1658--1695
In Henry Purcell I reach the last and the greatest of my Twelve Good
Musicians. And to attempt to consider and discuss completely his life
and work in the short space of a University Lecture, would be an absurd
effort. But, as I have before pointed out, my object has been to
endeavour to interest the musical student--amateur and professional--in
certain prominent masters of music, and in the remarkable progress made
in our own country by their aid in the seventeenth century. I can do
little more than arouse interest, and I cannot pretend to write a
complete history, but I trust the Lectures will have helped to fill up
the "blank" which Sir Hubert Parry declared existed in many minds as
regards the music of this period.
[Illustration: Henry Purcell]
In the consideration of the various musicians of whom I have already
treated I have avoided biographical detail. As a rule information in
these matters may be gleaned from the well-known books of reference.
But in the case of {119} Purcell I am obliged to enlarge a little on
his life, in the hope that I may be able to contribute a few
interesting facts with regard to his family that are not generally
known.
Let me begin, then, with Purcell's father. It is an extraordinary
thing that we know nothing whatever of him until we find his name among
distinguished musicians, such as Captain Cooke, Locke, and Lawes, as
one of the performers in the _Siege of Rhodes_, in 1656. In the
Preface to this publication it is claimed that "The Musick was composed
and both the Vocal and Instrumental is exercised by the most
transcendent of England in that Art."
What did the elder Purcell do before he attained to such a position?
We know absolutely nothing as regards his origin, his training, or his
career up to this. I have made diligent search in the archives of
Westminster to see if there were anything to be learned there, and have
gleaned a few small facts.
The name of Roger Pursell occurs in a bill for bringing timber to the
College--in August 1628. The items of the bill include Carriage by
land 1s. 6d., for watching 6d., for helping to land ye timber 6d. This
would seem to apply to a load of timber brought from a distance for the
use of the carpenters of the College. Roger Pursell {120} may have
come up with the timber or he may have been one of the carpenters. He
was paid 3s. for two days' work. The name appears again in 1659 when
we find in a page of accounts "Expended by George Blackborn and Joseph
Hobbes for the travelling charges about the Colledge affaires at
Offord, in the County of Huntingdon" the following note: "In the Bonds
taken from Mr Throgmorton and _Roger Pursell_ there is included L4
towards travelling charges." Then Roger Pursell is spoken of as "the
'Bayliffe' of Mr Giles." It is rather curious that the name of Roger
Pursell should occur at such a wide interval, 1628 and again in 1659.
One wonders if Roger's connection with the Abbey and its property was
the beginning of the musical members of the family coming to
Westminster.
There was a Shropshire Purcell family of some standing, and in the
_Herald's Visitation of Shropshire_ in 1623 it was given as of Onslow,
and Shrewsbury; and there were many distinguished Purcells in Ireland.
We know and hear nothing more of the elder Purcell after the production
of the _Siege of Rhodes_ in 1656 until his name appears in a book in
the Library at Westminster. This book records the admission of one or
two Petty Canons {121} in 1660, and the payment by them of 5s. for the
entry. Mr Henry Purcell's name is also entered with the note "instead
of 5s. _this book_."
Here, then, we have the great musician's father installed in the Abbey
as Master of the Choristers (not organist also) and Copyist. He was
also a Gentleman of the Chapel Royal and a Singing Man of Westminster.
Later on we find him a member of the Royal Band (1663). All these
important appointments testify to his leading musical position.
We have a glimpse of him in Pepys' _Diary_, under date February 21st,
1660.
"After dinner I back to Westminster Hall. Here I met with Mr. Lock
and Pursell, Master of Music, and with them to the Coffee House
into a room next the Water by ourselves. Here we had variety of
brave Italian and Spanish songs and a Canon for eight voices which
Mr. Locke had lately made on these words '_Domine Salvum fac
Regem_.'"
Another small fact of interest in connection with the elder Purcell is
furnished me by my brother of Chester. He finds in the Chirk Castle
accounts, by the steward of Sir Thomas Myddelton, an allusion to Mr
Purcell, who is, no doubt, our elder Purcell. Dr. Bridge writes as
follows:
"In 1661 the family had gone up to London and we find the Steward
there and recording
Dec. 24, Paid for a quart of
Purle with Mr. Purcell .... 2d.
{122}
As a rule only the names of important personages are put in the
accounts. As the Steward did not _live_ in London, it looks as if
Mr. Purcell was a former acquaintance from somewhere near Chirk.
This place is on the borders of three Counties of which Shropshire
is one, and as the Purcells probably came from Salop, their
birth-place or place of residence, may have been at the Chirk end
of the County. Possibly Mr. Purcell was an old friend of the
Steward's."
There is no doubt the elder Purcell lived in the place called the
Almonry, where the "Singing Men" had houses. These stood where the
well-known Westminster Palace Hotel now stands. And here his
distinguished son was born.[1]
It is generally stated that he was born in 1658. It seems, however,
just as likely--or even more likely--the date should be 1659.
Unfortunately it has been impossible to find the record of his baptism.
The Register at St Margaret's Church, Westminster, for this period
(which was then very carefully kept) does not show Henry Purcell's
name. The approximate date is fixed fairly well for us by the fact
that in June, 1683, Purcell published some Sonatas to which his
portrait was prefixed. On this portrait he is {123} said to be
"_aetat: suae_ 24," i.e. in the twenty-fourth year of his age. Again
on his monument in the Abbey we find "_Anno Aetatis suae 37_," i.e., in
the thirty-seventh year of his age. Therefore, if he was in his
thirty-seventh year on November 21, 1695 (the date of his death), he
must have been born between November 21st, 1658, and November 20th,
1659.
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 {124}
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 {125} 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 AEneas_ is, I think, proved by Mr
Barclay Squire's {126} 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.[2] 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
{127} 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.
{128}
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 {129} 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):
{130}
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 {131} 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 {132} 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)
L78 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 AEneas_ 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 {133} 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 AEneas_) of
Purcell's dramatic works, containing as it does the {134} 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 {135} 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. Fetis, 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 {136} 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 Jubilate[3], 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 {137} 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 L8 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 {138} 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 AEneas_ 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 reclaim
Her short-lived fav'rite and her chiefest fame,
Complaining that so prematurely died
Good-natured pleasure and devotion's pride.
Died? no, he lives while yonder Organs sound
And sacred echoes to the Choir rebound.
{139}