Twelve Good Musicians: From John Bull to Henry Purcell

Not only is his baptism during these years not recorded at St Margaret's, but the Rate Books of St Margaret's for 1658 and 1659 do not contain the name of Purcell, as they certainly would have had his father had a house in the parish.

A friend has made most careful enquiries for me on this point. I expect the Almonry was in the precincts of Westminster Abbey, and so would not be "in the parish," and it is quite reasonable to suppose the child born in the Almonry was christened in the Abbey: but I have never yet found any record of this. Purcell's own son, Edward, was christened in the Abbey in 1689.

It is interesting to know that Henry Lawes lived also in the Almonry, and so must have known the little boy Purcell; but, as Lawes died in 1662, the child could not have given any great proof of his future genius. The elder Purcell died in 1664, and the young boy was placed in the Chapel Royal Choir at the early age of six years.

Thomas Purcell, brother of the elder Purcell, was a distinguished musician also and a member of the Chapel Royal, besides holding other important posts. He looked after his clever little nephew, and was a real father to him. As in the case of Henry Purcell, Senior, we know nothing of the previous history of Thomas Purcell until we find him in his high position. Who trained him and his brother Henry we know not.

Henry Purcell was thus one of the remarkable set of boys to which I have often alluded in these Lectures, among his fellow choristers being Pelham Humfrey and Blow. Like the other boys, he began to compose, and the first reliable composition we have was the Address of the Children of the Chapel Royal to the King and their Master, Captain Cooke, on His Majestie's Birthday A.D. 1670, composed by MASTER PURCELL, one of the Children of the said Chapel.

Purcell, no doubt, owed much to Captain Cooke, but it is also certain that the influence of Pelham Humfrey, with the experience he gained by his studies with Lully, must have made a deep impression. As we know, Humfrey died at the early age of twenty-seven, and Purcell continued his studies with Blow, whose monument in the Abbey records he was "Master to the famous Henry Purcell."

The first appointment Purcell held was that of copyist to Westminster Abbey (1676), a post which his father had held before him. We know little for certain as to his compositions for the Church in his early days. As a matter of fact, he seems to have been drawn (like Henry Lawes) more to the secular side, writing for the theatre. It has been suggested that he was introduced to this kind of work by Locke, who we know was a prominent composer for the stage. We must also remember that Humfrey would, very likely, have helped to influence the mind of the young Purcell in that direction. On Locke's death in 1677 Purcell wrote an ode On the death of his worthy friend, Matthew Locke.

In 1680 Dr Blow resigned his position as Organist of Westminster Abbey, and Purcell succeeded him. There is no record of Blow resigning or the cause of it in the Chapter Books; one simply finds in the Treasurer's accounts that Purcell drew the salary as Organist instead of Blow. Probably his appointment to Westminster turned his mind more towards Church than stage.

The composition of the Opera Dido and Æneas is, I think, proved by Mr Barclay Squire's clever article on Purcell's dramatic music not to be a composition of his early years. It is not possible for me to go minutely into the subject of Purcell's many compositions, but I will for a few moments call attention to what I consider almost his master-piece. I allude to the splendid and original set of Sonatas which he issued in 1683.15 This was Purcell's first publication, and it was issued from St Ann's Lane, beyond Westminster Abbey, where the composer resided – having been married in 1681. (It should be added that he was made Organist of the Chapel Royal in 1682, holding that post at the same time as the Abbey.)

These Sonatas are a very interesting study in Purcell's career. Like many of the composers mentioned in these Lectures, Purcell wrote Fancies; but the Sonatas are a very different thing. Written for Two Violins 'Cello and Basso Continuo, and consisting of three or four movements of differing character, they are a wonderful advance on anything previously done in this direction, either in England or abroad.

Corelli issued his Sonatas in the same year that Purcell's appeared. But Corelli's – although beautiful – have not the depth or originality of Purcell's, which are admirably written for the strings and abound in clever devices, but are in no way dull or suggestive of vocal writing. The three strings are often complete without the Continuo, but occasionally there is an extra part for this. My own experience of them in performance is that the least possible accompaniment is best, and it should be remembered that the Continuo is not written for a modern pianoforte with its powerful tone, but for the Harpsichord or Organ.

Purcell in his Preface says: "for its Author he has faithfully endeavoured a just imitation of the most favour'd Italian Masters". He goes on to explain the meaning of certain Italian "terms of Art perhaps unusual," such as Adagio, Grave, Presto, Largo, etc., and concludes with a wish that his book may fall into no other hands but those who carry musical souls about them; for he is willing to flatter himself into a belief that with such his labours will seem neither unpleasant nor unprofitable."

The question of the models that Purcell had in writing these fine Sonatas and what famous Italian Masters he imitated has been often debated. For myself I cannot but believe that Purcell owed much to a remarkable Neapolitan violinist, Nicola Matteis.

This Italian violinist and composer came to London about 1672, and resided there till after Purcell's death. The date of Matteis's birth is not known, but the accounts of his playing given from personal observation by such authorities as John Evelyn in his contemporary Diary, and Roger North in his Memoirs of Musick, show that he came here as a mature artist. Purcell was then fifteen years old, and during the eleven years which elapsed till the publication of the 1683 Purcell Sonatas, Matteis was much the most prominent foreign musician, and the only Italian musician of any rank resident in London. The propagation of musical styles from one country to another was carried out in those days very little by the dissemination of copies, whether manuscript or printed, and much more by the activity of persons who went here and there giving performances and concerts. And Roger North says specifically: "But as yet wee have given no account of the decadence of the French musick, and the Italian coming in its room. This happened by degrees, and the overture was by accident, for the coming over of Sig. Nicolai Matteis gave the first start. He was an excellent musician, &c., &c., &c." Purcell, the Organist of Westminster Abbey, must of course have known Matteis, as he directed the concerts of Chief Justice Francis North (Roger North's brother) in Queen Street, and it is evident from the writings of Roger that the Norths were supporters of Matteis. In the Bodleian Library I have found Chief Justice North's name inscribed as the owner on one of the volumes of Matteis's Aires for the Violin. Then as to the explanation of Italian terms in Purcell's Preface, it is a little singular that much the same sort of information is found prefixed to Matteis's second volume of Violin Pieces. Again I have discovered in MS. parts in the Bodleian Library, and had performed at a Lecture at the Royal Institution, a Sonata in A by Matteis, in the exact Sonata form used by Purcell in 1683; and, though the date of this MS. composition cannot be traced, it is at least as likely to have been composed before 1683 as after. However, I am not asserting that a composer like Purcell copied Matteis's works. I am only saying that it was Matteis who made the Italian chamber-music prevalent in London, and that but for him Purcell would possibly never have thought or written in that style. And I cannot better conclude than by quoting from one of North's voluminous manuscripts, Essay of Musical Ayre (Brit. Museum, Addit. MSS., 32, 536, folio 78):

The poor man (Matteis) as a grateful legacy to the English nation, left with them a generall savour for the Itallian manner of Harmony, and after him the French was wholly layd aside, and nothing in towne had a relish without a spice of Itally, and the masters here began to imitate them, wittness Mr. H. Purcell, in his noble set of Sonnatas.

Purcell composed another set of Sonatas, which was published after his death. One of them, generally called The Golden Sonata, is, perhaps, the best known of any in either of the issues. But it is inferior to others, particularly No. 4 of the first set, and altogether I do not think the second is at all on a level with the first. I may add that I have in my library the parts of the original publication of the first set. The Continuo contains an immense number of additional figures, and there are a few corrections in the other parts, which I have never found in any other copy. It would appear almost as if Purcell had himself made the corrections, and, indeed, Sir Hubert Parry was of opinion this was so. I hope I may be able shortly to print these Sonatas in separate parts so that they may be accessible to lovers of Purcell.

I cannot linger now over these interesting Sonatas, but must glance at Purcell's further activities. He wrote an Ode for St Cecilia's Day in this year (1683) and many Anthems about this time. In 1686 he took part in the competition of Organ-Builders at the Temple Church, already spoken of in my Lecture on Dr Blow.

In 1685 he produced music for the Coronation of James II, himself singing in the choir with Blow, Child, and others. Who directed the music, i.e., played the organ, as was customary, we are not told. I possess a very rare engraving of this great ceremony, and one of the Choir seems certainly to hold a baton in his hand, but it was not usual to have a Conductor.

A second Coronation in which Purcell took part had a rather serious turn. It was that of William and Mary, and Purcell admitted persons to the organ-loft to see the Ceremony, for which they evidently paid pretty well. Purcell thought it was a "perquisite" (I do not suppose he was paid for his extra work on the occasion); but the Dean and Chapter claimed the money and passed the following Chapter Order:

April 18, 1689. It is ordered that Mr. Purcell, organist to ye Dean and Chapter of Westminster, do pay to the hand of Mr. John Needham, Receiver of the College, all such moneys as was received by him for places in the Organ Loft at ye Coronation of King William and Queen Mary, by or before Saturday next, being ye 20th day of this instant Aprill. And in default thereof his place is ordered to be null and void. And it is further ordered that his stipend or salary due at our Lady Day past be detayned in the hands of the Treasurer until further order.

(Entry in Chapter Book)

Poor Purcell paid up, as an entry in the Treasurer's book states:

"Received of Mr. Purcell (his poundage and charges being deducted) £78 4s. 6d."

The visitors to the organ-loft could not have been many, as it was but small, so they paid pretty well for their seats, and Purcell seems to have had some sort of commission in the way of "poundage and other charges."

The Opera of Dido and Æneas has often been quoted as a marvellous effort of Purcell's early days. Being a complete Opera without spoken Dialogue, it is a most interesting example of Purcell's advanced views, and, had he written it in 1675 (when only seventeen years of age), it would indeed have been a marvel. But I feel sure Mr Barclay Squire is right in putting it much later – in 1689. Although a splendid piece of work it is that of a man of experience and not of a youth.

One of the composer's best Operas is Dioclesian, an adaption from Beaumont and Fletcher by Betterton. It is scored for strings, flutes, hautboys (3), bassoons and trumpets. It is very interesting music, and there is a "Masque" included in it, containing some of the host of Purcell's operatic work. Purcell corrected the copies of the first issue by his own hand.

I possess one of these scarce books. He tells us a little of his troubles with the printer in an advertisement at the end of the book. "In order to the speedier publication of the Book I employed two several printers, but one of them falling into some trouble and the volume swelling to a bulk beyond my expectations have been the occasion of this delay." The music to Dioclesian and to Amphitryon (a play by Dryden), added greatly to Purcell's fame; and Dryden who at one time thought Grabu, the French master of the King's Music, to be far superior to any English composer, now mentions Purcell as one "in whose Person we have at length found an Englishman equal with the best abroad. At least my opinion of him has been such since his happy and judicious performances in the last Opera." (Dryden's.)

Dryden wrote another Opera in 1691, King Arthur, which Purcell set to music. This is, I think, the best (excepting Dido and Æneas) of Purcell's dramatic works, containing as it does the celebrated Air Come if you dare and the Frost Scene.

I cannot dwell longer on Purcell's dramatic music, but will turn for a moment to the music for St Cecilia's Day in 1692. This was performed, as usual, in Stationers Hall (the Hall still stands at the bottom of Paternoster Row), and The Gentleman's Magazine of the time mentions the performance and tells us the interesting fact that the second stanza was sung with incredible graces by Mr. Purcell himself. So it seems that Purcell had an alto voice; and it is pleasant to go into the very Hall, with the Musicians Company of the present day, and think of the old building echoing, years ago, to the strains of Purcell's voice.

And now I must turn to one of the finest of Purcell's contributions to the Services of the Church. In 1694 he wrote an elaborate Te Deum and Jubilate with orchestral accompaniment: this is the first of its kind by an English composer. It was written for the festival of St Cecilia's Day, 1694, but was not published until after the composer's death. The Te Deum was performed in St Paul's at the Annual Festival Service of the Sons of the Clergy until 1713, when Handel's Te Deum, composed for the Peace of Utrecht, took its place. From that time for some years the two rival Te Deums were performed alternately. There are some points of resemblance. Handel must have heard Purcell's setting, but the version of it which, until lately, was known – and sometimes performed – was a sad corruption of the original. Boyce, with the intention no doubt of helping Purcell's Te Deum to compete with Handel's, broke it up into various movements, made some alterations in the harmony, and added many dull symphonies. The original Purcell score consisted of 325 bars and Boyce added 149 more! The result was disastrous and practically killed the Purcell setting. A performance of it was given in 1829, again at the Festival of the Sons of the Clergy. A very interesting letter from M. Fétis, the great French writer, is preserved in a musical paper of June 1829, which I will quote:

I must confess that my curiosity was considerable to hear the music of Purcell, whom the English proudly cite as being worthy of being placed in the same rank with the greatest composers of Germany and Italy. I was in a perfectly admiring disposition of mind when the Te Deum of this giant began; but what was my disappointment upon hearing, instead of the masterpiece which they had promised me, a long succession of insignificant phrases, ill-connected modulations and incorrect, albeit pretending harmonies. At first I imagined myself deceived, and that I ought to doubt my judgment on a style of music to which I was unaccustomed but M. Felix Mendelssohn, a young and highly distinguished German composer, who stood beside me, received precisely the same impressions. Such indeed was the inconvenience felt by him that he would not prolong it, but escaped, leaving me to encounter Purcell alone during the performance of the Jubilate16, which appeared to me no way superior.

It was a great anxiety to me to know what to do about introducing this Te Deum in the music of the Abbey Purcell Celebration. I consulted Sir Hubert Parry, who said it was "long-winded and dull"! And so I had always found it, and the result was I gave up the idea. But – most providentially – the MS. score of this work was brought to me one day in the Cloisters of the Abbey; the announcement of the coming celebration had called the owner's attention to it. He sold it to me – and when I looked it over I found out what was the real reason of its failure. It was Boyce's edition and not Purcell's music. A new edition was prepared and the Te Deum again restored to life!

In another direction Purcell showed his remarkable versatility. He corrected and amended Playford's Introduction to the Skill of Musick, a book of great interest. Purcell's observations on Canon are particularly good and valuable.

In 1695 the funeral of Queen Mary took place in the Abbey, Purcell contributing an Anthem and other music. The solemn March for "flat mournful trumpets" has lately been recovered and published; this is a beautiful specimen of Purcell's art, and, it is said, was played at his own funeral.

Purcell died on November 21st, 1695, and Dr Cummings, in his Life of Purcell, draws a moving picture of the death of the composer "in a house on the west side of Dean's Yard." But – Purcell never lived in Dean's Yard. Rate Books are not romantic, but generally trustworthy. The Rate Books of Westminster show that in 1682 Purcell paid rates for a house in Great St Ann's Lane, in 1686 for a house in Bowling Alley East, and in 1693, 1694, and 1695 (the year of his death) for a house in Marsham Street. All these houses are now demolished, but the one in Bowling Alley existed until lately, and I possess cupboards made from the mantelpieces and balusters of the staircase of Purcell's house.

Further proof that he rented houses lies in the fact that he was allowed £8 a year in lieu of a house, and this same payment continued up to the time of my predecessor, who had no house for the early years of his organistship.

The death of this great man was a grievous loss to English music. Although he had worthy pupils in Dr Croft and others, yet he had no real successor; and the arrival of Handel and the musical domination which he exercised did much to cause Purcell's name to sink somewhat into oblivion. But it was only for a time – and now there is no English musician whose name and fame is more assured. A Purcell Society is gradually publishing all his works and making them more accessible. His Operas of Dido and Æneas and The Fairy Queen have been performed with great success, and his Church music is still constantly on the lists of our Cathedrals.

It has not been possible for me to notice all his work as I would wish to have done, but we must all feel that, not only was he the last of my Twelve Good Musicians, but by far the greatest.

A translation of the lines upon his gravestone in Westminster Abbey may fitly close this chapter.

Applaud so great a guest, celestial powers,Who now resides with you but once was ours,Yet let invidious earth no more reclaimHer short-lived fav'rite and her chiefest fame,Complaining that so prematurely diedGood-natured pleasure and devotion's pride.Died? no, he lives while yonder Organs soundAnd sacred echoes to the Choir rebound.NOTE

Since the preceding pages were written I have been in correspondence with Dr W. H. Grattan-Flood, of Enniscorthy, with reference to the Irish Purcells mentioned on p. 120. Dr Grattan-Flood claims to have proved Henry Purcell to be descended from a distinguished Irish family. Before quoting from his kind communication, I may say it seems to me very probable the Purcells were of good family. Both the elder Henry and his brother Thomas, were musicians of note when we first hear of them, and at the Restoration were members of the King's Band, Henry being also "Master of the Choristers" of Westminster Abbey. Edward Purcell, an elder brother of the composer, was a distinguished officer, who took part in the Siege of Gibraltar, and ended his days in honourable retirement at the seat of the Earl of Abingdon, at Wytham, near Oxford, in the chancel of which Church he is interred. Another small point is the fact that Purcell's first published work, the Sonatas, was issued with a portrait of the composer and with a coat-of-arms. All this looks as if "Roger Purcell, the 'Bayliffe' of Mr. Giles," (see p. 120) is not so likely to have been an ancestor of the musician as one of the Irish Purcells.

I am not able to give all the matter kindly sent to me – which I hope Dr Grattan-Flood will make public – but append his observations on the most important points: —

"Henry Purcell, the composer, was the younger son of Henry Purcell the Elder; and was adopted at the age of six by his uncle Thomas. The puzzle, then, is: Who was the father of Henry Purcell the Elder and of Thomas Purcell?

"In order to answer this, I have made a systematic search in the Fiants of Elizabeth and James I, in the Calendars of State Papers, Ireland, 1623-1670, in the Inquisitions, Funeral Entries in the Office of Arms, etc., and have succeeded in tracing the father and grandfather of Henry Purcell the Elder. I had unusual opportunities of making this investigation inasmuch as I assisted Capt R. P. Mahaffy, B.L., in the editing of the Irish State Papers of Charles I and Charles II.

"Henry Purcell the Elder was the son of Thomas Purcell of Gortanny and Ballycross, Co. Tipperary, the son of Thomas Fitz Piers Purcell, cousin of the Baron of Loughmoe, and cousin of the Purcells of Croagh, Co. Limerick. Both Henry and Thomas Purcell were brought when quite young to England by their aunt, and placed in the Chapel Royal. Their aunt was a blood-relation of the Marquis of Ormonde, who was on intimate terms with King Charles I. Mrs James Purcell, their aunt, took for her second husband Colonel John Fitzpatrick, who was also a personal friend of Charles I and of Charles II. This lady was Elizabeth Butler, 4th daughter of Thomas, Viscount Thurles; her marriage jointure is dated 11 February, 1639. She returned from London in 1643.

At the Restoration, through the influence of the Marquis of Ormonde, who was created Duke of Ormonde on March 30, 1661, both Henry Purcell the Elder and his brother Thomas were given posts as Gentlemen in the Chapel Royal, and were in the immediate entourage of the Court, and not unregarded by the observant Pepys. Henry married circa 1651, and his eldest son, Edward, called after an uncle of the same name, was born in 1653."

"W. H. GRATTAN-FLOOD."

It will be seen Dr Grattan-Flood gives interesting particulars of the Irish family. On one point the suggestion that the elder Purcell and his brother Thomas were "placed in the Chapel Royal," I wish he could give some real proof, for it would, I think, explain all the ensuing musical success of Purcell's father, his Uncle Thomas, and himself. But I can only hope that Dr Grattan-Flood's further researches may end in completely clearing up the mystery of the ancestry of Henry Purcell.

J.F.B.

1

i. e., stuttering; originally stot, from the German stottern. To "stut" is still used in Cheshire dialect, (v. Wilbraham's Glossary of Cheshire Words.)

2

It may have been because he was a Roman Catholic and his name would not have been welcome to Elizabeth.

3

Now published. Edited by Mr. Fuller Maitland and Mr. Barclay Squire.

4

Mr Arkwright gives us an interesting bit of information in connection with Morley and Shakespeare. "Morley lived in St Peter's, Bishopsgate, between 1596 and 1601, and his name appears in two Rolls of Assessments for Subsidies. In the earlier of these documents is the name of William Shakespeare, his goods being valued at the same amount as Morley's. He and Shakespeare both appealed against the assessment, and it may be supposed some amount of personal intercourse existed between them."