> My understanding is that for centuries after Bach's death, they were disregarded.
Not exactly.
Bach died in 1750. At this time the "market" for music was going through big changes. In Bach's time the main customers for music were courts of barons and kings and municipalities. That's the career he had, a musikmeister.
But look deeper and you'll see an economic landscape changing: the rise of cities, merchants, financial capitalism, etc. A bourgeoisie was rising and consuming music in concert rooms, opera houses and for private playing. But this bourgeoisie had different tastes. They didn't have a deep musical instruction so they preferred more "pop" music: easy to listen, easy to play, easy to follow. Bach's music is the opposite of it. It was out of fashion.
Bach's sons followed this simplified style. Most of all, Carl Philip Emanuel Bach was big into it. He got so good at this that he became an instructor and mentor to both Mozart and Haydn.
But Carl never stopped adoring his father music and used Johan Sebastian Bach (his dad) material for teaching. So J.S. Bach was widely known and venerated among musicians, including Beethoven.
However, the public recognition of Bach's worth only began when Mendelssohn made public presentations of his masses, in 1829. But this was 37 years before Pablo Casals was born.