# A Dictionary of Music and Musicians/Wohltemperirte Klavier, Das

​WOHLTEMPERIRTE KLAVIER, DAS—The well-tempered Clavichord, better known in England as 'The 48 Preludes and Fugues'—probably the most extensively known of all Johann Sebastian Bach's works. It is in two Parts, each containing 24 preludes and 24 fugues. The first part was completed at Cöthen in 1722 when Bach was in his 38th year, and to this alone he gave the above name. Subsequently (1744) he finished 24 more preludes and fugues 'through all the major and minor keys;' and so like in design to the former series are these, that they have come to be regarded as the second part, the entire collection being now universally known under the one title.
His own full title is as follows:—'Das wohl temperirte Clavier oder Praeludia und Fugen durch alle Tone und Semitonia so wohl tertiam majorem oder Ut Re Mi anlangend, als auch tertiam minorem oder Re Mi Fa betreffend. Zum Nutzen und Gebrauch der Lehrbegierigen Musicalischen Jugend als auch derer in diesem Studio schon habil seyenden besondern Zeit Vertreib aufgesetzet und verfertiget von Johann Sebastian Bach p. t. Hochfürstl. Anhalt. Cöthenischen Capell-Meistern und Directore derer Cammer-Musiquen. Anno 1722.'
It was Bach's intention by this work to test the system of equal temperament in tuning. To this end he furnishes a prelude and fugue in each key, the keys following one another not according to their relationship, but simply in the order of chromatic ascent.
A credible tradition says that most of the first part was written rapidly; in a place where Bach had no regular musical occupation, and where he was deprived of any musical instrument—probably when accompanying his prince. This tradition is supported by Gerber, whose father, Heinrich Gerber was a pupil of Bach in Leipzig soon after 1722. Forkel, however, who probably possessed some general information on the subject from Bach's sons, says that earlier compositions were used in compiling the first part. Many of the preludes had certainly already appeared as independent compositions. In rewriting these Bach often considerably lengthened them, the one in C♯ to the extent of nearly forty bars. Eleven of them were given in a short form in the Klavierbüchlein (1720), written for his son Friedemann. When used for the later work, they were, however, more fully developed, especially those in C major, C minor, D minor, and E minor. The A minor Fugue, too, is without doubt an earlier composition. Spitta considers it belongs to 1707 or 1708. It is an open copy of one in the same key by Buxtehude, and judging from the pedal at its conclusion, it was not at first intended for the clavichord. Perhaps it is therefore somewhat out of keeping with the rest of the work—written so manifestly for this instrument. Witness for instance the commencement of the 16th bar of the E♭ minor fugue, where the upper part stops short on C♭, evidently because D♭ was not available on most clavichords. Again, in the 30th bar of the A major fugue it is apparent that the imitation in the right hand is accommodated to a limited keyboard. In the second part of the work D♭ above the line occurs but once—in the 68th bar of the A♭ prelude. In compiling this, Bach again availed himself of earlier compositions, though not to such an extent as in the first part. The prelude in C is given, however, as a piece of 17 bars' length in a Klavierbuch of J. P. Kellner's, with the date '3. Juli 1726.' The Fugue in G had twice ​before been associated with other preludes. The A♭ Fugue first stood in F, it was shorter by more than one half and it had another prelude. Other instances of a similar kind may be adduced.
Three or four original MSS. are existing of the first part of the work: not one (complete) exists of the second. Still, notwithstanding the many revisions Bach made of the first part, there is perhaps, as Carl von Bruyck says ('Technische und ästhetische Analysen,' p. 68), on the whole a richer and broader display of contrapuntal art in the fugues of the second part.
The two oldest printed editions appeared in 1800–1801. One was issued by Simrock of Bonn and Paris, the other by Kühnel (now Peters) of Leipzig. The former was dedicated to the Paris Conservatoire de Musique, the matter being supplied by Schwencke. In it the second part is placed first: many of the older readings are given, and it has the long versions of the preludes which most editions since have copied. The latter was revised by Forkel, and it is to that he refers in his well-known treatise. The first English edition was that edited by S. Wesley and C. Horn, and published in 1811–12. The most complete critical edition is that of the Bach Gesellschaft (vol. xiv. 1865), by Franz Kroll, with an appendix of various readings.
Editors have not been slow to make alterations in the text of Bach. One of the most glaring of these is the bar introduced by Schwencke in the middle of the first prelude. Yet this bar has been retained by Czerny, by Wesley and Horn, and by many others. It is even used by Gounod in his 'Meditation.' As an editorial curiosity it is worth preserving:—
Of the First Part two autographs are known; one formerly belonging to Nägeli, and now in the Town Library of Zürich, another in the possession of Professor Wagener of Marburg. See Spitta's Bach (Novello) ii. 665. Of the Second Part no autograph is known to exist.
Since the above was in type I have discovered that for years past there have remained in comparative obscurity original autographs of nearly all the Preludes and Fugues of the Second Part. They were bought at Clementi's sale by the late Mr. Emett. During one of Mendelssohn's visits to England (June 1842) Mr. Emett showed them to him, and he at once recognised them as being in Bach's handwriting. Later on, in or about 1855, Sterndale Bennett saw them, and he too pronounced them to be in the handwriting of Bach. Since then they have so far lapsed out of sight that they are not mentioned even by Dr. Spitta. That they are authentic there can, I think, be no doubt. Because, first, Clementi knew or believed them to be so: see the 'Second Part of Clementi's Introduction to the Art of Playing on the Pianoforte, op. 43,' where, at p. 120, there is a 'Fuga by J. S. Bach from an original MS. of the author.' It is the one in C, and was evidently printed from No. 1 of this set. Secondly, Mendelssohn and Bennett witnessed to the writing. Thirdly, their internal evidence points to their being the work of a composer, not of a copyist. Upon this conclusion I have thought it worth while to make a bar by bar examination of them. For the most part they agree with Kroll's text, and, for convenience, taking his edition (including the marginal readings) as a standard, they compare with it as follows:—
I. Prelude:—In bars 1, 2, 6, 9, 17, 21, 23, where the groups of demisemiquavers occur, the MS. stands as at (a).
The latter half of bar 3 stands as at (b). At bar 14 five bars are erased and rewritten differently; the substitution accords with our text.
Fugue:—the first bar of the subject is grouped throughout (c); bar 24, the under stave is in the alto clef for four bars; bar 66 the middle part is a minim D; bar 67, the motion of semiquavers is arrested by (d).
Both Prelude and Fugue have the upper stave in the G clef. The other numbers (with the exception of No. 17, which is also in that clef) have it in the soprano clef.
II. Like Kroll's text throughout.
III. Prelude:—ten sharps in the signature, some of the notes being marked both in the upper and lower octave of the staves. Fugue:—signature like Prelude; bars 16, 19, 20, 26, 27, ​the demisemiquaver passing notes are omitted; as is also the semiquaver passing note, bar 28.
IV. Is missing.
V. Is missing.
VI. Prelude:—at bar 10, two bars are erased and eight bars are substituted at the foot of the page, the eight bars accord with text; bar 18, and the seven bars that follow, accord with marginal reading; at bar 22, the under stave is in the alto clef till bar 26; after bar 37 two bars are inserted at the foot, the two bars accord with text. Fugue:—throughout like text.
VII. Prelude:—bar 30, like text; bar 49, the C in the upper stave is an octave lower; bar 66, no flat to D in bass. Fugue:—throughout like text.
VIII. Prelude:—nine sharps in the signature, on the same principle as signature of No. 3. Fugue:—signature like Prelude; bar 14, the second B is omitted; bar 18, like marginal reading.
IX. Prelude:—bar 9, second quaver in bass B not A; bar 21, no turn on A♯; bar 50, bass like neither text nor margin, but (e), this is substituted in the place of an erasure, apparently like text;
bar 54, no chord in the upper stave, simply E. Fugue:—bar 15, trill on tenor D; bar 18, no natural to second E in alto.
X. Prelude:—throughout like text. Fugue:—in bar 18 and similar ones, the quaver of the compound time is written exactly under (or over, as the case may be) the semiquaver of the simple time. This throws a light on like instances in Bach's works, notably so on, the way the Prelude in D (No. 5 of the Second Part) should be played; bars 70, 71, (f), so the Fugue ends.
XI. Prelude:—throughout like text. Fugue:—bar 12 and the seven bars that follow, in G clef; from bar 89 to the end is written at the bottom of the Prelude, with 'Final zur folgend Fuga.'
XII. Is missing.
XIII. Prelude:—nine sharps in the signature of both Prelude and Fugue, on the same principle as Nos. 3 and 8.
XIV. Prelude:—end of bar 18 (g);
bar 27, the third E in upper stave is marked ♯. Fugue:—bars 3, 6, 11, there is a trill on the final minim of subject; bar 15, the last quaver of middle part is C only; bar 16, a trill on G in middle part; bar 53, the last C in upper stave is not ♯.
XV. Prelude:—bar 24, no ♮ to last D; bar 45, trill on first B. Fugue:—no ♮ to last C in upper stave, bar 64.
XVI. Prelude:—bar 9, like margin; bar 21, bass like text. Fugue:—bar 9, no ♮ to first E; bars 12, 13, 16, and 22, like text; bar 82, no ♮ to last A.
XVII. Prelude:—six flats in the signature, on the same principle as the extra sharps are marked in Nos. 3, 8, 13; bar 6, the demisemiquaver is G not F; bar 42, no ♭ to second A; from the end of bar 53 to the beginning of bar 56, is as at (h); bar 75, no appoggiaturas.
Fugue:—signature like Prelude; from bar 6 the under stave is in the alto clef for two bars and three quarters; the latter half of bar 14 is as at (i); bar 32, the upper part enters at the commencement with a B minim.
XVIII. Prelude:—bars 12, 14, 15, 40, like margin. Fugue:—throughout like text.
XIX. Prelude:—throughout like text. Fugue:—bar 16, like margin.
XX. Prelude:—bar 19, no ♮ to last G; bar 24, like upper margin; bar 30, bass like margin. Fugue:—bars 6 and 15 like margin; bar 28, ♯ to last C only; ♯ to C in last chord; but, no E in the upper stave and no upper A in the lower stave.
XXI. Prelude:—bar 36, third semiquaver in bass, A not C; bar 63, like margin; bar 67, no ♮ to B. Fugue:—bars 5 and 6 like margin; bar 89 as at (k).
XXII. Prelude:—seven flats in the signature, on the same principle as Nos. 3, 8, and 13; bar 16, ♭ to G in bass; bar 81, crotchet F in upper stave, no semiquavers E, D. Fugue:—signature like Prelude; no staccato marks in the subject; bar 22, B not C♭ in tenor; bar 33 like margin; bar 77, F not D in tenor.
XXIII. Prelude:—seven sharps in the signature, on the same principle as Nos. 3, 8, 13, 22; bar 45 like text. Fugue:—signature like Prelude; bar 70, no 𝄪 to C. This manuscript is in a much worse state of preservation than are the others.
XXIV. Prelude:—throughout (not like Kroll's but) like Chrysander's text. Fugue:—bar 16 ​(Kroll) like margin; no appoggiatura in the last bar.
[ F. W. ]
* ↑ The Well-tempered Clavier, or preludes and fugues in all the tones and semitones, both with the major third or Ut, Re, Ml, and with the minor third or Re, Mi, Fa. For the use and practice of young musicians who desire to learn, as well as for those who are already skilled in this study, by way of amusement; made and composed by Johann Sebastian Bach, Capellmeister to the Grand Duke of Anhalt-Cöthen and director of his chamber-music, 1722.
* ↑ See Rockstro's Life of Mendelssohn, pp. 83, 84.
* ↑ Mr Cummings has shown (Mus. Times, March 1885, p. 131) that the edition projected by Kollmann in 1799 was never published. [See Bach, vol. i. p. 117.]