemischt besetzt 634
Profe, Geistliche Concerte I, 18 rein vokal 0
16412
Profe, Geistliche Concerte II 18 rein vokal 1
16413
Profe, Geistliche Concerte III, 19 rein vokal 1
16424
Profe, Geistliche Concerte IV, 22 rein vokal 1
16464
Profe, Corollarium, 1649 6 12 rein vokal 0
34 Ein weiteres Werk, das auch in Havemanns Sammlung zu finden ist, kam
aus Danzig in die Dübensammlung. Es handelt sich im um Rovettas Kon-
zert Laetatus sum (Vmhs 43:4).
35 Zwei weitere Werke, die in Profes vierter Sammlung zu finden sind, kamen
auf andere Wege in die Dübensammlung. Es handelt sich um Rovettas Kon-
zert Laudate pueri (Vmhs 33:13) in der Hand von Christian Flor (vgl. Wollny,
Beiträge, S. 102f.) und Rovettas Werk Beatus vir (Vmhs 33:7) in der Hand ei-
nes Leipziger Kopisten (vgl. Wollny, Leipziger Hochzeitsmusik, S. 57).

100 Barbara Wiermann
Tabelle 4. Werke italienischer Komponisten in der Handschriftengruppe Leipzig.

Komponist Titel Besetzung Quelle
Vmhs
Monteverdi Beatus vir qui timet CCATTB, 2 Vl 29:21
Dominum
Rovetta Conditor alme siderum CC, 2 Vl 35:13
aeterna lux
Rovetta Beatus vir qui timet CTB, 2 Vl 33:7
Dominum
Tarditi, O. Dulce nomen Jesu CCAB 35:13
Tarditi, O. Lauda Hierusalem CCB, 2 Vl 35:14
Tabelle 5. Deutsche Drucke als Vorlagen für Handschriften der Sammlung

Düben.
Komponist Druck36 Erschei- Jahr Anzahl Anzahl der
nungsort der Wer- Werke in
ke im der Samm-
Druck lung Düben
Arnold Sacrarum Nürnberg 1651 21 1
cantionum
liber I
Arnold Sacrarum (Inns- 1661 28 8
cantionum bruck)
liber II
Arnold Psalmi Bamberg 1663 16 2
Vespertini
Bernhard Geistliche Dresden 1665 20 7
Harmonien I
Briegel Musikalische Darmstadt 1679 65 12
Trostquelle
Briegel Musikalischer Darmstadt 1680 83 22
Lebens-Brunn
Briegel Evangelische Frankfurt 1660 20 1
Gespräche I
Briegel Evangelische Frankfurt 1662 22 1
Gespräche II
36 Titel, die nicht in Kursiven stehen, liegen heute weder in der Sammlung
Düben noch in der Sammlung der Deutschen Kirche Stockholm vor.


ke im der Samm-
Druck lung Düben
Capricornus Opus musi- Nürnberg 1655 22 13
cum
Capricornus Geistliche Stuttgart 1659 12 2
Harmonien I
Capricornus Jubilus Nürnberg 1660 24 16
Bernhardi
Capricornus Zwey Lieder Nürnberg 1660 2 2
vom Leyden
und Tode Jesu
Harmonien
II
Harmonien
III
Capricornus Scelta musi- Bozen/ 1669 8 5
cale Frankfurt
Capricornus Theatrum Würzburg 1669 12 7
musicum
Capricornus Continuatio Würzburg 1669 8 2
Theatri mu-
sici
Dedekind Seelen-Freude Dresden 1672 8 2
oder Geistli-
che Concerten
I
Dedekind Seelen-Freude Dresden 1672 8 1
oder Geistliche
Concerten II
Fabricius Geistliche Leipzig 1662 6 2
Arien, Dialo-
gen und
Concerten
Fischer Himmlische Nürnberg 1686 18 3
Seelenlust


ke im der Samm-
Druck lung Düben
Gletle Expeditiones Augsburg 1667 36 4
musicae clas-
sis I
Gletle Expeditiones Augsburg 1668 39 22
musicae clas-
sis II
Hammer- Fest-, Buß- Zittau 1658 32 2
schmidt und Dank-
lieder
Hammer- Musicali- Freiberg 1641 34 1
schmidt scher An-
dachten
zweiter Theil
Heller Sacer concen- Mainz 1671 26 2
tus musicus
Krieger, J. Neue Musica- Frank- 1684 30 11
lische Ergetz- furt/Lpz.
lichkeit
Löwe Neue geistli- Wolfenbüt- 1660 12 1
che Concer- tel
ten
Mihl Psalmodia Ellwangen 1674 7 3
Davidica
Peter Geistliche Guben 1667 24 2
Arien
Rosenmüller Kernsprüche Leipzig 1648 20 2
Rosenmüller Andere Leipzig 1652 20 1
Kernsprüche
Scherer Musica sacra Ulm 1657 9 2
Schneider Erster Teil Liegnitz 1667 40 1
neuer geistli-
cher Lieder
Sebastiani Parnaß- Wolfenbüt- 1672 60 1
Blumen I tel
Steingaden Flores Konstanz 1666 24 3
hyemnales


ke im der Samm-
Druck lung Düben
Theile Weltliche Leipzig 1667 30 1
Arien und
Canzonetten
Weiland Deutorotokos. Bremen 1656 16 3
Sacratissima-
rum Odarum
Zeutschner Musikalische Leipzig 1661 10 9
Kirchen- und
Hausfreude
Tabelle 6. Georg Arnold, Liber secundus sacrarum cantionum (1661).

Titel Besetzung37 Tab in der St in der Bearbei-
alle mit Bc Sammlung Samm- tung
Düben lung durch
Vmhs Düben Düben
Vmhs
Nr.1–5 à 4, 2 Vok, 2 Vl -- --
Nr. 6 Omnipo- à4 77:82 2:14
tens & miseri- 2 C, 2 Vl
cors Deus
Nr. 7–11 à 4, 2 Vok, 2 Vl -- --
Nr. 12–15 à 4, 1 Vok, -- --
2 Vl, 1 Strch
Nr. 16 Laetare 2 C, 2 Vl, -- --
miltans ecclesia 1 Strch
Nr. 17 Adeste A, 2 Vl, 2 Va 77:121 2:9
quotquot amatis
Mariam
Nr. 18 O quam A, 2 Vl, 1 Va, -- --
venerandus 2 Strch
Nr. 19 Plaudite CCB 2 Vl, Va -- --
populi
37 Der Druck ist nur unvollständig erhalten, von daher ist keine genaue
Rekonstruktion der Besetzungen möglich. Streichinstrumente deren Lage
ungeklärt ist, werden mit ‘Strch‘ aufgeführt.

Titel Besetzung37 Tab in der St in der Bearbei-

alle mit Bc Sammlung Samm- tung
Düben lung durch
Vmhs Düben Düben
Vmhs
Nr. 20 Benedic CCB, 2 Vl, Va 77:66 38:19 CCB, 2
Domine Vl, 3 Va
Nr. 21 Laetentur CCT, 2 Vl, Va -- --
caeli
Nr. 22 Salve lux CCT, 2 Vl, Va -- --
mundi
Nr. 23 Estote CCB, 2 Vl, Va 77:70 41:7 CCB, 2
fortes Vl, 2 Va,
Va vel
Spinetta
Nr. 24 O dulcis- AT, 2 Vl, 2 Va 77:108 2:12
sime Jesu
Nr. 25 O Jesu 2 C, 2 Vl, 2Va 77:106 2:13
bone
Nr. 26 Plaudat, ATB, 2 Vl, 1 77:24 45:2
jubilet Strch, Va
Nr. 27 Pater CCB, 2 Vl, -- --
alme quam 1 Strch, Va
decorus
Nr. 28 Nulla CCATB, 2 Vl 77:12 2:11 plus
scientia Capella
mit Vok,
Strch
und
Bläsern

Tabelle 7. Tobias Zeutschner, Musikalische Kirchen- und Hausfreude (1661).

Titel Besetzung Tab in St in Bearbei-
alle mit Bc Sammlung Sammlung tung durch
Düben Düben Düben
Vmhs Vmhs
Nr. 1 Benedicta sit 3 Vok, 2 Vl 77:42 38:21 + 3 Strch
Sancta Trinitas [C1 C2 F4]
Nr. 2 Es ist kein 4 Vok, 2 Vl, 77:44 45:8 +[Rip.]: 2
ander Heil / Quis es 3 Tromb C, T
quem metius
Nr. 3 Gott sei mir 4 Vok, 2 Vl, 37:15
gnädig
Nr. 4 Herr hebe an 4 Vok 2 Vl 77:49 43:3
zu segnen / Laetare 3 Tromb
nunc in Domino
Nr. 5 Gott, du Gott 5 Vok, 2 Vl, 77:53 37 :14
Israel 3 Tromb
Nr. 6 Es erhub sich 5 Vok, 2 Vl, 77:84 41:4
ein Streit 3 Tromb
Nr. 7 Laudate Do- 5 Vok, 2 Vl, 77:37 43:10 + Rip.: A,
minum, omnes 3 Tromb T
gentes
Nr. 8 Beweise Herr, 6 Vok, 2 Vl, 69:10
Deine wunderliche 3 Tromb
Güte / Lauda Jeru-
salem
Nr. 9 Resonent 5 Vok, 2 Vl, --
orgnana 3 Tromb,
2 Clar
Nr. 10 Te Deum 5 Vok, 2 Vl, 85:92 unvoll-
laudamus 3 Tromb, ständig
2 Clar

Literatur
Bohn, Emil, Bibliographie der Musik-Druckwerke bis 1700, welche in der Stadtbib-
liothek, der Bibliothek des Academischen Institutsfür Kirchenmusik und der Kö-
niglichen und Universitäts-Bibliothek zu Breslau aufbewahrt werden, Berlin
1883.
Bohn, Emil, Die musikalischen Handschriften des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts in der
Stadtbibliothek zu Breslau, Breslau 1890.
Mitjana, Rafael, Catalogue critique et descriptif des imprimés de musique des XVIe
et XVIIe siècles, Tome I, Musique religieuse I, Upsala 1911.
Neubacher, Jürgen, Die Musikbibliothek des Hamburger Kantors und Musikdirektors
Thomas Selle (1599–1663). Rekonstruktion des ursprünglichen und Beschreibung
des erhaltenen überwiegend in der Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg
Carl von Ossietzky aufbewahrten Bestandes, Neuhausen-Stuttgart 1997.
Kjellberg, Erik, Kungliga musiker I Sverige under stormaktstiden. Studier kring
deras organisation, verksamheter och status ca 1620–1720, Uppsala: Uppsala
universitet 1979.
Kjellberg, Erik and Snyder, Kerala J. (ed.), The Düben Collection Database Cata-
logue. (http://www.musik.uu.se/duben/Duben.php).
Ordnung’, Teil I–II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 44 (1964), S. 27–
28;Teil II–III, ibid., 46 (1966), S.63–186.
evangelischen Kantate. Untersuchungen zum Handschriftenrepertoire evangeli-
scher Figuralmusik im späten 17. und beginnenden 18. Jahrhundert, (Berliner
Studien zur Musikwissenschaft, 10) Berlin: Merseburger 1965.
Rudén, Jan Olof, RISM-Zettelkatalog über Musikmanuskripte in Uppsala Uni-
versitetsbibliotek (vorhanden in der Handschriften- und Musikabteilung).
Webber,Geoffrey, A Study of Italian Influence on North German Church and Or-
gan Music in the Second Half of the Seventeenth Century, with a Special Refer-
ence to the Collection of Gustav Düben, Oxford 1988.
Wiermann, Barbara, Die Entwicklung vokal-instrumentalen Komponierens im
protestantischen Deutschland bis zur Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts (Abhandlun-
gen zur Musikgeschichte, 14), Göttingen 2005.
Wollny,Peter, ‘Beiträge zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Sammlung Düben’,
Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 87 (2005), S. 100–113.
Wollny, Peter, ‘Eine anonyme Leipziger Hochzeitsmusik aus dem 17. Jahr-
hundert’, Über Leben, Kunst und Kunstwerke: Aspekte musikalischer Biogra-
phie. Johann Sebastian Bach im Zentrum, hrsg. von Christoph Wolff, Leipzig
1999, S. 46–60.

FRIEDHELM KRUMMACHER
Vokalmusik der Dübensammlung im

Repertoire der Zeit.
Fragen und Beispiele im Rückblick
Die musikgeschichtliche Bedeutung, die der Dübensammlung

zukommt, läßt sich am ehesten ermessen, wenn man die Quel-
len im Verhältnis zum zeitgenössischen Kontext erfaßt. Daher
ist zunächst an das zunehmende Gewicht zu erinnern, das seit
der Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts der Überlieferung maßgeblicher
Werke in Handschriften statt – wie zuvor – in repräsentativen
Drucken zufiel. Sodann sind verbindende Kennzeichen solcher
Quellensammlungen zu umreißen, von denen sich zugleich
regional oder individuell geprägte Besonderheiten abheben.
Vor diesem Hintergrund läßt sich schließlich nach einigen Kri-
terien fragen, an denen das spezifische Gepräge der Düben-
sammlung greifbar wird.
Gedruckte und handschriftliche Überlieferung
In ihrer mustergültigen Dissertation hat Barbara Wiermann

unlängst gezeigt, daß die Funktionen nicht zu unterschätzen
sind, die der Überlieferung von Handschriften im frühen 17.
Jahrhundert zufielen.1 Denn am Vergleich gedruckter und
handschriftlicher Fassungen derselben Werke lassen sich die
1 Barbara Wiermann, Die Entwicklung vokal-instrumentalen Komponierens im

protestantischen Deutschland bis zur Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts (Abhandlun-
gen zur Musikgeschichte, 14), Göttingen 2005, S. 5–11 und 56–73.

108 Friedhelm Krummacher
Verfahren demonstrieren, derer sich die Musiker bei der Ein-

richtung der Werke für ihre Aufführungen bedienten. Doch
wurden repräsentative Hauptwerke der Kirchenmusik bis zur
Jahrhundertmitte weithin gedruckt, und wo es nicht zu einer
Publikation kam, dürfte sie doch wenigstens intendiert gewe-
sen sein, wogegen vor allem Gelegenheitswerke oder solche
von besonderem Anspruch nicht immer publiziert werden
konnten. Zugleich wurde aber sichtbar, daß die Drucklegung
repräsentativer Kirchenmusik nicht unmittelbar nach der Jahr-
hundertmitte, sondern in signifikantem Ausmaß erst seit etwa
1670 zurückgegangen ist.2 Das bestätigt zugleich eine frühere
Untersuchung, nach der für den Rückgang gedruckter Publika-
tionen nicht allein der Dreißigjährige Krieg ausschlaggebend
war, wie Arnold Schering gemeint hatte, als er erstmals auf die
Differenz der Überlieferungsformen hinwies.3 Maßgeblich war
vielmehr ein Bündel unterschiedlicher Gründe, die hier nur
zusammenfassend angedeutet werden können.4
Schon immer waren Publikationen durch die Kosten für
Herstellung und Papier teurer als Abschriften, bei denen der
Schreiber bei Bedarf auch eigene verkürzte Schreibformen ver-
wenden konnte. Zwar sparte der Zugriff auf Drucke – sofern sie
erreichbar waren – ein beträchtliches Maß an Mühe und Zeit,
doch galten sie als kostbar genug, um Abschriften für den Ta-
gesbedarf nicht überflüssig zu machen. Je mehr aber zugleich
der Bedarf nach einer eigenen Einrichtung der Werke für die
Aufführung wuchs, desto wichtiger konnten solche geschriebe-
nen Versionen in der Praxis werden. Das galt zumal – wie wie-
derum Wiermann deutlich machte – für solche Musik, die in
den Drucken als primär vokal erschien, während die Auffüh-
2 Wiermann, op.cit., S. 32–56 und S. 485–491.

3 Arnold Schering, ‘Die alte Chorbibliothek der Thomasschule zu Leipzig’,
Archiv für Musikwissenschaft 1,1918–1919, S. 275; vgl. auch ders., Musik-
geschichte Leipzigs, Bd. II Von 1675 bis 1723, Leipzig 1926, S. 54f. und 56f.
4 Zum weiteren Zusammenhang vgl. Fr. Krummacher, Die Überlieferung der
Choralbearbeitungen in der frühen evangelischen Kantate. Untersuchungen zum
Handschriftenrepertoire evangelischer Figuralmusik im späten 17. und frühen 18.
Jahrhundert (Berliner Studien zur Musikwissenschaft, 10), Berlin 1965.

Vokalmusik der Dübensammlung im Repertoire der Zeit 109
rungspraxis entweder Stimmen durch Instrumente ersetzte

oder aber dem gedruckten Satzverband weitere Instrumente
zufügte.5 Die usuelle Bearbeitung bedeutete also eine Vorstufe
jenes Prozesses, dessen Konsequenz später die nur mehr hand-
schriftliche Überlieferung wurde. Dabei ist gewiß nicht voraus-
zusetzen, daß die Komponisten immer freiwillig auf die Publi-
kation ihrer Werke verzichteten, auch wenn sie sich damit viel-
fach abfinden mußten. Je mehr aber Instrumentalstimmen be-
reits vom Autor intendiert waren und deshalb in den Druck
aufzunehmen waren, desto komplexer und zugleich kostspieli-
ger wurde die Drucklegung, wofür die Symphoniae sacrae von
Schütz nur ein besonders repräsentatives Beispiel bilden. War
für einen so herausragenden Musiker ein solcher Druck offen-
bar noch finanzierbar, so galt das nicht für jüngere oder weni-
ger gut gestellte Autoren. Sie blieben für eine eigene Publikati-
on entweder darauf angewiesen, eine möglichst kostengünstige
Publikation oder eine möglichst große Zahl von Käufern an-
zustreben.
Dieser Absicht diente es, in einem Druck mit möglichst ver-
schiedenen Besetzungen und Werktypen das Interesse der Käu-
fer zu wecken. Wenn man sich aber aus Kostengründen auf
möglichst wenige Stimmbücher beschränken mußte, dann
wurde deren Zahl bei größerer Besetzung leicht überschritten.
Bei Drucken, deren Werke wechselnde Instrumentalbesetzung
voraussetzten, bestand eine Möglichkeit zur Einsparung von
Papierkosten darin, auf einem Blatt oder einer Seite wechselnde
Instrumentalstimmen verschiedener Werke zu plazieren, Wo in
den Partes jeder freie Raum auszunutzen war, ergab sich eine
verwirrende und fast chaotische Anordnung, wie im IV. Teil
der Musicalischen Andachten (Freiberg 1648) von Andreas
Hammerschmidt oder in seiner Kirchen- und Tafel-Musik (Zwi-
ckau 1662).6 Um Klarheit zu schaffen, wären eingehende Regis-
ter erforderlich, wie sie wohl nur Johann Rudolf Ahle den bei-
den ersten Teilen seines Thüringischen Lustgarten (1657–58) bei-
5 Wiermann, op.cit., S. 1–11 und passim.

6 Vgl. dazu Krummacher, op.cit., S. 55–60, zum Folgenden ebd., S. 61–78.

gab. Den entgegengesetzten Weg, einen möglichst breiten Kreis

von Abnehmern anzustreben, gingen Hammerschmidt, Cons-
tantin Christian Dedekind und Wolfgang Carl Briegel, die in
den Vorworten ihrer Drucke ausdrücklich betonten, ihre Werke
seien durch ‘Anmut‘ und ‘Leichtigkeit‘ ausgezeichnet. So setzte
Briegel in seinem Lebensbrunn 1680 auf ‘einen leichten Stylum
für gemeine Cantoreyen /wo man keine schwere Arbeit zwin-
gen kann‘, und seine Trostquelle richtete sich 1679 ausdrücklich
an die ‘geringen orten / als kleinen Städten und Dorffschafften
(deren vielmehr sind als vornehme Capellen)‘.7 Erst recht galt
das etwas später, wenn man auf Sammlungen mit schlicht lied-
haften Arien auswich wie Ahle mit seinen Neuen geistlichen
Arien. Im Dritten Zehen (Sondershausen 1662) bekannte er: ‘Auf
die Lieblichkeit hab ich einzig gezielt, damit die schönen Texte
desto besser von den Einfältigen behalten würden‘. Und ent-
sprechend waren auch Daniel Speers Evangelische Seelengedan-
ken (Stuttgart 1681) für ‘gemeine Städte und die liebe Jugend‘
gedacht. Bei Hammerschmidt, Ahle und Briegel, deren Druck-
werke zusammen fast die Hälfte des Druckbestands dieser Zeit
ausmachen, blieb der Erfolg offenbar nicht aus, denn wenn sie
eigene Häuser bauen konnten, so kaum ohne die Einnahmen
aus ihren Publikationen. Daß bei Anlage und Inhalt der Drucke
die Interessen der Verleger mitspielten, lassen mitunter die
Vorworte erkennen. Wollte man von ihnen aber unabhängig
sein, so brauchte man entweder Zuschüsse, wie sie Briegel von
seinem Darmstädter Landesherrn erhielt, oder man war auf das
Risiko des Selbstverlags angewiesen. Nach dem Vorgang nam-
hafter Autoren wie Schütz, Schein oder Johann Rudolf Ahle
unternahm auch Dedekind einen solchen Versuch, um damit
aber offensichtlich ein Fiasko zu erleben. Andererseits konnte
eine betonte Schlichtheit, die zur Rücknahme des kompositori-
schen Anspruch führte, leicht Kritik und Spott finden, wie nicht
selten die Vorworte dieser Autoren andeuten, die mit vorbeu-
genden Wendungen gegen ‘Neider‘ und ‘Mißgünstige‘ das Maß
7 Wolfgang Carl Briegel, Musicalischer Lebens-Brunn, Darmstadt 1680; ders.,

Musicalische Trost-Quelle, Darmstadt 1679.

der üblichen captatio benevolentiae deutlich überschreiten.

Schließlich ließ aber nicht nur die drucktechnische Qualität der
Drucke zu wünschen, sondern der tradierte Notendruck, der
auf der Zusammenfügung einzelner Notentypen basierte, stieß
auf seine Grenzen. Bei wenig Sorgfalt ergaben sich kaum je
durchgehende Notenlinien, und Koloraturen oder Melismen
waren immer noch auf Fähnchen an den einzelnen Notenwer-
ten anstelle gemeinsamer Balken angewiesen. Um größere Ge-
nauigkeit bemühten sich erst kurz vor Ende des Jahrhunderts
Nicolaus Niedt oder der Nürnberger Verleger Wolfgang End-
ter, deren Vorworte das Bemühen betonten, man habe keine
Kosten gescheut, um mit Balken und gerundeten Notenköpfen
ein Notenbild zu erreichen, das dem von Handschriften glei-
che.8 Die Reform kam zu spät, um das Blatt zu wenden, indem
aber Handschriften als Vorbildet genannt werden, wird zu-
gleich auch eingeräumt, daß sie inzwischen den Vorrang über-
nommen hatten.
Sofern repräsentative Kirchenmusik nicht mehr gedruckt,
sondern nur mehr handschriftlich verbreitetet wurde, ergab
sich erstmals nach Aufkommen des Notendrucks eine Situation,
die bis in das 18. Jahrhundert anhalten sollte. Je mehr nämlich
die Drucke versiegten, desto mehr verbreiteten sich die Werke
in Handschriften, die bei wachsender Anzahl zu umfänglichen
Sammlungen anwuchsen. Erhalten blieben nur die drei großen
Kollektionen aus Stockholm, aus der Hofkapelle in Gottorf bei
Schleswig und aus der Fürstenschule zu Grimma in Sachsen,
während vergleichbar große Sammlungen aus Süddeutschland
verloren sind. Die Quellen werden jedoch durch erhaltene Ein-
zelhandschriften oder Reste weiterer Sammlungen ergänzt, wie
sie zum Beispiel aus Danzig, Lübeck und Wolfenbüttel im Nor-
den, aus Erfurt, Breslau, Merseburg und Luckau in Mitteldeut-
schland und aus Stuttgart, Frankfurt und Straßburg im Süden
vorliegen. Dazu kommen zahlreiche Inventarverzeichnisse, die
8 Nicolaus Niedt, Musicalische Sonn. und Fest-Tags-Lust, Sondershausen 1698;

Georg Caspar Wecker, XVIII. Geistliche Concerten. Mit 2. bis 4. Vocal-
Stimmen und 5. Instrumentis ad libitum zu musiciren, Nürnberg 1695.

vielerorts die Existenz analoger Bestände dokumentieren. Konn-

te 1965 ein erster Überblick 42 Bestände nennen, so hat sich die
Zahl durch neuere Funde kleiner Bestände und weiterer Inventa-
re so erweitert, daß sich jetzt ein Vorrat von rund 50 Sammlun-
gen ergibt.9 Sie verteilen sich auf die lutherischen Gebiete von
Stockholm und Danzig im Norden bis Stuttgart und Straßburg
im Süden und zeigen neben Gemeinsamkeiten, die bis hin zu
Konkordanzen reichen, auch bezeichnende Differenzen.
Zum Netz der Handschriftenüberlieferung
Während Drucke im Buchhandel oder über die Buchmessen

käuflich zu erwerben waren, setzte der Zugang zu Handschrif-
ten direkte oder wenigstens mittelbare Beziehungen voraus.
Das gilt auch dann, wenn für den Erwerb von Kopien oder die
Erlaubnis zu ihrer Anfertigung eine Geldzahlung erforderlich
war. Selbst wenn ein größerer Bestand von Handschriften käuf-
lich erworben wurde, wie es am Ende des Jahrhunderts aus
9 Fr. Krummacher und Theodor Wohnhaas, ‘Inventare zur Figuralmusik

des 17. Jahrhunderts aus Weißenburg / Mfr.’, Musik in Bayern, 17 (1978);
Eberhard Möller, ‘Schütziana in Chemnitz, Freiberg und Schneeberg’,
Schütz-Jahrbuch, 13 (1991); Werner Greve, Braunschweiger Stadtmusikanten.
Geschichte eines Berufsstandes 1227–1828 (Braunschweiger Stücke, 80),
Braunschweig 1991, S. 268–275; Andreas Traub, ‘Ein Musikalieninventar
des 17. Jahrhunderts aus Langenburg’, Musik in Baden-Württemberg I, 1994;
Werner Braun, ‘Berliner Kirchenmusik im letzten Drittel des 17. Jahrhun-
derts. Zur Sammelhandschrift Koch aus der ehemaligen Sing-Akademie’,
Jahrbuch des Staatlichen Instituts für Musikforschung Preußischer Kulturbesitz
1996; Peter Wollny, ‘A Collection of Seventeenth-Century Vocal Music at
the Bodleian Library’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 15 (1993); ders., ‘Materialien zur
Schweinfurter Musikpflege im 17. Jahrhundert: Von 1592 bis zum Tod
Georg Christoph Bachs (1642–1697)’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 19 (1997), S. 135–162;
Hans Rudolf Jung, Thematischer Katalog der Musikaliensammlung Großfahner/
Eschenbergen in Thüringen (Catalogus musicus, XVII), Kassel etc. 2001.

Stettin und Straßburg belegt ist,10 blieb ein wenigstens indirek-

ter Kontakt die Voraussetzung, solange der Handel mit Hand-
schriften noch nicht kommerziell so organisiert war, wie es erst
im 18. Jahrhundert die Leipziger Firma Breitkopf bewirkte. So
läßt sich an den Sammlungen mit Handschriften bis etwa 1720
ablesen, in welchem Maß ihre Zusammensetzung durch direkte
oder indirekte Beziehungen geleitet wurde. Einschränkend ist
allerdings zu ergänzen, daß nicht alle Werke von maßgeblichen
Komponisten ungedruckt blieben. Zunächst waren es Gelegen-
heitswerke wie Hochzeits- und Trauermusiken, die weiterhin
vielfach gedruckt wurden, wiewohl es sich um kleine Auflagen
handelte, die kaum regelmäßig in den Handel kamen. Doch
auch ein namhafter Autor wie Samuel Capricornus, dessen
Kompositionen sich weiter Verbreitung in Handschriften er-
freuten, konnte noch eine Reihe von Drucken herausbringen.
Da er jedoch sein letztes Druckwerk 1664 vorlegte und ein Jahr
später verstarb, liegen alle seine Drucke vor der kritischen
Grenze um 1670. Vor dieser Scheidelinie konnten indes auch
Musiker wie Rosenmüller, Zeutschner, Bernhard oder Johann
Albrecht Kress immerhin noch einzelne Werke publizieren, bei
denen es sich aber zumeist um Frühwerke handelte. Dagegen
erschienen nach 1690 nur noch vereinzelt Drucke mit ans-
pruchsvollerer Musik, wie sie 1695 Georg Caspar Wecker, 1696
Georg Bronner und 1697 Johann Philipp Krieger veröffentlich-
ten, doch mußten sich die Autoren dabei auf Einschränkungen
in der Besetzung und Anzahl der gebotenen Werke einstellen,
um ihr Risiko zu begrenzen.11
Soweit in den Handschriftensammlungen Kopien aus
Druckwerken vorliegen, muß man zwar damit rechnen, daß sie
auf die entsprechenden Publikationen oder zumindest nach
ihnen gefertigte Kopien zurückgehen. In all diesen Fällen ist
10 Werner Freytag, Musikgeschichte der Stadt Stettin im 18. Jahrhundert,

Greifswald 1936, S. 140ff; J. F. Lobstein, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Musik im
Elsaß und besonders in Straßburg, von der ältesten bis auf die neueste Zeit,
Straßburg 1840, S. 15 und 77f.
11 Vgl. dazu das Verzeichnis in Krummacher, Die Überlieferung, S. 479–485.

demnach die Frage nach Beziehungen zwischen Sammler und

Autor weniger belangvoll als die Begründung für den Bedarf
einer Abschrift. Sie ist desto klarer zu motivieren, je mehr sich
mit ihr eine Bearbeitung der Vorlage verbindet. Wo das aber
nicht zutrifft, wie es für manche Werke aus der Dübensamm-
lung der Fall zu sein scheint, da könnte man vielleicht vermu-
ten, daß die Druckvorlagen nicht Eigentum des Sammlers, son-
dern einer anderen Institution waren. Denn die Absicht, die
Drucke, deren Geldwertes man sich durchaus bewußt war, vor
ständiger Benutzung zu schonen, leuchtet nicht recht ein, wenn
man die zahlreichen schwedischen Texteintragungen heran-
zieht, die sich in den Exemplaren aus schwedischen Stifts- und
Gymnasialbibliotheken finden. Demnach ist es nur folgerichtig,
wenn Kopien nach Drucken primär in der frühen Phase der
Handschriftenüberlieferung bis etwa 1680 vorkommen, um im
späteren Repertoire immer weiter zurückzutreten. Je weiter sich
andererseits Kopien mit Werken von Komponisten wie Capri-
cornus und Rosenmüller verbreiten konnten, desto weniger
lassen sie Rückschlüsse auf nähere Beziehungen zu. Das gilt
prinzipiell auch für Werke italienischer Autoren, die fast immer
auf Drucke oder nach ihnen angefertigte Kopien zurückgehen
dürften, selbst wenn es sich dabei um deutsche Sammeldrucke
handelte. Doch auch Werke von Autoren wie Albrici und Pe-
randa, die vorwiegend in Deutschland tätig waren und hier
ebenfalls keine Drucke herausbrachten, konnten sich in Kopien
soweit verbreiten, daß ihr Vorliegen nicht immer auf nähere
Beziehungen schließen läßt.
Umgekehrt ist aber zu konstatieren, daß in den belegbaren
Sammlungen vor allem Werke solcher Komponisten repräsen-
tiert sind, die am Entstehungsort der Sammlung oder in seinem
Umkreis tätig waren. Wenig oder nichts wüßten wir beispiels-
weise von der Musik des in Schwäbisch-Hall tätigen Organisten
Johann Samuel Welter, dessen Werke nur im Südwesten
Deutschlands verbreitet waren, wenn nicht die Bestände in
Straßburg und Frankfurt a.M. erhalten wären, die einer Neu-

ausgabe dieses Œuvres zugrunde lagen.12 Obwohl von den

Stuttgarter Hofmusikern Capricornus, Kress und Johann Mi-
chael Nicolai nicht wenige Werke vorliegen, geben erst die In-
ventare der Stuttgarter Hofmusik einen Begriff von ihrem Wir-
ken.13 Ebenso hätten wir vom Umfang des Lebenswerks von
Johann Philipp Krieger keine Vorstellung, wenn nicht das Ver-
zeichnis seiner Aufführungen in der Schloßkirche zu Weißen-
fels vorläge.14 Und erst recht würde man von der Produktivität
der thüringischen Hofkapellmeister wenig wissen, sofern nicht
wenigstens die Inventare aus Ansbach und Römhild bekannt
wären.15 Auch von den Werken der Thomaskantoren vor Bach,
die durch Leipziger Inventare bezeugt sind, wäre nur ein weit
kleinerer Teil ohne den Sammeleifer Samuel Jacobis zugänglich,
der als Kantor der Fürstenschule im benachbarten Grimma
wirkte.16 Und mutatis mutandis trifft das ebenso für fast alle
anderen Orte zu.
Diesen Befunden entspricht ferner in sozialgeschichtlicher
Hinsicht, daß Werke von Stadt- oder Schulkantoren ganz
überwiegend in Sammlungen und Inventaren begegnen, die in
Städten oder Schulorten entstanden sind. Am sichtbarsten wer-
den solche Relationen im Blick auf die Organisten nord-
deutscher Städte, deren Vokalwerke fast ausschließlich in Be-
12 Johann Samuel Welter (1650–1720). Das geistliche Werk: Kantaten, Magnificat,

Kirchenlieder, hrsg. von Andreas Traub (Denkmäler der Musik in Baden-
Württemberg, Bd. 1), München 1993.
13 A. Bopp, ‘Beiträge zur Geschichte der Stuttgarter Stiftsmusik’, Württem-
bergisches Jahrbuch für Statistik und Landeskunde, 10, Stuttgart 1911, S. 211–
250.
14 Das Weißenfelser Aufführungsverzeichnis Johann Philipp Kriegers und seines
Sohnes Johann Gotthilf Krieger (1684–1732), kommentierte Neuausgabe hrsg.
von Klaus-Jürgen Gundlach, Sinzig 2001.
15 Richard Schaal, Die Musikhandschriften des Ansbacher Inventars von 1686
(Quellen-Kataloge zur Musikgeschichte, 1), Wilhelmshaven 1966; zum
noch unveröffentlichten Inventar aus Römhild, in dem die Werke leider
nur pauschal genannt sind,, vgl. Krummacher, Die Überlieferung , S. 230 ff.
16 Ders., ‘Zur Sammlung Jacobi der ehemaligen Fürstenschule Grimma’, Die
Musikforschung, 16 (1963), S. 324–347; vgl. auch A. Schering, Die alte Chor-
bibliothek, S. 275–288.

ständen norddeutscher Herkunft begegnen und zudem noch

Anlaß zur Frage geben, aus welchen Gründen und für welche
Anlässe Organisten überhaupt Vokalmusik komponierten, die
eigentlich nicht zu ihren genuinen Amtsaufgaben gehörte.17 Da-
gegen finden sich Werke vor allem mitteldeutscher Hofkapell-
meister zwar besonders zahlreich in den Beständen, die mit fürs-
tlichen Residenzen verbunden sind. Doch konnte diese Musik
vielfach auch in die Kollektionen der Stadt- und Schulkantoreien
einziehen, während es städtischen Autoren weit seltener ver-
gönnt war, mit ihren Werken in die höfische Praxis zu gelangen.
Deutlich werden solche Differenzen weiter, wenn man Krite-
rien der Textgruppen, der Besetzungen und der Werkformen
heranzieht. Daß im Zeitraum zwischen 1650 und 1720 lateini-
sche Texte spürbar zurücktreten, entspricht einer Tendenz, die
sich nicht auf die Kirchenmusik beschränkte.18 Wenn solche
Vorlagen anfangs noch einen ansehnlichen Anteil ausmachen,
so könnte man erwarten, daß sich das Lateinische vor allem in
den Lateinschulen behauptete. Desto auffälliger ist es jedoch,
daß es vor allem die höfischen Quellen sind, in denen lateini-
sche Texte einen bemerkenswerten Teil des Repertoires bestrit-
ten. Die Annahme drängt sich auf, daß die städtische Figural-
musik zur Bevorzugung deutscher Texte tendierte, sofern sie
auf das Verständnis der Gemeinden bedacht war, während an
Höfen weniger darauf als auf die persönliche Prägung der Lan-
desherren Rücksicht zu nehmen war. Wieweit solche Faktoren
maßgeblich waren, ließe sich nur durch Prüfung der lokalen
Gegebenheiten klären. Unabhängig davon sind allerdings litur-
gische Vorlagen, zu denen neben Messe und Magnificat vor
allem die lateinischen Vesperpsalmen zählen, von all den freien
Texten zu unterscheiden, die nur teilweise dem römisch-
17 Vgl. dazu Fr. Krummacher, ‘Orgel- und Vokalmusik im Œuvre nord-

deutscher Komponisten um Buxtehude’, Dansk Årbog för musikforskning
1966–1967.
18 Zu den Veränderungen im Fächerkanon der protestantischen Stadtschulen
vgl. Joachim Kremer, Das norddeutsche Kantorat im 18. Jahrhundert. Untersu-
chungen am Beispiel Hamburgs (Kieler Schriften zur Musikwissenschaft, 43),
Kassel etc. 1995, besonders S. 265–314.

katholischen Fundus zugehören, vielfach jedoch dem noch

nicht hinreichend erforschten Bereich der neulateinischen Dich-
tung zuzurechnen sind. Es sind solche Vorlagen, die bis etwa
1690 in höfischen Repertoires wie denen aus Stuttgart, Weißen-
fels, Stockholm oder Gottorf einen auffällig großen Anteil be-
haupten, während sie in den städtischen Sammlungen etwa aus
Lüneburg oder Grimma und Frankfurt oder Schweinfurt schon
anfangs keine prominente Stellung haben, um später weithin
ganz auszufallen. Zwar gehörten Kyrie, Gloria und Credo so-
wie das Magnificat noch in Bachs Zeit zum Grundbestand,
doch traten die Vesperpsalmen schon vor 1700 weiter zurück
und verschwanden schließlich fast ganz aus dem Repertoire, bis
all solche Differenzen mit dem Einzug der neuen madrigal-
ischen Kirchenkantate fast gegenstandslos wurden.
Zugleich entspricht es den Veränderungen der Textbasis,
wenn deutsche Texte, die dem Kirchenlied oder den Perikopen
entstammen und damit an die Predigttexte anschließen, in der
Kirchenmusik der Städte und Schulen – etwa in Erfurt, Grimma
oder Lüneburg –ungleich häufiger begegnen als in den höfi-
schen Kollektionen. Es sind aber derartige Textvorlagen, die mit
der Gliederung der Strophen oder Bibelverse auch eher der
internen Abhebung selbständiger Teilsätze entgegenkommen.
Zwar könnte das auch für strophische Dichtungen in deutscher
wie lateinischer Sprache gelten, doch tendierte ihre Vertonung
zur Formung liedhafter Strophen, die sich nach Satzart und
Besetzung nicht ebenso abheben. Schließlich bleibt nachzutra-
gen, daß so opulente Besetzungen, wie man sie sich in Danzig,
Leipzig oder Grimma leisten konnte, in den Hofkapellen kaum
ebenso bevorzugt wurden. Denn über größere Vokalensembles
und zugleich über Stadtpfeifer und Ratsmusiker verfügte man
an kleineren Höfen nicht gleichermaßen, an denen man dage-
gen auf professionelle Vokal- und Instrumentalsolisten zurück-
greifen konnte. Ohne all dem weiter nachzugehen, mögen die
Hinweise, die hier abgebrochen werden müssen, immerhin
genügen, um vor dieser Folie ein paar charakteristische Eige-
narten der Dübensammlung anzudeuten.

Über Kennzeichen der Dübensammlung
Die drei großen erhaltenen Sammlungen aus Stockholm, Got-

torf und Grimma enthalten zwar auch ältere Anteile, unter-
scheiden sich aber in der zeitlichen Schichtung ihrer Hauptbe-
stände. Während Kümmerling meinte, die Partituren der Bo-
kemeyer-Sammlung seien je etwa zur Hälfte vor 1692 und in
den folgenden Jahren bis 1702 geschrieben worden, konnte
Wollny belegen, daß der Anteil früherer Manuskripte noch hö-
her ist. Doch hat das Repertoire seinen Schwerpunkt in Werken
aus dem letzten Drittel des 17. Jahrhunderts und wurde später
nur in geringerem Ausmaß ergänzt.19 Dagegen entstammt das
Aufführungsmaterial der Grimmaer Sammlung Jacobi der Zeit
von 1670 bis 1720 und enthält zwar auch frühere Musik, reicht
aber bis nach 1700 und bezeugt Aufführungen älterer Werke
noch in Bachs Leipziger Jahren.20 Desto deutlicher weist die
Sammlung Dübens nicht nur mit einzelnen Belegen bis in die
Zeit um 1650 zurück. Vielmehr setzte die Tätigkeit des Samm-
lers bereits mit Antritt seines Amtes als Stockholmer Hofka-
pellmeister 1663 ein, wie neben einer Reihe einzelner Hand-
schriften vor allem die fünf großen Tabulaturbänden beweisen
(Libro I–V, Vmhs 77–81), die bis in die Jahre 1663–65 zurückge-
hen.21 Da die Sammlung zudem nicht erst 1690 mit dem Tode
Dübens endete, dessen Sammeleifer vielmehr schon nach 1680
deutlich nachließ, darf sie nicht nur als größte, sondern auch als
19 Harald Kümmerling, Katalog der Sammlung Bokemeyer, (Kieler Schriften zur

Musikwissenschaft, 18), Kassel u.a. 1970, S. 12 f.. Vgl. ebd., S. 60–70 auch
die Angaben in den Fußnoten, S. 60–70, sowie das Register der Gottorfer
Signaturen, S. 90–96; P. Wollny, ‘Zwischen Hamburg, Gottorf und Wol-
fenbüttel: Neue Ermittlungen zur Entstehung der ‚Sammlung Bokemeyer’,
Schütz-Jahrbuch, 20 (1998).
20 Fr. Krummacher, Zur Sammlung Jacobi, in ders., Die Überlieferung, S. 325–334.
schen Ordnung‘, Teil I–II’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning 46, 1964; Teil
II–III, ebd., 48, 1966. Zu älteren Einzelhandschriften und zu den erwähn-
ten Tabulaturbänden vgl. vor allem die Listen bei Grusnick Teil I–II, S. 41–
64, und Teil II–III, S. 89–106.

früheste dieser Kollektionen gelten. Dem entspricht es, daß ne-

ben der Vielzahl der Stimmensätze ein wesentlicher Anteil von
Dübens Beständen noch in deutscher Orgeltabulatur notiert ist,
die derart in keiner der jüngeren Kollektionen verwendet wur-
de.22 Im Unterschied dazu umfaßt die Sammlung Bokemeyer fast
durchweg Partituren, die im übrigen Repertoire nur in Ausnah-
mefällen vorkommen. Sie stellen auch in Gottorf nur vereinzelt
Autographe da und dürften zumeist nach verlorenem Stim-
menmaterial geschrieben worden sein.23 Dagegen besteht die
Sammlung aus Grimma – wie die meisten übrigen Quellen die-
ser Zeit – fast ausnahmslos aus Stimmensätzen, von deren Ver-
wendung hier ausnahmsweise zahlreiche Daten zeugen.
Demgemäß kann es nicht überraschen, wenn in der Düben-
sammlung die Anteile von lateinisch textierten Werken, von ita-
lienischen Autoren und von Kopien aus Drucken am größten
sind.24 Den Gegenpol dazu bilden die Kompositionen solcher
Autoren, deren Vokalwerke ausschließlich oder überwiegend
durch die Dübensammlung überliefert sind. Das betrifft vor allem
solche Musiker, die in Stockholm, Kopenhagen und Nord-
deutschland tätig waren. Da sich unter diesen Quellen fast alle
Belege für persönliche Kontakte finden, sind analoge Verbindun-
gen in diesem Umkreis wahrscheinlicher als in anderen Teilen
der Bestände. Ferner zeichnet sich die Stockholmer Kollektion
durch die überaus große Anzahl solistischer oder geringstimmi-
ger Werke aus, wogegen größere Besetzungen zwar durchaus
vorkommen, aber im Vergleich mit den Beständen aus Gottorf,
Grimma oder Erfurt und vielen weiteren Orten doch deutlich
zurückstehen. Dazu paßt der auffallend hohe Anteil lateinischer
und deutscher Texte, die als freie Dichtung zu gelten haben. Ih-
nen steht neben einer beträchtlichen Zahl von lateinischen Ves-
perpsalmen und weiteren deutschen wie deutschen Psalmtexten
22 Gelegentlich wurden in Grimma ältere in Tabulatur beschriebene Einzel-

blätter, die man offenkundig als Makulatur betrachtete, als Umschläge ge-
nutzt oder auf dem leeren Verso beschrieben.
23 Vgl. Kümmerling, op.cit., S. 10 und 12f.
24 Krummacher, Die Überlieferung, S. 88–147.

der relativ geringe Teil von Evangelien- und Kirchenliedtexten.

Und dazu gehört es weiterhin, daß Beziehungen zum de tempore
ebenso selten bleiben wie weitere Hinweise auf die praktische
Verwendung der Werke, wogegen sich die ständige Praxis in den
Handschriften aus Grimma und Erfurt, aber auch in den Inventa-
ren aus Lüneburg, Braunschweig, Weißenfels u.a. spiegelt.
Allerdings verbinden sich mit diesen Beobachtungen, die
andernorts statistisch belegt wurden,25 zugleich auch ebenso
viele weitere Fragen, die miteinander so verquickt sind, daß sie
sich nicht immer systematisch trennen lassen. Wenn zunächst
die Überlieferung in Form von Tabulaturen eine exklusive Spe-
zialität der Dübensammlung ist, dann drängt sich die Frage auf,
welche Funktion diese Quellen hatten. Nahe liegt der Hinweis,
daß diese Notation besonders dazu geeignet ist, Raum und da-
mit Papier zu sparen, da eine Tabulatur Tonraum und Zeitver-
lauf der Musik nicht ebenso abbildet wie eine Partitur. Ist damit
noch nicht die Frage nach der Verwendung solcher Quellen
beantwortet, so liegt für Werke, zu denen Düben selbst außer
einem Stimmensatz auch eine Tabulatur schrieb, deren Benut-
zung für Aufführungszwecke anstelle einer Partitur nahe. Of-
fen bleibt auch dann, welchen praktischen Nutzen die Tabula-
tur hatte, wenn zu den Stimmensätzen stets auch eine Stimme
für den Generalbaß bzw. ‘Organo‘ gehört. Sollten Tabulaturen
primär der Kenntnis der Werke oder einer Übersicht über sie
dienen? Dazu könnte es passen, daß einerseits ein gesichertes
Autograph, wie es die mit Widmung versehene Tabulatur von
Buxtehudes Membra Jesu nostri darstellt, in Tabulatur geschrie-
ben wurde. Entsprechend finden sich unter den Tabulaturbän-
den, die nur zu geringen Teilen von Düben geschrieben wurden
(Vmhs 79 und 81), auffällig viele Manuskripte fremder oder
sogar singulärer Schreiber. Könnte es sich dann um Handschrif-
ten handeln, die Düben von auswärts vermittelt wurden, so
sprechen doch andere Indizien nicht dafür, daß der Gebrauch
25 Vgl. Krummacher, Die Überlieferung, S. 96–113 sowie 159ff, 196–200 und 203ff.

von Tabulaturen im Ostseeraum weit verbreitet war.26 Offenbar

wurden von Düben ebenso nachträglich Tabulaturen nach ein-
gegangenen oder in Stockholm gefertigten Stimmen geschrie-
ben, wie umgekehrt Stimmen für den praktischen Bedarf nach
auswärtigen Tabulaturen angefertigt wurden. Insofern hatten
nicht nur Stimmen, sondern auch Tabulaturen praktische Funk-
tion und dienten nicht allein der Kenntnis der Kompositionen.
Daß aus gedruckten Vorlagen primär Stimmensätze kopiert
wurden, deutet auf ihre praktische Verwendung hin. Für die
Praxis sind auch diese Quellen aufschlußreich, wiewohl sie keine
Unica darstellen und nicht den primären Rang der Sammlung
ausmachen. Soweit es sich um Vorlagen handelt, die nicht in
Schweden verfügbar sind, ist die Quellenlage heute mittels RISM
zwar ungleich rascher zu klären als vor 40 Jahren. Nicht ebenso
leicht ist aber die Frage zu beantworten, warum solche Kopien
angefertigt wurden. Ein Weg zur Klärung bestünde darin, die
einstigen Besitzer der Vorlagen zu ermitteln, um verständlich zu
machen, wieweit ein Druck Düben zur Verfügung stand oder
nicht. Ein zweiter Weg würde – nach Wiermanns Verfahren –
über genauere Vergleiche zwischen Vorlagen und Kopien füh-
ren. Wenn sich dabei bestätigen sollte, daß mit der Kopie eine
Bearbeitung einherging, ließe sich auch der Frage näherkommen,
wie verläßlich die durch Düben überlieferten Versionen solcher
Werke sind, die nur in der Dübensammlung überliefert sind.
Bedenkenswert bleibt es, daß Kopien von sehr verschiedenen
Vorlagen gemacht wurden, sofern lateinischen Dichtungen und
Psalmtexten deutsch textierte Werke wie die von Briegel gege-
nüberstehen, die sich auf die Lesungen der Sonn- und Feiertage
beziehen und damit in der Sammlung ähnliche Ausnahmen wie
der Evangelien-Jahrgang Augustin Pflegers sind.
26 So schrieb Matthias Weckmann die Lüneburger Autographe seiner Vo-

kalwerke in Partitur, obwohl diesem Organisten die Tabulaturschrift na-
türlich geläufig war; vgl., Matthias Weckmann, Four Sacred Concertos, hrsg.
von Alexander Silbiger (Recent Researches in the Music of the Baroque
Era, 46), Madison 1984.

Gerade die Kompositionen von Autoren, deren Vokalwerke

überwiegend oder ausschließlich durch die Dübensammlung
bekannt sind, machen ihren unschätzbaren Wert aus. Als Jan Olof
Rudén 1968 eine Gruppe von Handschriften untersuchte, die of-
fensichtlich von in Stockholm tätigen Kopisten verwendet wur-
den, verfolgte er damit das Ziel, die Verwendungszeit der Papiere
durch Vergleiche ihrer Wasserzeichen mit datierten Belegen aus
Stockholmer Archiven einzugrenzen.27 Zugleich konnte er dabei
die Folgerungen modifizieren, die Grusnick aus der Erweiterung
seiner Beobachtungen an Dübens ‘Tintennummern‘ gezogen hat-
te.28 Von den in Stockholm entstandenen Kopien sind anderer-
seits die Quellen zu unterscheiden, die offensichtlich auswärtiger
Herkunft sind. Auffällige Indizien für direkte oder doch mittelba-
re Kontakte, die dabei zwischen dem Sammler und den Kompo-
nisten bestanden haben dürften, wurden schon früher zusam-
mengetragen.29 Neben der geschlossenen Danziger Reihe, die
‘Mss. Da.‘ oder ‘Befastr‘‘ benannt wurde, 30 sind etwa Widmun-
gen oder Orts- und Zeitangaben belangvoll. Doch werden sich
die Beispiel durch Untersuchungen der Papiere und der Schreiber
mehren lassen, wie es Peter Wollny für Werke Tunders zeigte (die
demnach recht früh im Umfeld Lübecks geschrieben wurden und
hohe Authentizität haben dürfen).31 Nachdem schon früher ver-
mutet wurde, daß Gruppen mit Werken mitteldeutscher Autoren,
deren Quellen sich durch Schreiber oder Papiersorten abheben,
aus diesem Umkreis stammen dürften, konnte wiederum Wollny
27 Jan Olof Rudén, Vattenmärken och musikforskning. Presentation och tillämp-

ning av en dateringsmetod på musikalier i handskrift i Uppsala Universitets
Dübensamling, Uppsala 1968, besonders S. 127–196.
28 Vgl. Rudén, op.cit., S. 109–115, sowie Grusnick , ‘Die Dübensammlung‘,
Teil II–III, besonders S. 131 f. und S.140–175.
29 Vgl. Krummacher, Die Überlieferung, S. 107 ff.
30 Krummacher, op.cit., S. 112 f., sowie Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung‘,
Teil I–II, S. 64–67.
31 Peter Wollny danke ich herzlich für die Mitteilung seiner noch nicht pub-
lizierten Untersuchungen.

die entsprechende Herkunft weiterer Quellen nachweisen.32 Doch

hat sich auch erwiesen, wie hilfreich es sein kann, wenn man die
Quellen der Dübensammlung nicht isoliert, sondern im Kontext
der Zeit zu sehen sucht.33
Die Eigenarten der Textgruppen und Besetzungen, in denen
sich die Dübensammlung am klarsten von städtischen oder schu-
lischen Beständen wie denen aus Grimma oder Erfurt unterschei-
det, sind in der Frage der praktischen Verwendung eng mitei-
nander verknüpft. Gewiß begegnen nicht wenige großbesetzte
Kompositionen wie die der Danziger Bütner und Erben oder die
Werke von Meder, Tunder und Buxtehude. Auch fehlen nicht
durchweg deutsch textierte Werke mit klarem Bezug auf das de
tempore oder das Choralgut, wofür exemplarisch der Jahrgang
von Pfleger oder die Serie schlichter Choralsätze von Buxtehude
zu nennen sind. Drängt sich hier der Gedanke an eine gottes-
dienstliche Verwendung in Tyska kyrkan (Die Deutsche Kirche)
auf, so wäre dann zu folgern, daß solche Musik dort wenn nicht
in regelmäßigem Turnus, so doch mindestens zeitweise aufge-
führt werden konnte. Fällt es aber schwerer, sich hier die Auffüh-
rung all der geringstimmigen Konzerte mit lateinischen An-
dachtstexten vorzustellen, so läge dann umgekehrt die Möglich-
keit ihrer Verwendung in der Schloßkirche nahe. Dem entsprä-
chen die Möglichkeiten, die durch das Ensemble der Hofkapelle
vorgegeben waren, auch wenn ihr größere Besetzungen keines-
wegs verschlossen waren. Doch wären andererseits bei der inti-
32 Wollny, ‘Eine anonyme Leipziger Hochzeitsmusik aus dem 17. Jahrhun-

dert’, Über Leben, Kunst und Kunstwerke. Aspekte musikalischer Biographie: Jo-
hann Sebastian Bach im Zentrum, Festschrift für Hans-Joachim Schulze, hrsg.
von Christoph Wolff, Leipzig 1999; ders., ´Beiträge zur Entstehungsge-
schichte der Sammlung Düben´, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 87 (2005).
33 Wollny, ‘Johann Rosenmüllers Dialog Christus ist mein Leben als musikali-
sches Vorbild’, Rezeption als Innovation. Untersuchungen zu einem Grundmo-
dell der europäischen Kompositionsgeschichte (Festschrift für Fr. Krummacher)
(Kieler Schriften zur Musikwissenschaft, 46), Kassel etc. 2001.

men Besetzung vieler Werke die Ressourcen der Hofkapelle und

besonders ihrer Bläser kaum angemessen ausgenutzt worden.34
Fragen und Beispiele
Wie ertragreich es sein kann, Möglichkeiten der Verwendung

von Werken mit Hilfe der Stockholme Archive zu klären, hat
unlängst Lars Berglund in seiner vorbildlichen Untersuchung
der Werke von Christian Geist bewiesen.35 Seine Kompositio-
nen vertreten wie die von Buxtehude jenen besonderen Ton,
der diesen Teil des Stockholmer Repertoires prägt. Exempla-
risch dafür sind auch die Werke des Danziger Marienkapell-
meisters Balthasar Erben, die vor allem durch die Dübensamm-
lung erhalten blieben. Einige Beispiele, mit denen sich zugleich
weitere Fragen verbinden, mögen dieses spezifische Idiom des
Stockholmer Bestandes andeuten.36
1. cantus mollis versus cantus durus – und die Ausführung?

Im Verzicht auf obligate Instrumente bildet die Motette O Domi-
ne Jesu Christe für vier Vokalstimmen und Generalbaß einen
Sonderfall für einen Musiker aus Erbens Generation.37 Wiederum
liegt ein lateinischer Andachtstext zugrunde, dessen Herkunft
34 Vgl. dazu Erik Kjellberg, Kungliga musiker i Sverige, Uppsala 1979,

besonders Vol. I, S. 58 f.
35 Lars Berglund, Studier i Christian Geists vokalmusik (Studia Musicologica
Upsaliensia, Nova Series 21), Uppsala 2002, besonders S. 69–81 und 89–100.
36 Von 23 erhaltenen Vokalwerken finden sich 17 nur in der Dübensamm-
lung, vier in der Sammlung Bokemeyer und zwei in beiden Kollektionen,
vgl. Fr. Krummacher, Art. ‘Erben, Balthasar‘, MGG 2. Aufl., Personenteil
Bd. 6, Kassel u.a. 2001, Sp. 407 ff.; ders., ‘Ein Profil in der Tradition: der
Danziger Kapellmeister Balthasar Erben‘, Musica Baltica. Interregionale mu-
sikkulturelle Beziehungen im Ostseeraum, hrsg. von Ekkehard Ochs u.a.,
(Deutsche Musik im Osten, Bd. 8, Sankt Augustin 1996), besonders S. 350f
und 355 (mit weiteren Auszügen aus Werken von Erben).
37 Vmhs 20:8 St. für Sopran, Alt, Tenor und Baß samt Generalbaß (mit Au-
torangabe ‘del Sigre B. Erben‘ vom Hauptschreiber).

vorerst kaum zu klären ist. Damit erscheint das Werk als später
Ausläufer38 jener Tradition der madrigalischen Motette, für die
ein halbes Jahrhundert zuvor die deutschen Spruchmotetten des
Israelisbrünnlein (1623) von Johann Hermann Schein oder die la-
teinischen Cantiones sacrae von Heinrich Schütz (1625) einstehen.
(1) O Domine Jesu Christe, adoro te in cruce vulneratum,
O Domine Jesu Christe, felle et aceto potatum,
in cruce vulneratum.
(2) Deprecor te, o mi Jesu, per amarem passionem et mortem tuam.
Ne permittas me a te separari.
(3) Deprecor te in hore mortis meae, miserere mei (nobis).39
In Erbens weit späterem Werk richten sich indes die ‘madriga-

lischen’ Züge in der sowohl chromatischen als auch melismati-
schen Stimmführung weniger auf die Auszeichnung einzelner
Wörter als auf die Intensivierung des bestimmenden Affekts.
Denn innerhalb des kontrapunktisch dicht gearbeiteten Satzes
werden die Möglichkeiten, die sich mit den Bereichen des can-
tus mollis und cantus durus bieten, ebenso systematisch wie ex-
tensiv ausgenutzt.40 Zunächst heben sich die umrahmenden
Teile (die in der Textwiedergabe vorgreifend als 1. und 3. be-
zeichnet sind) nicht nur durch ihre vollstimmige Besetzung von
einem ausgedehnten Mittelteil ab, in dem sich die jeweils als
solo markierten Einzelstimmen (in der Folge Canto – Tenore –
Alto – Basso) über dem Generalbaß ablösen. Der Teilkontrast
jedoch, der sich aus dem Wechsel der Besetzung und Satzart
ergibt, wird zusätzlich dadurch verschärft, daß die Rahmenteile
im cantus mollis bis zu Klängen über Es, As und Des (und im
flüchtigen Durchgang sogar über Ges) führen, während dem
solistischen Mittelteil die Aufhellung zum cantus durus bis zu
Klängen über H und Fis vorbehalten ist (Beispiel 1).
38 Nach der von Düben zugefügten Tintennummer (TN 440) ordnete Grusnick
die Quelle um 1672 ein, vgl. Grusnick, ’Die Dübensammlung‘, Teil II–III, S. 145
39 Die Textvariante ‘nobis‘ begegnet nur in der Sopranstimme, während sie
im Tenorpart gestrichen und durch ‘mei‘ ersetzt wurde.
40 Vgl. dazu Erik Chafe, ‘Aspects of durus / mollis shifts and the two-system
framework of Monteverdi’s music’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 12 (1990), bes. S. 173ff.

Beispiel 1. Balthasar Erben, O Domino Jesu Christe (Vmhs 20:8), Auszüge.

Das Verfahren führt aber andererseits dazu, daß die entspre-

chenden Stufen unter enharmonischer Verwechslung doppelt
verwendet werden (b-ais, es-dis, as-gis, cis-des und sogar fis-
ges).41 So traditionell Erbens Werk zunächst wirken mag, so
experimentell ist es zugleich in der ambivalenten Erprobung
des Spielraums, der sich zwischen dem Verblassen des tradier-
ten Modussystems und der weit späteren Etablierung eines
neuen theoretischen Fundaments auftat. Und mit der Frage
nach der Verwendung solcher Musik in Stockholm paart sich
das aufführungspraktische Problem, mit welcher Temperierung
hier bei einer Aufführung gerechnet werden konnte.
2. Danziger Gelegenheitsmusik in Stockholm?

Ein deutsch textiertes Gegenstück in Erbens Œuvre bildet das
expressive Lamento Ach daß ich doch in meinen Augen hätte des
Wassers g’nug für Canto solo, je zwei Violinen, Violen und
Gamben samt Generalbaß.42 Die primäre Quelle trägt auf dem
Titelblatt den vom Hauptschreiber herrührenden Vermerk
‘Dantisci Ao. 1682 10 Augusti: S. Schirm.‘, sie wurde also von
dem an der Danziger Marienkirche als Sänger tätigen Samuel
Schirm geschrieben, der 1690 auch in Lübeck bei einer Auffüh-
rung Buxtehudes mitwirkte.43 Obwohl die Autorangabe ‘di / B.
41 Da das Werk in F (mit nur einem b) notiert ist, wird in den Stimmen und in
der Bezifferung eine Fülle von nicht immer konsequent gehandhabten Ak-
zidentien erforderlich; daraus erklären sich die Versehen in der Wiedergabe
des Beginns bei Carl-Allan Moberg, ‘Drag i östersjöområdets musikliv på
Buxtehudes tid’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 39 (1957), S. 80f.
42 Vmhs. 20:1 St. (ein zweiter Stimmensatz mit der Signatur Vmhs 20:1a geht
auf einen Kopisten zurück, der auch an Abschriften mit Werken von Bux-
tehude beteiligt war). Die Besetzungsangabe ‘a 6‘ wird verständlich, wenn
nach dem Usus der Zeit die Generalbaßstimme so wenig mit gezählt wird
wie eine weitere, im Baßschlüssel notierte Instrumentalstimme, die als ‘Vi-
oletta‘ bezeichnet ist und den Generalbaß (mit geringfügigen Varianten) in
den instrumentalen Abschnitten verstärkt.
43 Zu Samuel Schirm vgl. Hermann Rauschning, Geschichte der Musik und
Musikpflege in Danzig. Von den Anfängen bis zur Auflösung der Kirchenkapel-
len, (Quellen und Darstellungen zur Geschichte Westpreußens 15), Danzig
1931, S. 294 f. Freilich sind auch 72 ‘Componirte Lieder von Samuel

Erben‘ von Düben nachgetragen wurde, besteht kaum Anlaß

zum Mißtrauen, denn einerseits liegt nichts näher, als daß
Schirm ein Werk des bis 1686 amtierenden Kapellmeisters Er-
ben kopierte, und andererseits war Düben über seine eigenen
Kontakte jedenfalls besser unterrichtet als wir.44 Die Textbasis
ist eine dreistrophige Dichtung, die in freier Tropierung an Jer.
8:23 und weiter an die Klagelieder Jeremiä anschließt, wie es –
hier in modernisiertem Lautstand – die erste Strophe zeigt45
Ach, daß ich doch in meinem Augen hätte

des Wassers g’nug und Tränen um die Wette
mit deinem Volk möcht‘ fließen lassen hin,
wie aber ach! Was tust du, o mein Sinn?
Ach, wach doch auf vom Schlaf der Sünden
laß ja die Sicherheit dich nicht mehr überwinden,
o besser dich, denn es ist hohe Zeit,
der große Gott hat schon die Straf bereit.
Die gereimten Zeilen umfassen in der Regel fünf Hebungen,

doch kann ihre Zahl auch so variieren wie in den Zeilen 5–6,
mit denen der zweiten Abschnitt der Strophe beginnt. Während
den drei Werkteilen eine zwölftaktige Sonata für volles Instru-
Schirm‘ belegt (vgl. Rauschning, ebd.), da aber die Incipits fast durchweg
auf Choraltexte hindeuten, darf man dahinter eher schlichtere Sätze ver-
muten, ohne diesem Autor – von dem sonst keine Vokalwerke nachweis-
bar sind – ein so komplexes Werk wie das in Rede stehende zuzumuten.
Freilich liegen von Schirm zwei kurze Suiten A ‘6 Viol.‘ vor, deren Stim-
mensätze die Angabe ‘Dantisci A [16]87. 15 Juni‘ zeigen, vgl. Erik Kjell-
berg, Instrumentalmusiken i Dübensamlingen. En översikt, Uppsala 1968, S.
23, Nr. 91–92.
44 Zu warnen ist ohnehin vor generellem Mißtrauen gegenüber nachgetra-
genen Autornamen, sofern sie zeitgenössischen Datums sind. Ein Gene-
ralverdacht träfe nicht nur viele Partituren aus der Bokemeyer-Sammlung,
sondern auch all die Stimmensätze, in denen verschollene Titelblätter
durch nachträgliche Angaben ersetzt wurden. Je weiter man die Zweifel
triebe, desto brüchiger würde das Fundament in einer Überlieferung, für
die man ohnehin zumeist auf Quellen sekundären oder noch weiter ent-
fernten Ranges angewiesen bleibt.
45 Der Text ist nicht identisch mit dem des Solokonzerts Ach, daß ich doch in
meinen Augen von Johann Christoph Bach.

mentarium vorangeht, ist die erste Strophenhälfte als freie Mo-

nodie angelegt, deren Vokalpart jeweils neu geformt und von
zwei Violen da gamba ‘per accompagnam.‘ samt Generalbaß
begleitet wird. Nach der ersten Halbstrophe wird jeweils die
gleiche viertaktige ‘Sinfonia‘ eingeschaltet, wonach die zweite
Strophenhälfte alle Instrumente mit der Sopranstimme zum
Tuttisatz vereinigt (Beispiel 2). Gegenüber den Varianten der
jeweils ersten Halbstrophe, deren unterschiedlicher Umfang
sich aus vielfach wechselnden Melismen und Wortwiederho-
lungen ergibt, ist der zweiten Hälfte aller Strophen ein instru-
mentaler Gerüstsatz gemeinsam. Er hat demnach die Funktion
eines Refrains, ohne aber Varianten der Deklamation und der
Stimmführung auszuschließen. Gerade diese deklamatorische
Flexibilität überspielt indes jenes metrische Gefüge, das sonst
die zeitgenössische Aria bestimmt und nicht selten fast mecha-
nisch wirken kann. Dagegen nimmt sich Erbens Satz weithin
fast wie die Vertonung einer Prosavorlage aus, von der sich die
stabileren instrumentalen Partien desto wirksamer abheben, je
mehr ihre klanglich gesteigerten Kadenzen den harmonischen
Verlauf markieren.

130

Beispiel 2. Balthasar Erben, Ach da ich doch in meinen Augen (Vmhs 20:1), Auszüge.
Friedhelm Krummacher
Es ist nicht auszuschließen, daß der Text dieses Werkes von

der Bedrohung ausgelöst wurde, der Danzig als freie Reichsstadt
unter polnischer Krone vielfach ausgesetzt war.46 Sollte sich be-
stätigen, daß hier ein Gelegenheitswerk vorliegen könnte,47 so
wäre auch nach Möglichkeiten seiner Verwendung in Stockholm
zu fragen. Wenn dabei aber schwer vorstellbar ist, der an-
spruchsvolle Vokalpart sei einem Knaben der Deutschen Schule
anvertraut gewesen, dann müßte er wohl von einem Sänger der
Hofkapelle ausgeführt worden sein. Wäre also die Aufführung
einer solchen Komposition in der Schloßkirche denkbar?
3. Marianischer Text in protestantischer Lesart?

Das in F stehende Solokonzert Salve suavissime Jesu, das im
Stimmensatz (Vmhs 20:11) Balthasar Erben zugeschrieben wird,
sieht neben Canto solo je zwei Violinen und Violen samt Gene-
ralbaß vor. Der Text indes erweist sich als eine gekürzte Version
des Salve Regina, dessen Beginn zu ‘Salve suavissime Jesus‘ ver-
ändert wird.48 Doch spricht die Deklamation zunächst nicht für
die Parodie einer fremden Vorlage, wozu auch die Umstellung
und Auslassung weiterer Textglieder wenig zu passen scheint.
Das mag ein Textvergleich zeigen, in dem die Auslassungen aus
der marianischen Vorlage kursiv abgehoben werden.49
46 In Riga wirkte zu dieser Zeit Johann Valentin Meder, der später Erbens
Nachfolge in Danzig übernahm. Auf dem Titelblatt seiner Komposition
Wie murren denn die Leute (Vmhs 28:9, St.) verbindet sich die Datierung
‘Rigae d 3 Octob: / 1684‘ mit dem Vermerk ‘Festo gratiarum actionis p li-
beratione urbis ejusdem ab obsidentibus Muscovitis‘.
47 In der zweiten Hälfte der mittleren Strophe heißt es: Ach handle nicht mit
uns nach unsern Sünden, laß uns bei dir, ach, Gnade finden. Hör auf, o Gott, zu
strafen diese Stadt und dieses Land, das ganz von Seufzen matt.
48 Vmhs 20:11, St. Vom Hauptschreiber stammt auch eine zweite Sopran-
stimme, die aber auf dem Titelblatt nicht genannt wird. Da sie fast durch-
weg in Terzparallelen zum ursprünglichen Canto verläuft, dürfte sie einen
nachträglichen Zusatz bilden.
49 Dem Vergleich mit der Textfassung der Dübensammlung liegt der Wort-
laut der Antiphon nach dem Antiphonale Romanum, Paris und Rom 1949, S.
68f, zugrunde.

Salve Regina, mater Salve, suavissime Jesu,

misericordiae: Deus misericordiae.
Vita, dulcedo et spes nostra, Salve dulcedo et spes
salve. nostra.
Ad te clamamus, exsules, Ad te clamamus, exsules,
filii Hevae. filii Evae.
Ad te suspiramus, gementes Ad te suspiramus,
et flentes gementes et flentes
in hac lacrymarum valle. in hac lacrymarum valle.
Eia ergo, Advocata nostra

,illos tuos misericordes oculos
ad nos converte
Et Jesum, benedictum fructum
ventris tui,nobis post hoc
exsilium ostende.
O clemens: O pia: O dulcis Ostende, o clemens, o dulcis

Virgo Maria. Fili Redemptor.
Die Verwendung der marianischen Textvorlage setzte zunächst

die Änderung der eröffnenden und abschließenden Anrufun-
gen Marias zu an Christus gerichteten Wendungen voraus.50
Das muß so wenig wie die Auslassung von Einzelworten (‘vita‘
bzw. ‘pia‘) für eine selbständige Vertonung des Textes durch
Erben sprechen. Doch fehlt in ihr der Mittelteil, der sich an Ma-
ria als Mittlerin wendet und in der Vertonung eines katholi-
schen Autors kaum ausfallen durfte. Daß er in protestantischer
Verwendung untauglich war, hätte hier eine eingehendere Um-
textierung bedingt, die aber gewiß nicht unmöglich gewesen
wäre. Ein verdächtiges Indiz bildet indes das Wort ‘ostende‘,
das sich am Schluß des Mittelteils der Antiphon auf ‘Jesum,
benedictum fructum ventris tui‘ bezieht. In der vorliegenden
Komposition jedoch wird es aus diesem Zusammenhang he-
50 Solche Textvarianten, die der protestantischen Anpassung mariologischer

Vorlagen dienen, sind gerade in der Dübensammlung mehrfach belegt,
vgl. Fr. Krummacher, ‘Parodie, Umtextierung und Bearbeitung in der Kir-
chenmusik vor Bach’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 53 (1971), beson-
ders S. 36.

rausgelöst und mit der abschließenden Wendung an den ‘Re-

demptor’ verbunden (Beispiel 3a). Mag das syntaktisch fragwür-
dig sein, so löst doch gerade dieses Wort den Umschlag zum
raschen Tripeltakt aus. So sehr dieses beschwingte Taktmaß for-
tan den ausgedehnten Schlußteil beherrscht, so wenig scheint es
für die Vertonung der vorletzten Zeile in der Antiphon nahezu-
liegen.
Da die Autorangabe auf dem Titelblatt der Quelle (‘Authore/
Balthasar Erben‘) vom Hauptschreiber stammt und nicht erst
von fremder Hand zugefügt wurde, bestünde zunächst kaum
Anlaß zum Zweifel an ihrer Authentizität. Allerdings sind hier
auch Einschränkungen zu machen. Zum einen nämlich ist die-
ser Hauptschreiber, dem eine auffällig steile Schrift zu eigen ist,
an der Dübensammlung nur mit wenigen Einzelquellen betei-
ligt, in denen er mit weiteren Stockholmer Kopisten zusam-
menwirkte, so daß er eher hier als auswärts tätig gewesen sein
dürfte. Zum anderen erhöht es nicht unbedingt das Vertrauen
in diesen Kopisten, daß er neben einem anonymen Werk auch
die verkürzte Fassung eines Werks von Christian Geist
schrieb.51 Schließlich aber haben die Studien von Rudén erge-
ben, daß das von ihm benutzte Papier dem Wasserzeichen zu-
folge erst in die Jahre nach 1692 gehört.52
51 L. Berglund, Studier, S. 353. Der Kopist war an der verkürzten Version von
Geists Vide, pater mir dolores (Vmhs 46:23) und dem anonym überlieferten
Diligam te, Jesu (Vmhs 40:7) beteiligt.
52 Vgl. Rudén, Vattenmärken , S. 168 (dagegen hatte Grusnick die Quelle um
1668–1670 eingeordnet, vgl. Grusnick, ’Die Dübensammlung‘, Teil II–III, S.
124).

Beispiel 3a. Balthasar Erben, Salve suavissime Jesu (Vmhs 20:11), Auszüge.

Konkurrierende Zuschreibungen: Erben oder Arnold?
Der Hinweis darauf, daß dasselbe Werk in zwei weiteren Quel-

len mit dem Bamberger Hoforganisten Georg Arnold verbun-
den wird, ist Frau Barbara Grusnick zu verdanken.53 Als primä-
re Quelle darf Dübens Kopie im Tabulaturband 77 gelten, der
von ihm mit der Jahresangabe 1663 versehen wurde. Hier findet
sich als Nr. 9 (fol. 22–24) das gesamte Werk unter Einschluß des
Mittelteils, der in dem Erben zugeschriebenen Stimmensatz
fehlt. Allerdings verzichtete Düben nicht nur auf jede Textun-
terlegung, sondern auch auf eine Autorangabe. Entsprechend
karg lautet der Kopftitel (fol. 22): Salve, Salve sua/vissime Jesu./C.
solo e 5 instrum., während die Angabe ‘Arnoldi Georg‘ erst von
Anders Lagerberg nachgetragen wurde. Anonym ist aber auch
der Stimmensatz (Vmhs 45:14), der ebenfalls von Düben ge-
schrieben wurde, während erst J. O. Rudén auf dem Titelblatt
einen Verweis auf Arnold ergänzte. Daß Düben sich hier auf
die Tabulatur stützte, geht aus seinem Hinweis auf die ‘Partitu-
ra No: 9: in libro Rubr:‘ hervor.54 Im Unterschied zur Tabulatur
ist dem Vokalpart des Stimmensatzes zwar der ganze Text ein-
schließlich des Mittelteils unterlegt, jedoch von vornherein in der
auf christologischen Version, die schon im Kopftitel der Tabula-
tur begegnet. Eine Autorenangabe fehlt jedoch ebenso in dem
Index, den Düben offenbar schon vor der Fertigstellung des
Bandes vorne eintrug. Denn hier notierte er lediglich: ‘9. Salve,
53 Für diesen Hinweis sei Frau Barbara Grusnick (Lübeck) ebenso gedankt
wie für eine Kopie aus ihrer Spartierung, die auf dem Arnold zugeschrie-
benen Stimmensatz basierte, ohne die mit Erben verbundenen Quelle he-
ranzuziehen. Herzlicher Dank gilt ebenso Lars Berglund für weitere Re-
cherchen in den Quellen.
54 Vgl. Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung‘, Teil II–III, S. 79. Während die Tabula-
tur um 1663 geschrieben wurde, würde die Tintennummer 246, die Düben
dem Titelblatt des Stimmen später zufügte, erst in die Zeit um 1666 weisen
(vgl. Grusnick.‘Die Dübensammlung‘, Teil I–II, S. 52). Das Beispiel mahnt al-
so zur Vorsicht bei Rückschlüssen von Daten aus Tabulaturen auf undatier-
te Stimmen aufgrund der numerischen Folge ihrer Tintennummern.

Suavissime Jesu pro pascha. C: solo con 4 viol.‘. Bemerkenswert

ist dabei der Hinweis ‘pro pascha‘, denn er zielt auf eine Ver-
wendung im Kirchenjahr, die sich offenkundig nicht von selbst
verstand. Indes hat dieser Index begrenzte Bedeutung, da er
mit den Nummern 1–16 nur die ersten Werke des Bandes erfaßt
und dabei durchweg keine Autorennamen anführt. Anders
verhält es sich mit einem zweiten Index, der sich erst am Ende
des Bandes findet. Da Düben hier alle Werke mit Folioangaben
nannte, dürfte er dieses Verzeichnis als nachträglichen Rück-
blick ergänzt haben. Mit dieser Einschränkung ist also sein
Vermerk zu lesen, der den einzigen zeitgenössischen Hinweis
auf den Autor gibt: ‘22. Salve Suavissime Jesu canto solo 5 viol.
Georg Arnoldi‘.
Insgesamt steht also einem relativ späten Stimmensatz, in
dem das Werk ohne Mittelteil Balthasar Erben zugewiesen
wird, nicht nur ein weiterer Stimmensatz gegenüber, in dem die
Zuschreibung an Georg Arnold erst neuerdings ergänzt wurde.
Vielmehr wurde auch die Autorenangabe im Kopftitel aus Dü-
bens Tabulatur erst später nachgetragen, während nur sein
nachträglicher Vermerk im Index des Bandes einen Autor
nennt. Kompositionen sowohl von Arnold wie auch von Erben
finden sich in den frühen Tabulaturbänden Dübens, dem schon
seit 1663 Vorlagen für Werke beider Autoren verfügbar gewe-
sen sein müssen. Mit Ausnahme weniger Gelegenheitsstücke
wurde Erbens Vokalmusik wie die seiner norddeutschen Zeit-
genossen nicht gedruckt, wer also Interesse an solcher Musik
hatte, war auf Beziehungen angewiesen, wie sie in der Düben-
sammlung gerade für Werke Danziger Autoren belegt sind.55
Dagegen konnte Georg Arnold (1621–1676), der seit 1649 Hof-
organist des Fürstbischofs von Bamberg war, nicht wenige
Werke in einer Reihe von Drucken publizieren.56 Auf Druckvor-
55 Vgl. die Hinweise in Anm. 30 und 36.

56 Gerhard Weinzierl, Art. Georg Arnold, MGG, 2. Aufl., Personenteil Bd. 1,
Kassel etc. 1999, Sp. 981–983; ders., Das Messenschaffen des Fürstbischöflich.–
Bamberger Hoforganisten Georg Arnold, Erlangen 1983, (phil. Diss.) (Teildruck
in: 119. Bericht des Historischen Vereins Bamberg, ebd. 1983, S. 153–286.)

lagen gehen auch 13 der Kopien zurück, die Düben von insge-
samt 22 Vokalwerken Arnolds anfertigte. Das Gewicht, das
diesem Musiker für die Frühphase der Dübensammlung zu-
kommt, wird erst dann einsichtig, wenn man hinzufügt, daß
von insgesamt 21 Werken, die Dübens Index am Ende seines
ersten Tabulaturbandes 77 aufzählt, allein 16 von Arnold
stammen, dessen Musik also fast ein Drittel des Bestands in
Dübens erstem großen Tabulaturband ausmacht. Insgesamt
entnahm er 10 Kompositionen Arnolds Sacrae Cantiones (1661),57
drei weitere stammen aus zwei anderen Drucken, für die acht
übrigen sind jedoch vorerst keine gedruckten Vorlagen nach-
zuweisen.58 Nach den Angaben von Gerhard Weinzierl findet
sich indes – wie kaum anders zu erwarten – unter Arnolds ge-
druckten Werken keine Komposition mit dem Textbeginn Salve
suavissime Jesu. Zwar enthält ein Druck eine Vertonung des Sal-
ve Regina, jedoch in anderer Besetzung als das Werk aus der
Dübensammlung.59 Doch hat Weinzierl auch auf weitere Indi-
zien hingewiesen, die ein anderes Druckwerk von Arnold bie-
57 Vgl. Georg Arnold (1821–1676), Missa Quarta .(Bamberg 1672), Sacrae Cantio-
nes (Innsbruck 1661), hrsg. von G. Weinzierl, (Denkmäler der Musik in
Bayern, Neue Folge, Bd. 10), Wiesbaden etc. 1994, S. XIf. Arnolds Samm-
lung Liber II. opus IV. sacrarum cantionum de tempore et sanctis ist nur in ei-
nem unvollständigen Exemplar der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München
erhalten. Zur Ergänzung der Edition, die alle zehn Werke des Drucks bie-
tet, wurde das Material der Dübensammlung trotz mancher Differenzen
herangezogen.
58 In Stockholm liegt der Liber primus sacrarum cantionum (Nürnberg 1651)
vor, worauf Quemadmodum desiderat cervus (Vmhs 77:97 und 2:17) zurück-
geht (freundliche Auskunft von Gerhard Weinzierl). Das gilt auch für Ar-
nolds Psalmi Vespertini (Bamberg 1661), denen die Psalmen Beatus vir und
Laudate Dominum (Vmhs 86:15 bzw. 81:146) entstammen (Grusnick, ‘Die
Dübensammlung‘, Teil II–III, S. 93 und 106). Vgl. insgesamt Rafael Mitja-
na, Catalogue critique et descriptif des Imprimés de Musique … a la Bibliothèque
de l’université Royale d’Upsala, Tome 1, Upsala 1911, Sp. 15ff. ; Åke Davids-
son, Catalogue critique et descriptif des Imprimés de Musique … dans les Biblio-
thèques Suédoises, Upsala 1952, S. 22f.
59 Psalmi De Beata Maria Virgine cum Salve Regina, Ave Regina, Alma Redemptoris
Mater et Regina Coeli à 5. vel. 6. 3. vocibus & 2. violonis concertantibus (Inns-
bruck 1662), vgl. RISM A(I/1, S. 114.

tet.60 Von seinen Motettae tredecim selectissimae de nomine Jesu

ejusque sacratissima virgine matre Maria sind zwar nur zwei In-
strumentalstimmen erhalten, dem Index zufolge hatten aber
drei Motetten jeweils zwei Titel, die sich nur durch wenige
Worte unterscheiden, wie beispielsweise in Nr. VI:
‘Deus meus succurre clamanti‘ de nomine Jesu

‘Alma mater succurre clamanti‘ & de beata Maria Virgine
Offenbar konnten diese Werke also zu wechselnden Anlässen

entweder in marianischer oder in christologischer Funktion
verwendet werden. Die Möglichkeit der Verwendung nicht nur
zu Marien-, sondern auch zu Christusfesten mochte zwar pro-
testantischen Interessenten entgegenkommen, ob Arnold aber
auch solche Abnehmer bei seinen Publikationen im Blick hatte,
ist damit noch nicht gesagt. Zwar ist nicht ganz auszuschließen,
daß ein gleicher Sachverhalt auch bei der Vorlage für Dübens
Kopie des Salve suavissime Jesu gegeben war. Das würde aller-
dings voraussetzen, daß Arnold sich selbst bei einer mariani-
schen Antiphon nicht davor gescheut hätte, den tradierten Text
durch eine Parodie zu ersetzen.
In den Quellen begegnet die Komposition durchweg nur in
christologischer Version statt mit dem Text der marianischen
Antiphon, die zugrunde gelegen haben müßte, falls die Zuwei-
sung an einen katholischen Autor wie Arnold triftig sein sollte:
Eia ergo, Advocata nostra, Et Eia ergo Miserator noster,

illos tuos misericordes illos tuos misericordes
oculos ad nos converte. converte oculus ad nos
Et Jesum, benedictum atque patrem cum Sancto
fructum ventris tui, Spiritu aeternum
nobis post hoc exilium nobis post hoc exilium
ostende. ostende.
Hier wie in den Rahmenteilen konnte also der Vokalpart weit-

hin den Wortlaut der Antiphon übernehmen. Die kursiv mar-
60 Herrn Dr. Gerhard Weinzierl (Bamberg) sei für freundliche Auskünfte

aufrichtig gedankt.

kierten Abweichungen in Dübens Fassung betreffen neben der

Anrufung der ‘Advocata nostra‘ den Verweis auf ‘Jesum, bene-
dictum fructum‘. Wird statt dessen auf ‘patrem cum Sancto
spiritu aeternum‘ hingewiesen, so wird auch das Wort ‘ostende‘
syntaktisch so eingebunden, wie es in der verkürzten Fassung
nicht der Fall war. Gegenüber den Worten der Antiphon, die an
das Geheimnis der Menschwerdung Christi rühren, nehmen sich
die Ersatzworte mit der allgemeinen Wendung an Gottvater et-
was blasser aus. Doch lassen sie sich kaum ohne Verstöße gegen
die Betonung unterlegen, während der Text der Antiphon eine
schlüssigere Deklamation zuließe. Die wenig glückliche Textie-
rung fällt noch mehr auf, weil nur in diesen neun Takten die In-
strumente aussetzen, so daß der Vokalpart desto deutlicher her-
vortritt.61 Das mag ein kurzer Auszug aus dem Ende des Mittel-
teils andeuten, der nur im Stimmensatz 45:14 mit Dübens Textie-
rung vorliegt, während hypothetisch die entsprechenden Worte
der Antiphon (kursiv) zugefügt seien (Beispiel 3b).
61 Die unbefriedigende Deklamation dieses Abschnitts mag ein Anlaß dafür

gewesen sein, daß der spätere Kopist den ganzen Mittelteil ausließ – frei-
lich um den Preis der sinnwidrigen Isolierung des Wortes ‘ostende‘. Offen
bleibt allerdings, warum er die Stimmen nochmals ausschrieb, obwohl er
offenbar Zugang zu Dübens Kopie hatte und auch die späte Abschrift in
der Sammlung verblieb.

140

Beispiel 3 b-c: Georg Arnold (?), Salve suavissime Jesu (Vmhs 45:14), Auszüge.
Beispiel 3 c: Balthasar Erben, Salve suavissime Jesu (Vmhs 20:11) 1662). Auszüge.
Friedhelm Krummacher
Ein genauer Vergleich würde allerdings den hier gesetzten

Rahmen sprengen und wäre im Grunde nur durch eine Kriti-
sche Edition zu leisten, die mit den Fassungen auch die Varian-
ten der Quellen einbeziehen müßte. Sie betreffen weniger Dü-
bens Tabulatur im Verhältnis zu seinem Stimmensatz als viel-
mehr den Vokalpart in den Arnold bzw. Erben zugeschriebe-
nen Stimmen. Wo Dübens Fassung nur eine halbe Note zeigt,
zeichnen in der späteren Quelle kleine Auszierungen schon
eingangs die Anrufung ‘Jesu‘ aus (Beispiel 3c). An etwa 20 wei-
teren Stellen des Vokalparts – vorzugsweise in Kadenzen – fin-
den sich entsprechende Varianten, die bis zur verzierten
Schlußwendung reichen. All das berührt jedoch das Satzgerüst
nicht derart, daß von einer grundlegenden Umarbeitung zu
sprechen wäre. Unabhängig davon fragt sich aber, auf welche
Weise Düben Vorlagen für ungedruckte Werke von Musikern
aus katholischen Bereichen erhalten konnte. Daß er auch bei
weiteren Werken Arnolds Instrumentalstimmen zufügte und
Varianten in der Textierung vornahm, hat Weinzierl gezeigt.62
Zwar verzichtete Düben bei der Intavolierung des ‘Salve sua-
vissime‘ wie auch bei anderen Werken63 auf eine Textunterle-
gung, doch hatte er zumindest schon das christologisch gewen-
dete Textincipit im Sinne, als er den Kopftitel notierte. Wiewohl
in solchen Fällen nicht ganz auszuschließen ist, daß er Hinwei-
sen in seinen Vorlagen folgte, darf es doch als wahrscheinlich
gelten, daß die meisten Änderungen auf ihn selbst zurückge-
hen. Mit Änderungen in Texten und Besetzungen ist aber auch
bei den Werken zu rechnen, die nur durch Dübens Handschrif-
ten überliefert sind. Will man nicht annehmen, daß Düben ein
62 Vgl. dazu Denkmäler der Tonkonst in Bayern, Neue Folge 10, S. XI. Der
Zusatz von Kapell- oder Instrumentalstimmen entspricht einem Verfah-
ren, das Düben auch sonst häufig anwandte, wie der Vergleich zwischen
seinen Fassungen und den Druckvorlagen zeigt.
63 So beispielsweise bei der anschließenden Komposition Plaudat, jubilet, die
Arnolds Cantiones sacrae entstammt und in der Tabulatur (Vmhs 77:24)
ebenfalls ohne Autorangabe und Textierung bleibt, während der Index
Arnold als Autor mit dem auf das de tempore zielenden Zusatz ‘in Pa-
scha‘ nennt.

verschollenes Druckwerk vorlag (wozu wenig Anlaß besteht),

so bleibt nur zu folgern, daß er Zugang zu Werken Arnolds
hatte, die nur in Handschriften kursierten.64
Die Frage nach der Herkunft von Dübens Vorlagen ist kaum
befriedigend und ganz gewiß nicht generell zu beantworten.
Daß zwischen den Musikern dieser Zeit weitreichende Verbin-
dungen bestanden, zeigt sich nicht allein an den Schreiben, in
denen Erben als Danziger Ratsstipendiat über seine fast fünf-
jährige Reise nach England, Flandern, Frankreich, Süddeutsch-
land und Italien berichtete.65 Auch an den Exzerpten aus den
Zollbüchern am Öresund wird sichtbar, wie beweglich – unge-
achtet aller Beschwernisse des Reisens – viele Musiker gewesen
sind.66 Einen Einblick vermittelt ebenfalls das Stammbuch des
sächsischen Studenten Georg Fabricius, in das auch Georg Ar-
nold am 18. Februar 1660 einen zweistimmigen Kanon ein-
trug.67 Die Quelle läßt nicht nur die ausgedehnten Reisen er-
kennen, die Fabricius zwischen 1658 und 1662 zweimal nach
Süd- und Westdeutschland und im folgenden Jahr durch Mit-
teldeutschland bis hin nach Schlesien unternahm. Sie enthält
auch Einträge von so bekannten Komponisten wie Schütz, Ah-
le, Hammerschmidt, Peranda, Adam Krieger, Dedekind u.a.68
Und daß Studenten wie Fabricius auch Musikalien vermittelten,
64 Die von Göhler genannten Titel waren – trotz kleiner Differenzen der
Datierung – mit den erhaltenen Druckwerken Arnolds identisch, vgl.
Georg Göhler, Verzeichnis der in den Frankfurter und Leipziger Meßkatalogen
der Jahre 1564 bis 1759 angezeigten Musikalien, Leipzig 1902, Teil 2, S. 3.
65 Hermann Rauschning, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig, S.
228ff.
66 Jens Henrik Koudal, ‘Mobility of Musicians in the Baltic in the 17th and
18th Century’, Musica Baltica, S. 137–147.
67 Johannes Wolf, ‘Das Stammbuch des Georg Fabricius’, Mélanges de musico-
logie offerts à M. Lionel de la Laurencie, Paris 1933, S. 144. Wolf teilte in einer
Umschrift den schlichten Kanon einschließlich einer Oktavparallele mit.
68 Bis auf Schütz trugen sich die genannten Musiker zumeist erst nach Ar-
nold ein. Doch faßte Wolf die Reiserouten nur kurz zusammen und teilte
auch nicht für alle Eintragungen genaue Daten mit.

hat Peter Wollny am Beispiel des Johann von Assig und Sie-
gersdorf belegen.69
Die Probleme der Zuschreibung schmälern kaum den
exemplarischen Rang, der dem Werk für eine frühe Schicht der
Dübensammlung zukommt, in der Düben weithin noch auf
gedruckte Vorlagen angewiesen war. In dem fraglichen Werk
umgeben zwei Rahmenteile – anfangs im alla breve- und am
Ende im Tripeltakt – ein geradtaktiges ‘adagio’70, dessen dek-
lamatorische Intensität durch stockende Suspirationes bewirkt
und zu chromatischer Baßführung gesteigert wird. Es wird in
dem Mittelteil, der nur unter Arnolds und nicht unter Erbens
Namen überliefert ist, zu den Worten ‘ei, eia, eia ergo...’ von
einem Abschnitt im Tripeltakt abgelöst, der nochmals durch
Rückkehr zum ‘allegro’ im geraden Takt unterbrochen wird
(‘atque patrem...’). Von der abgestuften Binnengliederung hebt
sich der beschwingte Duktus der Außenteile ab, deren latent
periodische Gliederung auf die Prinzipien der zeitgenössischen
Aria zurückdeutet. So verbinden sich die Traditionen des ita-
lienischen Concerto und der liedhaften Aria in einer Balance,
die einen nicht geringen Teil des Stockholmer Repertoires
kennzeichnet. Mit der reizvollen Melodik paart sich allerdings
eine recht einfache Faktur, die kaum jemals jene kontrapunkti-
sche und harmonische Dichte erreicht, wie sie Erbens Musik
nicht selten auszeichnet.
*
Es bleibt hoffentlich ein Sonderfall in der Dübensammlung, daß
sich mit einer bisher übersehenen Binnenkonkordanz zugleich
solche Widersprüche der Zuschreibung verbinden. Zugleich
zeigt sich freilich, daß die Suche nach Konkordanzen oder Au-
tornamen aufgrund von Textanfängen und Besetzungen nicht
aussichtslos ist. Doch auch die zuvor genannten Beispiele lenken
69 P. Wollny, ‘Beiträge zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Sammlung Düben’,

70 Diese wie auch die weiteren Tempoangaben bilden mit Bleistift notierte
Zusätze.

den Blick auf Probleme, die über den Bestand der Sammlung
hinausreichen. Einerseits zählen diese Werke zu ihren ungeho-
benen Schätzen, die sich fortan leichter erschließen lassen wer-
den. Manche Fragen werden eher zu klären sein, wenn nun der
neue Katalog der Dübensammlung mit seinen Angaben über
Schreiber, Papiere, Wasserzeichen, Provenienzen und Daten zur
Verfügung steht. Andererseits muß man sich bei den hier nur
gestreiften Problemen der Chronologie vor Augen halten, daß in
der Regel Kopier- und nicht Entstehungsdaten zu ermitteln sind.
Desto mehr bleibt man darauf angewiesen, die Schichtung des
Repertoires der Zeit im Verhältnis zu biographischen und lokal-
historischen Umständen im Blick zu behalten. Dazu nötigt schon
das unaufhebbare Mißverhältnis zwischen den Schwerpunkten
der Überlieferung und denen der Produktion. Nur wenige Quel-
len blieben dort erhalten, wo wie in Hamburg, Leipzig, Dresden
oder Nürnberg so maßgebliche Komponisten wirkten, wie es
umgekehrt für Orte wie Gottorf, Stockholm und Grimma, aus
denen die erhaltenen Hauptbestände stammen, wohl nur be-
grenzt zu behaupten ist. Und wenn die Dresdner Hofdiarien
Auskunft über Werke und ihre gottesdienstliche Verwendung
geben, so wird man überlegen müssen, wieweit entsprechende
Voraussetzungen auch für Hofgottesdienste in Gottorf oder
Stockholm gelten könnten.71 Ein erster Schritt ist gemacht, wenn
Konkordanzen fortan verläßlicher als bisher ermittelt werden
können. Wenn neben dem Katalog der Sammlung Bokemeyer
nun der für die Sammlung Düben verfügbar ist, so bliebe nur zu
wünschen, daß bald auch ein Verzeichnis der Grimmaer Samm-
lung Jacobi folgen möge. Dann müßte es kein Traum sein, an
einen Katalog des ganzen Handschriftenbestands unter Ein-
schluß der Inventare zu denken. So erst wäre es möglich, ein
Kapitel der Musikgeschichte, das auch die Vorgeschichte Bachs
umschließt, auf gesicherter Basis zu revidieren.
71 Mary E. Frandsen, Albrici, Peranda und die Ursprünge der Concerto-Aria-

Kantate in Dresden, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 18 (1996); dies., Crossing Confessional
Boundaries. The Patronage of Italian Sacred Music in Seventeenth-Century
Dresden, New York 2006.

Literatur
Berglund, Lars, Studier i Christian Geists vokalmusik (Studia musicologica Upsa-

liensia, N. S., 21), Uppsala 2002.
Bopp, A., ‘Beiträge zur Geschichte der Stuttgarter Stiftsmusik’, Würtembergi-
sches Jahrbuch für Statistik und Landeskunde, 10, Stuttgart 1911, S. 211–250.
Braun, Werner, ‘Berliner Kirchenmusik im letzten Drittel des 17. Jahrhun-
derts. Zur Sammelhandschrift Koch aus der ehemaligen Sing-Akademie’,
Jahrbuch des Staatlichen Instituts für Musikforschung Preußischer Kulturbesitz
1996, S. 166–193.
Chafe, Erik, ‘Aspects of durus / mollis shifts and the two-system framework
of Monteverdi’s music’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 12 (1990), S. 171–206.
Davidsson, Åke, Catalogue critique et descriptif des Imprimés de Musique des XIIe
et XVIe siècles conservés dans les Bibliothèques Suédoises, Upsala: Almqvist &
Wiksell 1952.
Frandsen, Mary E., ‘Albrici, Peranda und die Ursprünge der Concerto-Aria-
Kantate in Dresden’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 18 (1996), S. 123–139.
Frandsen, Mary E., Crossing Confessional Boundaries. The Patronage of Italian
Sacred Music in Seventeenth-Century Dresden, New York: Oxford Universi-
ty Press 2006.
Freytag, Werner, Musikgeschichte der Stadt Stettin im 18. Jahrhundert, Greifs-
wald 1936.
Göhler, Georg, Verzeichnis der in den Frankfurter und Leipziger Meßkatalogen der
Jahre 1564 bis 1759 angezeigten Musikalien, Leipzig 1902 (Teil 2).
Greve, Werner, Braunschweiger Stadtmusikanten. Geschichte eines Berufstandes
1227–1828 (Braunschweiger Stücke, 80), Braunschweig 1991.
Ordnung’ Teil I–II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 46 (1964), S. 27–82;
Teil II–III, ebd., 48 (1966), S. 63–186.
Jung, Hans Rudolf, Thematischer Katalog der Musikaliensammlung Großfahner /
Eschenbergen in Thüringen (Catalogus musicus, XVII), Kassel etc., 2001.
Kjellberg, Erik, Instrumentalmusiken i Dübensamlingen. En översikt. Uppsala:
universitet 1979.
Koudal, Jens Henrik, ‘Mobility of Musicians in the Baltic in the 17th and 18th
Century’, Musica Baltica. Interregionale musikkulturelle Beziehungen im Ost-
seeraum, hrsg. von Ekkehard Ochs et al., (Deutsche Musik im Osten, Bd. 8),
Sankt Augustin 1996 , S. 137–147.

Kremer, Joachim, Das norddeutsche Kantorat im 18. Jahrhundert. Untersuchungen

am Beispiel Hamburgs (Kieler Schriften zur Musikwissenschaft, 43), Kassel
etc. 1995.
Krummacher, Friedhelm, ‘Orgel- und Vokalmusik im Œuvre norddeutscher
Komponisten um Buxtehude’, Dansk Årbog for musikforskning 1966–67, Ko-
penhagen 1968, S. 63–90.
Krummacher, Friedhelm, ‘Parodie, Umtextierung und Bearbeitung in der Kir-
chenmusik vor Bach’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforsknig, 53 (1971), S. 23–48.
Krummacher, Friedhelm, Art. ‘Erben, Balthasar’, Die Musik in Geschichte und
Gegenwart , 2. Aufl., Personenteil, Bd. 6, Kassel Bärenreiter. 2001, Sp. 407ff.
Krummacher, Friedhelm, ‘Ein Profil in der Tradition: der Danziger Kapell-
meister Balthasar Erben’, Musica Baltica. Interregionale musikkulturelle Bezie-
hungen im Ostseeraum, hrsg. von Ekkehard Ochs et al. (Deutsche Musik im
Osten, Bd. 8), Sankt Augustin 1996, S. 341–357.
evangelischen Kantate: Untersuchungen zum Handschriftenrepertoire evangeli-
scher Figuralmusik im späten 17. und beginnenden 18. Jahrhundert (Berliner
Krummacher, Friedhelm, ‘Zur Sammlung Jacobi der ehemaligen Fürstenschu-
le Grimma, Die Musikforschung, 16 (1963), S. 324–347.
Krummacher, Friedhelm und Wohnhaas, Theodor, ‘Inventare zur Figuralmu-
sik des 17. Jahrhunderts aus Weißenburg / Mfr.’, Musik in Bayern, 17
(1978), S. 22–56.
Kümmerling, Harald, Katalog der Sammlung Bokemeyer (Kieler Schriften zur
Musikwissenschaft, 18), Kassel: Bärenreiter 1970.
Lobstein, J. F., Beiträge zur Geschichte der Musik im Elsaß und besonders in Straß-
burg, von der ältesten bis auf die neueste Zeit, Straßburg 1840.
Mitjana, Rafael, Catalogue critique et descriptif des Imprimés de Musique des XVIe
et XVIIe siècles conservés à la Bibliothèque de l’Université Royale d’Upsala,
Tome 1, Upsala: Almqvist & Wiksell 1911.
Moberg, Carl-Allan, ‘Drag i östersjöområdets musikliv på Buxtehudes tid’,
Möller, Eberhard. ‘Schütziana in Chemnitz, Freiberg und Schneeberg’, Schütz-
Jahrbuch, 13 (1991), S. 56–90.
Rauschning, Hermann, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig (Quel-
len und Darstellungen zur Geschichte Westpreußens, 15), Danzig 1931.
Rudén, Jan Olof, Vattenmärken och musikforskning. Presentation och tillämpning
av en dateringsmetod på musikalier i handskrift i Uppsala Universitets Düben-
samling, Uppsala: Uppsala universitet 1968. (Ms); Internet: http://www.
ordommusik.se/duben/index.htm
Schaal, Richard, ‚Zur Sammlung Jacobi der ehemaligen Fürstenschule Grim-
ma‘, Die Musikforschung, 16 (1963).

Schaal, Richard, Die Musikhandschriften des Ansbacher Inventars von 1686 (Quel-
len-Kataloge zur Musikgeschichte, 1). Wilhelmshaven 1966.
Schering, Arnold, ‘Die alte Chorbibliothek der Thomasschule zu Leipzig’,
Archiv für Musikwissenschaft, 1 (1918–1919)., S. 275–288.
Schering, Arnold, Musikgeschichte Leipzigs, Bd. II: Von 1675 bis 1723, Leipzig
1926.
Silbiger, Alexander (ed.), Matthias Weckmann, Four Sacred Concertos, (Recent
Researches in the Music of the Baroque Era, 46), Madison 1984.
Traub, Andreas, ‘Ein Musikalieninventar des 17. Jahrhunderts aus Langen-
burg’, Musik in Baden-Württemberg, I (1994), S. 143–177.
Traub, Andreas (ed.), Johann Samuel Welter (1650–1720). Das geistliche Werk:
Kantaten, Magnificat, Kirchenlieder (Denkmäler der Musik in Baden-
Württemberg, Bd. 1), München 1993.
Weinzierl, Gerhard, Das Messenschaffen des Fürstbischöflich.-Bamberger Hoforga-
nisten Georg Arnold, Erlangen 1983 (phil. Diss) (Teildruck in: 119. Bericht
des Historischen Vereins Bamberg, Erlangen 1983).
Weinzierl, Gerhard (ed.), Georg Arnold (1821–1676), Missa Quarta (Bamberg
1672), Sacrae Cantiones (Innsbruck 1661) (Denkmäler der Musik in Bayern
Neue Folge, Bd. 10), Wiesbaden u.a. 1994.
Weinzierl, Gerhard, Art. ‘Arnold, Georg ‘, Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegen-
wart, 2. Aufl., Personenteil Bd. 1, Kassel Bärenreiter 1999, Sp. 981–983.
Das Weißenfelser Aufführungsverzeichnis Johann Philipp Kriegers und seines Sohnes
Johann Gotthilf Krieger (1684–1732), kommentierte Neuausgabe hrsg. von
Klaus-Jürgen Gundlach, Sinzig 2001.
Wiermann, Barbara, Die Entwicklung vokal-instrumentalen Komponierens im pro-
testantischen Deutschland bis zur Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts (Abhandlungen
zur Musikgeschichte, 14), Göttingen 2005.
Wolf, Johannes, ‘Das Stammbuch des Georg Fabricius’, Mélanges de musicologie
offerts à M. Lionel de la Laurencie, Paris 1933, S. 133–151.
Wollny, Peter, ‘A Collection of Seventeenth-Century Vocal Music at the
Bodleian Library’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 15 (1993), S. 77–108.
Wollny, Peter, ‘Materialien zur Schweinfurter Musikpflege im 17. Jahrhun-
dert: Von 1592 bis zum Tod Georg Christoph Bachs (1642–1697)’, Schütz-
Jahrbuch, 19 (1997), S. 113–163..
Wollny, Peter, ‘Zwischen Hamburg, Gottorf und Wolfenbüttel: Neue Ermitt-
lungen zur Entstehung der ‘Sammlung Bokemeyer‘‘, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 20
(1998), S. 59–76.
Wollny, Peter, ‘Eine anonyme Leipziger Hochzeitsmusik aus dem 17. Jahr-
hundert’, Über Leben, Kunst und Kunstwerke. Aspekte musikalischer Biogra-
phie: Johann Sebastian Bach im Zentrum, Festschrift für Hans-Joachim Schulze,
hrsg. von Christoph Wolff, Leipzig 1999, S. 46–60.
Wollny, Peter, ‘Johann Rosenmüllers Dialog ‘Christus ist mein Leben‘ als
musikalisches Vorbild’, Rezeption als Innovation. Untersuchungen zu einem

Grundmodell der europäischen Kompositionsgeschichte. Festschrift für Friedhelm

Krummacher, (Kieler Schriften zur Musikwissenschaft 46), Kassel etc. 2001,
S. 17–35.
Wollny, Peter, ‘Beiträge zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Sammlung Düben’,
Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 87 ( 2005), S. 100–114.

KONRAD KÜSTER
Fame, Politics and Personal Relationship:

Whom did Düben know in the Baltic area?
It might be too early to answer questions like the one formu-

lated in the title. Too few significant details are available, from
which the history of this repertory could be reconstructed. In
general, we should know much more about logistic and finan-
cial aspects concerning the relation between music and trade or
court music and politics; with Düben in view, there are only
very few collections to which his approach could be compared.
That gives the Düben collection an almost unique position, and
many informations about music history of the second half of the
17th century are deeply indebted to it. But, basically, we first
should assess the Düben collection within the contemporary
music life, before we try to use it as a reference material to its
time. And so it is necessary to formulate that question even
now. Some answers might be given, at least as germs for future
perspectives.
For its time, the Düben collection is thought of as one of the
most important sources of music from the north of Central
Europe. Clearly, it is invaluable as far as its main segments are
concerned, above all the Buxtehude sources. But to which de-
gree does the collection reflect what happened within the Baltic
area, that is, from the peninsula of Jutland in the West to Esto-
nia in the East?1 I shall concentrate on territories beyond the
1 For a first survey, cf. Friedhelm Krummacher, Die Überlieferung der Choral-
kantaten in der frühen evangelischen Kantate, Berlin 1965, p. 95–116. His re-
marks can be transformed it into a ‘multi-dimensional’ system: first, as far
as the collection itself is concerned, by adding the observations about
chronology , see Bruno Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung. Ein Versuch ihrer
chronologischen Ordnung’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, Teil I–II, 46

150 Konrad Küster
Baltic Sea and include the former Swedish possessions in

nowadays’ Germany;2 this approach must have been the Swed-
ish understanding of the Baltic area in Düben’s time.
The choice Düben made was not only due to the fame of a
colleague or to his stylistic preferences; to a high degree, it de-
pended on the non-musical factor of sheer availability: on
Düben’s relation to contemporary systems of trade, traffic and
political connections. So, the impression we can get about the
collection is incomplete, if we aren’t aware of gaps that can be
seen in it. Naturally, all those compositions and composers ly-
ing outside Düben’s infrastructural compass remained ex-
cluded from his collection, even if we understand them as
landmarks or as leading figures of music history. In other
words: Düben hadn’t the whole of the music production of his
time at his disposal to choose the absolutely best pieces from it;
we must grasp why his collection looks how it does.
Actually, we don’t know much about Düben’s techniques to
obtain music.3 Many sources were written by himself, so that
the history lying behind them remains unknown. Thus,4 in most
cases, even watermarks5 cannot inform about the provenance of
the music but rather about the chronology within Düben’s col-
lection; at the same time, they can prove a connection between
Düben and a minor scribe working on the same type of paper
as the Chapel Master himself. A full-range, combined study of
scribes and watermarks would be necessary even to guess
(1964) Teil II–III, 48 (1966), and watermarks (Jan Olof Rudén, Vattenmärken
och musikforskning, Uppsala 1968), second, by relating it to those informa-
tions about music life that were not reflected in the music repertories
(thus, referring to the ‘topography’ of music).
2 Omitting the county of Pfalz-Zweibrücken belonging to the Swedish
crown from 1681 to 1718.
3 Cf. Krummacher, op. cit., p. 131; Grusnick, op. cit., Teil II–III, p. 63–66.
4 Besides, Düben used many paper types that were available internationally
at his time.
5 As reported in http://www.musik.uu.se/duben/basicSearch.php. Dates
refer to those given in this database, if not otherwise stated.

Fame, Politics and Personal Relationship 151
where the line between ‘Swedish’ and ‘non-Swedish’ sources

lies.6
The ‘important’ composers from the Baltic area:

A survey
It might be helpful to distinguish between composers who

where of principle and secondary importance for Düben, leav-
ing aside the great amount of printed sources he copied from
(this would be a third group). This differentiation shows the
extent of Düben’s interest: if he was attracted by music of one of
these composers, he might have tried to find a permanent con-
tact, at least to the music, if not to its composer himself; but his
interests couldn’t be satisfied if he couldn’t get in touch with
this musician or with a reliable mediator – for whatever reason.
So the collection as a whole can tell us, whether Düben’s efforts
to get this music were successful; in the collection, his interests
and the availability are blended.7
6 In the repertory in question, the most problematic case occurs in Johann

Schröder’s Adesto virtutum chorus (Vmhs 34:19), music for the royal Swed-
ish wedding written by a Danish chapel master: The parts ‘Tenor Ripien’
and ‘Bas: Rip’ have been written upon a paper which usually is identified
as a Danzig one (‘fish in double circle’, signed ‘Nadhanael Bropsly’). Paper
of a similar kind (signed ‘Henrich Brepsly’) was used between 1609 and
1619 in Heilsberg (now Lidzbark Warmiski, Poland), cf. Hauptstaatsar-
chiv Stuttgart, J 340 (Wasserzeichenkartei Piccard, http://pan.bsz-bw.de/
piccard/sitemap.php?sprache=), Nr. 044357–044359. If paper from this pa-
per-mill was available outside Danzig (i. e. in larger parts of the Baltic
area), one cannot be sure about the provenance of other Düben sources
written upon this paper type as well (cf. the scribe ‘Befastru’, who wrote
the parts to many Danzig pieces within Düben’s collection), see below. Cf.
already Grusnick, op. cit., Teil I–II, p. 63.
7 Furthermore, he might have come in touch with music by others at the
same time: His colleagues must have had large music collections, too.

152 Konrad Küster
It is easy to name those ‘important’ composers from the Bal-

tic area (clearly, this is a definitely quantitative remark). For the
earlier years, the top position is held by Augustin Pfleger, be-
cause his share comprises the 72 Evangeliendialoge; even if they
are subtracted, he can be ranked on the second position – to-
gether with Christoph Bernhard and only surpassed by Kaspar
Förster. The distance in which Buxtehude, Tunder and
Balthasar Erben follow is slight, and it was only in later times
that Buxtehude ascended to the top position. So these six musi-
cians provide a scope for starting informations, and Düben’s
knowledge of their works is summarized in Table 1.
Composer Pre- 1663 1664– 1666– 1671– 1674–

1663 1665 1670 1673 1677
Bernhard – 1 3 1 – – 5
Hamburg – 11 – – 11
26 – 5 2 3 10
Buxtehude – – – – – 1 1
Lübeck – 1 4 5 10
21[+1] [1] 1 2 7 10[1]
Erben – – 1 – – – 1
Danzig 8 2 2 12
19 – 3 3 6
Förster [1] – 2 4 – – 6[1]
Copenhagen – 1 10 8 2 4 25
42[+1] – 1 6 3 1 11
Pfleger – – 2 – 1 1 4
Gottorf – 8+72 – 3 11+72
26+72 – 4 – 7 11
Tunder – – 3 – – – 3
Lübeck 5 3 8
18 3 4 7
: [1] 1 11 5 1 2 20[1]
226 – 1 34 22+72 8 12 77+72
– – 9[1] 20 11 15 55[1]
Table 1. ‘Important’ composers from the Baltic region in the Düben collection,
c. 1663–1677.

In chronological aspects, the table is based mainly upon Bruno

Grusnick’s research.8 As he pointed out, the growth of Düben’s
collection can be seen from a comfortably big number of dates
given in the sources themselves; they allowed him to draw
chronological conclusions referring to philological criteria (wa-
termarks, handwriting of Düben and his scribes, tablature vol-
umes as relatively coherent ‘chronological groups’ of works).
Apart from this, he tried to obtain additional informations from
the ink numbers written by Düben upon many title pages. He
interpreted them as hints to the chronological order (especially
if philological parameters fall short), being aware of the fact
that the sequence of numbers can mirror the growth of the col-
lection only roughly.9 So the ink numbers are the weakest in-
formations within the chronological concept.
On the table, the dates are shown in three different groups:
The first line (in bold types) refers to written dates, the second
(typed normally) to dates linked to philological criteria (hand-
writing, watermarks, binding into volumes), and the third (italics)
to more hypothetical dates (including ink-numbers). The group-
ing of years within the vertical columns is due to the informations
given by Grusnick: In some cases, his dates overlap with
neighbouring ones, and I have tried to find consistent date
groups.
Naturally, the dates refer to Düben’s work only, and indi-
rectly they inform about the ‘terminus ante quem’ for the com-
pletion of a single work. It can not even be derived at which time
Düben got its music. So it seems as if the question of availability
cannot be answered. But there are two aspects that are of further
importance. First, the situation is different in the cases of the ‘im-
portant’ composers, especially if Düben’s dates are spread over a
longer time, so that it can be supposed that new sources arrived
8 Grusnick, op.cit.,Teil I–III. The dates have been checked against the cur-
rent ones given in the Düben Collection Database Catalogue (only in few
cases altered; cf. http://www.musik.uu.se/duben/basicSearch.php).
9 See Krummacher’s idea (op. cit., p. 132f.) that Düben numbered the
sources at a later time.

154 Konrad Küster
almost continuously. In this case, it is almost inevitable to as-

sume a constant contact, at least to this composer’s sphere. Sec-
ond: Even an important contact could break off; if the order of
dates referring to the sources of a specific composer ends, this
might indicate that Düben lost sight of his partner.
Christoph Bernhard and other Hamburg musicians
Very useful informations can be gained from the sources to

works by Christoph Bernhard.10 Düben must have been in touch
with him, because the Uppsala copy of Bernhard’s printed fu-
neral music of 1669 bears a personal dedication to Düben;
Düben, however, must have known Bernhard’s music from the
very beginning of his collecting activities. Thirteen manuscripts
show dates referring to the years 1664–1665. Of the remaining
ones, seven point to Bernhard’s music prints from 1665–1669,
and the last three (concerning the years after 1670) are hypotheti-
cal. So, Düben must have got a greater number of pieces from
Bernhard during his first years as Swedish Chapel Master; later
on, however, the contact seems to have been only a loose one.
This suggestion is supported by additional facts. First, most of
the other Düben sources containing music from Hamburg can be
dated to the same time, above all Düben’s Weckmann sources.11
Second, in at least two cases Düben was not certain about Bern-
hard’s profile as a composer: Weckmann’s Weine nicht, es hat
überwunden der Löwe appears as Bernhard’s work; in another case
Düben wrote ‘Stephan Bernhardi’ instead of Bernhard, although
the name could be copied from a printed source.12 So, it has been
argued that there was not a really friendly but rather a collegial
10 Including Salvum me fac, transmitted anonymously in the Düben collection

(Vmhs 45:16 and Vmhs 80:70).
11 Besides at least one piece by Dietrich Becker.
12 Krummacher, op. cit., p. 105.

contact between Düben and Bernhard (that is, different from the
friendship between Düben and Buxtehude).
The counter-evidence lies in Bernhard’s 1669 dedication to
Düben. He wrote: ‘Dem königl: Schw. CapellM. H. Düben,
seine[m] besondern Freunde verehret dieses Jenige zu seine[m]
andenken dessen dienstgeflissene[r] d Autor.’ It exceeded the
normal flattery of the time to call a mere colleague a ‘special
friend’; and this term matches perfectly to Buxtehude’s words on
the title page of Membra Jesu Nostri, which read ‘Amico pl[us]
honorando’.13 Clearly, the impact Buxtehude had upon the col-
lection was much bigger. But that wasn’t due to the extent of
their friendship; rather, Buxtehude might have been more inter-
ested in the dissemination of his works than Bernhard was.
This leads to a number of important conclusions. First: If the
music transmission from Hamburg to Stockholm was almost
restricted to the first time after 1663 anyway, we needn’t look
for an explanation why Düben didn’t know Hamburg music
from the years after 168014 – his Hamburg contacts didn’t in-
clude a regular delivery of music. Second: Bernhard shows that
in at least some cases Düben’s friendship with fellow musicians
might not have had consequences in his music collection. And,
finally: If Düben got music from the collection of a colleague,
this did not necessarily comprise music by other composers
from the same town or region. Thus, a parcel with music
sources from Bernhard would not automatically contain music
13 When Johann Sebastian Bach addressed a letter to his former school-friend

Georg Erdmann in 1726, he wrote ‘HochEdler, Insonders hochgeehrtester
Herr und (so es noch erlaubt seyn dörffte) Werthester Herr Bruder [… if it
may be still allowed: dearest brother]’; cf. Grigorij Ja. Pantijelew ‘Johann
Sebastian Bachs Briefe an Georg Erdmann: nebst Beiträgen zur Lebensge-
schichte von Bachs Jugendfreund’, Bach-Jahrbuch, 71 (1985), p. 85. So, a
formal and a highly personal formulation are juxtaposed. Even in this
sense, it is by no means clear that Bernhard’s form of address to Düben is
‘much more formal’ (Krummacher, op. cit., p. 105) than Buxtehude’s.
14 This question was raised by Krummacher (op. cit., p. 142): Music by nei-
ther Joachim Gerstenbüttel nor the musicians attached to the young Ham-
burg opera house lay within his compass.

156 Konrad Küster
by his local colleagues as well; at best, this information channel

could supply works by Weckmann (and, perhaps, by Becker15).
In 1663, one might expect that Hamburg musicians knew
music by Bernhard’s predecessor Thomas Selle; within the large
range of genres Selle had contributed to, there might have been
a composition that could have attracted the interest of at least
one of Düben’s mediators. Furthermore, nothing is known
about ensemble music by Weckmann’s Hamburg colleagues as
organists at the other main churches. At least in part, this is due
to this specific relation Düben had to Hamburg: Whom could
we expect to have conveyed vocal music to us, as soon as
Düben’s informations fall short?
Lastly: Düben could have found another contact to Ham-
burg, if he had tried. This is reflected by the dedication of Engel
Hut, a composition by Martin Colerus: It is addressed to a mer-
chant leaving Hamburg for Sweden.16 In any case, Düben can-
not have been in touch with the tradesmen and politicians sys-
tematically who were committed to the exchange between
Sweden and Hamburg.
15 Düben might have known Becker from the latter’s engagement in Sweden
during the mid-1650s (cf. Kjellberg. ‘Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie och mu-
siken’, Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie, Läckö Slott/Stockholm 1980, p. 75); but
even this wasn’t processed into a musical exchange: The Düben collection
comprises one piece by Becker (1663/64); for Amor Jesu (ink no. 372, c.
1670) see Grusnick, op. cit., Teil II–III, p. 132.
16 Vmhs 53:13: ‘…Herren Johan Wolpmann. Vornehmen Kauf Gesellen…
bey seiner abreise von Hamburg.’

Kaspar Förster, Danzig and Copenhagen
If we check this against the picture Düben’s collection displays

of Kaspar Förster, the situation is different.17 Düben dealt with
Förster sources almost permanently from his installation as
Swedish Chapel Master until Förster’s death in 1673. Especially,
no interruption can be seen in (or shortly after) 1667 Förster left
Copenhagen. Even if we leave aside the eight manuscripts
dated hypothetically, another eight manuscripts lie later than
1667. So it can be assumed that there was a permanent contact
between Förster and Düben, at least from 1664 onwards.
Naturally, the dates can report only when Düben got his in-
formations. But it is clear from the dates that the Förster sources
in the Düben collection form a Copenhagen segment,18 and it
might be misleading to remember Förster mostly for his merits
within the music life of his home city, Danzig.19 The Chapel Mas-
ters of Sweden and Denmark must have been on quite good
terms at this time; apparently Düben’s relation to Förster’s music
was independent of the question where Förster lived.
Two aspects regarding Förster’s position need a further dis-
cussion. First: Music from Danzig was of major importance for
Düben, and, as it has been noted, a remarkable number of
Düben sources reflecting the Danzig music life have been writ-
17 Of the 47 ‘Förster’ works in the Düben collection, the doubtful Laudate

Dominum omnes gentes is omitted in the table; the sources of two of his so-
natas have been written later than 1677 (probably around 1686/90), and a
third one has not been dated yet (Sonata à 3 in d).
18 Cf. Krummacher, op. cit, p. 102, 109. – The composer’s name is given as
‘Gasp: Fordster’ in a relatively late source (Quid faciam misera, usually
dated 1671–1674; the watermark however has been dated 1679–1683). The
‘d’ in the name can be explained as a Danish ‘mute’ d. Even at a late time
Düben might have got Förster sources from Copenhagen (this includes
Förster’s O dulcis Jesu written by Christian Geist as well).
19 So, even if nothing of Förster’s Danish sources survived the fire of Copen-
hagen in 1794 (cf. Niels Schiørring, Niels, Musikkens Historie i Danmark I:
Fra oltiden til 1750, Copenhagen 1977. p. 258), Düben’s sources can report
what kind of music Förster played there.

158 Konrad Küster
ten by a single scribe; Grusnick labelled him by the abbreviation

‘Befastru’ – the ‘f’ refers to Förster.20 Clearly, Düben might have
obtained them from Danzig directly; but he could get sources of
that kind from Förster as well – from Copenhagen.21 Then, they
might be a glance of Förster’s music collection, and even in this
case, they might have been written by a Danzig scribe or upon
paper common to Danzig sources, so that their history cannot
be reconstructed completely. On a different way, however,
Düben must have got the source to Förster’s Confitebor tibi
Domine22 from the years 1656–1657: This source was written
mainly by the Danzig town musician Balthasar Krepel, who got
the music from Förster himself.23 Only a few Danzig sources
remain that were independent of these two information chan-
nels.24 Somebody around Balthasar Erben25 might have been in
20 Grusnick, op. cit., Teil I–II, p. 64–67; Krummacher, op. cit., 1965, p. 112f.
21 Förster could have replaced them by new copies, a process which was not
uncommon among musicians: New material could serve the performance
purposes better than old ones. – The provenance of the ‘Befastru’ scribe from
Danzig has been supposed by Grusnick and Krummacher (see note 20), be-
cause he transmitted so much music from there. Clearly, he also might have
lived at another place which stood under a strong influence of Danzig music
life; he might even have worked for Düben himself when a greater amount of
pieces from Danzig came to Stockholm in order to be copied.
22 Vmhs 21:12.
23 His inscription is quoted by Krummacher (op. cit. p. 107). About Krepel cf.
Hermann Rauschning, Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig,
Danzig 1931, p. 177 (1648: ‘Pfeifer‘) and 224 (1651: ‘Violist‘). It is highly
unlikely that Düben had been in touch with Krepel himself at that time; it
is unknown when he got the source.
24 Most of the music by Crato Bütner and all by Thomas Strutius Düben
knew has been copied by the ‘Befastru’ scribe, whose activity can be con-
fined to the years 1664–1665 (cf. also Krummacher, op. cit., p. 113); thus, it
is highly unlikely that Düben was in touch with one of these two compos-
ers themselves.
25 The contact was loose at best (if there was any direct one): Six out of the 18
Erben sources (not counting the questioned attribution of the anonymous
Dixit Dominus in a and the late sources of Salve suavissime Jesu Deus and
Ach dass ich doch in meinen Augen) have been written by the ‘Befastru’
scribe as well; according to Grusnick’s chronology, another eight come
from years between 1667 and 1677 – that is, after Förster’s move to his

touch with Düben. But it cannot even be excluded that this,

again, was Förster, after his move to Oliva.26
The second question about Förster: The connections between
Düben and Denmark are thought of as having been less impor-
tant.27 This impression might be due to the fact that, even if
there was an interchange between Förster and Düben, almost
no other Copenhagen musician left a trace within Düben’s col-
lection; apparently, Düben didn’t know any music by the fa-
mous Johan Lorentz28 or, for example, by the Cathedral organist
David Bernhard Meder. But this lack doesn’t reflect anything at
all; it is absolutely similar to the Hamburg situation outlined
above.
Only two other works from Denmark can be mentioned, at
first Adesto virtutum chorus by Johan Schröder. The text alludes
to the wedding between the Swedish king Charles XI and the
Danish princess Ulrika Eleonora in 1680. Schröder, however,
had died 3 years earlier, during a war period between Sweden
and Denmark; the political wedding had to be postponed. Thus,
this work reflects a political contact between the two courts29,
not a personal one Düben had to a Copenhagen colleague.
So it is curious where Düben got the other ‘Danish’ work
from, Herr wenn ich nur dich hab by a composer named Martin
home region (for Düben’s printed sources see Erik Kjellberg, Kungliga mu-
siker i Sverige under stormaktstiden: studier kring deras organisation, verksamhe-
ter och status, ca 1620–ca 1720, Uppsala 1979, p. 299ff).
26 For later times, ‘S. Schirm.’ should be mentioned, the writer of Erben’s Ach
dass ich doch in meinen Augen (dated Danzig, 10 August 1682).
27 Kerala J. Snyder, Dieterich Buxtehude: organist in Lübeck, New York-London
1987, p. 123; Erik Kjellberg ‘The Royal Swedish Court and Music During
the Schütz-Era’, Anne Ørbæk Jensen and Ole Kongsted (ed.), Heinrich
Schütz und die Musik in Dänemark zur Zeit Christians IV., Copenhagen 1989,
p. 25f.
28 For Lorentz’s reputation cf. Bo Lundgren, ‘Nikolajorganisten Johan Lorentz i
Köpenhamn: ett försök till en biografi’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 43
(1961), p. 258.
29 Schröder, who was (like Düben) organist at a ‘German church’ (St. Peter’s
in Copenhagen), had succeeded Förster as chapel master. The composition
of Adesto virtutum chorus must have been a fruit of his official duties.

160 Konrad Küster
Radeck; furthermore, this person cannot be identified fully,

because, at this time, the name can point to either the organist
Martin Radeck at Trinity Church, Copenhagen, or the organist
at Roskilde Cathedral, (Johann) Martin Radeck.30.In any case, it
is reasonable to assume a personal contact between Düben and
Förster on the whole. As in the case of Hamburg, Düben didn’t
get music of Förster’s local colleagues at the same time; again,
the source transmission was confined to the collection of one
single musician.31
Tunder, Buxtehude, Pfleger
The same is true in Tunder’s and Buxtehude’s case: Düben’s

contacts to Lübeck referred almost completely to the organist’s
post of St. Mary’s only.32 Most probably, Düben had a direct (or
almost direct) contact to Tunder, when he became Chapel Mas-
ter and began to collect music sources. It is not important
whether they ever met one another; in Tunder’s case, the ‘con-
tact’ might have originated in the happy case that a group of
Lübeck tradesmen came to Stockholm in 1663 who might have
served as intermediaries: As Tunder had contacts to at least one
of the merchants (Mattheus Rodde), he might have advised him
and his colleagues to address to the newly installed chapel mas-
30 They died in 1683 and 1684 respectively; see Klaus Beckmann, ‘Rand-
bemærkninger til musikerfamilien Radeck’, Per Kynne Frandsen et al.
(ed.), Dansk orgelkultur, Vanløse 1997, p. 78f. According to Grusnick (op.
cit, Teil II–III, p. 154), the source has been written around 1674.
31 There isn’t any hint for a renewed connection between the Stockholm and
Copenhagen court music afterwards (that is in Christian Geist’s time).
32 Neither an organist from one of the other churches nor one of the cantors
at the famous St. Catherine’s School is represented in the Düben collection,
Düben knew only a few works by Nathanael Schnittelbach.

ter in order to disseminate his music.33 Similar to the Copenha-

gen situation after Förster’s retirement, one might expect that
Düben’s Lübeck connection was cut off after Tunder’s death in
1667. Buxtehude, however, became Tunder’s successor in what-
ever respect, including the position Tunder had had as Düben’s
partner: Only from this time onwards Düben might have
known something about Buxtehude.
In any case, nothing can confirm that Buxtehude had been in
touch with Düben when he lived at the Öresund (the sound
between Denmark and Sweden) and the contact wasn’t due to
Buxtehude’s early fame as well. The source to Buxtehude’s
Aperite mihi portas (dedicated to the Swedish commissary in
Helsingør, marked with square brackets on the table and listed
in a pre-Lübeck column) is undoubtedly not the dedication
copy:34 A manuscript that should be handed over to a dedicatee
may not have an erroneous spelling of his name. Obviously, the
scribe could read and write Latin and Greek very well, but he
had read the last two letters of the name as B and F instead of D
and E, thus showing that he hadn’t any idea how to pronounce
’Schneider’. The person in question might have been well
known in Helsingør, so that it seems improbable that it was a
local copyist who wrote this source. So, it must have come into
Düben’s hands through intermediaries – between Schneider
himself and the Stockholm court.
The Tunder-Buxtehude tradition is the only ‘Baltic’ case in
which Düben’s relation to a musical post survived the death of
one of its holders. Perhaps, Düben’s contact to Buxtehude grew
only gradually at the beginning; only very few sources can be
dated to the time before 1671. But this might be due rather to
the fact that most of the dates given by Düben point to earlier
times.
33 Kerala Snyder, ‘Franz Tunder’s Stock Exchange Concerts: prelude to the

Lübeck Abendmusiken’, Sverker Jullander (ed.), GOArt Research Reports, 2,
(2000), p. 46f.
34 Reproduced in Grusnick, op. cit., Teil II–III (plate XXXI).

162 Konrad Küster
Finally, Augustin Pfleger’s situation can be checked. One

single composition is dated ‘1664’ by Düben; at that time
Pfleger served to the ducal court at Güstrow. The next date re-
fers to the following year, when Pfleger moved to the Gottorf
court. All the other sources are spread over the following ten
years; most of the time, Pfleger was active as Chapel Master at
Gottorf castle. Pfleger left this service in 1673; a number of
Pfleger sources are supposed to have been written around 1675,
but this might have been a delayed effect of the contacts. But
from later times, when Pfleger was active at the court of Sachsen-
Lauenburg (residing mostly in Schlackenwerth, Bohemia)35, ap-
parently nothing is reflected in the Düben collection. Despite a
lively contact during a decade, this couldn’t be maintained af-
terwards. So Pfleger appears as a counterpart to Förster: Even if
Düben had been in touch with a musician, the relationship could
end at the same time as the engagement to the latter’s post.
Politics
Düben’s more important contacts within the Baltic area were

directed towards courts: Copenhagen and Gottorf. Both were
highly important in cultural aspects,36 but the political situation
might be even more significant. Denmark was Sweden’s main
rival during the 17th century; Förster’s engagement to Copenha-
gen, however, fell into one of the most peaceful periods be-
35 Pfleger was installed formally at the Schlackenwerth court in 1680; cf.

Franz Ludwig, ‘Neue Forschungen über den Markgräflich-Badischen Hof-
kapellmeister Johann Kaspar Ferdinand Fischer’, Mitteilungen des Vereins
für Geschichte der Deutschen in Böhmen, 49 (1911), p. 71, note 2.
36 The Swedish queen Hedvig Eleonora, who was a Gottorf princess, was
influential in the Swedish cultural life of the 1660s; cf. Kjellberg, Kungliga
musiker, p. 268–277.

tween the two countries.37 Gottorf was a partner for both, but
the weakest within this triangle;38 as the alliance between Swe-
den and Gottorf was especially close in the years after 1661, this
might have supported the contact between the two Court
Chapel Masters as well.
Apart from this, Düben kept in touch to Förster (or, at least,
to his music) even during the latter’s Oliva years, and, perhaps
by the same way, to Danzig music; his later contacts to Ham-
burg didn’t include delivery of music manuscripts, different
from those to Lübeck, which Buxtehude appears to have inher-
ited from Tunder. This was the only line Düben could keep
busy after the major cut during the years after 1675, when, as
Grusnick noted, Düben stopped his collecting activities almost
completely.39
What had happened then? The most plausible explanation
lies in politics again. For Sweden, the years after 1675 were
dominated by war, not only against the Danish rival but
equally within the complexity of central European alliances –
the Swedish-French alliance was a threat to the interests of the
Holy Roman Empire. Because of this, Sweden was condemned
for breach of peace by the Supreme Court of the Empire and
temporarily lost all its possessions in Germany. So Düben’s
37 After the war of 1657–1660 and preceding the next war period from 1675
onwards.
38 After 1660, a defensive treaty was signed between Denmark and Gottorf;
but already in 1661 the Swedish king and the Gottorf duke signed a security
treaty as well, and in 1672 a triple alliance between France, Sweden and Got-
torf was erected to secure the duchy against Danish pretensions. Shortly af-
terwards, the duke of Gottorf was pressed by the Danish king to leave his
territory twice for four or five years respectively: first in 1675, then in 1684.
In the first case, the Swedish allies weren’t able to intervene; this was the pe-
riod in which Sweden hadn’t any basis on the continent. In the second case,
Sweden formed an alliance with the Habsburg Emperor against a new alli-
ance of France and Denmark and supported the Gottorf duke.
39 Grusnick, op. cit., Teil II–III, p. 176. Only a few new names can be added.
It has been argued that Düben might have concentrated his activities to a
few lines voluntarily (Krummacher, op. cit., 142f.); but as shown, his scope
wasn’t really wide even in the years before 1675, too.

164 Konrad Küster
cooperation with musicians either within the Danish or within

the German territories were reduced to the absolute minimum,
and it must have been difficult to reorganize them afterwards.
Neither Copenhagen and Gottorf nor Hamburg and Danzig
played an important role for him any longer, and no other place
took over their former roles. At least with respect to the situa-
tion of the late 1670s, it is obvious that the collection mirrors the
specific position(s) Düben held at Stockholm.40
‘Secondary’ contacts and the Swedish possessions

around the Baltic Sea
To this, only few remarks can be added. Düben owned one sin-
gle composition by Hans Conrad Capeler; in 1664, the year in
which the piece was copied, he was engaged as Chapel Master
by the elder duchess of Gottorf, who spent her widowhood at
Husum. How Düben got this music cannot be decided. Fur-
thermore, he knew something of the music life in Güstrow: His
first ties lie during Pfleger’s time, and later he got a few pieces
composed by Daniel Danielis, perhaps via Christian Geist.41 A
similar case is Königsberg, but at least some music Düben got
from there was copied from prints only.42 And no musician
from Rostock left something to the Düben collection (in this
case, the local branch of the Hasse family is excluded).
Curiously enough, however, Düben hadn’t almost any in-
sight into the music life in the Swedish possessions on the other
40 As chapel master and as organist at the German church in relation to mu-

sicians either in Germany or at German churches around the Baltic Sea.
41 Lars Berglund, Studier i Christian Geists vokalmusik, Uppsala 2002 (Studia
musicologica Upsaliensia N. S., 21), p. 30.
42 Kjellberg, Kungliga musiker, p. 300 (Sebastiani); Krummacher, op. cit., p.
102, 111.

side of the Baltic Sea.43 Compared to Pomerania and Bremen-

Verden, the informations about Estonia and Latvia appear as
the most fruitful ones.
Düben had access to music from Narwa, composed by the
cantor Michael Hahn (around 1671) and the organist Ludwig
Busbetzki.44 In later times, the only ‘Düben’ composer in Esto-
nia or Latvia was Johann Valentin Meder: From 1674 onwards
he lived in Tallinn (then Reval), where one of his compositions
owned by Düben was dated in 1679; another one was com-
posed for the celebrations of the Swedish liberation of Riga in
1684.45 So Düben and Meder must have come in touch with one
another around 1680 (probably prior to Meder’s engagement to
Danzig). But we don’t know how this happened, and it didn’t
result in an intensified cooperation.46
One might argue that music from Estonia and Latvia was
less interesting for Düben than, for example, from Lübeck and
Copenhagen. But this cannot be true for the two Swedish re-
gions in Germany. In Pomerania, there were important
churches and schools, and close ties knitted both the home
country and the province together. Only the copy of one single
composition by Johann Vierdanck, organist at St. Mary’s in
Stralsund, represents the Pomeranian music history within the
Düben collection, but Vierdanck had died as early as 1646; and
as already Grusnick suggested, Düben might have got this
composition from Saxony, so that, perhaps, he wasn’t aware of
the fact that its composer had been active in a country belong-
43 Similarly, Düben hadn’t almost any access to Swedish music from outside
Stockholm. As in the case of the Hamburg tradesman who brought Martin
Colerus’s composition to Sweden, Düben might have got in touch with
them quite well, as with the commissary Schneider (in this case, on the
western side of Öresund).
44 Krummacher, op. cit., p. 111.
45 1679: Ach Herr, strafe mich nicht; 1684: Wie murren doch die Leut.
46 This almost complete lack of contacts seems curious because of Düben’s
relationship to at least Magnus De la Gardie, the Swedish chancellor who
held large estates in Latvia at that time, cf. Kjellberg, Kungliga musiker,
p. 278–280 and Kjellberg, ‘Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie’.

166 Konrad Küster
ing to the Swedish crown. In any case, the Swedish government

in Pomerania isn’t reflected by the Düben collection at all.
Two names can add further evidence: Works by neither
Vierdanck’s successor, Daniel Schröder, the first organist at
Friedrich Stellwagen’s famous organ,47 nor by Schröder’s col-
league at St. Nicholas’s, Johann Martin Rubert, can be found in
Düben’s collection. Rubert, who had attended the coronation of
Queen Christina in Stockholm in 1650,48, cannot have been un-
known to Swedish authorities; he died in 1677 – he was active
in Stralsund all the time during which Düben gathered most of
his musical sources together. But apparently Düben did not
take any notice of him for his collecting purposes;49 in the Ger-
man Church at Stockholm, Rubert’s works were sung from
printed sources-50 Similarly, music from Swedish Wismar is
missing within the Düben collection.51
Finally, nothing substantially different can be said about the
duchies of Bremen and Verden. The only name in Düben’s col-
lection that points to that territory is Moritz Schlöpke. He was
active at the Governmental Church in Stade from 1680 on-
wards; his two surviving compositions, both in Düben’s collec-
47 The conditions of music making at this church must have been similar to
those at Lübeck; polychoral music could be performed from specific lofts.
Daniel Schröder (cf. Ernst Praetorius, ‘Mitteilungen aus norddeutschen
Archiven über Kantoren, Organisten, Orgelbauer und Stadtmusiker
älterer Zeit bis ungefähr 1800’, SIMG, 7 (1905/06). p. 243) might have been
the ‘Daniel Schröder’ mentioned by Mattheson (1740, p. 320) as the son of
the Copenhagen organist Lorenz Schröder.
48 Beate Bugenhagen, Art. ‘Rubert, Johann Martin’, MGG 2. Aufl., Personen-
teil Bd. 14, col. 581.
49 Perhaps, if Düben had overtaken an active role in the cultural exchange
between the home country and Pomerania, a greater number of composi-
tions from Stettin, Greifswald or Stralsund might have been preserved; the
profiles of most of the musicians having been active there at that time,
however, don’t include music.
50 Kjellberg, Kungliga musiker, p. 317 and 811.
51 Praetorius, op. cit., p. 227 (Franz Diederich Knoop, St. Mary’s), p. 241
(Johannes Röding, St. George’s).

tion, bear autograph inscriptions pointing to the year 1685.52

Thus: What is missing there?
Stade hadn’t been the capital of this region prior to the
Swedish occupation in 1645; so, all the efforts to form a capital
there were Swedish, and they had to be intensified after the
town had been destroyed by fire in 1659. Schlöpke must have
had lively contacts to the local Swedish authorities; later, he
took over the organist’s post in the church of the small village
of Borstel, where the Swedish government had supported
weekly performances of figural music.53
But, clearly, Schlöpke was not alone. Simultaneously, Vin-
cent Lübeck, who was active in Stade from 1675 onwards,
adopted the function of a musical advisor to the government,54
and the organist Arnold Schepler had been the predecessor to
both of them.55 These remarks leave aside all the musicians at-
tached to the large schools at the cathedrals of Verden and
52 Cf. the introduction to: Moritz Schlöpke, ‘Ich preise dich, Herr’: Vokalkon-
zert zur Einweihung einer Arp-Schnitger-Orgel. ‘Nun komm, der Heiden
Heiland’: Adventsmotette, ed. Konrad Küster (Köstritzer Hefte, 52), Bad
Köstritz 2009.
53 Konrad Küster, ‘Orgel – Musik – Liturgie: Nachreformatorische Entwick-
lungen in Bremen-Verden’, Jahrbuch für Niedersächsische Kirchengeschichte,
104 (2006): at least from 1684 onwards, when, by the Swedish govern-
ment, Schlöpke’s predecessor, Johann Jacob Druckenmüller, was granted
an annual benefit for composing and performing church music, not only
on Feasts but also on ordinary Sundays. The church is neighbouring one
of the former seats of the Königsmarck family. This may explain why the
government overtook a responsibility for the making of music there.
54 He is reported as the composer for almost every political feast to be cele-
brated in the Swedish territories, cf. Wolfram Syré, Vincent Lübeck: Leben
und Werk, Frankfurt am Main 2000, p. 59–65. By chance, there was no feast
to be celebrated during the 1680s, cf. Nils Werner Fritzel, Der Stader Raum
zur Schwedenzeit: Studien zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte, Stade 1976,
p. 57–60. An earlier hint is Lübeck’s Passionsmusik for Bremen Cathedral.
55 For a broad survey see Amalie Arnheim, ‘Aus dem Bremer Musikleben im
17. Jahrhundert’, SIMG, 12 (1910/11), p. 410 (reads ‘Borstedt’ instead of
‘Borstel’ for Schlöpke); Paul Rubardt,‘Vincent Lübeck: ein Beitrag zur Ge-
schichte norddeutscher Kirchenmusik im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert, Archiv
für Musikwissenschaft, 7 (1924), p. 461.

168 Konrad Küster
Bremen56 and at Stade, similarly Schlöpke’s colleagues in the

smaller, but extremely wealthy villages.57 But nothing of them
found its way into the Düben collection.58
So it can be concluded that the Chapel Master to the Swedish
court did not have any (or: any important) relationship to lead-
ing musicians in the Swedish provinces south and east of the
Baltic Sea. Despite the favourable political circumstances, there
was almost no collegial contact. At least, the two Schlöpke
pieces and the compositions by Johann Valentin Meder may
indicate that Düben strived to reorganize his networks after the
war years and, for the first time, tried to get in touch with the
Swedish territories ‘on the continent’. But on the whole, neither
the musical culture nor the abilities of the musicians having
been active there can be evaluated from the Düben collection.59
56 Bremen Cathedral was especially important for musical reasons, because

the city of Bremen didn’t belong to the territory and was Calvinistic – it
was with the music that the difference between the two reformatory ideas
could be stressed.
57 Erik Kjellberg (Kungliga musiker, p. 393f.) points to the musician Gottfried
Bucholtz who came from Bremen to Stockholm in 1688 at the latest. That
David Duncker, who served at Carl Gustaf Wrangel’s court, came from
Stade (cf. ibid., p. 399) cannot be confirmed from other sources.
58 Druckenmüller didn’t, too; one single work of him was transmitted by
Bokemeyer (D-B Mus. ms. 30294). In the case of Schlöpke, it could be
checked if one of the new governmental officials could have been the me-
diator. If this was the new Generalgouverneur in Stade, Henrik Horn,
nothing would be explained – he held the post until 1693 without sending
something else. The same can be said about the Swedish chancellor to
Stade, Esaias von Pufendorf (active in 1674/75 and 1680/85). And if one of
them had been the dedicatee of Schlöpke’s works, it should be asked why
these were the only musical dedications given to them – a lot of other
composers might have had a similar reason.
59 This must have been a problem of Düben himself, because there was a
some kind of a Swedish awareness of Vincent Lübeck as the former lead-
ing figure in the Swedish duchy of Bremen-Verden. Cf. Jan Olof Rudén,
Music in tablature: A thematic index with source descriptions of music in tabla-
ture notation in Sweden, Stockholm 1981, p. 58f. and 62 (tablatures in Kal-
mar and Lund, the last one including works by Lübeck’s Swedish pupil
Gottlieb Nittauf).

Conclusion
Düben held one of the most important musical posts within the
Protestant countries of his time. But it might become clear that
he didn’t understand himself as the most important musical
representative of his country and its possessions, but rather as
the leading musician at an important court, who acted indi-
vidually within an international musical context. He had spe-
cifically personal contacts, some of them being due to a positive
political climate among neighbouring countries – and being cut
off as soon as the climate shifted.
Even if the Düben collection is indispensable for the tradi-
tion of works by Tunder and Buxtehude, by Förster, Bernhard
and Pfleger (completed by a strong segment of music from
Danzig), this scope does by no means mirror what really hap-
pened around the Baltic Sea. Düben’s collecting activities did
not only include ‘famous’ composers and exclude musicians
having been labelled as Kleinmeister;60 leading figures of that
time are missing as well61.
Düben’s approach to the music life at the Baltic Sea must
have been a different one. When he began his collection in the
early 1660s, he got in touch with neighbouring courts (espe-
cially Copenhagen, perhaps Güstrow, later Gottorf) and with
one leading musician from Hamburg and Lübeck each (one
cantor and one organist), finally, perhaps, with music from
Danzig. Only the contact to Lübeck survived the crisis during
the late 1670s. Afterwards, his approach appears as less system-
atic; Düben might have planned then to get in touch with musi-
60 A term that could have been used for Pfleger, especially with his Evange-
liendialoge: cf. Krummacher Die Choralbearbeitung in der protestantischen
Figuralmusik zwischen Praetorius und Bach, Kassel 1978, p. 240.
61 Johan Lorentz in Copenhagen, musicians being attached to the young
Hamburg opera house, Rubert and Vincent Lübeck would have been at-
tractive candidates for an integration of one or another work into the col-
lection, too.

170 Konrad Küster
cians from the Swedish provinces, but the yield was not really
significant.
These remarks may not reduce the admiration for the Düben
collection as a whole, and they don’t reduce Düben’s impor-
tance as a mediator of the music around the Baltic Sea from his
time. But we must be aware of the proper character of informa-
tion the collection provides: it is definitely personal.
Literature
Arnheim, Amalie,‘ Aus dem Bremer Musikleben im 17. Jahrhundert’, Sammel-

bände der Internationalen Musik-Gesellschaft, 12 (1910/11), p. 369–426.
Beckmann, Klaus, ‘Randbemærkninger til musikerfamilien Radeck’, Per
Kynne Frandsen et al. (ed.), Dansk orgelkultur, Vanløse 1997, p. 77–83.
Berglund, Lars, Studier i Christian Geists vokalmusik, Uppsala 2002 (Studia
musicologica Upsaliensia N. S. 21).
Bugenhagen, Beate, Art. ‘Rubert, Johann Martin’, MGG, 2. Aufl., Personenteil,
Bd. 14, Sp. 581f.
Fritzel, Nils Werner, Der Stader Raum zur Schwedenzeit: Studien zur Kultur- und
Geistesgeschichte, Stade 1976.
Teil II–III, ebd., 48 (1966), p. 63–186.
Kjellberg, Erik, Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden: studier kring deras
organisation, verksamheter och status, ca 1620–ca 1720, Uppsala: Uppsala Uni-
versitet 1979.
Kjellberg, Erik, ‘Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie och musiken’, Magnus Gabriel
De la Gardie (Nationalmusei utställningskatalog nr. 434) Läckö Slott/Stock-
holm 1980, p. 73–78.
Kjellberg, Erik, ‘The Royal Swedish Court and Music During the Schütz-Era’,
Anne Ørbæk Jensen and Ole Kongsted (ed.), Heinrich Schütz und die Musik
in Dänemark zur Zeit Christians IV., Copenhagen 1989, p. 25–31.

Krummacher, Friedhelm, Die Choralbearbeitung in der protestantischen Figural-

musik zwischen Praetorius und Bach (Kieler Schriften zur Musikwissen-
schaft, 22), Kassel: Bärenreiter 1978.
Küster, Konrad, ‘Orgel – Musik – Liturgie: Nachreformatorische Entwicklun-
gen in Bremen-Verden’, Jahrbuch für Niedersächsische Kirchengeschichte, 104
(2006).
Ludwig, Franz, ‘Neue Forschungen über den Markgräflich-Badischen Hofka-
pellmeister Johann Kaspar Ferdinand Fischer’, Mitteilungen des Vereins für
Geschichte der Deutschen in Böhmen, 49 (1911), p. 71–78.
Lundgren, Bo, ‘Nikolajorganisten Johan Lorentz i Köpenhamn: ett försök till
en biografi’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 43 (1961), p. 249–263.
Mattheson, Johann, Grundlagen einer Ehrenpforte (Hamburg 1740), hrsg. von
Max Schneider, Berlin 1910 and Kassel: Bärenreiter 1969.
Pantijelew, Grigorij Ja., ‘Johann Sebastian Bachs Briefe an Georg Erdmann:
nebst Beiträgen zur Lebensgeschichte von Bachs Jugendfreund’, Bach-
Jahrbuch, 71 (1985) p. 83–97.
Praetorius, Ernst, ‘Mitteilungen aus norddeutschen Archiven über Kantoren,
Organisten, Orgelbauer und Stadtmusiker älterer Zeit bis ungefähr 1800’,
Sammelbände der Internationalen Musik-Gesellschaft, 7 (1905/06), p. 204–252.
Rubardt, Paul,‘Vincent Lübeck: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte norddeutscher
Kirchenmusik im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert, Archiv für Musikwissenschaft, 7
(1924), p. 450–470.
Rudén, Jan Olof, Vattenmärken och musikforskning: presentation och tillämpning
av en dateringsmetod på musikalier i handskrift i Uppsala universitetsbiblioteks
Dübensamling, Uppsala: Uppsala universitet 1968. (Ms); Internet: http://
www.ordommusik.se/duben/index.htm
Rudén, Jan Olof, Music in tablature: A thematic index with source descriptions of
music in tablature notation in Sweden, Stockholm: Svenskt musikhistoriskt
arkiv 1981.
Schiørring, Niels, Musikkens Historie i Danmark I: Fra oltiden til 1750, Copen-
hagen 1977.
Snyder, Kerala J., Dieterich Buxtehude: organist in Lübeck, New York: Schirmer
Books 1987.
Snyder, Kerala J., ‘Franz Tunder’s Stock Exchange Concerts: prelude to the
Lübeck Abendmusiken’, Sverker Jullander (ed.), GOArt Research Reports, 2
(2000), p. 41–57.
Syré, Wolfram, Vincent Lübeck: Leben und Werk (Europäische Hochschulschrif-
ten, 205), Frankfurt am Main: Lang 2000.

PETER WOLLNY
A Source Complex from Saxony in the Düben

Collection
Since Bruno Grusnick and Friedhelm Krummacher published

their seminal and pioneering studies in the mid-1960s,1 the
Düben Collection has been widely recognized as the central
source for the music history of northern Europe in the second
half of the seventeenth century. The unique value of the collec-
tion is not least due to the enormous size of the repertory and to
its truly international character. During the almost three dec-
ades of his kapellmeistership Gustav Düben was able to gather
a great number of musical manuscripts and prints containing
sacred and secular vocal music as well as instrumental pieces,
which in its range of origins reached far beyond his own region.
Paper studies have shown that the Düben collection contains
manuscripts from southern Italy to the northern territories of
the Baltic Sea, from Paris to the Royal Polish court at Warsaw,
and from the Imperial court at Vienna to the Hanseatic city of
Hamburg. Düben’s efforts were aided by the numerous politi-
cal and dynastic relations of the Swedish Royal family and
other members of the court as well as by his own personal and
professional contacts to colleagues in northern Germany and
the Baltic region. Even in its own time the size of the collection
probably was considered large, but certainly not uniquely so.
We may assume that the kapellmeisters of other major courts,

schen Ordnung’, Teil I–II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 46 (1964). Teil
II–III, idem, 48 (1966); Friedhelm Krummacher, Die Überlieferung der Cho-
ralbearbeitungen in der frühen evangelischen Kantate. Untersuchungen zum
Handschriftenrepertoire evangelischer Figuralmusik im späten 17. und frühen 18.
Jahrhundert (Berliner Studien zur Musikwissenschaft, 10), Berlin 1965.

174 Peter Wollny
particularly in Germany, had similarly impressive numbers of

music manuscripts at their disposal. The Düben collection,
however, is the only source complex from its time that over the
centuries has remained virtually complete. It can’t be empha-
sized enough that without it we would have only a rather lim-
ited view of northern European music history after the Thirty
Years’ War. Metaphorically speaking, it is the only Pharaoh’s
tomb that remained sealed and inviolate until our time.
In the past forty years the Düben collection was the subject
of several more or less comprehensive and a large number of
specialized studies. Yet despite considerable progress we are
still far from exhausting all its hidden clues, from understand-
ing their implications fully, and from grasping the complicated
web of musical and personal relations suggested by it. The
Düben collection cannot only help us reconstruct the rich and
manifold musical traditions at the Royal Swedish court, in fact
it is also able to tell us a lot about other musical centers, particu-
larly those that suffered the loss of their primary source mate-
rial. While in the earlier phases of researching this source com-
plex the main focus lay upon Düben’s own activities as a scribe
and collector, the attention has somewhat shifted to uncovering
the provenance of the major groups of foreign sources within
the collection. Through them we hope to gain insight into the
transmission of music manuscripts in the seventeenth century
in general as well as into trade relations and biographical con-
stellations, to mention only a few aspects.
In recent years I have devoted some time to the study of
sources from central Germany that found their way to Stock-
holm. I was able, on the basis of a thorough philological exami-
nation of the manuscripts, to trace the provenance of a group of
relatively early sources that turned out to represent a significant
component of the repertoire of the Leipzig university church
from the 1640s.2 Another group of manuscripts, related to the
2 Cf. Peter Wollny, ‘Eine anonyme Leipziger Hochzeitsmusik aus dem 17.
Jahrhundert’, Über Leben, Kunst und Kunstwerke. Aspekte musikalischer Biog-

A Source Complex from Saxony 175
Silesian nobleman Johann von Assig und Siegersdorf, was

gathered in the early 1670s also in Leipzig and leads us to the
realm of the academic collegia musica.3 In this paper, I will try
to shed some light on a third group of sources, one that Bruno
Grusnick associated with a scribe from central Germany (‘Mit-
teldeutscher Schreiber’).4 Grusnick identified altogether thirteen
manuscripts as stemming from this hand. A systematic exami-
nation of the entire collection reveals, however, that the number
is actually significantly larger and the group of sources is
closely linked with other manuscripts, also of middle German
origin, but prepared by different, though related scribes (see
appendix). Apart from the well-known group of the Buxtehude
manuscripts5 and the cantata cycle by Augustin Pfleger,6 these
central German manuscripts represent perhaps the third largest
source complex within the Düben collection and one of its most
important foreign components. Since the only known copy of
the intermedia of Heinrich Schütz’s Weihnachtshistorie is part of
this group, it is all the more desirable to uncover traces of its
provenance and origins.
Before turning to the sources themselves, however, we need
to take a brief look at the historical situation in Saxony after the
Thirty Years’ War. The second half of the seventeenth century is
characterized by a unique rule of succession resulting in the
division of the home territories of Electoral Saxony, which
lasted well into the eighteenth century: Contrary to the usual
laws, the three younger sons of the elector Johann Georg I were
able to insist that upon his decease they each be granted a mi-
nor duchy of his own. Thus when Johann Georg II followed his
father as elector of Saxony in 1657, his three younger brothers
raphie. Festschrift für Hans-Joachim Schulze zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Christoph
Wolff, Leipzig 1999, p. 46–60.
3 Cf. Peter Wollny, ‘Beiträge zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Sammlung
Düben,’ Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 87 (2005), p. 100–114.
4 Grusnick, op.cit. Teil I–II (1964), p. 68–70 and Tafel VI (before p. 67).
5 Cf. the source descriptions in Kerala J. Snyder, Dieterich Buxtehude. Orga-
nist in Lübeck, New York 1987, revised edition, Rochester 2007.
6 Vmhs 72–74.

176 Peter Wollny
August, Christian, and Moritz assumed their own so-called

secundogeniture courts in the western part of the electoral
state.7 Before their father died, they had already been invested
with the administration of the old pre-reformational bishoprics
of Saxe-Merseburg, Saxe-Halle, and Saxe-Naumburg, and this is
where they now established their new ducal residences. Duke
August set up his court at Halle, but knowing that immediately
after his death the city of Halle would fall to Prussia (as part of
the 1648 Peace Treaty of Westphalia) he had a new castle built
at Weißenfels for his heir. This move eventually took place in
1680 and was accompanied by major structural changes in the
court chapel, coinciding with the rise of Johann Philipp Krieger
as kapellmeister.8 Duke Christian established his court at the
old castle of Merseburg. As the former inspector of the electoral
court chapel at Dresden, Christian stood in close contact with
Heinrich Schütz and is the addressee of Schütz’s famous letter
of August 1651 regarding the decline of courtly music. When
Christian moved to Merseburg, he took some of the musicians
from Dresden with him.9 The youngest of the three brothers,
Duke Moritz, first resided at Naumburg, but during the first
7 For a summary of the current state of research on this topic see Barocke
Fürstenresidenzen an Saale, Unstrut und Elster, Petersberg 2007. Valuable in-
formation about the cultural life at the secundogeniture courts is found in
Martin Bircher, ‘Johann Beer am Hof des Wohlgeratenen’, Johann Beer.
Schriftsteller, Komponist und Hofbeamter 1655–1700. Beiträge zum Internatio-
nalen Symposion in Weißenfels, Oktober 2000, ed. Ferdinand van Ingen &
Hans-Gert Roloff, Bern 2003, p. 69–90.
8 On the music history of Halle and Weißenfels see Walter Serauky, Musik-
geschichte der Stadt Halle, vol. II/1: Von Samuel Scheidt bis in die Zeit Georg
Friedrich Händels und Johann Sebastian Bachs, Halle 1939, particularly p.
198–370; Arno Werner, Städtische und fürstliche Musikpflege in Weissenfels bis
zum Ende des 18. Jahrhunderts, Leipzig 1911 and Max Seiffert, Preface to Jo-
hann Philipp Krieger. 21 ausgewählte Kirchenkompositionen, DDT 53/54, Leip-
zig 1916, p. V–XCI.
9 On musical life at Merseburg, see Wolfram Steude, ‘Bausteine zu einer
Geschichte der Sachsen-Merseburgischen Hofmusik (1653–1738)’, Musik
der Macht – Macht der Musik. Bericht über das Wissenschaftliche Symposion an-
läßlich der 4. mitteldeutschen Heinrich-Schütz-Tage, Weißenfels 2001, ed. Julia-
ne Riepe & Henrike Rucker, Schneverdingen 2003, p. 73–101.

years of his reign had a representative new castle built at

nearby Zeitz, which was finished in 1663. That year marks the
beginning of the court chapel of Saxe-Zeitz, which also drew
some of its musicians directly from the Dresden court. Among
the three Saxon secundogeniture courts, Zeitz may have been
the smallest, but it was certainly not last in line regarding its
representative splendour; for Duke Moritz managed to engage
the old and venerable Dresden kapellmeister Heinrich Schütz
as titular kapellmeister (‘Kapellmeister von Haus aus’). Schütz
was entrusted with the organization of the new chapel; he
wrote out a detailed set of rules and regulations and suggested
capable musicians, among them his former students Johann
Jacob Löwe (1629–1703) and Clemens Thieme (1631–1668).10
When the three court chapels at Halle/Weißenfels, Merse-
burg, and Naumburg/Zeitz took up their duties in the early
1660s, the dukes were obviously guided by their ambition to
create something comparable in quality and fame to rivaling
Dresden. It should be noted, however, that the three brothers
and their duchies were never fully independent from the elec-
toral court. Dresden continued to control parts of their admini-
stration, and the Dresden consistory looked after all matters of
religious life and education.11 And when Heinrich Schütz asked
that the new edition of his Becker Psalter should be used in
every church service in Merseburg and Zeitz (and probably also
in Halle), his letter probably has to be interpreted as an order
rather than a suggestion.12 Another fact that we need to keep in
mind is the increasingly dire financial situation at these courts.
The three duchies were simply too small to produce enough
10 On Zeitz see Arno Werner, Städtische und fürstliche Musikpflege in Zeitz bis
zum Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts, Bückeburg and Leipzig 1922.
11 On the historical background of the three secundogeniture courts see
particularly Hellmut Kretzschmar, ‘Zur Geschichte der sächsischen Se-
kundogeniturfürstentümer’, in Kretzschmar, Vom Anteil Sachsens an der
neueren deutschen Geschichte. Ausgewählte Aufsätze, ed. Reiner Groß &
Manfred Kobuch, Stuttgart 1999, p. 141–203.
12 Heinrich Schütz. Gesammelte Briefe und Schriften, ed. Erich H. Müller, Re-
gensburg 1931, p. 292–295 (no. 115).

178 Peter Wollny
income to support an extravagant lifestyle of their courts. Thus

for example a number of ambitious opera projects that were
begun at Weißenfels in the 1680s had soon to be abandoned due
to financial restraints. By the early eighteenth century the situa-
tion had become so tight that for his performances of church
music Johann Philipp Krieger had to resort to a rather limited
selection of works with small performing forces (such as a mass
for soprano, bass and three strings).13 Thus the situation of the
chapels at the three secundogeniture courts can be described as
a constant struggle between high artistic and representative
ambitions and the pressing reality of a shortage of financial
means to fulfil them. Yet during the 1660s and 1670s, the time
that we are interested in here, these difficulties may not yet
have been visible to an external spectator. In fact, for a while the
three duchies succeeded in participating in the lifestyle and
politics of the leading European courts.
I had to describe and characterize the Saxon secundogeni-
ture courts here in some detail, because in the following I will
try to show that the manuscript group from central Germany
that I mentioned at the beginning of my paper does in fact rep-
resent a repertoire directly drawn from them. I have to empha-
size at this point that any research on the history of the Saxon
secundogeniture courts is impeded by a rather frustating
scarceness of primary documents. When the courts were dis-
solved in the mid-eighteenth century, their papers went to the
state archives after having been weeded out quite drastically.
Thus when Arno Werner in 1922 wrote his book on Städtische
und fürstliche Musikpflege in Zeitz, his roughly thirty pages on
the court chapel were based almost entirely on a single docu-
ment – Schütz’s famous regulations of 1663.14
I have decided therefore to take a different route and begin
my examination with the musical sources from the Düben col-
13 See the performance documented in Klaus-Jürgen Gundlach, Das Weißen-

felser Aufführungsverzeichnis Johann Philipp Kriegers und seines Sohnes Johann
Gotthilf Krieger (1684–1732), Sinzig 2001, p. 194.
14 Cf. Werner, Städtische und fürstliche Musikpflege in Zeitz, p. 61–94.

lection. In trying to define the source group from central Ger-

many, I took Schütz’s Weihnachtshistorie as a starting point. The
numerous partbooks, today contained in vmhs 71, were pre-
pared by nine or ten different scribes (I count here only the
parts written on paper with Saxon watermarks, ignoring addi-
tional partbooks prepared by Düben and his scribes at Stock-
holm). When subsequently looking through the entire Düben
collection for further evidence, I searched specifically for scribal
concordances in other sources and also recorded secondary
copyists that appeared together with the scribes of the
Weihnachtshistorie. Altogether this search resulted in a group of
roughly fifty manuscripts containing mostly sacred vocal but
also some instrumental music. These sources must have come
to Sweden as a group, rather than being acquired individually
or spread over a longer period of time. Even without recogniz-
ing the full size of this source complex, Bruno Grusnick postu-
lated – on the basis of ink signatures (which are found only on a
few of the manuscripts, however) and of the watermarks of
Düben’s additional parts and intavolations – that all these
manuscripts must have come to Stockholm between 1671 and
1674 at the latest.15
Taking a look at the composers represented in this source
complex, we find a relatively homogeneous group of names
emerging. In fact we encounter the major composers from the
electoral Saxon court chapel at Dresden (Albrici, Bontempi,
Furchheim, Peranda, and Schütz) and also the major figures
from the secundogeniture courts of Halle/Weißenfels, Merse-
burg, and Zeitz.
It is a well-established method in Renaissance manuscript
studies to focus first on the minor and lesser known composers
because it is unlikely that their works are transmitted widely
outside their own limited range of activity.16 The presence of
their compositions side by side in a single manuscript thus can
15 Grusnick, op.cit., Teil I–II, p. 69–70.

16 Cf. Peter Wright, ‘The Compilation of Trent 871 and 922’, Early Music
History, 2 (1982), p. 237–271.

180 Peter Wollny
yield important clues about provenances and collectors. It has

proven fruitful to transfer this method to source complexes
from the seventeenth century. And indeed in our case we en-
counter some obscure names that are not easily found in the
pertinent secondary literature.
The first obscure musician I came across is Christoph Krei-
chel, who is not found in any musical dictionary and whose
biographical data have so far not been collected. Kreichel’s
name appears in the records on the Singballett Paris und Helena
performed in December 1650 at Dresden on the occasion of the
‘double wedding’, when the two brothers Duke Christian of
Saxe-Merseburg and Duke Moritz of Saxe-Zeitz married two
princesses from Sleswig-Holstein. In the lists of musicians par-
ticipating in this ballet, Kreichel is mentioned several times as a
‘kurfürstlicher Kapellknabe’.17 In 1653 he moved with Duke
Christian to Merseburg and became a member of his chapel.
His name is mentioned several times in church and municipal
records at Merseburg: He married in 1658, became a citizen of
Merseburg in 1665 and stood godfather at baptisms in 1667 and
1668. Kreichel probably died around 1670.18
Another unfamiliar name is that of Heinrich Groh, whose
professional career was very similar to that of Kreichel. Groh
also participated – as a ‘falsettist’ – in the Dresden Singballett
Paris und Helena of 1650 and followed Christian to Merseburg in
1653, first serving as a singer, and in 1667 assuming the position
of director of the Merseburg chapel.19 His activities as a com-
poser are documented in 1672 in printed librettos for a sacred
aria and a Singballett,20 in 1676 by the publication of a (now
17 See Moritz Fürstenau, Zur Geschichte der Musik und des Theaters am Hofe zu
Dresden, Dresden 1861–1862, vol. 1, p. 119, 121, and 125.
18 According to data collected by Arno Werner (Nachlaß Werner, Thüringi-
sches Musikarchiv der Hochschule für Musik Franz Liszt Weimar).
19 See Fürstenau, op. cit., p. 123 and 125 (his name is erroneously spelled
Googh here). See also Steude, op. cit., p. 78–80.
20 Das Danckbahre Fürsten-Hertz Welches Als der ... Herr Christian Herzog zu
Sachsen ... Postulirter Administrator des Stiffts Merseburg ... Den 27. Weinmo-
nats des ... 1672. Jahrs ... Ihr Hohes Geburts-Fest Hochfeyerlich beginge .../ Auß

lost) collection of instrumental pieces,21 and in 1679 through the

sale of a considerable number of his vocal compositions to Jo-
hann Schelle in Leipzig.22
The third unfamiliar name is that of Clemens Thieme.
Thieme’s life is documented comparatively well in a printed
funeral sermon (Leichenpredigt).23 Born in 1631, he was a choir
boy at the Dresden court and in 1651 was recommended by
Heinrich Schütz to join the elector’s chapel as a bassoon player.
After more than a decade of service at Dresden he moved to
Zeitz in 1663 where he became concert master. When in 1665
Johann Jacob Löwe resigned from his position, Thieme suc-
ceeded him as kapellmeister. He died in 1668.24
These brief biographical sketches offer important clues for
the dating of our manuscript group. For example, the parts of
Thieme’s psalm setting Laudate pueri (preserved in vmhs 69:11),
which contain the attribution ‘C. T. Mag. d’ Cap. Duc Sax
Naumb.’ must have been written between 1665 and 1668. Simi-
larly, the copy of Groh’s suite for strings in b minor (imhs 1:11),
in which he is called ‘Direct. Mus: Merseb.’ was prepared after
1667. And there are other pieces that can be dated quite exactly:
The monumental psalm setting Miserere mei Deus by Gioseppe
Peranda was first performed on Palm Sunday 1670 during a
memorial service held at Dresden for King Frederick III of
dem LXXXIX. Psalm ... vorgestellet Von Heinrich Grohen/ Hoch-Fürstl. Sächs.
Direct. Music., Merseburg 1672 (copy: D-HAu, 79 N 9, Kapsel 4); Die erfreu-
te Calliope, Welche/ Als Die Durchl. ... Fürstin und Frau Fr. Christiana/ Herzo-
gin zu Sachsen ... Am 22. Herbstmonats des 1672. Jahrs Dero ... Geburth-Fest ...
Hocherfreulich beging/ Auff Musicalische Arth/ nebst einer darzu absonderlich
Componirten Frantzösischen Suite, Auß Unterthänigster Devotion dargestellet
wurde Von Heinrich Groen/ Hoch-Fürstl. Sächs. Merseb. Direct. Mus., Merse-
burg 1672 (copy: D-HAu, 78 N 1, Kapsel 58).
21 Cf. Johann Gottfried Walther, Musicalisches Lexicon oder Musicalische Biblio-
thec, Leipzig 1732; reprint Kassel 1953, p. 292.
22 See Krummacher, op. cit., p. 209.
23 See the biographical accounts in MGG 2. ed. and New Grove Dictionary.
Thieme’s Leichenpredigt is published in Monatshefte für Musikgeschichte, 3
(1888), p. 38ff.
24 See also Werner, Städtische und fürstliche Musikpflege in Zeitz, p. 74–78.

182 Peter Wollny
Denmark.25 The vocal and instrumental pieces by the Dresden

violinist Johann Wilhelm Furchheim were probably composed
after he had been entrusted with the directorship of the music
at church and at table in 1667. The manuscripts must have left
central Germany around 1671 and thus at the time represented
a fairly new and up-to-date repertoire.
Dresden – Halle – Merseburg – Zeitz: Where did the manu-
scripts exactly come from? Since a conclusive answer to this
question is not possible at this point, it appears fruitful first to
collect the various hints that can be gleaned from the sources.
Their clues, however, do not suggest a straightforward solution.
Still, I will briefly discuss them in the following, in the hope
that future research will enable us to assemble these observa-
tions in a coherent picture.
Representative names such as Albrici and Peranda may point
to Dresden. It should be noted, however, that some of the works
show traces of a reduction of their original forces. For example,
Peranda’s Miserere is originally set for six voices ‘in concerto’, six
voices in ripieno, muted trumpets, timpani, six strings, three
trombones and continuo. The source from the Düben collection
does not contain the ripieno voices and marks the trombones ‘ad
libitum’. One may thus assume that the version transmitted here
is an arrangement made for a smaller ensemble.
Some observations point to Zeitz. The most important clue
here is Schütz’ involvement at this court. We know that from
1663 until his death in 1672 he regularly sent pieces of his own
composition and works of his Dresden colleagues to Zeitz; this
would also explain the presence of his private paper (water-
mark: bow and arrow, HSC) among the central German Düben
sources.26 If we assume a Zeitz provenance for at least some of
25 Cf. Mary E. Frandsen, Crossing Confessional Boundaries. The Patronage of

Italian Sacred Music in Seventeenth-Century Dresden, Oxford 2006, p. 473. For
a contemporary description of the memorial service see Anton Weck, Der
Chur-Fürstlichen Sächsischen weitberuffenen Residentz- und Haupt-Vestung
Dresden Beschreib- und Vorstellung, Nürnberg 1680, p. 433.
26 On Schütz’s private paper see Wolfram Steude, ‘Das wiederaufgefundene
Opus ultimum von Heinrich Schütz. Bemerkungen zur Quelle und zum

the manuscripts of our source complex, a hitherto puzzling let-

ter by Heinrich Schütz receives a possible context and explana-
tion. The letter is undated and addressed to the – unnamed –
superintendent in Zeitz. In his edition of Schütz’s letters and
writings, Erich Müller dated it ‘after 1667’ and assumed its ad-
dressee to have been Philipp Salzmann.27 So far it has not been
noticed that this cannot be true, however. Philipp Salzmann
was appointed superintendent of Zeitz in 1664 and died in No-
vember 1667.28 His immediate successor was Johann Sebastian
Mitternacht, who held this position until 1679.29 Thus, if the
letter was addressed to Salzmann, it must have been written
between 1664 and 1667; if it was written after 1667, it must have
been addressed to Mitternacht. Judging from the characteristics
of the handwriting, I would date the letter after 1670, perhaps
1671 or even 1672. In this document Schütz complained that
over the years he had sent a considerable number of works to
Zeitz, most of which, he now was told, had been given away.
Schütz further criticized that the manuscripts of the chapel
were not listed in a proper inventory. This is followed by de-
tailed suggestions of how such a catalogue should be laid out
and structured. Only by strictly following these instructions,
Schütz concludes, could the kapellmeister be assured that eve-
rything sent from Dresden would actually stay with the Zeitz
kapelle permanently without further losses. Schütz had obvi-
ously heard about certain irregularities in the keeping of the
music collection. One way to interpret his complaint could be to
Werk’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 4/5 (1982/83), p. 9–18, especially p. 11; Eva Linfield,

‘A New Look at the Sources of Schütz’s Christmas History’, Schütz-
Jahrbuch, 4/5 (1982/83), p. 19–36, especially p. 26; and Peter Wollny, ‘Hein-
rich Schütz, Johann Rosenmüller und die Kern-Sprüche I und II’, Schütz-
Jahrbuch, 28 (2006), S. 35–47.
27 Cf. Heinrich Schütz. Gesammelte Briefe und Schriften, p. 157–159 (Nr. 56).
28 On Salzmann’s biography see the funeral sermon by Abraham Beuchel
(Rechtschaffener Christlicher Prediger/ Auch aller Rechtschaffener frommer
Christen Sonderbares Grabmahl, Zeitz 1667).
29 On Mitternacht’s biography see his funeral sermon held by Otto Hanf-
mann (Das Liecht in Mitternacht, Zeitz 1679).

184 Peter Wollny
see it as an immediate reaction to a sale of manuscripts – of

which at least some may have reached Stockholm around or
shortly after 1671. Perhaps following the death of Thieme in
1668 the kapelle was in some disorder for a while. It should be
noted that Thieme’s own music collection did not remain with
the court either but was apparently bought by the court musi-
cian Heinrich Gottfried Kühnel, who took it to Leipzig when he
became organist at the Thomaskirche in 1682.30
Other hints point to Merseburg, particularly the presence of
works by Kreichel and Groh. It should also be noted that the
main scribe of the works by Kreichel in other manuscripts did
not spell the names of the leading musicians at the courts of
Zeitz and Halle properly, suggesting that he did not work in
their immediate vicinity. Thus he always writes ‘Phole’ (instead
of ‘Pohle’) and ‘Time’ (instead of ‘Thieme’).
Thirdly, Halle as the origin of some of the sources is sug-
gested by the comparatively large number of autographs by
David Pohle (who served as kapellmeister at Halle between
1660 and 1680). Also, this court maintained probably the closest
diplomatic connections to Stockholm. Another clue is provided
by the presence of a scribal hand found in one of the organ
parts of the Weihnachtshistorie and in a secular vocal piece by
Pohle. A comparison with several signed and dated documents
allows us to identify this scribe as the Halle organist Moritz
Edelmann.31 Although this evidence is quite valuable, I am still
reluctant to attribute the central-German sources to Halle as a
whole. The large number of different scribes and paper types,
despite a relatively narrow period of time during which they
were written, seems to indicate that the manuscripts did not
come from a single place, but in fact were assembled from dif-
ferent sources. We know that the three courts, situated only
about 25 miles away from each other, were in regular and close
30 See Krummacher, op. cit., p. 209–215.

31 On Edelmann’s biography see particularly Serauky, op. cit., p. 299–301
and 321–323. Autograph letters and receipts are found in the ‘Belege zur
Kirchen-Rechnung’ in the archive of the Marktkirche at Halle, especially in
the volumes for the years 1672–1675.

contact and frequently exchanged musicians and probably also

compositions. It would even be plausible to assume that the
repertoires of the three court chapels had many pieces in com-
mon, to the point of their being more or less identical. A plausi-
ble scenario could thus be that the manuscripts of our group
were assembled from all three secundogeniture courts, perhaps
by a collector in Halle, and subsequently brought to Sweden.
Figure 1.
Heinrich Schütz,
Weinachtshistorie:
organ part copied
by the organist
Moritz Edel-
mann, Halle.

186 Peter Wollny
Figure 2. Receipt written by Moritz Edelmann in 1673.

So far I have not been able to determine who may have brought
the manuscripts from Saxony to Stockholm, nor am I able to give a
sufficient explanation of why this was done. Perhaps the manu-
scripts were sold, perhaps they were exchanged for other pieces.
The agent may have been a musician or perhaps a diplomat. It
should also be noted that during the 1660s and 1670s a number of
veterans of the Swedish army lived in the duchies of Zeitz and
Merseburg.32 They may have established the necessary contacts.
And finally, perhaps the most likely way of transmission are direct
contacts between the courts of Halle and Stockholm in 1674, when
the second son of duke August, August the Younger (1650–1674),
undertook his cavalier tour through northern Europe and spent
several months at the Royal Swedish court. The exchange of musi-
cal manuscripts may easily have happened during this visit or
after the prince returned to Halle.33
To conclude, I think we can now identify the origins and trace
the history of the source complex from central Germany more
precisely. The roughly fifty pieces offer fragmentary but neverthe-
less valuable glimpses at the musical repertoire of the Saxon
secundogeniture courts around 1665–1670. In fact they represent
the only extant primary source material from these places. A more
detailed examination of the music itself would certainly yield fur-
ther interesting insights into the development of musical styles in
central Germany and the context of Heinrich Schütz’s late works.
32 I found references to Adam von Pfuel, who is entitled ‘Cron Schweden

Hochbestallter und Wohlverdienter General Majeur’, and Johann Bringel
(Pringel), ‘Königlicher Majestät zu Schweden wohlmeritirter Obrist’; both
lived in the duchy of Sachsen-Merseburg. These data are taken from
printed funeral sermons of members of their families (copies: Forschungs-
und Landesbibliothek Gotha, LP N 8° V, 4 [19] and LP O 4° I, 23 [14]).
33 This journey is described at length in the prince’s funeral sermon: Johann
Olearius, SPES AUGUSTA … Bey angestelletem HochFürstl. Leichbegängniß
... In der Fürstlichen M. Dom-Kirchen zu Hall Am Ersten Septembris deß
1674sten Jahres, Halle 1674 (copy: D-Hau, Pon. Xa 4522 4°). The prince and
his entourage reached Stockholm in mid-January 1672 and stayed there
until mid-April. It is said that he established amicable contacts with high
officials at the Swedish court, among them Per Brahe, Carl Gustaf Wran-
gel, Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie, Sten Bielke, and others.

188 Peter Wollny
Appendix
Sources from central Germany in the Düben Collection
Vmhs composer/work ink no. remarks

47:5 V. Albrici, Jesu nostra Redemptio
47:6 V. Albrici, In convertendo Domino
47:8 V. Albrici, Laetatus sum
67:5 Anonymous, Adveniet dies Domini
40:5 Anonymous, Deus miseratur nostri
67:17 Anonymous, Es steh Gott auf
41:16 Anonymous, Gott ist unser Zuversicht 465
69:13 Anonymous, Laudabo Nomen Dei
43:17 Anonymous, Laudate pueri 407
44:1 Anonymous, Magnificat 410
45:15 Anonymous, Salvum me fac Deus
70:16 Anonymous, Veni Creator
4:15 Bontempi, Paratum cor meum 434
69:8 J. W. F[urchheim], Missa a 6
54:14 V. Fux, Missa 409
67:7 C. Kreichel, Cantate Domino
5:4 C. Kreichel, Si bona suscepimus 405
57:8 J. P. Krieger, Cantate Domino
57:11 J. P. Krieger, Exulta jubila
57:12 J. P. Krieger, Haurietis aquas
61:15 G. Peranda, Cor meum crea
61:18 G. Peranda, Miserere
32:4 D. Pohle, Benedicam Domino autograph
40:12 D. Pohle?, Domine Deus meus autograph
32:8 D. Pohle, Herr, wenn ich nur dich habe 406
63:7 D. Pohle, Jesu auctor clementiae autograph

Vmhs composer/work ink no. remarks

63:6 D. Pohle, Jesu chare autograph
63:8 D. Pohle, Nur in meines Jesu Wunden 422
63:9 D. Pohle, Paratum cor meum autograph
63:10 D. Pohle, Te Sanctum Dominum
46:14 D. Pohle, Weiß und Schwarz partly
autograph
33:9a G. Rovetta, Dixit Dominus 413
33:14 G. Rovetta, Laudate pueri Domine partly in
Pohle’s hand
33:12 G. Rovetta, Missa 411
71 H. Schütz, Weihnachts-Historie
35:20 C. Thieme, Beatus vir 408
69:11 C. T[hieme], Laudate Pueri
35:22 C. Thieme, Missa 412
66:13 C. Thieme, Missa
66:12 C. Thieme, Nunc dimittis
Imhs composer/work
3:15 F. W. Furchheim, Sonata a 6 in D Major

3:17b F. W. Furchheim, Sonata a 5 in E-flat Major
1:11 H. Groh, Suite in e Minor

190 Peter Wollny
Literature
Barocke Fürstenresidenzen an Saale, Unstrut und Elster, Petersberg 2007.

Bircher, Martin, ‘Johann Beer am Hof des Wohlgeratenen’, Johann Beer. Schrift-
steller, Komponist und Hofbeamter 1655–1700. Beiträge zum Internationalen
Symposion in Weißenfels, Oktober 2000, eds. Ferdinand van Ingen & Hans-
Gert Roloff, Bern 2003, p. 69–90.
Frandsen, Mary E., Crossing Confessional Boundaries. The Patronage of Italian
Sacred Music in Seventeenth-Century Dresden, New York: Oxford University
Press 2006.
Fürstenau, Moritz, Zur Geschichte der Musik und des Theaters am Hofe zu Dres-
den, vol. 1, Dresden 1861–1862.
Teil II–III, ebd., 48 (1966), S. 63–186.
Gundlach, Klaus-Jürgen, Das Weißenfelser Aufführungsverzeichnis Johann Philipp
Kriegers und seines Sohnes Johann Gotthilf Krieger (1684—1732), Sinzig 2001.
Kretzschmar, Hellmut, ‘Zur Geschichte der sächsischen Sekundogeniturfürs-
tentümer’, in Kretzschmar, Vom Anteil Sachsens an der neueren deutschen Ge-
schichte. Ausgewählte Aufsätze, ed. Reiner Groß & Manfred Kobuch, Stutt-
gart 1999, p. 141–203.
Linfield, Eva, ‘A New Look at the Sources of Schütz’s Christmas History’,
Schütz-Jahrbuch, 4/5 (1982/83), p. 19–36.
Monatshefte für Musikgeschichte, 3 (1888).
Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 2. ed. Kassel: Bärenreiter 1994–2007.
The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2. ed., London 2001.
Schütz, Heinrich. Gesammelte Briefe und Schriften, ed. Erich H. Müller, Regens-
burg 1931.
Seiffert, Max, Preface to Johann Philipp Krieger. 21 ausgewählte Kirchenkomposi-
tionen, Denkmäler Deutsche Tonkunst , 53/54, Leipzig 1916.
Serauky, Walter, Musikgeschichte der Stadt Halle, vol. II/1: Von Samuel Scheidt
bis in die Zeit Georg Friedrich Händels und Johann Sebastian Bachs, Halle
1939.
Snyder, Kerala J., Dieterich Buxtehude: Organist in Lübeck, New York: Schirmer
Books 1987.

Snyder, Kerala J., Dieterich Buxtehude: Organist in Lübeck, rev. ed. Rochester:
University of Rochester Press 2007.
Steude, Wolfram, ‘Bausteine zu einer Geschichte der Sachsen-Merseburgi-
schen Hofmusik (1653—1738)’, Musik der Macht – Macht der Musik. Bericht
über das Wissenschaftliche Symposion anläßlich der 4. mitteldeutschen Heinrich-
Schütz-Tage, Weißenfels 2001, ed. Juliane Riepe and Henrike Rucker, Schne-
verdingen 2003, p. 73–101.
Steude, Wolfram,’Das wiederaufgefundene Opus ultimum von Heinrich
Schütz. Bemerkungen zur Quelle und zum Werk’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 4/5
(1982/83), p. 9–18.
Walther, Johann Gottfried, Musicalisches Lexicon oder Musicalische Bibliothec,
Leipzig 1732; ed. Rischar Schaul, Kassel: Bärenreiter 1953.
Weck, Anton , Der Chur-Fürstlichen Sächsischen weitberuffenen Residentz- und
Haupt-Vestung Dresden Beschreib- und Vorstellung, Nürnberg 1680.
Werner, Arno, Städtische und fürstliche Musikpflege in Weissenfels bis zum Ende
des 18. Jahrhunderts, Leipzig 1911.
Werner, Arno, Städtische und fürstliche Musikpflege in Zeitz bis zum Anfang des
19. Jahrhunderts, Bückeburg and Leipzig 1922.
Wollny, Peter, ’Eine anonyme Leipziger Hochzeitsmusik aus dem 17. Jahr-
hundert‘, Über Leben, Kunst und Kunstwerke. Aspekte musikalischer Biogra-
phie. Festschrift für Hans-Joachim Schulze zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Christoph
Wolff, Leipzig 1999, p. 46–60.
Wollny, Peter, ‘Beiträge zur Entstehungsgeschichte der Sammlung Düben,’
Wollny, Peter, ‘Heinrich Schütz, Johann Rosenmüller und die Kern-Sprüche I
und II’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 28 (2006), p. 35–47.
Wright, Peter, ‘The Compilation of Trent 871 and 922’, Early Music History, 2
(1982), p. 237–271.

LARS BERGLUND
The Roman Connection. The Dissemination

and Reception of Roman Music in the North
It is common knowledge among scholars that music and musi-

cal practices in Northern Europe during the 17th century were
heavily dependent on Italian models, and that this orientation
towards Italian music was particularly strong in the most
northern region, the Baltic area. It has also been pointed out,
although perhaps only more recently with more emphasis, that
from around 1650 and onwards this Italianate orientation was
particularly directed towards Roman models.1
The transmission of Roman traditions to the North is in its
turn connected with a number of key figures, who in different
ways contributed to the process – which is in fact relatively well
reflected in the Düben Collection and in the chronology of its
acquisition.
Thus, among the earliest manuscripts in the collection we
find two works by Marco Scacchi, dated 1649.2 Scacchi, a Ro-
man working in Warsaw from the early 1620s until the late
1640s, was an important forerunner of the Roman invasion to
come. He was a disciple of Giovanni Francesco Anerio, a musi-
cian who was associated with several of the most important
musical institutions in Rome: the Jesuit circles at Chiesa del Gesù
and Collegio Romano, the Congregazione dell’Oratorio of the Chiesa
1 See for instance Peter Wollny, ‘Kaspar Försters Dialog Congregantes Phil-
istei und der römische Oratorienstil’, Schweizer Jahrbuch für Musikwissen-
schaft, Neue Folge, 21 (2001), p. 11; Geoffrey Webber, North German Church
Music in the Age of Buxtehude, Oxford 1996, p. 55f.
2 Tota pulchra es ( Vmhs 85:63) and Laudate pueri Dominum (Vmhs 34:7).

194 Lars Berglund
nuova, the Arciconfraternita del SS Crocifisso di San Marcello al

Corso and the Basilica of St. John Lateran.3
In the early stages of the collection, as early as the 1650s, we
also find music by Kaspar Förster the Younger.4 Förster was
born in Danzig in 1616, son of the cantor and later Kapellmeis-
ter of the Marienkirche. He went to Rome and the Jesuit Col-
legium Germanicum to study under Carissimi in the 1630s,
most probably on the initiative of Marco Scacchi. He played an
equally important role in the transmission of Roman musical
traditions to the Baltic region as Henrich Schütz played in in-
troducing Venetian music to Middle Germany.
It was from the 1660s, however, after Gustav Düben took
over the position of Hofkapellmeister in 1663, that the Düben
Collection as we think of it started to take shape. At this time a
large number of works were acquired composed by two Ro-
mans based in Dresden: Vincenzo Albrici and Giuseppe Per-
anda, two of the most central figures in the dissemination of the
Roman style north of the Alps. It was also at this time that the
major part of Förster’s music was acquired. During this period,
from 1661 until 1667, Förster was active as Hofkapellmeister in
Copenhagen. Moreover, at this time a large stock of Italian mu-
sic, both Roman and North Italian, was added to the collection.
To a large extent this repertoire was copied from prints, in par-
ticular anthologies such as those published by Profe (mostly
containing North Italian music), and by Silvestri (Roman music
3 Klaus Fischer, ‘Anerio, Giovanni Francesco’, Grove Music Online ed

L. Macy (Accessed May 2007) <http://www.grovemusic.com>
4 Confitebor tibi Domine in C (Vmhs 21:12), explicitly dated 1656/57; see Lars
Berglund, ‘The Concerto Principle in Kaspar Förster’s Psalm Composi-
tions: Confitebor tibi Domine in C’, Musica Baltica. In Umkreis des Wandels –
von den cori spezzati zum konzertierenden Stil (Prace Specjalne, 64), Gdànsk
2004, p. 32–44. As Bruno Grusnick has remarked, the source could argua-
bly have reached Stockholm later than the dates in the manuscripts. Bruno
Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung: Ein Versuch ihrer chronologischen
Ordnung’ Teil II-III, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 48 (1966)., p. 70.

The Roman Connection 195
only). Several of these printed collections are still part of the

Düben Collection.5
From the 1670s onwards we can see more of the effects
rather than the causes of the Roman influx, for instance in the
music by Christian Geist, a major devotee of Roman music ac-
tive at the Swedish court.6 Furthermore, it was at this time that
music by Buxtehude started to reach Stockholm: music with a
far greater stylistic breadth compared to Geist’s, but still with a
large portion of Roman spirit. An exceptional example of this
spirit is Buxtehude’s cantata cycle Membra Jesu nostri, composed
in a distinctly Roman style which by that time, 1680, must ar-
guably be considered somewhat old-fashioned. It is hardly a
coincidence that the autograph of this particular work bears a
dedication from the composer to Gustav Düben himself. I
would in fact suggest that it was composed as a deliberate exer-
cise in, or demonstration of, the maniera romana, intended for a
colleague well-known for his strong bent for the Roman fla-
vour.
At the same time, Membra marks a culmination of this trend.
From the 1680s onwards musical practices at the Swedish royal
court seems to have drifted away from the distinctly Roman
inclinations, paying more attention to French currents instead
and to newer trends in Germany, as represented by composers
such as Johann and Johann Philipp Krieger, Johann Valentin
Meder and Christian Ritter.
Nevertheless, for three decades from mid-century to the
1680s the Hofkapelle in Stockholm was something of a strong-
hold of Roman musical traditions. In the following section I will
attempt to analyse the background to, and implications of, this
particular orientation.
5 See Erik Kjellberg, Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden. Studier

kring deras organisation, verksamheter och status ca 1620–ca 1720, Uppsala
1979, vol. 1, p. 299–309 and vol. 2, p. 825–831.
6 See Lars Berglund, ‘Christian Geist’s Vide pater mi dolores and his applica-
tion for the Johanneumskantorat in Hamburg’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 24 (2002),
p. 7–30.

196 Lars Berglund
The recruitment of Queen Christina’s Italian ensemble
As the reader may have noticed, one exceptionally important

event was left out in the brief survey above: the visit of an Ital-
ian ensemble of singers and musicians to Stockholm, including
the young Vincenzo Albrici, from December 1652 until the time
of Queen Christina’s abdication in the summer of 1654. Since
this visit was crucial to the development of Swedish court mu-
sic from the 1650s and onwards, I would like to dwell upon
some circumstances connected to this event.
The person whom Christina engaged to recruit an ensemble
of musicians and bring them to Stockholm was a certain Ales-
sandro Cecconi. Cecconi was originally from Pisa, but is listed
as a bass singer at the Medici court in Florence in 1641.7 Once in
Stockholm, however, he was not enrolled with the Italian musi-
cians at court but as Queen Christina’s personal valet-de-
chambre.8
Cecconi’s activities during the years preceding the recruit-
ment of the Italian ensemble are quite interesting, and give im-
portant insight into the connections and background of Queen
Christina’s Italian troupe. On the one hand he was affiliated to
the Jesuit musical circles in Rome. He was hired as a singer at
the Collegium Germanicum during 1646, thus singing under its
maestro di cappella, Giacomo Carissimi. There, if not earlier, he
must have come in contact with Vincenzo Albrici, who had en-
tered the college in May 1641, and was still active there as or-
ganist in December 1646.9 On the other hand, just a few years
later we find Cecconi in Paris, as a member of the group of mu-
7 Warren Kirkendale, The Court Musicians in Florence During the Principate of the
Medici: With a Reconstruction of the Artistic Establishment, Florence 1993, p. 396.
8 Einar Sundström, ’Notiser om drottning Kristinas italienska musiker’,
Svenska tidskrift för musikforskning, 43 (1961), p. 298.
9 Thomas D. Culley, Jesuits and Music: I. A Study of the Musicians connected with
the German College in Rome during the 17th Century and of their Activities in
Northern Europe (Sources and studies for the history of the Jesuits, 2), p. 216f.

sicians brought there from Rome by the cardinal brothers An-

tonio and Francesco Barberini, the nephews of Pope Urban VIII.
After Pope Urban’s death they had travelled to Paris more or
less as exiled refugees, due to the hostility of the new Pamfilii
pope.10 As Margaret Murata has convincingly pointed out, Cec-
coni is most probably identical with the bass singer ‘Alessandro
Fiorentino’, who sang the parts of Plutone and Momo in the
famous staging of Luigi Rossi’s opera Orfeo in March 1647.11
This also supports Einar Sundström’s suggestion, that Cecconi
was identical with the ‘Signor Allessandro that John Evelyn (?)
met in Paris in February 1650. In the entry for February 6th 1650
Evelyn writes: ‘[…] After Evening Prayer came Signor Alles-
sandro one of the Card: Mazarinis Musitians, & a person of
greate name for his knowledge in that Art, to visite my Wife, &
sung before divers persons of qualitie in my Chamber […]’.12
Cecconi’s double affiliation, with the Jesuit colleges and
churches on the one hand and the Barberini family on the other,
is no coincidence; there were important connections between
the Jesuit circles and the Barberini family at that time. The two
brothers Antonio and Francesco Barberini were the Cardinal
Protectors of the Collegium Germanicum until well into the
1650s, and their brother Don Taddeo Barberini was Prince Pre-
fect.13 It was Antonio Barberini who arranged and financially
supported the spectacular festivities held at the main Jesuit ba-
silica, Chiesa del Gesù in 1639, celebrating the centenary of the
society with solemn music for seven choirs, composed by Ste-
fano Fabri.14 The connection with the Barberini family, more-
10 Torgil Magnusson, Rome in the Age of Bernini, vol. 2, p. 8f.

11 Margaret Murata, ‘Obscure musicians: Alessandro Cecconi’, 17th Century
Music SSCM Newsletter, 10/1, (2000), p. 11. I am grateful to Alessio Ruffati
for drawing my attention to these circumstances.
12 Sundström, op. cit., p. 299; The diary of John Evelyn, ed. Guy de la Bédoyère,
Woodbridge 1995, p. 71.
13 Thomas D. Culley, op. cit., p. 198 and 204.
14 Frederick Hammond, Music & Spectacle in Baroque Rome. Barberini Patro-
nage under Urban VIII, New Haven 1994, p. 156–164. As Hammond re-
marks, the relation between the Barberinis and the Jesuits was complex,

198 Lars Berglund
over, explains why the ensemble mainly consisted of a mixture

of Roman and Florentine musicians. On the one hand the Bar-
berinis originated from Florence; on the other hand they domi-
nated cultural life in Rome during Urban VIII’s pontificate.
These intermingling circles of the Barberini family and the
Jesuit society represent precisely the very soil for the musical
traditions that were to make such an important imprint on Swed-
ish court music. There are many examples of these affiliations
between the musical circles of the Jesuits and the Barberinis. I
would like to mention a few circumstances which are interesting
in connection with Queen Christina’s Italian ensemble.
The first example is Vincenzo Albrici. As already mentioned,
he studied and performed at the Collegium Germanicum and at
San Apollinare under Carissimi between 1641 and 1646. What
has not been observed before is the regular payments recorded
in the account books from Chiesa del Gesù from December 1649
to April 1651, to Signor Vincenzo organista.15 It is more than likely
that this Vincenzo organista is identical with Vincenzo Albrici.
We know that Albrici was active as an organist at the Col-
legium Germanicum and at Chiesa nuova,16 and that Giuseppe
Ottavio Pitoni characterised him as an excellent player of the
organ and harpsichord.17 Considering Albrici’s earlier affiliation
with the Jesuit Collegium Germanicum, it is not surprising to
find him at Il Gesù. This also means that he performed under
not least due to the Society’s close bonds with Spain. Still, one can note
that one of Urban VIII’s models as pope was Paul III Farnese, who autho-
rized the Jesuit Society in 1540. Hammond, op. cit., p. 38f.
15 Archivium Romanum Societatis Jesu, Fondo Chiesa del Gesù 2009, Libro
dell’entrata e uscita per la Sagrestia della Chiesa del Gesù (anni 1637–1654).
16 It is not known for sure exactly when; see Mary E. Frandsen, article ‘Albri-
ci, Vincenzo’, Grove Music Online, ed. L. Macy (Accessed February 2007),
<http://www.grovemusic.com>.
17 Giuseppe Ottavio Pitoni, Notitia de’ contrapuntisti e compositori di musica,
ed. Cesarino Ruini, Florence 1988, p. 326. Pitoni’s manuscript was proba-
bly compiled around 1725, see Siegfried Gmeinwieser, ‘Pitoni, Giuseppe
Ottavio’, Grove Music Online, ed. L. Macy (Accessed February 2007),
<http://www.grovemusic.com>

another of the most significant figures in Roman ecclesiastical

music at this time, Bonifazio Graziani, who was then maestro di
cappella at Il Gesù and at the Seminario Romano.
Furthermore, very little attention has been paid to the exis-
tence of one, and possibly even several, very early pieces by
Albrici in the Barberini collection at the Vatican Library, in
Barb. lat. 4163.18 One work is explicitly attributed to him: an aria
to the text ‘Mio cor non pensar più’. The two succeeding
anonymous pieces in the volume are possibly also by him (nos.
11 and 12, Che volete da me pensieri and Fate largo al mio pensiero),
since it appears that the manuscript consists of series of compo-
sitions by one and the same composer, with the composer’s
name only given for the first piece.
These compositions are part of a larger collection of music
manuscripts that once belonged to a famous singer in the ser-
vice of Cardinal Antonio Barberini, Marc’Antonio Pasqualini,
and were for the most part copied by him.19 Albrici’s piece (or
possibly pieces), the only known music attributed to him from
his time in Rome, is found side by side in this source with
works by Pasqualini himself and by Luigi Rossi.20 Pasqualini
was the leading singer in Rome at this time. He took the leading
roles in all of the Roman opera productions arranged by the
Barberinis, such as Stefano Landi’s San Alessio and Luigi Rossi’s
In palazzo incantato. He also performed the role of Aristeo in
Rossi’s Orfeo in Paris, thereby sharing the stage with Alessan-
dro Cecconi. Moreover, the contact between Cecconi and
Pasqualini is reflected in the interesting manuscript of arias in
the Royal Library in Stockholm, which was copied by Cecconi,
apparently in Paris, and which includes works by Pasqualini,
18 Concerning these manuscripts see Margaret Murata, ‘Pasqualini rico-

nociuto’, Et facciam dolçi canti. Studi in onore di Agostino Ziino in occasione del
suo 65° compleanno, ed. B. M. Antolini, T. M. Gialdroni, and A. Pugliese,
Lucca 2003, p. 655–686.
19 Gloria Rose, ‘Pasqualini as a copyist’, Analecta musicologica, 14 (1974),
p. 170–175.
20 Among the other composers we find Signor Mario (most likely Mario
Savioni), Antimo Liberati and Carlo Rainaldo.

200 Lars Berglund
Carissimi, Carlo Caprioli and others, including one of the num-

bers from Rossi’s Orfeo: Eurydice’s sarabanda.21 In the same
manner, pieces by Pasqualini, Luigi Rossi and Carissimi are
included in the manuscript copied by the theorbo-player of the
Italian ensemble, Angelo Michele Bartolotti. This manuscript
was offered to the English Ambassador Bulstrode Whitelocke in
Uppsala during the spring of 1654 and is now at Christ Church
Library in Oxford.22 Again this double affiliation with the Jesu-
its and the Barberini family.
Admittedly, such affiliations are not surprising at this time.
The Barberini family had dominated Roman culture for two
decades, and took particular interest in the patronage of musi-
cal productions of different kinds. These were components of
an unusually ambitious and relatively coherent political pro-
gramme, which reflected both the more general political, reli-
gious and moral agenda of Urban VIII’s pontificate, as well as
the more worldly economical and political goals of the family.23
In a similar way, the musical activities connected with the
Jesuit Society were part of an ambitious missionary and educa-
tional programme, where high artistic standards where consid-
ered an important requirement.24 Most important in this context
was their relatively pragmatic view on ecclesiastical music and
their willingness to allow the use of the modern innovations of
the musica moderna, a style focusing primarily on a strong ap-
peal to the listener’s senses and affections, in the service of a
religious rhetoric.25 This meant that the music produced and
performed at the Jesuit churches and institutions in Rome was
21 Murata, op. cit., p. 665f.

22 See Geoffrey Webber, ‘Italian music at the Court of Queen Christina. Christ
Church, Oxford, Mus. MS 377 and the visit of Vincenzo Albrici’s Italian
ensemble, 1652–54’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning¸ 75 (1993), p. 47–53.
23 Hammond, op. cit., p. 37–42.
24 For a recent study on Jesuit patronage of the art, see Evonne Levy, Propa-
ganda and the Jesuit Baroque, Berkeley etc. 2004.
25 Lars Berglund, ‘Angels or Sirens? Questions of reception and performa-
tivity in Roman church music around 1650’, Performance and performativity
in Baroque Art (forthcoming).

often innovative and boldly expressive, and Roman composers

did not hesitate to adopt new means explored in the search for
the most effective musical setting of secular erotic texts. This
double striving for high artistic quality and extraordinarily
strong expression in contemporary Roman music was to make a
deep mark on the musical repertoire typically associated with
the Düben Collection.
Where do these connections lead us? Both Einar Sundström
and John Bergsagel have suggested, albeit tentatively, that the
turn towards Roman music at Queen Christina’s court in the
early 1650s actually originated in Paris with the import of Ro-
man culture to the French court during the Barberini exile.26
Queen Christina, and the Swedish nobility as a whole, had an
inclination for French court culture during the 1640s, partly as
an effect of the political alliance during the Thirty Years’ War.
Thus, goes this line of argument, when Italian music became à
la mode in Paris, the Swedish court followed suit.
However, this is to make things a little too simple. It is based
on the assumption that interest in, and knowledge of, Italian cul-
ture in Sweden at this time was meagre, and that there were no
extensive cultural contacts between Sweden and Italy during the
Thirty Years’ War, which is not true. During the 1630s and 1640s a
steady stream of travellers from the North visited Rome. They
were mainly young noblemen on their peregrinatio, their so-called
‘grand tour’ of Europe. It has been estimated that between five
and seven hundred members of the Swedish gentry made this
tour during the 17th century,27 in other words five to ten persons
a year, coming back to the capital with news and gossip to report
to the court. And they all went to Rome. I would like to bring
attention to one such case, which I find interesting in this context.
26 Sundström, op. cit.; John Bergsagel, ‘Music at the Swedish Court of Queen
Christina’, Convegno internazionale Cristina di Svezia e la musica (Roma, 5–6
dicembre 1996) (Atti dei convegni Lincei, 138), Rome 1998, p. 9–20, and Mu-
rata, op. cit., p. 666f.
27 Lars Niléhn, Peregrinatio Academica. Det svenska samhället och de utrikes
studieresorna under 1600-talet, Lund 1983.

202 Lars Berglund
One traveller among many: Karl Lilliecrona in Rome
Karl Lilliecrona (1620–1674) was the son of Kasper Lilliecrona

(born Kenig) a former court pharmacist who had recently been
made a nobleman. The father had made a respectable fortune,
which he spent on a city palace and on the education of his
sons. Karl undertook his peregrination between 1639 and
1643.28
It should be noted from the start that Lilliecrona was by no
means a major figure in Swedish history. On the contrary, after
his final return to Stockholm, for unknown reasons and despite
good prospects, he did not achieve any remarkable career
whatsoever. He was not a key figure in the process of bringing
knowledge of Roman culture to Stockholm, but simply a typical
representative of the many travellers, and he just happened to
leave source material for us to document his travels in the form
of an unusually comprehensive diary from his journey, encom-
passing some two hundred handwritten pages in Latin.29
On his grand tour Lilliecrona kept to the main route, taken
by more or less everyone at this time: Amsterdam – Paris –
Provence – Marseille – Genoa – Florence – Rome – Naples –
Rome again – Venice, and then back home again. What is un-
usual for Lilliecrona’s diary is that it doesn’t follow the stan-
dard pattern, which is to laconically record the route and briefly
describe the most important sights by quoting from the popular
guide-books. Instead Lilliecrona often makes personal com-
ments about what he saw and did.
To begin with, while he was in Saumur in the Loire Valley
(officially he was there to study law, in reality he trained riding
and fencing) he came in close contact with another young no-
bleman on his grand tour, Count Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie.
On his return to Stockholm De la Gardie was to become Queen
28 I would like to thank Ola Winberg for drawing my attention to Lilliecro-

na’s diary.
29 Uppsala University Library (UUB), X 353 and 352.

Christina’s favourite at court, and thanks to their friendship

Lilliecrona also came in close contact with the queen.
Lilliecrona arrived in Rome on February 27th 1642 and ex-
cept for a visit to Naples in March he stayed there until April
24th the same year. In the entry for February 28th – i.e. the very
day after his arrival in the city – his diary relates an interesting
story.
At the hour of Vespers on that day he was standing outside
the Barberini palace together with a large crowd of people –
‘almost the whole city’, Lilliecrona writes – who had come there
because Cardinal Antonio Barberini was giving a comedy in the
palace theatre. Then Antonio Barberini himself appeared, and
he turned out to be particularly friendly towards foreigners,
because he picked out Lilliecrona and his companion, a certain
Herr Reiswitz, from the crowd, and personally conducted them
into the theatre, leaving the rest of the crowd behind. Then,
when they were all installed inside the theatre, Antonio Bar-
berini and his brother, Cardinal Francesco, came round to see if
they were comfortably seated.
And thus it happened that the young Karl Lilliecrona from
Stockholm attended one of the performances of Luigi Rossi’s
opera Il palazzo incantato (‘The enchanted palace’), with none
other than the celebrated castrato Marc’Antonio Pasqualini in
the leading role as Bradamante. In a comparatively long pas-
sage in the diary Lilliecrona describes the performance in glow-
ing terms:
Even if the comedy was worthy of and received applause from everyone,
the sweetness of the singing, and the living representation of everything
and movement, and the accumulation of all things delighting, filled me,
while I was sitting there with my attention on everything that happened
on stage, with such wonder, so that I not without reason believed myself
to be placed in a heavenly theatre.30
30 ‘Comaedia vero ipsa, quamvis cunctorum applausum et merita, et nacta

fuerit: me attamen cantium suavitate sua, vivaque omnium rerum mo-
tumque repraesentatione, atque adeo omnium oblectamentorum congerie,

204 Lars Berglund
He then goes on to describe the first scene of the opera, where

‘a maiden in a beautiful dress’ – an allegorical representation of
Painting – is sitting on a chair painting on the theatre wall with
a paintbrush in her trembling hand, while she began to speak
with the sweetest singing voice (‘suavissima voce ac cantu ex-
sorsa est loqui’). This is obviously Lilliecrona’s way of describ-
ing his impression of recitative. He uses a similar expression in
the next paragraph of his diary, when he relates how Painting
rises to contemplate her painting from a distance and then re-
turns to her chair, while at the same time ‘with a sweet sound
and singing, speaking distinctly without interruption’ (‘cum
suavi sono et cantu distincte sine intermissione loquens’). This
notion of a combination of singing and ‘distinct speech’ is ar-
guably his way of explaining a musical phenolmenon not alto-
gether familiar to him.
Lilliecrona then describes a stage set representing a magnifi-
cent palace, and other sets depicting the waters and mountains
of Frescati, and Civitaveccia, the maritime port of Rome, with
ships sailing back and forth, as well as the representation of
flashes in the air. The comedy was concluded, Lilliecrona tells
us, with sweet singing by the character of Bradamante (i.e.
Marc’Antonio Pasqualini), dressed like a Roman. The perform-
ance lasted for six hours, and the Cardinal was said to have
spent 16000 scudi on the production.31
Moreover, in the entry for March 2nd, two days later, Lillie-
crona reports how he went back to the theatre, and how he once
again was picked out by Antonio Barberini and brought into
the theatre to see the performance a second time.
This is a telling example in several ways. One interesting as-
pect is how keen Antonio Barberini was to bring Lilliecrona and
his friend into the theatre, not once but twice. We must note
sedentem reique agendae intentum admiratione sui adeo occupaverat, ut

in caelesti quodam theatro constitutum esse me non abs re putaverim.’
UUB, X 353.
31 This may be an exaggeration. A contemporary diarist, Theodore Amey-
den, estimates the expenses to 8000 scudi. Hammond, op. cit., p. 244.

that the competition for seats was very tough,32 a fact that is
also clear from Lilliecrona’s description of the large crowd that
had gathered in front of the palace. It gives us some idea of the
propagandistic agenda behind such a production, and that
members of the elite from the protestant countries north of the
Alps were regarded as interesting targets.
Lilliecrona’s enthusiasm about a performance that must
clearly have contained many ingredients that were new and
unfamiliar to him is also remarkable. In actual fact the première
on February 22nd was something of a fiasco, mainly due to
technical problems with the stage machinery.33 Moreover, the
opera was criticised for being too ‘long and tearful’, with a ri-
diculous over-exposure of Barberini’s favourite Marc’Antonio
Pasquilini in the role as Bradamante.34 Nothing of this is hinted
at in Lilliecrona’s report, which on the contrary is unreservedly
positive.
Apart from this spectacular opera performance Lilliecrona
mostly mentions visits to the major monuments of Rome, such
as the Coliseum and Castel San’Angelo. He does not say much
about the Roman churches, but in some passages church music
is mentioned in passing. On Palm Sunday he attended Mass in
the Sistine Chapel and ‘heard music’. Moreover, during his
brief visit to Naples he attended the Jesuit church there, where
he listened to ‘beautiful and sweet music’.35
It is not hard to imagine how the young Queen Christina,
stuck in Stockholm with a burning interest in the esteemed
European culture and a longing for Italy, eagerly squeezed
every detail about such experiences from the returning travel-
lers she met at court.
We can also note that Lilliecrona, thanks to his friendship
with Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie and his success at court on
32 Hammond, op. cit., p. 248.

33 ibid.
34 ibid.
35 ‘In templo Jesuitarum egregiam atque suavem Musicam ascultavi’. UUB,
X 353, entry for March 23, 1642.

206 Lars Berglund
his homecoming, was chosen as one of the members of the large

Embassy led by Magnus Gabriel De la Gardie that was sent to
Paris in 1646, where he was able to hear some of Barberini’s
Roman musicians again – both Luigi Rossi and Marc’Antonio
Pasqualini were in Paris during the Embassy’s stay.
What I would like to establish by this isolated example is
that awareness of Italian culture and Italian music is likely to
have been comprehensive and very up-to-date in the North at
this time, including a detailed knowledge of leading figures,
trends and shifts in taste. This is also exemplified by a letter
from Queen Christina to Paolo Giordano, Duke of Bracciano,
dated 1652, where she asks him for detailed news of Rome’s
cultural life: had Bernini finished the Navona fountain? Had
any new composer emerged, surpassing Carissimi?36 What was
lacking in Stockholm, until 1653, was the possibility of hearing
this kind of music performed by musicians well-trained in the
tradition.
The repertoire of the Italian ensemble
So what kind of music was heard in Stockholm in 1653, after the

arrival of the Italians?
As we have already seen, secular arias and cantatas by com-
posers such as Luigi Rossi and Giacomo Carissimi must have
been an important part of the repertoire – music intended for
court divertissements, i.e. music of the same kind that was per-
formed as entertainment at Queen Christina’s court in Rome.
However, the ensemble apparently also sang sacred music of
Roman origin. This is exemplified by the manuscript Vhms
53:10 in the Düben Collection: a set of parts copied during the
early 1650s, containing twenty-five Roman motets by Giacomo
36 Sven Stolpe, Drottning Kristina, 2. ed., Stockholm 1966, p. 211.

Carissimi, Orazio Benevoli, Francesco Foggia and Antonio Ci-

fra, and even one piece by Alessandro Cecconi himself – the
only known composition by him. The manuscript was copied in
Stockholm, just after the Italian ensemble had left Sweden.37
Also of interest are the eleven manuscripts of works by Fran-
cesco Foggia in the Düben Collection, copied by an Italian
scribe whom Bruno Grusnick refers to as the ‘Foggia-Schreiber’.
Two of the pieces, Celebrate o fideles (Vmhs 23:2) and Laetantes
canite diem laetitiae (Vmhs 23:10), bear the explicit date 1646, and
on the title page of the former the composer’s name is given
thus: ‘Di Francesco Foggia Maestro di Capella in S. Gio. Later-
ano’.38 The date, style of writing and formulation of the inscrip-
tion all suggest that this source was copied in Rome in 1646,
and this assumption can be extended to the entire group of
manuscripts, which is clearly homogeneous. The eleven works
consist of five motets for two or three voices and instruments,
five settings of vesper psalms for eight voices (2 x SATB), vio-
lins and trombones and connected to these a Magnificat with
the same scoring. Interestingly, the scoring of the five motets
includes violins, which is unusual in printed Roman motets.
This suggests that the absence of concertato instruments in
printed music was at least to some extent due to technical and
economical considerations connected with the printing process,
rather than a reflection of Roman performance practices. Dur-
ing performances in Roman churches it is likely that sacred mo-
tets and psalm settings such as these would often have included
sinfonias and interludes for violins, or possibly cornetti.
Geoffrey Webber also concludes from this material that the
Italian musicians brought sacred music with them to Stock-
holm. Webber also refers to some printed music from Rome
which belongs to the Düben Collection, such as the four an-
37 Geoffrey Webber, ‘Italian music at the court of Queen Christina, Christ

Church, Oxford Mus. MS 327 and the visit of Vincenzo Albrici’s Italian en-
semble, 1952–54’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 74:2 (1993), p. 52.
38 Vmhs 23:2, ‘Organo’. An almost identical inscription is also found on the
title page of the Organo part of Laetantes canite diem laetitiae (Vmhs 23:10).

208 Lars Berglund
thologies edited by F. Silvestri, 1647–49, and Francesco Foggia’s

Concentus ecclesiastici, 1645. However, he states that ‘it is
unlikely that any of the Italian musicians took part in the per-
formance of sacred music at Court’, since the Hofkapelle al-
ready ‘maintained a full complement of Swedish and German
musicians’. Instead, Webber suggests, the Italians ‘may well
have supplied the Hofkapelle with copies of Italian sacred
works for them to perform’.39
I find this a doubtful assumption. First, it underestimates the
importance attached at this time to skill in musical practices
and knowledge of performance traditions. During the 17th cen-
tury emphasis on the work itself was comparatively weak,
whereas the practical realisation of the music was considered
most important. Simply representing the notes of a written part
was not sufficient; it was essential to perform it in an adequate
fashion, which demanded know-how and experience of the
exclusive Roman style of playing.40 It seems unlikely that
Queen Christina, with a group of brilliant Italian singers and
musicians at her disposal, would let the Swedish-German en-
semble perform Italian motets at her court services – unless
they were prohibited to perform for confessional reasons, for
which we have no evidence. At the Lutheran court of Dresden
in the 1660s and 1670s Italian musicians regularly performed at
church services. In addition, it is highly likely that the demand-
ing alto parts found in some of Kaspar Förster’s motets for the
royal court of Copenhagen were specifically written for, and
performed by, the Italian castrato Giuseppe Petrucci. Therefore,
I see no reason not to assume that the Italians also performed
sacred music at church services in Stockholm. In this context we
must also note that the regular services at the royal court in
Stockholm were not normally held in the palace church, but in a
39 Webber, ‘Italian music’, p. 50f.

40 The most famous evidence of this is Heinrich Schütz’ often quoted state-
ment in his preface to Symphoniae sacrae II (1647), that those performers
that were not familiar with the new Italian style ([die] heutige Italienische
Manier), should seek instruction from somebody experienced.

hall of the palace called ‘gamla matsalen’ (‘the old dining-

hall’).41 This tradition of celebrating religious services in a semi-
private environment may arguably have made the participation
of Italian musicians less controversial.
What then about the outcome of this brief visit on perform-
ance practices and performing standards at the Swedish court?
Obviously we have little substantial knowledge, due to the lack
of sources. However, a qualified guess is that the contact and
collaboration with these excellent Italian musicians had an im-
mense and lasting impact on the court music ensemble. What
was perhaps most important in this context was precisely the
opportunity to study and receive instruction in the Italian man-
ner of performance. In addition, an important effect of this close
contact with a prestigious and highly esteemed musical culture
was arguably its impact on the way music was discussed and
evaluated at the Swedish Court. This impact on the critical dis-
course on music should not be underestimated.
On the imitation of Roman models in musical

composition
The presence of Italian musicians at North European institu-

tions, in Stockholm and elsewhere, thus arguably had a major
impact on the standard of playing and the style of performance,
on modes of listening and reception and also on the discourses
on music among both professional musicians and connoisseurs.
But what can be said about the importance of Roman models
for the music that was composed in the North at this time?
For the scholar seeking to understand the impact of Roman
music on composing in the Baltic area, i.e. on compositions by
41 Lars Berglund, Studier i Christian Geists vokalmusik, Uppsala 2002, p. 74–77;

Kjellberg, op. cit., p. 129–134.

210 Lars Berglund
musicians such as Kaspar Förster, Baltasar Erben, Christian

Geist or Dietrich Buxtehude, much of the relevant source mate-
rial is obviously to be found in the Düben Collection. Still, this
is a quest that raises scholarly challenges of several kinds and
there is no room here for a comprehensive survey. Instead I
would like to make some reflections on methodological and
empirical problems.
Firstly, I would once and for all like to discard the problem-
atic and over-simplistic concept of influence. The term presents a
corrupt picture of the process of actively choosing and emulat-
ing models, giving the impression of a causal mechanism work-
ing forward in time, rather than the opposite: that of active
agents consciously looking for models in the immediate or dis-
tant past. Moreover, one should not naively take every likeness
as a trace of such an ‘influence’, or, more precisely, as an exam-
ple of imitation or emulation, but instead be aware of the exis-
tence at this time of a conventional repertoire of schemes and
topoi, many of which should not necessarily be traced to specific
models.
Still, there is no doubt that North European composers imi-
tated Roman models, and especially so during the period from
1650 to 1680. Such imitation was in fact recommended, even
prescribed, by contemporary writers. Thus, for instance, in his
monumental treatise Musurgia universalis (Rome 1650), the
German Jesuit Athanasius Kircher points to Giacomo Carissimi
as a superior example of the art of depicting affections in music,
and he also recommends some of Carissimi’s Roman contempo-
raries for the proselyte to study and imitate: Orazio Benevoli at
St. Peter’s Basilica, Bonifazio Graziani at Chiesa del Gesù, Fran-
cesco Foggia at the Basilica of St. John Lateran, Stefano Fabri at
San Luigi dei Francesi and Carlo Chechelli at Santa Maria
Maggiore.42
In a similar manner Christoph Bernard states in his Tractatus
compositionis augumentatis that ‘the emulation of the most dis-
42 Athanasius Kircher, Musurgia universalis, sive artis magnae consoni et dissoni,

vol, I, Rome 1650, p. 603f, 614.

tinguished composers is no less profitable – indeed necessary –

in this profession that in any other art, as a part of one’s prac-
tice, without which all precepts are useless’.43 He then goes on
to recommend specific composers for the proselyte to imitate,
and his choice of models for the modern styles (stylus luxurians
communis and stylus theatralis) is dominated by Roman compos-
ers. He names Stefano Fabri, Giacomo Carissimi, Vincenzo Al-
brici, Marco Scacchi, Guiseppe Peranda and Luigi Rossi, and
then concludes that ‘contemporary Roman musicians would
well-high take the prize from the others’.44
One can point to a number of instances of close imitations
and parodies represented in the Düben Collection. I have for
instance been able to demonstrate that Christian Geist’s compo-
sition, Alleluia. De funere ad vitam is a very close, but neverthe-
less independent imitation of a solo motet by Bonifazio
Graziani.45 Another interesting example is Förster’s biblical dia-
logue Congregantes filistei, which, as Peter Wollny has shown,
emanates from a composition by one of the papal singers,
Mario Savioni, although in this particular case Förster’s compo-
sition is more independent from its model.46 In addition we
have Gustav Düben’s emulations of models by Albrici, in his
Sinfonia a 4 from 1654, and in his Fader vår from 1663.
These examples of more regular parodies or imitations leave
little doubt about the process of imitating or emulating. Far
more intriguing is the question of emulations of a kind that are
not limited to individual compositions, but which replicate
more general patterns of style, which in its turn raises questions
43 ‘Denn doch die Imitation der vornehmsten Authorum dieser Profession nicht
weniger als in allen andern Künsten nützlich ja nötig ist, als ein Theil der
Praxeos, ohne welche alle Praecepta ohne Nutzen sind’; Joseph Müller-
Blattau, Die Kompositionslehre Heinrich Schützens in der Fassung seines
Schülers Christoph Bernhard, Kassel etc. 1963, p. 90. English translation from
Walter Hilse, ‘The Treatises of Christoph Bernhard translated by Walter
Hilse’, Music Forum, 3 (1973), p. 121f.
44 Hilse, op. cit., p. 122f.
45 Lars Berglund, Studier i Christian Geists vokalmusik, p. 148–153.
46 Peter Wollny as in note 1.

212 Lars Berglund
of several kinds. One question concerns the possibility of dis-

tinguishing idioms or stylistic patterns unique either to indi-
vidual composers or to specific regions – a possibility that I
would claim has often been overestimated in musicological
scholarship, and which gives rise to major methodological diffi-
culties. A problem of a more empirical nature, although closely
connected with these considerations, is the question of the exis-
tence at this particular time of a specific Roman manner, versus
a more general Pan-Italian style. It is a question that awaits
more analytical and comparative studies. Still, contemporaries
seemingly reckoned with a specific Roman manner, albeit the
question must to some extent remain open whether this was
primarily associated with a manner of composing, or rather
with a manner of performing, or possibly the integration of
both.
And finally: before embarking on the laborious task of trac-
ing ‘influences’ from works by specific individuals or groups in
the musical compositions of other individuals or groups, the
scholarly interest and value of such discoveries should be care-
fully considered. Would it not be more interesting and reward-
ing to focus on the processes of actively choosing different
schemes and patterns from a repertoire, for example, or how
such patterns were used to solve particular problems of compo-
sition and/or performance, be it in an innovative manner or in a
more conventional way? The intentions and evaluations behind
such processes, and their reception by contemporary listeners
are surely also of interest?
All these considerations notwithstanding: as a major figure
for Northern reception and imitation of Roman models, schol-
ars have persistently pointed to Giacomo Carissimi, and there
can be no doubt that he was important, both considering his
achievements as a teacher at the Collegium Germanicum and
the number of manuscripts bearing his name which are to be
found north of the Alps. Nevertheless, if one actually examines
his compositions, the scope of his significance is not altogether
clear – and this is not only due to the vast problems concerning
attribution and dating. His motets in general are clearly more

conservative in style than those by his presumed followers in

the North, including the two Dresden-based Romans, Albrici
and Peranda. It is true that Carissimi’s exquisite harmonic lan-
guage – his technique of transposing, his use of the Sekundenak-
kord (V2) for expressive purposes and his use of durezze e liga-
ture, not least chains of double suspensions – seem to have been
much admired and imitated. But these are more typical of his
secular cantatas and oratorios than of his liturgical pieces. One
can also point to the music of Luigi Rossi, a somewhat older
composer, for quite similar traits, to take only one example.
And in fact many of the traits and innovations found in the
typical Italianate sacred concertos composed in Dresden and in
the Baltic area are far less typical of Carissimi’s style.
The Italianate repertoire which more or less epitomises large
parts of the Düben Collection is instead characterised by a
clear-cut formal organisation with relatively extended sections
in distinctive styles, and, in particular, with independent aria
sections. There is also a tendency towards a strictly regular
phrase structure, even in contrapuntal concertato sections,
which in addition are often clearly pre-determined by harmonic
patterns and schemes.
With traits such as these in mind, Mary E. Frandsen has
pointed to Bonifazio Graziani as a possible model for the com-
positions by Albrici and Peranda,47 and indeed some observa-
tions I recently made in the records of Chiesa del Gesù seem to
support such an assumption. I have already touched upon the
presence of Vincenzo Albrici as an organist there, under Graz-
ini’s leadership, but I would also tentatively suggest that the
singer given as 'Gioseppe contralto’, appearing in the church
records from 1647 until 1650, is likely to be none other than
Giuseppe Peranda, who one year later, in 1651, was hired in
Dresden precisely as a Contralto.48
47 Mary E. Frandsen, Crossing Confessional Borders. The Patronage of Italian

Sacred Music in Seventeenth-Century Dresden, Oxford 2006, p. 172–190.
48 See also Frandsen, op. cit., p. 23 and 26.

214 Lars Berglund
It is certainly true that many of the traits mentioned above

are already seen in Graziani’s early motets, for instance in Rex
magnae caelitum from his opus primus (printed in 1650), a sec-
tionalised motet including long and independent solo arias,
alternating with concertato sections. It is also true that
Graziani’s music was widely disseminated all over Europe at
this time in numerous printed collections, several of which
were reprinted in Rome and Antwerp. Moreover there was a
wide dissemination of Graziani’s music in manuscript copies,
preserved to our day in more than twenty-six libraries in at
least eight countries outside Italy.49 His music was apparently
much in demand long after his death in 1664, even into the
1680s. One only has to look at the numerous collections pub-
lished posthumously by his brother and nephew, and consider
the efforts they made to secure the rights to publish the music
from Pope Alexander VII immediately after Bonifazio’s death.50
Still, it would obviously be too simple to just substitute
Graziani for Carissimi. The processes of developing, transmitt-
ing and emulating musical traditions, patterns and norms are
much more complex than that, and we need far more knowl-
edge concerning such traditions, including modern editions
and analytical and critical studies – an undertaking which
hopefully will be facilitated by the Düben Collection Database
Catalogue.
In this process, finally, we must also remember the instru-
mental music. Where instrumental ensemble music is con-
cerned there also appears to be a distinct Roman line of tradi-
tion leading to the Baltic area, represented by the sonatas by
Kaspar Förster and Dietrich Buxtehude – a specific Roman
genre tradition in fact, which is perhaps best represented by the
49 Catalogue of works and sources in Susanne Shigihara, Bonifazio Graziani

(1604/05-1664): Biographie, Werkverzeichnis und Untersuchungen zu den Solo-
motetten, Bonn 1984.
50 Shigihara, op. cit., p. 59–61 and 65.

symphonie by Lelio Colista.51 These Roman symphonie are distin-

guished by a specific formal structure, by the style of the poly-
phonic canzona sections, and also by the inclusion of impro-
vised or quasi-improvised solo sections.52 Apart from Colista
we can see examples of this tradition in Albrici’s sinfonias in
the Düben Collection, but this, too, is a field where further re-
search is needed.
And that is where I would like to conclude, with an appeal:
in order to obtain a fuller understanding of the repertoire and
musical cultures connected with the Düben Collection we need
more studies of Italian music and more editions, in particular of
Roman ecclesiastical music from this period. Although much
progress has been made since 1976 when Wolfgang Witzen-
mann pointed out the many lacunas in the research on Italian
17th century church music, there is still much important work
to do. The relevance of our knowledge of Italian music, and of
Roman music in particular, for the understanding of a major
part of the music in the Düben Collection cannot be overesti-
mated.
51 Lars Berglund, ‘On Style and Tradition in the Sonatas by Kaspar Förster’,
Swedish-Polish Cultural Relations During the Vasa Dynasty, ed. Tadeusz Ma-
ciejewski, Warszaw 1996, p. 89–94.
52 Peter Allsop, The Italian ‘trio’ sonata: from its origins until Corelli, Oxford
1992.

216 Lars Berglund
Literature
Allsop, Peter, The Italian ‘trio’ sonata: from its origins until Corelli, Oxford: Cla-
rendon 1992.
Bédoyère, Guy de la (ed.), The diary of John Evelyn, Woodbridge 1995.
Berglund, Lars, ‘On Style and Tradition in the Sonatas by Kaspar Förster’,
Swedish-Polish Cultural Relations During the Vasa Dynasty, ed. Tadeusz Ma-
ciejewski, Warszaw 1996, p. 89–94.
Berglund, Lars, ‘The Concerto Principle in Kaspar Förster’s Psalm Composi-
tions: Confitebor tibi Domine in C’, Musica Baltica. In Umkreis des Wandels –
von den cori spezzati zum konzertierenden Stil (Prace Specjalne; 64), Gdànsk
2004, p. 32–44.
Berglund, Lars, ‘Angels or Sirens? Questions of reception and performativity
in Roman church music around 1650’, Performance and performativity in Ba-
roque Art (forthcoming).
Berglund, Lars, ‘Christian Geist’s Vide pater mi dolores and his application for
the Johanneumskantorat in Hamburg’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 24 (2002), p. 7–30.
Berglund, Lars, Studier i Christian Geists vokalmusik (Studia musicologica Upsa-
liensia, N. S., 21), Uppsala 2002.
Bergsagel, John, ‘Music at the Swedish Court of Queen Christina’, Convegno
internazionale Cristina di Svezia e la musica (Roma, 5–6 dicembre 1996) (Atti
dei convegni Lincei, 138), Rome 1998, p. 9–20.
Culley, Thomas D., Jesuits and Music: I. A Study of the Musicians connected with
the German College in Rome during the 17th Century and of their Activities in
Northern Europe (Sources and studies for the history of the Jesuits, 2),
Rome 1970.
Fischer, Klaus, ‘Anerio, Giovanni Francesco’, Grove Music Online ed L. Macy
(Accessed May 2007), <http://www.grovemusic.com>
Frandsen, Mary E., ‘Albrici, Vincenzo’, Grove Music Online, ed. L. Macy (Ac-
cessed February 2007), <http://www.grovemusic.com>.
Frandsen, Mary E., Crossing Confessional Borders. The Patronage of Italian Sacred
Music in Seventeenth-Century Dresden, New York: Oxford University Press
2006.
Gmeinwieser, Siegfried, ‘Pitoni, Giuseppe Ottavio’, Grove Music Online, ed.
L. Macy (Accessed February 2007), <http://www.grovemusic.com>
Ordnung’, Teil II–III, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 48 (1966), p. 63–186.
Hammond, Frederick Music & Spectacle in Baroque Rome. Barberini Patronage
under Urban VIII, New Haven: Yale University Press 1994.
Hilse, Walter, ‘The Treatises of Christoph Bernhard translated by Walter
Hilse’, Music Forum, 3 (1973), 1–196.

Kircher, Athanasius, Musurgia universalis, sive artis magnae consoni et dissoni,

vol. I, Rome 1650.
deras organisation, verksamheter och status ca 1620–ca 1720, Uppsala: Uppsala
universitet 1979.
Kirkendale, Warren, The Court Musicians in Florence During the Principate of the
Medici: With a Reconstruction of the Artistic Establishment, Florence: Olschki
1993.
Levy, Evonne, Propaganda and the Jesuit Baroque, Berkeley: University of Cali-
fornia Press 2004.
Magnusson, Torgil, Rome in the Age of Bernini. Stockholm 1982–1986.
Murata, Margaret, ‘Obscure musicians: Alessandro Cecconi’, 17th Century
Music SSCM Newsletter, 10/1, (2000).
Murata, Margaret, ‘Pasqualini riconociuto, Et facciam dolçi canti. Studi in onore
di Agostino Ziino in occasione del suo 65° compleanno, ed. B. M. Antolini, T.
M. Gialdroni, and A. Pugliese, Lucca 2003, p. 655–686.
Müller-Blattau, Joseph, Die Kompositionslehre Heinrich Schützens in der Fassung
seines Schülers Christoph Bernhard, Kassel: Bärenreiter 1963.
Niléhn, Lars, Peregrinatio Academica. Det svenska samhället och de utrikes
studieresorna under 1600-talet, Lund: Liber / Gleerup 1983.
Pitoni, Giuseppe Ottavio, Notitia de’ contrapuntisti e compositori di musica, ed.
Cesarino Ruini, Florence: Olschiki 1988.
Rose, Gloria, ‘Pasqualini as a copyist’, Analecta musicological, 14 (1974), p. 170–
175.
Shigihara, Susanne, Bonifazio Graziani (1604/05–1664): Biographie, Werkverzeich-
nis und Untersuchungen zu den Solomotetten, Bonn 1984.
Stolpe, Sven, Drottning Kristina, 2. ed., Stockholm: Aldus / Bonnier 1966.
Sundström, Einar, ’Notiser om drottning Kristinas italienska musiker’, Svensk
tidskrift för musikforskning, 43 (1961), p. 297–309.
Webber, Geoffrey, ‘Italian music at the court of Queen Christina, Christ
Church, Oxford Mus. MS 327 and the visit of Vincenzo Albrici’s Italian en-
semble, 1952–54’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 74:2 (1993), p. 47–53.
Webber, Geoffrey, North German Church Music in the Age of Buxtehude, Oxford
1996.
Wollny, Peter, ’Kaspar Förster’s Dialog Congregantes Philisti und der römische
Oratorienstil’, Schweizer Jahrbuch für Musikwissenschaft, Neue Folge, 21
(2001), p. 11–25.


ALEKSANDRA PATALAS
Ut oratio sit Domina.The Dispute between

Romano Micheli and Marco Scacchi
Musical culture within the Republic of Poland in the first half of

the 17th century remained under a significant influence from the
Italian œuvre which was effectuated by, among other things, the
agency of numerous musicians – performers and composers –
coming from the Apennine Peninsula and living, temporarily or
otherwise, in the Republic. Though they originated from vari-
ous Italian centers, both northern and southern, an especially
influential group was represented by Roman composers, whose
employment facilitated close contacts between the Polish and
papal courts. Starting in 1596 – thus, the moment when King
Zygmunt III Vasa hired Luca Marenzio – until ca. 1650, the post
of royal chapel master was held by composers from the Eternal
City: Annibale Stabile, Asprilio Pacelli, Giovanni Francesco
Anerio and Marco Scacchi. With this same center were asso-
ciated maestri di cappella of the cathedral ensemble at Wawel:
Annibale Orgas and Francesco Gigli, i.e. Franciscus Lilius, born
in Poland, but educated in Rome under the direction of Fresco-
baldi.1 A particularly important role in Polish musical culture
was played by Marco Scacchi, whose compositional œuvre and
polemical writings found interest not only in the local musical
community, but also in other countries of Europe.2 Based on the
1 More information on Italian musicians in Poland in Anna and Zygmunt

M. Szweykowski’s Wosi w kapeli królewskiej polskich Wazów. Kraków 1997,
and Barbara Przybyszewska-Jarmiska's Muzyczne dwory polskich
Wazów. Warszawa 2007.
2 Scacchi’s musical works and theoretical texts were known all over the
Republic of Poland and in German lands, as well as in Sweden and Italy.
Among manuscripts of the Düben collection there are four sacred concerti

220 Aleksandra Patalas
treatises of Italian authors, Scacchi formed his theoretical views,

transplanted them to the soil of Poland and its neighboring
countries, by means of which he inspired authors writing in the
German language. After returning to his homeland, Scacchi
shared his reflections with his student Angelo Berardi, whose
treatises on music contain many threads previously present in
the theory of the Warsaw chapel master.
Marco Scacchi, Italy, and Cribrum musicum
Scacchi maintained contacts with Rome during his entire stay in

the Republic – thus from ca. 1624, when Zygmunt III accepted
him to his ensemble as a violinist, until returning to his home-
land, probably at the end of 1649 or in the spring of 1650. The
composer was helped in this matter by his brother Pellegrino
Scacchi, a Roman organist very active in his community. Marco
Scacchi himself probably visited the Eternal City at the end of
1633 – thus, shortly after he had been appointed to the position
of chapel master by the newly-elected King Wadysaw IV Vasa.
He took this trip in order to see to the printing of his collection
of a cappella masses, which were published by the Robletti press
in Rome.3 When Scacchi published his first and lengthiest po-
by Scacchi, composed in the 40ies of the 17th century, and these are the on-
ly extant copies of these pieces.
3 MARCI SCACCHI ROMANI SERENISSIMI AC POTENTISSIMI
VVLADISLAI QVARTI POLONIAE ET SVECIAE REGIS ETC. CAPPELLAE
MVSICAE MODERATORIS MISSARVM QVATVOR VOCIBVS LIBER
PRIMVS. ROMAE, CVM PRIVILEGIO SVMMI PONTIFICIS. Typis Io:
Baptistae Robletti, In Domo Puerorum Litterati. M. DC. XXXIII.
SVPERIORVM PERMISSV. On this occasion, at the Bartolomeo Magni
press in Venice, Scacchi submitted for printing the book MADRIGALI A
Cinque, concertati da cantarsi sù gli stromenti, DI MARCO SCACCHI ROMANO
Maestro di Cappella della Maestà Serenis.[si]ma di Polonia, e Suecia. DEDICATI
ALL' INVITTIS.[si]mo E GLORIOSISSIMO IMPERATORE FERDINANDO

Ut oratio sit Domina 221
lemical text Cribrum musicum in 1643 in Venice,4 he took care to

ensure that the Roman music community also became ac-
quainted with its content. Let us recall that this text was written
in allusion to the conflict between two Gdask musicians: Kas-
par Förster the Elder, chapel master at the Church of the
Blessed Virgin Mary, and Paul Siefert, organist at the same
church. The source of the conflict was the injured ambition of
Siefert, who was denied the post of chapel master at St. Mary’s;
instead, Förster, a musician of lesser standing, was hired. At the
beginning of the 1640s, Scacchi, who was friendly with Förster,
got involved in the dispute. After an initial oral exchange of
opinions, Wadysaw IV’s chapel master published a critique of
Siefert’s compositions published under the title Psalmen Davids.5
The main aim of Cribrum musicum was to publicly discredit Sie-
fert as a composer; and beyond this, it was meant to refute the
Gdask organist’s charges addressed to the community of Ital-
ian artists, who were, in his opinion, bereft of skill in creating
true contrapuntal art.
Förster – who was not only a musician, but also a bookseller
– tried, with help from Johann Moretus of Antwerp, to reach as
wide an audience as possible with Scacchi’s publication6; how-
SECONDO Con Licenza de Superiori & Priuilegio. IN VENETIA M DC XXXIIII

Appresso Bartolomeo Magni.
4 CRIBRVM MVSICVM AD TRITICVM SIFERTICVM SEV, Examinatio
succincta Psalmorum, quos non ita pridem Paulus Sifertus Dantiscanus, in aede
Parochiali ibidem Organaedus in lucem edidit, In qua clare & perspicue multa
explicantur, quae summè necessaria ad artem melopòèticam esse solent,
AVTHORE MARCO SCACCHIO, ROMANO, Regiae Majestatis Poloniae, &
Sueciae Capellae Magistro. VENETIIS, Apud Allexandrum Vincentium.
MDCXXXXIII.
5 Psalmen Davids, Nach Francöischer Melodey oder Weise in Music componirt,
unterschiedliche Theil mit 4. und 5. Stimmen zu singen, und mit allerhand In-
strumenten zu gebrauchen, nebenst einem General-Baß. Von Paulo Syfert Dan-
tiscano, Vor zeiten in Königl. Capelle Königs in Polen Sigismundi III. Sel. Hochl.
Gedächtnüß, itziger zeit der Pfarrkirchen zu Dantzigk, bestalten Organisten. Ers-
ter Theil. I. VOX. Gedruckt zu Dantzigk bey Georg Rheten, in verlegung des Au-
thoris, Anno 1640.
6 It was possible to buy the publication directly from the Vincenti press, as
well as, for example, at book fairs in Leipzig and Frankfurt-am-Main. It
seems that both von Meurs and Förster contributed financially to and

ever, this was not easy, because the book was expensive, and its
length as well (ca. 250 pages) did not encourage reading. As an
aside, let us add that, in 1646, Förster sent part of the printing
run to musician friends from neighboring countries – among
others, to Andreas Düben7. In August 1644 in Warsaw, in order
to encourage potential purchasers of Cribrum musicum, Scacchi
wrote and published a text containing the main theses of the
previous publication, entitled Lettera per maggiore informazione.8
This little publication – according to the words of Micheli – was
distributed gratis in Rome, and was most clearly meant to fulfill
the function of an advertisement addressed to the Italian mar-
ket, as is witnessed by the choice of language for the statement.
Through the medium of the Lettera, Siefert’s negative opinion
on the skills of Italian artists became known to a well-known
Roman composer specializing in the writing of canons, Romano
Micheli, who made contact via correspondence with Scacchi.
distributed in northern Europe not only Cribrum musicum, but also other
publications of Scacchi’s. This could explain the adnotations which were to
be found in the exhibition catalogs for fairs in Leipzig and Frankfurt. Cf.
Albert Göhler Verzeichnis der in den Frankfurter und Leipziger Messkatalogen der
Jahre 1564 bis 1759 angezeigten Musikalien. Hilversum 1965, p. 75.
7 IUDICIUM CRIBRI MUSICI ID EST LITTERAE QUAEDAM Certo tempore a
Praestantissimis Artis Musicae in Germania Professoribus et Peritis transmissae.
Mihique MARCO SCACCHIO S.R.M. Joannis Casimiri Poloniae et Sueciae Re-
gis Capellae Magistro oblatae A me diligenter collectae et ipsismet Authoribus ad
maiorem animi benevolentiam dedicatae atque consecratae VARSAVIAE In Offi-
cina Petri Elert S.R.M. Typographi. A unique copy of the undated publica-
tion is held by the Civico Museo Bibliografico Musicale in Bologna. One of
the letters in Iudicium is a reply to a letter from Förster. It was sent from
Stockholm on 28 August 1646. Discussed in it is, among others, Andreas
Düben, who was a reader of Cribrum, and the letter was written in his
name by an anonymous member of his ensemble.
8 LETTERA PER MAGGIORE INFORMATIONE, A chi leggerà il mio
CRIBRVM, Stampato in Venetia nell'anno 1643. nella Stamparia D'Allesandro
Vincenzi, Cioe, censura fatta sopra alcune Cantilene di Paolo Syfert Danzichano
in Idioma Germano. At the end of the print: Varsauia li 29 Agosto 1644. nella
Stampa Reggia.

MS 500 – an important manuscript by

Romano Micheli
Romano Micheli (ca. 1575–1659) was not initially involved in

composition of canoni artifiziosi. His Compieta a sei voci9 from
1616 is written in the new concertato alla romana style. Shortly,
however, the artist began to write exclusively sophisticated
canons of various types: enigmatic, containing an obbligo, or
based on a soggetto cavato delle parole. These works were, in his
conviction, the expression of the highest compositional craft
and in the end, his œuvre began to be identified exclusively with
this type of works.10 Thus, it is no surprise that Micheli could
feel personally insulted by Siefert’s comment on ignorance of
the art of counterpoint among Italians. Micheli’s manuscript,
today forgotten, held by the Biblioteca Angelica in Rome under
the call number MS 500, and unknown to musicologists in-
volved up until now in studying the artistic relationships be-
tween Micheli and Scacchi11, sheds new light on the mutual
contacts of the two musicians, and permits us to delve more
deeply into the essence of their polemics. In the present paper
Romano Micheli Compieta a sei voci con tre tenori, concertato all’uso moderno,
con il basso continuo per l’organo e un’ altro basso particolare... opera quarta.
Venezia, Giacomo Vincenti, 1616.
10 With time, in the musical community, it was forgotten that Micheli was
able to compose works which were not canons. This is evidenced by a
statement by one musician, cited by Micheli in MS 500 (Biblioteca
Angelica, Rome), on f. 16v: ‘[...] il Signor Giovan Battista della Spinetta,
musico peritissimo, et Organista nella Chiesa Nuova mi disse, habbiamo
cantato li vostri salmi studiosi e belli, e non credevo, mentre Lei attende
agl’Artificij, che componesse così vago. Io gli risposi, che nelle Cantilene
sciolte si può fare quello [che] si vuole. Negli artificij poi si fà un altro
modo di comporre [...]’.
11 Claude Palisca ‘Marco Scacchi's Defense of Modern Music (1649)’, in: Words
and Music: the Scholar's View. A Medley of Problems and Solutions Compiled in
Honor of A. Tillman Merritt., ed. L. Berman, Cambridge, MA, 1972, p. 189–
235; Zygmunt M. Szweykowski Musica moderna w ujciu Marka Scacchiego.
Z dziejów teorii muzyki w XVII wieku. Kraków 1977, p. 260–262.

we focus mainly on characteristics of the views of the chapel-

master in Warsaw.
The manuscript mentioned was drawn up by Micheli start-
ing from ca. 1648. It was meant to be a summary of his achieve-
ments in the art of canon-writing, as well as representing a sort
of public defense in the face of Scacchi’s critique. Plans to pub-
lish the manuscript in its entirety are evidenced by a title page,
printed as a sort of announcement, included in another publica-
tion of Micheli’s from 1650.12 The planned item was to bear the
title: Musiche Pellegrine artificiose, et armoniose inventate da Roma-
no Micheli Romano. Opera Settima. In the end, the publication of
this item never did come to pass. Just before his death in 1659,
Micheli donated his manuscript to the Biblioteca Angelica in
Rome. It contains copies of Micheli’s previous publications con-
taining canons, copies of his polemical texts, as well as copies of
seven letters received from musicians from Italy, Poland and
the Habsburg Empire. To Micheli’s manuscript were appended
over a dozen original letters from musicians from the countries
mentioned.13
MS 500 contains, among other things, a copy of Scacchi’s let-
ter addressed to Micheli, sent from Warsaw on 6 January 164614.
We find out from it that Romano Micheli, who returned to
Rome in 1644 after over twelve years’ absence, read Scacchi’s
12 AVVISO INVIATO DA ME ROMANO MICHELI Insieme col foglio reale del

Canone musicale FONS SIGNATVS, Alli famosi, e peritissimi Signori Musici
d’Italia e di tutti gl’altri Regni, e Potentati miei Patroni osseruandissimi. IN
ROMA, MDCL. Nella Stamperia di Lodouico Grignani. CON LICENZA DE’
SUPERIORI.
13 Copies of the letters mentioned were placed in MS 500 on folios 21r–23r;
and the original correspondence, together with the envelopes, was
appended at the end of the manuscript on folios 88r–118v. The original
letters were sent, among others, by: Giovanni Felice Sances (Vienna, 11
November 1641), Franciscus Lilius (Kraków, 23 February 1647), Kaspar
Förster senior (Gdask, 19 February 1647), Giovanni Maria Trabaci
(Napoli, 16 September 1645), Alfonso Mazzoni (Ferrara, September 1645),
Cesare Bellatesta (Lodi, 4 October 1645).
14 Scacchi’s letter – the longest of them all – was inscribed in MS 500 on folios
23r–24v.

Lettera per maggiore informatione, which was supposedly distri-

buted gratis in the Eternal City, and expressed himself in a flat-
tering manner concerning it in conversation with Pellegrino
Scacchi. The two Roman musicians knew each other fairly well
from the times when Marco’s brother held the position of organ-
ist at San Luigi dei Francesi in the period from December 1626 to
January 1629. His direct supervisor during the years 1626–1627
was Micheli, who at the time held the post of chapel master at
that church. Despite the fact that he received the text of the Lette-
ra well, he also perceived in it certain contradictions and issues
open to discussion. Scacchi, not sufficiently acquainted with the
theory representing the foundation for the prima pratica, was not
in a position to clear up all of Micheli’s doubts, about which he
reported in correspondence with his brother, who then ad-
dressed to Micheli the letter under discussion. This letter shows
that – previous opinions notwithstanding – relations between the
author of Cribrum and the canon writer were very cordial. Scac-
chi addressed Micheli with respect, calling him – with the exag-
geration typical of the era – the ‘most expert master’ in the area
of composition. Desiring to answer all of Micheli’s doubts, he
encouraged him to send his comments. In his letter, he no longer
repeated the issues contained in his previous texts; on the other
hand, he lamented the poor condition of the church music of the
period. Already at that time, Scacchi discerned a necessity to
differentiate the musical styles which were described, over a year
later in a letter to Christoph Werner, as stylus ecclesiasticus, cubi-
cularis and theatralis.
Wadysaw IV’s chapel master could not reconcile himself to
the fact that in church one hears barzelette, passacaglie and recita-
tivo style, so that there is no longer any difference between the
style of music performed at the theater and in the house of God.
In these statements, we can discern echoes of the views of
Agostino Agazzari, who in 1638 wrote in La musica ecclesiasti-
ca[...],15 ‘my intent is to speak here only of church music, which
15 Agostino Agazzari La musica ecclesiastica dove si contiene la vera diffinitione

della musica come scienza. The full text of the treatise was published in Po-

today has lost the way of good and dignity [becoming unfaith-
ful] to its aim and to the God Who rules over it [...].’16 And fur-
ther, Agazzari recalls, ‘The Holy Council of Trent removes from
the church all singing and playing which would be or bring to
mind secular songs and dances, or sensual arias, [...] St. Hiero-
nymus [...] rebukes those who sing in church as if it were trage-
dy or theater.’17 It would be difficult to prove that Scacchi was
repeating Agazzari’s views; but we can certainly assume that a
discussion on church music was constantly in progress in the
musical community, in particular since the times of the Council
of Trent. The author of Cribrum musicum, citing Giovanni Maria
Artusi and Pietro Aaron, reemphasizes that music can have a
very strong effect on audiences; therefore, all the more, the style
of a given work ought to correspond to the function the compo-
sition is to fulfill. He cited the words of his teacher Giovanni
Francesco Anerio, who composed religious madrigals for Ro-
man oratories, and saw how the faithful, gathered in the orato-
ry of the Philippine fathers, cried from the emotion of hearing
these and similar works.18 In comparison with them, the church
music contemporary to Scacchi was in large measure weak,
because it no longer served the purpose of prayer; all it did was
provide sensual pleasure. On the other hand, however, musical
art should not remain in a state of stagnation, duplicating tried-
and-true patterns. In his letter to Micheli, Scacchi took up a sub-
ject which he developed most broadly three years later in the
well-known text Breve discorso sopra la musica moderna. The au-
thor emphasized the necessity of perfecting musical art, which
at the beginning of its existence was very simple, but developed
thanks to successive generations of artists. In so doing, he al-
luded to Monteverdi’s words, indicating that the task of earlier
lemics on the Musica moderna, in the series: Practica musica, vol. 1, ed. Zyg-
munt M. Szweykowski and Tim Carter, Kraków 1993, p. 9–29.
16 Ibid., p. 12–13.
17 Ibid., p. 22–23.
18 Perhaps he was speaking of the madrigali spirituali which were composed
by G.F. Anerio, and published in TEATRO Armonico Spirituale DI MADRI-
GALI [...] In Roma. Appresso Gio. Battista Robletti. 1619.

composers was to obey the rules, while today’s artists approach

them differently. In this context, in a tone of veiled criticism,
Scacchi gave his opinion of a four-voice canon with obbligo, au-
thored by Micheli, of which the title is not mentioned. While
this type of pieces represented evidence of artists’ exceptional
brilliance of mind, in general they were lacking in that which
represents the ultimate aim of musical art – thus, appropriate
sound and harmony, without which the authors’ efforts appear
completely fruitless; and their compositions, boring.
The Art of Canon composition
Micheli, most clearly encouraged by Scacchi’s letter, standing in

defense of the Italian school, sent several copies of his latest
publication, entitled Canoni musicali composti sopra le vocali di piu
parole19 to Poland and to other musical centers in Italy as well as
to Vienna – including at least three to Poland. Here, the addres-
sees were musicians holding chapel master posts in the coun-
try’s most important musical centers – thus, at the royal court in
Warsaw, Marco Scacchi; at St. Mary’s Church in Gdask, Kas-
par Förster the Elder – Siefert’s supervisor; and at Wawel Ca-
thedral in Kraków, Franciscus Lilius (Gigli).
This title contained over a dozen enigmatic canons presented
in the form of a verbal record. Three of them (with text: a. Iste
est, qui magna sapit, terrena sapit, & caelestia sapit; b. Pater, & Fi-
lius, & Spiritus Sanctus, & hi tres unum sunt; c. Spiritus ubi vult
spirat), he also presented in notated form. The successive vo-
wels of the text indicated which solmization syllables were to
19 CANONI MVSICALI COMPOSTI SOPRA LE VOCALI DI PIU PAROLE,

DA ROMANO MICHELI ROMANO, DEL QUAL MODO DI COMPONERE
E INVENTORE. ALLI FAMOSI, E PERITISSIMI SIG. MVSICI D’ITALIA, E
di tutti gl’altri Regni, & Potentati miei Patroni Osseruandissimi. At the end: IN
ROMA, Nella Stamperia di Lodouico Grignani. MDCXLV.

be used to create the canon subject. However, other parameters

of the composition, such as the number of voices, place and order
of entry, were not precisely described. Micheli challenged other
musicians to solve his canons. The letters appended to MS 500, as
well as those recopied by Micheli which are part of the publica-
tion itself, contain words of thanks for sending of the publication
Canoni musicali, which their author interpreted unambiguously
as approval of his artistic activities. In completing the manuscript
under discussion, the Roman composer constantly alluded to the
negative statement of Siefert on Italian artists; and beyond this,
was already then ill-disposed towards the person of Scacchi. For
this reason as well, he considered as particularly valuable two
letters written in a cordial tone, which came from the pens of
musicians active in the Republic of Poland – Förster and Lilius.
The first of these letters was even duplicated by Micheli in
printed form and placed ostentatiously at the beginning of the
planned publication of Musiche Pellegrine. Sent from Gdask on
19 February 1647, the letter contained many courteous compli-
ments addressed to Micheli and his compositions, which with
the exaggeration typical of the era were described as ‘miracoli
della natura’. Förster even offered to send the Roman’s further
publications to his friends in Flanders and Holland. In the fore-
word preceding this letter, Micheli took credit for the silencing of
Siefert, suggesting simultaneously that the Gdask organist did
not blacken the name of Italian composers without basis, for he
had evidently happened upon some not so well-educated artist
from Italy. In light of the other writings contained in MS 500, it
seems obvious that this undereducated musician was supposed
to be Scacchi. A letter from Franciscus Lilius, sent from Kraków
on 23 February 1647, remained only in manuscript form, because
its content is limited only to words of thanks and contains a
promise to look through Canoni musicali in spare time20. Despite
this, Micheli considered this statement to be words of commen-
dation for him.
20 Letter of Franciscus Lilius. MS 500, f.100r: ‘quando sarro dissocupato delle

mie fatige consideraro i canoni di V. et poi scriuero il mio parere’.

Unlike other musicians to whom the canon author sent his

publication, Scacchi did not limit himself merely to courteous
words of thanks. Furthermore, he acquainted himself not only
with the content of Canoni musicali, but also with other Micheli’s
publications, such as Musica vaga et artificiosa21 and Virtuosa Ris-
posta.22 The last one, two-page print concerned the possibility of
modifying the three-voice and three-version canon Pater, & Fi-
lius, & Spiritus Sanctus, & hi tres unum sunt, by adding to it a
fourth voice. Micheli was, however, against such a thing, for in
this composition the numeral 3 symbolized the Holy Trinity. In
explaining the essence of this canon, its author cited Plato’s
famous statement from the dialogue De Republica, which he
rendered as follows: ‘l’armonia deve seguitare l’oratione, e non
per il contrario’ (‘harmony should follow speech, and not vice
versa’). This quote, applied in reference to the art of the canon,
evinced an animated reaction from Scacchi, who interpreted
Plato’s dictum completely differently. For the Warsaw chapel
master, a supporter of Monteverdi’s views, Micheli’s words
evidenced confusion of concepts, ignorance of the rules of prima
and seconda pratica, as well as of the fundamental differences
existing between them. If he charged Siefert, active in faraway
Gdask, with lacking skill in use of the old style or knowledge
of the second musical practice, he must have been struck all the
more by the attitude of the Italian composer, to whom the defi-
nition of seconda pratica, given by Monteverdi, should have been
known for forty years already. In March 1647 in Warsaw, Scac-
21 MVSICA VAGA ET ARTIFICIOSA Continente Motetti con oblighi, & Canoni

diuersi, tanto per quelli, che si dilettano sentire varie curiosità, quanto per quelli,
che vorranno professare d’intendere diuersi studij della Musica. DI D. ROMA-
NO MICHELI ROMANO Nuouamente composta, & data in luce. IN VENETIA,
APPRESSO GIACOMO VINCENTI. MDCXV. The publication was men-
tioned by Scacchi in Breve discorso sopra la musica moderna. Warszawa 1649,
fol. 14v. The full text of the treatise was published in Polemics on the Musica
moderna, op. cit.
22 VIRTUOSA RISPOSTA Che si fà da Romano Micheli Musico Romano Alla
virtuosa curiosità d’vn Musico peritissimo in Roma. At the end: In Roma, Nella
Stamperia di Lodouico Grignani. 1645.

chi published a text in which he polemicized with the views of

Micheli. This publication was distributed in Rome, and it
reached the other participant in the controversy five months
after its date of publication. According to the present state of
knowledge, no copy of this polemical text has survived. In a
letter to Werner (written in 1647 or 164823), Scacchi described it
as ‘Consideratio canonum R.D. Romani Michaelis Romani’ and
it is under this substitute title that it is known to today’s musi-
cology. According to Micheli’s words, the publication was long,
boring and, unfortunately, devoid of notated examples –
though the author’s argument would in principle require them.
It should be noted here that presses in Poland during Scacchi’s
time did not have the technical capabilities at their disposal to
publish sheet music at an appropriate level of quality. The royal
chapel master no doubt did not have funds for a foreign publi-
cation; probably he was also deterred by bad experiences ac-
quired on the occasion of the Italian publication of Cribrum mu-
sicum, which contained errors and it was necessary to print an
additional index of errata.24
Having acquainted himself with Scacchi’s publication, the
offended and insulted Micheli prepared a reply, which was
ready by mid-1648, and bore the title Risposta fatta da me Romano
Micheli.25 However, he did not submit it for printing in its enti-
rety, but utilized a portion of it, which he published in 1650 as
Avviso inviato da me.26 Despite the fact that the author does not
23 The letter is held by Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Hamburg Carl von

Ossietzky, call number ND VI 5573, and was published by Erich Katz in
Die musikalischen Stilbegriffe des 17. Jahrhunderts, Augsburg 1926.
24 The only extant copy of Errata is held in Herzog-August-Bibliothek, Wol-
fenbüttel, together with Scacchi’s Cribrum musicum.
25 Risposta fatta da me Romano Micheli per informatione Alli famosi e peritissimi
Signori Musici d’Italia, e di tutti gl’altri Regni e Potentati miei Padroni
Osservandissimi. MS 500, fol. 10–21.
26 See footnote 12. In Avviso Micheli wrote: ‚[...] è già un anno, e mezo, che
stà finita la mia Risposta insieme con la proposta del detto Musico ... co[n]
havervi io aggiunto tutte quelle opere, che sono state necessarie per giusti-
ficatione della verità, è riuscito un libro di quaranta sei fogli, cioè 92. carte
di carta mezzana, e per darne giusta notitia alla SS.VV. ne metto quì im-

mention Scacchi’s name even once, bringing up only a certain

musician who published a pamphlet against him in a place far
from Italy, those in the know could not have had any doubt as
to whom he had in mind – all the more so that in the introduc-
tion, Micheli addressed his words to the King of Poland. Re-
maining until today in manuscript form, as part of MS 500, his
original reply to Scacchi’s publication is a text three times long-
er than the printed Avviso, dealing with more problems, and –
of particular value – containing over 30 quotes from the lost
Consideratio canonum (for the most part, Micheli highlighted
them in his manuscript by underlining the text). On the basis of
them, we can more or less determine what sort of reflections
found themselves in the circle of Scacchi’s interests at this time.
Soggetto cavato delle parole
The first and most extensively-treated issue was a consideration

of the genesis of works which a musicologist of today would
characterize as based on a soggetto cavato delle parole. Micheli
himself described his canons as ‘composed on the vowels of
several words’, at the same time proclaiming that he is the
inventor of such a manner of composition. Having analyzed it,
Scacchi stated that Micheli’s claim to the appelation of inventor
was unfounded. By proceeding in this manner, he revealed
ignorance of the œuvre of the earlier masters of polyphony, to
whom similar solutions were not unfamiliar. The royal chapel
master postulated the thesis that the Roman artist did not so
much invent a new and difficult manner of composition, as
adopt and develop ideas already presented earlier. In this way,
Micheli wanted to inscribe himself in the memory of posterity,
but attained the opposite result. In support of the above
statements, Scacchi cited an array of examples of works in
which the soggetto cavato delle parole was utilized. In doing so, he
presso il fro[n]tespitio acciò sia anco noto il suo titolo per quando sarà
stampato’.

showed a relatively broad knowledge of musical literature,

mentioning – aside from anonymous composers – the names of
such artists as Johannes Ghiselinus, Josquin Desprez, Cipriano
de Rore, Francesco Soriano, Pietro Cerone or Paolo Agostini
(Table 1). This argumentation was unfortunately weakened by a
lack of notated examples, as we have noted previously.
Table 1. Pieces with soggetto cavato delle parole, mentioned by M. Scacchi in

Consideratio canonum.
Composer Title of the piece Characteristics of work
Anonim La sorella mi fà languire 3-voice canon; melody comprised of
notes: la, sol, re, la, mi, fa, la mi, re
Anonim 4-voice piece In bass, melody derived from
words: ‘mi, re, fa solare le calsette,
mi fa re solare le scarpe schiette’
Paolo Missa Ave Regina Fragment containing 4-voice canon
Agostini Caelorum from based on soggetto ‘Ave Regina
Secondo libro delle Caelorum’
partiture (Roma 1627)
Pietro Veni Sponsa Christi Tenor based on soggetto
Cerone
Josquin Missa Hercules Dux Soggetto cavato delle parole
Desprez Ferrariae
Johannes 4-voice canon Contains soggetto which can be read
Ghiselinus upside down
Cipriano 6-voice piece Sopranos sing in canon all’unisono,
de Rore (SSSSTT) tenors as independent voices
perform melody derived from
vowels of text
Francesco Canoni et oblighi di Subject derived from words of
Soriano cento, e dieci sorti sopra antiphon
‘Ave maris stella’
Another element of Scacchi’s reflections was a critique of the

canons presented in Micheli’s publication in notated form. The
Warsaw chapel master observed that Micheli misled readers,
improperly designating the number of voices in the canons. In
the work Pater, & Filius, & Spiritus Sanctus, & hi tres unum sunt,
the canon is carried out by only two voices; the third moves in
parallel motion to the first. It is an abuse to call this little work a

three-voice canon and consider the number of its voices to be a

symbol of the Holy Trinity. For the same reasons, Spiritur ubi
vult spirat is, in Scacchi’s opinion, a two-, and not a four-voice
canon. Citing the authority of Franciscus Lilius, the critic consi-
dered Micheli’s works to be musically imperfect, bereft of all
harmony and devoid of new solutions. He particularly opposed
the (in his opinion) warped interpretation of Plato’s doctrine.
According to Scacchi, this doctrine applies to the interpretation
of the meaning of words by, above all, appropriate harmony,
not only selection of the number of voices and the number of
variants, as Micheli wanted to do in the canon Pater & Filius. It
could seem that the division into prima and seconda pratica, as
well as the manner of interpretation of Plato’s definition, differ-
ent from Zarlino’s, in the 1640s in Italy should no longer have
raised any doubts; however, in Consideratio canonum, Scacchi
was obliged to explain the philosopher’s words in the formula-
tion of Monteverdi, whose interpretation he considered to be
binding. However, he was not speaking out against the canons
as such, but against ignorance of the principles of new music,
and against placing canons in the category of works subject to
the ut oratio sit domina harmoniae principle, which is comprised
rather of such genres as madrigals, canzonette, laments, sonnets,
octaves, recitativi, as well as concerti for small ensemble, written
by well-known composers contemporary to him. If the Roman
artist wanted to follow the views of Plato properly conceived,
he should (according to Scacchi) have interpreted the sweet-
ness, gentleness and prayerful character of the text with the aid
of harmony, and emphasized the unity of the Holy Spirit, ex-
pressed in the words ‘unum sunt’, with utilization of unison
sonorities.
Scacchi, alluding to what he had expressed in his letter to
Micheli discussed above, yet again declared himself in favor of
transformations on the ground of musical art, of the search for
new, more and more perfect solutions. For this reason as well,
the compositions analyzed did not receive a high rating from
him. He even permitted himself a bit of sarcasm addressed to
their creator. He wrote that occupying oneself with this type of

tricks is a waste of time, and if someone squanders years creat-

ing one canon and finally achieves a result, one cannot speak of
any miracle. Those who occupy themselves with this type of
studies are not knowledgeable in the art of music. They express
themselves in it rarely, presenting only an artistic plan, but not
a proper result, which should be pleasant to listen to. Not only
do they write dry and sterile works in the sense of sonority,
they often do not even provide satisfaction to the mind. In the
above statements resounds an echo of the 16th-century discus-
sion of whether reason or the senses are the criterion for evalua-
tion of music. Zarlino’s position in this matter suggested a bal-
ance between the two ways of perception.27 Analyzing Scacchi’s
opinions expressed in Consideratio canonum, as well as his earli-
er texts, we find that he proposed we be guided by both reason
and sensory judgment; but for the prima and seconda pratica, he
applied somewhat different criteria. The quality of works writ-
ten according to the first practice, he left in first order of priori-
ty to the evaluation of reason, for the condition of good music
was, in this case, subjection to the rules. The seconda pratica,
whose strength lay in, among other things, the breaking of
those rules, was to be subject, above all, to the evaluation of the
senses.28
The chapel master to the King of Poland opposed the mea-
surement of the quality of artists’ technique by the quantity of
canons they had created. He no doubt formulated this opinion in
response to the attitude of both Micheli and Siefert. He lamented
that the Roman composer had joined the group of those artists
who while away time in vain, emphasizing that this is also the
opinion of other educated musicians in Rome. Scacchi boasted
27 LE ISTITVTIONI HARMONICHE DI M. GIOSEFFO ZARLINO DA

CHIOGGIA; Nelle quali; oltra le materia appartenenti ALLA MVSICA; Si
trouano dichiarati molti luoghi di Poeti, d’Historici, & di Filosofi; Si come nel
leggerle si potrà chiaramente vedere. [...] IN VENETIA MDLVIII, chapter 36, p.
344–347.
28 We cannot agree with Z. M. Szweykowski’s view that Scaccchi ‘trusted,
above all, the testimony of the ear’, which he ‘brought out into the fore-
ground’, cf. Szweykowski Musica moderna, p. 251.

that he had dared to take up his pen to show what a great mis-
take Micheli had made in sending his Canoni musicali all over the
world, while other musicians did not express their opinions con-
cerning these canons, because they speak for themselves.
Scacchi´s last words and works
The last word in the polemic with Micheli was spoken by

Scacchi on the pages of Breve discorso sopra la musica moderna,
published in 1649 in Warsaw. Aside from other issues, a concise
summary appeared in this publication of all of the main threads
taken up in his letter to Micheli, as well as discussed in
Consideratio canonum.
Analysis of Scacchi’s texts addressed to Romano Micheli
shows that the Warsaw chapel master gradually formed and
sharpened his views in the course of successive polemics. In
coming into contact with various artistic attitudes, he perceived
the necessity of taking up discussion on selected theoretical
issues. In order to conduct an objective polemic, he studied the
theoretical texts and musical works at his disposal, reaching
back, in so doing, to the 16th century. At the same time, he
enriched his compositional technique, as is evidenced by his
last collection of compositions, published in print in Królewiec
and entitled Canones Nonnulli Super Arias quasdam Musicales
Domini Christophori Werneri29 (‘Certain canons [based] on certain
29 CANONES NONNVLLI, Super Arias quasdam Musicales DNI.

CHRISTOPHORI VVERNERI, Chori Musices ad D. Cathar: Gedani
Moderatoris dignissimi, compositi, ac artificiosè elaborati. AVTHORE MARCO
SCACCHIO, ROMANO SERENISSIMI ac POTENTISSIMI JOHANNIS
CASIMIRI, Regis Poloniae & Sveciae Capellae Magistro. REGIOMONTI, Typis
PASCHALIS MENSENII, Anno 1649. I discuss the collection in ‘Die Kom-
positionen von Christoph Werner als Quelle der Inspiration für Marco
Scacchi’, Ständige Konferenz Mitteldeutsche Barockmusik, Jahrbuch 2004, ed.
Peter Wollny, Beeskow 2005.

musical arias of Mr. Christoph Werner’). Scacchi, taking as his

basis the melodies of arias by Christoph Werner30, the cantor of
Gdask, created seventeen compositions which belong to two
genres which can intersect with each other. One is represented
by canons, in which the composer focuses on proper construc-
tion of the subject; and the second, by polyphonic compositions
containing obblighi – that is, structural assumptions adopted a
priori. All works, with the exception of the last, are devoid of
words; they are accompanied only by an incipit identifying
them with the corresponding aria by Werner; their character
seems to be rather didactic, theoretical. Though there are no
canons sopra le vocali di più parole in Scacchi’s collection, we can
surmise that the critic of Micheli’s works wished to contend
with a similar type of musical material.
Literature
Göhler, Albert, Verzeichnis der in den Frankfurter und Leipziger Messkatalogen der
Jahre 1564 bis 1759 angezeigten Musikalien, Hilversum: Knuf 1965.
Katz, Erich, Die musikalischen Stilbegriffe des 17. Jahrhunderts, [Charlottenburg]
1926.
Palisca, Claude, ‘Marco Scacchi's Defense of Modern Music (1649)’, Words and
Music: the Scholar's View. A Medley of Problems and Solutions Compiled in
Honor of A. Tillman Merrit, ed. L. Berman, Cambridge, MA, 1972.
Palisca, Claude, Studies in the History of Italian Music and Music Theory, Oxford:
Clarendon Press 1994.
Patalas, Aleksandra, ‘Die Kompositionen von Christoph Werner als Quelle
der Inspiration für Marco Scacchi’, Ständige Konferenz Mitteldeutsche
Barockmusik Jahrbuch 2004, ed, Peter Wollny, Beeskow 2005.
30 Musicalische ARIEN Oder Melodeyen / über etliche Heilige Lieb= und Lob=
Lieder Herrn MICHAEL ALBINI, Mit 4. Stimmen zu singen und spielen geset-
zet und außgegeben von Christoff Wernern- der Music Directore, bey S. Catha-
rin: in Dantzig. Königsberg in Preussen/ Gedruckt bey Paschen Mense/ Jm Jahr
unsers Heyls M. DC. XLIX.

Polemics on the Musica moderna, Practica musica, vol. 1, ed. Zygmunt M. Szwey-
kowski and Tim Carter, Kraków 1993.
Przybyszewska-Jarmiska, Barbara, Muzyczne dwory polskich Wazów,
Warszawa 2007.
Szweykowski, Zygmunt M., Musica moderna w ujciu Marka Scacchiego. Z
dziejów teorii muzyki w XVII wieku, Kraków 1977.
Szweykowski, Anna and Zygmunt M., Wosi w kapeli królewskiej polskich
Wazów, Kraków 1997.
Wollny, Peter (ed.), ‘Die Kompositionen von Christoph Werner als Quelle der
Inspiration für Marco Scacchi’, Ständige Konferenz Mitteldeutsche Barock-
musik, Jahrbuch 2004, Beeskow 2005.
Sources
AGOSTINO AGAZZARI
La musica ecclesiastica dove si contiene la vera diffinitione della musica come
scienza, in: Polemics on the Musica moderna, in the series: Practica musica, vol.
1, ed. Zygmunt M. Szweykowski and Tim Carter, Kraków 1993.
ROMANO MICHELI
CANONI MVSICALI COMPOSTI SOPRA LE VOCALI DI PIU PAROLE,
DA ROMANO MICHELI ROMANO, DEL QUAL MODO DI COMPONERE
E INVENTORE. ALLI FAMOSI, E PERITISSIMI SIG. MVSICI D’ITALIA, E
di tutti gl’altri Regni, & Potentati miei Patroni Osseruandissimi. IN ROMA,
Nella Stamperia di Lodouico Grignani. MDCXLV.
VIRTUOSA RISPOSTA Che si fà da Romano Micheli Musico Romano Alla
virtuosa curiosità d’vn Musico peritissimo in Roma. In Roma, Nella Stamperia di
Lodouico Grignani. 1645.
AVVISO INVIATO DA ME ROMANO MICHELI Insieme col foglio reale del
Canone musicale FONS SIGNATVS, Alli famosi, e peritissimi Signori Musici
d’Italia e di tutti gl’altri Regni, e Potentati miei Patroni osseruandissimi. IN
ROMA, MDCL. Nella Stamperia di Lodouico Grignani. CON LICENZA DE’
SUPERIORI. Manuscript MS 500, Biblioteca Angelica, Rome.
MARCO SCACCHI
CRIBRVM MVSICVM AD TRITICVM SIFERTICVM SEV, Examinatio
succincta Psalmorum, quos non ita pridem Paulus Sifertus Dantiscanus, in aede

Parochiali ibidem Organaedus in lucem edidit, In qua clare & perspicue multa
explicantur, quae summè necessaria ad artem melopòèticam esse solent,
AVTHORE MARCO SCACCHIO, ROMANO, Regiae Majestatis Poloniae, &
Sueciae Capellae Magistro. VENETIIS,Apud Allexandrum Vincentium.
MDCXXXXIII.
LETTERA PER MAGGIORE INFORMATIONE, A chi leggerà il mio
CRIBRVM, Stampato in Venetia nell'anno 1643. nella Stamparia D'Allesandro
Vincenzi, Cioe, censura fatta sopra alcune Cantilene di Paolo Syfert Danzichano
in Idioma Germano. Varsauia li 29 Agosto 1644. nella Stampa Reggia.
CANONES NONNVLLI, Super Arias quasdam Musicales DNI.
CHRISTOPHORI VVERNERI, Chori Musices ad D. Cathar: Gedani
Moderatoris dignissimi, compositi, ac artificiosè elaborati. AVTHORE MARCO
SCACCHIO, ROMANO SERENISSIMI ac POTENTISSIMI JOHANNIS
CASIMIRI, Regis Poloniae & Sveciae Capellae Magistro. REGIOMONTI, Typis
PASCHALIS MENSENII, Anno 1649.
IUDICIUM CRIBRI MUSICI ID EST LITTERAE QUAEDAM Certo tempore a
Praestantissimis Artis Musicae in Germania Professoribus et Peritis transmissae.
Mihique MARCO SCACCHIO S.R.M. Joannis Casimiri Poloniae et Sueciae
Regis Capellae Magistro oblatae A me diligenter collectae et ipsismet Authoribus
ad maiorem animi benevolentiam dedicatae atque consecratae VARSAVIAE In
Officina Petri Elert S.R.M. Typographi.
CHRISTOPH WERNER
Musicalische ARIEN Oder Melodeyen / über etliche Heilige Lieb= und Lob=
Lieder Herrn MICHAEL ALBINI, Mit 4. Stimmen zu singen und spielen
gesetzet und außgegeben von Christoff Wernern- der Music Directore, bey S.
Catharin: in Dantzig. Königsberg in Preussen/ Gedruckt bey Paschen Mense/ Jm
Jahr unsers Heyls M. DC. XLIX.
GIOSEFFO ZARLINO
LE ISTITVTIONI HARMONICHE DI M. GIOSEFFO ZARLINO DA
CHIOGGIA; Nelle quali; oltra le materia appartenenti ALLA MVSICA; Si
trouano dichiarati molti luoghi di Poeti, d’Historici,& di Filosofi; Si come nel
leggerle si potrà chiaramente vedere. [...] IN VENETIA MDLVIII.

STEPHEN ROSE
The Composer as Self-Publisher in

Seventeenth-Century Germany
The Düben collection is a testament to the efforts of seven-

teenth-century musicians to collect compositions in manuscript.
It shows the importance of scribal dissemination in a period
when music-printing had declined. Yet a small quantity of mu-
sic continued to be printed during the second half of the seven-
teenth century, partly because it was still held in high regard by
patrons and institutions. Many of these printed collections were
published by the composers themselves. Between 1660 and
1700, composers who published at least one book of their own
music included Christoph Bernhard, Johann Philipp Krieger,
Johann Kuhnau and Johann Rudolf Ahle (see Table 1). In so
doing, they continued a tradition of self-publishing by compos-
ers earlier in the century (such as Johann Hermann Schein,
Heinrich Schütz and Michael Praetorius); they also anticipated
eighteenth-century composers who would self-publish (such as
Georg Philipp Telemann, Johann Sebastian Bach and Carl
Philipp Emanuel Bach). The extent of self-publishing can be
measured statistically, using as an example the holdings of
printed music in Uppsala University Library. According to
Rafael Mitjana’s and Åke Davidsson’s catalogue, the library
holds 108 printed collections by German composers from the
seventeenth century. At least 22 of these collections are pub-
lished by the composer, according to information on their title-
pages.1
1 This calculation excludes anthologies (which were often produced by

commercial publisher) and occasional music (which generally was not-
published). Rafael Mitjana & Åke Davidsson, Catalogue critique et descriptif

240 Stephen Rose
Table 1. A selection of self-published music from Germany, 1660–1700.

Johann Rudolf Ahle, Neu-gepflanzter thüringischer Lustgarten,
Nebengang & Dritter Theil (Mühlhausen, 1663 & 1665)
Johann Rudolf Ahle, Neue geistliche auf die hohen Festtage durchs gantze Jahr
gerichte Andachten (Mühlhausen, 1662)
Johann Rudolf Ahle, Musicalische Frühlings-Lust (Mühlhausen & Erfurt,
1666)
Johann Rudolf Ahle, Neue geistliche Communion und Häupt Fest-Andachten
(Mühlhausen, 1668)
Dietrich Becker, Musicalische Frühlings-Früchte (Hamburg, 1668)
Christoph Bernhard, Geistliche Harmonien (Dresden, 1665)
Wolfgang Carl Briegel, Geistliche Arien I & II (Gotha & Mühlhausen, 1660,
1661)
Georg Bronner, VI geistliche Concerten (Hamburg, 1696)
Dietrich Buxtehude, VII suonate op.1 (Hamburg, ?1694)
Samuel Capricornus, Zwei Lieder von dem Leyden und Tode Jesu
(Nuremberg, 1660)
Samuel Capricornus, Jubilus Bernhardi (Stuttgart & Nuremberg, 1660)
Samuel Capricornus, Sonaten und Canzonen (Stuttgart & Nuremberg, 1660)
Samuel Capricornus, Geistliche Harmonien III (Stuttgart, 1664)
Andreas Hammerschmidt, Kirchen- und Tafel-Music (Zittau, 1662)
Jakob Kremberg, Musicalische Gemüths-Ergötzung oder Arien (Dresden,
1689)
Johann Philipp Krieger, Musicalischer Seelen-Friede (Nuremberg, 1697)
Johann Kuhnau, Neue Clavier Übung I & II (Leipzig, 1689 & 1692)
Johann Kuhnau, Musicalische Vorstellung einiger biblischer Historien
(Leipzig, 1700)
Johann Christoph Pezel, Bicinia variorum instrumentorum (Leipzig, 1675)
Johann Adam Reincken, Hortus musicus (Hamburg, c.1688)
Esias Reusner, Musicalische Taffel-Erlustigung (Brieg, 1668)
Esias Reusner, Musicalische Gesellschaffts-Ergetzung (Brieg, 1670)
Johann Rosenmüller, Studenten-Music (Leipzig, 1654) (published in
collaboration with the heirs of Henning Grosse)
Johann Sebastiani, Das Leyden und Sterben unsers Herrn und Heylandes Jesu
Christi nach dem heiligen Matthaeo (Königsberg, 1672)
For a selective list of self-published works from the first half of the seventeenth
century, see Stephen Rose, ‘The mechanisms of the music trade in central Ger-
many 1600–1640’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association 130 (2005), 1–37 (p.17).
de imprimés de musique des XVIe et XVIIe siècle conservés à la Bibliothèque de

’Université royale d’Upsala, 3 vols., Uppsala 1911–51.

The composer as self-publisher 241
Before investigating the phenomenon of self-publishing, it is

useful to clarify the role of the publisher in producing a book of
music. Not all printed music was published; many occasional
pamphlets (Gelegenheitsdrucke) of wedding and funeral songs
were printed for private circulation.2 A publisher, however, was
required for editions that would be sold via the wider book-
trade. Typically the publisher oversaw and financed the ven-
ture, supplied the printer with paper, and took responsibility
for marketing, storing and selling copies. The printer, by con-
trast, usually worked on the commission of the publisher, set-
ting the type (or engraving the plates) and manufacturing the
number of copies specified in the contract. Sometimes the roles
of printer and publisher were performed by the same person,
but in seventeenth-century Germany it was more common for
these jobs to be undertaken separately. Such a division of la-
bour allowed composers to take on the role of publisher, acting
as entrepreneurs as they promoted their own music (and, by
extension, advertised their compositional ability). A study of
those musicians who self-published hence gives insights into
their business relationships and also the changing market for
sheet music.
An obstacle in researching self-publication is the absence of
detailed evidence. For most collections of printed music, the
only indication of the publisher is found on the title-page. Here
the publisher’s name is usually introduced by phrases indicat-
ing the provision of financial support (‘expensis’, ‘sumptibus’,
‘in Kosten von’); the printer’s name is introduced by phrases
that refer to the physical act of pressing ink on paper (‘druck’,
‘typis’, ‘excudebat’). In addition there may be details of who
sells copies (‘apud’, ‘bey’, ‘zu finden’). The information given
on the title-page is often repeated in the catalogues produced at
2 On the private status of most occasional pamphlets, see Stephen Rose,

‘Schein’s occasional music and the social order in 1620s Leipzig’, Early
Music History, 23 (2004), p. 275–276 and idem, ‘Music printing in Leipzig
during the Thirty Years’ War’, Notes: quarterly journal of the Music Library
Association, 61 (2004), p. 328–329.

242 Stephen Rose
the Leipzig and Frankfurt book-fairs, sometimes with extra de-

tail about where to buy copies.3
Yet it is very hard to find further information about the exact
role of a composer-publisher or the financial arrangements be-
hind an edition. In a few cases discussed below, there is archi-
val evidence of the financial transactions that supported a com-
poser’s publishing ventures. Further clues may sometimes be
found in the preface and dedications of printed music, although
such statements must be read within the rhetorical conventions
of the genre.4 For example, Christoph Bernhard dedicated his
Geistliche Harmonien (a self-published work of 1665) to the
Hamburg council, saying that the purpose of the dedication
was not to publicise his skill in composition, nor to seek the
council’s favour, nor least of all to cover the costs of printing.
Yet such a reference to the printing costs might be an example
of the rhetorical device of paralipsis, where a writer draws atten-
tion to a matter by pretending to pass over it. Hence it is hard to
know whether to take Bernhard’s dedication at face value. It
can be equally difficult establishing the exact meaning of the
prefaces and dedications of other self-published works.
Because of the shortage of evidence, it is not feasible to focus
this account on a single composer who self-published.5 Instead
this paper offers an overview of German musicians who pub-
3 Entries of music in the book-fair catalogues are summarised in Karl Albert

Göhler (ed.), Verzeichnis der in den Frankfurter und Leipziger Messkatalogen
der Jahre 1564 bis 1759 angezeigten Musikalien, Leipzig 1902.
4 For an introduction to the rhetoric of literary prefaces, see Kevin Dunn,
Pretexts of authority: the rhetoric of authorship in the Renaissance preface, Stan-
ford 1994. One common theme of prefaces – the pre-emption of criticism –
is discussed in Stephen Rose, ‘Publication and the anxiety of judgement in
German musical life of the seventeenth century’, Music & Letters, 85 (2004).
5 For accounts of eighteenth-century self-publishers, see Steven Zohn,
‘Telemann in the marketplace: the composer as self-publisher’, Journal of
the American Musicological Society, 58 (2005), 275–356; Rudolf Rasch, ‘Muzio
Clementi: The last composer-publisher’, Muzio Clementi: studies and pros-
pects, Bologna 2002; Peggy Aub, ‘The publication process and audience for
C. P. E. Bach’s Sonaten für Kenner und Liebhaber’, Bach perspectives ii: J. S.
Bach, the Breitkopfs and 18th-century music trade, Lincoln 1996.

lished their own compositions in the seventeenth century. There

are dangers in taking a broad-brush approach, in particular the
risk of ignoring the diverse circumstances in which musicians
worked. Yet by taking a broader perspective, this paper can ask
why composers self-published, how they funded such ventures,
and what role they played in distributing their printed music. In
studying the motives of self-publishers, this paper also sheds
light on the various purposes of printed music.
Reasons for self-publication
Often self-publication is taken as a sign of a weak market for

printed music, where composers cannot find publishers for
their works. Yet in other economic circumstances, composers
might self-publish for financial advantage, as a way to gain
maximum profit from their printed music.
Johann Hermann Schein (1585–1630) is arguably an example
of a composer who published in order to gain the entire profit
from his printed music. His first three collections were issued
by commercial bookdealers: Venuskränzlein (1609) was pub-
lished by Thomas Schürer, Cymbalum sionium (1615) was pub-
lished by Abraham Lamberg, and Banchetto musicale (1617) was
published by Lamberg with Caspar Klosemann. Thereafter
Schein published all his remaining music himself, issuing nine
new collections plus at least three second editions between 1618
and 1630 (see Table 2). The second editions indicate strong de-
mand for his music, particularly for the secular songs in Musica
boscareccia. Because Schein had gained Saxon printing privileges
in 1617 and 1628, he was the only person legally entitled to
print his music, preventing any other Saxon publisher from
profiting from it.6 Had Schein lived longer, he would have con-
6 Schein’s 1617 Saxon privilege is reprinted in the prefatory material of

Opella nova I, Leipzig, 1618; for his 1628 privilege, see Wilibald Gurlitt, ‘Ein

244 Stephen Rose
tinued to profit regularly from further printings of his music.

As late as 1651–1652, new editions appeared of Diletti pastorali
and Israelisbrünnlein, as well as versions of Musica boscareccia
with Latin texts.7 Such continuing popularity suggests that
Schein had sound commercial reasons for acting as his own
publisher. Indeed Nicole Restle has suggested that the prolif-
eration of Schein’s publications in 1626 reflected his need for a
large sum of money (2200 gulden, half paid immediately and
the rest in annual instalments) to buy the house of his second
wife’s parents.8 As Table 2 shows, Schein issued three new col-
lections in 1626; the following year there was another new book
(Cantional) plus second editions of Musica boscareccia I, Musica
boscareccia II and Opella nova I.
Table 2. Johann Hermann Schein’s self-publications

All published in Leipzig by the author.
Opella nova I (1618) (RISM S1377)
Musica boscareccia I (1621) (RISM S1379)
Israelisbrünlein (1623) (RISM S1385)
Diletti pastorali (1624) (RISM S1387)
Opella nova II (1626) (RISM S1388)
Musica boscareccia II (1626) (RISM S1389)
Studenten-Schmauß (1626) (RISM S1395)
Cantional (1627) (RISM S1397, DKL162710)
Musica boscareccia I, 2nd ed. (1627) (RISM S1380)
Musica boscareccia II, 2nd ed. (1627) (RISM S1390)
Opella nova I, 2nd ed. (1627) (RISM S1378)
Musica boscareccia III (1628) (RISM S1399)
Autorenprivileg für Johann Hermann Schein’, Festschrift Karl Gustav

Fellerer zum sechzigsten Geburtstag am 7. Juli 1962, ed. Heinrich Hüschen,
Regensburg: Gustav Bosse, 1962. The privilege did not stop the Strasbourg
firm of Paul Ledertz reprinting Schein’s secular collections; it is not known
whether Schein authorised Ledertz’s editions.
7 The 1651–1652 editions of Diletti pastorali and Israelisbrünlein were pub-
lished by Jakob Schuster in Leipzig; the 1651 Latin contrafacta of Musica
boscareccia were published by Christian von Saher in Erfurt.
8 Nicole Restle, Vokales und instrumentales Komponieren in Johann Hermann
Scheins Opella nova ander Theil, Frankfurt am Main 2000, p. 14; Arthur Prü-
fer, Johan Herman Schein, Leipzig 1895, p. 72.

Gerhard Dünnhaupt (Personalbibliographien zu den Drucken des Barock, 2nd

edition (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1990–1993) lists a 1630 self-published edi-
tion of Musica boscareccia I and 1631 self-published editions of Musica
boscareccia I and II as among the books formerly in the Preussische Staats-
bibliothek, Berlin, and now in the Biblioteka Jagielloska, Kraków. How-
ever, I have not located these copies; nor are they listed by Aleksandra
Patalas, Catalogue of early music prints from the collections of the former Prus-
sische Staatsbibliothek in Berlin, kept at the Jagiellonian Library in Cracow
(Kraków: Musica Iagellonica, 1999).
Already in the 1620s, though, other musicians were having dif-

ficulties in finding a publisher, particularly with the chaos
caused by the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648). In 1623 Burckhard
Grossman complained that ‘Saul’s spear’ was disrupting musi-
cal life and music-printing (especially with a shortage of pa-
per).9 By the 1630s publishing and bookselling had reached a
nadir in central Germany: the number of books sold at the
Leipzig book-fair fell so drastically that only one catalogue was
issued in 1637 rather than the usual two.10 In 1635 Samuel
Scheidt appealed in his Geistliche Concerte III for a publisher to
support his projected fifth and sixth volumes of sacred concer-
tos. A year later, Heinrich Schütz explained that the war had
forced him to hold back some of his compositions, on account
of a lack of publishers.11 His statement is qualified by the fact
that he made it in Kleine geistliche Concerte I, a book of modestly
scored pieces published by the Leipzig firm of Gottfried Grosse;
but a general dwindling of commercial interest in printed music
might explain why Schütz turned to publishing himself or
through his colleagues from the 1640s onwards.
9 Preface to the motet collection, Angst der Hellen und Friede der Seelen, ed.
Burckhard Grossman, Jena 1623.
10 For the numbers of books advertised at the fairs, see Gustav Schwetschke,
Codex nundinarius Germaniae literatae bisecularis: Mess-Jahrbücher des deut-
schen Buchhandels von dem Erscheinen des ersten Mess-Kataloges im Jahre 1564
bis zu der Gründung des ersten Buchhändler-Vereins im Jahre 1765, Halle 1850.
11 ‘etzlicher meiner componirten Musicalischen Operum selber / mit welchen
ich aus Mangel der Vorlegere biß anhero / wie auch noch anjetzo / zurück
stehen müssen’. Kleine geistliche Concerte I, Leipzig 1636 (dedication).

246 Stephen Rose
Earlier in his career Schütz had self-published his Psalmen

Davids (1619), his first publication after his arrival at the Dres-
den court. From the 1640s, though, he used colleagues and pu-
pils in and around Dresden as the publishers and distributors
of his music (see Table 3).
Table 3. Heinrich Schütz’s publishers and agents, 1639–1664.

Schütz work Publisher Agent
Kleine geistliche None specified Johann Klemm,*
Concerte II, 1639 Dresden;
Daniel Weixer,*
Leipzig.
Symphoniae sacrae II, Johann Klemm, Delphin Strungk,
1647 Dresden; Brunswick;
Alexander Hering, Johann Rosenmüller,
Bautzen. Leipzig.
Geistliche Chormusic, Johann Klemm, Dres- Delphin Strungk,*
1648 den Brunswick;
Samuel Scheibe,*
bookdealer, Leipzig.
Symphoniae sacrae III, None specified. Dedi- None specified
1650 cation implies that
Schütz was publisher
Zwölff geistliche Christoph Kittel, None specified
Gesänge, 1657 Dresden
Historia der Geburt Jesu Alexander Hering, Sebastian Knüpfer,
Christi, 1664 Dresden Leipzig;
Alexander Hering,
Dresden
* advertised as also stocking Schütz’s other music publications
Particularly significant were Johann Klemm, a former pupil

who seems to have acted as Schütz’s copyist and secretary;12
Alexander Hering, described by Schütz in 1647 as ‘my former
servant and copyist’;13 and Christoph Kittel, who was a court
12 Joshua Rifkin & Colin Timms, ‘Heinrich Schütz’, The New Grove North
European Baroque masters, London 1985, p. 41.
13 ‘mein bishero gewesener Diener Vndt Copist’. Letter of 14 April 1647
recommending Hering for post of organist in Bautzen. Heinrich Schütz: Ge-

organist in the 1650s. At first Schütz seems to have used his

junior colleagues as assistants in his master-plan to get his
works published, perhaps as an extension of their duties as
copyists. Around this time he repeatedly asserted his desire to
‘collect and complete my musical works that I began in my
youth and have them printed for my remembrance’, albeit al-
ways in letters where he was pleading with his patron to be
allowed to retire from everyday duties at the Dresden court.14
From the mid-1650s, though, as Schütz entered his seventies
and became increasingly exasperated at the musical fashions of
his age, he lost interest in initiating publications himself. On the
Zwölff geistliche Gesänge (1657), the title-page indicates that the
publisher Christoph Kittel took the initiative in assembling the
pieces and getting them printed, with Schütz’s permission.15 As
for the Historia der Geburt Jesu Christi (1664), this seems to have
been neither instigated nor supervised by Schütz; unlike his
collections of the 1640s and 1650s, it is not printed on his pri-
vate supply of paper.16
From the 1650s several examples of self-publishing were
caused by the difficulty that musicians experienced in finding
commercial publishers. The market for printed music was con-
tracting and fragmenting in this period. As Friedhelm Krum-
macher has shown, very little concerted vocal music appeared
in print after 1660; manuscript dissemination was much better
suited to the specialised nature and complicated textures of this
repertory.17 Only the simpler styles of vocal music were likely
sammelte Briefe und Schriften, ed. Erich H. Müller von Asow, Regensburg
1931, p. 173.
14 ‘Vndt (:damit Ich meine anderweit in meiner Jugendt angefangene Musi-
calische Wercke colligiren Completieren, undt zu meinen andencken auch
in den druck geben könne:) von der ordentlichen auffwartung mich zube-
freyen.’ Letter of 14 January 1651, Heinrich Schütz: Gesammelte Briefe, p. 213.
15 Title-page: ‘Ietzo aber Zusammen getragen / und mit seiner Vergünstigung
zum öffentlichen Druck befördert worden / Durch / Christoph Kitteln’.
16 Rifkin & Timms, ‘Heinrich Schütz’, p. 61.
17 Friedhelm Krummacher, Die Überlieferung der Choralbearbeitungen in der
frühen evangelischen Kantate, Berlin 1965, p. 50–78.

248 Stephen Rose
to attract publishers: as late as 1680 Wolfgang Carl Briegel was

paid a lump-sum (Honorar) by the publisher Albrecht Otto Fa-
ber for his Musikalischer Lebens-Brunn.18 Other composers, how-
ever, felt there was little reason to enter print in the current
economic climate. Johann Rosenmüller complained in his Kern-
Sprüche II (1652–1653; published by Hamburg firm of Zacharias
Hertel) that publishers paid for neither the paper nor the ink of
a book, let alone for the author’s labour.19
In such circumstances, self-publication remained one way
for composers to get their works printed. Johann Rudolf Ahle
had managed to find a publisher – Johann Birkner in Erfurt –
for the first two parts of his Neu-gepflanzter Thüringischer Lust-
garten (1657–1658). But Birkner died on 2 August 1658, leaving
Ahle without a publisher for the rest of the collection. After a
delay of five years, a continuation (Nebengang) of the Lustgarten
appeared in 1663, published by Ahle himself. A final volume
(Dritter Theil) appeared in 1665, again published by Ahle. It is
evident that self-publishing restricted the scope of these last
two volumes, which with ten pieces each are about a third of
the size of the first two instalments.20
Whereas Ahle turned to self-publishing in order to complete
a multi-volume publication already underway, other composers
became their own publishers to issue their first printed collec-
tion. Such ‘opus 1’ collections were often released at a symbolic
moment in the career of a composer – on starting a major job,
for instance – in much the same way as musicians earlier in the
seventeenth century sought to prove their compositional skill
via print.21 Christoph Bernhard’s Geistliche Harmonien (1665)
marked his appointment in Hamburg as cantor of the
18 Elisabeth Noack, Wolfgang Carl Briegel, Berlin 1963, p. 73–74.

19 That the publisher did not supply paper is confirmed by Peter Wollny’s
discovery (to be reported in a forthcoming article in Schütz-Jahrbuch) that
Rosenmüller’s collection is printed on paper from Heinrich Schütz’s pri-
vate supply.
20 Markus Rathey, Johann Rudolph Ahle 1625–1673: Lebensweg und Schaffen,
Eisenach 1999, p. 166–172.
21 See Rose, ‘Publication and the anxiety of judgement’, p. 22–23.

Johanneum and director of church music; it is dedicated to his

new employer, the Hamburg town council. Similarly, Dietrich
Becker’s Musicalische Frühlings-Früchte (1668) marked his ap-
pointment as a municipal musician in Hamburg in succession
to Johann Schop, and is again dedicated to his new employer.
The books by Bernhard and Becker serve an important symbolic
role, displaying their compositional ability and acknowledging
their patrons; such a symbolic function may explain why com-
posers still wanted their work to appear in print, despite the
shift to manuscript dissemination in the period.
The difficulties of finding a publisher were still evident in
the early eighteenth century, particularly for composers of key-
board music (another genre with a strong manuscript tradition
of dissemination). Take the example of Johann Gottfried
Walther, who was reported by Johann Mattheson to have com-
pleted a cycle of chorale preludes for the church year ‘and who
would be delighted if a good engraver chose to engrave and
publish this at his own cost; he [Walther] would ask for no
more in return than a few copies’.22 Despite Mattheson’s appeal,
Walther failed to find a publisher. Eleven years later he com-
plained to his friend Heinrich Bokemeyer that ‘my chorale
variations, which amount to over 350 variations on 112 tunes,
are likely to remain silent forever in the store’.23 During his life-
time Walther managed to get only four of his chorale variations
printed, some at the expense of a near relative (nahe Anver-
wandte).24 It seems that the market for engraved keyboard music
was limited by the competition with scribal copies. Walther told
22 ‘[Er] wäre zu frieden/ wenn ein guter Kupffer-Stecker solchen auf seine
Kosten stechen und verlegen wollte: er praetendirt für sich weiter nichts/
als etliche exemplaria.’ Johann Mattheson, Critica musica, tomus ii, pars vi,
Hamburg 1725, p. 175.
23 ‘mögen demnach meine variirte Chorale, deren jetzo 112 sind, und die über
3½ hundert variations betragen, immer auf dem Lager stille liegen’ . Letter
to Heinrich Bokemeyer, 4 August 1736. Johann Gottfried Walther, Briefe,
ed. Karl Beckmann & Hans-Joachim Schulze, Leipzig 1987, p. 195.
24 See his autobiography in Johann Mattheson, Grundlage einer Ehrenpforte,
ed. Max Schneider, Berlin 1910, p. 389.

250 Stephen Rose
Bokemeyer that no publisher would touch his set of chorale

variations on Allein Gott, ‘because for every music-lover who
buys it, ten or more copy it out. And that is the truth.’25
Such conditions help explain why keyboard composers at
the end of the seventeenth century sometimes acted as their
own publishers. Johann Kuhnau, for instance, is named as pub-
lisher on three of his keyboard collections: Neuer Clavier-Übung
Erster Theil (1689), Neuer Clavier-Übung andrer Theil (1692) and
Musicalische Vorstellung einiger biblischer Historien (1700). All of
Kuhnau’s keyboard publications are engraved rather than type-
set, and as the composer-publisher would retain ownership of
the metal plates, he was therefore able to print further impres-
sions whenever extra copies were required. Indeed the surviv-
ing copies of Kuhnau’s keyboard publications show many small
bibliographical differences, indicating a complex chain of cor-
rections and reprintings that have been studied by C. David
Harriss.26 Self-publishing continued to be the norm with key-
board collections of the early eighteenth century, such as Jo-
hann Sebastian Bach’s Clavierübung I (1726–1731) and Cla-
vierübung III (1739), Georg Friedrich Kauffmann’s Harmonische
Seelenlust (1733–1740), Daniel Vetter’s Musicalische Kirch- und
Hauß-Ergötzlichkeit (1709–1713), and Johann Caspar Vogler’s
Vermischte musikalische Choral-Gedanken (1737).
25 ‘die Verleger befürchten, es möchte ihnen solch Unternehmen zu Schaden

gereichen, weil, wenn 1 Liebhaber Geld anwendet, ihrer 10 und mehr es
abschrieben; welches auch die Wahrheit ist.’ Letter of Bokemeyer, 4 Au-
gust 1736. Walther, Briefe, p. 195.
26 Johann Kuhnau: the collected works for keyboard, ed. C. David Harriss, 2 vols,
New York 2003, vol. 1, xx–xxiii and vol. 2, p. 129–203.

Financing music-books
One of the main tasks of a publisher was to pay for the paper
and the printing costs of multiple copies of a book. Figures from
Leipzig during the 1620s suggest the size of this financial com-
mitment. In this period Schein’s salary as Thomaskantor was
100 gulden, although he also received free lodging, fees for
weddings and funerals, plus various gifts in kind.27 The costs of
paper and printing for a music-book in Leipzig in 1630 – Sam-
uel Michael’s Ander Theil Paduanen, as recorded in the accounts
of the heirs of the publisher Michael Wachsmann – totalled 76
gulden 14 groschen 4 pfennigs.28 (Werner Braun has calculated
this book was produced in a print-run of just over a thousand
copies; Schein’s collections might have been produced in simi-
lar numbers.) In other words, it might have cost Schein three-
quarters of his notional annual salary to publish one partbook
collection.
It is unclear how Schein financed his publications. Certainly
he received rewards from the Leipzig town council and other
dedicatees when he presented copies to them. But the sums
involved (for instance, 20 gulden from the Nuremberg town
council for Opella nova II, 1626) would not alone cover the cost
of printing. (To be sure, in 1623 he did receive 250 gulden from
the Leipzig town council for the dedication of Israelisbrünnlein,
27 Rudolf Wustmann, Musikgeschichte Leipzigs, i: Bis zur Mitte des 17. Jahrhun-
dert, Leipzig 1909, p. 115.
28 Stadtarchiv Leipzig, Richterstube Teil 1, Nr 1269, p.16. Transcribed and
analysed in Werner Braun, Samuel Michael und die Instrumentalmusik um
1630, Saarbrücken 1990, p. 24–32. The paper cost 30 gulden and the prin-
ting cost 46 gulden 14 groschen and 4 pfennigs. The publisher’s heirs also
paid the composer 32 thalers; although the accounts do not indicate the
purpose of this sum, Braun argues that it was an honorarium for the com-
poser, implying that Wachsmann regarded the book as a sound commer-
cial proposition.

252 Stephen Rose
but this was at a time of extreme instability in the currency.)29

Adam Adrio has suggested that Schein funded his publications
with the fees from providing music at weddings and funerals;
this argument is plausible, although again there is no firm evi-
dence.30 Yet Schein evidently had considerable money available
to him: in 1623 he advanced 150 Reichsthaler towards the cost
of a new organ at Leipzig’s university church.31
For composers working at courts, it is likely that their self-
publications were subsidised by their patron. In 1618 Schütz
wrote to the Elector of Saxony about the impending self-
publication of Psalmen Davids, saying ‘you graciously encour-
aged me by equipping your electoral print-shop with new and
lovely music-type, for which I am extremely grateful’.32 In
Schütz’s Symphoniae sacrae III (1650) – possibly also published
by the composer, although the title-page does not specify a
publisher – he thanked the Elector for ‘the most gracious means
that you kindly granted me some time ago, whereby the publi-
cation of my musical work can be further promoted and its
printing facilitated’.33 Wolfram Steude has argued that such
29 Heinz Zirnbauer, Der Notenbestand der Reichsstädtisch Nürnbergischen Rats-

musik: eine bibliographische Rekonstruktion, Nuremberg 1959, p. 33–34; Ru-
dolf Wustmann, Musikgeschichte Leipzigs, p. 117.
30 Adam Adrio, ‘Die Drucker und Verleger der musikalischen Werke Johann
Hermann Scheins’, Musik und Verlag: Karl Vötterle zum 65. Geburtstag, ed.
Richard Baum & Wolfgang Rehm, Kassel etc. 1968, p.135.
31 Arthur Prüfer, Johan Herman Schein, p. 111–112, 142.
32 ‘hierüber zu Erkaufung neuer und schöner Noten in Ihre Churfürstliche
Gnaden Truckerey allhier (davor ich underthenigst danckbar) mir gne-
digsten Vorschub thun lassen’. Sächsische Hauptstaatsarchiv Dresden Loc.
10754, Privilegia, Bd. 2, 1618–28, fol. 85. Transcribed by Agatha Kobuch,
‘Neue Sagittariana im Staatsarchiv Dresden: Ermittlungen unbekannter
Quellen über den kursächsischen Hofkapellmeister Heinrich Schütz’, Jahr-
buch für Regionalgeschichte, 13 (1986), p. 89. Donald Krummel dubs this font
‘Gimel Berg’ in his survey of ‘Early German partbook typefaces’, Guten-
berg Jahrbuch, 60 (1985), p. 93.
33 ‘Nicht sind auch hierbey mit stillschweigen zu übergehen / die jenigen von
E. Churfürstl. Durchl. vor etlicher Zeit / mir bewilligte gnädigste Mittel /
wodurch die Publicirung oder Auslassung meiner Musicalischen Arbeit hin-
füro auch weiter befördert / und derer Verlag erleichtert werden kan.’

support took the form of a private supply of paper, used for

five of the editions published by Schütz or his colleagues, with
a watermark incorporating the composer’s monogram.34 Mean-
while at the Wolfenbüttel court, Michael Praetorius received
extensive support for his ambitious publishing programme. In
1612 he was awarded 2000 thalers by Duke Heinrich Julius, in
part ‘to relieve the heavy costs incurred by him…in printing his
music’.35 Three years later Praetorius wrote to the court excheq-
uer (Rentkammer), claiming reimbursement of the publishing
costs of Terpsichore (1612) on the grounds that it was dedicated
to Duke Friedrich Ulrich.36 Such examples from Praetorius and
Schütz suggest that, for court composers, self-publication was
not so much an entrepreneurial venture as a subsidized opera-
tion to boost the court’s prestige. This might particularly be the
case with Schütz’s Psalmen Davids, which represented the latest
style of Italianate music being performed at Dresden.
Another court musician, Constantin Christian Dedekind
(1628–1715) held the position of Concertmeister at the Dresden
court between 1666 and 1676, in addition to being tax-collector
for the Meißnische and Erzgebirgische Kreis of Saxony. Dede-
kind claimed to have self-published extensively, although few
of his printed works specify a publisher. Because he held two
jobs, Dedekind was in a good position to fund his publishing
projects. According to the dedication of his Königs Davids göld-
34 These books are Kleine geistliche Concerte II (1639), Symphoniae sacrae II & III
(1647, 1650), Geistliche Chormusic (1648) and Zwölff geistliche Gesänge (1657),
all printed in Dresden, see Wolfram Steude, ‘Das wiederaufgefundene
Opus ultimum von Heinrich Schütz. Bemerkungen zur Quelle und zum
Werk’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 4/5 (1982–83), p. 11. For a description of the wa-
termark, see Steude’s edition of Schütz’s Der Schwanengesang for Neue
Ausgabe Sämtliche Werke, 39, Kassel 1984, p. 275.
35 ‘auch zu Erleichterung der angewandten schweren Unkosten, so ihm auf
sein musikalisch Druckwerk…gegangen.’ Walter Deeters, ‘Alte und neue
Aktenfunde über Michael Praetorius’, Braunschweigisches Jahrbuch, 52
(1971), p. 108. Praetorius may never have received the full amount, for the
exchequer promised that he would receive interest at the annual rate of 6
per cent until the entire sum was paid.
36 Deeters, op.cit., p. 114.

254 Stephen Rose
nes Kleinod (Dresden, 1674), he used the whole of his Concert-

meister salary (175 Reichthalers)37 to pay for publishing pro-
jects. In the same book, though, he said that he was ceasing to
self-publish: ‘You shouldn’t wait for any more pages at my own
expense, for self-publication takes too much of my effort,
money and goodwill.’38
The composer as distributor
Having invested in a print-run of music, a composer had to

distribute copies to customers. One of the most efficient ways to
reach a dispersed market was to advertise for subscriptions, but
such a method required the use of public media such as news-
papers that only became widely available at the end of the sev-
enteenth century. In London, Henry Purcell’s Sonnatas in III
parts (1683) was sold via subscriptions, as announced in The
London Gazette of 28 May 1683. Possibly the first German com-
poser to use subscriptions was Telemann for his cantata cycle,
Harmonischer Gottes-Dienst (1725).39 By contrast, seventeenth-
century German composers tended to sell their publications
personally (Schein publicised his address at the Leipzig
Thomasschule on copies of his music and also in book-fair cata-
logues) and via agents. In addition, a self-publisher would also
present copies to churches, courts and town councils in the
hope of a reward; I have documented this practice in another
article.40
37 Gina Spagnoli, Letters and documents of Heinrich Schütz 1656–1672, Roches-

ter 1992, p. 91.
38 ‘Auf meine Kosten aber habet ihr kein Blatt mehr zugewarten/ denn der
Verlust eigenes Verlags ist meiner Mühe Lohn und Dank.’ Königs Davids
göldnes Kleinod (Dresden, 1674), organ book, preface.
39 Zohn, ‘Telemann in the marketplace’, 290–296.
40 Stephen Rose, ‘The mechanisms of the music trade in central Germany
1600–1640’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association, 130 (2005).

Many self-publishers collaborated with commercial book-

sellers to sell copies of their works. Although Johann Rudolf
Ahle had to publish the Nebengang and third part of his Neu-
gepflanzter Thüringische Lustgarten himself, he was able to dis-
tribute copies via the heirs of Johann Birkner (his former pub-
lisher), as is indicated on the title-pages. Kuhnau also co-
operated with local booksellers, Johann Herbord Kloss and
Friedrich Groschhuff, who offered copies of his keyboard music
for sale in Leipzig and also at the Leipzig and Frankfurt book-
fairs.
Schein, however, complained that booksellers were failing to
acknowledge his own publications:
I have heard it credibly reported – by word-of-mouth as well as in writing

– that the existence of my previously published musical things (which I
published myself, with particular concern for accuracy) has been denied
by some booksellers here and elsewhere, who (the reason is obvious to
anyone) when asked said that my books were either not yet out, or were
out-of-print and unobtainable. Hence it is necessary for me to announce
that not just this present work, but also my previous and (God willing)
forthcoming books can be obtained, one and all, from me at the Thomas-
schule here in Leipzig, or from those bookdealers who make the necessary
payment.41
41 ‘Demnach Ich glaubwürdig so wol Schrifft: als auch mündlich berichtet /

Als ob etzliche buchführer/ alhier vnd anderswo / meine bißhero ausge-
gangene Musicalische Sachen / weil ich dieselben nicht ohne sonderbares
bedencken der Correction selbst verleget / wenn darnach gefraget worden /
als ob sie entweder gar nicht heraus / oder sonsten nicht mehr verhanden
vnd zubekommen weren / (die vrsach verstehet jederman) verleugnet ha-
ben sollen: So habe ich eine notdurfft zuseyn erachtet / männiglich solches
hiermit nachrichtiglich zuveravisiren, daß nicht allein dieses ietzige / Son-
dern auch alle andere meine hievorige / vnd noch (geliebt es Gott) künffti-
ge verlegte Wercklein / einig vnd alleine bey mir / auff der Schulen zu
S. Thomas allhier in Leipzig / oder doch wem ich solche etwa vnter der
Buchführen vmb gebührliche zahlung vberlassen möchte / zubekommen
seyn.’ Schein, Opella nova II (Leipzig, 1626), basso continuo part, Auverti-
mento.

256 Stephen Rose
Schein implies that he was impeded by the professional jeal-

ousy of booksellers, although it is equally likely that he lacked
the necessary contacts or guild membership. Moreover, the
wholesale book-trade operated on the principle of exchange,
with dealers swapping stocks of books on the basis of the
weight of paper. As George H. Putnam has explained, such
Tauschhandel could exclude author–publishers, who presumably
wanted money for their publications rather than other books.42
Schein may allude to this predicament when he says that he is
happy to send copies to booksellers, provided they supply ‘the
necessary payment’. Contemporary catalogues, however, con-
tradict Schein’s claim that he was frozen out by booksellers: at
the Michaelmas 1623 fair in Leipzig, for instance, his Musica
boscareccia I and Israelisbrünlein (both published by himself)
were offered for sale by the Leipzig firms of Elias Rehefeld and
Johann Grosse, while in the same year the Frankfurt bookdeal-
ers David and Daniel Aubry also acted as agents for his publi-
cations.43
As well as selling copies themselves, composers who acted as
publishers often advertised agents for their music in other towns,
almost as a substitute for the commercial network of booksellers.
Table 3 (p. 246) lists Schütz’s agents as advertised in his publica-
tions and also some book-fair catalogues. In Brunswick he was
represented by Delphin Strungk, organist at the Martinskirche
there from 1637. Schütz had strong links with the city, particu-
larly in the 1640s when he was active as Kapellmeister in absen-
tia at the court of August of Braunschweig-Lüneburg. He also
spent the winter of 1644–1645 in Brunswick and in February
1645 stood as godfather to Strungk’s second child.44 In Leipzig,
by contrast, Schütz was represented by a series of church musi-
42 George H. Putnam, Books and their makers during the Middle Ages, 2 vols,
New York: Putnam 1876, p. 435.
43 See Grosse’s catalogue for Leipzig bookfair, Michaelmas 1623, F3r; also
Ernst-Ludwig Berz, Die Notendrucker und ihre Verleger in Frankfurt am Main
von den Anfängen bis etwa 1630, Kassel etc. 1970, p. 291.
44 Rifkin & Timms, ‘Heinrich Schütz’, p. 38–39.

cians, including Daniel Weixer (organist of the Nikolaikirche,

1637–1645), Johann Rosenmüller (assistant teacher at the
Thomasschule in the late 1640s and organist at the Nikolai-
kirche, 1651–1655) and Sebastian Knüpfer (cantor at the
Thomasschule, 1657–1676). Only once was a professional book-
dealer mentioned, namely Samuel Scheibe as the Leipzig agent
for Geistliche Chormusic (1648). Sometimes Schütz’s agents were
advertised as stocking his entire published works, as with
Weixer in Leipzig in 1639, who could supply any of them ‘at
reasonable price’ (‘umb billicher Preis’).45 Schütz’s network for
selling copies may have paralleled the channels through which
music manuscripts were circulated. Similar networks of sales
agents were used by early eighteenth-century composers who
self-published: Johann Sebastian Bach recruited musicians in
Augsburg, Brunswick, Dresden, Halle, Lüneburg and Nurem-
berg to sell his Clavierübung I.46
Conclusion
Our understanding of seventeenth-century music-publishing is

limited by the fragmentary nature of the surviving evidence.
For only a few music-books is there anything more than the
information on the title-page to indicate the publishing ar-
rangements, and it is hard to know how typical these examples
are. Nonetheless, it is clear that self-publication persisted in the
second half of the seventeenth century, even when music-
printing was generally in decline. Some aspects of self-
publication, such as the recruitment of a network of sales agents
by Schütz, may suggest the commercial element of these ven-
45 Advert in basso continuo part of Kleine geistliche Concerte II, Dresden 1639.
46 Bach-Dokumente ii: Fremdschriftliche und gedruckte Dokumente zur Lebensge-
schichte Johann Sebastian Bachs 1685–1750, ed. Werner Neumann and Hans-
Joachim Schulze, Kassel etc. 1969, p. 169.

258 Stephen Rose
tures. For other composers such as Becker and Bernhard, their

efforts in publishing their own works suggest the continuing
importance of printed collections as a symbol of musicians’ skill
and prestige.
Literature
Adrio, Adam, ‘Die Drucker und Verleger der musikalischen Werke Johann
Hermann Scheins’, Musik und Verlag: Karl Vötterle zum 65. Geburtstag, ed.
Richard Baum & Wolfgang Rehm, Kassel: Bärenreiter 1968, p. 128–135.
Bach-Dokumente ii: Fremdschriftliche und gedruckte Dokumente zur Lebensgeschich-
te Johann Sebastian Bachs 1685–1750, ed. Werner Neumann and Hans-
Joachim Schulze, Kassel: Bärenreiter 1969.
Berz, Ernst-Ludwig, Die Notendrucker und ihre Verleger in Frankfurt am Main
von den Anfängen bis etwa 1630, Kassel: Bärenreiter 1970.
Braun, Werner, Samuel Michael und die Instrumentalmusik um 1630, Saar-
brücken: Saarbrücker Druckerei 1990.
Daub, Peggy, ‘The publication process and audience for C. P. E. Bach’s ‘Sonaten
für Kenner und Liebhaber’, Bach perspectives ii: J. S. Bach, the Breitkopfs and 18th-
century music trade, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press 1996, p. 65–83.
Deeters, Walter, ‘Alte und neue Aktenfunde über Michael Praetorius’, Braun-
schweigisches Jahrbuch, 52 (1971), p. 102–120.
Dunn, Kevin, Pretexts of authority: the rhetoric of authorship in the Renaissance
preface, Stanford: Stanford University Press 1994.
Dünnhaupt, Gerhard, Personalbibliographien zu den Drucken des Barocks, 2nd
edition, 6 vols, Stuttgart: Hiersemann 1900–1993.
Göhler, Karl Albert (ed.), Verzeichnis der in den Frankfurter und Leipziger Mess-
katalogen der Jahre 1564 bis 1759 angezeigten Musikalie, Leipzig: Breitkopf
1902.
Grossmann, Burckhard, Angst der Hellen und Friede der Seelen, ed. Buckhard
Grossman, Jena 1623. Preface to the motet collection, Angst der Hellen und
Friede der Seelen, ed. Burckhard Grossman, Jena 1623.
Gurlitt, Wilibald, ‘Ein Autorenprivileg für Johann Hermann Schein’, Festschrift
Karl Gustav Fellerer zum sechzigsten Geburtstag am 7. Juli 1962, ed. Heinrich
Hüschen, Regensburg: Gustav Bosse 1962, p. 200–204.
Jahre 1564 bis zu der Gründung des ersten Buchhändler-Vereins im Jahre 1765,
Halle 1850.

Kobuch, Agatha, ‘Neue Sagittariana im Staatsarchiv Dresden: Ermittlungen

unbekannter Quellen über den kursächsischen Hofkapellmeister Heinrich
Schütz’, Jahrbuch für Regionalgeschichte, 13 (1986), p. 79–124.
Krummel, Donald, ‘Early German partbook typefaces’, Gutenberg Jahrbuch, 60
(1985), p. 80–98.
Kuhnau, Johann, The collected works for keyboard, ed. C. David Harriss, 2 vols.,
New York: Broude 2003.
Mattheson, Johann, Grundlage einer Ehrenpforte, (Hamburg 1740) ed. Max
Schneider, Berlin: Liepmanssohn 1910 and Kassel: Bärenreiter 1969.
Mattheson, Johann, Critica musica, Hamburg 1725.
Mitjana, Rafael & Davidsson, Åke, Catalogue critique et descriptif de imprimés de
musique des XVIe et XVIIe siècle conservés à la Bibliothèque de ’Université royale
d’Upsala, 3 vols, Upsala: Almqvist & Wiksell 1911–1951.
Noack, Elisabeth, Wolfgang Carl Briegel, Berlin: Merseburger 1963.
Patalas, Aleksandra, Catalogue of early music prints from the collections oft he
former Preussische Staatsbibliothek in Berlin, kept at the Jagiellonian Library in
Cracow, Kraków: Musica Iagellonica 1999.
Prüfer, Arthur, Johan Herman Schein, Leipzig: Breitkopf 1895.
Putnam, George H., Books and their makers during the Middle Ages, 2 vols., New
York: Putnam 1876.
Rasch, Rudolf, ‘Muzio Clementi: The last composer-publisher’, Muzio Clemen-
ti: studies and prospects, Bologna: Ut Orpheus Edizioni 2002, p. 355–366.
Rathey, Markus, Johann Rudolph Ahle 1625–1673: Lebensweg und Schaffen, Eisen-
ach: Karl Dieter Wagner 1999.
Restle, Nicole, Vokales und instrumentales Komponieren in Johann Hermann Scheins
Opella nova ander Theil, Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang 2000.
Rifkin, Joshua & Timms, Colin, ‘Heinrich Schütz’, The New Grove North Euro-
pean Baroque masters, London: Macmillan, 1985, p. 1–150.
Rose, Stephen, ‘Music printing in Leipzig during the Thirty Years’ War’,
Notes: quarterly journal of the Music Library Association, 61 (2004), p. 323–349.
Rose, Stephen, ‘Publication and the anxiety of judgement in German musical
life of the seventeenth century’, Music & Letters, 85 (2004), p. 22–40.
Rose, Stephen, ‘Schein’s occasional music and the social order in 1620s Leip-
zig’, Early Music History, 23 (2004), p. 253–284.
Rose, Stephen, ‘The mechanisms of the music trade in central Germany 1600–
1640’, Journal of the Royal Musical Association, 130 (2005), p. 1–37.
Schwetschke, Gustav, Codex nundinarius Germaniae literatae bisecularis: Mess-
Jahrbücher des deutschen Buchhandels von dem Erscheinen des ersten Mess-
Kataloges im Jahre 1765, Halle 1850.

260 Stephen Rose
Schütz, Heinrich, Der Schwanengesang, ed. Wolfram Steude, Neue Ausgabe

Sämtliche Werke, 39, Kassel 1984.
Schütz, Heinrich, Letters and documents of Heinrich Schütz 1656–1672, ed. Gina
Spagnoli, Rochester: University of Rochester Press 1992.
Schütz, Heinrich, Gesammelte Briefe und Schriften, ed. Erich H. Müller von
Asow, Regensburg: Gustav Bosse 1931.
Steude, Wolfram, ‘Das wiederaufgefundene Opus ultimum von Heinrich
Schütz. Bemerkungen zur Quelle und zum Werk’, Schütz-Jahrbuch, 4/5
(1982–1983), p. 9–18.
Walther, Johann Gottfried, Briefe, ed. Karl Beckmann & Hans-Joachim Schulz
Leipzig: Deutscher Verlag für Musik 1987.
Wustmann, Rudolf, Musikgeschichte Leipzigs, I: Bis zur Mitte des 17. Jahrhunderts
Leipzig: Teubner 1909.
Zirnbauer, Heinz, Der Notenbestand der Reichsstädtisch Nürnbergischen Ratsmu-
sik: eine bibliographische Rekonstruktion, Nuremberg: Stadtbibliothek 1959.
Zohn, Steven, ‘Telemann in the marketplace: the composer as self-publisher’,
Journal of the American Musicological Society, 58 (2005), p. 275–356.

WERNER BRAUN
Zeitereignisse in Meders Oper

Die beständige Argenia (1680)
Als der noch stellungslose Johann Valentin Meder seinen Bru-

der David Bernhard, den Kopenhagener Marienorganisten,
1674 besuchte und hier den Entschluß faßte, sein weiteres Le-
ben im ‘feindlichen’ Schweden zu verbringen,1 waren fraglos
die politischen Verhältnisse im Norden der eigentliche Beweg-
grund: Schweden befand sich konkurrierend mit Dänemark auf
dem aussichtsreicheren Wege zur nordeuropäischen Groß-
macht. Meder glaubte jetzt offenbar zu wissen, warum er frühe-
re Angebote mitteldeutscher Landesherren sogar zum Hofka-
pellmeisteramt ausgeschlagen hatte. Nicht nur, weil er sich ‘zu
jung dafür fühlte’, wie er vorgab,2 sondern weil ihm die Ver-
hältnisse eher zu klein erschienen waren. Die ‘wohlbestellte
Musique’ am schwedischen Dom zu Bremen hatte ihn dagegen
schon 1673 derart beeindruckt, daß er sich noch am Ende seines
Lebens (1700) den Kapellmeisterposten daselbst wünschte.3
Und die politischen Aufgaben oder Funktionen der Oper kann-
te er aus französischen Partituren: Im Prolog ließ sich König
Ludwig XIV. als Herrscher, als Sieger und als Friedensbringer
verherrlichen.4 Warum sollte so etwas nicht auch im Norden
möglich sein, vielleicht in noch gesteigerter Form?
1 Johannes Bolte, ‘Das Stammbuch Johann Valentin Meder's’, VfMw, 8

(1892), S. 501 und 504f.
2 Johann Mattheson, Grundlagen einer Ehrenpforte (Hamburg 1740), hrsg. von
Max Schneider, Berlin 1910 und Kassel 1969, S. 221.
3 Amalie Arnheim, ‘Aus dem Bremer Musikleben im 17. Jahrhundert’,
SIMG, 12 (1910/11), S. 414.
4 Herbert Schneider, Art. ‘Prolog’, 2., MGG 2. Aufl., Sachteil, Bd. 7, Kassel:
Bärenreiter 1997, Sp. 1846–1848.

262 Werner Braun
Das Kapelleisteramt am Hofe zu Stockholm wurde zwar von

Gustaf Düben dem Älteren von 1663 bis zu seinem Tod 1690
umsichtig verwaltet, aber auf ‘internationaler’ Grundlage: ohne
größere eigene Werke. Er war etwa zwanzig Jahre älter als Me-
der und der äußerte seinen Wunsch, Düben im Amt nachzufol-
gen, erst viel später offen: nach Dübens Ablegen, als der Hof-
kapellmeisterdienst acht Jahre wegen der Kriegsereignisse
unbesetzt war.5 Aber wir dürfen seine erste Oper Die beständige
Argenia von 1680,6 die den sonst kärglichen Literaturbefund in
den ehemals deutschen Ostseeprovinzen modifiziert,7 wohl
schon als Probesttick für seine Anwartschaft beziehen. Denn ihr
Thema ist der ‘Schonische Krieg’ zwischen Schweden und Dä-
nemark (1675–1679), vertreten durch seine Hauptakteure ‘Li-
sander‘ (= Karl XI. von Schweden),8 ‘Cleander‘ (= Christian V.
von Dänemark9 und ‘Argenia‘ (= Ulrica Eleonora), Cleanders
Schwester und Lisanders spätere Brautl.10 Meder stellte sich auf
den Geschmack von Lisander ein: ‘mehr der Organisation des
Heeres zugewandt’, und seine Gattin war eher an der Literatur
als an der Musik interessiert, wie schon die ältere schwedische
Forschung vermutete.11 Unter ‘Princessin Sophimene’ verbirgt
5 Wie Anm. 2. Schreiben vom 21. Mai 1708.

6 Vgl. Vorwort zu Meders Oper Die beständige Argenia, hrsg. von Werner
Braun, Mainz 1973, S. 7.
7 Gero von Wilpert, Deutschbaltische Literaturgeschichte. München 2005, S.
100–102.
8 Über ihn vgl. Alf Åberg, Art ‘Karl XI‘, Svenskt Biografiskt Lexikon, Bd. 20,
Stockholm 1973/75, S. 650–655. Siehe auch Erik Kjellberg, Kungliga musiker
i Sverige under Stormaktstiden. Studier kring deras organisation, verksamheter
och status ca 1620 – ca 1720, Uppsala 1979, vol. 1, S. 188–204.
9 Vgl. C. Laursen in Dansk Biografisk Leksikon, Bd. 3, 1979, S. 311–313.
10 Simon Isogaeus, Leichenpredigt auf Ulrica Eleonora, Stockholm 1693,
schwedischer Titel in Stolberger, Leichenpredigten Katalog, IV 2, Leipzig
1935, S. 844, in der Herzog August Bibliothek Wolfenbiittel. Ferner
Kjellberg, op.cit., vol. 1, S. 204–208 und C.O. Bøggild-Andersen in Dansk
Biografisk Leksikon, Bd. 15, 1985, S. 171f.
11 Tobias Norlind, ‘Die Musikgeschichte Schwedens in den Jahren 1630–
1730’, SIMG, 1 (1899/1900), S. 184. Johann Gottfried Walther erwähnt einen
durch die Pest in Dresden 1679 erzwungenen Aufenthalt des dortigen

Zeitereignisse in Meders Oper 263
sich Sophie Amalie von Dänemark (1628–1685) geborene Her-

zogin von Braunschweig-Lüneburg, die Mutter von ‘Cleander‘
(1646–1699) und ‘Argenia‘ (1656–1693).12 Als Witwe Friedrichs
III. von Dänemark (1609–1670) vertrat sie bei ihren Kindern
auch die Vaterrolle. Meder gestaltete also jüngste nordische
Zeitereignisse über den Prolog hinaus – ein gefährliches Wag-
nis, wie sich sogleich zeigen sollte.
1. Gattungsfragen
Zuerst aber fordert die Gattungsgeschichte ihr Recht. Meders

Werk gehört als Schuloper eigentlich nicht an einen königlichen
Hof. Ihre Wurzeln liegen in der seit Martin Luther gebilligten
Schulkomödie, in Stücken biblischen Inhalts und von beträcht-
licher Personalstärke. Der Anteil der Musik beschränkt sich in
der Regel auf Chöre am Akt-Ende. Wegen des Nutzens solcher
Aufführungen für die lateinische und die deutsche Sprachfertig-
keit und für die christlich-humanistische Erziehung wurden die
Schulrektoren ausdrücklich auf sie verpflichtet: auf jährlich ein
Spiel laut der weithin vorbildlichen kursächsischen Schulord-
nung (1580).13 Von den Stoffkreisen des Schultheaters zeigt die
alttestamentliche Esther einen Weg zur Schuloper, der spätestens
1697 in der Freien Reichstadt Goslar14 vollendet ist. (Sie existiert
nur als Text.) Als Dramatisierung von Zeitereignissen scheint die
Argenia einer völlig andersartigen Stoffkategorie anzugehören.
Schon die Titelheldin ist nicht zeitfern ausgedacht:
Geigers Johann Paul von Westhoff bei der königlich schwedischen Braut:
Johann Gottfried Walther, Musicalisches Lexicon, Leipzig 1732, S. 649f.
12 Wie Anm. 9.
13 Hugo Holstein, Die Reformation im Spiegelbild der dramatischen Literatur des
16. Jahrhunderts, Halle 1886, S. 43.
14 Rudolf Schwartz, Esther im deutschen und neulateinischen Drama des Refor-
mationszeitalters, Oldenburg und Leipzig 1894, S. 259.

264 Werner Braun
Ulrica Eleonora, Princessin auß Dennemarck und Königin von Schweden’ wird
von dem Leipziger Librettisten Georg Christian Lehms unter den hochadeligen
Poetinnen geführt und dabei ihre Fertigkeit in sechs Sprachen gerühmt, darunter
natürlich das ‘Teutsche.15
Von den anderen historischen Personen bei Meder verstärkt

‘Graf Arsetes’ noch die schwedische Seite. Es handelt sich bei
ihm um den Generalgouverneur Johann Gyllenstierna (1635–
1680), den Ratgeber des jungen Königs Karl XI.16 Das reizt zum
Vergleich mit anderen Schlüsselopern dieser Zeit, etwa mit La
Laterna di Diogene aus Wien 1674. Sie thematisiert den Konflikt
von Kaiser Leopold I. (‘Alessandro’) mit dem französischen Kö-
nig Ludwig XIV. (‘Dario‘) und verkleidet bereits Schweden als
‘Thrakien’.17 Der auch deutsch vorgelegte italienische Text
stammt von Nicolò Minato, die Musik von Antonio Draghi.18
(Der erste Akt ist verloren.) Vor diesem Hintergrund treten Eige-
narten des baltischen Singspiels deutlicher hervor. Während in
Wien Propaganda gegen Frankreich gemacht wurde –der Son-
nenkönig als skrupelloser absolutistischer Herrscher19–blieb
Schweden zwar auf französischer Seite, doch die Feindschaft
gegen Dänemark wurde durch die Familienpolitik durchkreuzt:
eine schwierige Konstellation für ein Opernlibretto. Das Schul-
theater tendierte zu flächenhafter schwarz-weiß-Malerei.
Anders als der Wiener Diogene, der unter Ausschluß der Öf-
fentlichkeit die ganze kaiserliche Hofgesellschaft kritisch be-
leuchtet und dabei den Monarchen Leopold nicht ausspart,
spiegelt Meders Oper die Zeitereignisse aus der Sicht des loyalen
schwedischen Untertans. Insofern folgt auch die ‘Verschlüsse-
lung’ anderen Prinzipien. Sie bestand eigentlich nur in der Um-
15 Georg Christian Lehms, Teutschlands galante Poetinnen [...] Nebst einem An-
hange ausländischer Damen [...]. Frankfurt am Main 1715, Vorrede, Bl. g.
16 Ingvar Andersson, Schwedische Geschichte von den Anfängen bis zur Gegen-
wart, München 1950, S. 256f.
17 Herbert Seifert, Die Oper am Wiener Kaiserhof im 17. Jahrhundert, Tutzing
1985, S. 248–262.
18 Ibid., S. 479.
19 Ibid., S. 256.

benennung der historischen Personen. Ein besonderer Schlüssel

entfiel also. In Wien hatte es sich zudem um ein durchaus karne-
valistisches Treiben gehandelt. In dieser Jahreszeit konnte man
sich vieles erlauben, wenn auch ein paar Persönlichkeiten mehr-
deutig geblieben waren. Im herbstlichen Reval kannte jeder Zus-
chauer die gemeinten Persönlichkeiten. Zusätzliche mythologi-
sche, komödiantische und neutrale Figuren entstammten der
Theatertradition; Wahrheit und Dichtung vermischten sich, wo-
hingegen in Wien fast alles ‘historisch’ ablief.
Bleiben wir zunächst bei dem genannten Goslarer Spiel, so
vertritt Esther ihr jüdisches Volk. Sie wird zwar im Titel als
liebreich, tugendhaft und demütig herausgestellt. Doch im ent-
scheidenden Augenblick weiß sie zu handeln. Dieser Zug fehlt
der ‘beständigen’ Argenia. Sie wirkt neben Esther passiv. Und
wie der Gegenspieler der Hebräer, der ‘ungetreue’ machtgieri-
ge Perser Haman, seinen Lohn in Form eines großen Galgens
erhält, so nur weniger radikal der böse dänische Rat Cacoble-
thes, der an allen unheilvollen Verwicklungen schuld ist und
dessen altgriechischer Phantasiename (‘der Übelveranlagte’)
eigentlich schon alles über ihn sagt. Er soll seinen Herrn Clean-
der moralisch entlasten und ist schon von daher ,unwirklich‘.
Die Bestrafung besteht aus lebenslangem Gefängnis. Mit dem
Blut eines solchen Menschen durfte das junge Bündnis nicht
befleckt werden. Doch der Zuschauer fragt sich, wie der Böse-
wicht Einfluß an einem ‘befreundeten‘ Hof gewinnen konnte.
Das Goslarer Libretto stammt vom Syndikus David Kühne.20
Wer aber hat den Argenia-Text verfertigt? Die Partitur gibt kei-
ne klare Antwort, und das alte Libretto wird anonym vorgelegt
worden sein. Unser Poet wirkt eher metrisch denn sprachlich
versiert. Am Ende der Oper, im fünften Akt, weicht der Kom-
ponist in zwei Fällen vom ursprünglichen Text ab, was in bezug
auf die Verfasserschaft unterschiedlich bewertet werden kann.21
20 [David Kühn], Die erhöhete Demuth und gestürzter Hochmut […], [Goslar]
1697.
21 In einer korrigierten ersten Niederschrift fehlte ein Vers, und in Schluss-
spiel lässt das Metrum das Fehlen von zwei Silben erkennen. Statt

266 Werner Braun
Für die schon 1937 vermutete Personalunion von Dichter und

Musiker22 sprechen gute Gründe, erstens die Tatsache, daß die
über 20 Jahre jüngeren Festmusiken aus der Rigaer Zeit aus-
drücklich Meder als Autor der ‘Reim- und Textworte’ nennen.23
Zweitens ist er bei den Verhandlungen im Vorfeld der Ur-
aufführung und danach stets allein aktiv gewesen. Da der
Komponist natürlich eine angemessene Belohnung erwartete
und da er sich stets in Geldnöten befand, mag auch dies auf
seine ungeteilte Autorschaft weisen: Er brauchte das erhoffte
Honorar mit keinem anderen Verfasser zu teilen.
2. Aufführung
Die Aufführungssituation der Argenia im November 1680 wird

durch die Revaler Ratsprotokolle klargestellt.24 Als maßgebli-
cher Vorauskritiker erscheint Bischof Jacob Helwig (1632–1684),
mit dem Meder zwei Jahre zuvor zusammengearbeitet hatte:
Zur Begräbnispredigt auf den schwedischen Feldmarschall Fa-
bian von Fersen steuerte Meder ein geistliches ‘Madrigal’ bei.25
Helwig erwähnte hi er außer weiteren schwedischen Siegen die
vergebliche dänische Belagerung der Festung Malmö, die in der
Oper dargestellt ist.26 Doch auch dieses ‘Denkmal’ für Schwe-
‘Kommt, ihr dreimal Dreien‘ (die neun Musen) müßte es heißen: ‘Kommst
her, ihr dreimal Dreien‘. Dies war in einer Widmungspartitur nicht mehr zu
regulieren, denn das Zeilenritornell übernimmt die ‘falsche‘ Deklamation.
Vgl. die Neuausgabe der Partitur, S. 159 und Kritischer Bericht, S. 168.
22 Åke Vretblad, ‘Johann Valentin Meder och hans opera ’Die beständige
Argenia’’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 19 (1937), S. 70.
23 Johannes Bolte, ‘Nochmals Johann Valentin Meder’, VfMw 7 (1891), S. 457.
24 Neuausgabe der Partitur, Vorwort, S. 6.
25 Handbuch des personalen Gelegenheitsschrifttums in europäischen Bibliotheken
und Archiven, Band 7: Reval-Tallinn. Hrsg. von Sabine Beckmann u.a., Hil-
desheim 2003, S. 126.
26 In Akt 4, Neuausgabe, S. 93–123.

den wollte der Bischof nun nicht mehr akzeptieren. Er vermute-

te, daß die ehemals verfeindeten Könige darin ‘touchirt’ werden
könnten und beantragte eine neuerliche Prüfung des Texts.
Vielleicht war sogar einer seiner Söhne der Informant, etwa
Johann Joachim, der von 1696 bis 1700 Gymnasialkantor in Re-
val war, also ein Nachfolger Meders.27
Das französische Wort ‘toucher’ bedeutet nicht nur ‘berüh-
ren’, sondern damals vor allem ‘beleidigen’,28 und damit das
Gegenteil zur Selbsteinschätzung des Adels. Im persönlichen
Umgang wurden körperliche Berührungen peinlich vermieden.
Man trug üppige Gewänder, Handschuhe und Perücken. Nicht
einmal die Rückansicht eines sich verabschiedenden Ge-
sprächspartners war erlaubt. Wer den anderen grundlos unbe-
deckt berührte, beging eine grobe Unhöflichkeit. Wenn nun
also der Kantor Meder einen Höhergestellten in ganz einfachen
Versen zitierte, handelte er entsprechend. Auch später, nach
der Uraufführung der Argenia, kam Helwig auf dieses ‘hohe
Majestäten’ verkleinernde Schauspiel zurück, in seiner soge-
nannten zweiten Kometenpredigt.29 (Kometen galten als Vorbo-
ten nahen Unglücks.)
In seiner ersten Erwiderung von 1680 behauptet Meder, daß
alles, ‘so anstößig und einen und den andern touchiren könte,
außgethan’ habe und daß zwei Abgesandte des Rats bei einer
27 Heidi Soobik, ‘Kantoren und Musikleben am Revalischen Gustav-Adolf

Gymnasium 1631–1710’, Music history writing an national culture, hrsg. von
Urve Lippus, Tallinn 1995, S. 100.
28 In ‘Hof-Zeremoniell’ ging es grundsätzlich um ‘Respect des Hofes und der
Herrschaft’, also um ein ‘innenpolitisches’ Ziel. Vgl. Juliane Riepe, ‘Hof-
musik in der Zeremonialwissenschaft des 18. Jahrhunderts’, Händel-
Jahrbuch, 49 (2003), S. 29. Die ’touchierung‘ durch einen Untertan kam da-
her eigentlich nur im Theater zur Geltung. Da die Fürstenhauser Europas
verwandt und verschwägert waren, stand dem durch Kriege betroffenen
‘Volk’ kein Urteil über die dafür Verantwortlichen zu. Lediglich in Glau-
bensfragen dürfte es die Stimme erheben – oft genug durch die Mächtigen
gesteuert.
29 Elisabeth Rosen, ‘Rückblicke auf die Pflege der Schauspielkunst in Reval’,
Festschrift zur Eröffnung des neuen Theaters in Reval im Sommer, September
1910, S. 51f. Ferner Vretblad, op.cit., S. 79.

268 Werner Braun
Probe nicht Widriges gefunden hätten. Es handelt sich — nach

den etwas verderbten Lesarten in den Ratsprotokollen und
nach Meders späteren Aussagen – vielleicht um den Landmar-
schall ‘Baron’ Georg Reinhold von Tiesenhausen und sicher um
[Jonas] Klingstedt, die die Sache natürlich unter dem schwedi-
schen Aspekt beurteilten.30 Ausführlichere Selbstkorrekturen
finden sich in der Partiturreinschrift im zweiten Akt, Auftritt 8
und 9 des schwedischen Gesandten am dänischen Hof (Wer-
bung um Argenia). Soweit der ursprüngliche Text noch lesbar
ist, lautet die Verwünschung des Neiders im Munde der Köni-
gin Sophimene statt ‘Er werde verbannet mit Schaden und
Hohn, so wie ihm gebühret sein endlicher Lohn’:
Gott mach ihn zu Schanden und [?] bring Ihn in Spott, er stürz und verdamm
Ihn zur helleschen Rott. 31
Diese Fassung bringt einen Fluch, der literarisch nicht formu-

liert werden durfte. Sie stammt aus dem ersten Entwurf und ist
auf die Hinderungen für die endgültige Spielerlaubnis zu be-
ziehen.
So stand das Festspiel insgesamt tatsächlich unter einem un-
glücklichen Stern. Die Zensur von Theaterstücken war zwar
üblich, doch eine Liste von zu beanstandenden Unziemlichkei-
ten hätte das ganze Vorhaben gefährdet. Auch waren die Zen-
soren mit ihren Prüfungsaufgaben überfordert. In Nürnberg
wachten ebenfalls beauftragte Ratsherren darüber, daß nichts
‘Gefährliches oder Vergriffliches’ im Text vorkam. Das bezog
sich außer auf die Form des Ganzen auf moralische und politi-
sche Aussagen.32 Nur eher private höfische Bedingungen er-
laubten spöttisch gesprochene Bemerkungen des Veranstalters
und dann solche über die zu erwarteten Spielleistungen im auf-
30 Zu Jonas Klingstedt, siehe Artikel (ohne Autorenangabe) in Svenskt Biogra-

fiskt Lexikon, Bd. 21, Stockholm 1975–1977, S. 340–342.
31 Neuausgabe der Oper, S. 167.
32 Theodor Rampe, ‘Die Entwicklung des Theaterwesens zu Nürnberg [...]’,
Mitteilungen des Vereins für Geschichte der Stadt Nürnberg, 12 (1898), S. 156.

zuführenden Dramentext.33 Im Singspiel italienischen Stils war

alles offiziell, denn die gesungenen Worte vereinigten zwei als
‘hoch’ geltende Stilisierungsfaktoren.
Wie sollte Meder also die ‘Touchirung’ der benachbarten,
zerstrittenen und schließlich verbündeten lebenden Könige,
von denen einer sein Landesherr war, vermeiden? Im Gang der
Handlung verspürt der Schwedenkönig Lisander Lust auf ei-
nen Zusammenstoß mit Brandenburg. Doch der dänische böse
Rat Cacoblethes, dessen Auftrittsarie anfangs nur ‘kultur-
kritisch‘ klang, hat bereits den Schonischen Krieg oder Auf-
stand angezettelt. Von diesem erdichteten Übeltäter hob sich
auf schwedischer Seite Graf Arsetes (= Johann Gyllenstierna)
glänzend ab – was in der Musik allerdings nicht ausgedrückt
ist; die Arien des dänischen Ratgebers berühren den Hörer
mehr. Arsetes wird die Aussöhnung der beiden Königreiche
durch Heirat befördern. Die militärischen Mißerfolge Lisanders,
darunter die Niederlage gegen Brandenburg bei Fehrbellin am
28. Juni 1675, wurden natürlich übergangen.
3. Vertonungsbedingungen
Als Kantor am Revaler Gymnasium konnte Meder ausgiebig

Chöre verwenden (Vierte Handlung). Nach der Sonata di Battaglia
mit ihren fünfstimmigen Schilderungen der Reiterei, der Infan-
terie und der Dragoner erscheinen die vierstimmigen licischen
(= dänischen) und thracischen (= schwedischen) Soldaten, die
sich in ihrem Kampfesmut auch achtstimmig vereinigten. Hö-
hepunkt dieses Akts bildet die genannte Abweisung der Dänen
vor Malmö. Diesem Spektakel tritt ein reicher mythologischer
Apparat zur Seite: zuerst die Göttin des Streits Eris. Den Schluß
markieren Apollo und die Musen – dies ein gymnasialer Aus-
33 ‘Zusehende Personen’ in der ‘Absurda Comica oder Herrn Peter Squenz‘‘,

in Andreas Gryphius, Lustspiele, 1, hrsg. von Hugh Powell, Tübingen 1969.

270 Werner Braun
blick. Die Friedensgöttin lrene hat zwei Auftritte, weil jede der
beiden Parteien ihn braucht. Im dritten Zwischenspiel muß sie
noch Mars den Vortritt lassen, im fünften bereitet sie dagegen
das Erscheinen der Liebesgöttin Venus vor.
Argenias Beständigkeit ihrem Verlobten Lisander gegenüber
kündigt diese christliche Tugend wenigstens privat an. Über
das komische Dienerpaar, das zwischen beiden Parteien vermit-
telt, Heluanthes und Carinthia, durfte das Publikum lachen, liber
‘seinen’ Materialismus und ‘ihre’ Durchtriebenheit. Solche Auf-
tritte gehörten mittlerweile zur ‘heroischen’ Oper. Meder spart
keinen theatralischen Effekt aus. Nie wieder wird er so abwech-
slungsreich und so grandios die Bühne bedienen, denn er muß-
te ja in der Folge ohne einen Schulchor auf der Bühne auskom-
men. Den ‘polyphonen’ Tonsatz beherrschte er meisterhaft.
Doch die Sprache hält oft nicht, was die Noten versprechen.
Die Potentaten sangen ‘elende Knittelverse’, wie der Bischof
rügte, denn italienische Dichtungsformen standen nicht zur
Verfügung. So sagt der Schwedenkönig gleich am Anfang:
Himmel, ich weiß mich verbunden
dir zu Tage, Nacht und Stunden,
daß ich sitz auf meinem Thron.
Dir will ich nach femer danken;

laß denselben ja nicht wanken,
wenn ein Feind mir saget Hohn.
Nach dem Ende des Schonischen Krieges am 5. Mai 1679 und

nach der von manchen Feiern unterbrochener Reise von Ulrica
Eleonora von Kopenhagen nach Stockholm hatte Meder seine
‘Krönungsoper’ vollendet. Er brachte sie ‘ohngefehr verwiche-
nen Herbst’ 1680, etwa gleichzeitig mit ‘Dero Solennen Einzug
in Stockholm’, in Reval zur Aufführung. Sein zuerst ins Auge
gefaßter Uraufführungstermin, der 21. Oktober 1680, entsprach
den politischen Vorgängen. In diesem Monat hatte der schwe-
dische Reichstag die dänische Prinzessin als Landesherrin

anerkannt.34 Doch das junge königliche Paar hörte die Festmu-

sik nicht, weder damals noch später: eine Widmungsoper ohne
die Gefeierten. Die Königin wurde am 26. Juni 1681 von der
Prinzessin Hedvig Sofia entbunden; zur Feier dieser Geburt
war wohl die Revaler Gesandtschaft in Begleitung Meders nach
Stockholm gereist. Doch der königliche Vater war ‘zu dieser
Zeit nicht zur stelle’, wie der Komponist betont. Die schwedi-
sche Hofkapelle kam für eine bloße Wiederholungsaufführung
seiner Oper natürlich nicht in Betracht. (Es fehlten ja bereits die
singenden Schüler.) Und nach Reval führten die bald wieder
ausbrechenden kriegerischen Unternehmungen den ehrgeizi-
gen König offenbar nicht.
Die im schwedischen Reichsarchiv zu Stockholm erhaltene
Widmungspartitur der Beständigen Argenia ist eine Art Rein-
schrift post festum. Sie wurde am 14. Juli 1681 mit weiteren ein-
schlägigen Schriftstücken dem Revaler Rat zur Weitergabe an
den Schwedenkönig übergeben, angeblich um das Gerücht ab-
zuwehren, auch der König von Dänemark werde darin ‘tou-
chirt’. Dieser Aktenvorgang trat erst nach Ruckführung des
Revaler (Tallinner) Archivs 1989/90 ans Licht.35
Wir erfahren daraus, daß Meder vor der Uraufführung in ei-
ner kleinen Ansprache an die Zuschauer die politische Harmlo-
sigkeit der Materia und der Elaboration unterstrichen hatte und
daß er im ‘vergangenen Sommer’ (1681) vergeblich in Stock-
holm versucht habe, diese Partitur dem Könige vor die Füße zu
legen. Da Meder mit weiteren Verzögerungen bis zur Übergabe
der Materialien rechnete, sprach er schon vom ‘vergangenen
Sommer in Stockholm’, obwohl die Reise im Früh- oder Hoch-
34 Dietrich Kilian, ‘Buxtehudes MEMBRA’, Norddeutsche und nordeuropäische

Musik. Referate der Kieler Tagung 1963, hrsg. von Carl Dahlhaus und Walter
Wiora. Kassel: Bärenreiter l965, S. 34.
35 Signatur: TLA (= Stadtarchiv Tallinn), B[estand] 230 (Der Revaler Magistrat),
Verz[eichnis] 1 (Handschriften, Inkunabeln, weitere Frühdrucke, weitere
Archivalien) Nr. B. 1. 15 (Revaler Kirchen, Anstellungen und Suppliken der
Kirchendiener, Küster, Stadtuhrmacher etc. 1585–1804), S. 52f. (Supplika. Jo-
hann Valentinus Meder. Cantor. d. 14. July 1681). Ich danke dem Tallinna
Linnaarchiv für diesen Nachweis.

272 Werner Braun
sommer 1681 stattgefunden hatte. Eile tat gerade in dieser Sa-

che not. Meder erwähnt nun auch seine Bittschrift um eine kö-
nigliche ‘Gagie’ (= Belohnung) und ein in Stockholm gedrucktes
‘vorher censurirtes Carmen’, das er wie auch die beiden Revaler
Aufführungsgenehmigungen vom Vorjahr beilegte. Diese Do-
kumente fehlen heute. Eine Revaler Ratsresolution vom 28. Juli
1681 über die Anfertigung des ‘Rekomendierungsbrief[s] zur
Musicalischen Composition der [= des] Cantor[s] Joh. Valentin
Meder’ findet sich dagegen noch vor. Hier ist auch das einst
zugehörige Textbuch wenigstens genannt (= ‘die Abschrifft der
ganzen Commoedien nebst Musicalischen Composition’). Eine
Übertragung von Meders Eingabe, die er kurz nach der Heim-
kehr seiner vorgesetzten Behörde übergeben haben wird, findet
sich im Anhang dieses Berichts.36 Helwig scheint noch immer
im Hintergrund gestanden zu haben.
Obwohl wir also streng genommen von dem originalen Auf-
führungsmaterial keine einzige Note besitzen, scheint Meders
Anti-Touchirungs-Kampagne zu keinen wesentlichen Textände-
rungen geführt zu haben. Er wird die Widmungspartitur parallel
zur Einstudierungspartitur geschrieben haben. Es fragt sich so-
gar, ob der dänische Protest nicht vorgeschoben wurde, um eine
Dedikationsgebühr anmahnen zu können. Jetzt reichte Meder
auch den Gedanken nach, daß die vornehmen Zeugen der bei-
den Proben bei bestehenden politischen Bedenken die Festauf-
führung gar nicht besucht haben würden. Diese Entschuldigung
konnte das Ganze natürlich nicht akzeptabel machen. Der Reva-
ler Stadtrat befand sich in einer schwierigen Lage.
36 Peter Wollny spricht von Meders Aufenthalt ‘um 1680 in Stockholm’, wo

er ‘aktiv am Musikleben des Schwedischen Hofes teilnahm, wohl in der
Hoffnung, dort eine feste Anstellungzu finden: ‘Geistliche Musik der Vor-
fahren Johann Sebastian Bachs. ‘Das Altbachische Archiv’’. Jahrbuch des
Staatlichen Instituts für Musikforschung PK 2002, S. 58. Diese Mitteilung
stammt wohl aus unserem Revaler Aktenstück, die er mir sodann in Kopie
überließ. Ich danke ihm auch an dieser Stelle für seine Hilfe.

4. Folgen
Nach Darbietung der Beständigen Argenia (wohl im großen Saal

der Großen Gilde in Reval) vor einem ansehnlichen Publico war
klar, daß es eine weitere Oper dieses Zuschnitts hier kaum
mehr geben würde.37 Die Zuschauer müssen ‘kritisch’ einge-
stimmt gewesen sein, aus Anteilnahme und Ablehnung ge-
mischt. Für Meder hatten sich die ‘unbeschreibliche Mühe und
große[n] Unkosten’ – offenbar eine stehende Redewendung38 –
nicht gelohnt, denn das Stockholmer Kapellmeisteramt war ja
nicht frei und daher nicht neu zu besetzen. Als ‘einsamer’
Opernkomponist, der die Mächtigen ‘beleidigt’ hatte, mußte er
seine persönliche Lage überdenken.
Der Eklat mit seiner Beständigen Argenia setzte zudem seiner
Tätigkeit am Königlichen Gymnasium in Reval ein vorzeitige
Ende. Er wurde zwar nicht aus seinem Amt fristlos entlassen,
aber nach dem kritischen Jahr 1681 blieb er angeschlagen nur
noch drei Jahre in der Stadt.39 Wie es scheint, suchte Meder nun
seine musikdramatischen Neigungen stärker mit traditionellen
Musikformen und -Inhalten zu verbinden, vor allem mit der
Passion Jesu. So mag seine Rigaer Lukaspassion von 1685 eben-
falls an der Grenze des Erlaubten verfaßt worden sein. ‘Mit
vielen geistlichen Liedern’, ‘mehr figuraliter’, ‘länger und weit-
läuffiger’,40 unterschied sie sich von dem üblichen Typ der ‘ora-
torischen’ Passion. Wir kennen bisher weder die Noten noch
das Formular.
37 Der Sammelband Das deutschsprachige Theater im baltischen Raum, 1630–

1918, hrsg. von Laurence Kitching, Frankfurt am Main 1997 nennt Meder
nicht.
38 Vgl. Meders Äußerung im Zusammenhang seiner Danziger Oper Die
wieder vereligte COELIA (1698) bei Johannes Bolte, Das Danziger Theater im
16. und 17.Jahrhundert, Hamburg-Leipzig 1895, S. 149.
39 Soobik, Kantoren, S. 100.
40 Johannes Bolte, ‘Nochmals Johann Valentin Meder’, VfMw 7 (1891), S. 455f.

274 Werner Braun
Als Operkomponist hatte Meder seine Lektion gelernt. Die

Einzelheiten sind aus der älteren Forschung bekannt und brau-
chen hier nicht wiederholt zu werden. Es handelt sich um die
Danziger Opern Nero (1695) und Die wieder vereheligte Coelia
(1698), ferner um Die befreite Andromeda aus Riga (nach 1699). In
Danzig wies der Komponist 1695 letztmalig darauf hin, daß er
‘hiebevor zu Revall in Esthland auff E[ines] Löbl[ichen] Magist-
rats Bewilligung, mit damaliger studierender Jugend am Gym-
nasio eine Singcommedie praesentiret gehabt’ hatte.41 Nach 15
Jahren konnte er mit dem Vergessen des problematischen In-
halts rechnen, ohne die erhaltene Spielerlaubnis verschweigen
zu müssen.
‘In fine videtur cuius toni’, lautete eine bekannte Redewen-
dung dieser Zeit. Am Ende eines Tonstücks zeigt sich die ver-
wendete Tonart und ihr Affekt. Auch das menschliche Leben
verläuft vielfach nach dieser Maxime. Meders hochgesteckte
musikdramatische Pläne erfüllten sich nicht. Weder erlangte er
das königliche Kapellmeisteramt (das ohnehin an Bedeutung
verloren hatte), noch erlaubte die politisch-militärische ‘Be-
schaffenheit dieser Zeit’42 eine ausgeprägte baltische Opernge-
schichte. Wo die Waffen lärmen, hat die Musica keine Chance.
Diese übergeordnete Regel ließ nur punktuelle Triumphgesän-
ge militärischen Siegen zu – eine tragische Bilanz für unseren
Musiker.
41 Johannes Bolte, Das Danziger Theater, S. 157–149. Hermann Rauschning,

Geschichte der Musik und Musikpflege in Danzig, Danzig 1931, S. 296.
42 Bolte, Danziger Theater, S. 148 (Begründung des Rats für seine Ablehnung
von Meders Aufführungsgesuch der COELIA vom 18. Juni 1698).

Anhang
Meders Eingabe an den Rat zu Reval vom 14. Juli 1681.

(Tallinner Stadtarchiv)
Hoch= und WolEdle, Veste, Hochachtbahre, Hochgelahrte,

Hoch= und Wolweise Herren. Insonders Hochgeehrte Herren
Patroni und große Förderer!
Ob ich wol gemeinet, es würde der, wegen meiner lengstgehaltenen Commoe-
dien oder sonstgenanten Sings=spiels, vergeblich entstandene Rumor bereit
gehoben seyn, so erschallet doch wiederum ein neues Gerücht: als wenn nicht
allein bey I[hro] Königl[ichen] Majest[ät] unserm allergnädigsten König und
Herrn, sondern auch noch anderweit, bey dem Königl[ich] Dän[ischen] En-
voye, man berührte meine Commodie (:ob sollte nemlich, so doch nimmer
zuerweisen, I[hro] königl[iche] Maj[estät] von Dennemarck darinnen touchiret
worden seyn:) gantz unverantworttlich traduciret und angegeben.
Wann ich dann mit Gott bezeuge, und die Materia es an sich selbst auswei-
set, daß nichts darinnen enthalten, was einigen Potentaten touchiren könne; In
Ansehung 1. die herrn Groß=Legaten und Königl[iche] hochbetraute Ministri,
als nemlich der Herr Baron Tiesenhausen, und der Herr Klingstedt (welche auff
meine von mir selbst an Sie privatim beschehene Erkundigung, ob Sie etwas in
meiner Com[m]oedien desiderirten? daß aber nichts darinnen, so eintzigem
Potentaten anzüglich, nicht nur geantwortet, sondern auch, auff erheischenden
Fall, wider den unwahren Bericht, ein wahrhafftiges Zeugnis werden mit
abstatten können) wie ingleichen einige H[erren] Landräthe, nebst unter-
schiedlichen H[erren] von Adel, beydes in dem vorhergehenden zweymaligen
Exercitio, als in der öffentlichen Action gegenwertig gewesen, welche alle-
sämbtlich (: im Fall meine Commoedia einzigem Potentaten verkleinerlich zu
seyn schiehne :) sich als Spectatores nicht mit eingefunden haben würden. Zu
deme auch 2. in derenselben und allersämbtlichen Spectatorum Gegenwart,
vor angehenden öffentlichen Praesentationem ich, in eigener Person, auff dem
Theatro eine expressam protestationem mundlich gethan,
[Blatt 2]
daß nemlich der Innhalt von meiner Commoedia ein purum figmentum und auff
keinen Potentaten zu appliciren were, Sondern weil 3. damals I[hro] Kö-
nigl[iche] Maj[e]st[ät] sambt dero Königl[iche] Gemahlin ohngefehr ihren
solennen Einzug in Stockholm, da man allerhand Festiviteten angestellt, hiel-
ten, daß umb höchstgedachter I[hro] Königl[iche] Maj[e]st[ät], meine allerun-
terthänigste Devotion, Ehr= und Freudenbezeigungen über Dero Königl[ichen]
Einzug, an diesem Ort, zusambt andern, auch mit zu declariren, und der studi-

276 Werner Braun
renden Jugend ein animirendes Exercitium zugleich mit abzustatten, ich diese
meine Commoediam oder Sing=spiel, so durch und durch in die Music überset-
zet, habe praesentiren wollen.
Worbey E[uer] hochedl[er] hochw[ürdiger] Rath dieses zur ferneren ge-
horsamen Nachricht dienen laße, daß vergangenenen Sommer in Stockholm
berührte Commoediam (: welche ich, noch zum Uberfluß, auff der Reise, dem
H[errn] Baron Billinghusen, wie auch dem H[errn] Land=Secretario Müller
alhier, in deren Suite ich hin=nächer Stockholm reisete, gezeiget und ihr Sen-
tement oder Approbation darüber vernommen :) I[hro] Königlichen Maj[e]st[ät]
ich allerunterthänigst zu offeriren willens, aber keine Addresse, dieselbe zu
I[hro] Königl[ichen] Maj[e]st[ät] Füßen allerunterthänigst niederzulegen,
erlangen kunte, jedoch ließ ich beygefügtes, und vorher censurirtes Carmen, in
Stockholm drücken, solches nebst einer Supplicque wegen meiner Kö-
nigl[ichen] Gagie per tertium an Tit[ulum] Herrn öhrenstedt, (der selbmals
eben unpäß1ich war,) liefernd, ob aber l[hro] Königl[iche] Maj[e]st[ät] daßelbe
insinuriret worden? habe biß dato noch nichts vernommen; zweyfele auch
daran sehr, nachdem l[hro] Königl[iche] Maj[e]stät zu der Zeit nicht zur stelle,
und die Zeit dero Allergnädigste, Wiederkunfft ich ohnmöglich erwartend
von Stockholm wieder abreisen muste. Woraus 4.abermals zu beweisen, daß,
wenn offtberührte meine elaborirte Commoedia einem Potentaten despectirlich
gewesen, ich nicht
[Blatt 3]
so große Mühe, umb dieselbe in die Music beschwehrlich zu übersetzen, an-
gewandt, noch mich, umb l[hro] Köngli[iche] Maj[e]stät sie zu Stockholm ad
selbster Person allerunterthänigst zu offeriren unterstanden haben würde.
Damit nun aber gleichermaßem ich, als der ich, (wie gedacht) ohne des eine
unbeschreibliche Mühe, und große Unkosten (: so mir kaum umb die helffte
wieder ersetzet :) darauff gewandt habe; noch auch E[uer] hochEdl[er]
hochw[ürdiger] Rath selbst (: nachdem von Selbigem, wie ex lit[erisJ A. und B.
beygefügt zu sehen, ich, dafür nochmals gehorsamst dancke, die Commoediam
publice zu praesentiren, hochgeneigten Zulaß gehabt :) in keine unnöthige weit-
leufftigkeit gerathen, So habe nicht umhin gekunt, die Abschrifft der gantzen
Commoedien, nebst der musicalischen Composition, E[ine]m hochedl[en] hoch-
w[ürdigen] Rath gehorsamst einzureichen, umb selbige beyde so wol Poetisch=
als musicalische Exemplaria, an l[hro] Königl[iche] Maj[e]st[ät] zu allergnädigst
beliebiger selbsthöchstverstänigsten Judicio,und mitbetrachtung meiner ange-
wandten großen mühe, ohne maasgebung, mit gelangen zu laßen. Inmittels
gereichet an E[uer] Hoch= und wolEdl[e] vest[e] hochgeacht[ete] Hochge[lahrte]
hoch= und wolw[ollende] Herrl[ichkeiten] mein gehorsames bitten, Sie geru-
hen, wieder den ungescheuten Angeber mich höchstgeneigt zu schützen, und
Höchstgedachter I[hro] Königl[ichen] Maj[e]stät Unseren Allergnädigsten Kö-
nig und Herrn, den unverantwortlichen Bericht, (so aus einem vorsetzlichen
Rencor* vielleicht geschehen seyn müste,) anders zu remonstriren, Gleichwie

E[ure]m HochEdl[ en] Hochw[tirdigen] Rath ich in allem höchstverpflichtet bin:

Also werde in müglichster Danck=Erkäntnis so Tags so Nachts bereitgefließen
leben.
Eu[er] Hoch= und WolEdl[en] Vest hochachtb[aren]
Hochge[strengen] Hoch= und wohlw[ollenden]
Herrl[ichkeiten] gehorsamwilligster Joh[ann]
Valentinus Meder.
—————————
* spanisch: Groll
Literatur
Åberg, Alf, Art. ’Karl XI’, Svenskt Biografiskt Lexikon, Bd. 20, Stockholm 1973–
1975, S. 650–655.
‘Absurda Comica oder Herr Peter Squenz’, in Andreas Gryphius, Lustspiele 1
(Gestamtausgabe der deutschsprachigen Werke, Bd. 7) hrsg. von Hugh
Powell, Tübingen: Niemeyer 1969.
Andersson , Ingvar, Schwedische Geschichte von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart
(Geschichte der Völker und Staaten), München: Oldenbourg 1950.
Arnheim, Amalie, ‘Aus dem Bremer Musikleben im 17. Jahrhundert’, Sammel-
bände der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft, 12 (1910/11), S. 369–416.
Bøggild-Andersen, C.O., ‘Ulrica Elenora‘, Dansk Biografisk Leksikon, Bd. 15,
1985.
Bolte, Johannes, ‘Nochmals Johann Valentin Meder’, Vierteljahrsschrift für
Musikwissenschaft, 7 (1891), S. 43–64.
Bolte, Johannes, ‘Das Stammbuch Johann Valentin Meder’s’, ebd., 8 (1892).
Bolte, Johannes, Das Danziger Theater im 16. und 17. Jahrhundert (Theaterge-
schichtliche Forschungen, 12), Hamburg–Leipzig 1895.
Das deutschsprachige Theater im baltischen Raum, 1630–1918, hrsg. von Laurence
Kitching (Thalia Germanica 1/1), Frankfurt am Main: Lang 1997.
[David Kuhn], Die erhöhete Demuth und gestiinter Hochmuth [...], [Goslar] 1697.
(Exemplar der Herzog Adolph Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel.)
Handbuch des personalen Gelegenheitsschrifttums in europäischen Bibliotheken und
Archiven, Bd. 7: Reval/Tallinn, hrsg. von Sabine Beckmann u.a., Hildes-
heim: Olms-Weidmann 2003.
Holstein, Hugo, Die Reformation im Spiegelbild der dramatischen Literatur des 16.
Jahrhunderts, Halle 1886.

278 Werner Braun
Kilian, Dietrich, ‘Buxtehudes MEMBRA’. Norddeutsche und nordeuropäische

Musik. Referate der Kieler Tagung 1963, hrsg. von Carl Dahlhaus und Walter
Wiora, Kassel: Bärenreiter l965.
Kjellberg, Erik, Kungliga musiker i Sverige under stormaktstiden: studier kring
universitet 1979.
Laursen. C.; Art. ’Christian V’, Dansk Biografisk Leksikon, Bd. 3, 1979.
Lehms, Georg Christian, Teutschlands galante Poetinnen [...] Nebst einem Anhan-
ge ausländischer Damen [...], Frankfurt am Main 1715, Vorrede, Bl. g.
Mattheson, Johann, Grundlagen einer Ehrenpforte (Hamburg 1740), hrsg. von
Max Schneider, Berlin 1910 bzw. Kassel: Bärenreiter 1969.
Meder, Johann Valentin, Die beständige Argenia (Das Erbe deutscher Musik,
68), hrsg. von Werner Braun, Mainz 1973.
Norlind, Tobias, ‘Die Musikgeschichte Schwedens in den Jahren 1630–1730’,
Sammelbände der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft, 1 (1899/1900), S. 165–212.
Rampe, Theodor, ‘Die Entwicklung des Theaterwesens zu Nürnberg [...]’,
Mitteilungen des Vereins für Geschichte der Stadt Nürnberg, 12, 1898.
Riepe, Juliane, ‘Hofmusik in der Zeremonialwissenschaft des 18. Jahrhun-
derts‘, Händel-Jahrbuch, 49 (2003).
Rosen, Elisabeth von, ‘Rückblicke auf die Pflege der Schauspielkunst in Re-
val’, Festschrift zur Eröffnung des neuen Theaters in Reval im Sommer, Septem-
ber 1910. Melle i.Hann 1910.
Schneider, Herbert, Art. ‘Prolog‘ Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart, 2.
Aufl., Sachteil, Bd. 7, 1997.
Schwartz, Rudolf, Esther im deutschen und neulateinischen Drama des Reformati-
onszeitalters, Oldenburg und Leipzig 1894.
Seifert, Herbert, Die Oper am Wiener Kaiserhof im 17. Jahrhundert, Tutzing:
Schneider 1985.
Soobik, Heidi, ´Kantoren und Musikleben am Revalischen Gustav-Adolf
Gymnasium 1631–1719´, Music history writing and national culture, hrsg.
von Urve Lippius, Tallinn: Eesti Keele Instituut 1995.
Stolberger, Leichenpredigten Katalog, IV 2, Leipzig 1935.
Svenskt Biografiskt Lexikon Bd. 21, Stockholm 1975–1977, S. 340–342.
Vretblad, Åke, ‘Johann Valentin Meder och hans opera Die beständige Argenia’,
Walther, Johann Gottfried, Musicalisches Lexicon oder Musicalische Bibliotec,
Leipzig 1732, hrsg. von Richard Schaal, Kassel: Bärenreiter 1953.
Wilpert, Gero von, Deutschbaltische Literaturgeschichte, München: Beck 2005.
Wollny, Peter, ‘Geistliche Musik der Vorfahren Johann Sebastian Bachs. ‘Das
Altbachische Archiv’‘, Jahrbuch des Staatlichen Instituts für Musikforschung,
PK 2002.

JAN OLOF RUDÉN
Ensemble Music copied by the Swedish

Student Nils Tiliander in Greifswald, Rostock
and Wittenberg 1698–1699
In the City Library in Växjö there is a music manuscript (shelf

number Mus Ms 6) that has been mentioned in the literature
without its context being examined regarding provenance and
contents. However, it has been catalogued for RISM by Anna-
Lena Holm at the Music Library of Sweden and there are a
great many incipits in the RISM electronic manuscript data-
base.1 It is to her credit that she was able to identify music by
the Austrian composer Benedict Anton Aufschnaiter, which
will be discussed later. Even before her time a number of pieces
could be attributed to Jean-Baptiste Lully: excerpts from operas
and ballets listed by Herbert Schneider in his Lully-Werke-
Verzeichnis, where the source is named S-Vx ms 6.2
Professor Carl-Allan Moberg of Uppsala was the first musi-
cologist to mention the manuscript: ‘Cf. Music Manuscript No.
6 in the Secondary School Library, Växjö, which contains a large
number of pieces from French operas. A note contains the in-
formation that pieces nos. 1–40 have been copied from a book
belonging to Count Steuchius in Rostock and nos. 41–81 have
been written down by a musician in Greifswald, Jeremiah
Würffel. The book has belonged to a C.N. Tiliander and bears
the date 1716’.3 This article will continue where Carl–Allan Mo-
berg left off and place the manuscript in a context.
1 RISM Online. Ser. A. 2, Music manuscripts after 1600, 1997–.

2 Herbert Schneider, Chronologisch-thematisches Vezeichnis sämtlicher Werke
von Jean-Baptiste Lully (LWV), Tutzing 1981.
3 ’Jfr Växjö läroverksbiblioteks musikhandskrift nr 6, som har ett stort antal
musikstycken ur franska operor. En anmärkning upplyser om, att stycke-

280 Jan Olof Rudén
Source description
An examination of the manuscript paper reveals the same wa-

termark throughout the whole volume, which is bound in card-
board with strengthened corners and spine. We can reasonably
assume that it was bought as a ready-bound volume and then
used for copying music. On the outside cover there is an unde-
cipherable inscription. The inside of the front cover bears the
owner’s name and the date:
Niclas Tiliander: Anno 1698: d 30 Septemb:
and Latin maxims and verses about music. On the last page of
the volume (fol. 85v, after which between ten and fifteen folios
have been cut out) there is another owner’s name and date:
Possessor huius Libri sum ego Carolus Nicolai Tiliander
d 1 septem:1716.
This is the name and date quoted by Moberg.
Biographies
Who were the owners? Fortunately for us they were educated

men, and both of them were Swedish clergymen. The careers of
the clergy and information about their families have been re-
corded through the years and thus we know that Nicolaus Til-
iander was born around 1673 in Vittaryd in the province of
Småland. He was the son of Sven Ingemarsson Tiliander (1637–
na 1-40 avskrivits ur en greve Steuchius bok i Rostock och nr 41-81 ned-

tecknats av en musiker i Greifswald, Jeremia Würffel. Boken har tillhört en
C.N. Tiliander och bär ett årtal, 1716’, Carl-Allan Moberg, ’Mikael Zethrin
och svensk paroditeknik’, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 8 (1936), p. 13.

Swedish Student Nils Tiliander 281
1710), a clergyman later to become vicar of Pjätteryd, also in the

province of Småland.4
In all probability the father Sven attended the cathedral
school in Växjö, continuing his studies in Königsberg in 1663–
1664 and in Uppsala from December 1664. Apparently he was
interested in music because he brought home a handful of
pieces of printed music from Königsberg, the most important
being the Arien vol. 1–3 by Heinrich Albert. After taking orders
and acting as religious advisor to the Governor General of Bre-
men-Verden, General Henrik Horn in Stade, he returned to
Småland in 1673 and was then appointed vice-rector, responsi-
ble for music at the Jönköping Grammar School. He never took
up the position, however, but was instead appointed vicar of
Pjätteryd in 1677.5
When this article was first presented in 2007 Sweden was
celebrating the 400th anniversary of the birth of the famous
Swedish botanist Carolus Linnaeus, and in this context it may
be of interest to note that the Tiliander family and the Linneaus
have the same root, originating from the linden tree, and there
is yet another family name, Lindelius, originating from the
same tree. By way of explanation I quote The Linnaean Corre-
spondence, an electronic presentation edited by the Swedish
Linnaeus Society, Uppsala, and the Centre International
d’Étude du XVIII siècle, Ferney-Voltaire:6
Carl Linnaeus’s paternal grandfather, like most Swedish
peasants and farmers of his times, had no surname and was
known, in accordance with the old Scandinavian name system,
as Ingemar Bengtsson, being the son of Bengt Ingemarsson.
When his son, Carl’s father, Nils Ingemarsson (1674–1733),
went to the University of Lund, he had to provide himself with
4 Gunnar Ekström, Västerås stifts herdaminne II:, 1600-talet, Västerås 1971, p.

866; Gotthard Virdestam, Växjö stifts herdaminne, vol 3, Växjö 1929, p. 25.
Sven attended the grammar school in Växjö. See below.
5 Jan Olof Rudén, ’Myntmästarens informator och hans noter’. Dagsverket
(1997:3), 13–15.
6 http://linnaes.c18.net/Doc/presentation.php

282 Jan Olof Rudén
a surname for registration purposes. He invented the name Lin-

naeus in allusion to a large and ancient tree of the small leaved
linden (Tilia cordata Miller, T. Europaea L. in part), known in the
Småland dialect as a ‘linn’, which grew on the family property
known in the seventeenth century as Linnegård. Other
branches of the family took the names Lindelius and Tiliander
from the same famous tree. Linnaeus himself referred to this
when he described Tilia in 1745 as being vastissima in pago
Stegaryd Sunnerboae Smolandiae unde Tiliandri et Linnaei dicti.
Thus tilia is Latin for linden and the root of the name Tiliander.
See family tree fig 1.
Fig 1. The ‘Linden’ family tree.

We return to the owner of the manuscript, Niclas/Nils Tilian-

der. He studied at the cathedral school in Växjö, where musical
activities were an important part of the curriculum during the
twenty-year period before his birth from 1650 to 1676 when
Erlandus Magni Colliander was vice-rector and thus in charge
of music. Colliander acquired a large collection of partbooks
which is still preserved. Nils continued his studies at the Uni-
versity of Lund, registering in the autumn of 1693 and defend-
ing a dissertation in 1695.7
Tiliander went on a study trip abroad, visiting universities in
north German cities (some of them in Swedish possession after
the Thirty Years’ War). He registered at the University of Greifs-
wald on Sept 14th, 1698 and at the University of Wittenberg on
June 13th, 1699, where he received a Master’s degree on Octo-
ber 15th the same year. However, there is no record of him in
the register of University of Rostock, a city where he also cop-
ied music.8 I will return to this later.
He must have returned to his father in Pjätteryd and married
not later than September 1700 (his son Carl was born on May
18th, 1701). He received orders on Sept 11th, 1700, and became
clergyman of the infantry regiment Smålands tremänningar. He
died in the war in Kurland in 1702 or 1703.
In 1716 his wife was still living at Bergagården, her estate in
Pjätteryd. Their son Carl/Carolus inherited the partbook and
wrote the date of his ownership as Sept 1st, 1716. He was born
in Pjätteryd on May 18th, 1701 and died as vicar of Jönköping
on January 22nd, 1765. He does not appear to have ever trav-
elled abroad.
7 Gotthard Virdestam, Växjö stifts herdaminne, vol 8: Regementspräster m.m.,

Växjö, p. 33.
8 Christian Callmer, ’Svenska studenter i Wittenberg’, Personhistorisk tidskrift
1976.

284 Jan Olof Rudén
The contents
The title of the volume is (fol. 1) Concors discordia seu I et II Vio-

lin. We will return to this later.
The manuscript contains one hundred and forty-five num-
bered pieces. They are notated in G clef or French G clef (the
second violin sometimes in Soprano C clef). They are arranged
so that Violin I plays from the left side and Violin 2 from the
right side of the open book. Some movements have titles in
(bad) French. As mentioned previously, many pieces have been
identified as being composed by Jean-Baptiste Lully. In the
source description I refer to numbers in Herbert Schneider’s
Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis sämtlicher Werke von Jean-
Baptiste Lully (LWV) (Tutzing 1981). A few movements can also
be found in versions for keyboard or plucked instruments in
my bibliography Music in tablature (Stockholm 1981).9 They are
marked with R numbers.
Fig. 2. The beginning of B.A. Aufschnaiter’s Suite no. 1 (Manuscript in Växjö

City Library, Mus Ms 6). See edited score at end of article, (Fig. 4).
9 Jan Olof Rudén, Music in Tablature: A thematic index with some descriptions of
music in tablature notation in Sweden, Stockholm 1981.

The first copies made in Greifswald
Now we will take a closer look at the contents. Tiliander had

registered at the University of Greifswald two weeks before he
wrote his name in the volume and the date September 30th,
1698, so it is reasonable to suppose that he had bought the book
there and that he copied the following pieces in Greifswald.
These nine pieces are notated for two violins except for no. 6,
Gassenhauer de Mellien(?) – an unknown composer – which is
for violin solo. The rest of the pieces are dance movements
which were usually put together in suites. There seems to be no
specific complete suite but the key of C Major for the first three
movements indicates a connection. The first instance of music
by Lully is no. 5, taken from the ballet Temple de la paix (1685).
folȱ noȱ Titleȱ Composer R numberȱ

1v 1 Gavotte C Major
2 Minuet C Major
3 Boure C Major
2v 4 Aria Bb Major
5 Entré from Temple de [J B Lully], LWV 69/6
la paix a minor
3v 6 Gassenhauer D Major, de Mellien(?)
violin solo
4 7 Gigue G minor
4v 8 Ballo E Major
9 Boure C Major

286 Jan Olof Rudén
Visiting Johannes Steuchius in Rostock
On fol, 5v Nils wrote, ‘The following pieces, nos. 10–39, I have

copied in Rostock from Master Steuchius’ book’.10
Master Steuchius was another clergyman, a student friend that
he met at the University of Lund in 1695. Jöns/Johannes Steuchius
was born in 1676 in Härnösand in the province of Ångermanland.
He had an outstanding career and died in Uppsala in 1742 as
Archbishop of Sweden. In this connection it should be noted that
it was Johannes Steuchius who acknowledged the receipt of the
Düben Collection in 1732.11 Like Nils Tiliander he was the son of
a clergyman, Matthias Steuchius, who was also Archbishop of
Sweden. Johannes Steuchius went to school in Härnösand, reg-
istered as a student in Uppsala in 1690 and moved to Lund in
1695 with his father who had been appointed bishop there. In
1696 Johannes returned to Uppsala. From 1698 to 1701 he con-
tinued his studies, visiting the University of Rostock where we
find his name in the university register in November 1698. He
was then twenty-two years old. He pursued his studies at the
universities of Hamburg, Wolfenbüttel, Helmstedt, Wittenberg,
Altdorf, Paris, London, Oxford, Amsterdam and Leiden. In
1701 he was appointed lecturer at the University of Uppsala
and the following year, 1702, he became professor and librarian
at the University of Lund with subsequent positions in Upp-
sala, Karlstad and Linköping.12
From these dates we can conclude that pieces nos. 10–39
could not have been copied by Nils Tiliander in Rostock until
November 1698. Let us take a look at them.
10 Effterfölgande Stÿcke [viz. Nr 10] til Num: 40 hafw{er] iagh i Rostock af Hr

Mag Steuchii book affskrefwet.
11 See Erik Kjellberg’s article ’The Düben family and the Düben Collection’ in
this volume.
12 J. A. Westerlund & J.A. Setterdahl, Linköpings stifts herdaminne, vol 1,
Linköping 1915–1916, p. 84.

folȱ No.ȱ Titleȱ Composer R numberȱ

5v 10 Entre de Houbois C Ma-
jor
11 Entre de Dauphin G
Major
6v 12 La marche Rondeau [J B Lully], LWV
[Thésée] (1675) C Major 51/30
7v 13 Finirifice de March Ron- [J B Lully], LWV
deau [Les sacrificateurs 49/44
from Cadmus et
Hermione] (1673)
8v 14 La loure [Alceste] (1674) [J B Lully], LWV
C Major 50/29
15 Entre Bb Major
9v 16 Allemand C Major
17 Aria
10v- 18- [Branles] F Major
12v 24
18 Branle [de Mons 3062
Guillaume
DuManoir]
19 Courant D:o 3778
20 Gaÿ ; 21 Amener ; 22 D:o
Gavotte ; 23 Courant
Entre ; 24 Gique
13v- 25- [Suite A minor] 25 Ale-
14v 28 mand ; 26 Courant ; 27
Sarabande ; 28 Gique
15v- 29- [Suite?, Bb Major] 29
17v 34 Alemand ; 30 Minuet ; 31
Entre ; 32 Minuet ; 33
Ballet
17v 34 Rundeau [Ballet des [J B Lully], LWV
Muses] (1666) 32/9
18v 35- [Suite?, Bb Major ] 35
36 Praeludium ; 36 Gique
19v 37 Overtur BelleRophon [J B Lully], LWV
(1679) C Major 57/1
20v 38 Overtur C Major di Lovet
21v 39 Overteur

288 Jan Olof Rudén
Again there are movements from Lully operas and ballets – this
time five movements from five different operas. Other pieces
that have not yet been identified also appear to be from operas
or ballets by the Lully school, but they are not by Lully him-
self.13 Among the pieces are some which seem to form (parts of)
regular suites, for instance the Suite in A minor and the two in
B flat major.
The Branle Suite, nos. 18–24, is an older kind of suite. In a
keyboard source no. 18 is attributed to Mons DuManoir and it
is possible that the remaining movements should also be attrib-
uted to him. In all probability the composer in question is Guil-
laume DuManoir. No. 19, Courant, is found in a keyboard
source but without an attribution. The composer Lovet has not
been identified.
Our manuscript has concordances with another manuscript
which is part of the extensive Ihre Collection, now preserved in
Uppsala University Library. The owner and collector was the
linguist Johan Ihre and the shelf number is 217. In the catalogue
by Anders Grape it is described as violin duets.14
The following movements concord with our manuscript. The
composer Lovet even appears at the end of this manuscript.
Entre de Houtbois
Entré/Gavott de Dauphin
March [J B Lully], LWV 51/30
La Loure [J B Lully], LWV 50/29
Rondeau [J B Lully], LWV 49/44
Allemand
Aria
Branle [de Mons DuManoir]
Courant d:o
Gay d:o
Amener d:o
13 They are not found in Bruce Gustafson, A thematic locator for the works of
Jean-Baptiste Lully, New York 1989.
14 Anders Grape, Ihreska handskriftssamlingen i Uppsala Universitets bibliotek,
vol 2, Uppsala, p. 437.

Gavotte d:o
Courant Entré d:o
Giqve d:o
[Suite A minor] Allemand
Courant
Sarrabande
Gique
[Suite? Bb Major] Allemand
Minuet
Entré
Minuet
Rondeau
Ouvertur 39
Ballet
[Suite? Bb Major] Praeludium
Gique
Overture [J B Lully], LWV 57/1
Overteur di Lovet
The contents of this manuscript are almost identical with the

one Johannes Steuchius showed Nils Tiliander in 1698. Only
one or two movements are missing and the order is almost ex-
actly the same.
The music part of the Ihre collection comprises only seven
volumes, and according to Grape the scribe is probably Thomas
Ihre, an older member of the family. Thomas Ihre registered at
the University of Copenhagen in 1677, at the University of
Rostock in 1680 and at the University of Uppsala, where he
studied theology, the same year. As preceptor for two young
noblemen he travelled to Denmark, Germany, Holland and
France. He subsequently studied theology in Germany, Holland
and England for three years on a royal bursary. On his return to
Uppsala in 1692 he was appointed Professor of Theology. In
1717 he was appointed Dean in Linköping where he died in
1720.15
15 Ibid.,vol 1, p. 10 et passim.

290 Jan Olof Rudén
Thomas Ihre was a competent musician. His instrument was

the violin but the music that he collected in Copenhagen and
Rostock from 1679 to 1680 consists mainly of keyboard music.
There are pieces by Buxtehude, J.A. Reincken, Franz Tunder
and, above all, by the Copenhagen organist Johann Lorentz.16
In 1696 Thomas Ihre married the sister of Johannes Steuchius
so it seems not to be mere coincidence that Steuchius brought
music to Rostock, perhaps copied from partbooks in the posses-
sion of Thomas Ihre. In Rostock Nils Tiliander could then copy
the music in his turn.
Jeremiah Würffel in Greifswald
On fol 22v of our manuscript Nils Tiliander has written a note:

‘The following pieces including no. 80 I received from the excel-
lent musician Jeremiah Würffel in Greifswald.’17
As we may remember, Tiliander first arrived in Greifswald
and then made a visit to Rostock. At this point he was back in
Greifswald again.
According to Dr. Lutz Winkler in Greifswald musicians
named Jeremiah Würffel are mentioned quite often in Vita pomer-
anorum – Biographies of Pomeranians, and Dr. Winkler therefore
assumes that there is a father and a son with the same name.18
Incidentally, this source states that the family came from Norway.
In Hans Engel’s book Musik und Musikleben in Greifswalds Ver-
gangenheit there are also many references to Jeremiah Würffel.19
16 Published by Bo Lundgren.
17 Effterfölgande [nr 40] til num. 81 har iag fått, af dhen förtreffelige Musi-
cante[n] Jeremia Würffel, i Griyswald.
18 I am grateful to Dr. Winkler for drawing my attention to this source in 1996.
19 Hans Engel, Musik und Musikleben in Greifswalds Vergangenheit, Greifswald
1929.

In 1671 the ‘Kunstpfeifergeselle’, viz. the apprentice town

musician Jeremiah Würffel received approval from the City
Council to succeed his master Heinrich Oltböter or Altböter but
did not do so until 1686 when Oltböter died and Würffel was
appointed Town Musician on May 2nd.20 On March 15th, 1699
Jeremiah Würffel approved the organ of Saint Mary which had
been silent for almost a year due to national mourning after the
death of Charles XI on April 5th, 1697.21 There is also mention of
the recently appointed Town Musician Jeremiah Würffel, who
in 1677 married the widow of the tower guard, Henning Bolte.22
In the meantime Würffel also became attendant of the tower
in December 1698 to ultimately achieve the position of tower
guard in 1719. This merely consisted of giving signals and keep-
ing watch but it provided him with another income which he
badly needed to support his household, which normally also
consisted of apprentices. In 1724 Würffel is mentioned as being
seventy years old (which means that he would have been born
in 1654) and in ill health. All these details could well refer to the
same Jeremiah Würffel.
And now to the music!
22v 40 Overture C Major
41 Entree C Major
23v 42 Minuet C Major 3840
43 La Marche C Major
24v 44 Battallie C Major
45 Bourree C Major
25v 46 [Movements from [J B Lully], LWV 51/24
Thesée] (1675),
a minor Prelude
47 La sacrifice [J B Lully], LWV 51/27
26v 48 Noll [J B Lully], LWV 51/39
49 Giqve [J B Lully], LWV 51/41
20 Engel, op.cit., p. 12.

21 Ibid., p. 13.
22 Ibid., p. 14.

292 Jan Olof Rudén

27v 50 [Movements from [J B Lully], LWV 51/5 3716
Thésée] C Major
La de Finte de Mare
[La descente de Mars
]
51 Les combantos [Les [J B Lully], LWV 51/32
combattans]
52 Noll [J B Lully], LWV 51/78
29v 53 Rondoau [J B Lully], LWV 51/79
30v 54 Le Songe Funeste, [J B Lully], LWV 53/60
[Atys] (1676)
Bb Major
31v 55 rue aur de Songe, [J B Lully], LWV 53/62
[Atys] B b Major
32v 56 Allarm Bb Major
33v 57 [Movements from [J B Lully], LWV 54/1 569
Isis] (1677), G minor
Overture D’isis
34v 58 Air Les Musis [J B Lully], LWV 54/10 594
59 Menuet [J B Lully], LWV 54/11 1290
35v 60 Les sens et les paisis [J B Lully], LWV 54/33
61 Boure [J B Lully], LWV 54/35
Alceste], (1674)
F Major La fette
Infernale
37v 63 Suitte pour les [J B Lully], LWV 50/72
38v 64 Minuet [from [J B Lully], LWV 51/55
Thésée] F Major
65 [Movements from [J B Lully], LWV 50/3
Alceste],
C Major Pree
39v 66 La Gloire [J B Lully], LWV 50/4
40v 67 Rondeau [J B Lully], LWV 50/14
68 Minuet [Quel coeur [J B Lully], LWV 50/15
sauvage]
41v 69 Les combatens [J B Lully], LWV 50/43
42v 70 Rons Pons Brisson [J B Lully], LWV 50/61
[Rompons, brissons]


Atys],
g minor Chacona
44v 72 Minuet [J B Lully], LWV 53/48
73 Les tremblement [J B Lully], LWV 54/51
[from Isis]
45v 74 Echo, a minor
46v 75 Noll [from Cadmus [J B Lully], LWV 49/54
et Hermione] C
Major
76 Gavotte C Major
47v 77 Entre de Apollon, 3633
G Major
48v 78 Air, G Major
49v 79 Chacone, G Major
50v 80 Gique, G Major
Out of forty pieces more than half (twenty-eight) are taken from
Lully’s operas Alceste, Atys, Cadmus et Hermione, Isis and Thésée.
The first six pieces, nos. 40–45, all in C Major, seem to have been
taken from another opera/ballet. The concluding four pieces,
nos. 77–80, all in G Major, also seem to have a similar origin. In
keyboard sources in Sweden there are two anonymous move-
ments which correspond to one piece in each group. Nos. 74–77
are notated in ordinary G clef, not in French G clef like the rest
of the pieces.
This is musique à la mode at the end of the 17th century, show-
ing the strong influence of the Lully opera school. We can as-
sume that the music was used by the Town Musician and his
apprentices on festive occasions arranged by the City Council
or at weddings and other festivities in the city and the sur-
rounding areas.

294 Jan Olof Rudén
Paul Krause in Wittenberg
On fol 51v Tiliander wrote: ‘The following pieces, including no.

146, I have received as a fine souvenir of my esteemed friend,
the famous, and at the University of Wittenberg highly distin-
guished, Town Musician Mr Paul Krause, with deep affection’.23
Among the pieces nos. 92–101, Parties de Opera Hercules et
Hebe [viz. Die Verbindung des grossen Hercules mit der
schönen Hebe. Singspiel, 3 Akte {1699} by Reinhard Keiser in
Hamburg], are written by another hand in 1699.
According to Tiliander’s note Paul Krause was Town Musi-
cian of Wittenberg and a friend of his. Can it be Paul Krause’s
handwriting? Reinhard Keiser’s music was completely new at
the time, because the opera was performed in 1699 and we
know that Tiliander was in Wittenberg from at least June 13th
to October 15th, 1699.

51v 81 [Pieces in G Major] Air
52v 82 Air
83 Gique
53v 84 Air
85 Menuet
54v 86 [Suite?, d minor]
Praelude
87 Entree
55v 88 Gique
89 Rundeau
56v 90 Menuett
91 Entree
57v 92 Parties de Opera [Reinhard Keiser]
Hercules & Hebe
Chaconne d-moll
23 ’Nachfolgende Stücke [viz no. 81] biss num: 146 [the last] Habe ich von
meinem wehrtgeschätzten Freunde, als(?) weitberümten v[nd] auf d[er]
universitet (sic) Wittenbergh höchstmeritierten StadtMusico, Herrn Paul
Krausen, aus sonderbahrer affection, zum guten andencken bekommen‘.


58v 94 Saraband, Bb Major [Reinhard Keiser]
93 Menuet, F Major [Reinhard Keiser]
58v 95 Menuet, D minor [Reinhard Keiser]
96 Saraband, C Major [Reinhard Keiser]
59v 97 Entree, A minor + 98 Trio [Reinhard Keiser]
98 Trio [Reinhard Keiser]
99 Gique, C Major [Reinhard Keiser]
100 Entree, A minor [Reinhard Keiser]
101 Menuet, C Major [Reinhard Keiser]
60v 102 Overture, C minor, d’Verinwel
Violin I and Flute I
103 Saraband, C minor
61v 104 Echo, Eb Major
62v 105 Menuet, C minor
Menueth, G minor, only de Stolte, inscribed
Violin I later
63v 106 [Suite?, G Major] de Rieck
Overture
64v 107 Rigadon
108 Boure
65v- 109 [from Suite no. 6, Bb [B A Aufschnaiter]
Major] Chaconna 6:5
66v 110 Grand Ballet 6:2
111 Gavotte 6:4
67v 112 Menuet 6:3
68v- 113 [Suite no. 1, G Major] [B A Aufschnaiter]
Chaconna 1:1
69v 114 Ballo 1:2
115 Menuet 1:3
70v 116 Boure 1:4
117 Gique 1:5
71v 118 [from Suite no. 2, [B A Aufschnaiter]
F Major] Air 2:2
119 Menuet 2:3
120 Boure 2:4
121 Rondeau 2:5
72v- 122 [Suite no. 3, G minor] [B A Aufschnaiter]
Overture 3:1

296 Jan Olof Rudén

73v 123 Entree 3:2
124 Menuet 3:3
125 Gavott 3:4
74v 126 Fantasie 3:6
75v 127 Menuet 3:5
75v- 128 [from Suite no. 4, [B A Aufschnaiter]
A minor] Aria 4:2
129 Rondeau 4:3
76v 130 Bouree 4:4
131 Menuet 4:5
77v- 132 [from Suite no. 5, [B A Aufschnaiter]
F Major] Entree 5:1
133 Menuet 5:2
134 Gavotte 5:3
78v 135 Rondeau 5:4
79v 136 Air, Bb Major
Polones [inscribed later]
D Major?
138 Air, Bb Major
140 Gique, Bb Major
142 Air, Bb Major
83v 143 Trio, Bb Major
84v 144 Menuet, Bb Major
145 Menuet, Bb Major
Air Basson [inscribed
later] D minor
Certain items presumably belong together as a suite since they

are in the same key: nos. 81–85 in G Major, nos. 86–91 in A mi-
nor and nos. 136–145 in Bb Major.

Ensemble music by B. A. Aufschnaiter
In addition to Reinhard Keiser there is another composer whose

music takes up almost half the contents of this part of the
manuscript. The composer has been identified as Benedict An-
ton Aufschnaiter by Anna-Lena Holm as already mentioned
earlier. The pieces are copied from a print with the title Concors
discordia amori et timori augusti et serenissimi Romanorum regis
Josephi I consecrate.24 It was published in Nuremberg in 1695 so
the music would have been quite new at the time.
The title indicates that the music was dedicated to King Jo-
seph I of Austria. The name of the collection, in translation
Harmonic disharmony, explains the title of Tiliander’s manu-
script: Concors discordia. This title must have been added to the
manuscript after Aufschnaiter’s pieces had been copied.
A comparison with the print shows that the copies of
Aufschnaiter’s pieces are accurate, but this is of course no guar-
antee for the accuracy of the other pieces in the manuscript un-
til proven. Not all the movements from the suites by
Aufschnaiter have been copied and the sixth suite was copied
before the other five.
It so happens that a copy of the print is preserved in Uppsala
University Library (Utl. instr. mus. i tr. 37:3). It is a set of parts,
containing not only the first and second violin parts as in our
manuscript but also parts for two violas and violone, which
was the normal five-part string ensemble at the time.
24 RISM A2854.

298 Jan Olof Rudén
Incorrect classification as violin duos
Since our manuscript only contains the violin parts facing each
other we must conclude that there are two volumes missing,
one containing the viola parts and the other the violone part
and perhaps a basso continuo part. Thus it is quite probable
that many of the other pieces in Växjö Mus Ms 6 were also in-
tended for five-part string ensemble. In any case the classifica-
tion of the contents as violin duos is incorrect. A comparison
with publications of Lully’s music reveals that a bass/continuo
part is never missing. The most common set of parts is premier
dessus, seconde dessus, taille, basse.
Attributions to composers – anonymous pieces
Composers’ names that occur in the manuscript are Verinwel,

nos.102–105 (no.102 for violin I and flute I), Rieck, nos.106–108,
and Stolte f. 62v (inscribed later). They have not been identified.
The last piece in the manuscript, Air basson, was also inscribed
later. Curiously enough, the only pieces in the whole manu-
script that have composers’ names are the ones mentioned
above, with the addition of no.6, Mellien and no.38, Lovet.

Fig.3. Composers’ names and later additions.
All the other pieces are anonymous, which is in fact typical for
manuscripts from this period, as is shown throughout my bibli-
ography Music in tablature for keyboard and plucked instru-
ments. Concerning the repertoire represented in the tablatures
there are remarkably few concordances with our manuscript,
which might be explained by the fact that the tablatures are a
decade or two later than our manuscript.
Was the music ever performed?
Nils Tiliander must have been genuinely interested in music.

He visited three cities – Greifswald, Rostock and Wittenberg –

300 Jan Olof Rudén
during his one-year study trip from September 30th 1698 to

October 15th 1699 and in each city he made the most of his op-
portunity to copy music. Maybe he inherited his love of music
and the idea of collecting pieces from his father; he may also
have been inspired by the collection of music at the Cathedral
School of Växjö.
The question is whether Nils was ever able to enjoy the mu-
sic he so eagerly copied and brought back to his native country.
In September 1700 he went off to the war in Kurland, so he
would only have been at home in Pjätteryd for approximately a
year. If the partbooks were passed on to town musicians in cit-
ies such as Växjö or Lund performances would have been pos-
sible, but this is mere speculation.25
What happened to Nils Tiliander’s partbooks? On his return
to Sweden, before he went to war, he took holy orders and mar-
ried and in the year 1716 his 16-year old son Carl Tiliander inher-
ited the manuscript and inscribed his name in it. After Carl’s
death in 1765 the music came into the possession of the Secon-
dary School in Växjö and was subsequently given to the City
Library. Nowadays only the partbook containing the two violin
parts is preserved.
Repertoire of town musicians
The manuscript is of interest not only as an example of the net-

work between students and of the way music was imported to
Sweden but also because it contains repertoire which was cop-
ied from two German town musicians, Jeremiah Würffel of
25 One professional musician with assistants was on the payroll of the cathe-
dral since 1699. He was also responsible for music at the University of Lund.
See Greger Andersson, ’Musiken vid Lunds universitet före Kapellets
grundande’, Spelglädje i Lundagård: 250 år med Akademiska kapellet, 1996, p. 19.

Greifswald and Paul Krause of Wittenberg. It is unusual to find

such specific examples of this kind of repertoire.
According to Greger Andersson, ‘the town musicians [in Swe-
den] probably mainly played a common European repertoire. The
town musicians were chiefly performers who very seldom wrote
music themselves. Especially during Sweden’s Age of Greatness
few music prints or manuscripts can be linked directly to town
musicians – either composers or performers’.26 But through our
manuscript we are made aware that town musicians, not only in
Sweden, were eager to play the newest music but that they were
restricted to the repertoire that was published or otherwise avail-
able for copying. In one instance there is an identified print which
was the source for the copy. The many instrumental pieces from
Lully’s operas might have been copied from partbooks that were
published at the end of the 17th century. This music was much
appreciated, judging from the many copies listed in Schneider’s
thematic index of Lully’s works.
The same music was also used by instrumental ensembles at
the universities, ‘collegium musicum’ which is indicated by the
phrase ‘at the University of Wittenberg highly distinguished
Town Musician Mr Paul Krause’ (‘auf der Universität Wittenberg
höchtsmeritierter Stadtmusico Paul Krause’, see footnote 16). It
can also be assumed that organists in central Sweden, who were
also town musicians, played the same music together with their
sons, apprentices and other members of their household.
26 ’Stadsmusikanterna [i Sverige] spelade sannolikt huvudsakligen en allmän

och europeiskt spridd repertoar. Stadsmusikanterna var i första hand
reproducerande musiker, som mycket sällan ägnade sig åt eget kompo-
nerande. Under särskilt stormaktstiden kan få musikalier direkt knytas till
stadsmusikanter – vare sig som tonsättare eller brukare’, Greger Andersson,
’Stad och landsbygd’, Musiken i Sverige vol. 1, Stockholm 1994, p. 371.

302 Jan Olof Rudén
Fig. 4. First movement of Suite no.1 by Benedict Anton Aufschnaiter, Nurem-

berg 1695.

Literature
Andersson, Greger, ’Stad och landsbygd’, Musiken i Sverige, bd 1, Stockholm:

Fischer 1994.
Andersson, Greger, ’Musiken vid Lunds universitet före Kapellets
grundande’, Spelglädje i Lundagård: 250 år med Akademiska Kapellet, Lund
University Press 1996.
Callmer, Christian, ’Svenska studenter i Wittenberg‘, Personhistorisk tidskrift,
72 (1976).
Ekström, Gunnar, Västerås stifts herdaminne, bd. II: 1600-talet, Västerås 1971.
Engel, Hans, Musik und Musikleben in Greifswalds Vergangenheit, Greifswald
1929.
Grape, Anders, Ihreska handskriftssamlingen i Uppsala Universitetsbibliotek, vol.
2, Uppsala 1949.
Gustafsson, Bruce, A thematic locator for the works of Jean-Baptiste Lully, New
York: Performer’s Editions 1989.
Moberg, Carl-Allan, ‘Mikael Zethrin och svensk paroditeknik’, Svensk tidskrift
för musikforskning, 18 (1936), p. 5–23.
RISM online, Ser. A 2, Music manuscripts after 1600. 1997.
Rudén, Jan Olof, Music in tablature. A thematic index with source description of
music in tablature notation in Sweden, Stockholm: Svenskt musikhistoriskt
arkiv 1981.
Rudén, Jan Olof, ’Myntmästarens informator och hans noter’, Dagsverket vol.
17:3 (1997), p. 13–17.
Schneider, Herbert, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis sämtlicher Werke von
Jean-Baptiste Lully (LWV), Tutzing 1981.
Westerlund, J.A. – Setterdahl, J.A., Linköpings stifts herdaminne, vol. 1, Lin-
köping 1915–1916.
Virdestam, Gotthard, Växjö stifts herdaminne, vol. 8: Regementsregister m.m.,
Växjö 1934.
http://linnaeus.c18.net/Doc/presentation.php

KERALA J. SNYDER
Beyond Sources and Works.

A fresh look at Buxtehude’s Legacy
With the publication of the Düben Collection Database Cata-

logue,1 the musical world has gained a valuable new tool to
study the music of a broad array of seventeenth-century com-
posers, most notably that of Dieterich Buxtehude, the most
heavily represented composer in the collection. This online data-
base properly resides, with the collection itself, at Uppsala Uni-
versity, where Carolus Linnaeus worked during the eighteenth
century. As Linnaeus did with his plants, we have attempted to
impose a classification system upon an unruly mass of manu-
scripts, and since DCDC is a relational database, which sorts in
many different ways, we can ask questions of the information in
it that were never before possible. How many of the Buxtehude
manuscripts, for example, contain a continuo part specified for
organ? (The answer is twenty-five.) But as we exploit our new-
found powers of observation made possible by the fact that this
catalogue exists in a multidimensional database rather than on a
two-dimensional printed page, we must not lose sight of the fact
that any attempt to classify things, to put them into boxes, as it
were, inevitably involves some distortion, caused by numerous
decisions on the part of the encoders to place material into this or
that box even if it does not fit there comfortably.
These problems of classification go all the way back to Gus-
tav Düben himself, as I discovered when I attempted to figure
out why Buxtehude’s name was written upside-down at the
1 Erik Kjellberg and Kerala J. Snyder (ed.), The Düben Collection Database
Catalogue (http://www.musik.uu.se/duben/Duben.php), hereafter abbre-
viated DCDC.

306 Kerala J. Snyder
end of the continuo part for the Missa alla brevis (BuxWV 114).2
Martin Geck had used this fact in an argument against its au-
thenticity as a work of Buxtehude,3 and I was hoping to disprove
his hypothesis. Its unique source, the set of parts, ‘vokalmusik i
handskrift’ (=Vmhs) 6:16, comes to the modern reader neatly
packaged in a folio-sized nineteenth-century wrapper, but it is
plain to see that although all the parts are written in folio format,
they were once all folded in half, and then the continuo part at
the bottom of the pile became the wrapper for the entire set, and
the title and composer ascription as written make complete
sense. This manuscript bears Düben’s ink catalogue number 504,
and when I looked at the manuscripts with numbers surround-
ing 504 I found that they were all either in quarto format or, like
the Missa, folios folded to quarto size. So Düben had a classifica-
tion category, quarto format, determined most likely by the size
of his shelf, into which he squeezed a few manuscripts that did
not fit. How, then, does the modern encoder fill the format box
for this record in the database; is it folio or quarto? I opted for
folio, because that is how it was originally written and is now
preserved, but the fact that it spent an intermediate part of its life
as a quarto is an important part of its history that does not fit into
our database structure and can only be accomodated in a ‘com-
ment’ field. Searches such as this one, incidentally, provided the
impetus for all those leading zeros in the ‘Uppsala University
catalogue number’ field, which turn the catalogue number 6:16
into 006:016. By making it possible to sort by shelf order in this
field, the leading zeros enable us to do virtually what is not
usually possible to do in reality: to enter the stacks of the Manu-
script Division of the University Library and browse the shelves
where the Düben Collection is housed.
2 Facsimile in DCDC: (Step 1) Basic Search, Composer: Buxtehude, Title:

Missa alla brevis, click on Find. (2) Click on Select. (3) Click on Select. (4)
Click on 06 [bc] Select. (5) Click on vmhs006.016 p06 01v.jpg.
3 Martin Geck, ‘Quellenkritische Bemerkungen zu Dietrich Buxtehudes Missa
Brevis,’ Die Musikforschung, 13 (1960), p. 47–49. See also Kerala J. Snyder,
Dieterich Buxtehude: Organist in Lübeck, rev. ed., Rochester 2007, p. 224.

Beyond Sources and Works 307
The portion of our database that I wish to address here is the

table called Works, which one enters in the advanced search
and which presumably contains one record for each separate
work. But what constitutes a separate work? I first encountered
the problem posed by this question while working with ‘Bux-
works,’ the predecessor of DCDC’s Works, a table in my first
relational database, which I set up in 1985 to try to gain some
control over the mass of material that I had accumulated for the
first edition of my book Dieterich Buxtehude: Organist in
Lübeck.4 That database originally contained only two tables,
‘Buxsources’ and ‘Buxworks.’ Entering the data into my sources
table was relatively easy; despite subtleties such as I have just
mentioned, a source is after all a physical entity, and each of
them got its own record in ‘Buxsources.’ A work, however, is an
abstraction, and thus not always so neatly determined. A cata-
logue of Buxtehude’s works already existed, Georg Karstädt’s
Buxtehude-Werke-Verzeichnis,5 neatly divided into genus and
species, BuxWV numbers ordered by genre and sorted in turn
by title and by key. The BuxWV numbers should have yielded
one record for each work in my database, but they did not. The
problems mainly concern variant versions, as can be seen in
four case studies drawn from the Düben Collection.
4 Kerala J. Snyder, Dieterich Buxtehude: Organist in Lübeck, New York 1987.

5 Georg Karstädt, Thematisch-systematisches Verzeichnis der musikalischen
Werke von Dietrich Buxtehude: Buxtehude-Werke-Verzeichnis (BuxWV), Wies-
baden: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1974; 2. ed. 1985.

1. Sonatas in B-flat
A sonata in B-flat by Buxtehude for violin, viola da gamba, and

organ survives in a set of manuscript parts, Imhs 13:25
(=‘instrumentalmusik i handskrift’13:25),6 copied in the hand
identified by Bruno Grusnick as DBHc,7 probably dating from
the 1680s. This sonata contains five named movements: Sonata
(in three distinct sections), Allamanda, Courant, Sarraband, and
Gigue. Buxtehude also included a B-flat sonata as number 4 in
his first published collection, opus 1, most likely from 1694. It
closely resembles the opening movement of the manuscript
sonata, but the four dances that follow in the manuscript have
been omitted from the print. In addition, Buxtehude replaced
the middle section of the manuscript sonata with a slightly
longer movement in the printed version, and he made small
revisions to the outer movements as well. Karstädt catalogued
these two versions as BuxWV 273 for the manuscript sonata
and BuxWV 255 for the printed version, i.e. two separate works.
Given especially the removal of the suite from the printed ver-
sion, no one would dispute this decision, and each has a sepa-
rate record in my ‘Buxworks’ table.
6 DCDC: (1) Basic Search, Uppsala Univ. cat. no: imhs 013:025, click Find. (2)
Click Select. (3) Click Select. (4) Click on individual parts for information
and facsimiles.
7 Bruno Grusnick, ‘Die Dübensammlung: Ein Versuch ihrer chronolo-
gischen Ordnung,’ Teil II–III, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 48 (1966),
p. 183.

2. Jesu meines Lebens Leben
The tablature Vmhs 82:37,8 written on paper from the 1680s,

appears to contain three separate works: Buxtehude’s setting of
Ernst Christoph Homburg’s poem Jesu meines Lebens Leben (title
number 1), a composition by David Pohle, and a ‘corrected’
version of Jesu meines Lebens Leben (title number 2). The set of
parts for Jesu meines Lebens Leben (Vmhs 6:13)9 contains three
distinct layers: a discarded continuo part remaining from a part
set for the first composition in the tablature (‘Continuo [ex 2]’),
a complete set of parts for the ‘corrected’ version, and a flute
part and extra continuo part (‘[bc ex 3]’) added later to the cor-
rected version. The principal difference between the two ver-
sions consists of an added 17-measure ‘Amen’ section over the
same ostinato; the early version has thirty-three repetitions, the
corrected version forty-one. Karstädt catalogued both versions
as BuxWV 62, and again one would not dispute his decision,
although he might have called the earlier version BuxWV 62a.
But the two versions cannot be entered into the database as a
single record, because one of the fields in the Works table asks
for the number of measures: 76 for the early version, 94 for the
corrected version. The database solution was to enter these two
versions as two separate records in the Works table, as can be
seen through an Advanced Search.10 This solution does not ac-
curately reflect the overwhelming similarity between the two
versions, however. In volume 9 of the Collected Works, the cor-
rected version appears in the main body of the volume and the
early version in an Appendix.11
8 DCDC: Basic Search, Uppsala Univ. cat. no: vmhs 082:037, click Find.
9 DCDC: (1) Basic Search, Uppsala Univ. Cat no. vmhs 006:013, click Find.
(2) Click Select. (3) Click vmhs 006:013 parts Select.
10 DCDC: (1) Advanced Search, Works selection, Composer: Buxtehude;
Title: Jesu meines Lebens Leben; click Find. (2) Click Work.
11 Dieterich Buxtehude, The Collected Works, vol. 9, ed. Kerala J. Snyder,
New York 1987, p. 249–260. See the Critical Report on BuxWV 62, p. 283–
287 for further details on the two versions.

Membra Jesu Nostri
Buxtehude’s seven-cantata cycle Membra Jesu Nostri presents

two distinct problems in work classification. First, does one
consider the entire cycle as a single work, or each cantata as a
separate work? Buxtehude’s autograph tablature (Vmhs 50:12)
certainly gives the visual impression that the composer consi-
dered it a single work, to be performed at one time, and that is
how Karstädt catalogued it: BuxWV 75 includes all seven canta-
tas. But by copying the parts and performing them separately at
different times, Gustav Düben most certainly considered them
separate works.12 Given these separate part sets, we had no
choice but to catalogue the seven cantatas separately and give
them separate BuxWV numbers: BuxWV 75.1, BuxWV 75.2, etc.
Düben’s revisions, both to Buxtehude’s manuscript and to the
parts derived from it, prompted further consideration in two of
them.
3. Membra Cantata 4: Ad latus (Surge amica mea)
Gustav Düben added a viola part to Ad latus, which Buxtehude

had scored for only two violins and violone (see Figure 1). Al-
though this change appears to be a written revision rather than
an improvisation, it bears some resemblance to an anecdote that
C.P.E. Bach related concerning his father in a letter to Johann
Nikolaus Forkel:
12 Cantata 1, Ad pedes (Vmhs 6:2); Cantata 2, Ad genua (Vmhs 6:3); Cantata 3,

Ad manus (Vmhs 51:23); Cantata 4, Ad latus (Vmhs 6:1); Cantata 5, Ad pec-
tus (Vmhs 6:18); Cantata 6, Ad cor (Vmhs 46:25); Cantata 7, Ad faciem
(Vmhs 51:10).

Thanks to his greatness in harmony, he accompanied trios on more than one occa-
sion on the spur of the moment and,being in a good humor and knowing that the
composer would not take it amiss, and on the basis of a sparsely figured continuo
part just set before him, converted them into complete quartets, astounding the
composer of the trios.13
Düben’s additions to Cantata 4 do not present a problem for the

database, because the scoring field is kept in the Sources table,
rather than in Works. The Düben Collection contains numerous
instances in which a given work has more than one source with
variant scorings.
4. Membra Cantata 1: Ad pedes (Ecce super montes)
The cantatas of Buxtehude’s Membra Jesu Nostri normally con-

sist of an opening sonata, a concerto for voices and instruments,
and a three-verse aria, closing with the repetition of the opening
concerto. In Ad Pedes, however, Buxtehude ended the opening
concerto on a half cadence and added a tutti setting of the first
verse of the aria to follow after the repetition of the concerto,
thus concluding the entire cantata in the opening key of C mi-
nor. In his arrangement, Düben added two measures to the fi-
nal cadence of the concerto to end it in C minor, which he wrote
into Buxtehude’s tablature (see Figure 2) and included in his set
13 ‘Vermöge seiner Größe in der Harmonie, hat er mehr als einmahl Trios
accompagnirt, und, weil er aufgeräumt war, u. wuste, daß der Componist
dieser Trios es nicht übel nehmen würde, aus dem Stegereif u. aus einer
elend beziferten ihm vorgelegten Baßstimme ein vollkommenes Quatuor
daraus gemacht, worüber der Componist dieser Trios erstaunte.’ Hamburg,
December 1774; transcription in Bach-Dokumente III: Dokumente zum Nach-
wirken Johann Sebastian Bachs 1750–1800, ed. Hans-Joachim Schulze, Kassel
etc. 1972, p. 285; translation from The New Bach Reader: A Life of Johann Sebas-
tian Bach in Letters and Documents, ed. Hans T. David and Arthur Mendel,
revised and enlarged by Christoph Wolff, [New York 1998], p. 397.

of parts (Vmhs 6:2).14 Düben then suppressed in his parts Bux-

tehude’s added tutti setting of the first aria verse, presumably
because it was no longer needed in order to return to the open-
ing key. Düben’s version of the closing concerto can be heard
on Ton Koopman’s 1988 recording of Membra.15
In the forthcoming edition of Membra in the Collected
Works, Düben’s arrangement of these two cantatas will appear
in an Appendix. Nevertheless, no one would want to grant
Düben’s arrangments of these cantatas the status of separate
works, and they have no separate records in DCDC. The ver-
sion of Ad Pedes transmitted in the parts, however, has a dif-
ferent number of measures from that of the tablature, and this is
not reflected in our database. This situation is quite different
from that of Jesu meines Lebens Leben, in which the corrected
version presumably came from Buxtehude himself.
***
Lydia Goehr would probably respond to what I have written

thus far with the rejoinder that Buxtehude would not have con-
sidered any of these pieces ‘works’ in the sense that we now use
the word. In her book The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works
she makes the central claim that ‘given certain changes in the
late eighteenth century, persons who thought, spoke about, or
produced music were able for the first time to comprehend and
treat the activity of producing music as one primarily involving
the composition and performance of works. The work-concept
at this point found its regulative role.’16 The composer who
made this all happen was, of course, Beethoven.
14 DCDC, (1) Basic Search, Uppsala Univ. Cat. No. vmhs 006:002, click Find.
(2) Click Select. (3) Click vmhs 006:002 parts Select. It seems clear from the
parts that Düben intended his added two measures to replace Buxtehude’s
half cadence only in the repetition of the concerto.
15 Erato ECD 75378.
16 Lydia Goehr, The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works: An Essay in the
Philosophy of Music, Oxford 1992, p. 113.

Much has been written about the work-concept before and

after this provocative book, and it is not my purpose here to
prove or disprove Goehr’s claim. But I find that a number of the
points she raises help us to see Buxtehude’s contributions to our
musical heritage in a new light, so let us proceed a bit further.
First, let me complete the paragraph from which I just quoted.
This claim is not committed to the supposition that the
work-concept has, since this time, retained its original founda-
tion in the sense that it has come to take on no further meaning.
Nor does it imply that composers producing music in the cen-
turies prior to the nineteenth were not producing works. Thus,
despite the story of its emergence into a regulative concept in
the late eighteenth century, the use of the work-concept is not
confined to products only of this and later periods.17 ‘Before
1800,’ she tells us a bit further on:
music was predominantly understood as regulated by, and thus defined according
to, what we would now think of as extra-musical ideals. ... Such ideals affected
everything musical – the theory, the conditions of production, the forms of criti-
cism and appreciation. Usually they were shaped by the functions music served in
powerful institutions like the church and the court.18
Composers needed to be emancipated from their subservience

to these institutions in order to produce works, and music
needed to be emancipated from its subservience to poetic and
religious texts; the rise of absolute or purely instrumental music
is a central element in her argument.
In a chapter entitled ‘Musical Production without the Work-
Concept,’ Goehr relates that before the late eighteenth century,
serious music was truly a performance art. It was mostly produced in the public
arena to perform extra-musical functions. Performances were geared towards the
temper and needs of the persons and institutions who determined the functions.
Musicians, who were normally in the latter’s employ, had little control and power
of decision regarding matters of instrumentation, form, length, and text. They ob-
eyed the wishes of their employers ... Perhaps it did not matter that musicians had
17 Goehr, op.cit, p. 113.

18 Ibid., p. 122.

so little control over their public affairs, for they were not always recognized as
the authors of their music anyway, and if they were, such recognition was not ac-
corded much importance ... The same reasoning gave ownership of music to
church, court, or increasingly, the publishing house, but not to composers. ... The
sense in which music was owned, however, was variously and often vaguely un-
derstood. ... What ownership did not yet entail was the idea that composers could
have completely free and privileged access to the music they composed.19
One of her observations rings quite true in light of Düben’s ar-

rangements: ‘Music had to be adaptable to resident instrumen-
tal ensembles, to the occasion, to temporal restraints, and so on.
... Composers themselves did not hesitate to make these sorts of
alterations, either to their own music or to that of others.’20 And
another, ‘Rarely did musicians think of their music as surviving
past their lifetime,’21 brings to mind the comment in 1753 of the
Lübeck cantor Caspar Ruetz, who tells us that he had used the
sets of parts that he had inherited from his father-in-law as kin-
dling for the fire or scrap paper, and then states: ‘I predict no
better fate for my own music, and I am satisfied with that, be-
cause I am no better than my fathers.’22 Buxtehude, on the other
hand, seems to have had something better in mind when he
supervised the copying of twenty-one of his vocal works into a
volume of the same size and paper quality as the archival vo-
lumes in which he kept the accounts of St. Mary’s in Lübeck.23
I would like to mention just one of the published reactions to
The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works. In 1998 Michael
Talbot organized a symposium at Liverpool, ‘The Musical
Work: Reality or Invention,’ and in its published proceedings
19 Ibid., p. 178–180.
20 Ibid., p. 181.
21 Ibid., p. 186.
22 ‘Ich prophezeye meinen Musicalien nach mir kein besseres Schicksal, und
bin auch damit zufrieden; weil ich nicht besser bin denn meine Väter.’
Caspar Ruetz, Widerlegte Vorurtheile von der Wirkung der Kirchenmusic und
von den darzu erfoderten Unkosten, Rostock – Wismar: Johann Andreas Ber-
ger – Jacob Boedher 1753, p. 112. Translation from Snyder, Dieterich Buxte-
hude, rev. ed., p. 317.
23 Lübeck, Bibliothek der Hansestadt, Mus. A 373.

he contributed his own modification of Goehr’s hypothesis: ‘My

own ’central claim’ is this: between 1780 and 1820, approx-
imately, a genre-centered and performer-centered practice be-
came a composer-centered one.’24 He compares composers be-
fore that time to choreographers of today in terms of the
public’s awareness of them, and notes that ‘A person attending
a church service with music, entertained by Tafelmusik while
dining or even (and this, to the modern mind, is incredible)
going to the opera might have no opportunity, save by casual
word of mouth, to learn the composer’s identity.’25 This was
certainly true for the worshipers attending St. Mary’s in Lübeck
during the Christmas season of 1682; the text book that survives
from that year26 contains not a single composer attribution for
the music that was performed. And the librettos from the Ham-
burg opera that I have seen from that time do not contain the
composer’s name either.27
For Buxtehude’s Abendmusiken, however, the situation was
completely different. Despite some good evidence that Johann
Wilhelm Petersen could have been the author of the text for
Buxtehude’s Abendmusik Die Hochzeit des Lamms,28 Petersen’s
name is nowhere to be found on its printed libretto (see Figure
3), only that of Dieterich Buxtehude, the composer. This was,
after all, his show. Although his position as organist of St.
Mary’s entitled him to use the church to put on his perfor-
24 Michael Talbot, ‘The Work-Concept and Composer-Centeredness’, The

Musical Work: Reality or Invention? ed. Michael Talbot, Liverpool Music
Symposium I, Liverpool 2000, p. 172.
25 Talbot, op. cit., p. 177.
26 Natalitia sacra, Lübeck: Schmahlhertz 1682; reprinted in Martin Geck, Die
Vokalmusik Dietrich Buxtehudes und der frühe Pietismus, Kassel etc. 1965, p.
230–237.
27 For numerous facsimiles of Hamburg librettos see Hans Joachim Marx –
Dorothea Schröder, Die Hamburger Gänsemarkt-Oper: Katalog der Textbücher
(1678–1748), Laaber 1995, p. 511–540.
28 Jürgen Heidrich, ‘Andachts- und Erbauungsliteratur als Quelle zur nord-
deutschen Musikgeschichte um 1700: Dieterich Buxtehude, Johann Wilhelm
Petersen und die Hochzeit des Lamms,’ Bach, Lübeck und die norddeutsche Mu-
siktradition, ed. Wolfgang Sandberger, Kassel etc. 2003, p. 86–100.

mance, his presentation of the Abendmusiken had nothing

whatever to do with his duties as organist, and he was not sub-
servient to the church authorities in ‘matters of instrumenta-
tion, form, length, and text.’ He did always choose religious
themes, and it is doubtful that he could have presented a purely
secular work in the church, but if Wacht! Euch zum Streit is an
Abendmusik by Buxtehude, as I believe it is, then even the de-
piction of drunks and whores was tolerated.29 In presenting the
Lübeck Abendmusiken he was acting as an emancipated com-
poser, one of the first musical entrepreneurs, and I do not be-
lieve that he was any more beholden to his financial supporters
in the Lübeck business community in his choice of topic, in-
strumentation, or performers than modern directors of arts or-
ganizations are to their corporate backers. This is the first ele-
ment of Buxtehude’s musical legacy. It is a point that I have
made often, but it bears repeating in this context.
With respect to the rest of Buxtehude’s vocal music, ever
since Martin Geck drew the distinction between Organisten-
und Kantorenmusik,30 it has been quite clear that as the organist
of the church Buxtehude composed and performed vocal music
freely, as a matter of choice, and not as a part of his prescribed
duties. Furthermore, Buxtehude’s preservation of at least a part
of this oeuvre in the Lübeck tablature A 373 would suggest that
he regarded these pieces as genuine works, to be preserved for
the future and performed again. It is also evident that at St.
Mary’s in Lübeck the ownership of vocal works in manuscript
was vested in the composers and not the church. The church
library consisted mainly of printed partbooks, the remainders
of which are now in Vienna, and it was the Bürgermeister of the
city who gave these away in 1814.31 But even the music that the
cantors composed for the liturgy must have belonged to them
personally, or else Ruetz would not have felt free to burn it as
kindling. And had Buxtehude not owned the vocal music he
29 See Snyder, Dieterich Buxtehude, rev. ed. Rochester 2007, p. 208–211.

30 Geck, Die Vokalmusik Dietrich Buxtehudes, p. 60–66.
31 Snyder, Dieterich Buxtehude, rev. ed., p. 95.

composed, he would not have been able to make it available to

his friend Gustav Düben, and we would not have it today.
It is principally Buxtehude’s instrumental music, however,
which forms such an important part of his musical legacy, that I
see displayed in the imaginary museum of musical works in a
new light. I am struck by the emphasis that Goehr places on
freedom, the freedom of composers from institutions such as
the church, the freedom of music from the domination of the
text, in order for the work-concept to emerge in absolute in-
strumental music. Included in her evidence is a quotation from
Ludwig Tieck published in 1799: ‘In instrumental music art is
independent and free; here art phantasizes playfully and pur-
poselessly, and nevertheless art attains the ultimate.’32 Tieck’s
statement provides a distant echo of Athanasius Kircher’s fam-
ous definition of the stylus phantasticus from 1650:
The fantastic style is suitable for instruments. It is the most free and unrestrained
method of composing; it is bound to nothing, neither to words nor to a melodic sub-
ject; it was instituted to display genius and to teach the hidden design of harmony
and the ingenious composition of harmonic phrases and fugues; it is divided into
those [pieces] that are commonly called fantasias, ricercatas, toccatas, sonatas.33
32 ‘In der Instrumentalmusik aber ist die Kunst unabhängig und frey, sie
schreibt sich nur selbst ihre Gesetze vor, sie phantasiert spielend und ohne
Zweck, und doch erfüllt und erreicht sie den höchsten.’ Ludwig Tieck,
‘Symphonien,’ in Wilhelm Heinrich Wackenroder, Phantasien über die Kunst:
für Freunde der Kunst, ed. Ludwig Tieck, Hamburg: F. Perthes, 1799, p. 261.
Tieck attributes his contributions to this posthumous publication to conver-
sations that he had with Wackenroder before his death. Goehr drew her qu-
otation and translation (p. 154) from Bellamy Hosler, Changing Aesthetic
Views of Instrumental Music in 18th-Century Germany, Ann Arbor 1981, p. 190.
33 ‘Phantasticus stylus aptus instrumentis, est liberrima, & solutissima com-
ponendi methodus, nullis, nec verbis, nec subiecto harmonico adstrictus
ad ostentandum ingenium, & abditam harmoniae rationem, ingeniosum-
que harmonicarum clausularum, fugarumque contextum, dividiturque in
eas, quas Phantasias, Ricercatas, Toccatas, Sonatas vulgò vocant.’ Athanasius
Kircher, Musurgia universalis sive Ars magna consoni et dissoni in X. libros di-
gesta, Rome 1650; facsimile reprint, ed. Ulf Scharlau, Hildesheim 1970, p.
585; translation from Snyder, Dieterich Buxtehude, rev. ed., p. 254.

Goehr’s emphasis on freedom from institutional control throws

new light on the stylus phantasticus. Its freedom from words
and from a melodic subject can be understood as its freedom
from a cantus firmus of Gregorian chant, and thus its freedom
from subservience to the institution of the church. Many of us
have tried to find a place for Buxtehude’s great organ praeludia
within the context of the church services at St. Mary’s, but per-
haps their greatness, and their status as genuine works, lies pre-
cisely in the fact that they had sprung the bounds of the liturgy.
Here let me introduce one last quotation from Goehr: musi-
cians from Haydn’s time ‘still composed music for actually ex-
isting instruments and specific performers. ... composers did not
usually have the advantage of conceiving of their music at a
distance from the particularities of its immediate performance.’34
With the return of the post-1685 account books from St. Mary’s
Church to the Lübeck archives, Ibo Ortgies has been able to
demonstrate in his recent dissertation that it is unlikely that the
organs there were tuned to Werckmeister III in 1683, as I had
hypothesized more than twenty years ago.35 If Ortgies is correct
in his assumption that the organs were thus still tuned in quar-
ter-comma meantone, then some of the grandest compositions
that Buxtehude committed to paper in the comfort of his study
in the Werkhaus, such as the preludia in E minor (BuxWV 142)
and F-sharp minor (BuxWV 146), may have been unplayable on
the St. Mary’s organs, at least in the versions that have been
handed down to us. Hans Davidsson’s monumental project to
record all of Buxtehude’s organ works on the North German
34 Goehr, op. cit., p.196.

35 Ibo Ortgies, Die Praxis der Orgelstimmung in Norddeutschland im 17. und 18.
Jahrhundert und ihr Verhältnis zur zeitgenössischen Musikpraxis, Göteborg
2004, p. 184–208, available online at http://ibo.ortgies.googlepages.com/
phd-dissertationiboortgies. Snyder, Dieterich Buxtehude, 1987 ed., p. 84–85,
354–356; see also my revised discussion in Dieterich Buxtehude, rev. ed.
(2007), p. 228–232.

Baroque Organ in Göteborg, Sweden,36 has contributed signifi-

cantly to the discussion but has not resolved it. While this organ
is tuned in pure quarter-comma mean tone, its keyboards are
equipped with the subsemitones E-flat and D-sharp, G-sharp
and A-flat, and B-flat and A-sharp, which were never present on
the organs of Lübeck’s St. Mary’s Church. So if they were still
tuned in pure mean tone during Buxtehude’s tenure – which is
by no means certain – then Buxtehude would indeed have con-
ceived his organ praeludia ‘at a distance from the particularities
of immediate performance.’ But he would also have had to
adapt them, perhaps by transposition, to the conditions at hand
in his own church, thus creating the very variants by adaptation
that undermine the work-concept. And yet the ideal of freedom
for the modern composer is realized more completely in these
praeludia than in any of Buxtehude’s other compositions.
One step that Buxtehude chose not to take, and that might
have solidified the status of his organ praeludia as genuine
works, was publication. Johann Gottfried Walther noted this in
his Lexicon: ‘Of his many artful keyboard pieces (Clavier-
Stücken), to my knowledge none have been published other
than the chorale Mit Fried und Freud ich fahr dahin.’37 Johann
Mattheson concurred: ‘It is a shame that from this excellent art-
ist few or none of the well-composed keyboard works (Clavier-
Sachen) – in which he endowed most of his power – have been
published.’38 Buxtehude did take that final step with the publi-
36 Loft LRCD 1090–1095. For details on the organ and the recordings, see
http://www.gothic-catalog.com/Hans_Davidsson_Complete_organ_works_
of_Buxtehude_s/826.htm.
37 ‘Von seinen vielen und künstlichen Clavier-Stücken ist ausser dem, auf
seines Vaters Tod, nebst einem Klag- Liede gesetzten Choral: Mit Fried und
Freud ich fahr dahin, etc. meines Wissens sonsten nichts im Druck publicirt
worden.’ Johann Gottfried Walther, Musicalisches Lexicon, Leipzig: Wolfgang
Deer 1732; facsimile reprint, ed. Richard Schaal, Kassel etc. 1953, p. 123.
38 ‘Es ist Schade, daß von dieses braven Künstlers gründlichen Clavier-Sachen,
darin seine meiste Krafft steckte, wenig oder nichts gedruckt ist.’ Johann
Mattheson, Der Vollkommene Capellmeister, Hamburg: Christian Herold, 1739;
facsimile reprint, ed. Margarete Reimann, Kassel etc. 1954, II/4, §73.

cation of his sonatas for viola, viola da gamba, and harpsi-

chord,39 the sister works to the organ praeludia, which next to
them best exemplify the stylus phantasticus. Whether or not Bux-
tehude regarded his organ preludia as genuine works, they
have definitely been accorded that status by succeeding genera-
tions: diligently copied during the eighteenth century, pub-
lished in the nineteenth century, widely performed and record-
ed in the twentieth century and on into the twenty-first. They
are among the earliest works to have entered the standard re-
pertory, and as such they definitely belong in that imaginary
museum of musical works.
Literature
Bach-Dokumente III: Dokumente zum Nachwirken Johann Sebastian Bachs 1750–

1800, ed. Hans-Joachim Schulze, Kassel 1972.
Buxtehude, Dieterich. The Collected Works, vol. 9, ed. Kerala J. Snyder, New
York: The Broude Trust 1987.
Davidsson, Hans, Complete organ works http://www.gothiccatalog.com/Hans_
Davidsson_Complete_organ_works_of_Buxtehude_s/826.htm.
Geck, Martin, ‘Quellenkritische Bemerkungen zu Dietrich Buxtehudes Missa
Brevis‘, Die Musikforschung, 13 (1960), p. 47–49.
Geck, Martin, Die Vokalmusik Dietrich Buxtehudes und der frühe Pietismus, Kas-
sel: Bärenreiter 1965.
Goehr, Lydia, The Imaginary Museum of Musical Works: An Essay in the
Philosophy of Music, Oxford: Clarendon Press 1992.
Grusnick, Bruno, ‘Die Dübensammlung: Ein Versuch ihrer chronologischen
Ordnung’ Teil II–III, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 48 (1966), p. 63–186.
Heidrich, Jürgen, ‘Andachts- und Erbauungsliteratur als Quelle zur nord-
deutschen Musikgeschichte um 1700: Dieterich Buxtehude, Johann Wil-
helm Petersen und die ‘Hochzeit des Lamms’‘, Bach, Lübeck und die nord-
deutsche Musiktradition, ed. Wolfgang Sandberger, Kassel: Bärenreiter 2003,
p. 86–100.
39 Opus 1 (BuxWV 252–258), Hamburg, [1694]; Opus 2 (BuxWV 259–265),

Hamburg, 1696.

Hosler, Bellamy, Changing Aesthetic Views of Instrumental Music in 18th-Century

Germany, Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press 1981.
Karstädt, Georg, Thematisch-systematisches Verzeichnis der musikalischen Werke
von Dietrich Buxtehude: Buxtehude-Werke-Verzeichnis (BuxWV), Wiesbaden:
Breitkopf & Härtel 1974; 2. ed., ebd. 1985.
Kircher, Athanasius, Musurgia universalis sive Ars magna consoni et dissoni in X.
libros digesta, Rome 1650; facsimile reprint, ed. Ulf Scharlau, Hildesheim:
Georg Olms 1970.
Kjellberg, Erik and Snyder, Kerala J. (eds.), The Düben Collection Database Cata-
logue http://www.musik.uu.se/duben/Duben.php).
Marx, Hans Joachim and Schröder, Dorothea, Die Hamburger Gänsemarkt-Oper:
Katalog der Textbücher (1678–1748), Laaber: Laaber Verlag 1995.
Mattheson, Johann, Der Vollkommene Capellmeister, Hamburg: Christian He-
rold 1739; facsimile reprint, ed. Margarete Reimann, Kassel: Bärenreiter
1954.
The New Bach Reader: A Life of Johann Sebastian Bach in Letters and Documents,
ed. Hans T. David and Arthur Mendel, revised and enlarged by Christoph
Wolff, New York: Norton 1998.
Ortgies, Ibo, Die Praxis der Orgelstimmung in Norddeutschland im 17. und 18.
Jahrhundert und ihr Verhältnis zur zeitgenössischen Musikpraxis, Göteborg:
Göteborg University 2004; available on line at http://ibo.ortgies.google
pages.com/phd-dissertationiboortgies.
Ruetz, Caspar, Widerlegte Vorurtheile von der Wirkung der Kirchenmusic und von
den darzu erfoderten Unkosten, Rostock–Wismar: Johann Andreas Berger –
Jacob Boedher 1753.
Snyder, Kerala J., Dieterich Buxtehude: Organist in Lübeck, New York: Schirmer
Books 1987.
Snyder, Kerala J., Dieterich Buxtehude: Organist in Lübeck, rev. ed. Rochester:
University of Rochester Press 2007.
Talbot, Michael, ‘The Work-Concept and Composer-Centeredness’, The Musi-
cal Work: Reality or Invention? ed. Michael Talbot, Liverpool Music Sympo-
sium I, Liverpool: Liverpool University Press 2000.
Wackenroder, Wilhelm Heinrich, Phantasien über die Kunst: für Freunde der
Kunst, ed. Ludwig Tieck, Hamburg: F. Perthes 1799.
Walther, Johann Gottfried, Musikalisches Lexikon, Leipzig: Wolfgang Deer;
facsimile reprint, ed. Richard Schaal, Kassel: Bärenreiter 1953.

Figure 1. Uppsala Universitetsbibliotek, vokalmusik i handskrift 50:12, fol. 8v,

top system, showing BuxWV 75, Cantata 4, Ad latus, opening Sonata, mm. 1–
5. Düben’s additions to Buxtehude’s autograph tablature may be seen be-
tween the second and third lines of mm. 1–3 and the third and fourth lines of
mm. 4–5.
Figure 2. Uppsala Universitetsbibliotek, vokalmusik i handskrift 50:12, fol. 2r,

third system, showing BuxWV 75, Cantata 1, Ad pedes, end of opening con-
certo, mm. 18–21. Düben’s addition of two measures to Buxtehude’s auto-
graph tablature, forming a cadence in C minor, may be seen following the
double bar.

Figure 3. Buxtehude, Die Hochzeit des Lamms, 1678. Libretto (Uppsala Uni-
versitetsbibliotek).

ERIK KJELLBERG
The Düben Database Project
It was in 1987 that I first met Professor Kerala J. Snyderat a Bux-

tehude symposium in Lübeck. Our shared interest in the Düben
Collection at the Uppsala University Library was the starting
point for the project that was completed some 20 years later.
The following year I visited my colleague at the Eastman
School of Music at the University of Rochester to give some lec-
tures. We resumed our discussion and made the first sketches for
a computer-based catalogue of the entire collection. We wanted
to make this historical resource much more accessible; since no
printed catalogue existed it was difficult, especially for a non-
specialist, to obtain more than superficial knowledge of its con-
tent. Admittedly, important cataloguing and research had been
done over the years, but it was our belief that this huge and rich
collection from 17th century Europe should be made more acces-
sible to scholars, students, musicians and laymen alike.
It seemed natural to take advantage of recent database tech-
niques in order to make the catalogue as consistent and multi-
faceted as possible. But how were we to realize our rather ambi-
tious plan? From the outset we decided that the project should
be anchored in the education of young musicologists at our
respective universities in Uppsala and Rochester through spe-
cialised seminars and lectures dealing with historical, biblio-
graphical and philological research techniques, and work on the
project should also be based on both sides of the Atlantic. One
of the main obstacles during the years to come was the diffi-
culty of securing a financial base for the project. It seemed that
this enterprise was not regarded as research or education in a
more traditional sense. Still, we felt that the work needed doing.

326 Erik Kjellberg
Enthusiasm and curiosity were essential ingredients for us and

our students in order to forward our joint enterprise.
The beginnings
We managed to obtain some small grants to enable musicology

students from America, Sweden and Germany to come together
beginning 1991 and 1993, and in 1995 three students from the
Eastman School of Music worked together with their Swedish
colleagues in the Uppsala University Library.
At a fairly early stage we found that there was no standard
database programme on the market that met our requirements.
We explored in turn the possibilities of using D-Base 3, Para-
dox, and Access. Nor were international ventures in systematic
music documentation (including the RISM project) of much
help at that time (the early 1990s). Consequently we had to de-
sign our own database structure in order to meet the high stan-
dards we were aiming for.
Musical and philological parameters needed to be defined
and made as clear-cut as possible with the important aim of mak-
ing interactive searching possible. We agreed upon a strategy
whereby the first step was to enter a large amount of data from
existing catalogues. Soon this work was extended by our own
detailed examination of the manuscripts in the Düben Collection,
numbering considerably more than thirty thousand. This led to
interesting discussions and in time to rewarding results.
The project was laid out in an overall plan in three stages:
Stage 1: Designing a database and entering existing catalogued
information. This was accomplished both in Rochester
and Uppsala.
Stage 2: Examining individual manuscripts.
Supplementing and correcting existing information to
meet the requirements of the database structure.

The Düben Database Project 327
Stage 3: Allowing for possible future amendments and the addi-

tion of new information, thus making the Düben Collec-
tion Database Catalogue an open-ended research resource.
During the first years the students who were involved in Stage
1 of the project included Lars Berglund, Lena Bergquist, Tom
Elston, Mary Frandsen, Susanne Fåhraeus, Kia Hedell, Birgit
Heinz, Britt-Marie Hogmalm, Peder Kodsas, Andrus Madsen
Bernt Malmros, Stan Pelkey, John Sheridan and Mats Åberg.
In due course we advanced to Stage 2. Entries of data could
now be controlled, revised and supplemented both in Sweden
and USA through a computer link – the main storage of infor-
mation taking place in Rochester.
Based on the information available we decided which pa-
rameters needed to be added and how they should be linked in
our relational database (Stage 2). The lack of continuous finan-
cial support made organisation of the whole project somewhat
hazardous. To be honest, at times it seemed doubtful that we
would be able to complete the project successfully.
The breakthrough
As a result of the work that we accomplished during the 1990s,

despite all the practical difficulties, the final break-through
came in 2003 when I managed to obtain a grant from Riks-
bankens Jubileumsfond (The Bank of Sweden Tercentenary
Foundation) for a two-year fully-financed project. At that time
this important Swedish fund decided to allocate resources to
the task of making important material in Swedish libraries and
archives more available, mainly by the use of database tech-
niques. It was almost as though we, on our own initiative, had
anticipated this more official shift of interest. In addition, the
project received additional financial support from Veten-
skapsrådet (Swedish Research Council).

328 Erik Kjellberg
We could now afford two PCs and a scanner that were in-
stalled at the manuscript department at Carolina Rediviva (Upp-
sala University Library). During the following years the daily
work was primarily done by Lars Berglund, Kia Hedell and
Juliane Peetz, who became experts at handling the demanding
material: scrutinising every scrap of manuscript paper in the
Düben Collection, putting data into all the parameters of the
database, checking earlier encoding work, identifying hand-
writing and watermarks and entering computerised facsimiles
into the database. During limited periods they were assisted by
David Jansson, Katharine Leiska, Alison Hurst and Anne Reese.
The web-based database, initially set up at Rochester, was
moved to the Göteborg Organ Art Center (GoArt) before it was
finally transferred to Uppsala University. The database struc-
ture has continuously been refined by our data consultant, Carl
Johan Bergsten (GoArt) in close collaboration with the partici-
pants in the project, notably Lars Berglund and Jan Johansson,
who also implemented the current system at Uppsala Univer-
sity. Advisors for this project were Peter Wollny (Bach-Archiv,
Leipzig) and Kerala Snyder (Rochester University). At the Uni-
versity Library our principal supporters were the librarians
Anders Edling and the late Inga Johansson. I myself was re-
sponsible for keeping the inner and outer domains of the pro-
ject under control.
It has been our ambition to base the project and the resulting
catalogue on available musicological research. The Düben Col-
lection Database Catalogue (DCDC) can be inspected, used, and
commented upon, either through a direct entry at www.musik.
uu.se (or a search on Google: ‘DCDC’ or ‘Düben Collection’).
Information, amendments and additional data from scholars’
own research will be gratefully acknowledged. Thus, the cata-
logue should be seen as a dynamic and open-ended resource
which will be regularly updated in order to represent the cur-
rent state of relevant research.

CARL JOHAN BERGSTEN
The Düben Database Structure
Introduction
The development of a relational database has been an impor-

tant part of the Düben Collection digitalisation project. Defining
the different objects in the collection and the parameters de-
scribing the properties of each object has been an essential part
of the development work. It was also necessary to find a data-
base structure that could handle all possible situations in the
source material and also all types of questions to the database,
requiring thorough knowledge of the Düben Collection.
What is a database?
In the simplest case, a database is a table consisting of rows and

columns containing information. In the example below Figure 1
shows a table, or a database, containing information on pipe
organs. There is one row for each organ and the information for
each separate organ is stored in the columns. One could also
say that the table consists of a list of objects of the same type, in
this case organs. Each object is described by its properties, one
column for each property.

330 Carl Johan Bergsten
Fig. 1: A database.
In addition there is a computer software, often called ‘search

engine’, which searches for information requested by the user.
For example, if we search for all organs built by a specific
builder, we will receive a list of the organs fulfilling this search
criterion.
A relational database
If the database contains several organs built by the same organ-

builder, the information on the builder will be repeated for each
organ. This is very impractical, because if the builder’s date of
birth needs to be changed, for instance, due to new information
from archival research, the birth date has to be changed for each
of these organs. In order to avoid this redundancy we can store
organ-builder information in a new table (Figure 2). Now the
information on the builder only needs to be entered into the
database once. By entering a unique builder identity parameter
in the builder table, we can link or relate this parameter in the
organ table to the builder table. The builder identity parameter

The Düben Database Structure 331
defines a relationship between the organ table and the builder

table. We have now created a relational database. Our database
consists of two tables describing two different objects, organs
and builders. There is a relationship between the tables.
The relationship can be of different kinds: one-to-one (1-1) or
more often one-to-many (1-n). The builder-to-organ relation is a
one-to-many relationship: a builder may have built several or-
gans, but each organ was built by only one builder. This is not
strictly true, however, since there are organs in existence that
were built by more than one builder. This illustration demon-
strates the importance of knowledge of the subject matter in
creating an efficient database structure.
Fig. 2: A relational database

If we search for all organs built a specific year by a specific

builder, the search engine, through the relationship, will com-
bine the information in the two tables in order to retrieve the
requested information.
The ultimate goal of a relational database is to eliminate any
type of redundancy or duplicate information.
The various requirements under consideration when design-
ing a relational database are (i) the suitability of the design for
the purpose of the database, (ii) the necessity for the design to
cover all possible information in the subject area, (iii) the impor-
tance of avoiding redundancy and (iv) the importance of predict-
ing the types of questions that will be asked by database users.
The Düben database structure
The development of a database for the Düben Collection has

lead to a network of tables related to each other where informa-
tion on each object type is stored in separate tables.
The database contains thirteen different tables. The tables
can be divided into two groups, based on their function in the
database: tables containing information on the various objects
such as sources, composers, parts, volumes and watermarks
and, in case of a many-to-many (n-n) relation, tables making
connections between objects, such as watermarks to parts. The
reason for this is that an n-n relation cannot be described di-
rectly between two tables but needs to be converted to two 1-n
relations through a separate connection table.
The objects (tables) and the relations in the Düben database are
as follows (see Figure 3):
Source: the Source table is the main table containing general

information on the composition represented by the docu-

The Düben Database Structure 333
ment in the collection, such as composer, title, Uppsala Uni-

versity Library catalogue no. etc. There are thirty-eight dif-
ferent properties or parameters describing a source.
Composer: there is a separate table for composers. The reason for
this is the same as for the organs and organ-builders in the
example above.
Relation: Source – Composer.
Work: the Work is a more abstract object. It makes it possible to
store information on attributions and conflicting attributions.
It is also possible to describe the degree of uncertainty con-
cerning attribution. There are often several Sources for a sin-
gle Work.
Attribution: the Attribution table connects the Source to the
Work.
Relation: Work – Composer.
Text: the texts have been placed in a separate table since not all
works have texts.
Part: contains information on the parts. There are twenty differ-
ent properties or parameters describing a part.
Part facsimile: contains a reference to the file containing a scan-
ned picture of one page of the part.
Volume: contains information on the organ tablature. There are
twelve different properties or parameters describing a vol-
ume.
Volume facsimile: contains a reference to the file containing a
scanned picture of one page or sometimes both the left and
the right page of a volume.
Watermark: contains information on the different types of wa-
termarks in the collection. There are seven different proper-
ties or parameters describing a watermark.
Relation: Part – Watermark through the connection table Wm-
Part.
Relation: Volume – Watermark through the connection table
Wm-Vol.
Relation: Source – Volume through the connection table Vol-
Source.

Fig. 3: The Düben database structure

ANDERS EDLING
The use of the Düben Collection as seen in the

Correspondence of the Uppsala University
Library
This article, which I would like to dedicate to the memory of

my dear colleague Inga Johansson and her fine handling of both
music collections and scholars, presents a survey of the life of
the Düben Collection from the beginning of the 20th century,
when it was newly discovered, to the present time, as it can be
traced in the correspondence of the library. In the first decade
of the last century, letters concerning the music collections were
part of the correspondence of the head librarian, who answered
them himself, giving detailed information about manuscripts
etc. Later this task was taken care of by the manuscript librar-
ian, and still later, as it is today, by a librarian responsible for
the music.
To obtain a general picture of the use of the Düben collec-
tion, the Düben correspondence from every tenth year during
the century – 1906, 1916 etc. – has been studied. Although this
material does not fully reflect the musicological dialogue or
debate concerning the collection, it can nevertheless provide
information about the research on it.
A statistical overview of these letters per decade shows a
curve that is not unexpected.

336 Anders Edling
50
40
30
20
10
0
1906 1916 1926 1936 1946 1956 1966 1976 1986 1996 2005
Number of «Düben letters» to the Uppsala UL per year
For the first decade, 1901-1910, all letters were grouped together
in alphabetical order, so it took no more effort to scan the whole
decade than to look for the year 1906.1 During these ten years,
six musicologists wrote letters about the Düben Collection: four
Germans and two Frenchmen. One of these two was Jules
Ecorcheville, who asked which works by Pierre Verdier were
preserved in Uppsala. He requested and received hand-written
copies of these manuscripts, produced by an amanuensis at the
library, Herman Brulin. His second question is an interesting
example of the early diffusion of information about the collec-
tion. It concerns the collection of French dances for four or five
string instruments which now has the shelf number
Instr.mus.hs. 409 (previously 109). He asks if certain composer
names, such as Belleville and Dumanoir, are present in the vol-
ume. His source of information is an article by Tobias Norlind
about the early instrumental suite, published in Sammelbände
1 Uppsala University Library Archive (UULA), DD 17–18.

The Use of the Düben Collectionu 337
der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft the same year, where the

author mentions this manuscript.2
The other French letter-writer, André Pirro, is more closely
associated with the Düben Collection. He was given the name
of one of the librarians (probably the head librarian, Leonard
Bygdén) by his fellow-countryman Henry Expert, who also ap-
pears in the library correspondence, though not in connection
with the Düben Collection. Pirro acquired his information from
the recently published catalogue by Robert Eitner (whose inac-
curacies he was already aware of). To start with he is interested
in the work attributed to Heinrich Bach. Pirro suggests another
possible composer but without mentioning any name. Then he
mentions Buxtehude, at first out of interest in the eventual mu-
sical ‘motifs pittoresques’ for words signifying rest, sleep and
peace;3 then he becomes more generally interested and is per-
mitted to have a number of manuscripts transferred to the Bib-
liothèque Mazarin in Paris, which seems to have had more rig-
orous rules for this type of loan than the Uppsala University
Library. In Uppsala such measures were unusual – Pirro prof-
fers thanks for this ‘derogation to the practices of your library’.4
He transcribes several works in tablature, not only works by
Buxtehude, and comments to the head librarian: ‘Plusieurs de
ces vieilles pièces en tablature sont de la plus grande beauté ...’5
These Frenchmen were young, just over thirty years of age. So
was Arnold Schering, when he reported to the library in De-
cember 1908 – in Swedish! – that he had found an important
work by Schütz considered to be lost, the Intermedia of his Weih-
nachtshistorie.6 Carl Stiehl, who also writes to the library, belongs
to quite another generation, being almost eighty years old. He is
preparing an edition of Buxtehude’s sonatas, to be published as
2 Tobias Norlind, ’Zur Geschichte der Suite’, Sammelbände der Internationlen

Musikgesellschaft, 7 (1906), p. 172–203.
3 UULA, DD 1S, letter 30.3.1905 (no. 200).
4 Ibid., letter 18.5. 1905 (nos. 203–204). UULA, DD.
5 Ibid., undated letter (nos. 203–204).
6 Ibid., letter 12.12.1908 (no. 267).

338 Anders Edling
Volume 11 of Denkmäler deutscher Tonkunst, and for this purpose

he proposes a loan either to the Lübeck Stadtbibliothek – ‘oder
noch lieber an mich selbst.’7
According to the ten-yearly check undertaken here, there is a
small but steady stream of Düben questions during the First
World War and between the wars. One must bear in mind that
the Düben Collection is only one part of the collections of old
music in Uppsala. Information about all of them was available
through Eitner, and large parts of the material have been con-
sulted during the entire century. Both the printed music from
pre-Düben time, mainly war booty from the Thirty Years’ War,
and later material – partly from the court chapel of Stockholm –
were of interest to German, French and Italian scholars. Inci-
dentally, it is interesting to note that the library was offered
Mozart and Beethoven autographs by German sellers between
the two world wars, offers that were not accepted, however.
What happened to Düben research during the Second World
War? A check of the year 1941 shows that the stream of requests
did not stop entirely, as one might have expected. The Düben
manuscripts were packed in boxes as a safety measure, but they
could be taken out for making copies, for instance for Friedrich
Blume, who managed to avoid conflict with the Nazi govern-
ment and thus could seemingly work undisturbed by the war –
he requested a large number if Buxtehude and Pfleger cantatas
that year. 8
After the war, for natural reasons, there was a deadlock in
German Düben Collection research. In the correspondence from
1946 one only finds Swedish and Danish letters. The Danish
correspondent is Knud Jeppesen, who very reluctantly accepts
that Uppsala University Library no longer allows loans of mu-
sic manuscripts to Copenhagen, whereas before the war he had
been able to obtain such loans. In its answer the library refers
vaguely to ‘different experiences’ which have caused the
7 Ibid., letter 3.3 1902 (no. 343).

8 UULA, DE 11, order from Friedrich Blume, 2.11.1941.

change of rules.9 However, the general German revival shows

up in the Düben correspondence, and the requests from Ger-
many resume their place in the mid-1950s with an increasing
number of letters.
What then can be said about Swedish research into the
Düben Collection? In 1927 Carl-Allan Moberg became docent of
musicology in Uppsala and he started seminars for his students
where transcription of a manuscript from the Düben Collection
was an essential part. This transcription assignment became
compulsory for students in the 1930s, and remained so well into
the 1960s. It became a basic training in edition technique and
the handling and evaluation of sources, and gave all the stu-
dents a living contact with old musical practice. It also inspired
students to continue with Düben-related research projects, one
of the results being Folke Lindberg’s catalogue from 1946 of
vocal music in the collection. (As we have seen, even before
Moberg’s time there was at least one Swedish musicologist
dealing with Düben material – Tobias Norlind.) However, there
was a problematic side to this connection between the Düben
Collection and musicology studies in Uppsala. Faced with the
new international (mainly German) interest in the Düben Col-
lection after the war, Moberg wanted to safeguard this material,
or at least part of it, for Swedish research. This is evident in the
library’s correspondence from 1956. There is a letter from Mo-
berg addressed to Wilhelm Virneisel, music librarian at the
Deutsche Staatsbibliothek in Berlin, a copy of which was sent to
the Manuscript Department in Uppsala and which was in-
cluded in the correspondence under the heading ‘Uppsala: Mu-
sicology’.10 It was probably intended, and perceived, as guid-
ance for the library. First Moberg writes that the musicologist
Harald Kümmerling will be given the help he needs in consult-
ing the Düben Collection, then adds:
9 UULA, DE 16, letter to Knup Jeppesen, 2.10.1946.

10 UULA, DE 27, letter from Carl-Allan Moberg to Wilhelm Virneisel,
19.1.1956.

340 Anders Edling
However, when it comes to the Düben Collection we have to show a cer-

tain caution concerning questions from abroad and aiming at the use of a
considerable part of the collection, often without giving a specific reason.
We must take into consideration that the members of the Music History
Seminar at our university at a certain stage of their education have to deal
with certain works in the Düben Collection, in accordance with the cur-
riculum. Naturally, some of the students would like to do further research
on this material. Therefore, our students have a justified interest in keep-
ing their particular research material under a long-term control, as far as
use by others is concerned.11
Today his argumentation seems like the defence of a sick cause.

That same year, 1956, Moberg was apparently asked by the li-
brary if it was suitable to send a copy from the Düben Collec-
tion to Bruno Grusnick. Only Moberg’s answer is preserved,
where he says that there is no problem whatsoever in sending
items from the collection to Grusnick, an ‘old friend’ whom
Moberg even wants to write an article on the Düben Collection
for the series Studia musicologica upsaliensia. This suggests that
Grusnick’s major Düben study, published in Svensk tidskrift för
musikforskning in the 1960s.12 was originally intended to be a
book – a book that would certainly have merited inclusion in
the series. From Moberg’s point of view his policy must have
11 ‘Immerhin sehen wir uns gerade im Falle der Düben-Sammlung gezwun-

gen, eine gewisse Vorsicht walten zu lassen angesichts vielfacher Anfra-
gen von auswärts mit dem Ziel, einen beträchtlichen Teil der Sammlung
auszunutzen, wobei es nicht selten an einer näheren Begründung fehlt.
Wir müssen Rücksicht darauf nehmen, dass, den hiesigen Studienplänen
entsprechend, die Mitglieder des Musikhistorischen Seminars unserer
Universität auf einer gewissen Stufe der Ausbildung sich mit bestimmten
Musikalien der Düben-Sammlung eingehend zu beschäftigen haben. Es
kommt naturgemäss häufig vor, dass der eine oder andere der Studieren-
den das betreffende Studienmaterial späterhin zum Gegenstand weiterer
Forschungsarbeit machen möchte. Unsere Studierenden haben in Folge
dessen ein berechtigtes Interesse daran, dass dieses, ihr spezielles Stu-
dienmaterial einer dauernden Kontrolle unterliegt, soweit dabei die Be-
nutzung von anderer Seite in Frage kommen könnte.’
12 Bruno Grusnick,‘Die Dübensammlung: Ein Versuch ihrer chronologischen
Ordnung’ Teil I-II, Svensk tidskrift för musikforskning, 46, (1964); Teil II-III,
ebd., 48, (1966).

been a balancing act between a fruitful collaboration with inter-

national researchers and the scholarly education he wished to
provide for young Swedish musicologists, using material that
was already available.
From the mid-1960s onwards the transcription of a Düben
manuscript was no longer compulsory. At that time, all ambi-
tions to reserve Düben-related subjects for Swedish scholars,
strange to our time and also incompatible with the collection
itself, were abandoned.
The number of letters in 1956 was ten, in 1966 it was nineteen,
half of which were requests for microfilms. Microfilms had been
in use for a long time, but mainly for preservation; now it had
become the new way to disseminate this kind of material. One of
the requests comes from an American library, which wants a
microfilm of the entire Düben Collection, but receives a laconic
answer from the music librarian in Uppsala stating that ‘the pho-
tographic department of the library is not dimensioned for such
a huge task.’13 This was also the time when Deutsches musik-
geschichtliches Archiv in Kassel was building up a microfilm col-
lection of a large part of the Düben Collection.
The German dominance is still very obvious in the letters
from 1966. Ten years later, however, America has entered the
stage: out of the twenty-six letters from that year, ten are from
Germany and Austria and eight from the USA. These countries
continue to dominate the correspondence.
In the 1970s we also see the first traces of the early music
movement. In 1976 one of the correspondents is Ton Koopman,
and he will continue to ask for Düben material up to the present
day. Other prominent figures in the early music movement, such
as Christopher Hogwood and Reinhard Goebel, have consulted
the Düben Collection as well as a large number of musicians,
singers and ensembles from many countries. Sometimes they
know exactly what they want, sometimes they are looking for
music with a certain theme or for a certain instrument.
13 UULA, Handskriftsavdelningen, Brev 1966, letter to Washington Univer-

sity Libraries, 21.10.1966.

342 Anders Edling
Of course there may have been ideas of performance behind

some of the letters from musicologists in earlier days – the re-
searching musician is a typical figure in our correspondence –
but letters written by musicians begin to appear in the 1970s.
The first recording which could be called a Düben anthology,
albeit a very modest one, was an EP from 1959, Music for Queen
Christina, where Eric Ericson conducted the Swedish Radio Choir
in works by Albrici and Düben. A later Swedish Düben record
anthology is Laudate 1–2 from around 1980 with the Uppsala
University Chamber Choir (Uppsala Akademiska Kammarkör),
this time influenced by historically informed performance; the
same recordings (on a CD) are still for sale in the shop at the li-
brary.14 Several recordings dominated by music from the Düben
collection were made in the series Musica Sueciae in the 1990s,
and nowadays works from the collection are included in a great
number of records on the international market.
This study started with an overview of the first ten years of
the 20th century, and it ends in a similar way. A list covering
the years 1995–2004, only including letters from established
researchers (thus not at all complete), shows the international
spread of interest. Of the sixty persons listed, twenty-eight
write from Germany-Austria, ten from the USA, seven from
Great Britain and three each from France, Italy and the Nether-
lands. Some of them mention a theme for their research, such as
music in Dresden, music in Leipzig, music in Riga, music
around Queen Christina or 17th century parody technique.
The two composers mentioned most often in this selection of
letters are Carissimi and Capricornus. Naturally, there is a great
variety of composers, the most obscure among them being Bar-
tolomäus Rothmann, an author of celebration odes and compo-
sitions in the Baltic area at that time.
***
14 Originally on two LPs from 1978 and 1981 (Proprius label). A selection of
these recordings were issued on a CD in 1994 (PRCD 9100).

As we can see, there has been a long history of correspondence

about the Düben Collection, characterised by curiosity, schol-
arly work on a high level, an increasing traffic of questions and
copies, and an increasing international participation, which
harmonises well with the international character of the collec-
tion itself.
The new Düben database creates wonderful possibilities for
musicologists and musicians. What would Herman Brulin, the
man who wrote the copies for Jules Ecorcheville in 1904, have
said about these facilities? And what would Carl-Allan Moberg
have said?
It will no longer be necessary to contact the Uppsala Univer-
sity Library (or the Deutsches Musikgeschichtliches Archiv) to
access the music. Even if this makes a great difference to the
work at the library, it does not change everything, since there
are still so many music sources that are not digitalised, and for
which the old routines are still relevant. The archive of the li-
brary will not be able to present a rich documentation of the
interest in the Düben Collection, like the one that has amassed
these past hundred and six years.
However, the library will continue to receive questions
about the Düben Collection. A control of the Düben Collection
letters of 2005 in order to see how many of them needed an an-
swer from a librarian – and not just from the database, had it
then existed – showed that out of forty-six letters, twenty-one
needed such an answer. These letters concerned varied topics:
printed music in the collection, permission to publish or to re-
produce material, identification of a composer, questions about
other sources for the same music, and a future exhibition.
One can wonder what role the Düben Collection itself will
play in the future. This relates to the general and important
question as to what will happen to the librarian and his/her
competence in the age of virtual presentation. The physical
Düben Collection may well become irrelevant for some forms of
research, but it will continue to be relevant for others. The fu-
ture will show us – but in all probability the library has not re-
ceived the last question about this amazing collection.

Index
1. Names and titles
Aaron, Pietro 226 Annerstedt, Claes 21, 25–26

Åberg, Mats 327 Arnold, Georg 61, 84–92,
Adrio, Adam 252 135–138, 141–143
Agazzari, Agostino 225–226 Adeste quotquot amatis
La musica eccelesiastica Mariam 89
225 Benedic Domine 89–90
Agostini, Paolo 232 Benedicta sit Sancta
Ahle, Johann Rudolf 109– Trinitas 91
110, 142, 239, 248, 255 Estote fortes 90–91
Dritten Zehen 110 Liber primus sacrarum
Nebengang 248, 255 cantionum 85
Neuen geistlichen Arien Liber secundus sacrarum
110 cantionum 84, 88–89, 91
Thüringischen Lustgarten Motettae tredecim
109, 248 selectissime de nomine Jesu
Albert, Heinrich 281 138
Albrici, Vincenzo 35, 61, 75, Nulla scientia 91
82–83, 114, 179, 182, 194, O dulcissime Jesu 89
196, 198–199, 211, 213, O Jesu bone 89
215, 342 Omnipotens & misericors
Che volete da me pensieri Deus 89, 91
199 Pater alme quam
Fate largo al mio pensiero Decorus 89
199 Salve suavissime 135–137
Alessandro Fiorentino 197 Artusi, Giovanni Maria 226
Alexander VII, Pope 214 Assig und Siegersdorf,
Andersson, Greger 301 Johann von 143, 175
Anerio, Giovanni Francesco Aubry, Daniel 256
35, 193, 219, 226 Aubry, David 256

346 Index
Aufschnaiter, Benedict Bernhard, Christoph 63, 85–

Anton 279, 297, 302 86, 113, 152, 154–156, 169,
August, Duke 176 239, 242, 248–249, 258
August (the younger), Duke Geistliche Harmonien 85,
187 242, 248
Aurivillius, Pehr Fabian 22, Surgit Christus 63
25 Tractatus compositionis
Bach, Carl Philip Emanuel augmentatis 210
239, 310 Birkner, Johann 248, 255
Bach, Heinrich 337 Blume, Friedrich 338
Bach, Johann Sebastian 115, Boer, Bertil van 52
117–118, 144, 239, 250, Bokemeyer, Heinrich 118–
257 119, 144, 249–250
Clavierübung 250, 257 Bolte, Henning 291
Bagge, Julius 24 Bontempi, Giovanni Andrea
Barberini, family 197–200 179
Barberini, Antonio 197, 199, Brahe 17, 25
203–206 Braun, Werner 251
Barberini, Don Taddeo 197 Briegel, Wolfgang Carl 43,
Barberini, Francesco 197, 84, 86–87, 110, 121, 248
203 Musicalischer Lebensbrunn
Bartolotti, Angelo Michele 43, 84, 87, 110, 248
200 Musikalischer Trostquelle
Becker, Diedrich 156, 249, 87, 110
258 Bronner, Georg 113
Musicalische Frühlings- Brook, Barry S. 8
Früchte 249 Brulin, Herman 336, 343
Beethoven, Ludvig van 312, Bull, William 35
338 Burchard, Wolfgang 44
Belleville 336 Burman, Eric 15–17
Benevoli, Orazio 207, 210 Busbetzki, Ludwig 165
Bengtsson, Ingemar 281 Buxtehude, Dieterich 24–26,
Berardi, Angelo 220 29, 120, 123–124, 127, 149,
Berglund, Lars 124, 327–328 152, 155, 160–161, 163,
Bergquist, Lena 327 169, 175, 195, 210, 214,
Bergsagel, John 201 290, 305–320, 325, 337–
Bergsten, Carl-Johan 328 338

Index 347
Aperite mihi portas 161 Cerone, Pietro 232

Die Hochzeit des Lamms Charles XI (Karl XI), King
315, 323 159, 262, 264, 291
Jesu meines Lebens Leben Charles XII (Karl XII), King
309, 312 13
Lauda Sion 26 Chechelli, Carlo 79, 210
Membra Jesu nostri 120, Per regidos montes 79
155, 195, 310–312 Christian, Duke 176, 180
Ad Latus 310– Christina, Queen 13, 17, 35,
311, 322 59, 166, 196, 198, 201, 203
Ad pedes 311– 205–206, 208, 342
312, 322 Christian V, King 262
Missa alla brevis 306 Cifra, Antonio 207
Mit Fried und Freud ich Clemens non papa 37
fahr dahin 319 Colerus, Martin 156
Wacht! Euch zum Streit Engel Hut 156
316 Colista, Lelio 215
Bütner, Crato 123 Colliander, Erlandus Magni
Bygdén, Leonard 337 283
Byrd, William 35 Concors Discordia 284, 297
Capeler, Hans Conrad 164 Crequillon, Thomas 37
Capricornus, Samuel 84, 86, Curtius 26
113–115, 342 Danielis, Daniel 164
Geistliche Harmonien 84 Davidsson, Hans 318
Jubilus Bernhardi 86 Davidsson, Åke 21–23, 26,
Opus musicum 86 239
Scelta musicale 84 Dedekind, Constantin 85–
Theathrum Musicum 84 87, 110, 142, 253
Caprioli, Carlo 200 Königs Davids göldnes
Carissimi, Giacomo 79, 81, Kleinod 253–254
194, 196, 198, 200, 206–207, De la Gardie 17
210–214, 342 De la Gardie, Magnus
Missa a quinque 81 Gabriel 202, 205–206
Carisio, Giovanni 78 Denkmäler deutscher
Sacri concerti 78 Tonkunst 338
Cecconi, Alessandro 196– Desprez, Josquin 232
197, 207

348 Index
Deutsches Musikgeschichtliges Musik und Musikleben i

Archiv 341, 343 Greifwalds Vergangenhet
Draghi, Antonio 264 290
La Laterna di Diogene 264 Engelhardt, Heinrich
Düben, Anders von 12–20, Christopher 15, 17, 20–21
23, 33–35 Erben, Balthasar 123–
Narva Ballet 34 136,140–143, 152, 158, 210
Düben, Andreas 12, 36, 44, Ach daß ich doch in meinen
51–52, 57, 222 Augen 127
Düben, Andreas (der O Domine Jesu Christe 124
Älteste) 41, 45 Salve suavissime Jesu 131
Düben, Emerentia 13 Ericson, Eric 342
Düben, Gustav 12, 20, 25, Evelyn, Johm 197
27, 29, 35–36, 41, 44, 49– Expert, Henry 337
51, 54–57, 59, 61–71, 73– Faber, Albrecht Otto 248
74, 77–92, 118, 120–121, Fabri, Stefano 78, 197, 210–
128, 135–136, 138–139, 211
141–143, 150, 153–161, Fabricius, Georg 142
165–166, 168, 194–195, Fabricius, Werner 85
211, 262, 305, 310, 317, Fåhraeus, Susanne 327
342 Favart, Charles-Simon 34
Fader vår 211 Fersen, Fabian von 266
Düben, Joachim von 13,18 Fichtelius, Johannes 45
DuManoir, Guillaume 288, Finatti, Giovanni Pietro 81
336 Jubilate, cantate 81
Dünnhaupt, Gerhard 245 Fischer, Johann 86–87
Ecorcheville, Jules 336, 343 Fleischer, Oskar 27
Edelmann, Moritz 184 Foggia, Francesco 61, 92,
Edling, Anders 328 207–208, 210
Eitner, Robert 25–26, 337– Celebrate o fideles 207
338 Concentus ecclesiasticus
Quellen Lexikon 26 208
Elston, Tom 327 Laetantes canite diem
Endter, Wolfgang 111 laetitiae 207
Engel, Hans 290 Forkel, Johann Nikolaus 310
Förster, Kaspar (the elder)
221–222, 227–228

Index 349
Förster, Kaspar (the Expeditionis musicae

younger) 152, 157–160, classis I 85
162–163, 169, 194, 208, Expeditionis musicae
210–211, 214 classis II 69
Confitebor tibi Domine 158 Gluck, Christoph Willibald
Congregantes filistei 211 34
Frandsen, Mary E. 213, 327 Goebel, Reinhard 341
Fredrik I, King 14 Goehr, Lydia 312–315, 317–
Fredrik III (Friedrich III), 318
King 181, 263 The Imaginary Museum of
Friedrich Ulrich, Duke 253 Musical Works 312–314
Frescobaldi, Girolamo 35, Grandi, Alessandro 80
219 Factum est silentium 80
Frondin 20–21 Grape, Anders 288, 289
Furchheim, Johann Wilhelm Graziani, Bonifazio 199,
179, 182 210–211, 213–214
Gallus (Handl), Jacobus 36– Rex magnae caelitum 214
42, 44–46 Groh, Heinrich 180–181, 184
Missa super in Mayen 37– Groschhuff, Friedrich 255
41, 45–46 Grosse, Gottfried 245
Selectiones quaedam missae Grosse, Johann 256
37 Grossi, Giovanni Antonio
Galuppi, Baldassare 34 77–78
Gassenhauer de Mellin 285 Orfeo pelegrino ne sacre
Geck, Martin 306, 316
cantici 77
Geist, Christian 124, 133,
Grossman, Burckhard 245
164, 195, 210–211
Grusnick, Barbara 135
Alleluia, De funere ad
Grusnick, Bruno 23, 29, 36,
vitam 211
41, 45, 51–54, 59,64, 66,
Geistliche Concerten 43
75, 122, 153, 158, 163, 165,
Gesellschaft für
173, 175, 179, 207, 308,
Musikforschung 26
340
Ghiselinus, Johannes 232
Gustavus Adolphus, King
Gigli, Francesco 219, 227
12–13, 18
Giordano, Paolo 206
Gyllenstierna, Johann 264,
Gletle, Johann Melchior 43,
269
69, 85–86

350 Index
Hahn, Michael 165 Johann Georg I, Duke 175

Handel, George Frederick Johann Georg II, Duke 175
34 Johansson, Inga 328, 335
Hammerschmidt, Andreas Joseph I, Kaiser 297
43, 84,109–110, 142 Kade, Otto 25
Musicalischen Andachten Karstädt, Georg 307–310
84, 109 Kauffmann, Georg
Kirchen- und Tafel-Musik Friedrich 250
109 Harmonische Seelenlust
Harris, David C. 250 250
Havemann 80, 82, 86 Keiser, Reinhard 294, 297
Haydn, Joseph 318 Concors discordia amori et
Hedell, Kia 23, 327–328 timori 297
Hedvig Sofia, Princess 272 Hercules et Hebe 294
Hegardt 20 Kellner, Bertil
Heinrich Julius, Duke 253 Missa super Lauda
Heinz, Birgit 327 Jherusalem 44
Helwig, Jacob 266–267, 272 Kircher, Athanasius 210,
Hering, Alexander 246 317
Hermansson 20–21 Musurgia universalis 210
Hertel, Zacharias 248 Kittel, Christoph 246–247
Hogmalm, Britt-Marie 327 Kjellberg, Erik 33, 43
Hogwood, Christopher 341 Klemm, Johan 246
Holm, Anna-Lena 279, 297 Klingstedt, Johan 268
Homburg, Ernst Christoph Klosemann, Caspar 243
309 Kloss, Johann Herbord 255
Horn, Henrik 281 Knüpfer, Sebastian 257
Hurst, Alison 328 Kodsas, Peder 327
Ihre, Johan 288 Koopman, Ton 312, 341
Ihre, Thomas 289–290 Krause, Paul 294, 301
Ingemarsson, Bengt 281 Kreichel, Christoff 180, 184
Ingemarsson, Ingemar 281 Krepel, Balthasar 158
Jacobi, Samuel 115 Kress, Johann Albrecht 113,
Jansson, David 328 115
Jeppesen, Knud 338 Krieger, Johann Philipp 113,
Joachim, Johann 267 115, 142, 176, 178, 195,
Johan III, King 42 239

Index 351
Krummacher. Friedhelm 30, Linnaeus, Carl/Carolus 281–

73, 173, 247 282, 305
Kuhnau, Johann 239, 250, Lorentz, Johann 159, 290
255 Lovet 288, 298
Musicalische Vorstellung Löwe, Johann Jacob 177, 181
einiger biblischer Historien Lübeck, Vincent 167
250 Ludwig XIV, King 261, 264
Neuer Clavier Übung 250 Lully, Jean Baptiste 279,
Kühne, David 265 284–285, 288, 293, 298,
Kühnel, Heinrich Gottfried 301
184 Alceste 293
Kümmerling, Harald 118, Atys 293
339 Cadmus et Hermione 293
Kyhlberg, Bengt 15, 51–52 Isis 293
Lagerberg, Anders 21–22, Temple de la Paix 284–285
24–27, 33, 66, 135 Thésée 293
Lamberg, Abraham 243 Madsen, Andrus 327
LaRue, Jan 8 Malmros, Bernt 327
Lasso, Orlando di 38–39, Marenzio, Luca 219
43–46 Maria Eleonora, Queen 12
Im Mayen 38–39, 45 Mattheson, Johann 249, 319
Newe Teutsche Liedlein 38 Meder, David Bernhard 159,
Lauda Jerusalem 44 262
Legrenzi, Giovanni 77–78 Meder, Johann Valentin 123,
Psalmi a 5 77 164–165, 168, 195, 261–
Lehms, Georg Christian 264 264, 266–277
Leiska, Katharine 328 Die befreite Andromeda
Leopold I, Kaiser 264 274
Lewenhaupt 25 Die beständige Argenia
Lilius, Franciscus 219, 227– 262–263, 265–268, 270–
228, 233 273
Lilliecrona, Karl 202–205 Die wieder vereheligte
Lilliecrona, Kasper 202 Coelia 274
Lindberg, Folke 14, 18, 21– Lukaspassion 273
22, 28, 33–34, 36, 339 Mellien 285–298
Lindberg, Nils J. 36 Michael, Samuel 251
Lindelius 281–282 Ander Theil Paduanen 251

352 Index
Micheli, Romano 222–233, Niedt, Nicolaus 111

235–236 Norlind, Tobias 27–28, 52,
Avviso inviato da me 230 336, 339
Canones nunnulli super Die Musikgeschichte
arias 235 Schwedens in den Jahren
Musica vaga et artificiosa 1630–1730 27
229 Från Tyska kyrkans
Pater, &Filius, & Spiritus glansdagar 27, 51
Sanctus 232–233 Oltböter (Altböter),
Musiche Pellegrine Heinrich 291
artificiose 224, 228 Orgas, Annibal 219
Risposta fatta da me 230 Ortgies, Ibo 318
Spiritus ubi vult spirat 233 Pacelli, Asprilio 219
Virtuosa riposta 229–230 Paris und Helena 180
Mihl, Erasmus von der 69, Pasqualini, Marc’Antonio
86 199–200, 203–204, 206
Minato, Nicolò 264 Patalas, Aleksandra 245
Mitjana, Rafael 22–23, 239 Peetz, Juliane 328
Moberg Carl-Allan 28–29, Pelkey, Stan 327
279, 339–340, 343 Peranda, Marco Giuseppe
Från kyrko- och hovmusik 75, 82–83, 114, 142, 179,
till offentlig konsert 28 181–182, 194, 211, 213
Monatshefte für Miserere mei Deus 181–
Musikgeschichte 26 182
Monteverdi, Claudio 81, 91– Pergolesi, Giovanni Battista
92, 226, 229, 233 34
Resurrexit de sepulchro 81 Petrucci, Giuseppe 208
Moritz, Duke 176–177, 180 Pfleger, Augustin 121, 123,
Moretus, Johann 221 152, 160, 162, 164, 169,
Mozart, Wolfgang 175, 338
Amadeus 338 77 Evangeliendialoge 152
Müller, Erich 183 Pirro, André 337
Murata, Margaret 197 Plato 229, 233
Music for Queen Christina Pohle, David 58–59, 184, 309
342 Benedicam Domine 58
Musica Sueciae 342 Praetorius, Michael 239, 253
Nicolai, Johann Michael 115

Index 353
Profe, Ambrosius 79–80, 82, Rudén, Jan Olof 30, 33, 57,
86–87, 194 59, 122, 133, 135
Purcell, Henry 254 Music in Tablature 284,
Sonnatas in III parts 254 299
Putnam, George H. 256 Ruetz, Caspar 314, 316
Radeck, Martin 159–160 Salve Regina 131, 137
Herr wenn ich nur dich hab Salzmann, Philipp 183
159 Sammelbände der
Reese, Anne 328 Internationalen
Rehefed, Elias 256 Musikgesellschaft 27, 336–
Reincken, Johann Adam 290 337
Reiswitz 203 Sandberger, Adolf 27
Restle, Nicole 244 Savioni, Mario 211
Rhyacander, Torstenius 44 Sheridan, John 327
Rieck 298 Scacchi, Marco 193–194, 211,
Ritter, Christian 195 219–236
Robletti 220 Breve discorso sopra la
Rochlitz, Friedrich 26 musica moderna 226, 235
Für Freunde der Tonkunst Canoni musicali composti
26 sopra le vocali di piu parole
Rodde, Mattheus 160 227–229, 235
Roman, Johan Helmich 13, Consideratio canonum
16 230–235
Rore, Cipriano de 232 Cribrum musicum 220–
Rose, Stephen 240 222, 225–226, 230
Rosenmüller, Johann 43, 84, Lettera per maggiore
113–114, 248, 257 informatione 222, 225
Kern-Sprüche 84, 248 Scheibe, Samuel 257
Rossi, Luigi 197, 199–200, Scheidt, Samel 245
203, 206, 211 Geistliche Concerte 245
Il Palazzo incantato 199, Kleine geistliche Concerte
203 245
Orfeo 197, 199–200 Schein, Johann Hermann
Rothmann, Bartholomäus 110, 125, 239, 243–244,
342 251–252, 254–256
Rubert, Johann Martin 166 Banchetto musicale 243
Cantional 244

354 Index
Cymbalum sionium 243 Symphoniae Sacrae 109,

Diletti pastorali 244 252
Israelisbrünnlein 125, 244, Weihnachtshistorie 175,
251 179, 184, 337
Musica boscareccia 243– Zwölff geistliche Gesänge
244 247
Opella nova 244, 251 Selle, Thomas 73, 82, 156
Venuskränzlein 243 Senfl, Ludwig 38
Schelle, Johann 181 Siefert, Paul 221–223, 227–
Schepler, Arnold 167 229, 234
Schering, Arnold 108, 337 Psalmen Davids 221
Schirm, Samuel 127–128 Silvestris, Floridus de 78,
Schlöpke, Moritz 166–168 194, 208
Schneider, Herbert 279, 284, Snyder, Kerala J. 325, 328
301 Sophie Amalie, Princess 263
Schnittelbach, Nathanael 25 Soriano, Francesco 232
Schop, Johann 249 Speer, Daniel 110
Schürer, Thomas 243 Evangelische
Schönfeldt Peter 15 Seelengedanken 110
Schröder, Daniel 166 Spegel, Haquin 18
Schröder, Johan 159 Spitta, Philipp 25
Adesto virtutum chorus Stabile, Annibale 219
159 Steingaden, Konstantin 85,
Schultz (Praetorius), 87
Bartholomeus 12 Flores hyemnales 85
Schütz, Heinrich 109–110, Stellwagen, Friedrich 166
125, 142, 175–179, 181, Steuch(ius), Jöns (Johannes)
183, 187, 194, 239, 245, 17–19, 279, 286, 289–290
247, 252–253, 256–257, Steuchius, Matthias 18, 286
337 Steude, Wolfram 252
Cantiones Sacrae 125 Stiehl, Carl 24–26, 337
Geistliche Chormusic 257 Stolte 298
Historia der Geburt Jesu Striggio, Alessandro 35
Christi 247 Strungk, Delphin 256
Psalmen Davids 246, 252– Studia musicologica
253 upsaliensia 340
Sundström, Einar 197, 201

Index 355
Svensk tidskrift för Verdelot, Philippe 37

musikforskning 340 Verdier, Pierre 336
Sweelinck, Jan Pieterszoon Verinwel 298
35 Vesi, Simone 75
Talbot, Michael 314 Vetter, Daniel 250
Telemann, Georg Philipp Musicalische Kirch- und
239, 254 Hauß-Ergötzlichkeit 250
Harmonischer Gottes- Vierdanck, Johann 165–166
Dienst 254 Virneisel, Wilhelm 339
Terradellas, Domingo Vogler, Johann Caspar 250
Miguel Bernabe 34 Vermischte musikalische
Theile, Johann 25 Choral-Gedanken 250
Thieme, Clemens 177, 181, Wachsmann, Michael 251
184 Walther, Johann Gottfried
Laudate pueri 181 249–250, 319
Tieck, Ludwig 317 Allein Gott 250
Tiesenhausen, Georg Webber, Geoffrey 207–208
Reinhold von 268 Weber, Gottfried, 26
Tiliander, Carolus Nicolaus Theorie der Tonsetzkunst
280, 283, 300 26
Tiliander, family 281–282 Wecker, Georg Caspar 113
Tiliander, Niclas/Nils 280, Weckmann, Matthias 65,
283, 286, 289–290, 294, 154, 156
297, 300 Gegrüet seist du
Tiliander, Sven Ingemarson Holdselige 65
280–281 Weine nicht, es hat
Trabattone, Giovanni überwunden die Löwe 154
Battista 78–79 Weinzierl, Gerhard 137
Tunder, Franz 25–26, 122– Weixer, Daniel 257
123, 152, 160–161, 169, Welter, Johann Samuel 114
290 Werckmeister, Andreas 318
Ein kleines Kindlein ist uns Werner, Arno 178
geboren 26 Städtische und fürstliche
Ulrika Eleonora, Queen 13, Musikpflege in Zeitz 178
159, 262, 264, 270 Werner, Christoph 225, 235–
Urban VIII, Pope 197–198, 236
200 Whitelocke, Bulstrode 200

356 Index
Wiermann, Barbara 23, 107– Zengel, Caspar (junior) 51

108, 121 Zetterqvist, Cynthia 9
Winkler, Lutz 290 Zeutschner, Tobias 61, 85–
Witzenmann, Wolfgang 215 86, 88–92, 113
Wladyslaw IV Vasa, King Benedicta sit Sancta
220–221, 225 Trinitas 89–91
Wollny, Peter 57, 82, 122, Es ist kein ander Heil 90–
143, 211, 328 91
Wrangel 17, 35 Gott sey mir gnädig 89
Würffel, Jeremiah 279, 290– Laudate Dominum, omnes
291, 300 gentes 91
Zarlino, Gioseffo 233–234 Musikalische Kirchen- und
Zeitschrift der Geschichte für Haussfreude 86, 88–89
Schleswig Holstein 26 Te Deum laudamus 90
Zellbell, Anders 15 Zygmunt III Vasa, King
Zengel, Caspar 50–51, 57 219–220
2. Towns
Altdorf 286 Danzig (Gdansk) 36, 46, 75,

Amsterdam 202, 286 111–112, 117, 122–124,
Ansbach 115 127, 131, 136, 142, 157–
Antwerp 214, 221 158, 163–165, 169, 194,
Augsburg 257 221, 229, 236, 274
Bamberg 135–136 Darmstadt 43, 110
Berlin 12, 339 Dresden 35, 75, 86, 144, 176–
Brandenburg 12, 269 177, 179–183, 194, 208,
Braunschweig 120 213, 246–247, 253, 257,
Bremen 86, 165–166, 168, 342
261, 281 Erfurt 111, 117, 119–120,
Breslau 73, 80, 111 123, 248
Brunswick 256–257 Fehrbellin 269
Copenhagen 24, 157–162, Florence 196, 198, 202
164–165, 169, 194, 208, Frankfurt 111, 114, 117, 242,
270, 289–290, 338 255–256
Genoa 202

Index 357
Goslar 263, 265 169, 307, 314–319, 326,

Göteborg 319, 328 338
Gottorf 111, 117–119, 144, Luckau 111
162–164, 169 Lund 24, 281, 283, 286, 300
Greifswald 279, 283, 288, Lüneburg 117, 120, 256–257,
290, 299, 301 263
Grimma 111, 115, 117–120, Malmö, 266, 269
123, 144 Marseille 202
Güstrow 162, 164, 169 Merseburg 111, 176–177,
Halle 176–177, 179, 182, 179–182, 184, 187
184–185, 187, 257 Naples 202–203, 205
Hamburg 73, 82, 144, 173, Narva 34–35
154–156, 159–160, 163– Naumburg 176–177, 181
164, 169, 173, 242, 248– Nürnberg 111, 144, 251, 268,
249, 286, 294, 315 297
Härnösand 286 Oliva 159, 163
Helmstedt 286 Oxford 200, 286
Helsingör 24 Paris 173, 196–197, 199, 201–
Husum 164 202, 206, 286, 337
Jönköping 281, 283 Pisa 196
Karlskrona 15 Pjätteryd 281, 283, 300
Karlstad 286 Prag 37
Kassel 57–59, 341 Reval 165, 265–267, 269–275
Königsberg 164, 281 Riga 165, 266, 273–274, 342
Kraków 227–228, 245 Rochester 326–328
Królewiec 235 Rome 193, 196–207, 210,
Leiden 286 214, 219–220, 222–224,
Leipzig 12, 41, 45, 82, 86, 230, 234
113, 115, 117–118, 144, Römhild 115
174–175, 181, 184, 242, Rostock 164, 279, 283, 286,
245, 251–252, 254–257, 289–290, 299
264, 328, 342 Saumur 202
Linköping 25, 286, 289 Schlackenwerth 162
Liverpool 314 Schwäbisch-Hall 114
London 254, 286 Schweinfurt 117
Lübeck 24–26, 29, 111, 122, Skara 56
127, 160–161, 163, 167, Stade 166–168

358 Index
Stettin 113 297, 305–306, 325–326,

Stockholm 14, 16, 18–20, 24– 328, 333, 336–339, 341–
25, 28–29, 35, 42, 45, 51, 343
57–59, 61, 75, 77, 78–79, Västerås 26
83, 111–112, 117–119, Växjö 279, 281, 283, 298, 300
121–122, 124, 127, 131, Venice 202, 221
133, 137, 143–144, , 155, Verden 165–167, 281
160–161, 164, 166 , 174, Vittaryd 280
179, 184, 187, 195–196, Warsaw 173, 193, 220, 224,
199, 202–203, 205–209, 227, 229, 232, 235
262, 270–273, 338 Weißenfels 115, 117, 120,
Stralsund 165–166 176–179
Straßburg 111–114 Wien (Vienna) 173, 227,
Stuttgart 111–112, 115, 117 264–265, 316
Tallinn 165 Wismar 166
Trent 226 Wittenberg 283, 286, 294,
Uppsala 7, 11, 14–26, 28, 33– 299, 301
34, 37, 51, 154, 200, 239, Wolfenbüttel 111, 253, 286
279, 281, 286, 288–289, Zeitz 177, 179, 180–184, 187

Varia Musicologica
Band 1 Mine Dogantan

˘
Mathis Lussy – A Pioneer in Studies of Expressive
Performance
188 S. 2002.
ISBN 3-906769-50-X / US-ISBN 0-8204-5897-X
Band 2 Kristina Ericson
Heinz Holliger – Spurensuche eines Grenzgängers:
das kompositorische Schaffen im Spiegel der Beschäftigung
mit Sprache, Atem, Schweigen
640 S. 2004. ISBN 3-03910-354-7
Band 3 Walter Ludwig Bühl
Musiksoziologie
394 S. 2004. ISBN 3-03910-448-9
Band 4 Nikolaus Urbanek
Spiegel des Neuen: Musikästhetische Untersuchungen zum
Werk Friedrich Cerhas
230 S. 2005. ISBN 3-03910-445-4
Band 5 Daniel Muzzulini
Genealogie der Klangfarbe
598 S. 2005. ISBN 3-03910-458-6
Band 6 James K. Wright
Schoenberg, Wittgenstein and the Vienna Circle
191 S. 2005, 2007.
ISBN 978-3-03911-287-6 / US-ISBN 978-0-8204-8935-3
Band 7 Ellen Taller
Gaetano Donizetti – Moment und Prozess
Studien zur musikalischen Dramaturgie.
249 S. 2005. ISBN 3-03910-637-6
Band 8 Rudolf Flotzinger
Von Leonin zu Perotin:
Der musikalische Paradigmenwechsel in Paris um 1210.
504 S. 2007. ISBN 978-3-03910-987-6

Band 9 Isabelle Marc Martínez
Le rap français – Esthétique et poétique des textes (1990-1995)
327 S. 2008. ISBN 978-3-03911-482-5
Band 10 Fiona McAlpine
Tonal Consciousness and the Medieval West.
474 S. 2008. ISBN 978-3-03911-506-8
Band 11 Massimo Zicari
The Land of Song. La “Terra del Belcanto” nella stampa
londinese di fine Ottocento. Una raccolta di testi critici
tra 1890 e 1900
266 S. 2008. ISBN 978-3-03911-507-5
Band 12 Marion Lamberth
Interaktion von Leben und Werk bei Schönberg.
Analysiert anhand seiner Ehekrise des Jahres 1908
279 S. 2008. ISBN 978-3-03911-515-0
Band 13 Claude Dauphin (éd.)
En collaboration avec Raymond Court, Yves Jaffrès,
Michael O’Dea, Daniel Paquette et Pierre Saby
Le Dictionnaire de musique de Jean-Jacques Rousseau:
une édition critique.
890 S. 2008. ISBN 978-3-03911-620-1
Band 14 Pascale Duhamel
Polyphonie parisienne et architecture
au temps de l’art gothique (1140-1240).
266 S. 2010. ISBN 978-3-03911-613-3
Band 15 Giuliano Castellani
Ferdinando Paer.
Biografia, opere e documenti degli anni parigini.
668 S. 2008. ISBN 978-3-03911-719-2
Band 16 In Vorbereitung
Band 17 Anne Ibos-Augé
Chanter et lire dans le récit médiéval.
La fonction des insertions lyriques dans les œuvres narratives
et didactiques d’oïl aux XIIIe et XIVe siècles.
In Vorbereitung. ISBN 978-3-0343-0032-2

Band 18 Erik Kjellberg (ed.)
The Dissemination of Music in Seventeenth-Century Europe.
Celebrating the Düben Collection. Proceedings from the
International Conference at Uppsala University 2006.
358 S. 2010. ISBN 978-3-0343-0057-5
Band 19 In Vorbereitung
Band 20 Eric Lecler
L’opéra expressionniste.
120 S. 2010. ISBN 978-3-0343-0313-2

Erik Kjellberg (Ed.) - The Dissemination of Music in Seventeenth-Century Europe-Peter Lang PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Erik Kjellberg (Ed.) - The Dissemination of Music in Seventeenth-Century Europe-Peter Lang PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

UG Varia Musicologica 18.qxd 25.03.

2010 13:28 Seite 1

In this volume fifteen musicologists from five countries present new

The papers in this volume were initially presented at an international

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00) Pe t e r L a n g

In this volume fifteen musicologists from five countries present new

The papers in this volume were initially presented at an international

Erik Kjellberg (ed.)

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00) Pe t e r L a n g

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

The Dissemination of Music

Proceedings from the International Conference

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

British Library and Library of Congress Cataloguing-in-Publication Data:

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

1. Dissemination of music–Europe–History–17th century–Congresses. 2. Uppsala

This volume was financed by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (The Bank of Sweden

Cover illustration: Uppsala Cathedral and Gustavianum.

© Peter Lang AG, International Academic Publishers, Bern 2010

All rights reserved.

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

The Düben Collection preserved at the Uppsala University Li-

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

As early as the 1960s successful attempts were made to com-

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

This volume was financed by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond (The

Stockholm in November 2009

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

The Düben Family and the Düben Collection

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

other initiatives in a politically emerging country. In fact Gus-

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

ancestors’ musical activities in Stockholm and elsewhere to

The donation of 1732/33 and an academic controversy

The early history of the Düben Collection was summarised

3 Folke Lindberg, Katalog över Dübensamlingen i Uppsala Universitets

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

ever, when it comes to the donation that interests us here, the

5 For a description of situations and incidents in Uppsala see Bengt

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

Director Musices, since he had served very well both as organ-

Contexts and questions

If we pause here and focus for a moment on Johan Helmich

6 Uppsala universitets arkiv: konsistorieprotokoll, 27th January 1728.

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

could be interpreted as illustrations of his own taste, compe-

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

Archbishop of Uppsala in 1730. Steuchius was well aware of

8 See Åke Davidsson, ‘Kring Uppsalaakademiens förvärv av musikalier på

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

weeks later things began to happen. Archbishop Jöns Steuchius,

Letter from the council of the Academy (the University) in Uppsala to

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

But Düben arranged things his own way. In minutes dated

This document is licensed to Vitaly Zhdanov (3-11296097|00)

were made and placed in the galleries. During the autumn of

The Revival in the 1880s

However, by the time that Annerstedt drew attention to it,