Netherlands Organ Monographs

The organs of the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam

The Profusion of Heaven

Editor: Henk Verhoef

eBook edition, March 2016

Stichting Nederlandse Orgelmonograﬁeën

Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg

The organs of the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam. The Profusion of Heaven is an English translation of ’s Hemels overdaad. De orgels van de Nieuwe Kerk te Amsterdam, which is the seventh volume in the book series ‘Netherlands Organ Monographs’, published in association with The Netherlands Department for Conservation (rdmz) in Zeist.

Illustrations book jacket: see illustrations 9.

Illustration frontispiece The interior of the Nieuwe Kerk towards the north transept. Drawing by Joh. Jelgerhuis, 1821.

© 2005 individual authors, c/o Uitgeversmaatschappij Walburg Pers, Zutphen

This digital publication is based on the 1st edition, november 2005

www.walburgpers.nl

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

Translation: Stephen Taylor, with thanks to Bini Biemans-van der Wal

Cover design: Rob Buschman, bno Gees

isbn 978.94.6249.139.7

Contents

Introduction

Rogér van Dijk

The organs of the Nieuwe Kerk and their history

Thijs Boers

The case of the transept organ, an art-historical description

Eymert-Jan Goossens

The main organ of the Nieuwe Kerk, harmony to the ear and symmetry to the eye

Mieke van Zanten

The story in pictures on the shutters

Willem Jan Cevaal

The restoration of the organs, -1989

A description of the main organ

A description of the transept organ

Ground plan of the Nieuwe Kerk

Archivalia

List of organists

Technical appendices

Bibliography

Dedicated to the memory of Onno Wiersma,

in our time the Finder and Father

of the main organ in the Nieuwe Kerk.

(after E. Meyster, 1655)

Introduction

The ﬁrst half of the seventeenth century is one of the most fascinating periods in the history of Amsterdam. As the number of inhabitants increased tenfold, the town took the lead in the Northern Netherlands. In just a few decades, the mouth of the River Amstel became a centre of power and trade, art and science. Today, we would be surprised by many aspects of the metropolis which Amsterdam had become by about 1650. The town gates closed at ten o’clock in the evening, the gap between rich and poor was unbridgeable, the law was severe and the church was at the heart of urban life. But those familiar with the city today are also struck by the fact that so much seems unaltered since the seventeenth century. Amsterdam still looks towards far horizons, and likes to be compared with New York and Tokyo rather than Brussels or Cologne. The city is slightly megalomaniacal, as the projects undertaken by the city council illustrate, and is in need of better accountants. For though the sums involved are large, projects invariably turn out to be more expensive than envisaged. Although the citizens of Amsterdam – often born elsewhere – like to complain, they would ﬁnd it unthinkable to live anywhere else, and indeed they are always keen to show their beloved city to all who care to admire it. And so the words put into the mouth of Amsteldam by Constantijn Huygens sound all too familiar (from his volume Stede-stemmen en Dorpen):

Gemeen’ verwonderingh betaemt mijn’ wondren niet;

De Vreemdelingh behoort te swijmen die my siet.

Swijmt, Vreemdelingh, en seght, Hoe komen all’ de machten

Van al dat machtigh is besloten in uw’ grachten?

Hoe komt ghy, gulde Veen, aen ’s Hemels overdaed?

Pack-huys van Oost en West, heel Water en heel Straet,

Tweemael Venetien, waer’s ’t einde van uw’ wallen?

Seght meer, seght, Vreemdelingh. Seght liever niet met allen:

Roemt Roomen, prijst Parijs, kraeyt Cairos heerlickheit;

Die schrick’lickst van my swijght heeft aller best geseit.

Common astonishment does not beﬁt my wonders;

The stranger who beholds me should swoon.

Swoon, stranger, and say, how do all the powers

Of all that is mighty become enclosed in your canals?

How do you, golden peat, gain the profusion of heaven?

Warehouse from east and west, all water and all street,

Twice Venice, where is the end of your wharfs?

Say more, say, stranger. Say rather not with all:

Boast of Rome, praise Paris, crow over Cairo’s splendour;

He who is silenced by me most terribly has said the best of all.

In his short poem, Huygens plays a virtuosic game of connotation. Amsterdam trades with the entire world, but Venice only with the east; Venice is a city of water, but Amsterdam has both canals and streets – in short, twice Venice. The town is immensely rich, and the soft peaty soil proves, in more ways than one, to be ﬁlthy lucre. Undoubtedly, the heavenly profusion observed by Huygens in Amsterdam is similarly ambiguous. In the most obvious connotation lies a certain contradiction: the word profusion (overdaad) has a negative undertone which is not entirely removed by the description ‘heavenly’. On further consideration, the Dutch word overdaad could suggest ‘make over’ in the sense of ‘sell’ or ‘give away’. And one could also take it to mean that, in Amsterdam, heaven is ‘imitated’: the town as a model of heaven. A town with organs built to reﬂect heavenly harmony in all its perfection, and thus bring about its own harmony. It all seems rather pretentious. In the present study, however, the chapter by Eymert-Jan Goossens on the case of the main organ reveals that precisely this interpretation is supported by what is known about Huygens’ concepts of man, the cosmos, and the organ as a machine and musical instrument.

When Huygens wrote his ode to Amsterdam in 1625, the Dam was just a modest square, and the Nieuwe Kerk stood among the houses. Twenty-ﬁve years later, reconstruction of the church was in full swing, and Amsterdam had embarked on the largest building project of the seventeenth century, the erection of a new town hall. Within a short time, an unparalleled ensemble arose, comprising two buildings closely related in terms of town planning, architecture and ornamentation. Within this whole, the organs of the Nieuwe Kerk were more than just the usual utilities of a church. The chapters on the case and shutters of the main organ reveal that this instrument was the indispensable keystone of the whole, and the ideological key to the building programme. In the Nieuwe Kerk organ, ornamentation, representation and ideology were inextricably intertwined.

The ﬁrst chapter of this book relates the history of the organs. Recent archive research has prompted a reinterpretation of this history on a number of points. It is now almost certain, for instance, that Van Hagerbeer completed the transept organ by December 1645, less than a year after the ﬁre. It was therefore one of the ﬁrst furnishings to be installed in the church, even before rebuilding had been completed. In addition, a clearer picture has been formed of the ﬁnal years of the nineteenth century, when the pipework of this instrument disappeared. In view of the history of the main organ, and the rather drastic restoration by Bätz, it is remarkable how well it has survived. This chapter also gives an impression of the way in which the organ was used. Having started out as a concert instrument, built by the town and looked on with suspicion by orthodox churchgoers, it became an accompanimental instrument for the church service. It gradually became absorbed into the world of the church, and at the end of the nineteenth century the use of the organ in the service had become so natural that organ recitals were considered inappropriate. The change was both gradual and remarkable, and it brought the seventeenth century closer to the present day than to the period around 1900.

The last chapters deal with the recent restorations of the main organ and transept organ by Marcussen and Flentrop respectively. Never before has it been possible to present such an extensive report on this operation, which naturally has brought all sorts of facts and ﬁgures to light. The picture is completed by illustrations of the insides of the organs and lists of technical data.

Finally, transcriptions of the most important documents are included in appendices, enabling the reader to see the original context of quotations included in the main text. In the English edition of this book the quotations have been translated, but the appendices include the original Dutch texts.

The organs of the Nieuwe Kerk are unique witnesses to the seventeenth century. Those aware of the vulnerability of organs will realise that it is nothing short of a miracle that they have survived. This book may help to quench the listener’s thirst, offering a clearer background to the unforgettable sound heard in the Nieuwe Kerk. And when the organ ceases we stand still, as it were, before the closed shutters – inevitably, for the sound itself cannot be described. Time and time again, the sound must be brought forth and heard, so that we may experience the true wonder, and discover that these old machines are living instruments of music in time and eternity: the profusion of heaven.

Henk Verhoef

1. The Nieuwe Kerk from the south, before the 1645 ﬁre. A staircase turret is visible at the west end, and a building that was probably the baptistry. A funeral procession enters the church from the Dam. Etching by Claes Jansz. Visscher, 1613.

Rogér van Dijk

The organs of the Nieuwe Kerk and their history

The two organs of the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam may be counted among the most important seventeenth-century instruments in the Netherlands; until the present, however, little has been published on their history and construction. In 1886 and 1917, articles by Martin Boltes and J.W. Enschedé respectively focused on the history of the main organ and mentioned only in passing the transept organ, which became unplayable at the end of the nineteenth century.1 When reconstruction of the transept organ was completed in 1948, the advisor A. Bouman (who believed it dated from the sixteenth century) devoted an article to it.2 Just over ten years later the Nieuwe Kerk was closed for extensive restoration, thus silencing the organs for a long period. As so often in churches, the restoration of the Nieuwe Kerk provided the opportunity to work on the organs. Despite the fact that the restoration of both instruments was preceded by exhaustive historical and technical research, this was published only very summarily. In 1981 a brochure was written by the advisor Cor Edskes to mark the completion of the restoration of the main organ.3 When a new reconstruction of the transept organ was completed eight years later, only a short account of the history and reconstruction of the instrument was included in an article by Jan Jongepier.4 In 2003, ﬁnally, a booklet was published by Erik Visser, entitled The Organs of the Nieuwe Kerk, which, however, is largely based on the above publications by Edskes and Jongepier.

These short publications contrast sharply with the exhaustive – but unpublished – historical research undertaken by B. Bijtelaar in the 1960s.5 Cor Edskes, as advisor for the restoration of both instruments, also carried out extensive preparatory historical and technical research, and drew considerably on information made available by Bijtelaar. Remarkably, Edskes sometimes brushed aside archive information in favour of another historical source, the writer Joachim Hess.6 However, information published by Hess on the two instruments of the Nieuwe Kerk proves to be incorrect on a number of points.

In the present publication, the history of the two organs of the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam is examined once again in the light of new research into surviving archives and the instruments themselves.

The history of the Nieuwe Kerk7

The history of the Nieuwe Kerk began on 15 November 1408, when Frederik van Blankenheim, Bishop of Utrecht, divided Amsterdam into two parishes and gave permission to build a second parish church. Although this ediﬁce soon became popularly known as the Nieuwe Kerk, it was dedicated to the Holy Virgin Mary and ofﬁcially designated the Onze Lieve Vrouwekerk. According to later sources there was mention of a second patron saint, Catharine, though this is not conﬁrmed by any ofﬁcial documents. The erection of the church was largely ﬁnanced by Willem Eggert, a wealthy merchant who resided in a stone house to the south of the site. This may have been the premises depicted on maps of Amsterdam by Cornelis Anthonisz. (1538), Pieter Bast (1597) and Balthasar Florisz. (1625); it was pulled down in the mid-seventeenth century to make way for the new town hall, now the Royal Palace, on the Dam. In the early ﬁfteenth century, the choir, choir aisles and transepts of the new church arose in what had been the orchard of this house. It was to take many years, however, before the ediﬁce was completed.

2. ‘The Nieuwe Kerk after the burning of the same.’ Anonymous drawing, 1645.

As in so many churches, there were several outbreaks of ﬁre in the Nieuwe Kerk. While the town ﬁre on 21 April 1421 seems to have done only limited damage to the building, on 23 May 1452 an enormous ﬁre reduced almost the entire town to ashes, and with it most of the Nieuwe Kerk. Restoration was to take many years, and was not completed until the end of the ﬁfteenth century. Work on the building was to continue throughout the sixteenth century. In 1564, preparations were undertaken for the construction of a tower, though this was never realised, and indeed at that time the church itself remained unﬁnished. According to dates found on the coverstones of the pilaster capitals against the pillars in the crossing, the clerestory of the nave was not completed until 1599. Again, this was not the end of building activity, for in the early afternoon of 11 January 1645, during work on the roof, a ﬁerce ﬁre caused devastation through the omission and carelessness of several plumbers.8 In his description of Amsterdam, dating from 1662, Melchior Fokkens related it as follows:

... the ﬂame swiftly ﬂew through the entire church, which was ablaze within half an hour; the wooden vaulting, which was dry, put ﬂame to almost everything that was of wood, and because of the great height nobody could get to it to quench it; at three o’clock in the afternoon all the wooden vaulting and the roof, little tower, bells, organs, shores and all that was attached had collapsed into the church and burnt; only the façades and walls remained standing, and some old glass which still exists behind the choir...

Fokkens’ words are conﬁrmed in an elegy by Joost van den Vondel:9

The Queen of Amstel’s head buildings

Has now, alas! her blue veil lost,

And with bared head must grow numb and catch cold,

In the heart of the bleak wintertide,

Her teeth chatter, and she sits with naked shins,

Her pillars, scorched purple, damaged, burnt.

She mourns in ash and ruins of wood and stones,

Mixed with lead, and steel, and glass, and sand,

And copper of her tired-rung bells;

Impeded by her oak, smoked black.

The ﬂame has pulled the wig from her head,

While the bones of the dead fry, and boil,

And disturbs the sleep of the corpses, deeply buried.

O citizens! build an eighth wondrous work:

Wear away a century with sweating, labouring, slaving

And cleave a rock in pieces, for a church:

In one moment the treasures disﬁgured,

Devoutly collected, to God’s honour,

As with one arm of stone and rock, to embrace it.

The hallowed roof of Eggart falls down,

Burnt to ash before two struck hours.

How the ﬁre drives time so quickly past!

This handsome frame, that was to last for centuries,

Sinks, like a glorious ship, in the Y,

With ﬂag, and mast, and copper tow-rope;

Where the water foams, like a rough sea.

They pump in vain, the light of the ships’ buildings

To save: oh! the water pulls it along.

The midday sun to its heights raised,

Learns of the smoke, the smell, and soon the glow.

She well-nigh faints, doomed, and shy,

As Phaeton, and sees the high ﬂood

Of ﬂames gradually puncture the cool slates,

Thereafter the air, and smothered stars.

She calls: it is time, high time to prolong my journey,

Before Etna burns my horse and wagon.

She tears along, already struck by fright,

And soon hears from behind crack on crack,

And balk on balk, and roof and tower thud:

There tombstone after tombstone sprung to pieces, and broke.

The ﬁre spares neither chapel, nor choir, nor sanctuary,

Only by chance, and slings here and there

the apostle himself, even Christ does not hang safe:

He roasts on the cross, and is scorched on his pillar;

Where the rod stripes the bosom with slashes.

The Emperor complains, while kneeling devoutly,

He glows with heat, and breaths with difﬁculty,

And avoids the ﬁre, which destroys Jesus’ honour:

He appears to beseech Mary and Catharine:

Protectors, ah, protect your old institution,

So that the sun may not shine here on ruins;

While this church pledged to your name,

Bears your titles, and was dedicated to God,

In your name, two centuries ago,

Such a poor town was rich in your delight,

And offered you here incense, and prayers;

Unfolded your strength and virtue, through prime tongues:

The organ took delight in such a matter,

So often his spirit drove through the pipes,

And blew sounds in the angel-covered court,

Seated high in the ear and choir of the Deity.

But it is in vain that Caesar prays and moans:

They quench in vain: the crying is in vain:

A ﬁre cannot be extinguished, if God does not protect us.

The Church is as (as violated, alas!)

Some king’s bride, after the state was taken unawares,

And she was robbed in her splendour

Of gorgeous veils, stones, pearls and ring,

And woefully maltreated, and violated.

In vain one hangs one’s heart on appearance.

That which is bound with guys or copper,

Bursts in the end; though it deﬁes centuries.

Do not gape at external wood or stone;

The true church stands fast, and is enduring.

3. The monument to Joost van den Vondel (1587-1679), erected in the Nieuwe Kerk in 1772 by members of the ﬁne art society Diligentiae Omnia (‘Everything with diligence’). The stone monument by Anthony Ziesenis was originally on a pillar diagonally opposite the transept organ. During the church restoration it was moved to the east wall of the south transept.

Rebuilding of the Nieuwe Kerk commenced without delay. Indeed, the inﬂuential town council grasped the opportunity to further enhance the ediﬁce and at last to add a tower. Commelin described matters as follows:10

This accident had hardly overcome this church, when the Burgomasters and Council immediately decided to adorn and repair the same once more, as well as to enrich it with a tower, which had not existed before. ... In addition, everything outside and inside was made more elegant and outstanding than it had been before.

The restoration of the Nieuwe Kerk coincided with the renovation of the Dam and preparations for a new town hall designed by Jacob van Campen. Consequently, the south transept came to face the Dam and became the main entrance. The town council not only ﬁnanced the rebuilding of the church, but had much to say about its refurnishing. Numerous craftsmen engaged on the new town hall also worked on the church; they included the architect Jacob van Campen, the painter Jan Gerritsz. van Bronchorst, the silversmith Johannes Lutma, the bellfounder François Hemony and the sculptors Artus Quellijn and Rombout Verhulst. The town council also stipulated what depictions, symbols, arms and inscriptions were to be included, for the Nieuwe Kerk was not only a house of God,11 but also a prominent and representative public building.

4. The tower of the Nieuwe Kerk, which was never completed, from a model now preserved in the Amsterdam Historic Museum.

On 10 June 1648 the ﬁrst service was held again in the renovated church, even though the restoration was not yet ﬁnished. Of the envisaged tower, for which the foundations were laid in 1646, only a small part was built, most of which was demolished in succeeding centuries. The building as it now stands, therefore, is largely as it was shaped during the restoration of 1645-1648.

It was thought for a long time that both organs were lost in the ﬂames that engulfed the Nieuwe Kerk. This was indeed true of the main organ, which stood at the west end of the nave,12 as is evident from Vondel’s elegy and the following poem by Caspar van Baerle:13

In Organa Exusta

Quae toties cecinere Deum, quae carmine sancto

Tot placuere piis organa, lapsa jacent.

Summa nocent imis, pars haec male saevit in illam.

Inque mali partem cuncta ruina rapit.

Igne tubi, pulchri ﬂamma periere canales,

Ordinibusque suis qui sonuere, silent.

Aestuat in dulces rabies Vulcania cannas,

Aptaque centenis vocibus ora liquat.

Confunditque sonos omnes et barbara miscet,

Materiaeque artem tollit iniqua suam.

Redde melos solitum Iubal, tot redde loquelas.

Fac iterum nobis docta metalla loqui.

Sic plus in templis Deus & divina placebunt.

Ipsa voluptates Sacra decenter amant.

On the burnt organ14

The organ that so often sung the praise of God, and with sacred songs

Delighted so many of the faithful, falls in pieces to the ground.

The uppermost parts damage the undermost, one part destroys the other.

In a short instant everything is ruined.

The pipework has been harmed by ﬁre, the beautiful pipes have been lost in ﬂames,

The parts that sounded in their assigned position, are now silent.

The rage of Vulcan ﬂickers up to the wonderful pipes,

And makes the mouths, which were apt for a hundred voices, melt.

He mingles all the sounds and mixes them with barbarous sounds,

He takes away the art from the material, the choleric one.

Jubal, bring back the familiar songs, bring back the numerous tongues.

Make the venerable metal sound again for us.

Then God and the divine will please more in the churches.

Sacred matters too require decent pleasures.

5. Some artists took an advance on the envisaged tower and depicted the Dam as it would have looked after completion. Jacob van der Ulft, 1653.

Reliable sources reveal that the transept organ, however, which was being renovated at the time of the ﬁre, was spared.15 It is of importance, therefore, to discuss in brief the organs that served the Nieuwe Kerk prior to 1645.

6. An anonymous drawing (ca. 1650) of the Nieuwe Kerk after the ﬁre, apparently showing the clerestory of the north transept, with a temporary roof and sealed window openings.

The earliest organs and their players

It would seem logical to assume that the Nieuwe Kerk, like the Oude Kerk, already possessed one or more organs in the ﬁfteenth century. Since hardly any archives survive, partly because of the ﬁre in 1645, information is sadly lacking, and indeed the same is true of the sixteenth century.

In 1539 a priest named Claes Jansz. served as organist.16 He probably remained at his post until 1573, but nothing is known of his duties. He appears to have been closely involved in the provision of new organs for the Oude Kerk: his signature is among those in the contract agreed at the end of 1539 between the churchwardens and the organ builders Hendrik and Herman Niehoff and master Hans of ’s-Hertogenbosch. He also signed a short declaration on 28 October 1545 concerning the improvement and enlargement of the same instrument, and the maintenance of the recently completed choir organ in the Oude Kerk.17

Claes Jansz. was succeeded by Willem Aertsz, who was appointed on 9 November 1574 and died at the beginning of March 1607. He was a brother of Coenraad Aertsz, organist of the Joriskerk in Amersfoort.18 Once again, almost nothing is known about the activities of Willem Aertsz as organist of the Nieuwe Kerk. From the fact that the churchwardens of the Oude Kerk decided in 1583 to have a cornettist play at the Sunday evening concerts, following the example of the Nieuwe Kerk, it could be concluded that the organist of the Nieuwe Kerk may have played there with the cornettist in question.19 What is known for certain is that Willem Aertsz, together with prominent colleagues, was called on to inspect organs. He was probably involved in the inspection of the renovated organ at Nijmegen in 1585; with Jan Pietersz. Sweelinck and Philips Jansz. van Velsen he inspected the new north organ in the Bavokerk at Haarlem in 1594, an instrument by the Utrecht builder Peter Jansz de Swart.20

Following the death of Willem Aertsz, Willem Jansz. Lossy (1581-1639) was appointed organist of the Nieuwe Kerk. He was married to a daughter of his predecessor and, like Aertsz, was active as an expert on organs. Together with Cornelis Helmbreecker of Haarlem and Pieter de Vois of The Hague, he inspected the new organ of the Oude Kerk in Delft in 1632. With Helmbreecker and Alewijn de Vois of Utrecht, Lossy inspected the organ built by the Van Hagerbeers in the Jacobskerk at The Hague (1629), and their renovations at the Bavokerk at Haarlem (1634, when Pieter de Vois was also present) and the Sint-Jan at ’s-Hertogenbosch (1632 and 1634).21 In 1631 Willem Jansz. Lossy was also witness to a notorial agreement between Galtus van Hagerbeer and his son Germer.22 He was therefore well known to the Van Hagerbeers, and he made no secret of his admiration of their work. He and his colleagues described the renovated organ in the Bavokerk in Haarlem with the words so laudable and perfect that it will astonish all. The renovated instrument in the Sint-Jan at ’s-Hertogenbosch was even praised by Lossy and his fellow inspectors as the best organ in the Netherlands.23 All this conﬁrms that Lossy was a prominent organist and organ expert. It should also be borne in mind that, as organist of the Nieuwe Kerk, he was employed by the municipal authorities. The church council was quite opposed to the organ: it was not used during the service, and in 1609 they even tried to ban its use prior to the service.24 Willem Jansz. Lossy was succeeded in 1639 by his son Nicolaas, who was to leave his mark on the organs of the Nieuwe Kerk.

The organists of the Nieuwe Kerk mentioned above were therefore in close contact with the leading organ builders of their day. Although archive sources are absent, it does not seem unreasonable to assume that these same craftsmen also worked in the Nieuwe Kerk.

The transept organ

Surviving material from the transept organ indicates that it was built in the late sixteenth century and renovated in about 1620. At the latter date the original manual compass FGA–g2–a2 was probably extended by adding C, D, E, F# and G#. In order to accommodate the extra pipes, the front posts of the central tower were lengthened and those on the inside removed. It is almost certain that new tin front pipes were installed, and the arrangement of the front may have been altered too.25

In the ﬁrst half of the seventeenth century, organs were rebuilt relatively frequently due to rapid developments in organ building. In Amsterdam too, work was carried out regularly on the organs in the Oude Kerk, and probably on those of the Nieuwe Kerk. In 1644 the time was at any rate considered ripe to renovate the transept organ of the Nieuwe Kerk once again. The following entry was made in the treasurers’ records:

On X of June 1644 Germer van Hagerbeer, organ builder residing in Alckmaer, agreed to renew and fashion the small organ in the Nieuwe Kerk of this town according to the requirement of the art, supplying at his own expense the hire, materials and necessary requirements. And further that he will receive and be paid the sum of twelve hundred guilders, and that ﬁre and light, which he will need here in the church, will be supplied at the expense of the church by the churchwardens of the same church. And that the afore-mentioned work must be renewed and completed before next May 1645. Act as above.26

The transept organ was apparently to undergo extensive renovation, as the considerable amount of money involved and the phrase renew and fashion ... according to the requirement of the art go to illustrate. The instrument was to be adapted as far as possible to the latest fashion, and in this respect it is not surprising that Germer van Hagerbeer was contracted, since he was the most modern and prominent organ builder in Holland (i.e. the present-day provinces of North and South Holland). A year earlier, he had completed a largely new organ in the Pieterskerk in Leiden, and he was now building a main organ for the Laurenskerk in Alkmaar. These two instruments formed the very summit of Van Hagerbeer’s work, and were among the most important and sumptuous organs built in Holland in the ﬁrst half of the seventeenth century.

Unfortunately, the scarce archives do not reveal what Van Hagerbeer actually did to the transept organ in the Nieuwe Kerk. The contract makes no mention at all of a new instrument, and it is difﬁcult to imagine that a progressive builder like Germer van Hagerbeer would at that time have built a new organ in a 6-foot case with a manual compass of CDEFGA–c3, as Edskes suggests.27

Although work on the transept organ was thwarted by the ﬁre on 11 January 1645, the instrument was not lost in the ﬂames, as was thought for a long time. Shortly after the ﬁre, the organist Nicolaas Lossy requested the town council to retain him at his post, despite the fact that services in the Nieuwe Kerk had to be discontinued. On 3 March 1645 the council agreed to Lossy’s request upon condition that he would supervise repairs to the transept organ, which has not been ruined.28 The work that had commenced in 1644 was apparently so extensive that the entire organ had been dismantled before the ﬁre, and thus saved. Nicolaas Lossy retained his position but received less payment: instead of the 450 guilders he had received from the town up until then, he was paid 300 guilders, which was the same amount as his colleague Dirck Jansz. Sweelinck earned as organist of the Oude Kerk.

Renovation of the transept organ proceeded relatively smoothly, but in view of the circumstances it was naturally not completed by the agreed date. Upon signing the contract, Van Hagerbeer had received 200 guilders, and the second installment of 500 guilders was paid one year later; the remaining 500 guilders were paid on 28 December 1645.29 In contrast to what Joachim Hess wrote in 1774, work on the transept organ appears to have ﬁnished not in 1651, but as early as 1645.30 This assumption is supported by the fact that on the same day in December 1645, instead of the customary gratuity, Germer van Hagerbeer was commissioned to build a new main organ for the Nieuwe Kerk.

Surviving material from the transept organ indicates that the concept realised by Van Hagerbeer in 1644-45 was achieved by extensively rebuilding the previous instrument. Channels for g#2, b♭2, b2 and c3 were added to the existing Hoofdwerk chest. What had previously been a pedal chest was redesigned to create a so-called Zijwerk (‘side-work’). The chest and pipework of this second department were installed in a new case in the transept gallery, in which parts of the previous pedal case were possibly incorporated. In order to accommodate the action, the existing lower main case was turned in respect to the upper case, so that the Hoofdwerk chest too changed position and lay at an angle to the front. The pedal keys C–b could now be coupled to the Zijwerk; for c1, c#1, d1 and e1 a little chest was installed, with sliders connected to the stop knobs of the Zijwerk. This pedal chest will therefore have included the same stops as the Zijwerk.

Since all the pipework of this instrument disappeared in the course of years, the extent to which Van Hagerbeer employed existing material cannot be ascertained. It is known that the organ had tin front pipes in 1866; the Van Hagerbeers, however, always made their front pipes of lead, while no information survives to indicate that the front was renewed between 1644 and 1866. It may therefore be assumed that the tin front dated from before 1644. The earliest known source for the stoplist of the transept organ dates from the early nineteenth century, when Hess included it in the sequel to his Dispositien:31

This stoplist is incomplete, however, since it does not mention the couplers, ventil, tremulant and pedal – which were certainly all present. Nonetheless, this source is particularly important, since surviving archives do not mention alterations to the stoplist between 1645 and Hess’ description. It could therefore be concluded that Hess’ stoplist was identical to that of Van Hagerbeer.

The transept organ must have enjoyed a certain fame, and it was described by various chroniclers. In 1662, more than 15 years after Van Hagerbeer’s rebuild, Melchior Fokkens wrote as follows:

... this is such a delightful work that in its sound it does not need to yield to any other organ.32

A year later, Olfert Dapper described the shutters rather than the sound:

The shutters of this organ are not painted, but skilfully carved with foliage and other ornaments.33

The organ was apparently ﬁtted with ﬁnely carved shutters, in contrast to the present simple ones.

Another description of Amsterdam dates from 1664 and is from the hand of Filips von Zesen. Of all surviving seventeenth-century descriptions of the transept organ, this is the most extensive:

In addition to this large organ there is also a small one to the side of the Dam door; it is the custom to play on it every day, especially on winter evenings, since many people walk up and down this church. It has a rather long gallery of oak woodwork, of which its case is also made, together with the shutters, ornamented with skilful foliage and turnery. Its sound, which [is] unusually sweet, lends it all that adorns it, and ensures that it will not easily yield to any other organ. At the side, around the corner of the crossing, is another wide gallery or rather Pohrkirche; here the orphans are accustomed to sit every Sunday during the service.34

Von Zesen not only praises the sound of the transept organ, but gives quite a detailed description of the instrument and its location. He also mentions the so-called orphans’ gallery in the nave aisle, where the bellows were probably housed. Finally, Von Zesen is the ﬁrst to record that the transept organ was frequently played.

All the above accounts were written shortly before the instrument, according to Hess, was ‘improved’ by Jacobus van Hagerbeer in 1664. In the recent past, Edskes and others have attached much importance to this remark. However, no surviving archives indicate that the organ was actually worked on at this date. The laudatory tone of chroniclers also makes it unlikely that such a celebrated instrument underwent extensive alteration at the same time. If any work was carried out, it would surely have concerned minor matters. It is not inconceivable, for example, that the pitch was adjusted to that of the main organ, completed in 1655.

7. The Nieuwe Kerk from the north. The tower is under construction at the west end. Engraving from Olfert Dapper, Historische beschryvinge van Amsterdam (1663).

Preparations for the construction of a new main organ

Towards the end of 1645, restoration of the Nieuwe Kerk was apparently sufﬁciently advanced to allow preparations to be made for a new main organ. Unfortunately, information from surviving archives is again all too scarce:

On 28 December 1645 the organ maker Germer van Hagerbeer has agreed to make a large organ here in the Nieuwe Kerk, and having completed it to place it and fashion it, and make ﬁtting according to the requirement of the art, and as quickly as possible, for which, for his effort and supervision and work, he will receive ﬁve guilders a day, also three guilders for his apprentices, and after adequate completion a good gratuity; he will not enjoy house rent but must pay his rent himself, as well as ﬁre, light, candles and beer; and the gentlemen burgomasters and treasurers must supply him with all necessary materials for the work, and Germer must shape the said materials for the said work, according to the model in his possession; signed by the secretary.35

Van Hagerbeer was therefore paid a daily rate; the agreement reveals nothing of the nature and scale of the envisaged instrument. The remark concerning ‘the model’ in Van Hagerbeer’s possession is notable: did he have drawings, or perhaps a model, of the new case? It is known that the burgomasters had models made for the new window in the north transept, one small, and the other large.36 Despite the lack of archival evidence, it would seem likely that Jacob van Campen produced the design for the new main organ: he had worked with Van Hagerbeer in Alkmaar, and was already involved in the refurbishment of the Nieuwe Kerk.

The death of Germer van Hagerbeer in April 1646 gave cause to adapt plans for the new main organ. Germer’s half-brother Jacobus (1622-1670) was apparently considered too young, and their father Galtus too old, to be entrusted with such a project. Moreover, those concerned will have been aware of the fact that work undertaken by the Van Hagerbeers did not always proceed smoothly.37 Whatever the case may have been, priority was given to completion of the church restoration and erection of the new tower. Work on the new main organ was postponed until 1650, when the burgomasters signed a contract with Hans Wolff Schonat on 8 May.

8. A silver plate, made in 1613 by the Utrecht silversmith Adam van Vianen and presented to Hans Wolff Schonat in 1649 upon completion of the organ in the Lutherse Kerk in The Hague. The plate is ca. 19 cm in diameter and is borne by a triton seated on a tortoise. A low relief on the inside depicts Jupiter and Io. Engraved on the outside is the inscription:

To master Hans Wolff Schonat,

the Lutheran Church has given,

by reason of the well-made organ,

this plate in good memory.

Next to this are the arms and names of: Hans Jacob Behr, Conrad Hoppe, Jan Hoffgen, Hans Conrad Brechtel, Otho von Langen, Christian Eyckmeyer and Andreas Pfennieg, ‘Ouderlingen en Diaconen in ’s-Gravenhaag 1649.’

The Schonat family

Hans Wolff Schonat was the sixth child of Martin and Barbara Schonat, and was baptised on 13 August 1614 at Windesheim in the German Rhineland.38 Martin Schonat († 1627), born in Burgellern near Scheßlitz, was also an organ builder. He was probably apprenticed to Timotheus Compenius of Königsberg, and he went on to work for Friedrich Künzinger in Lohr, and for an unnamed builder in Coburg. In 1602 Martin Schonat established his own workshop in Kitzingen. He produced a number of new organs, the most important of which were for the Stadtkirche in Leutershausen (1607) and the Stadtkirche in Windesheim (1617). The Schonats had eight children, two of whom became organ builders: Hans Wolff and his younger brother Johann Linhard (1616-1661). Since both were young when their father died, they will have been apprenticed elsewhere. Johann Linhard trained with Johann Georg Künzinger of Lohr, the son of his father’s teacher Friedrich. In the years 1638-41 Johann Linhard completed the renovation of the organ in the Jacobikirche in Rothenburg, which his teacher had commenced. This was a remarkable instrument comprising three separate sections, two of which stood opposite each other against the walls of the nave, with the Positiv placed on a passage connecting them. The manual compass was CD–c3 (48 notes). The pedal stops were located on the Hauptwerk chest, enabling some Hauptwerk stops to be available by transmission on the pedal. Upon completion of work at Rothenburg, Linhard began to build a new instrument for the Marienkapelle in his own town of Würzburg (1642). In succeeding years too, Johann Linhard was a productive builder, though nothing remains of his instruments.

Although it cannot be ruled out that Hans Wolff Schonat was also apprenticed to Johan Georg Künzinger, and that he subsequently worked with his brother for some time, it is probable that he arrived in Holland in the early 1640s. It is known that Hans Wolff Schonat also made harpsichords and cabinet organs, the latter in view of the fact that a small organ signed Hans W. Schoonat was offered for sale in Amsterdam in 1740.39

In 1648-49 Hans Wolff Schonat constructed a new organ for the Evangelisch Lutherse Kerk in The Hague; it must have met with great approval, for he was rewarded with a silver plate made by the Utrecht silversmith Adam van Vianen (now preserved in the Rijksmuseum). Unfortunately, little is known about the organ in the Lutherse Kerk. It was enlarged in 1688 by Appolonius Bosch, and altered and moved in 1724 by Rudolph Garrels. Parts of it were used by Johann Heinrich Hartmann Bätz in his new organ for the same church, completed in 1762. Some pipework by Schonat still survives in this instrument.40

The new organ in the Evangelisch Lutherse Kerk in The Hague seems to have been Schonat’s showpiece, and it is not unlikely that news of his skills soon spread to Amsterdam. Various members of the town council frequented The Hague on business and even had their own lodgings there; with plans for their own Nieuwe Kerk in mind they will have been particularly interested to see the work of organ builders. This may go to explain why a craftsman who was relatively unknown in Holland was commissioned to build the main organ for the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam.

Upon acquiring this prestigious contract, Schonat settled in Amsterdam for some years, where he lived in the Gravenstraat and married the 23-year-old Catharina Rudigers on 10 March 1652.41 After completion of the main organ in the Nieuwe Kerk, Schonat made a small instrument for the Oude Kerk in 1657, using some pipework from the previous, sixteenth-century instrument by Hendrik Niehoff to create an organ with Hoofdwerk, Borstwerk and pedal. Although the case still stands in its original position, the instrument itself was removed in 1821. Much pipework survived and was moved from one organ to another, until in 1977 it was incorporated in the Metzler organ in the Groene Kerk (Willibrordkerk) in Oegstgeest.42

The small organ in the Oude Kerk must have been a success. It was visited by the churchwardens of the Lutheran church, who were planning to order an organ for their church on the Spui in Amsterdam. They requested Schonat to build a similar instrument, but since he and his wife were about to return to Kitzingen, he declined.43 The small organ in the Oude Kerk is the last instrument that he is known to have built.

Schonat and his wife stayed in Kitzingen for some time, and their son Martinus was baptised in the Evangelische Kirche on 22 November 1657. But the family returned to Amsterdam, and in 1659 Hans Wolff Schonat purchased a house (known as De Propheet Daniël) from the Amsterdam harpsichord maker Hermanus Geerdinx in the Nieuwezijds Achterburgwal, near the Raambrug. Two years later, Schonat and his wife lived in the Handboogstraat, according to a mutual will drawn up on 24 October 1661. The last known record of Hans Wolff Schonat dates from 1669 and concerns maintenance of the organ in the Nicolaikerk in Utrecht. Although the archives of Amsterdam do not record the death of Schonat or his wife, it is very probable that they both died in or before 1677. On 15 October of that year a certain Johannes Schonat, aged 25, gave notice in Amsterdam of his intended marriage to Anna Adriana Geerdinghs, daughter of the previously mentioned harpsichord maker Hermanus Geerdinx. On this occasion, Johannes, probably a son of the organ builder and an elder brother of Martinus, declared that his parents were no longer alive.44

9. The main organ with the shutters opened.

Construction of the main organ

Hans Wolff Schonat agreed to build the main organ for the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam for the sum of 7,500 guilders. An extensive contract was drawn up on 8 May 1650, which is known to have been kept in the white box in the room;45 despite the fact that it is presumed lost, the text of the nineteenth article has survived:

The master is also to be permitted, when the pipework is to be tuned, to employ another man to sit at the keyboard who has knowledge of such, at the expense of the town.46

Although this article hardly seems important in itself, Schonat and the town council quarrelled about payment of the ‘keyboard assistant’, and the organ builder turned to a notary to put the matter into writing. This act has survived, and offers a glimpse of progress on the organ in the Nieuwe Kerk. The municipal archives also record the various payments made to Schonat. Between 31 December 1650 and 3 December 1652, accounts amounting to 2,200 guilders were settled; in addition, on 17 June 1652 the original contract sum was increased by no less than 2,000 guilders because some changes to the work have been made.47 In view of this considerable sum, which was taken into account in the following payments to Schonat, the original plan must have been extensively altered while the organ was being built. One such change possibly concerned the manual compass. Research has revealed that the channels for F# and G# are not in the usual position, and that some of the front pipes are connected otherwise than would normally be expected. A number of Schonat’s pipes for F# and G# have survived, and it would therefore seem plausible that these notes were added while building was in progress. Dates found in the Hoofdwerk and Rugpositief chests indicate that they were completed by 1652; the decision to add the extra notes therefore meant that considerable adaptions had to be made, with corresponding costs.

Three payments were made to Schonat in 1653: on 13 May he received 800 guilders, on 30 June 1,500 guilders and on 11 November 500 guilders. In the following year he was paid 600 guilders on 5 June, and another 800 guilders on 13 November. On 9 April 1655 Schonat received another 800 guilders; around this time he probably began to voice the instrument, a process which was to take some ﬁve months. The remainder of the sum due, 2,300 guilders, was paid on 24 August. The organ must have been inspected at about this time, for on 7 September Schonat received a gratuity of 200 ducats (630 guilders).48 Altogether, the builder was therefore paid more than 10,000 guilders. In the context of the refurbishment of the church this was a relatively small amount, comparable to the expense of installing a large new window in each of the transepts.

Hardly any documents have survived concerning the construction and inspection of the organ. Besides the payments to Schonat, there are just a few records concerning the shutters for Jacob van Campen’s case.49 The carving on the case was executed by Artus Quellijn, while the shutters were painted by Jan Gerritsz. van Bronchorst. In order to install the instrument the last row of graves in the church had to be removed in order to create a strong foundation. A further complication was that work on the tower came to a halt. As in many churches, it was intended to house the bellows there, but although piles had been sunk into the ground in 1647, progress on the enormous tower was slow. A year after the ﬁrst war against England broke out in 1652, the old town hall was destroyed by ﬁre, and the town council decided to discontinue work on the tower. At the time it was no more than a stump of about eleven metres height; after it had been roofed over with planks and an iron railing, the bellows chamber was built on top.50

According to Joachim Hess, the organ was inspected by Nicolaas Lossy, then organist of the Nieuwe Kerk, his colleague Jacobus van Noordt from the Oude Kerk, and the well-known Utrecht musician Jonkheer Jacob van Eyck. In view of the generous increment paid to Schonat, his work must have met with great satisfaction. It could hardly have been otherwise, since Lossy had been closely involved in the voicing and ﬁnishing of the instrument, as he had been in the transept organ too. The above-mentioned notorial act does indeed reveal that it was he who assisted from the keyboards, as mentioned in article nineteen; in 1657 Schonat recorded this through the notary as follows:

…the same work has been taken on by the same Lossy and beside the witness [Schonat] very excellently completed, to which tuning the said Lossy has spent the time of ﬁve months long, and during the same time has so furthered and taken to heart the work, that in the summertime from four o’clock in the morning until ordinarily late in the evening he remained there, as in succeeding days he also stayed there from the morning at daybreak to the evening, except that in the afternoon he went home for a short time to eat something, is in the end the said work so laudably executed by the same Lossy beside the witness, that he the witness has had his complete contentment and satisfaction, as in the inspection of the said organ it has proved clear that nothing in the least could be said about the tuning, that for years after the inspection of the said organ the now deceased joncker van Eyck, who lived in Utrecht, spoke very laudably of the tuning to the witness in the presence of others.51

The above passage also conﬁrms that Van Eyck took part in the inspection and, according to Schonat, gave a positive assessment of the instrument. Nevertheless, this was not the end of the matter, for the town council refused to pay Lossy for his services. If Schonat was of the opinion that Lossy was owed money, the treasurer Van Dronckelaer snarled, then he was to settle it himself: should you be given money to pay him, now you have money enough. For this reason Schonat requested the notary to put matters into writing. The organ builder defended Lossy and declared that he had been most suitable to govern and manage an organ with good knowledge, as is required of a keen, quick and very good organist. It remains uncertain whether the town council ﬁnally rewarded Lossy for his efforts.

This animosity between organist, organ builder and town council was probably sparked off by the fact that, according to the churchwardens, Nicolaas Lossy had adopted a provocative attitude on various occasions. No sooner was the new instrument ﬁnished than complaints were made about the organist. In a meeting of the church council on 24 August 1656 it was remarked that, on the preceding Saturday, Lossy had played in a popish manner, so that people had sung to his playing, which was not customary. This was considered a matter with a bad consequence, but it was decided to have the minister and elder ﬁrst investigate exactly what had occurred. On 28 September the minister reported that the playing on the organ in the Nieuwe Kerk had occurred without offence in the usual way. According to the minister, therefore, nothing incorrect had taken place. However, on 5 October new complaints were made about Lossy’s playing: concerning the playing on the organ in the Nieuwe Kerk, it is said that last Saturday popish ditties were played and sung most offensively. In order to nip the seeping evil in the bud, it was decided to complain to the burgomasters. According to the minutes of the church council, Lossy was summoned to the town hall and saltishly spoken to. But he declared ignorance: there had been no singing, he had played in the usual manner, and the noise in the church had been caused by the dog beater or his wife. The burgomasters consequently decided to put matters into the hands of the sheriff: if the church council had any evidence, then they must submit it. The church council reacted by appealing to the sheriff. The latter reassured the church council that if anything irregular occurred, action would be taken; in other words, they should not interfere. When at last it became clear that the ‘evidence’ against Lossy came from hearsay, the church council decided to let the matter rest, on condition that such will not happen again.52

The absence of documents makes it difﬁcult to form an accurate impression of the 1655 instrument. It is known that Schonat built a two-manual organ, with a large independent pedal division compared with other instruments in Holland; the pitch was about a semitone above a1 = 440 Hz. Like Hans Henrich Bader at Zutphen ten years before, he employed spring rather than slider chests. The reeds had wooden boots and tin shallots.53 The two Hoofdwerk mixtures almost certainly contained a tierce rank.54 On the basis of the surviving Schonat pipework, the 1655 stoplist can be reconstructed as follows:

Later sources conﬁrm the Hoofdwerk and pedal stoplists; the Rugpositief remains less certain. Edskes suspects that there was a shove coupler between Hoofdwerk and Rugpositief, as well as three ventils and a tremulant;55 although this seems plausible, it is not supported by archival evidence. In a poem written for the opening of the new town hall, Joost van den Vondel speaks of fourteen pairs of stops, suggesting that the instrument had 28 stop knobs.56 The keys F# and G#, almost certainly added during construction, were probably accommodated as split sharps, as in the transept organ. Unfortunately, information is lacking on the number of ranks in the mixtures and the extent to which other stops had doubled ranks.

Various chroniclers were particularly enthusiastic about the splendid exterior of the main organ. Fokkens wrote as follows: … incomparable with the previous one, in the whole of the Netherlands there is nothing so exquisite. Von Zesen wrote in similar words, as did Olfert Dapper, who added that this also applied to the sounding tone of the organ.57 Nevertheless, as in many other towns, the main organ did not fulﬁll the leading musical role: this was taken by the transept organ, which was used daily for the popular evening recitals.

10. The choir organ in the Oude Kerk in Amsterdam, built in 1657 by Hans Wolff Schonat.

Enlargement of the main organ by Jacobus van Hagerbeer

Nicolaas Lossy held the post of organist until his death in August 1664. He and his wife were buried on the same day, and it is assumed that they fell victim to the plague, which took thousands of lives that year in Amsterdam.58 Lossy was not succeeded by his son Johannes, but by the organist of the Nieuwezijds Kapel, Anthoni van Noordt (1619-1675).59 He was the brother of Jacob van Noordt, who in 1652 had been appointed to succeed Dirck Jansz. Sweelinck at the Oude Kerk. Anthoni van Noordt is one of the few Dutch organists by whom compositions have survived: his Tabulatuur-Boeck van Psalmen en Fantasyen forms the main source of information on organ playing in the Republic in the mid-seventeenth century. (The Republic refers to the federation of seven provinces in the Northern Netherlands in the period ca. 1600-1795: Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Gelderland, Overijssel, Groningen and Friesland.) Van Noordt published his volume in 1659 and dedicated it to the burgomasters of Amsterdam. The pieces were therefore written before his appointment to the Nieuwe Kerk, and he may have been inspired by the small organ in the Oude Kerk, completed in 1657. Unlike the instrument in the Nieuwezijds Kapel, this organ had a ‘modern’ independent pedal, which some of the pieces require.60

Despite the fact that archive material is again lacking, it may be assumed that Van Noordt was responsible for a proposal to enlarge and renew the main organ of the Nieuwe Kerk. In the Oude Kerk the main organ had been renovated a few years before by Jacobus van Hagerbeer, and it may well be that the Nieuwe Kerk did not want to lag behind. Moreover, Amsterdam organists must have been aware of the fact that most other towns in the Republic had already introduced congregational accompaniment, and they may have wanted to adapt their own instruments in anticipation of this new role. Whatever the case may have been, no half measures were taken. On 31 May 1668 the treasurers were granted permission to negotiate with Jacobus Galtusz. van Hagerbeer on repairs to the organ according to the largest speciﬁcation. One of the conditions was that Van Hagerbeer, who resided in Haarlem at the time, would pay for his own materials and tools, except for scaffolding and a place to cast metal. He accepted the commission for 10,000 guilders and commenced work on 14 September of the same year. The instrument was to be ﬁnished within two and a half years.61

Various plans were apparently made, but unfortunately none has survived, and the exact content of Van Hagerbeer’s contract is unknown. In view of the fact that the contract sum was almost as much as the organ had cost in the ﬁrst place, it may be assumed that far-reaching alterations were envisaged. When the commission was granted, Van Hagerbeer received a ﬁrst installment of 1,000 guilders. On 15 November 1668 it was decided that he was to receive another 600 guilders per quarter, a sum that was later raised to 800. Of the contract sum, 3,000 guilders was to be kept as security until the organ had been completed and inspected.62

Jacobus van Hagerbeer did not live to ﬁnish his work: he died in February 1670 and was buried in the Nieuwe Kerk. On 6 March his widow, Maria van Campen, relinquished the contractual obligations of her deceased husband. Accounts settled at the time reveal that Van Hagerbeer had paid out 5,800 guilders, while unpaid suppliers’ bills amounted to 318 guilders, 13 stivers and 4 pence. Roelof Barentsz Duyschot (1620-1684), Van Hagerbeer’s foreman, took on the completion of his master’s work for the remaining sum of 3,881 guilders, 6 stivers and 12 pence. The instrument was to be completely ﬁnished within two years, and he was to pay Maria van Campen 150 guilders for the use of tools.63 Duyschot, assisted by his son Johannes (1645-1725), did not manage to complete the work in time, and the organ was not inspected until the second half of 1673. Hess writes that the inspection was carried out by Jacobus and Anthoni van Noordt, Jan Jansz. Backer, organist of the Nieuwezijds Kapel, Michiel Nouts, carillonneur of the Oude Kerk, and Salomon Verbeeck, carillonneur of the tower known as the Regulierstoren. They must have approved of the instrument, since Roelof Barentsz Duyschot was given a gratuity of 200 silver ducats on 20 September. The next day he received the remaining sum of 581 guilders, 6 stivers and 12 pence. In addition, on 20 October the treasurer paid another 130 guilders to Maria van Campen for completion of the organ in the Nieuwe Kerk. A note to the effect that this money was at Duyschot’s expense may indicate that he had not paid the agreed amount for the hire of tools.64

Once again, through the absence of archives it is not clear exactly what was done to the organ. Joachim Hess records that the instrument was enlarged by adding seventeen stops and a third manual. It is known that Van Hagerbeer installed two more bellows than envisaged in the speciﬁcation.65 The instrument itself reveals that an eleven-stop Bovenwerk was added, as well as six stops on the Rugpositief. The Bovenwerk was new, but existing front pipes by Schonat were employed for the Praestant 8'. Remarkably, a slider chest was supplied for this stop, while a spring chest was made for the other Bovenwerk stops. In the Rugpositief a raised chest was added, connected by conveyances to the existing Schonat chest. A Cornet was also added to the Rugpositief on a separate little chest; a number of dummy front pipes by Schonat were employed for this prestant-scale stop. The new Rugpositief stop knobs were ﬁtted into the back of the Rugpositief case. Work also included changes to the spring construction of the pallets in the Schonat chests, and new separate chests for the bass octave of the 16-foot ﬂue stops. The Hoofdwerk and pedal stoplists remained unchanged, although it is almost certain that the number of doubled ranks in various stops was considerably increased, and the composition of the mixtures changed.

In view of the fact that Jacobus van Hagerbeer died while the work was being carried out, and father and son Duyschot will have ﬁnished it in keeping with his manner of working, it is difﬁcult to estimate their share of the rebuild. Sufﬁce it to say that they were proud of the result, as the plaque that they installed above the console testiﬁes:

Roelof Barendsz Duyschot of Goor and

Iohannes Duyschot Father and Son have

rebuilt and improved this organ Anno 167366

The instrument now boasted 43 stops, winded by eight bellows of 9 x 6 foot, and was thus the largest in Amsterdam. The stoplist was almost certainly as follows:

Through the introduction of wide open ﬂutes in the Rugpositief and the addition of a Bovenwerk, regular features of organs in Holland from the sixteenth century onwards, the instrument had become more typical of this region. Notable is the presence of the Vox Humana, Baarpijp and Quintadeen on the Bovenwerk; this group of three stops, probably found here for the ﬁrst time, was to become more or less standard in Bovenwerk departments in Holland until the nineteenth century. The Cornet was also new in organ building in the Republic in the second half of the seventeenth century, and this stop too was soon to become a feature of most organs.67 The Cornet in the Nieuwe Kerk had prestant scaling and the surprisingly low composition 8' - 51/3' - 31/5'. Later Cornet stops were wider and had a higher composition.

Anthoni van Noordt, who had presumably proposed to have the organ renovated, probably only played a few times on the renewed organ. Over the years his health had deteriorated to such an extent that he was discharged from ofﬁce before completion of the instrument:

By reason of the indisposition of Anthonij van Noort, organist of the Nieuwe Kerck, it is approved and agreed, that Van Noort is declared emeritus with retention of his salary for the rest of his life.68

Some years later something similar happened to his brother Jacobus in the Oude Kerk.69 In the Nieuwe Kerk, the burgomasters were now authorised to appoint another competent organist. As long as Anthoni van Noordt continued to live, however, his successor would not receive a salary, but would have to be satisﬁed with occasional payments and the prospect in salary too to succeed [Van Noordt]. Hendrik Rijpelenberg, who was appointed organist of the Nieuwe Kerk on 20 November 1673, had to make do without a salary for more than a year. His predecessor was laid to rest in the Zuiderkerk on 23 February 1675.

Hendrik Rijpelenberg was to be organist of the Nieuwe Kerk for nearly twenty years. Like his predecessors, on occasion he was asked to inspect organs. He took part in the inspection of the newly completed Westerkerk organ in 1686, and possibly in that of the renovated organ in the Grote Kerk in Alkmaar a year before.70 As far as is known, nothing was done to the main organ in the Nieuwe Kerk during his period of ofﬁce. Hendrik Rijpelenberg died in March 1692 and was succeeded by Simon van Ulft.71

11. The Nieuwezijds Voorburgwal towards the north, drawn by Johannes Schouten (1750). At the west end, the stump of the tower can be seen with the wooden bellows chamber on top.

Notes

1 Boltes 1886; Enschedé 1917.

2 Bouman 1948.

3 Edskes 1981.

4 Jongepier 1990.

5 Gemeentearchief Amsterdam (gaa, Amsterdam Municipal Archive) archive no. 777, box 52/27/4/2, Het tegenwoordige groot orgel van de Nieuwe Kerk, 1655 tot heden (manuscript, ca. 1975). The Organ Archive of Utrecht University also preserves Bijtelaar’s: Het grote orgel van 1655 (unpublished, ca. 1961) and Supplement op de geschiedenis van het groot orgel in de Nieuwe Kerk van Amsterdam (unpublished, ca. 1968).

6 Hess 1774 / 1980.

7 Information on the history of the Nieuwe Kerk is taken mainly from: Breen 1944 and Vrieze (ed.) 1999.

8 Fokkens 1662, 202.

9 Commelin 1693, 446-447.

10Commelin 1693, 447.

11 Brouwer Ancher 1897. Beside information on the organs the article describes the installation of several new stained-glass windows at a cost of many thousands of guilders.

12 Several drawings dating from before 1645 show a large bricked-up window in the west end; it seems most likely that the main organ would have stood against it. Breen 1944, 77.

13 Enschedé 1917, 3.

14 Translated with the help of Dr E. Rose.

15 gaa, archive no. 5024 inv. no. 1, fol. 151v.

16 Enschedé 1917, 21.

17 Vente 1963, 67-71.

18 Bouwstenen 1980, 250.

19 Bijtelaar 1975, 51-52.

20 Nieuwkoop 1988, 339.

21 Nieuwkoop 1988, 372.

22 Steketee 1993, 22.

23 Nieuwkoop 1988, 94, 119.

24 gaa, archive no. 376, inv. no. 3, fol. 202r.

25 According to a description dating from 1866 the front pipes of the transept organ were all made of very hard tin and largely corroded by age. In view of the fact that there is no mention of replacement in the archives, and the Van Hagerbeers in principal only used lead front pipes, it could be concluded that these front pipes dated from before 1644.

26 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 1, fol. 127v.

27 C.H. Edskes, Rapport betreffende het kleine orgel in de Nieuwe Kerk te Amsterdam (Groningen, 1984, Rijksdienst voor de Monumentenzorg Zeist).

28 gaa, archive no. 5024, inv. no. 1, fol. 151v. This fact was published by Enschedé in 1917.

29 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 459, fol. 10v.

30 The year 1651 is certainly incorrect, since a notarial act dated 7 April 1650 survives in which it is stated that the organ in the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam was made commendably. Bouwstenen 1971, 285.

31 Hess ca. 1815 / 1907.

32 Fokkens 1662, 207-209.

33 Dapper 1663, 383.

34 Zesen 1664, 330.

35 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 1, fol. 130r.

36 Brouwer Ancher 1897, 14.

37 The Leiden and Alkmaar organs took much longer to build than was envisaged, to the considerable irritation of the churches.

38 Information on the Schonat family is taken largely from Wohnhaas 1968.

39 In the literature mention is made of a virginal by Schonat dated 1643, supposedly in the Gemeentemuseum in The Hague. The instrument is not in the collection, however, so such references must be based on a misunderstanding. J.H. van der Meer describes a harpsichord by Schonat in a private collection in Spain. It is dated 1643, has a single manual with compass C/E to c''' and two 8-foot stops; see Meer 1998. For the 1740 advertisement, see Gierveld 1977, 274-276.

40 Jongepier 1995. The pipework concerned is the Rugpositief Holpijp 8' and Octaaf 2', and three ranks of the Mixtuur.

41 Gierveld 1977, 275.

42 Os 1978.

43 Kluiver 1974, 61-62.

44 Gierveld 1977, 275-276.

45 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 460, fol. 13v.

46 The information in this article is included in a notarial act drawn up on 12 September 1657 in Amsterdam in the presence of notary Westfrisius. gaa, archive no. 5075, inv. no. 2801, no. 100. See also Scheurleer 1909-1914.

47 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 462, fol. 13v.

48 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 460, fol. 13v; inv. no. 461, fol. 13v; inv. no. 462, fol. 13v.

49 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 461, fol. 16v.

50 Vrieze (ed.) 1999, 25-27.

51 gaa, archive no. 5075, inv. no. 2801, no. 100.

52 Records of the church council dated 24 August, 22 September, 5 October and 2 November 1656. gaa, archive no. 376, inv. no. 9, fol. 172v, 173r, 175r, 176v, 177r, 178v, 179r and 180r.

53 This can be concluded from a restoration plan by Johannes Duyschot dated 1697. Transcribed in the supplements to C.H. Edskes, Rapport betreffende het grote orgel in de Nieuwe Kerk te Amsterdam (Groningen 1975 (i), 1976 (ii), rdmz Zeist).

54 As late as 1839, F. Smeer, who was closely involved in the restoration, considered it desirable that both these stops were changed such that the same may consist entirely of pure ﬁfths and octaves. gaa, archive no. 378, inv. no. 182.

55 Edskes Rapport 1975, 4.

56 Zanten 1999, 226.

57 Fokkens 1662, 207-209; Dapper 1663, 383; Von Zesen 1664, 308-309.

58 Bijtelaar manuscript ca. 1975, 14.

59 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 2, fol. 193v-194r.

60 Nieuwkoop 1990. However, Van Nieuwkoop bases his theory on the assumption that neither of the organs in the Nieuwe Kerk had manual keys for F# and G# in 1659, an assumption now proved untenable (see the description of the main organ in this book). A relationship between the Tabulatuurboeck and the Nieuwe Kerk organs, therefore, may no longer be excluded. On the other hand, Van Noordt would have had easy access to the new choir organ in the Oude Kerk, where his brother Jacobus was organist.

61 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 3, fol. 183v, 186r and 194v.

62 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 3, fol. 186r and 194v; inv. no. 4, fol. 8r.

63 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 4, fol. 100.

64 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 477.

65 gaa, archive no. 5039, inv. no. 4, fol. 100.

66 The original plaque has been lost. Until the last restoration it was in its original place above the keyboards, but afterwards it had disappeared (information offered by Erik Visser, custodian of the organs in the Nieuwe Kerk).

67 Biezen 1995, 355-356.

68 gaa, archive no. 5024, inv. no. 2, fol. 183r.

69 Nieuwkoop 1988, 382.

70 Vlagsma 1992, 131-132.

71 gaa, archive no. 378nk, inv. no. 22.