Wikipedia:Peer review/Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1/archive1

Wie schön leuchtet der Morgenstern, BWV 1

I've listed this article for peer review because this is a cantata by Bach first performed OTD in 1725, No. 1 for a reason, and I would like to find out if the present GA has potential for FA.

Thanks, Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Reason for #1

• Re. "No. 1 for a reason" – I don't know: I never saw a reason given why the Bach Gesellschaft (BG) opened its first publication with precisely this cantata. A few Bach cantatas had been published in the first half of the 19th century, and it seems logical the BG chose previously unpublished works early in their complete works edition. But that still leaves hundreds of works that could have been chosen. Even why the first cantata volumes of the BG edition had so many chorale cantatas seems rather accidental (most of these cantatas had been kept together in Leipzig for a long period of time, so their manuscripts were possibly fairly easy to access for the BG editors). And again, that still leaves a few dozen cantatas which they could have chosen as first item of their first volume. Further, the BG choices are maybe not even solid reasons: their second volume of cantatas already contained two works that didn't belong in a series of cantatas by Bach. So, I doubt this cantata is "No. 1 for a reason" – but look forward to an explanation in a reliable source that can explain it. --Francis Schonken (talk) 11:44, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

  I would also like to know that reason, but all I'm saying - and only here, not in the article - is that there must have been a reason to make this and no other #1, - while it's rather a final point, being the last of the second-cycle chorale cantatas. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:32, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

  Re. "there must have been a reason" – no, why should there? If all reliable sources consistently give no reason whatsoever it is WP:OR to postulate "there must have been" one. That is, unless you're prepared to include "pure randomness" as one of many possible reasons. But even "pure randomness" can not be given as a reason in Wikipedia unless a source says so. So, go look it up in sources if any of them gives a reason. I re-read Moritz Hauptmann's Preface to the first BGA volume, and the only thing it seems to confirm, somewhat indirectly, is that ready access to Leipzig sources played a role. Which indeed is no confirmation of whatever reason why precisely this cantata was chosen, among many dozen manuscripts available in Leipzig at the time, to become the first of the first volume. --Francis Schonken (talk) 14:57, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Chronology in recordings

• One small error I noticed in the table of recordings at the bottom of the page, they are not listed in chronological order (1981 is listed before 1971). DrGregMN (talk) 13:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

  DrGregMN, I fixed it, correcting the date, and promise to add better sourcing to the recordings in general, or make a separate article for the discography (or both). --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)