CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Orgelbüchlein

collection of compositions for organ by J.S. Bach

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 6, 2026
Entity authorityQ2030219
Source-derived summary

The Orgelbüchlein (Little Organ Book), BWV 599−644, is a set of 46 chorale preludes – one given in two versions – for organ by Johann Sebastian Bach. All but three were written between 1708 and 1717 when Bach served as organist to the ducal court in Weimar; the remainder and a short two-bar fragment came no earlier than 1726, after the composer’s appointment as cantor at the Thomasschule in Leipzig.

Bach's apparent plan was for a collection of 164 settings of chorale tunes sung during the Church year so that each part of the year was represented. However, only 46 of these were completed. The manuscript, which is now in the Staatsbibliothek, leaves a number of tunes as missing or "ghost" pieces. A project to complete the missing chorales called "The Orgelbüchlein Project" has been launched in the 21st century, where the chorales are written in modern styles. This project took nine hours in the first complete performance, giving an idea of the potential scope of Bach's "little" book. The Orgelbüchlein as Bach left it contains about 80 minutes of music which span the liturgical calendar.

Each setting takes a Lutheran chorale, adds a motivic accompaniment, and quite freely explores form. Most of the preludes are short, setting only a single verse of the chorale, and use four contrapuntal voices.

Editorial summary

“Orgelbüchlein” enters the record as collection of compositions for organ by J.S. Bach. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Orgelbüchlein, compositions and organ can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1708, 1717, 1726—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Orgelbüchlein, compositions and organ.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Orgelbüchlein” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Orgelbüchlein, compositions and organ provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 6, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q2030219. VIAF identifies the subject as 174166928. The Library of Congress control number is n80020487. 1 of 3 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1708, 1717 and 1726.

Critical limits

The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Orgelbüchlein”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Orgelbüchlein primary sources, Orgelbüchlein archive and Orgelbüchlein research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Orgelbüchlein”?
  2. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Orgelbüchlein” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.