Subject: CONTEMPORARIES OF MOZART: Joseph Haydn
From: Gary Smith
To: All
Date Posted: 12:09:06 05/31/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
CONTEMPORARIES OF MOZART:
Haydn, Franz Joseph (1732-1809)
This is another posting in an irregular series on the various contemporary composers from Mozart's lifetime. The material is mostly derivative from general sources as noted. These are the people that Mozart:
Competed for work with.
Considered as friends and colleagues.
Knew from reputation.
Taught/nurtured as pupils and students.
Joseph Haydn has suffered through the decades under the image of “Papa” Haydn, the be-wigged Kapellmeister of a remote court offering up Classical Lite as opposed to any substantive works. This is a malicious reduction of one of the pivotal composers in history. Haydn was responsible for the maturing of Classical music by his measured development of all its genres and practices. One might accept the point that he had fewer “great” works than Mozart or Beethoven, but over the long stretch of time that constituted the Classical Era, it was Haydn to whom the musical community kept looking to for quality works, for it was he who was constantly supplying them from the very start. His influence is felt everywhere in the music of that time. For one example, while Beethoven may have considered Mozart the superior composer, it is Haydn whom you “hear” when listening to early Beethoven works.
Haydn was born in Austria of pure German stock. This has been a point of importance in Europe, as various studies have attempted to claim Haydn as being Czech, or Croatian, or Hungarian or even of Gypsy stock, based on the apparent folk tunes and themes he used. However, E. F. Schmid in 1934 collected decisive evidence to show Haydn’s roots were German. The son of a farmer-wheelwright, Haydn showed immediate music promise and at the age of 5 was given into the care of a Hainburg schoolmaster named Johann Mathias Franck, who taught him the rudiments of music, though Haydn recalled that he had often received “more thrashings than food” from his benefactor! At 8 Haydn was “discovered” by Georg Reutter, who was looking for talented singers for the choir at St. Stephens’ Cathedral in Vienna. Haydn was selected and went off with him to Vienna and became a choirboy, arriving in Vienna in the late spring of 1740. For the next ten years, he was a prominent and well-liked member of the choir, but accounts differ as to whether he received much in the way of systematic musical training beyond singing. Haydn did receive some training by all accounts, so at the least it can be said that his native talent in this area was not neglected so much as malnourished for these ten years.
When his voice broke at 17, he left St. Stephen’s and lived at first in poverty as a music teacher. His quarters were in the Michaelhaus (still standing proudly in Vienna) in “a miserable little attic room without a stove.” Aside from teaching, he studied music on his own and played for money in various serenade groups and orchestras. Also living in this house was the court poet Pietro Metastasio and the dowager Princess Esterházy, the mother of the two princes Haydn would be working for in the not-too-distant future. Through contacts such as these Haydn was introduced to the composer Nicola Porpora. This got Haydn engaged as an accompanist and valet to the composer. While somewhat demeaning, this position allowed Haydn to take payment in the form of compositional and singing lessons, as well as in the Italian language. Also, via this engagement with Porpora, Haydn was able to make further contacts in the music circles of Vienna.
Porpora left Vienna sometime in 1752 or 53, which then saw Haydn working for two aristocratic patrons for the balance of the 1750s. The first was with Karl Joseph Edler von Fürnberg, supplying mostly chamber music for small musical gatherings, which Haydn as well played in. It was for these gatherings that the first quartets were composed. However, this work was far more freelancing than a “position” as such, meaning that Haydn did not give up teaching. But, through the efforts of von Fürnberg he was to meet Count Karl Joseph Franz Morzin. Supposedly on von Fürnberg’s written recommendation in 1758 (or 1759, accounts differ), Haydn became music director to Count Morzin’s musical establishment for the fee of 200 gulden (say $ 9000 US), free room and meals at the staff table. The Count maintained a small orchestra for which Haydn composed his first symphony. This appointment was a godsend to the struggling composer, and he must have felt great elation at the prospects for the future.
Until, unfortunately, the Count dissipated his fortune (the word “squandered” is also applied here) and thus disbanded his musical establishment, probably in 1760. Despite this loss, good fortune smiled upon Haydn once again. Prince Nikolas Esterházy had heard Haydn’s initial symphony at the Count’s, and being pleased by it, offered the composer the vice-Kapellmeister post with his own musical establishment. The contract for this is dated 1 May 1761, but some information exists to show that Haydn was with the Prince in 1760, so he may have had another lesser position before achieving this plum assignment. Here, at Eisenstadt, Hungary, Haydn remained with the Esterházy household for 30 years, for both Prince Paul and his successor Prince Nikolaus, who reigned from 1762 to 1790, were passionate music-lovers. In 1766 Nikolaus built the palace of Eszterháza (modeled on Versailles, a common practice throughout Europe at this time) on the south side of the Neusiedlersee, spending the greater part of each year in this new home.
At this same point in time, Haydn married Maria Anna Aloysia Apollonia Keller, the ceremony taking place in St. Stephen’s Cathedral. Haydn had fallen in love with her sister first though, but when that Keller daughter entered a convent, Haydn agreed to marry the eldest. It was an unsatisfactory union from both sides. Obviously, she had not been Haydn’s first choice, which probably didn’t set well with her, and since she was devout religious and he was not, he felt she was much too fond of the clergy for his taste. Maria, for her part, appears to have had absolutely no appreciation for the artist she married, as she appears to have been totally lacking of any understanding of her husband’s work. Haydn is reported to have said of her: “It’s all the same to her if her husband is a cobbler or an artist.” He, as the saying goes, found comfort elsewhere, putting it delicately as: “My wife was unable to bear children, and I was therefore less indifferent to the charms of other women.”
One hears of the title Kapellmeister (or in this case, Vice-Kapellmeister) used during the Classical Era, but what did this position actually entail for the bearer of the title? At Eszterháza initially, Haydn was subordinate to Gregor Werner, who by 1760 was old and tired. Haydn’s position was really in fact that of the Kapellmeister, as he appears to have been put in charge of the musical establishment, allowing Werner to, in reality, retire. Werner was still responsible for choral music; on all other occasions regarding musical performances, everything pertaining to music was assigned to Haydn. What that entailed was that Haydn was responsible for organizing the musical events; hiring, training, disciplining and letting go musicians, composing music, acquiring and maintaining the music library, as well as seeing to it that instruments were purchased and maintained. At the time of his hiring, a new theater was under construction, so opera was to soon come under his charge as well. Even with stage plays though, the Princes often wanted incidental music set for them, which Haydn was required to see to. He was obligated to compose for the Prince as required and forbidden to sell or give away this music without direct permission. To compose for others outside the household required special permission from the Prince as well. Haydn was to dress and behave “…as befits an honest house officer in a princely court.” Towards the musicians, he was to set an example of conduct for them and “…avoid undue familiarity in eating and drinking or otherwise in his relations with them, lest he should lose the respect due him.” As remuneration, Haydn initially received 400 gulden plus another 180 for expenses; by 1764 this had risen to 600 gulden plus 180 for expenses, or roughly $30,000 US. In 1778 he became the organist as well, which added another 180 gulden, meaning he made about $40,000 US per annum from just his Kapellmeister duties. This didn’t count any teaching or sales of his compositions, which did bring him progressively more income as the years went on. Finally, Eszterháza, being somewhat remote, presented the situation of being both inexpensive to live at and offering little opportunity to spend money on “luxuries.” Haydn did however buy a house there, and kept chickens, two horses and probably a cow as well. He had two servants eventually and while he was a major person of the Eszterháza household, he never acted as though he was anymore than a well-paid servant there. Haydn was comfortable with who he was, and showed tremendous loyalty to the family that had lifted him out of poverty.
Though modeled on Versailles, the palace of Eszterháza was isolated, by distance and as well culturally from the rest of the Austrian Empire. Haydn's art actually benefited from this seclusion. As he put it (probably making a virtue out of vice here) “There was no one near to confuse me, so I was forced to become original.” What he may have meant there was that with few works by other composers crossing the threshold, his efforts in music could be centered more on expanding the forms he was comfortable with, as opposed to “competing” with other composers for position and acclaim. As his music passed beyond the borders of Eszterháza , Haydn's fame spread throughout Austria, the German states and into Italy as well. As his symphonies and quartets were published and circulated, the standard “bootleg” French editions began to appear in Paris and later in London. This was a standard problem throughout the Classical Era, as with no copyright protection granted composers (except, notably in England), once other than the original publisher seized a work, all monies from sales went into their pockets.
Through the 1760’s and early 1770’s Haydn basically grappled with the problems inherent in learning how to run an operation such as the Eszterháza musical establishment. Before this time he had been more or less a freelancing artist, but now he was a retained liveried composer to a prince who expected a smoothly running operation first, and genius second. And with a theater now open and on the premises, he was expected to compose operas as well, something he had very limited exposure to previously. It was a constantly testing challenge, but one that he successfully mastered. As he mastered the demands of his post, he gradually was given permission to accept outside commissions and to sell his scores directly to publishers for his personal profit. He composed extensively for every possible medium (just see the lists at the end of this work!) and through them pursued his own musical course. One that gently but firmly expanded the “envelope” of the Classical style.
The works within this initial timeframe that standout from the others would be his symphonies, which were increasing in depth and complexity. After 1762, Haydn more or less abandoned the pre-classical, three-movement format that had developed out of Italian opera overtures (fast—slow—fast) and had moved on to a four-movement plan (fast—slow—dance—fast). This change reflects stylistic transforming of late Baroque into the Classical style. Haydn’s maturity was fully established by the Sturn und Drang symphonies of 1770-1774. These works combined the symphonic technique of motivic development (inherent in a sonata-allegro format) with the art of counterpoint and proceeded to expand the intensity and variety of human emotion, as instrumental music had not consistently seen before. One should note especially the symphonies No.26 in d minor (Lamentatione) and No.44 in e minor (Trauer). Symphony No. 26 is his first minor key work in this genre and with its somber intensity, quotations from the plainsong melodies of the Holy Week Liturgy and violent syncopations, must have seemed a revelation of what this form could be, and become. Symphony No. 44 has an opening movement that is tragic and fiery, with a sadly beautiful Adagio. Haydn at one point requested that this particular adagio be played at his funeral. Finally, Haydn gave this work a minuet that is eerily and effectively contrapuntal, in the end again producing a work that gave much pause for thought among connoisseurs and colleagues. Though he had been composing quartets almost from the start of his career, his quartet sets from this time (Op. 9, 17 and 20 in particular), expanded beyond the limits others were composing at. These are milestones in the development of the genre and were avidly studied. Haydn, however, was a practical man in that his compositional approach was essentially two-sided; he could change between an “expressive” style and a “functional” style without apparent difficulty, composing for household use on the one hand and on the other to experiment and expand. The 18th century, unlike the “progressive” 19th, found no contradiction between these two approaches.
After 1772, Haydn’s musical development (conditioned by an edict from the Prince not “…to write so much learned ears”) is characterized by expert, self-assured craftsmanship, the use of more brilliant orchestral resources (adding trumpets and drums, for one) and further expansion of the sonata-allegro style he had picked up. The works through the 1770’s into the early 1780’s provide a consistent musical structure within the genres so that it is possible for one to measure Haydn’s expanding development of his music. These works show an instinctive sense of form, an expansion on the use of orchestral winds (notably the French horn) and the inclination (that grew into a trademark) for building musical development through the elaboration of small motives and themes. In 1784-5 he was commissioned by the Cadiz Cathedral to compose an oratorio without words on Christ's Seven Last Words on the Cross. Here Haydn expands one of his finer talents, his constant ability to find new and inventive solutions to limiting problems, and succeeds on a very high level. He was rightly proud of this work, and its challenge came at an opportune time for him. The Parisian musical society Concert de la Loge Olympique commissioned him to compose 6 symphonies. These six works (Nos. 82-87) were composed in 1785-86 and are so personal and original that it is clear Haydn was setting out to create something entirely new and his own. In 1788-89, he composed three other symphonies for the Loge Olympique, (Nos. 90-92), the last of which was played at the conferring of his Honorary Doctorate of Music by Oxford University. The “Oxford” represents the culmination of Haydn’s symphonic skills. The following 12 are the justly famous “London” symphonies, which are in the end variations on the level the “Oxford” had reached.
By the time of the early 1780’s he had become friends with Mozart, for whom he had the highest admiration. Their works from this date (1781) betray passages of mutual influence. Mozart frequently acknowledged his personal debt to Haydn as a major influence on his developing style, while Haydn, in his more direct way, simply declared that Mozart was “a God in music.” Mozart, in one grand show of gratitude towards Haydn, composed 6 string quartets (k.387, K.421, K.428, K.458, K.464 and K.465), which were played for Haydn on 15 January 1785. Later, when they were published, Mozart wrote a heartfelt dedication to Haydn that accompanied them. Through them one understands Mozart’s remark, “It was from Haydn that I first learned the true way to compose quartets.” Though we have little information on how much the two composers stayed in touch, we do know that Mozart was much moved and saddened by Haydn’s departure for England. “We are probably saying our last farewell in this life,” he is reported to have told Haydn, with tears in his eyes. He was correct, but from the wrong perspective. Haydn assumed that Mozart meant the remark as a reference to his own advanced age, not the prospect of Mozart’s early passing. Mozart, for his part, defended Haydn from any attacks made within his hearing. The composer Kozeluch once assured Mozart that he would never composed a quartet the way Haydn had, to which Mozart replied: “Nor should I, but do you know why? Because neither you or I would have had so good an idea.” There is a different version of this tale as well, with Kozeluch still criticizing a Haydn quartet effort, and Mozart replying: “Sir, even if the two of us were fused together, we wouldn’t make a second Haydn by a long shot!” Nor was Mozart exempt from the tongue of Kozeluch, who declared upon hearing the overture to Don Giovanni K.527: “Good, but full of faults.” Haydn is reported to have passed along Kozeluch’s condescending judgment upon hearing the full rehearsal of the overture to Die Zauberflöte K.620, “Ah, our good friend Mozart is trying to be learned this time!” (Since Haydn was in England at that point, this anecdote is at best second if not third hand, but is certainly in line with Kozeluch’s style).
For his part, Haydn was equally as generous. When Leopold Mozart visited his son In Vienna later on in 1785, Haydn said to him upon their meeting: “I say to you before God, as an honest man, that your son is the greatest composer I know, personally or by name: he has taste and, in addition, the most profound knowledge of composition.” Later on in England, Haydn was to declare that Mozart was the most extraordinary, original and comprehensive musical genius that was ever known in this or any age. When he received news in England of Mozart’s death, he wrote: “Posterity will not see such a talent again in a hundred years!” (He was and is still correct; it’s been over 200 years now and counting.) The chronicler Dr. Charles Burney later overheard Haydn tell listeners; “He was a truly great musician. I have been often flattered by my friends with having some genius; but he was much my superior.”
Haydn's life at Eszterháza ended in 1790 when Prince Nikolaus died and his successor dismissed the musicians, leaving Haydn his salary and title, though without obligations of any kind. In effect, it was a pension. Haydn left the estate for Vienna where he accepted an invitation from the visiting impresario J. P. Salomon to visit London. Efforts had been made in the past to engage Haydn for a concert series in London. All attempts had failed, for one or another reasons. Salomon had been in Cologne to engage soloists for his concerts when heard of the passing of Prince Esterházy. Knowing what this could mean, he at once set off for Vienna, arriving at Haydn’s home unannounced to declare to the somewhat startled Haydn: “I am Salomon from London and have come to fetch you. Tomorrow we shall conclude an agreement.” He stayed in England from January 1791 to the middle of 1792, being fêted, lionized, and entertained by royalty. He completed his symphonies No. 93-98 on this visit, when he was deeply impressed by the 1791 Handel Festival in Westminster Abbey. In July 1791 the honorary degree of Doctor of Music was conferred on him by Oxford University. The “Oxford” Symphony (No. 92) was given at this event, as Haydn had not completed any new works yet while in England, but he had brought some of his latest works for use, or sale. On his return to Vienna he bought a house there and accepted Beethoven as a pupil, which began an uneasy relationship for both great men. (In the end, Beethoven moved on to other teachers such as Schenk and Albrechtsberger; men who could teach him the craft without tending to influence his style). In 1794 he visited England again, having been commissioned by Salomon to write 6 new symphonies. This 2nd visit lasted from February 1794 to August 1795 and was even more successful artistically and, especially, financially than the first. Haydn’s profits are estimated as being as high as 15,000 gulden, which equates over to approximately $600,000 US. He was wealthy beyond his dreams when he returned to Vienna after the second and final tour.
By this time the Esterházy family had now reconstituted their musical establishment and in turn had sent a request to Haydn asking for his return to Eszterháza as Kapellmeister. Though he really was under no obligation to do so, out of loyalty to the family that had given him so much over the decades, he returned to service. In effect though, he assumed the role that Werner had held as Kapellmeister over 30 years earlier. Haydn composed only for special occasions and was allowed to concentrate on his work as a composer, letting others (notably Hummel for one) take over the actually running of the musical establishment. However, as the story goes, there was one change of note. The latest Prince Esterházy at one point in a discussion early on was edging into being severe with Haydn on some point of business. Haydn’s measured reply was that one shouldn’t talk to “A Doctor of Music from Oxford” in that fashion. The Prince paused and addressed Haydn as “Herr Doktor” from then on, moderating his approach to the celebrated composer.
Between 1796 and 1802 he wrote 6 magnificent settings of the Mass, each unique and distinct. In 1797 he composed his Gott erhalte Franz den Kaiser, which was adopted as Austria's national anthem. He had admired the English “God Save the King” and wanted to honor his own monarch in a similar manner. But his chief pre-occupation at this time was his oratorio Die Schöpfung (The Creation), first published privately in Vienna, 1798. This was followed by Die Jahreszeiten (The Seasons), published in 1801. Both of these works had Baron Gottfried van Swieten working on their text. Apparently the Baron tended to take more than his share of the credit for the success of these works, which annoyed Haydn. Especially when the Baron, an amateur composer, began to offer Haydn suggestions on what needed to be done musically!
During these later years Haydn became “the grand old man” of music. He was made an honorary citizen of Vienna, of various musical societies across Europe, and was awarded many medals for his compositions, etc. Foreign visitors called to pay their respects, which pleased him very much. He kept composing, but it was becoming more difficult for him to submit himself to the rigors of working out the music. From 1803 onwards, his health and strength began to decline, which meant that composition fell off and then basically ceased. Though he made several more public appearances, at first conducting and then finally just attending, he gradually withdrew from public life and stayed at home. His last public appearance was for a performance of The Creation at the hall of the old university, given in 1808, with Salieri conducting and Beethoven in the audience to honor his old teacher.
Joseph Haydn died on 31 May 1809 during Napoleon’s occupation of Vienna. He had not wanted to go into the inner town with the threat of combat all around, so he had settled into his house in Gumpendorf. After Vienna surrendered to French forces, Napoleon had a guard of honor placed in front of his house. But Haydn, already weak, began to quickly lose strength and died quietly at home. On 1 June, Corpus Christi, he was buried at the Hurdsturm Cemetery; a memorial mass was given for him at the Gumpendorf church the following day. Later, on 15 June, a great memorial service was held in the Schottenkirche in the inner city of Vienna, at which Mozart’s Requiem K.626 was performed, under the direction of Joseph Eybler. The major people in the musical world of Vienna were in attendance to say their last farewell to a composer who had been an inseparable part of European music for almost 50 years.
A final indignity was bestowed on him, though. Days after he was buried, persons involved in the study of phrenology (the study of heads and skulls to determine character and intelligence, in other words, nitwit science) dug up his grave and removed the head. Haydn’s skull passed through several hands before being safely stored in a museum in Vienna. Finally in the 1950’s it was restored to the rest of his remains, since moved to Hungary. Given that Mozart’s skull might have been stored away as well, it seems a cosmic joke that the two close friends and colleagues should end up at the end emulating one another once again, if only inadvertently!
If Haydn's life was comparatively uneventful, his vast output of music is notable for the number of surprises and delights contained in nearly every work. Yet though the number and magnitude of Haydn masterpieces are constantly amazing, his music for many decades failed to exert as powerful a sway over the public as that of Mozart and Beethoven. He is regarded as the ‘father’ of the symphony (which he wasn’t) and of the string quartet, but some delectable Haydn lies in his vocal music, in his oratorios, masses, and in his operas (which, while not of the caliber of Mozart’s, are still in process of re-evaluation). In all his music his inventive flair seems practically inexhaustible. Haydn's symphonies were written over a period of several decades and reveal an extraordinary wealth of novel and convincing solutions to problems of form. One very distinctive quality they display - and one for which he was roundly criticized by pedantic critics in their own lifetimes - is wit. This is revealed both on a subtle, musical level by deceptive phrase lengths, rhythmic surprises and deceptive cadences and, on occasion, by his penchant for writing descriptive music (at least in comparison to the times). As well, Haydn delights in exploiting the capabilities of solo instruments and virtuoso performers, and within every genre in which he worked he enlarged, extended, and re-shaped the material he touched. Not revolutionary, but evolutionary motion describes the breadth of Haydn’s compositional span. The symphonies are a remarkable example of his development of a particular form, hallmarked by deep feeling, drama, wit, and, in the final 12, a near-Mozartian perfection of all these qualities combined. But much the same can be said of his quartets and masses (especially the later ones); nor should his keyboard sonatas be overlooked. In fact, one shouldn’t overlook any of Haydn’s work.
Joseph Haydn serves as the locus of the Classical Era, a composer who was able to impart his own stamp on the music of his times, encourage his peers by example and personal contact, and through teaching pass along the musical tools which would allow the further expansion of music. There were composers who were as admired and others whose tunes were as much hummed and whistled during their lifetimes, but no other composer so completely won at the same time the unquestioned and generous respect of his peers and the acclaim of the public.
The collecting and cataloguing of Haydn's works has been the object of considerable research. It was begun in 1766 by Haydn himself (sparked by a complaint of inattentiveness to his job), aided by the Esterházy court copyist Joseph Elssler, whose son Johann (1769-1843) later became Haydn's copyist and faithful servant. Haydn worked on this list until about 1805. In fact, his efforts may have proved an inspiration to Mozart, who began his own catalogue of works in 1784, no doubt, one suspects, not long after meeting Haydn in Vienna. Pohl prepared a manuscript catalogue, and for the Breitkopf and Härtel complete edition Mandyczewski assembled his list of 104 symphonies (but omitting 3 now acknowledged as being by Haydn). Modern scholarship, led foremost by H. C. Robbins Landon, has amended this list, and a modern thematic catalogue has been edited by Hoboken in which works are given Hob. numbers in the manner of Köchel's Mozart catalogue (though the numbering system chosen for Haydn’s works is much cleaner and less complicated!).
SYMPHONIES: Nos. 1-5 (1757); No.6 in D (Le Matin), No.7 in C (Le Midi), No.8 in G (Le Soir) (c.1761); No.9 in C (c.1762); No.10 in D (c.1761); No.11 in Eb (c.1760); No.12 in E, No.13 in D (1763); No.14 in A, No.15 in D (1764); No.16 in Bb, No.17 in F, No.18 in G, No.19 in D, No.20 in C (all before 1762); No.21 in A, No.22 in Eb (The Philosopher), No. 23 in G, No.24 in D (1764); No.25 in C (c.1761-3); No.26 in D minor (Lamentatione) (c.1770); No.27 in G (c.1760); No.28 in A, No.29 in E, No.30 in C (Alleluia), No.31 in D (Horn Signal) (1765); No.32 in C, No.33 in C (c.1760); No.34 in D minor (c.1766); No.35 in Bb (1767); No.36 in Eb (c.1761-5); No.37 in C (c.1757); No.38 in C (Echo) (c.1766-8); No.39 in G minor (c.1768); No.40 in F (1763); No.41 in C (c.1769); No.42 in D (1771); No.43 in Eb (Merkur), No.44 in E minor (Trauer) (c.1771); No.45 in F# minor (Abschied), No.46 in B, No.47 in G (1772); No.48 in C (Maria Theresia) (c.1768-9); No.49 in F minor (La Passione) (1768); No.50 in C (1773); No.51 in Bb, No.52 in C minor (c. 1771-3); No.53 in D (L'Impériale) (c.1780); No. 54 in G, No.55 in Eb (Der Schulmeister), No.56 in C (1774); No.57 in D (1774); No.58 in F, No.59 in A (Feuersymphonie) (c.1776-8); No.60 in C (Il Distratto) (1774); No.61 in D (1776); No.62 in D, No.63 in C (La Roxolane) (c.1780); No.64 in A (c.1775); No.65 in A (c.1771-3); No.66 in Bb, No.67 in F, No.68 in Bb, No.69 in C (Laudon) (c.1778); No.70 in D (1779); No.71 in Bb (c.1779-80); No.72 in D (c.1763-5); No.73 in D (La Chasse) (1780-1); No.74 in Eb (1780); No.75 in D (1779); No.76 in Eb, No.77 in Bb, No.78 in C minor (1782); No.79 in F, No.80 in D minor, No.81 in G (1783-4); No. 82 in C (Bear) (1786); No.83 in G minor (La Poule) (1785); No.84 in Eb (1786); No.85 in Bb (La Reine) (1785); No.86 in D (1786); No.87 in A (1785); No.88 in G, No.89 in F (c.1787); No.90 in C, No.91 in Eb (1788); No.92 in G (Oxford) (1789); No.93 in D, No.94 in G (Surprise), No.95 in C minor, No.96 in D (Miracle) (1791, London); No.97 in C (1792, London); No.98 in Bb (c.1792, London); No.99 in Eb (1793, Austria); No.100 in G (Military), No.101 in D (Clock), No.102 in Bb (1794, London); No.103 in Eb (Paukenwirbel, Drum Roll), No.104 in D (London) (1795, London).
CONCERTOS: vc. in C (c.1765), in D (1783); Klavier in D (c.1784), Klavier and str. in G; hn. No.1 in D (1762), No.2 in D (c.1764); 2 hn. and str. in Eb; for lira organizzata No.1 in C, No.2 in G, No.3 in G, No.4 in F, No.5 in F (c.1786); org. conc. (1756); for tpt. in Eb (1796); for vn. No.1 in A, No.2 in C, No.3 in G (c.1765); for vn., pf., and str. in F (1766); Sinfonia Concertante in Bb for ob., bn., vn., vc. (1792).
STRING QUARTETS: Op.1 (6 qts., 1760); Op.2, Nos. 7-12 (Nos. 9 and 11, with 2 hn. added) (1755-60); Op.9 (6 qts., 1771); Op.17, Nos. 25-30 (1771); Op.20, Nos. 31-6 (1772); Op.33, Nos. 37-42 (1781); Op.42, No.43 (1758); Op.50, Nos. 44-9 (c.1787); Op.51, Nos. 50-6 (1785, Seven Last Words from the Cross); Op.54, Nos. 57-9 (c.1788); Op.55, Nos. 60-2 (c.1788); Op.64, Nos. 63-8 (c.1790); Op.71, Nos. 69-71 (1793); Op.74, Nos. 72-4 (1793); Op.76, Nos. 75-80 (c.1797); Op.77, Nos. 81-2 (c.1799); Op. 103, No.83 (1802-3).
KEYBOARD: 62 sonatas (c. 1761-94), Variations in F minor (1793).
OPERAS: 20 were completed, some of the first ones being lost. The extant 15 include La Canterina (1766); Lo Speziale (1768); Le Pescatrici (1769); L'infedeltà delusa (1773); L'incontro improvviso (1775); Il mondo della luna (1777); La vera costanza (1777-8, rev. 1785); L'isola disabitata (1779, rev. 1802); La fedeltà premiata (1780, rev. 1782); Orlando Paladino (1782); Armida (1783); Orfeo ed Euridice (1791); also 5 puppet operas incl. Philemon und Baucis (1773) and Dido (1776).
MASSES: No.1 in F (Missa brevis) (1750); No.2 in Eb (Grosse Orgelmesse) (1766); No.3 in C (St Cecilia) (1776); No.4 in G (1772); No.5 in Bb (Kleine Orgelmesse) (c.1775); No.6 in C (Mariazellermesse) (1782); No.7 in C (In tempore belli—Paukenmesse) (1796); No.8 in Bb (Heiligmesse) (1796); No.9 in D minor (Nelson) (1798); No.10 in Bb (Theresien-messe) (1799); No.11 in Bb (Schöpfungsmesse) (1801); No.12 in Bb (Harmoniemesse) (1802). Also a Mass in G (c.1750).
CANTATAS & ORATORIOS: Stabat Mater (1767); Applausus (1768); Il Ritorno di Tobia (1774-5); Die sieben letzten Worte unseres Erlösers am Kreuz (The Seven Last Words of Our Saviour on the Cross, 1st version (str. qt.) 1785, choral version 1795-6); Die Schöpfung (The Creation) (1796-8); Die Jahreszeiten (The Seasons) (1799-1801).
CHAMBER MUSIC: 32 pf. trios; 6 sonatas for klavier and vn.; flute qts; lute qts.; divertimentos for str. trio; str. trios; 126 baryton trios; 32 pieces for mechanical clocks; and Notturnos for lira organizzata.
SOLO CANTATAS: Arianna a Naxos for sop. (1790); Berenice che fai (1795).
Sources:
Braunbehrens, Volkmar Mozart in Vienna 1781-1791 Grove Weidenfeld, New York 1986
Clive, Peter Mozart and His Circle: A Biographical Dictionary Yale University Press, New Haven 1993
Concise Oxford Dictionary of Music Oxford University Press 1996
Harrison, Max Liner Notes to the Philips Set “Haydn Name Symphonies” 1996
Larsen, Jens Peter The New Grove Haydn W.W. Norton & Company, New York 1982
Rosen, Charles The Classical Style: Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven W.W. Norton & Company, New York 1972
Sadie, Stanley (Ed.) The New Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians 2nd Edition Groves Dictionaries, New York 2000
Sisman, Elaine (Ed.) Haydn and His World Princeton University Press, Princeton 1997
Subject: Re: Musikalisches Würfelspiel Chart?
From: dennis
To: All
Date Posted: 04:55:47 05/29/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
Musikalische Wurfelspiele--Dice Games Attributed to Mozart Anh
C30.01
The first appearance of a Musical Dice Game under Mozart's name
was in 1793, when J.J. Hummel published two "Introductions" and
tables for Waltzes and Contredances in Berlin and Amsterdam. The
title page of the edition for Waltzes reads (in German, French,
English and Italian):
"W.A. Mozart
Instruction
To compose without the least knowledge of Music so much
German Walzer or Schleifer as one pleases, by throwing a certain
Number with two Dice".
The actual page with the "Instruction" is also in the same 4
languages, giving a good introduction of how to play the game.
Page 2 has the tables for the 1st and 2nd part of the composition.
The tables run "A-H" across and "2-12" downward. Thus the
composition would have 8 measures in the 1st part [1st measure
= A roll of the dice, 2nd measure = B roll of the Dice etc.) and 8 in
the second part. Pages 3-6 give the music of each numbered
measure--on two staffs--(176 different measures) from the dice
rolls from the table on page 2. For example on the fourth roll of
the dice (Column D across), if your roll was 6, you would look up
measure 45 on page 3 and put it in the proper place in the
composition. After 16 rolls of the dice you would have a 16
measure Waltz.
Hummel did not state how he came into possession of this game,
or how he attributed it to Mozart.
In 1798 Nikolaus Simrock in Bonn reprinted the Hummel editions
as his Publisher-Nr.48 (Waltzes), Nr.49 (Contredances), using the
same Introduction and Tables. About 1801 Johann Michael Götz
in Worms published these same Waltzes as his Publisher Nr.690.
Goetz most likely took these from the Simrock edition of 1798.
Wurzbach's 'Biographisches Lexikon of Austria' mentioned the
Hummel, Simrock and Goetz printings. Wurzbach also named a
printing of Kratsch in Hamburg for Contredances. According to
Wurzbach in 1801 Kratsch also put out the Waltz installment for 2
Violins, Flute and Bass. A copy of this is found in the Gesellschaft
der Musikfreundes in Vienna under Mozart's name. Wurzbach also
mentioned Waltz Instructions by Kreitner in Worms which appear
to be identical to that of Hummel in Amsterdam. Issues attributed
to Mozart also appeared about 1800 in Paris by Voigt; in
Amsterdam by Henning; and in 1806 in London by C. Wheatsone.
This last game stated it was "Mozart's Musical Game fitted in an
elegant box, showing by an easy system to compose an unlimited
number of Waltzes, Rondos, Horpipes, & Reels...To compose
Waltz's only, by turn of a te-to-tum". A te-to-tum was a small top
with many sides which could be spun between the fingers. So one
could compose not only with dice.
Thus by the first decade of the 19th Century many games were
issued attributed to Mozart. But a closer look reveals many (if not
almost all) derived from the original J.J. Hummel issue. A possible
hypothesis how Hummel brought the dice game into connection
with Mozart will come in the next section.
In addition to the games with Mozart's name attached were
numerous other pieces that one could compose by somehow
choosing numbers in some random fashion. The first of these
games to appear in print was Johann Philipp Kirnberger's "Der
allezeit fertige Meunuetten--und Polonoisenkomponist" in 1757 in
Berlin. Numerous others followed, some under the name of
popular composers, such as C.P.E. Bach and Joseph Haydn, and of
course Mozart. I found at least 20, in addition to those above
attributed to Mozart, up to 1811. Of these 20, three have had
Mozart's name attached to them at some point.
Probably In the beginning of 1793 in Berlin Johann Karl Friedrich
Rellstab published as Op. CXLII "Instructions so many Waltzes one
will compose with Dice without knowledge of music or
composition". Although published without a composer's name, in
the early 20th Century it became attributed to Carl Phillip Emanuel
Bach. Otto Erich Deutsch believed it was this issue that led Mozart
to write out his Dice Game. On occasion this issue has been said
to be from Mozart in print. However it has nothing to do with
Mozart or C.P.E. Bach, it is only an adaptation of Kirnberger's
"Allzeit fertige Menuetten etc".
In 1790 a musical dice game was published by Marescalchi in
Naples as "Gioco Filarmonico" under the name of Joseph Haydn. It
exits in two issues: one for piano and another for 2 Violins or
Flute and Bass. It consists of two tables that correspond to the
dice game published under Mozart's name by Hummel, Simrock
etc. In 1973 Gunter Thomas (in Festschrift Karl Gustave Fellerer)
showed the true author of this "Gioco Filarmonico". It is actually a
youth work of Maximilian Stadler (1748 - 1833), published in
1781 by Artaria: "Tables from which one can toss off countless
Menuets and Trios for the Klavier. Drawn up by P. Maximilian
Stadler" [copy in Gesellschaft der Musikfreundes in Vienna]. In his
manuscript autobiography Stadler listed this among the pieces he
wrote from 1759 to 1763. The numbers used in the Stadler work
are the same as those in the tables for Haydn's "Gioco
Filarmonico", but also those by Hummel and Simrock for their dice
games attributed to Mozart. The music of Stadler's game and
Haydn's is even the same. To add to this mix-up, Gerber's 1792
Historisch-biographisches Lexicon der Tonkunstler (pg 556)
attributed these Tables and music (also published anonymously in
Vienna and Paris, undated but given as 1780 by Gerber) as being
by one of the two brothers who "around 1783 were members of
the Royal Harmonie", thus Anton or Johann Stadler. Could this be
a clue to how the 1793 Hummel edition got Mozart's name
attached to it?
In the library catalogue estate of Joseph Haydn was listed a
"Cabala which anyone, even those who cannot compose, can make
Menuets with the help of dice". Otto Deutsch thought this game
was the same as Haydn's "Gioico filarmonico", which had been
attributed to Mozart according to Deutsch. However the Cabala
manuscript, found in the Nationalbibliothek Szechenyi in Budapst
is not the same as the "Gioico filarmonico", and there is no author
listed on the manuscript. The game has nothing at all to do with
Mozart.
It appears to me that all the dice games with any Mozart
attribution can be traced back to the Hummel editions of 1793.
The Simrock and Goetz for certain. The wording of some of the
others leads to that conclusion. It appears rather plausible that the
Hummel edition goes back to the Maximilian Stadler game
published by Artaria in 1781. The tables are the same as Stadler's,
which were used for the attributed to Haydn "Gioco Filarmonico"--
which even used the same music. Perhaps Hummel thought if a
dice game was out in Haydn's name, why not use the same tables,
add music by a composer he knew, and put one out in Mozart's
name. Perhaps he even had the Stadler edition in hand, and
thought there was some connection to Anton Stadler, and this
gave him the idea it was by Mozart.
Up to K3 the Music Dice games were not to be found in Köchel. I
guess this in itself shows neither Köchel (K1) nor Waldersee (K2)
believed any of the editions had anything to do with Mozart.
However to my knowledge no-one actually wrote that the Hummel
edition was not by Mozart. Einstein first placed these Dice Games
in K3 in the Anhang section (Anh 294d) for misattributed works.
K6 placed them in the Anh C section (C 30.01).
Paul Lowenstein was the only person (I know of) to actually give
any opinion on when and why Mozart composed the Game. Writing
in the 1929 Zeitschrift fur Musikwissenschaft Lowenstein admitted
it "would be difficult to examine Mozart's authorship from the
musical style of such a composition, not to mention to establish it
beyond a doubt, as the stylistic deployment understandably is
hindered through the deliberate interchangeability of all individual
measures". Taking up the Simrock and Goetz editions, Lowenstein
could not believe the same idea of a forgery suddenly appeared
and was carried out in two different places. Taking into
consideration the strikingly similar published presentations of the
two issues, his logical conclusion was that a connection must have
existed between the works of both publishers. He also concluded
that Goetz took his from Simrock [Lowenstein did not know of the
Hummel editions--Erich Otto Deustch reported on them in the
same journal the following year]. Lowenstein (rather naively)
believed that some unknown person--either from his own
initiative for in the commission of the publisher--could have
worked out and put together the music and then had it issued
under Mozart's name, lacked not only any foundation but also any
credibility. Furthermore, as interest in Mozart was low at the time
of his death and immediately afterwards, a time frame of 10 years
after his death would be too short for any forgeries in his name
according to Lowenstein. Thus he believed the work was by
Mozart. It is very well established that from Mozart, who had a
naive independent spirit, many humorous improvisations are
handed down. To Lowenstein, in some good mood Mozart had
noted the Instructions to his idea of the composition. Thus
Simrock and Goetz could only have obtained the manuscript from
the hands of a third party. Looking at some irregularities and odd
shortcomings in the printings, Lowenstein believed that the
publisher was not working from Mozart's original, but from a copy
made by an unversed hand.
Lowenstein brought the origin of the Dice Games in connection
with Mozart's Mannheim visit (1777/78). He believed most likely
an interested amateur from Mozart's Mannheim acquaintance
circle took pleasure in such games and as a jest Mozart wrote out
these instructions for a game, certainly never intending it to be
printed or delivered to a publisher. By this circumstance the fact
that neither Simrock or Goetz had any ascertainable direct
connections to Mozart is insignificant.
In short there is absolutely no evidence, even a hint beside
Mozart's name being on the title pages of the above issues, that
these games had anything to do with Mozart. Later in the 20th
Century a fragmentary autograph was found that appears to be
some sort of randomly played game. As the two upper staves
contain a piano reduction of the opening of the 3rd movement of
the String Quintet K516, it has been listed in the Koechel
Catalogue as K516f. I will not get into this so-called "Musikalische
Wurfelspiele" here, except to say it has little to do with the type of
dice games listed above.
However many people writing on the subject have used the sketch
of K516f as proof Mozart wrote the dice games published under
his name. One certainly does not lead to the other without more
proof. Even worse, many times what is really one of the Anh
C30.01 games is wrongly called K516f. This happens on the
Philips Complete Mozart Edition CD vol. 45. What Marriner and
Smith are playing is from a table of one of the Anh C30.01
attributed to Mozart games, but it is called K516f on the cover and
in the notes. This would be like calling the Symphony K16 the
"Jupiter Symphony" on the cover of a CD because it shares the
same theme somewhere in the composition.
As for charts, there are many on the internet. If you type in
Musikalische Wurfelspiele will will find numerous entries. Two that
I found with a useful chart are:
http://www.worldvillage.com/jchuang/Music/musdice/musdice/
Rules/rules.html
http://www.schott-music.com/wuerfelspiele/tabelle.htm
dennis
Subject: The Mozart/Vanhal Missa solemnis in Eb K.Anh 186
From: Dennis Pajot
To: All
Date Posted: 06:58:32 05/27/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
On a few occasions on this Forum and other places I have stated I
thought the Missa solemnis in Eb by Johann Baptist Vanhal
(recorded on Orfeo CD by the Prager Kammerchor and Virtuosi di
Praga-conductor Vaclav Neumann) is equal to any of Mozart's
Masses, with exception of the c-minor K427.
A recent article and some follow-up research surprised me, as I
found the Vanhal Mass has been misattributed to Mozart in the
past. So now I feel justified in my high regard for this Missa
solemnis.
In the 2001 Mozart-Jahrbuch Paul van Reijen published an article
on the authorship of the two misattributed Mozart Masses K.Anh
185 (in C-major) and K.Anh 186 (in Eb major) [K6 = Anh C1.01
and C1.03]. In the article Reijen gave a history of the sources.
Regarding K.Anh 186, the Kyrie and Gloria were first published by
Vincent Novello in 1822 or 1823 in an arrangement for 4-voice
parts and organ as Nr.13 in his edition of Mozart Masses. Novello
based his edition of these 2 movements on a full score in the
possession of Christian Ignatius Latrobe. In 1825 or 1826 Novello
published the remaining portions of the Eb Mass as Nr.16 in his
series, with a notice it was "From a very scarce M.S. score
preserved in the Chapel of Moses & Aaron in Amsterdam".
In the original Köchel Catalogue (1862) Ludwig Köchel reported of
the 17 Masses in the Novello edition of Mozart Masses, 10 were
authentic, 5 were misattributed and 2 were "very doubtful". These
two very doubtful Masses were Anh 185 and Anh 186. These
Masses have remained in the Anhang section of every Köchel
Catalogue. In K3 a "Mass for ?" was listed as Anh 235a; its source
being a copy in the Paris library of J.B. Weckerlin, auctioned in
1910. In 1957 H.C.R. Landon showed this was the same Mass as
K.Anh 186; it is now in the Swiss Royal Library in Bern.
Thus we have 3 sources for the Eb Mass K.Anh 186 attributing it
to Mozart:
1) The Novello issues (Nr.13 and 16) from the 1820's
2) The copy in Amsterdam
3) The copy in Bern (Kyrie and Gloria only)
However Reijen found a further copy of this Mass in the RISM files
in the Benedictine Abby at Ottobeuren--under the name of Johann
Baptist Vanhal. These parts are listed in the manuscript catalogue
of Getraut Haberkamp (Libr.Nr. MO 885) as dating from ca.1790.
Now in the Thematic Catalogue of the works of Vanhal, compiled
by Alexander Weinmann, we find under the Masses of Vanhal
(Group XIX) as Eb4 a manuscript of this Mass in the Moravski
Zemske Museum in Brünn (with Libr.Nr. A20.213). Reijen states he
was informed the source for this was the music collection of the
Augustine of St. Thomas in Brno and the manuscript parts from
the watermarks appear to originate from the time of 1790, but the
writing could be from as early as 1770.
Certainly these sources for the Mass show several variant
differences. In the sources attributed to Mozart, one difference is
that in the Amsterdam copy at the end of the 'Christe eleison' in
pencil is noted "Kyrie DS"--meaning the Kryie should be repeated.
This is lacking in Novello and the copy in Bern.
However in the "Vanhal" Ottobeuren parts after the 'Christe
eleison' a completely new 'Kryie' of 158 measures is found.
Another major difference between the "Mozart" Mass and the
"Vanhal" Mass is in the beginning of the Gloria sequence. The
"Mozart" sources divide the Gloria, Laudamus te and Gratias into 3
different sections of 89 measures, 101 measures and 99
measures. The "Vanhal" source at Ottobeuren has a musically
briefer Gloria movement: The Gloria portion consists of measure
1-56, the Laudamus te of measures 57-68, and the Gratias of
measures 69-89.
Now to the Orfeo recording of the Missa solemnis in Eb of Vanhal.
I compared the incipit in the Vanhal catalogue of Weinmann with
that in K6 and found them identical. However both Weinmann and
K6 only give 3 measures of the Kyrie for reference. (Weimann
gives no tempo indication, K6 indicates Andante.) I played the CD
and found the Kyrie incipits the same as the beginning of the Kyrie
recorded (although the CD tempo indicates Adagio). Luckily, K3
gives the incipits of all the movements of the Mass K.Anh 186 (i.e.
Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Benedictus, Agnus Dei). Comparing
these incipits with the music on the CD, I found all identical. Thus,
the Missa solemnis on the Orfeo CD has the same music as K.Anh
186 attributed to Mozart.
However there are a few problems that I am unable to solve with
only the incipits from K3, the information from Reijen. and the CD
recording--which gives no information on its source.
The Kyrie on the CD recordings is 3 long sections with different
music after "Christe eleison", as described by Reijen as the
Ottobeuren parts. However on the CD recording "Gloria",
"Laudamus te" and "Gratias" are long, separate movements, not
short ones as Reijen describes in the Vanhal source; thus most
likely from the "Mozart" Amsterdam and Berlin scores.
So do we have a Mass by Vanhal or Mozart here? Could it be a lost
Mozart Mass? Very doubtful. But as early as 1817 Novello
questioned Christian Ignatius Latrobe on the authenticity of the
Masses he received from him. Latrobe replied in part "I have been
told in Germany that Mozart composed a great many short Masses
for Convents in Bohemia, and that there is a great deal of
excellent Music of his Composition in many of them, or was, for
many convents have been suppressed and sacrilegious hands have
probably destroyed their stocks of music, and sold them for waste
paper".
However more than likely we are dealing with unauthentic Mozart.
In a discussion that followed the reading of Reijen's original paper
Marius Flothuis asked what his opinion was of the Masses (Anh
185 and Anh 186). Reijen responded that there are several
measures of so-called "Mozartisms" in the Masses, but that is all.
The writing style and "at times nearly absurd proportions"
certainly disqualified a Mozart authorship. Reijen thought the
sources (for Anh 186) pointed to a Vanhal authorship.
Reijen's only hesitation seemed to be the large difference in
measure numbers that are found in both Masses. Rudolf
Flotzinger supplied a logical answer for this. Masses (as other
music of the time) were altered. If one had a wonderful singer, a
new solo would be inserted for that singer. If a good Violinist
appeared, a Violin solo would be added (as appeared in the
Benedictus of the C-major Mass K.Anh 185). Also Flotzinger
stated Brevis-versions could be made of Longa-Masses and vice-
versa. As for the attribution to Mozart. it probably was a simple
matter of someone willed it, and it happened. And of course it was
also good for distribution. And as Christoph-Hellmut Mahling
pointed out, Mozart's and Vanhal's music have a certain similarity,
both composing in the style of the time. And Mozart thought
highly enough of Vanhal to carry a Violin Concerto of his around in
his luggage.
Whatever the source situation for the recording is--and hopefully
someone will be able to shed some light on it--we have music
connected to Mozart (even if only misattributed) that is in the
Köchel Catalogue.
=======
Just to complete the entire picture, the Mass in C K.Anh 185 (K6 =
Anh C1.01) was found by Reijen in the Feldkirch Cathedral
attributed to Joseph Aloys Wheelsman (1762-1815), a composer/
organist from Hall in Tyrol.
Both Anh C1.01 and Anh C1.03 have been updated to reflect this
new information in our Köchel files.
dennis
Subject: The "Lucio Silla" Symphony
From: dennis
To: All
Date Posted: 05:26:28 05/25/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
In his follow-up to the Complete Mozart Symphonies, Matt made a
comment on the Lucio Silla Overture/Symphony. As some might
not be aware of this, here is the background on this Overture/
Symphony.
We have only one statement from Mozart himself that he used any
of his Opera overtures as a symphony. In a letter from Mannheim
of February 14, 1778, he wrote to his father: "Yesterday there was
an Academy at Cannabich's where all the music was of my
composition, except the first symphony...At the end my Overture
to 'Il Re Pastore' was performed". There is a Presto assai (K102/
213c) handed down in autograph that is assumed to have been
added to the one movement 'Il Re Pastore' overture, along with an
adapted version of the first Aria. to make up this symphony.
Most of Mozart's early Italian opera overtures are handed down in
manuscript copies as symphonies. The opposite is true of 'La finite
someplace'--originally a symphony (K46a) dated January 16,
1768, Mozart reworked it into an overture by eliminating the
Menuet and Trio, changing the instrumentation, and expanding
the outer movements by a few measures. There exists numerous
independent symphony manuscripts for 'Mitridate'. The NMA
(Symphonies volume 2) even thought "it is not entirely
inconceivable" this overture was not originally a symphony,
adapted as an overture, such as 'La finta semplice.' For 'Ascanio in
Alba' it again appears Mozart wrote the Presto movement (K120/
111a) to be appended to the original 2-movement overture to
make a symphony. 'Il sogno di Scipione' is found in similar fashion
combined with the Presto-finale K163, to form a 3-movement
symphony that appeared in the Breitkopf & Härtel Catalogue as
Symphony Nr.49. 'La finta giardiniera' is thought to have been
expanded into a symphony with the addition of the Finale K121.
This leaves the Overture to Lucio Silla as never having had life as a
Symphony. This overture is in 3 independent movements--as
those to 'La finta simplice' and 'Mitridate'.
In 1991 Ernst Hintermaier reported on a discovery in the archive of
the Pfarrkirche Stuhlfelden in Salzburg of a complete set of parts
of a 4-movement "Sinfonia in D" that added the Menuet Nr.3 from
K61h as the third movement to the Lucio Silla overture. This set of
parts can not be considered an "authentic" source, as it lacks any
autograph entries of Mozart, nor does it originate from any of the
copyists known to have worked for the Mozart's. However it is
possible this set of parts originated in Mozart's lifetime and could
have been copied from authentic Salzburg sources. The copyist of
these Stuflfelden parts, Matthias Kracher, stood in close
connection with Michael Haydn, and from 1772 to 1814 was
teacher and organist at the Kollegiatestift in Seekirchen, near
Salzburg. It was reported that through his contact with Michael
Haydn, Kracher was "allowed to borrow full scores of the excellent
Master". It is unknown if Kracher obtained a copy from Michael
Haydn or he had contacts with a Salzburg copyist. A direct contact
with the Mozarts is rather unlikely, as his name never appeared on
any of their correspondence.
The title of the set of parts reads: "Sinfonia in D/for/2 Violins/2
Oboes/2 Horns/2 Trumpets/Timpani/Viola/and Basso/Sig
Amadeo Wolf Mozarth". On the lower right corner is no doubt the
possession remark "M K" [=Matthias Kracher]. There is also a
possession remark of the Pfarrkirche Stuhlfelden, but when and
how it can into their possession is unknown. In determining the
dating of the set of parts, Hintermaier used the watermarks to
conclude the origin time most probably laid between 1781 and
1799.
Hintermaier deduced Kracher did not expand the 3-movement
Overture, but copied from a set of parts or full score copy of a 4-
movement Symphony. Kracher's copy of the three overture
movements reflects nearly exactly the articulation and dynamics in
the autograph of Mozart's overture. The slight deviations could go
back to the copy Kracher had in front of him. However the Menuet
differs vastly from the copy of the set of Menuets K61h drawn up
by Johann Nepomuk Rainsprechter--and an anonymous copyist--
in Salzburg. The symphony setting added 2 Trumpets, Timpani
and Viola to the Rainsprechter Menuet copy setting of 2 Oboes, 2
Horns, 2 Violins and Bass. Thus now the new Menuet setting was
the same as the 3 overture movements. Several deviations in
articulation and dynamics indicate Kracher could not have used
Rainsprechter's set of parts for his copy.
The Menuet consists of 32 measures = 16 Menuet, 16 Trio. Of
Mozart's Symphonies only the Menuet of K112 is in the 16 + 16
measure structure of dance Menuets. And this very symphony
(K112) has its Menuet (but not the Trio) not in Wolfgang Mozart's
hand, but his father's, causing the NMA editor to question
"whether it most likely is to regard as a composition of the father's
that the son here employed, and if the entire movement was
actually first later added in the symphony". This gives some
credence that the Mozarts might have added Menuets to expand
symphonies.
Hintermaier dismisses the idea this could have been a 4-
movement symphony cut down to 3 movements--like 'La finta
semplice'--for the opera overture. In a letter of November 14,
1772, Leopold wrote from Milan that Wolfgang already "had
written all Recitatives and the Overture" for 'Lucio Silla'.
Hintermaier argues the 4-movement symphony goes back to
Mozart, sometime after his return from Milan in March 1773, and
should be included in a future NMA Supplement.
The one stumbling block in Hintermaier's supposition is the
doubtfulness of the Menuet. The 6 Menuets that comprise K61h
were first discovered by Friedrich Frischenschlager within various
copies of Mozart orchestral dances in the music archives of St.
Peter in Salzburg in the early 20th Century. His findings were
published in the 1923 Mozart Jahrbuch. The copy has a heading
attributing the 6 Menuets to "Amadeo Wolfgango Mozart". Even
though the dynamics were foreign to Mozart's style,
Frischenschlager accepted the Menuets as authentic and placed
them between 1768 and 1772. Einstein placed the Menuets in the
main part of K3--at K61h--in Carnival time of 1769 in Salzburg.
Rudolf Elvers in NMA (1961) thought it better to date the Menuets
"probably 1771/1772". K6 continued Einstein's dating of 1769. In
the 1971/72 Mozart Jahrbuch Wolfgang Plath placed doubts on
K61h. As at least numbers 1 and 2 of K104/61e and K105/61f
had turned out to be originally Michael Haydn Menuets, Plath
considered K61h could be part of the 18 Menuets of Haydn's that
Wolfgang told his sister he would make piano arrangements of. In
the 1995 Mozart Jahrbuch Andrea Lindmayr-Brandl correctly
stated the authenticity of the 6 Menuets was rather in limbo.
Earlier stylistic arguments were now invalid because they used
Menuets for comparison that were now known or believed to not
be authentic [Frischenschlager--K64,K015,K122,K164; Einstein--
K103,K104,K105]. Lindmayr-Brandl did however use Hintermaier's
findings on the 'Lucio Silla' Symphony to call Mozart's authorship
of the Menuets "at least probable". She dated the set ca. 1772.
The connection I make here is Michael Haydn--Johann Nepomuk
Rainsprechter--Mozart family. It is known Rainsprechter was well
connected with Michael Haydn. Could he have inserted a Michael
Haydn Menuet into the 'Lucio Silla' Overture to make a Symphony?
As Mozart had made copies and/or piano reductions of Haydn
Menuets, he could even have believed it was a Mozart original
Menuet. Of course as Lindmayr-Brandl pointed out, Rainsprechter
had also been a student of Leopold Mozart, so he could have got
this Menuet--or entire 4-movement Symphony--from Leopold. If
this were the case, chances are great it is an authentic Mozart
symphony.
If any orchestras are looking for a filler for a grouping of early
Mozart symphonies, Hintermaier has the Symphony version of
K61h edited and published in the 1991 'Mozart Studien'. Add it
along with a few of the symphonies we have discussed at this
Forum, such as K98 and K311a, to a few earlier symphonies and I
would buy it immediately.
dennis
Subject: CONTEMPORARIES OF MOZART: Thomas Attwood
From: Gary Smith
To: All
Date Posted: 22:06:25 05/24/04 ()
Email Address: smithworld@earthlink.net
Message:
CONTEMPORARIES OF MOZART:
Thomas Attwood (1765-1838)
This is another posting in an irregular series on the various contemporary composers from Mozart's lifetime. The material is mostly derivative from general sources as noted. These are the people that Mozart:
Competed for work with.
Considered as friends and colleagues.
Knew from reputation.
Taught/nurtured as pupils and students.
Attwood’s father, also named Thomas Attwood, was a member of the household staff to King George III of Britain, as well as a viola and trumpet player (as well as a coal merchant), and as such was a member in the Royal Band of Musicians. Obviously, father and son made a strong, friendly impression on the King and his family, for Attwood junior was to benefit from royal patronage his entire life, from George III, then the Prince of Wales and thus ultimately George IV.
At the age of nine, Thomas Attwood became a choirboy in the Chapel Royal. When his voice finally broke and he had to leave, he became one of the Pages of Presence to the Prince of Wales. HRH was so impressed with by Attwood’s musical ability at this stage that he arranged to send him abroad to study music and composition. From 1783 to 1785 he lived in Naples, taking lessons and studying composition with Felipe Cinque and Gaetano Latilla.
Deciding at this point that he could learn no more there, and also determining to continue and complete his education with Mozart, Attwood traveled to Vienna via Stuttgart. He arrived sometime in the summer of 1785, and began his first lessons with Mozart in August of that year. They commenced with covering the fundamentals of theory. This included writing down scales, realizing the figured base in example pieces, and working through counterpoint studies by J. J. Fux. These studies progressed into composing minuets and short pieces for string quartet as well as taking lessons in instrumentology, with special regards to wind instruments. Thus, Mozart ended up attempting to teach him how to master the modern techniques of the period. As quoted by Michael Kelly in his book, Mozart was reputed to have said: “Attwood is a young man for whom I have a sincere affection and esteem; he conducts himself with great propriety, and I feel much pleasure in telling you, that he partakes more of my style than any other scholar I ever had; and I predict, that he will prove a sound musician.” (It might be noted here that Mozart had not yet encountered Hummel or Eybler, both of whom had greater musical careers [and talent] than Attwood. Given that Kelly’s book was written some 40 years after this point in time, Mozart’s reported comments here should be regarded with some skepticism.)
Attwood’s exercise studies with Mozart have been preserved and published. They are numbered as K.506a in the Koechel catalog of Mozart’s works. In fact, since they are exercises concerning pupil and master, we have works by Attwood with corrections overwritten and added on, supplied by Mozart. In Oldham’s words, they “…are valuable not only for the light they throw on the apprentice years of a notable English composer, but as evidence that Mozart, given an apt and congenial pupil, took his duties as a teacher with the utmost seriousness.” (Would that we had Hummel’s exercises, or, further in to the what-if column, Beethoven’s!) Most valuable of the lot might be a Minuet and Trio in C. Attwood had initially provided a pleasing, slight work, but Mozart, in his corrections added a touch of understated brilliance by introducing counterpoint touches hear and there. Both versions were published when these studies went to print. Mozart as well touched up another minuet by Attwood in his place as teacher. A final “collaboration” here as well looks to be in the final movement of Mozart’s A Musical Joke (K522), finished in June of 1787, or about four months after Attwood left for England. Here, an uninspired fugue attempt by Attwood is displayed in worse shape by Mozart as the wretched fugue example in the 4th movement. Such joking with his friends and pupils was completely in character with him, and one wonders if a copy went off to London, or whether Wolfgang wrote out this section with Attwood looking over his shoulder, back in the winter months of 1786-87.
Attwood left with English friends (Michael Kelly and Nancy Storace, for two) in February of 1787 to return to England. Stopping off to visit Leopold Mozart in Salzburg, they were received with great kindness by both Mozart’s father and the Archbishop. While there, the English party, apparently with Mozart’s consent, broached a plan by Wolfgang to visit England in the near future, once Attwood and the Storaces had prepared the stage, so to speak. (Surprisingly [but perhaps not], Leopold appears to have considered their visit a burden, complaining about the volume of luggage involved, and sourly commenting on Mozart’s projected plans to travel to England and leaving his children with Leopold to care for. He wrote Mozart to dissuade him from such a plan, which appears to have succeeded, no doubt coupled with the fact that not much demand for Mozart’s services in London appears to have developed then.) Nothing apparently came of the English party’s lobbying at this time. However, in late1790, Mozart was to receive a famous note from one Robert May O’Reilly, an English impresario, who made him a lucrative offer to travel to England and compose for the theater there. The note begins: “Through a person attached to H.R.H the Prince of Wales, I was to learn of your design to undertake a journey to England…” While the Storaces have often been put forth as the source of this “design”, given the much stronger and longer “attachment” of Attwood to the Prince of Wales as well, he most likely worked this offer to fruition.
Back in England, Attwood became a chamber musician to the Prince of Wales, music teacher to the Duchess of York and later, to the Princess of Wales. By 1796, he as well became organist of St. Paul’s Cathedral and composer to the Chapel Royal. He occupied both positions until his death. Starting in 1792, he began producing stage works, mostly (but not always) in the manner of pastiches, such as The Mariners (1793) which included music by Martini, Dittersdorf and Mozart. He was one of founders of the Philharmonic Society, was one of the first to performed Mozart’s last symphonies in England, as well as Beethoven’s Fifth. He died in 1838 and was buried with great honor under the organ of St. Paul’s Cathedral.
Attwood’s compositions appear to be strongly affected by his experience as the pupil of Mozart. Not through direct imitation or by copying, but via the feeling for melodic shape and the beautifully tasteful organization of harmony. These points serve to distinguish him from his English contemporaries. The early instrumental trios (piano trios, mostly) like Mozart’s but NOT like most English “accompanied” sonatas of the time, have the string instruments working on equal terms with the piano. His somewhat slender reputation at this point in time rests mostly on his smaller, intimate and exquisitely polished religious works. They appear to follow a direct line from the Mozart of Ave verum corpus. To Mozart then, they may owe their balance and serenity, melodic grace and the sweetness of their full four-part harmony.
Sources:
Deutsch, Otto Erich Mozart: A Documented Biography Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA 1965
Kelly, Michael Reminiscences by Michael Kelly, Oxford University Press, London 1975
Sadie, Stanley (Ed.) The New Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians 2nd Edition Groves Dictionaries, New York 2000
Liner notes to Mozart’s Schüler CD by Concilium musicum Wien CHR 77136
Liner notes to Eine Kleine Nachtmusik, CD by Etc. L’Oiseau-Lyre 411 720-2
Liner Notes to Mozart Night Music, CD by Harmonia mundi HMU 907280
Subject: Looking to Purchase a Complete Symphony Cycle?
From: dennis
To: All
Date Posted: 08:40:02 05/24/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
The "Complete" Mozart Symphonies are one of the hardest genres
of his music to place a number on. Different sources give different
numbers, different symphonies, and even different versions of the
same symphonies. I have tried to list the "complete" symphony
cycles available on CD, with a very brief description what you will
find in each collection. Remember the "official" 41 number means
little. There are some of these 41 symphonies that are not Mozart,
later numbers added (sometimes up to "55"), and some
unnumbered symphonies. Hopefully this will help a little in
making your way through the mess.
As I have not heard all these cycles, I have refrained from
mentioning anything about the orchestral playing on the CD.
There maybe more cycles I am unaware of, and I do not know
which of these cycles are still available. But even the deleted ones
might turn up on e-Bay or some outlet such as that.
Also, as I do not have all these cycles in my collection, I had to rely
on information from the record companies, CD stores, and
libraries to find out what symphonies were in each collection. For
this reason, there could be some error--either on my part or the
part of the source I used.
COMPLETE SYMPHONY CYCLES
Christopher Hogwood conducting Academy of Ancient Music
L'Oiseau-Lyre (7 volumes originally consisting of 19 discs):
All the numbered symphonies 1-41(except the spurious #2 and
#3), and the later added symphonies 42 and onward. Also
included are all the movements added to Overtures to make up
symphonies. Added delights are K16a in a-minor, both versions of
#40 in g-minor, both the Old and New Lambach symphonies, the
bounced around symphony in Bb (#54) K.Anh216/K74g/
Anh.C11.03; 2 versions of the Paris Symphony (in addition to the
alternative 2nd movement), the complete 3 movements of
Symphony #37, 2 versions of the Haffner Symphony #35.
Sir Charles Mackerras conducting Prague Chamber Orchestra
Telarc (11 CDs):
The numbered symphonies 1-41 (excluding 2,3,and 37), plus the
unofficial #42-47 and a few others tossed in such as K45b, K19a.
As most, uses both slow movements of the "Paris". The g-minor
K550 uses the version without Clarinets.
Sir Neville Marriner conducting the Academy of St.Martin in the
Fields
Philips 2 vols (12 CDs)
All the "official" and "unofficial" numbered Symphonies (except
#2,#3,#37) and the movements added to Overtures to make
symphonies. Added delights include both Lambach symphonies.
Special delights are the Minuet in A K61g/I and the only recording
I know of that includes Mozart's crossed out Minuet in K114.
Jaap ter Linden conducting the Mozart Akademie Amsterdam
Brilliant Classics (11 CDs)
Includes the "Officia"l Symphonies 1-41, however missing the
usual #2,#3,#37, plus Nr.11. However it does include the Overture
symphonies, Symphony K19a and both versions of the g-minor
K550.
Jeffrey Tate conducting the English Chamber Orchestra
EMI (12 CDs)
The usual "official" and "unofficial" symphonies up to #47, and the
Overture Symphonies. Added are a few others such as K19a and
the Old Lambach Symphony.
Erich Leinsdorf conducting the Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra
of London
MCA (8 CDs)
41 Symphonies, all the "official" Symphonies--including #2 and #3
and #37.
Trevor Pinnock conducting the English Concert
Archiv Produktioin (11 CDs)
Again all the "Official" and "unofficial" numbered symphonies, with
exception of #2,#3,#37. Includes the bounced around K74g in Bb,
but only the Old Lambach Symphony. Only records only the 1st
Andante of "Paris" Symphony, but records the "Linz" Symphony
with the changes reported by Cliff Eisen.
NOT COMPLETE, BUT A LOT OF SYMPHONIES
Nikolaus Haroncourt conducting Concentus Musicus Wien and
Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra
Teldec (12 CDs)
Haroncourt leads the Concertebouw in the later Symphonies (#31-
#41 in a 4-CD package; #25, 26, 28, 29, 30 in two single CDs)
and the Concentus Musicus Wien in the earlier ones. As some are
included on CDs with larger Serenades, it can be difficult to find
and sort them all out. Earlier symphonies include #10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 42, 44, 45, 46.
Nicholas Ward conducting the Northern Chamber Orchestra (and)
Barry Wordsworth conducting the Capella Istropolitania
Naxos (8 CDs)
It appears all the "Official" symphonies from 19 to 41 are included
(except #37); but I could only find one CD with early ones and that
included Nrs.6-10.
Ton Koopman conducting the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra
Erato (6 CDs)
All of the late symphonies, with a splattering of middle ones.
Includes all the Symphonies from the Paris to the Jupiter (except
#37), and before that #17, 18, 19, 21,22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29.
John Eliot Gardiner conducting the English Baroque Soloists
Philips (5 CDs)
A collection of the later symphonies. Includes everything (except
#37) from the Paris to the Jupiter, and throws in the popular #29.
dennis
Subject: dennis
From: Looking to Purchase a Complete Symphonies Cycle?
To: All
Date Posted: 05:19:37 05/24/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
The "Complete" Mozart Symphonies are one of the hardest genres
of his music to place a number on. Different sources give different
numbers, different symphonies, and even different versions of the
same symphonies. I have tried to list the "complete" symphony
cycles available on CD, with a very brief description what you will
find in each collection. Remember the "official" 41 number means
little. There are some of these 41 symphonies that are not Mozart,
later numbers added (sometimes up to "55"), and some
unnumbered symphonies. Hopefully this will help a little in
making your way through the mess.
As I have not heard all these cycles, I have refrained from
mentioning anything about the orchestral playing on the CD.
There maybe more cycles I am unaware of, and I do not know
which of these cycles are still available. But even the deleted ones
might turn up on e-Bay or some outlet such as that.
Also, as I do not have all these cycles in my collection, I had to rely
on information from the record companies, CD stores, and
libraries to find out what symphonies were in each collection. For
this reason, there could be some error--either on my part or the
part of the source I used.
COMPLETE SYMPHONY CYCLES
Christopher Hogwood conducting Academy of Ancient Music
L'Oiseau-Lyre (7 volumes originally consisting of 19 discs):
All the numbered symphonies 1-41(except the spurious #2 and
#3), and the later added symphonies 42 and onward. Also
included are all the movements added to Overtures to make up
symphonies. Added delights are K16a in a-minor, both versions of
#40 in g-minor, both the Old and New Lambach symphonies, the
bounced around symphony in Bb (#54) K.Anh216/K74g/
Anh.C11.03; 2 versions of the Paris Symphony (in addition to the
alternative 2nd movement), the complete 3 movements of
Symphony #37, 2 versions of the Haffner Symphony #35.
Sir Charles Mackerras conducting Prague Chamber Orchestra
Telarc (11 CDs):
The numbered symphonies 1-41 (excluding 2,3,and 37), plus the
unofficial #42-47 and a few others tossed in such as K45b, K19a.
As most, uses both slow movements of the "Paris". The g-minor
K550 uses the version without Clarinets.
Sir Neville Marriner conducting the Academy of St.Martin in the
Fields
Philips 2 vols (12 CDs)
All the "official" and "unofficial" numbered Symphonies (except
#2,#3,#37) and the movements added to Overtures to make
symphonies. Added delights include both Lambach symphonies.
Special delights are the Minuet in A K61g/I and the only recording
I know of that includes Mozart's crossed out Minuet in K114.
Jaap ter Linden conducting the Mozart Akademie Amsterdam
Brilliant Classics (11 CDs)
Includes the "Officia"l Symphonies 1-41, however missing the
usual #2,#3,#37, plus Nr.11. However it does include the Overture
symphonies, Symphony K19a and both versions of the g-minor
K550.
Jeffrey Tate conducting the English Chamber Orchestra
EMI (12 CDs)
The usual "official" and "unofficial" symphonies up to #47, and the
Overture Symphonies. Added are a few others such as K19a and
the Old Lambach Symphony.
Erich Leinsdorf conducting the Philharmonic Symphony Orchestra
of London
MCA (8 CDs)
41 Symphonies, all the "official" Symphonies--including #2 and #3
and #37.
Trevor Pinnock conducting the English Concert
Archiv Produktioin (11 CDs)
Again all the "Official" and "unofficial" numbered symphonies, with
exception of #2,#3,#37. Includes the bounced around K74g in Bb,
but only the Old Lambach Symphony. Only records only the 1st
Andante of "Paris" Symphony, but records the "Linz" Symphony
with the changes reported by Cliff Eisen.
NOT COMPLETE, BUT A LOT OF SYMPHONIES
Nikolaus Haroncourt conducting Concentus Musicus Wien and
Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra
Teldec (12 CDs)
Haroncourt leads the Concertebouw in the later Symphonies (#31-
#41 in a 4-CD package; #25, 26, 28, 29, 30 in two single CDs)
and the Concentus Musicus Wien in the earlier ones. As some are
included on CDs with larger Serenades, it can be difficult to find
and sort them all out. Earlier symphonies include #10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 27, 42, 44, 45, 46.
Nicholas Ward conducting the Northern Chamber Orchestra (and)
Barry Wordsworth conducting the Capella Istropolitania
Naxos (8 CDs)
It appears all the "Official" symphonies from 19 to 41 are included
(except #37); but I could only find one CD with early ones and that
included Nrs.6-10.
Ton Koopman conducting the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra
Erato (6 CDs)
All of the late symphonies, with a splattering of middle ones.
Includes all the Symphonies from the Paris to the Jupiter (except
#37), and before that #17, 18, 19, 21,22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29.
John Eliot Gardiner conducting the English Baroque Soloists
Philips (5 CDs)
A collection of the later symphonies. Includes everything (except
#37) from the Paris to the Jupiter, and throws in the popular #29.
dennis
Subject: K.551 Symphony #41 in C "Jupiter"
From: Gary Smith
To: All
Date Posted: 13:03:16 05/22/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
Famous Works Series
K.551 Symphony # 41 in C “Jupiter”
3rd of the last three symphonies (K.543, K.550 and K.551) Pt. 3
This is another in the series of short background articles on famous works by Mozart.
Many mysteries, questions and speculations will be found in regards to the last three symphonies of Mozart. He had composed 15 piano concerti by 1788 in Vienna, but only 3 new symphonies, and two of them (the “Haffner” and “Linz”) were originally for other venues. The third symphony, the “Prague”, might not have gotten premiered in Vienna either, as we have no concrete proof that it did, though the odds are very good for this to have happened. So, didn’t the Viennese concert public like symphonies? The simple answer here is that Mozart had written early on to his father in Salzburg (once he’d established himself in Vienna), asking that various older symphonies be sent to Vienna for concert use, works the Viennese were unfamiliar with. That would offer one good explanation why he felt no need to compose more early on. Another would be that Vienna, the land of the fortepiano, gravitated towards keyboard works, so Mozart’s piano concerti satisfied that thirst. So, why three large-scale symphonic works now in the later years?
As discussed in the first installment of this series, good evidence would appear to show that Mozart was composing these last three works for use beyond just concerts in Vienna. Most likely, they were for the music publisher Artaria, as part of a larger series of symphonies produced by other leading composers. Hard (enough) times had settled upon the Austrian Empire that this series was delayed and most likely reduced in scope. The possibility exists as well that Mozart was composing these for use on a projected trip to England. In the end, plans for such a trip never firmly materialized (though Leopold mentions in a letter that many people knew Wolfgang had discussed such a plan). However, it is not out of the question that since symphonies played a bigger role in the musical world of London than Vienna, Mozart might well have planned for their use or sale there. In the end, though, Mozart was an imminently practical composer, so with no firm prospects in England to hang a hat on, this potential reason for composing symphonies should be regarded as secondary (or even tertiary) at best.
There are scattered about Europe orchestral parts from the last three symphonies that can be dated (by their paper and copyists) to around this time, but not specifically to it. That there are indeed multiple copies would tend to indicate performances. Certainly, given the effort involved, people would rather have bought a printed copy at a less expensive rate than pay a copyist to draw out an orchestral parts set. For that matter, by 1790 the music publishers Westphal was offering in their catalogue 8 Mozart symphonies, prices based on the size of the printed manuscripts. It should be of no surprise that the three most expensive (and thus largest) works were a Symphony in C with kettledrums and trumpets, a Symphony in E flat, also with trumpets and drums, and a Symphony in D with, yes, trumpet and drums also. Cliff Eisen, in his article “Contributions to a New Mozart Documentary Biography’ Journal of the American Musicological Society 1986 xxxiv 615-32 identifies these three symphonies as probably being K.551, (“Jupiter”), K.543 (#39) and K.504 (“Prague”).
We also have some remaining programs from a few of Mozart’s concerts that indicate that “new” and “grand” symphonies were offered. Unfortunately, no details or keys are given. However, one is worthy of close interest. Given in Frankfurt on October 15, 1790 it indicates again a new grand symphony being on the program, which, however appears not to have been played due to lack of time. A piano concerto on the program did, though. Research into the orchestra present appears to show a wind compliment present that could handle Mozart’s last two new piano concerti (K.503 and K.537), but only one of Mozart’s Vienna symphonies, and that would be K.551.
Finally, the name “Jupiter.” Where did it come from, and when did it get linked to this symphony? It originated in England in the early part of the 19th Century. The earliest known concert note attachment of “Jupiter” to this work comes from 1819, at a concert in Edinburgh. It appears on a London concert program less than a year later, and on a printed edition by 1823. Franz Xaver Mozart (Wolfgang Jr.) told Vincent and Mary Novello that the impresario Johann Peter Salomon had coined it. In any case, it must have been inspired, at least in part, by the opening pomp of this work; kettledrums and trumpets enhancing the dotted rhythms Mozart offers us.
As we saw with K.543 and K.550, Mozart is able to make immense leaps of range between works. From the passionate, warm E Flat of Symphony #39 Mozart moves to the intense, involved and utterly serious “Great” Symphony #40 in g and then to the, well, Olympian display of musical prowess and pride of the “Jupiter.” Each opening movement, each opening set of bars, almost immediate sets the table for what shall follow along throughout the entire work. Mozart starts with the description Allegro vivace (hinting at a fast pace if nothing else), yet within only the first two opening bars, we are commanded to pay attention and get prepared for great things to come. Here, as in no other work of the 800+ we can call Mozart’s, does the music convey so distinctly and directly the imperiousness, mastery and skill he could marshal to animate his themes. The opening theme, composed of one part command and one part yearning alternating, is paired against a warm second theme that switches like a flash of lightning to show us it too has a streak of the imperial within it.
Then, Mozart offers us a third theme, which is a direct quote from an insertion aria he composed some months before (K.541). On the surface, this theme acts initially to tamp down the effect produced by the first two, as it sounds almost as though a country folk tune had wandered in. Of course, it too shows that it has the imperial touch, at least when a Mozart can get a hold of it. But, it is highly worthwhile to review the lyrics to K.541 to note what it is Mozart is quoting. Our third theme runs to the words: “You are a bit innocent, my dear Pompeo. Go study the ways of the world.” Given Mozart’s love of word play and riddles, are we seeing merely a coincidence here, or an instruction? One might say coincidence, but given the flood of musical gems the exposition provides us, Mozart commences and drives the development with this third theme, finally evoking the opening theme via a false recapitulation which becomes more angular and jagged until, inevitably but masterfully so, we head down a short preparatory path to the proper start of the recapitulation. If anything, Mozart heightens the sense of imperiousness and command throughout without overdoing a single bar. The sonata-style form was never better illuminated than Mozart’s use of it here. The closing four chords, with trumpets and drums are the perfect capstone, crowning 10 minutes of some of the best music ever penned. It is sorely tempting to know that Mozart knew exactly what he had done here, that indeed he could look back on these bars and know he had not seen these heights before. What symphony before 1788 can one point to as a comparison? Have we then indeed been shown something to study?
The second movement, labeled Andante cantabile, might indicate a steady, singing pace that provides us with a breather. But Mozart can agitate equally as well when quiet. This movement, also in sonata style (bit unusual for a slow second movement), raises one’s eyebrow, with that subtly “off” third note in the quiet opening, then through passages of gentle yearning we are brought up short with abrupt fortes, chromaticism, off-beat semi quavers and Mozart’s ability to build tension quietly but distinctly. Within the development, the “bite” gets sharper and we are treated to darker depths, where the built-in yearning themes become more plaintive before partially resolving themselves when the recapitulation starts. But here, Mozart does not resolve things, he merely, well, shallows up the deepest points, and while he cadences three times, he ends things with roughly the same amount of mystery with which we begin. Any thoughts of mere decorative entertainment have been left out of this movement.
The Menuetto and Trio move us back to pomp and imperiousness, but they don’t move us away from sonata style. Mozart crafts this movement to develop and recapitulate, but does so without whacking us upside the head so that it’s obvious. But please note, the earlier symphonic pattern of four movements in contrasting yet complimentary forms (sonata, binary, dance and rondo) has been changed to four complimentary sonata forms that can pass for the earlier four, should you not, well, study them a bit. Thematically, everything is very simple and uncomplicated in the third movement; it’s the emphasis and technique that shape things here. For one, this is supposed to be a “dance” and that means that the bass supports the beat and the dancers instinctively follow the beat. For the first time in a symphonic minuet, Mozart decides to split the cellos off from the double basses and, here and there, give them separate lines to play. The Trio, which Mozart generally reserves as the area for fun or a joke, manages to see him stick the cadence ahead of the melody it is suppose to serve to resolve. The “melody” here is a short, forte, jagged chromatic riff, which can hardly be accidentally placed, as it foreshadows the opening motif of the closing fourth movement. Mozart thus gives us two birds with one stone, in the simplest section in this symphony.
Finally, all the best Mozart had learned of contrapuntal texture, polyphony, composition and “taste” is summed up and on display in this proud finale. Once called “the symphony with the fugue at the end,” it is really a fugato; a here a constant, almost breathtaking tapestry with a set of five subjects used. The first is an old liturgical subject used by him before, curiously (or fatefully) in his very first Symphony K.16 back in London. It’s derived from Gregorian chant and probably best known in the eighteenth century as the start of the hymn Lucis creator. Dozens of composers had used it, it was a staple in the counterpoint studies Mozart had trained in, and in fact trained some of his pupils on. Perhaps significantly, Mozart used it in his Missa brevis K.192 where its continuation at one point is closely related to what Mozart pursues in the “Jupiter.” It’s relationship here in K.192 suggests that “credo, credo” (I believe) is to be understood, since in K.192 the continuation is aligned to the words “in unum Deum, Patrem omnipotentem.” Neal Zaslaw in his work Mozart’s Symphonies poses the question: “Does this work, then contain Mozart’s Creed?” New dating techniques have shown that many fragments of Kyries and some other religious works, once thought to be unconnected, now all date to around this time period. Did one concept transplant over into another here? Michael Haydn, a good friend of Mozart’s back in Salzburg, and a composer Wolfgang admired, had composed several symphonies in the 1780’s that had fugal endings. Did this at least point the way for Mozart, even if his result transcends anything Haydn could ever have dreamed of?
In any case, its use ignites one of the most complex musical conflagrations in music; certainly beyond anything heard prior to 1788, and not matched until Beethoven’s 9th appeared some 30 years later. Mozart builds and sustains a movement filled again with grandeur and impetus that weaves and interweaves it way across his chosen five themes (or six, depending on who analyzes this movement). It only sounds better in sonata style (as if any other form could sustain the impact), and after such a movement, there is surely the grandest close in the symphonic literature. For, having concluded a sonata-style movement, Mozart pauses and gives us a coda as the ending, which, on it's own, is a fairly standard end to this type of movement. Not just any coda though, but one with all five primary motifs combined in a design the cumulative power of which rivals Bach or Handel’s works. We have just spent 10 minutes listening to each of them individually dazzle us as they move past in order. Mozart’s grand design is that, here at the end, they dazzle us in combination, such a design having been planned from the start. It is an astonishing close by a composer who, when he completed the last note, could justly believe that nothing finer in the genre had ever seen the light of day before. Mozart, by accident or design, was serving notice that symphonies were not to be occasional, filler works any longer. The great French scholar and Mozartian Georges de Saint-Foix described it as: “…a vast instrumental ‘chorus’ that saw the older music, suddenly revived, united with the new to salute the future.”
EPILOUGE
Having journeyed through Mozart’s last three symphonies, we can go back to one of the initial points raised in the paper on Symphony #39 K.543, which was whether or not Mozart had some underlying plan in his ordering of these three symphonies. In that paper it was stated:
“In Vienna, on December 1787, the newspaper Wiener Zeitung announced that the music publisher Artaria was issuing 6 symphonies by Joseph Haydn, in two sets of three. The first set consisted of Symphonies 82 in C, 83 in g and 84 in E flat. C, g and E flat; the very keys of Mozart’s last three symphonies. And by his old friend, Haydn to boot. As well, that E flat symphony by Haydn has a slow introduction, and is the only one in that set of three to have one as well, though Haydn’s E flat was the last work of his set, while Mozart’s was the first in his. A reason for this will be suggested in later installments.”
So, what do we have as any sort of evidence of a plan? Of these last three symphonies; the first one (K.543) has the only slow introduction. The middle work (K.550) has the shortest opening to a first movement and the quickest close to the last, as well. The last symphony (K.551) has the most extensive closing of the three. So, did Mozart envision these three as integrated units of a greater whole, with a mysterious opening, and a proud closing as some sort of proof of the composer’s skill? Or, is this just an "accident" handed down to us? Can we see that Mozart could plan far ahead in the layout and composition of individual movements within a work, but couldn't do so in the layout and composition of individual works within a larger set? If one wants to speculate further, can we see this set as K.543 = spiritual, inner happiness (via use of Masonic motifs), K.550 = external strife, unhappy and unsatisfied, and K.551 = professional accomplishment and sense of worth? There are no facts we can seize on to prove such conclusions. But, for the time, who else but Mozart would even consider such a plan, and then carry it off so well? It might be noted that at the age of only 32 (!), Mozart could not suspect that these might be his last symphonic works, still less that they stand as some of the greatest instrumental works yet composed. Yet, within the Mozart mythos, as the Requiem serves as the dark, disturbing close of the story, the “Jupiter” serves as its bright counterpart, closing out the series of some 50 symphonic works that Mozart gave us.
Sources:
Burk, John N. Mozart and his Music Random House, NY 1959
Gutman, Robert Mozart: A Cultural Biography Harcourt Brace 1999
Roy, Klaus G. Liner Notes to Time-Life Record Series “The Late Symphonies” 1979
Sisman, Elaine Mozart: The ‘Jupiter’ Symphony Cambridge Uni. Press 1993
Zaslaw, Neil Mozart’s Symphonies Clarendon Press, Oxford 1989
Subject: The Ferlendis/Mozart Oboe Concerto in F Op.13
From: dennis
To: All
Date Posted: 07:25:04 05/20/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
Mozart wrote to his father in a letter of February 14, 1778, from
Mannheim: "Ramm played my Oboe Concerto for Ferlendis for the
fifth time...". On February 15, 1783, he wrote to his father again,
this time from Vienna: "Send me also the little book in which is the
Oboe Concerto for Ramm, or rather for Ferlendis". This Concerto
for Ferlendis was believed lost until in 1920 Bernhard Paumgartner
found in the archive of the Mozarteum a copy of an Oboe
Concerto in C-major that was apart from minor differences
identical to the Flute Concerto K314 Mozart had written for the
amateur Flutist de Jean in Mannheim. Paumgartner's theory, which
still holds today, was that Mozart--short on time--arranged his
Oboe Concerto in C-major for Ferlendis into a Flute Concerto in
D-major for de Jean.
In the 1920 Rivista Musicale Italiana Georges St. Foix reported he
had found in the Bilbliotheque des Conservatorio di Musica in
Milan two Oboe Concertos under of the name of Giuseppe
Ferlendis, of which the first ("1st Concerto pour hautbois, avec
accompagnement de quatuor, cors et basson, Op.13. Syrenne,
Paris--parts) he took special interest in. This Concerto in F-major
St.Foix found to be in a somewhat "popular" character. It gave the
impression it was written down rapidly, as in response to a
commission. But within the Concerto St. Foix found light and
tender emotions, and was impressed by the inexhaustible wealth
of invention of the themes. He found the manner of the
composition entirely "Mozartian." He candidly stated there was one
doubt in his mind about this Concerto: is this fine Concerto by
Giuseppe Ferlendis? Is it not rather the Concerto composed "for"
Giuseppe Ferlendis by Mozart in 1775 or 1776 as a favor, and
later lost? Some of the flavor of the 20 year old Mozart is found in
this Concerto, in spite of all the inaccuracies of the publisher, who
appeared to be a certain Carli. To St.Foix the Concerto writing was
very Mozartian, especially in the astonishing beauty of the melody
ideas. St. Foix hypothesized that the musical composition
appeared after the death of Giuseppe Ferlendis in 1802, that it
was published for one of his sons to be circulated during a Paris
stay between 1805 and 1810. This son had found in his father's
papers his successful composition of the celebrated "cheval de
bataille" of 1778, of which Ferlendis had remained the owner, but
perhaps by no means the creator! St. Foix believed he had found
the lost Oboe Concerto that Mozart had written for Giuseppe
Ferlendis. [A note here--the above St. Foix article is in French, a
language I can not read. The paragraph or two that St. Foix lays
out his thoughts took me almost all day to translate. I believe I
have the gist of it, but could be inaccurate in some details.]
But in K3 (1936) Alfred Einstein wrote he could not agree with the
opinion of St. Foix. "The Concerto, although very pleasant and not
without melodic charm, conflicted entirely with Mozart's
compositional style--not only that of 1777, but his style in
general, and actually went back to an older Concerto model--
namely that of Tartini. Un-Mozartian are, entirely apart from the
setting, since Mozart instead of Bassoons rather had taken up two
Flutes to his pair of Horns, the accompaniment of the Solo by the
two Violins alone; the awkwardness of the form (shorten Reprise
of the 1st movement) and a series of crude compositional errors;
consequently contrasted the 'modern' invention, that rather on
post-Mozart time referred, namely that of the Mozartian Spohr.
One must continue to leave the authorship with Ferlendis". In his
endeavor to discredit Ferlendis, in K3a (1947) Einstein added to
the remarks: "Louis Spohr heard Ferlendis execute on September
13, 1816, a 'concerto of his own work. Composition and playing
were equally pitiful. One can not think of more a wretched tone
and no greater lack of good taste in the delivery of passages and
the cantabile'". More on this addition later. (Einstein identified the
second concerto found by St.Foix in Milan, Op.14, as a Concerto
for English-Horn by Michael Haydn. However I do not find this in
any Michael Haydn literature or catalogue).
In his article "Zu Mozarts Oboen-Concerto C-major, KV 314/285d"
in the 1950 Mozart Jahrbuch, Bernhard Paumgartner was more
kind to Ferlendis. Paumgartner thought that despite pronounced
amateurisms in the composition, it is a not untalented pleasant
work that makes it appear odd that there were no other works
preserved by Ferlendis than the two Concertos (Op.13 and 14 in
Milan). However in no case could Paumgartner see the work being
attributed to Mozart. Against an attribution to Mozart spoke
synthesis, instrumentation and numerous details. "I would place
the Concerto between the Tartini student Nardini [Pietro, 1722
-1793] and Simone Mayr [1763 - 1845], owing to its peculiar
conflicting posture. Already the incipit is missing the vitality
energy that even the small Concertos of Mozart's immediately with
unrivalled power come into the world". From this statement I get
the impression Paumgartner never actually saw the full score, and
only relied on St. Foix and Einstein.
Friedrich Blume in the Mozart Companion (1956) also stated "the
Concerto itself has hardly any feature that would credibly justify
its being ascribed to Mozart".
Guglielmo Barblan in a 1962 article on the Oboe Concerto [written
in Italian, again a language I can not read, and with great difficulty
translated parts] points out that because the two Concertos found
by St.Foix are the only ones known does not mean that there are
not others by Ferlendis unknown to research. So because they
shine "like beacons in the night" has no significance. It is known
Mozart composed an Oboe Concerto for Ferlendis in the summer
of 1777 and that this composition because the "cheval de bataille"
of another virtuoso. However there is not sufficient data to induce
an identification of that piece of Mozart's with that which
Ferlendis's son published in Paris after the death of his father.
Barblan believed the high stature of Mozart's compositions
dominates all Concertos written in the late 1790's and early
1800's, however he assimilated the forms and dominated with the
clarity of his imagination; thus his spirit would be found also in
the Concertos of Ferlendis. Bablan states Mozart's influence was
high in all minor composers, and especially Italians. Looking at the
piece, Bablan stated certain modulations in the second theme of
the 1st movement--both in the tutti and the solo--were un-
Mozartian. The sorrowfulness which almost retreats into itself and
the expressive chromatics in the Adagio, Bablan believes is a sure
sign of the Neapolitan and not Mozart. The Rondo finale, with a bit
of the Tarantella in it, was a structure adopted by all composers of
the age, but no where in it is the distinctive outburst one always
sees in Mozart; in fact the central minor episode points to a
"southern" composer in Barblan'e eyes. Barblan sees the Concerto
as being by Ferlendis. The language of the Concerto--especially at
its conclusion--is that of a virtuoso looking toward getting the
final applause.
K6 combined Einstein's and Paumgartner's comments under the
lost Oboe Concerto K271k.
Who was Giuseppe Ferlendis? He was born in 1755 in Bergamo,
Italy. As an Oboist he toured Italy in 1776-77 with one of his
brothers (probably Pietro). On April 1, 1777, he joined Archbishop
Colloredo's orchestra in Salzburg, receiving a salary of 540 florins
per year, compared to Wolfgang Mozart's 500 florins. On July 30,
1778, he left the Archbishop's service (according to Michael Brian
Whitter, giving the excuse that the Salzburg air was bad for his
wife's health), and went to Turin. By 1780 he had settled in Venice
and occasionally played elsewhere in northern Italy. By 1793
Ferlendis was in London, where he performed his own Concertos
for Oboe and English Horn during Haydn's last season, 1795. He
then returned to Venice and in 1801 moved to Lisbon, where he
was apparently employed until his death. The year of his death is
with great frequency wrongly given . It was originally thought he
died in 1802, however more recent research shows he is on record
as being employed at the Real Camara in Lisbon in 1804. As late
as the beginning of 1810 he was still recorded as employed there;
later that year his wife is described as a widow.
His death in 1810, brings us back to Einstein's K3a remark that
Louis Spohr heard him in 1816. In Einstein's time it was thought
Ferlendis had died in 1802, so only a little research would have
told Einstein that Spohr's remarks could not have been directed
toward Giuseppe. These remarks actually refer to Giuseppe's son,
Alessandro, born in Venice in 1783. Alessandro married the
contralto Camilla Barberi in Lisbon and toured with her throughout
Europe from 1803 to 1817.
The entire quote from the Spohr autobiography reads: "September
14, 1816: Last evening we went to a concert, given by Ferlendis of
Venice, a Professore di Oboa. His composition and play were alike
pitiable. It is impossible to imagine a worse Tone and a greater
want of Taste in the execution of the passages and of the
cantabile, than this Professor di Oboa displayed. In Germany he
would most certainly have been hissed off; here of a necessity, he
was applauded as a matter of course by the Free-tickets".
So then what did Ferlendis' contemporaries actually think of him?
He is mentioned numerous times in the Mozart correspondence,
but only once is anything about him as a performer hinted at. In a
letter to his son on August 3, 1778, Leopold Mozart writes: "Now
for a piece of news! Ferlendis resigned three days ago, having left
the service at the end of June. This has been the more unexpected
and upsetting as during the last two months whenever Ferlendis
played a concerto, the Archbishop had been in the habit of giving
him one or two ducats. Moreover he was the favorite in the
orchestra and since Besozzi's arrival in Salzburg had learnt a good
deal from him". Leopold refers to Carlo Besozzi, an Italian touring
Oboist, who arrived in Salzburg in May 1778 and was highly
praised by Leopold for his playing. (Michael Brian Whitter
speculates Besozzi could have been the real reason for Ferlendis's
departure from Salzburg, and not the Salzburg air). During
Ferlendis' London trip one commentator noted that he possessed
"astonishing fine command of the instrument, but degenerated
into mere foolish trick". Joseph Haydn found Ferlendis a
"mediocre" player.
Of his composing skill, perhaps we can read between the lines
from Leopold's letters. On August 3, 1778, he wrote that Ferlendis
"had learnt a good deal" from Besozzi. Back on May 28, 1778,
Leopold wrote of Besozzi's composing: "although it smacks a little
of the older style, it is neatly and soundly worked out and has
something in common with that of our Haydn" [Michael that is].
This would connect rather well with Einstein's opinion that the
Oboe Concerto in F "actually went back to an older Concerto
model--namely that of Tartini". However if Leopold was referring
to Besozzi's playing rather than his composing, this would be a
different story. Leopold praised Besozzi's playing, writing "it is all
that is to be desired...In short he has everything!" Writing in the
New Grove II (2001), Alfredo Bernardini states of Ferlendis: "his
own compositions reveal an idiomatic feeling for wind
instruments, but in spite of their elegance of manner they are of
limited musical interest".
Of the Oboe Concerto in F, Einstein certainly had little use for it.
Paumgartner, although denying any attribution to Mozart, was
kinder to the Concerto. John Warrack in the New Grove (1980)
wrote "His Oboe Concertos No.1 in F and no.2 in C are in a vein
similar to that of Mozart's Concerto, though of limited musical
interest; well written for the instrument, they are designed largely
to display the performer's dexterity". Guglielmo Barblan edited the
Concerto #1 and published it in 1967. In his Introduction he writes
the Concerto's "most interesting features are the melodic
invention, the lyrical pathos, the convincing eloquence and the
timbric symmetry of the typically Italian musician whose idiom can
be placed between Tartini and Viotti. Of the 1st movement he
praises its "sweeping, caressing themes both in the tutti and in the
solo. In the second movement Adagio he talks of the "melodic
felicity of the solo instrument in the lyrical abandon and
expressive chromaticism accompanying the thematic line". "The
brisk and lively theme of the final Rondo has the flavor of an
amiable Tarantella tinged with an almost poignant touch in the
minor key of the middle section".
As to Einstein's opinion on the scoring difference (2 Bassoons
rather than 2 Flutes), the copy Paumgartner found in the
Mozarteum of Mozart's Oboe Concerto K271k is scored for Oboe
Principale, 2 Violins, 2 Oboes, 2 Horns, Viola and Basso. As seen it
contains neither Bassoons nor Flutes. In Mozart's Flute Concerto in
G-major K313 2 Oboes are used in the outer movements, and 2
Flutes in the Adagio ma non troppo. In the Flute Concerto
arranged from the Oboe Concerto, 2 Oboes are used. In the
Andante for Flute and Orchestra K315 again 2 Oboes and 2 Horns
are used by Mozart. These same instruments are also used in the
Flute and Harp Concerto. Barblan found that the Bassoon part is
identical to the Double-Bass in the Milan score, so he deleted the
Bassoon in his edition.
Could the Oboe Concerto in F be the lost Mozart Concerto "written
for Ferlendis"? There is absolutely no evidence or hint apart from
St.Foix's speculation, it could be. The Op.13 manuscript clearly
states Ferlendis is the composer. Leopold Mozart's letter of
August 3, 1778, states "whenever Ferlendis plays a concerto", not
anything like "whenever Ferlendis plays your concerto", so one
would conclude Ferlendis did compose in Salzburg. As seen above
he played his own Oboe and English Horn Concertos in London in
1795.
Subject: GEORG NICOLAUS NISSEN
From: Agnes Selby
To: All
Date Posted: 00:50:57 05/20/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
Constanze's second husband, Georg Nicolaus Nissen's contribution to Mozartean history cannot be underestimated. Although he did not complete his Mozart biography before his death, and what we have today is considered a "scissors and paste" work, the book remains a point of reference to all serious Mozart scholars. One will never know Nissen's intentions as to what the book would have been like had he had a chance to complete his task. It was the first book which included Mozart family letters giving readers an intimate look into the life of the Mozart family.
Nissen was born on January 22 1761 in Haderslev, North Schleswig. His father was an impoverished merchant, his mother a descendant of an Italian nobleman from Verona who established himself in Schleswig in 1570.
At the age of twelve, Nissen was sent to be brought up by his uncle, Vilhelm Zoega, the Dean at Mogeltonder near the North Sea. At the age of sixteen he arrived in Copenhagen where another uncle, Georg Zoega was chief of the Postmaster-General's office. Nissen matriculated from the University of Copenhagen in 1779 and was employed as head clerk at the PMG office.
Nissen had never taken music lessons and knew nothing of music. His interest lay in poetry some which had been published by the Danish poet, Knud Lyhne Rahbek. Nissen's poems were severely criticised and this discouragement finished his literary ambitions.
Nissen joined the Foreign Service in 1789 and in 1791 was posted to Regensburg in Germany. Two years later he was posted to Vienna. His letters to his cousin in Italy reveal the delight he experienced in discovering Viennese culture and the revelation music had become to him. He chose to take an apartment at the Trattnerhoff rather than live at the house of his superior, Armand de Saint-Saphorin in order to savour the cultural life of Vienna.
It is not known how he met Constanze Mozart. It could have been through the Trattners who remained Constanze's friends after Mozart's death. He could also have met her through the Danish painter Hans Hansen whose future wife was Constanze's maid and often her companion. Hansen had painted the delightful
portrait of Mozart's children.
Constanze organised concerts at her home where Mozart's and Haydn's works were performed. Haydn was a frequent visitor. Many people attended these concerts. Nissen too was often present at these musicales and a friendship and later a love affair developed between these two lonely individuals.
Nissen and Constanze began their life together on September 1, 1798. Contrary to reports by some writers, who happily coppied each other, Constanze never did run a boarding house and was certainly not employed by Nissen as his maid. In this Einstein is absolutely wrong as he is in his many biographical sketches. Nissen, on his meagre salary, as Secretary at the Danish Embassy, could hardly afford to employ a lady who had recently returned from a most profitable year's journey through the German states, promoting Mozart's works. So successful was Constanze that she was able to lend the Duscheks in Prague mortgage money on their Villa Bertramka.
Marriage was out of the question as Nissen had signed a contract with the Foreign Service which specified that he remain single while serving his country in foreign lands. However, in his letter to his cousin, Georg Zoega in Rome, he refers to Constanze as "my wife". Mozart's childeren referred to Nissen as "father", a fair indication of the love they felt for him.
Constanze's continuous troubles with publishers of Mozart's works, particularly the Requiem (see "Provenance of the Requiem" in Library under Essays), slowly began to be handled by Nissen, although Constanze's voice speaks loud and clear beneath Nissens's diplomatic approach.
Constanze and Nissen were married on June 26, 1809 at Pressburg (now Bratislava in Slovakia) during Napoleon's invasion of Vienna. The marriage took place at the Pressburg Cathedral.
Nissen and Constanze left Vienna for Copenhagen on 27 July, 1810. Nissen had resigned from the Foreign Service and in Copenhagen he was given the post of censor for the Danish newspapers. By 1820 Nissen's health began to deteriorate and in July 1820 Nissen and Constanze left Denmark in search for a cure for Nissen's ill health.
During their travels through German lands, Nissen and Constanze stayed as Nannerl's guests. Constanze's letter of 28 October, 1825 describes their stay in Salzburg. Constanze and Nissen's signatures and well wishes also appear in the diary of Andreas Stumpff dated (Salzburg) 21 September, 1824. During their stay in Salzburg, Nannerl showed them the Mozart family correspondence. Nissen showed great interest in the history of the Mozart family and he and Constanze visited the remaining Mozart family members in Augsburg. After spending a long time with Karl Mozart in Italy, Nissen and Constanze settled in Salzburg in an apartment in Marktplaz (today Alter Markt No.5).
Nannerl, who liked and respected Nissen, gave him the Mozart family correspondence for the purpose of writing Wolfgang Mozart's biography. Nissen began his research in a methodical way by collecting all printed articles about Mozart, all biographies, be they fancifull or imaginary, as many were in fact devoid of actual data. The reading through the Mozart correspondence neccessitated the deletion of names of people still living as well as the names of those whose descendants or relatives would have been offended by Mozart's unflattering comments.
A typical reaction by Wolfgang Mozart Jnr. is worth mentioning here. In his letter to Jahndl, who was at first in charge of completing the biography after Nissen's death, Wolfgang Jnr. wrote:
"It is true that my father was treated badly by the then Archbishop but I would request that you treat this as gently as possible because although a Bishopric is not inherited, there is a certain spiritual relationship between them and this could hurt me in my career".
Nissen worked closely with Nannerl who developed an appreciation and liking for this gentle man. Nissen needed help in musical matters and this came through Anton Jahndl and Maximilliam Keller, both men being accomplished musicians and music teachers.
Nissen died on March 24, 1826.
For a while Jahndl was charged to complete the Mozart biography but for some reason, Constanze gave all the material collected by Nissen to Dr. Feuerstein. My article about Dr. Feuerstein explains what a mistake this was on Constanze's part.
By the way, Nissen's biography, edited by Dr. Angermuller is available at the Mozarteum Bookshop.
-----
Ref: Sjoqvist: "Twice Perfectly Happy"
Translations of Nissen's letters from Danish to English by Mr.Mortem Vestrup of Rigsarkivet in Copenhagen. (Personal correspondence).
Letters of Constanze Mozart.
A. Selby: "Constanze, Mozart's Beloved".
Regards, Agnes Selby.
.
Subject: Contemporaries of Mozart: Adalbert Gyrowetz
From: Gary Smith
To: All
Date Posted: 18:59:36 05/18/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
CONTEMPORARIES OF MOZART:
Adalbert Gyrowetz (1763-1850)
This is another posting in an irregular series on various contemporary composers from Mozart's lifetime. The material is mostly derivative from general sources as noted. These are the people that Mozart:
Competed with for work.
Considered friends and colleagues.
Knew from reputation.
Taught to and nurtured as pupils and students
.
Gyrowetz was born in the Bohemian town of Ceske Budejovice in 1763, son of choirmaster, who gave him a head start in his studies of the violin, keyboard and composition. His earliest works included sacred works (obviously), serenades and quartets. Due to his talents, his father was able to get him into schooling in Prague, but, as was fairly typical, not for music, but for law. He was an exceptional student, learning five languages (including English), but a lack of money forced him to cut his studies short and he took a post in administration of the estate of Count Franz von Fünfkirchen. Music however, eventually won out, as he had not given up those studies in Prague, and the Count encouraged his efforts. Gyrowtez played in the Count’s orchestra, and dedicated some early symphonies to his patron.
However, a bright, intelligent and talented man such as Gyrowetz could not stay satisfied working in a quiet corner of the Empire. He ended up traveling to the principal music centers of Europe: Vienna, London, Paris and Italy. In late 1785 or early 1786 he visited Vienna and met the main players on the musical stage there. He called on Haydn, Dittersdorf and Albrechtsberger, and soon came to admire Haydn immensely, but it was Mozart to whom he became a friend. Taken by the young Gyrowetz, Wolfgang had a symphony of his performed at a concert in the Mehlgrube, without letting people know it wasn’t a Mozart work. Once the cries of approval were done, Mozart introduced him as the real composer. About a year later, Gyrowetz talked over with Mozart the opportunity to go to Italy to study. Wolfgang, who had been there three times in his life and knew the country well, responded on hearing Gyrowetz had decided to take the plunge: “You lucky man! Oh, if only I could go with you, how happy I should be!”
In Italy, he met both Goethe and the great violinist Nardini, and composed a set of 6 string quartets for publication. These works, however, ended up being published without his knowledge (or reward) in Paris. Ending up in Naples for two years, he took composition training from both Paisiello and Nicola Sala. As well, he taught music and took part in many quartet parties (for pay, not as a dilettante), as his supply of funds began to dwindle down. Moving on to Paris, Gyrowetz discovered that one of his symphonies had been published under Haydn’s name, and that his 6 Italian string quartets had caused a sensation. Eventually, seven editions of this set were issued, new works were demanded, and he settled down to a highly productive and lucrative time.
However, the continuing upheavals of the French Revolution made Paris a worrisome place for foreigners, and by 1790 he had made his way across the Channel to London, where he spent the next 3 years. Gyrowetz and London society took very well to one another, and his works were as successful here as they were in Paris. In 1791, Haydn arrived for his famous London concerts, and Gyrowetz helped smooth the way into high society for him. Salomon rewarded him by having many of his works performed at Haydn’s concerts. Finally, Gyrowetz obtained a commission to compose an opera seria entitled Seriamis (a similar libretto to which Mozart once had an opportunity to work on) for the Pantheon theatre. Unfortunately, the theater burnt down the night before the first performance and only the overture to this opera survives.
Later that year (1792), he set out on a homeward journey (on which he met Napoleon briefly) that saw him end up again in Vienna, in the service of Count von Sikkingen. But, in the year 1804 he obtained an appointment as second Kapellmeister to the Vienna Court Theater, which changed his music output for the rest of his life. He was now obliged to compose one opera/singspiel and one ballet a year, which caused his instrumental production to rapidly dwindle to a trickle. His first major success was an opera seria Agnes Sorel that was performed 124 times in Vienna over the next decade and lasted on the boards in Europe for nearly 30 years. His best know ballets were La laitie’re Suisse and The Inconstant Page, or, The Marriage of Figaro.
He retired from his Kapellmeister post in 1831 on a pension, wrote his autobiography in 1848, and died in 1850. Gyrowetz stayed firmly rooted in the Classical style, and while keenly aware of the modern trends around him, he preferred to compose with an understanding of unity, balance and proportion. Early on, he had professed an admiration for Haydn, Hoffmeister and Kozeluch. While having befriended Mozart, there is no trace of any influence by him on Gyrowetz’s output, while certain traits by the others can at least be surmised with some accuracy. And so, while incorporating the Romantic style into his works, he never fully fell under the spell of the era. He served as a pallbearer at Beethoven’s funeral and became greatly admired in his later years by the young Romantics. He encouraged Chopin early on, and in 1818 the nine year old made his debut in Vienna playing a concerto by Gyrowetz (which apparently was composed some 22 years earlier in 1796).
His works include some 30 operas/singspiels, 28 ballets, ca. 40 symphonies, 2 piano concerti, 5 sinfonia concertantes, 42+ string quartets, 46 piano trios, close to 100 songs and arias, 11 masses, 2 vespers and many unpublished works.
Sources:
Sadie, Stanley (Ed.) The New Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians 2nd Edition Groves Dictionaries, New York 2000
Liner notes from Hyperion CDA 67109 Three String Quartets Op. 44
Liner notes from Chandos 9791 Adalbert Gyrowetz: Three Symphonies
Subject: Contemporaries of Mozart: Adalbert Gyrowetz
From: Gary Smith
To: All
Date Posted: 18:58:25 05/18/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
CONTEMPORARIES OF MOZART:
Adalbert Gyrowetz (1763-1850)
This is another posting in an irregular series on various contemporary composers from Mozart's lifetime. The material is mostly derivative from general sources as noted. These are the people that Mozart:
Competed with for work.
Considered friends and colleagues.
Knew from reputation.
Taught to and nurtured as pupils and students
.
Gyrowetz was born in the Bohemian town of Ceske Budejovice in 1763, son of choirmaster, who gave him a head start in his studies of the violin, keyboard and composition. His earliest works included sacred works (obviously), serenades and quartets. Due to his talents, his father was able to get him into schooling in Prague, but, as was fairly typical, not for music, but for law. He was an exceptional student, learning five languages (including English), but a lack of money forced him to cut his studies short and he took a post in administration of the estate of Count Franz von Fünfkirchen. Music however, eventually won out, as he had not given up those studies in Prague, and the Count encouraged his efforts. Gyrowtez played in the Count’s orchestra, and dedicated some early symphonies to his patron.
However, a bright, intelligent and talented man such as Gyrowetz could not stay satisfied working in a quiet corner of the Empire. He ended up traveling to the principal music centers of Europe: Vienna, London, Paris and Italy. In late 1785 or early 1786 he visited Vienna and met the main players on the musical stage there. He called on Haydn, Dittersdorf and Albrechtsberger, and soon came to admire Haydn immensely, but it was Mozart to whom he became a friend. Taken by the young Gyrowetz, Wolfgang had a symphony of his performed at a concert in the Mehlgrube, without letting people know it wasn’t a Mozart work. Once the cries of approval were done, Mozart introduced him as the real composer. About a year later, Gyrowetz talked over with Mozart the opportunity to go to Italy to study. Wolfgang, who had been there three times in his life and knew the country well, responded on hearing Gyrowetz had decided to take the plunge: “You lucky man! Oh, if only I could go with you, how happy I should be!”
In Italy, he met both Goethe and the great violinist Nardini, and composed a set of 6 string quartets for publication. These works, however, ended up being published without his knowledge (or reward) in Paris. Ending up in Naples for two years, he took composition training from both Paisiello and Nicola Sala. As well, he taught music and took part in many quartet parties (for pay, not as a dilettante), as his supply of funds began to dwindle down. Moving on to Paris, Gyrowetz discovered that one of his symphonies had been published under Haydn’s name, and that his 6 Italian string quartets had caused a sensation. Eventually, seven editions of this set were issued, new works were demanded, and he settled down to a highly productive and lucrative time.
However, the continuing upheavals of the French Revolution made Paris a worrisome place for foreigners, and by 1790 he had made his way across the Channel to London, where he spent the next 3 years. Gyrowetz and London society took very well to one another, and his works were as successful here as they were in Paris. In 1791, Haydn arrived for his famous London concerts, and Gyrowetz helped smooth the way into high society for him. Salomon rewarded him by having many of his works performed at Haydn’s concerts. Finally, Gyrowetz obtained a commission to compose an opera seria entitled Seriamis (a similar libretto to which Mozart once had an opportunity to work on) for the Pantheon theatre. Unfortunately, the theater burnt down the night before the first performance and only the overture to this opera survives.
Later that year (1792), he set out on a homeward journey (on which he met Napoleon briefly) that saw him end up again in Vienna, in the service of Count von Sikkingen. But, in the year 1804 he obtained an appointment as second Kapellmeister to the Vienna Court Theater, which changed his music output for the rest of his life. He was now obliged to compose one opera/singspiel and one ballet a year, which caused his instrumental production to rapidly dwindle to a trickle. His first major success was an opera seria Agnes Sorel that was performed 124 times in Vienna over the next decade and lasted on the boards in Europe for nearly 30 years. His best know ballets were La laitie’re Suisse and The Inconstant Page, or, The Marriage of Figaro.
He retired from his Kapellmeister post in 1831 on a pension, wrote his autobiography in 1848, and died in 1850. Gyrowetz stayed firmly rooted in the Classical style, and while keenly aware of the modern trends around him, he preferred to compose with an understanding of unity, balance and proportion. Early on, he had professed an admiration for Haydn, Hoffmeister and Kozeluch. While having befriended Mozart, there is no trace of any influence by him on Gyrowetz’s output, while certain traits by the others can at least be surmised with some accuracy. And so, while incorporating the Romantic style into his works, he never fully fell under the spell of the era. He served as a pallbearer at Beethoven’s funeral and became greatly admired in his later years by the young Romantics. He encouraged Chopin early on, and in 1818 the nine year old made his debut in Vienna playing a concerto by Gyrowetz (which apparently was composed some 22 years earlier in 1796).
His works include some 30 operas/singspiels, 28 ballets, ca. 40 symphonies, 2 piano concerti, 5 sinfonia concertantes, 42+ string quartets, 46 piano trios, close to 100 songs and arias, 11 masses, 2 vespers and many unpublished works.
Sources:
Sadie, Stanley (Ed.) The New Groves Dictionary of Music and Musicians 2nd Edition Groves Dictionaries, New York 2000
Liner notes from Hyperion CDA 67109 Three String Quartets Op. 44
Liner notes from Chandos 9791 Adalbert Gyrowetz: Three Symphonies
Subject: Contemporaries of Mozart: Christoph Willibald Gluck
From: Tel Asiado
To: All
Date Posted: 06:43:40 05/15/04 ()
Email Address: webmaster@inspiredpen.4t.com
Message:
[Submitted by: Tel Asiado, for MozartForum]
CONTEMPORARIES OF MOZART:
Christoph Willibald Ritter von Gluck (1714-1787)
This is another posting in an irregular series on the various contemporary composers from Mozart's lifetime. The material is mostly derivative from general sources as noted. These are the people that Mozart:
Competed for work with.
Considered friends and colleagues.
Knew from reputation.
Taught to and nurtured as pupils and students.
Quoted from J.A. Hiller about Gluck, "Wochentliche Nachrichten" (24th October 1768): ... "Gluck's imagination is immense. The confines of all national music are thus too narrow for him: out of Italian and French music, out of that of every people, he has made a music that is his own; or rather, he has sought in nature all the sounds of true expression and conquered them for himself."
The Bohemian-German composer Christoph Willibald Gluck was born on July 2, 1714 in Erasbach, Upper Palatinate. His father, Alexander Johannes Gluck, was a forester and huntsman in the Upper Palatinate, now the western extreme of Czechoslovakia. Czech was Christoph Gluck's native tongue. The young Gluck went to school at Kamnitz and at Albersdorf near Komotau, where he first came in contact with music. In 1732 Gluck went to Prague to study. It's not certain whether he studied in a university or not, or where he cultivated his knowledge of French and Italian languages, but one thing was certain: music attracted him more and more at this time. While in Prague, he devoted himself to instrumental music. He was also an excellent singer, and most likely came in contact with opera at the houses of princely and aristocratic patrons. He earned some money by playing the organ at various churches, at the same time he gave singing and violoncello lessons.
At age 22, he left Prague and moved to Vienna, where the youthful Prince Ferdinand Philipp Lobkowitz took him into his service as chamber musician. He continued his musical studies and heard much Italian opera.
The following year, Prince Melzi heard about Gluck's talent and induced him to accompany him to Milan. There, he became chamber musician to Melzi as well as pupil of the Italian composer Giovanni Battista Sammartini. He became a very close friend of Sammartini, who also tutored him. During this time, he got exposed to many contemporary operas.
Gluck's first opera, "Artaserse," was given in Milan in 1741. The libretti was produced by Pietro Metastasio and the work was dedicated to the governor of Milan, Count Traun. The first performance was well received by the general public, although the rehearsal was critically judged by a select audience. Other operas by Gluck followed elsewhere in Italy, including "Cleonice" (originally called "Demetrio" ), "Demofoonte," "Tigrane," and "Ippolito." In 1745, at the invitation of Lord Middlesex, Gluck accompanied Prince Lobkowitz to England. On the way, they visited Paris where Gluck became acquainted with French opera and admired Rameau.
Gluck also performed operas in London during 1745-46, where he met Handel and the latter's music. Although Handel thought him to be a poor contrapuntist, they became friends. After further travel (Dresden, Copenhagen, Naples, Prague) he settled in Vienna in 1752 as Konzertmeister of the Prince of Saxe-Hildburghausen's orchestra, then as Kapellmeister. He also became involved in performances at the court theatre of French 'operas comiques' as composer and arranger, and he wrote Italian dramatic works for court entertainments. His friends tried, at first unsuccessfully, to procure a court post for him; but by 1759 Gluck got a salaried position at the court theatre and soon after was granted a royal pension.
In 1760, Gluck met the poet Ranieri Calzabigi and the choreographer Angiolini, and with them wrote a ballet-pantomime "Don Juan" (1761), which embodied a new degree of artistic unity. The next year they wrote the opera "Orfeo ed Euridice", the first of Gluck's so-called 'reform operas,' another libretto by Calzabigi. In spite of its disconcerting novelty, this opera made a tremendous impression, and enthusiastic admirers grouped themselves against advocates of the school of Metastasio (by now 64 years old). In 1763, he visited Venice and Bologna with Dittersdorf, the singer Chiara Marini and her mother. The singers of the newly built theatre at Bologna gave a concert for Gluck, who was to write an opera for them. This was "Il trionfo di Clelia," which he finished. But after a visit to Parma, he was recalled to Vienna. The following year, he composed an 'opera comique,' "La rencontre imprevue," and the next year two ballets. He followed up the artistic success of "Orfeo ed Euridice" with a further collaboration with Calzabigi, "Alceste" (1767), this time choreographed by Noverre; a third, "Paride ed Elena" (1770), was less well received.
In 1769, Gluck and his wife adopted his niece Marianne Hedler, who showed considerable musical talent in musical circles by her singing.
Gluck around this time decided to apply his new ideals to French opera, and in 1774 he gave "Iphigenie en Aulide" as well as "Orphee" a French revision of "Orfeo ed Euridice" in Paris. It was a triumph, but it also set the ground for a controversy between Gluck and Italian music (as represented by Piccinni) which flared up in 1777 when his "Armide" was given, following a French version of "Alceste" (1776). "Iphigenie en Tauride" followed in 1779, his greatest success, along with his greatest failure, "Echo et Narcisse." He now acknowledged that his career was over. Unwilling to give up new experiments and to repeat merely what the public wanted, he decided to leave Paris. He fell ill with several apoplectic seizures, recovered, returned to Vienna by end of October 1779, and retired from public life.
He revised "Iphigenie en Tauride" for German performance, and composed some songs, but abandoned plans for a journey to London to give his operas. In 1781 he suffered from a stroke which partly paralyzed him. At the command of Joseph II, the German version of "Iphigenie en Tauride" was performed. The following year, a special performance of Mozart's "Die Entfuhrung," which Gluck was anxious to hear, was arranged for him in August. He was much delighted that he invited Mozart to dinner. In 1783 Gluck went to Mozart's concert, where Mozart improvised variations on a theme from "La Rencontre imprevue." Notably, Gluck's relations with Mozart were friendly but reserved. This was due to the fact that Gluck patronized Antonio Salieri, Mozart's natural opponent, something the Mozarts were not sympathetic about. Leopold and Wolfgang were said to have mistrusted Gluck ever since their first visit to Vienna in 1768, and when Mozart went to Paris in 1778, Leopold Mozart instructed him to avoid Gluck.
Gluck died in Vienna in the autumn of 1787. He was widely recognized as the doyen of Viennese composers and the man who had carried through important reforms to the art of opera. Although his opera reforms were not exclusively his own, (several other composers notably Jommelli and Traetta, both like Gluck, were French-influenced), he worked along similar lines - outlined in the preface he wrote, probably with Calzabigi's help, to the published score of "Alceste." He said: "When I undertook to write the music of "Alceste," I resolved to divest it of all those abuses, introduced either by the mistaken vanity of the singers or by the too great complaisance of composers, which have so long disfigured Italian opera and made of the most beautiful of spectacles the most ridiculous and wearisome. I have striven to restrict music to its true office of serving poetry by means of expression and by following the situations of the story without interrupting the action or stifling it with a useless superfluity of ornaments ..." [Eric Blom's translation from Einstein's biography of Gluck in Dent's 'Master Musicians' series.]
Gluck aimed to make the overture relevant to the drama and the orchestration apt to the words, and to break down the sharp contrast between recitative and aria. "Orfeo ed Euridice" exemplifies most of these principles, with its abandonment of simple recitative in favour of a more continuous texture (with orchestral recitative, arioso and aria running into one another) and its broad musical-dramatic spans in which different types of solo singing, dance and choral music are fully integrated. In short, it had a simpler, direct plot, based on straightforward human emotions.
Gluck's historical importance rests on his establishment of a new equilibrium between music and drama, and his greatness in the power and clarity with which he projected that vision. He dissolved the drama in music instead of merely illustrating it. His convincing operas exerted a strong influence on his younger contemporary Mozart, into the 19th century, and perhaps beyond. His works include several operas (plus 'operas comiques'), four ballets, many vocal works, sonatas for two violins and bass, eight trio sonatas, and symphonies.
Music Suggestions:
Naxos (3) 8 660066/8 (147 minutes: DDD) Alceste
Decca 467 248-2DH Arias
Archiv Production (2) 459 616-2AH2 Armide
Erato (2) 22920-45002-2 Iphigenie en Aulide
Telarc Classics (2) CD80546 Iphigenie en Aulide
Decca compact Opera Collection (2) 470 424-2DOC2 Orfeo ed Euridice
EMI CDS5 56885-2 Orphee et Eurydice
Sources:
Blanks, Harvey. The Golden Road. Rigby Limited. (Australia. 1968)
Einstein, Alfred. Gluck. Translated by Eric Blom. McGraw-Hill Book Company, with revisions, J.M Dent & Sons Ltd. (New York, 1964.)
Kennedy, Michael. The Oxford Dictionary of Music, 2nd Edition. Oxford University Press, (Oxford, 2001)
Sadie, Stanley (Ed.). The Grove Concise Dictionary of Music, The MacMillan Press Ltd, (London. 1994)
Sadie, Stanley (Ed.). The Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 2nd Edition Groves Dictionaries. (New York, 2000.)
Liner Notes to the CD’s as noted above.
-- Tel Asiado 15.May.2004
Subject: Dr. Johann Heinrich Feuerstein.
From: Agnes Selby
To: All
Date Posted: 19:07:34 05/13/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
What can one say about Feuerstein when in his biography about this "gentleman", Eric Offenbacher (Mozart-Jahrbuch 1993 and 1994)refers to his "deceptive and fraudulent personality").
It is not known where Constanze Mozart and her second husband, Georg Nissen met this person nor, for that matter, do we know how Nannerl Mozart met him, seeing that she was mostly confined to her bed. One must assume that Feuerstein, being a crafty manipilator,
visited Nannerl and impressed her so much that she
presented him with 8 of Leopold Mozart's letters addressed to herself and a copy of letter she herself wrote to her son Leopold in Linz dated August 10, 1806.
Feuerstein so impressed the Salzburg trio, that all three considered him a "worthy and deserving Mozart scholar"
It is difficult to believe that a man like Nissen, a long time diplomat and later censor of Danish newspapers, could fall under Feuerstein's spell. But then, Feuerstein petitioned the University of Jena to grant him his medical degree after only two years of study and involved the Grand Duke of Weimar in his machinations. Despite being the owner of a property, he was granted a "poverty certificate" to study medicine free. This same fraudulant situation was repeated again when he applied for medical
registration in Dresden. Here he was found to have copied all the answers for his exams from a book and when reprimanded, published a spitful booklet, "Der Dresdner Cursus" at his own expense, deriding the professor who had found him cheating.
So this was the man Constanze chose to complete Nissen's Mozart biography. The Nissen biography is considered by many Mozart scholars as a "scissors and paste job", but we will never know how a pedantic man like Nissen would have completed Mozart's biography.
Constanze sent all the material Nissen had collected to Feuerstein and empowered him to deal directly with the subscribers, and have them pay for the book directly to Feuerstein.
Constanze had spent thousands of gulden to have Nissen's Mozart biography published but when by 1830 Constanze had not recouped a single kreutzer, she began to worry and suspect Feuerstein's integrity.
There was considerable confusion regarding the distribution of the biography to subscribers.
A letter from Breitkopf & Hartel, the publishers of the biography,(dated April 14, 1832) bears testimony to the chaos Feuerstein managed to create:
" We are deeply sorry that you found cause to be dissatisfied with Dr. Feuerstein and cannot conceal from you the fact that he created many difficulties for us as well. Being totally unacquainted with commercial matters and particularly with commercial orderliness, the lists he submitted to us for the purpose of having us send out copies of the Mozart biography were compiled with little care, so that a great number of copies were returned to us, partly because the recipients had already received a copy directly from him".
It really was not a bad business for Feuerstein to receive money directly from subscribers and more from the publishers. No one knew how many subscribers had received the biography and how much money Feuerstein had collected.
In 1828 Feuerstein had moved from Dresden to Pirna. In 1829 Feuerstein's son, aged thirteen months died.
Feuerstein stole the child's body from the undertakers and placed it fully clothed in a cask, submerging it alcohol. He then sent the empty coffin to the cemetery for burial. It was not until 1837, when Feuerstein made one of his many appearances in the magistrate's court in Dresden, that this bizarre story became public knowledge. He had by then been divorced by his wealthy wife, had lost his collection of rare manuscripts and had spent all his own money, as well as Constanze's, on alcohol and drugs.
After the death of his son, Feuerstein lost interest in the Mozart biography but not in the income it generated. By 1830 he had received 1510 thalers which amounted to 3020 gulden of which Constanze received nothing.
When Constanze asked Feuerstein for proper accounting, Feuerstein was nowhere to be found. When Constanze eventually located him in a questionable neighbourhood in Dresden, Feuerstein in a letter denied ever to have received any monies from either subscribers or from Breitkopf & Hartel.
In desperation Constanze turned to the Royal Bavarian Assessor, Sattler, at the Provinicial Court of Justice in Altdorf near Nurnberg. On April 30, 1835 she wrote:
"...You were entirely correct. Dr. Feuerstein is no longer in Pirna but really in Dresden where I have located him through our local police. They were good enough to write on my behalf to the Magistrate in Dresden....The saddest part of it all is that, as the Magistrate wrote to me, he [Feuerstein] lives in poor circumstances, and when there is nothing, even the emperor has lost his power. So much for this very likeable man."
Constanze did not receive any money from Feuerstein, who went from bad to worse, frequently making court appearances for one thing or another. He lived in Fischerdorf, a street in Dresden inhabited by artisans, fish dealers, innkeepers and, generally, people of the lower middle class. He was still listed in the Dresden city register as Professor Doctor Feuerstein when he died on Janury 2, 1850 at the age of fity.
References:
Eric Offenbacher: "Linkage to Mozart"
Mozart - Jahrbuch, 1993 -1994.
Agnes Selby: "Constanze Mozart's Beloved"
Constanze Mozart's letters and diaries.
Kind regards,
Agnes Selby
Subject: Re: Mozart's copy of Violinsonata by Maria-Therese Bathilde d’Or
From: dennis
To: All
Date Posted: 19:00:09 05/13/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
Mozart Copy of "Mademoiselle" Violin/Piano Sonata
In the 2001 Mozart Studien (vol. 11) Rudolph Angermueller brings
to light a copy Mozart wrote out of a Violin/Piano Sonata of a Paris
"Mademoiselle". What follows is the interesting story of this up to
now unknown Mozart copy, as Angermueller put it together. I cut
down or omitted some of the details not exactly pertaining to the
Sonata copy.
The Mozart family--father, mother, Wolfgang, and his sister Maria
Anna (Nannerl)--arrived in Paris on November 18, 1763, and
stayed until April 10, 1764. At the special invitation of the
Bavarian Ambassador, Count van Eyck, the familiy stayed at his
residence at the Hotel Beauvais. The Count was married to the
Salzburg Countess Maria Anna Felicitas Arco.
On December 1, 1763, Friedrich Melchoir von Grimm reported in
the 'Correspondance Litteraire' at length on the Mozart children.
Of Nannerl he reported she played the harpsichord in "the most
brilliant manner...with an astonishing precision". However the
majority of his praise went to her brother. The young Wolfgang,
"who will be 7 years old next February [in reality 8 years old the
next January] is such an extraordinary phenomenon that one is
hard put to believe what one sees with one's eyes and hears with
one's ears". Grimm follows with the now famous report of
Wolfgang's playing of difficult pieces, and his inspiration in
improvizing. In addition he reported the trick of playing the piano
with the keyboard hidden by a cloth laying over it and Mozart's
gift for sight reading. As for composing, Grimm thought Wolfgang
had a "marvellous facility".
On Christmas Eve the Mozart's went to Versailles for two weeks,
where they stayed "au Cormier, rue des bons enfants". On New
Year's Day 1764 the family was present at the court dinner. They
were graciously treated by Louis XV and his consort, Queen Marie
Leszczynska, and others at court. Wolfgang and Nannerl
performed before the Royal family and received 1200 livres, a
truely hugh sum. In his travel journal Leopold Mozart recorded:
"Duc d'Orleans and his son le Duc de Chartres and his daughter, la
Mademoiselle".
Interesting in our connection is "la Mademoiselle". She is Louise-
Maria-Therese Bathilde d'Orleans (born September 9, 1750 and
died January 10, 1822), at the time 13-years old. She was the
daughter of the Duc d'Orleans (Louis-Philippe d'Orleans), and
sister of Louis-Philippe-Joseph d'Orleans, who under the name
"Philippe Egalite" was to be guillotined in Paris in 1793.
In 1763 Louise-Marie-Therese Barthilde was in the Priory of Nuns
of the Madeleine-de-Traisnal. There she received musical
instruction on the Piano and Harp, as well as entering into
composition. One of her composition endeavours she dedicated to
Wolfgang Mozart: a Rondeau for Clavecin and Violin. Of this piece
three manuscripts have been preserved:
[A] the autograph of the composer from 1764 {in Bibliotheque
nationale de France, Paris; facsimilie page 192 of Mozart Studien};
[B] a copy of Wolfgang Mozart's from the same year {in private
possession; facsimilie page 193,194};
[C] a copy from about 1820 by Georg Nikolaus von Nissen {in
Bibliothek der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum, Salzburg;
facsimilie page 195,196}.
The manuscripts [B] and [C] have been unknown to research up to
now. Manuscript [C], which derives from Manuscript [B] as the
copying of the page division and exact repeats of all copying
errors shows, originated doubtlessly in the course of the
preparation of Nissen's 'Biographie W.A. Mozart' (Leipzig, 1828),
where the piece appeared reprinted on page 114-116, although
confusingly in the context of 1766.
From the evidence in the Mozart letters, along with these
manuscripts, Angermueller put together a reconstruction of the
what happened:
Mozart had become acquainted with the composing young lady
while in Versailles [we learn in later letters the Mozarts visited her
twice in the convent], where she also might have shown them her
Rondeau with the dedication. For Wolfgang this was the occasion
to copy out the composition: certainly with some mistakes and
omissions. [Angermueller points out several here.]
Father Mozart had looked over these mistakes, but probably would
have renounced making any improvements. As trusted chronicler
he was certainly most concerned that the circumstances were
captured, so for that reason it was of primary importance that the
"Dedication text" was carried on the copy of his son: "de la
Composition de S:A: Mademoiselle qui/prend la liverte de
presenter Son ouvrage/a Mr: Wolfgang Mozart", was written at the
top by Leopold.
The page [Manuscript B], for years carefully guarded, was finally
part of Mozart's estate, where Nissen must have found it during
his cataloguing work. From Nissen originated new and additional
remarks: first in the upper left corner the correct year "1764";
further a commentary on the composer.
In the by Leopold Mozart written text Nissen placed after
"Mademoiselle" a cross and repeated it at the bottom of the page
for an additional remark in parenthesis: "fille de Msgr le Duc
d'Orleans". With finer ink was the indication later--again by
Nissen--expanded in the lower right portion of the page in two
lines: "Kaiser Joseph would have married her, as his mother did
not consent, so he resolved never to marry."
In a further work stage Nissen wrote down Mozart's copy on a
single double page for himself [Manuscript C]. The purpose of this
might be explained in a later crossed out and not more completely
readable remark in the left upper corner of the first page:
"Belonged to pg.47...[?]". Consequently could the manuscript have
been meant for a Mozart biography. In this copy exists the same
copying errors (and even a few more), which indicated that the
piece never had been read through by an experienced musician as
Maximilian Stadler.
Nissen returned to the explanation inscriptions that had been
assembled over the course of time on Mozart's copy [B] on his
copy [C] with slight variations. The heading was this time formed
into its own title page: "Rondeau/de la composition/de S.A.
Mademoiselle/ (fille du Duc d'Orleans)/ qui pend la liberte de
presneter Son ouvrage/a/M.r Wolfgang Mozart". At the bottom of
the page the remark about Kaiser Joseph was repeated: "It was
said that Kaiser Joseph II was to have married this Princess, and
that as he was denied the consent of his mother, resolved never to
marry".
Nissen's note, repeated on page 114 of his biography of 1828, is
certainly uncomplete. Joseph II on October 6, 1760, had married
Maria Isabella, Princess von Bourbon-Parma of Spain in Vienna.
She died on November 27, 1763. On January 23, 1765, Joseph II
married a second time, to Maria Josepha, Princess of Bavaria, who
died on May 28, 1767.
Our "Mademoiselle" in 1770 married Louis-Joseph de Bourbon,
Prince de Conde, who in August 1766 invited the Mozart family to
Dijon, where the two children put on a concert.
Two more times Leopold Mozart mentioned the "Mademoiselle"
and her Violin/Piano piece in his correspondance: On February 5,
1778, he send Wolfgang in Mannheim a list of old Paris
acquaintances, including "the Mademoiselle d'Orleans, who is now
Madame la Duccesse de Bourbon. She had to you there dedicated
a short piano piece". And on February 9, 1778, he wrote to
Wolfgang "the most important people [to look up] are M. Grimm,
and Madme la Duchese de Bourbon, formerly Mademoiselle
d'Orleans, with whom we found Paisible on the two occasions
when we visited her in the convent, and who dedicated to you a
little piece for the piano, which she had composed herself...".
For the acquaintance extent of Mozart in Paris and Versailles in
1763/64 spoke the composition of the "Mademoiselle". A 13-year
old aristocrat "dedicated", as Leopold Mozart said, a Rondeau to a
7-year old Salzburger. Wolfgang-- and also his father--must have
been highly honored.
But Mozart attained high praise not only in Versailles. Friedrich
Karl von Bose wrote a flowery dedication in a book presented to
the "little Orpheus of seven years". In February 1764 Mozart's first
printed compositions appeared: two Sonatas for Clavecin with
accompaniment of a Violin, dedicated to Madame Victoire of
France, Opus I [K6 and K7]. On March 5, 1764, the 'Avant-
Coureur' devoted an article to this "extraordinary phenomena". In
this same month in Paris an anonymous poem appeared in praise
"of the children of M. Mozart". Then in April Wolfgang's Opus II
Sonatas for Clavecin with accompaniment of a Violin [K8 and K9]
appeared in print in Paris. Mozart was thus all the talk in the
Seine-metropolis.
dennis
Subject: K.550 Symphony # 40 in g “Great”
From: Gary Smith
To: All
Date Posted: 20:45:22 05/11/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
Famous Works Series
K.550 Symphony # 40 in g “Great”
2nd of the last three symphonies (K.543, K.550 and K.551) Pt. 2
This is another in the series of short background articles on famous works by Mozart.
Many mysteries, questions and speculations will be found in regards to the last three symphonies of Mozart. He had composed 15 piano concerti since coming to Vienna, but only 3 symphonies, and two of them (the “Haffner” and “Linz”) were originally for other venues. The third symphony, the “Prague”, might not have gotten premiered in Vienna either, as we have no concrete proof that it did, though the odds are very good for this to have happened. So, didn’t Vienna like symphonies? The simple answer here is that Mozart had written early on to his father in Salzburg (once he’d established himself in Vienna), asking that various older symphonies be sent to Vienna for concert use, works the Viennese were unfamiliar with. That would offer one good explanation why he felt no need to compose more. But then, why three large-scale works now?
As discussed in the first installment of this series, good evidence would appear to show that Mozart was composing these last three works for use beyond just concerts in Vienna. Most likely, they were for the music publisher Artaria, as part of a larger series of symphonies produced by other leading composers. Hard (enough) times had settled upon the Austrian Empire that this series was delayed and most likely reduced in scope. The possibility exists as well that Mozart was composing these for use on a projected trip to England. His English friends (the Storaces, Thomas Attwood and Michael Kelly) had left in early 1787 to return to London. We have, through Leopold, evidence that Mozart was planning to travel to London himself, as well as evidence that Attwood was attempting to use his connections to open doors for him there.
Specifically, for Mozart to compose an opera or stage a subscription concert series. Such a series, of course, to no doubt include new works. In the end, plans for a trip never firmly materialized. However, it is not out of the question that since symphonies played a bigger role in the musical world of London than Vienna, Mozart might well have planned for their use or sale there. In the end, though, Mozart was an imminently practical composer, so with no firm prospects in England to hang a hat on, this potential reason for composing symphonies should be regarded as secondary (or even tertiary) at best.
There are scattered about Europe orchestral parts from the last three symphonies that can be dated (by their paper and copyists) to around this time, but not specifically to it. However, we do have one set of parts that have a highly interesting background.
Cliff Eisen, in his article “Another look at the ‘corrupt passage’ in Mozart’s G minor symphony, K550” (Early Music Aug 1997 pgs. 373-381), covers the details regarding this set, which is located in the Landeskonservatorium library in Graz, Austria. This copy is partly in the hands of Viennese copyists, one of whom worked on other Mozart copies (while Mozart was alive) dating from the later 1780’s. The Graz manuscript is also partly in the hands of Salzburg copyists who worked for the Mozart family there. To see this in a work produced after Mozart’s death (and therefore in the 1790’s) would mean that Constanze would have had to be in contact with Nannerl in Salzburg during that time period, something we know did not occur. This mixture of copyists could realistically occur only while Mozart was alive.
Much more significant are the correction changes in the Graz copy. Mozart made various changes to the Andante of K.550 on his autograph. Some were accomplished by writing out on a separate page a new version of some bars, and signaling for the cancellation of the original bars directly on the autograph with the notations ‘vide Pag: 1’ and ‘vide Pag: 2’ respectively. Other corrections were made by him such as canceling out the bars in the autograph and adding in free hand corrected bars. All the corrections noted in Mozart’s autograph appear in the Graz copy, but some in the violin section were revised in the Graz copy with paste overs onto Mozart’s original version. So, despite Mozart’s clear indications, the copyist would have had to write down the “wrong” crossed out bars first, then supply a paste-over to correct his error. All the other corrections in the Graz copy duplicate Mozart’s autograph. Or, the copyist correctly copied the violin bars in question from Mozart’s autograph before Mozart made his changes here, and then supplied paste overs for these bars when he completed the balance of the copying after receiving Mozart’s revised autograph. Which means that these orchestral parts were being produced while Mozart was still working on this symphony. This would strongly indicate a performance in the near future. Finally, Mozart added two corrections himself to this manuscript, each in a different location. No other copy of any other orchestral manuscript can claim to have material in it from Mozart’s own hand. As Cliff Eisen states: “It is difficult to escape the conclusion that the Graz manuscript of K.550 represents Mozart’s own performance parts for this work.”
One does not pay to produce parts for performance then hide them in a drawer for posterity. This evidence strongly suggests that K.550 would have seen at least one performance while Mozart was alive. We have program notes from some concerts Mozart gave that state that a new, grand symphony is to be performed at them, with unfortunately no description of the work meant by the notes. However, there is evidence from one specific concert that would indicate that one of the last three was played; specifically K.550. The Tonkünstler-Societät (the Society of Musicians) held two pairs of annual concerts to collect money to aid the widows and orphans of member musicians. In 1791, at the Lenten concerts, which took place on 16 and 17 April, the opening work was ‘Eine neue grosse Simphonie von Herrn Mozart.’ It is hardly likely that Mozart could or would try to palm off an older work on such an informed group of musicians. This description could, realistically, be any of the last four symphonies, if we include the “Prague.”
However, each one of the last four works has a different wind arrangement. As it turns out, we have the manuscript list of the Society’s performers for these two concerts in question. The orchestra included flutes, oboes and clarinets; the latter played by the Stadler brothers, both good friends of Mozart. Of the last four symphonies, only K.550 in its revised form utilizes all three of these instruments. While it is possible for Mozart to have offered any one of the last four symphonies for use here and hence leave out the unneeded woodwind players, would he have let his friends the Stadlers be the ones to sit this one out?
It’s hard not to believe here that a large and elegant Viennese audience heard K.550 performed on these dates, directed by—of all people—Antonio Salieri, one of the major directors of the Society. In fact, it was probably the last time Mozart heard such a large orchestra perform any of his works. The Society’s concerts usually commanded an orchestra of around 100 players; triple that of the standard orchestra of the time. Further, since this was a charity event, everyone contributed their time (and music) gratis, meaning that Mozart could at best reap only celebrity from the concerts.
When we discussed the first symphony of this last trilogy, we recalled Sir Donald Tovey, the great English musical essayist, describing Symphony #39 as “…a triumph of euphony.” As well, Klaus G. Roy wrote, it “…sings above all of beauty, of luxuriant sound, of wisdom sought for and gained.” Whether one agrees with these statements or not, Mozart chose to start this set with a luminous, warm and attractive work. As mentioned, it might have been a tribute to the inner peace Masonry provided him. Or, it may simply be (assuming there is simplicity in here) a deliberate contrast to the melancholy of the following Symphony #40 in g K.550.
In his book Mozart’s Symphonies: Context, Performance Practice, Reception Neal Zaslaw writes “In addition to being a pillar of the repertory and one of the most flawless exemplars of the classical style, the G minor symphony is a key work in understanding the link between musical classicism and musical romanticism, and perhaps even a mournful hint at what Mozart might have composed had he lived a normal lifespan.” Certainly this work is cast in a pervasive mood and style. The special coloring of this work is illustrated by a quote coming from Mendelssohn. Franz Liszt had declared that the piano could produce the essential effects of an orchestral score. “Well,” said Mendelssohn, “if he can play the beginning of Mozart’s G minor Symphony as it sounds in the orchestra, I will believe him.”
The opening movement (marked Molto Allegro) of this work very subtly puts us on edge right at the start. Mozart opens with a single measure of apparently nervous accompaniment, which means here that it is waiting alone for a theme to be the accompaniment to. The first theme subject group ends up being symmetrical when it finishes, but Mozart realizes this with odd-numbered measures interspersed within the group. However, the single opening measure is not balanced; to do so would mean to extend it to two or four measures. As Mozart intends, we are thus subtly off-balance immediately, even before the opening theme commences, and without a fuss or fireworks or opening introduction.
The opening theme, as well as the melodic phrasing that follows, uses the falling semitone to the dominant, which is the technical way of saying that they descend at their ends, a standard convention for stating plaintive sadness. It is all incisive music, attaining its strength by its choice of keys, its imperceptible subtleness and its concentrated compositional approach, instead of by massive means. The entire movement is thus concise and taut, moving chromatically across its length. Like Beethoven’s 5th in C minor, both are constructed compactly on a recurring motif which is really only a mere interval. As well, Mozart uses various motifs that could fit well in any opera buffa score, were they not shrouded in the keys and situations Mozart places them here in this work. Mozart’s exquisite transition from the close of the development to the opening of the recapitulation is worthy of mention. Despite the large number of allusions to its arrival, Alfred Einstein remarked that it “…makes its appearance almost imperceptibly” which allows Mozart to make us realize that the recapitulation has begun before we are truly aware of it. The exquisite effect of this “dovetailing” seemingly never loses it effect, which has been described as the changeover of a face from angry despair to melancholy sadness. Mozart gives us a short coda to close the movement, which resolves none of the mood he created before its arrival.
The second movement Andante presents us with a rhythmic motif and a flowing main theme in E Flat major. There is a clarity of sound here, and in time one feels a sense of inexorable motion of music of great beauty, punctuated with unexpected, sharp bars of overflowing sadness, as though the sun were suddenly blocked out by dark, ominous clouds. In the recapitulation, Mozart combines the main theme and the rhythmic motif in such a fashion that it might be called predestined, had we not known that, of course, it was planned out from the start. This is another of those movements where Mozart conjures up whole worlds by use of economical means that no other contemporary composer had a clue of how to utilize.
The Menuetto (marked Allegretto) has lost its courtly pretence in Mozart’s hands. Back in G minor, this movement is grim, incisive and dramatic. Cutting dissonances, elliptical phrases, odd accents and syncopations, all serve to keep the listener’s attention, as opposed to the beat or the melody. Towards the end of the minuet a gorgeous pyramid of melody is contrapuntally built up from the theme. Only in the trio (which switches to G major) do we get a respite from the enormity of this work. Here Mozart gives us sweet, ingratiating music (as a reminder perhaps, of what once was, or is, elsewhere?); simple, clear and almost taunting in its context within this work.
The finale (marked Allegro assai) takes off with a deceptively understated “Mannheim rocket” theme punctuated with forte chords as a closing. The secondary theme is heard a total of 8 times; four in the major, four in the minor, and each following one a subtle variation on the preceding one. The beginning of the development has been called the most daring in all of Mozart’s works, virtually turning into a 12-tone theme. Fragmented and spinning wildly, Mozart moves the music along with halts and starts, almost as though it were a trapped animal seeking a way out of its cage of bars. The recapitulation thus gives it a way to “escape” back into just being aggressive and not happy. The ending coda is short, uncompromising and gives us little concession towards being a resolving ending, let alone a happy one.
Whether or not one feels that this work is a “…uniquely moving expression of grief…” (there are many who do not), it is an absolutely personal expression by Mozart. With all its hidden skill and subtlety, it speaks to our emotional side. The argument will long continue as to whether it did so in Mozart’s time, or whether we have all become so used to the Romantic influence in music that any precursory music that uses elements of the Romantic style must therefore have similar Romantic meanings. The counter argument is, of course, that by means of such unique works as K.550, the Romantic style was given its foundation and owes those works an eternal debt of gratitude.
Subject: Mozart Not in Kochel
From: dennis
To: All
Date Posted: 06:55:13 05/11/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
I have put together a list of compositions not in any of the Kochel
Catalogues (K.deest) to aid people on the Forum who use the
Köchel listings. I have intentionally kept the information as slight
as possible, attempting to limit any section to no more than 2
sentences. If anyone has more interest in a work, I am sure myself
or someone else on the Forum would be happy to elaborate. As it
would extremely difficult to place these in chronological order, I
have placed them in broad categories—not following any NMA or
other order.
I had difficulty deciding what to include here. For the most part I
have stayed with music that is authentic Mozart. There are so
many pieces of music misattributed to Mozart that are not listed in
Köchel that one could spend a lifetime looking them up. However
a few which are rather well known, or have been discussed with
some frequency I have included.
Also for drafts and sketches, I decided (entirely arbitrarily) to
include some and disregard others. I included those that appeared
to me to be of interest. Many sketches are so short and
undeterminable I just decided to forget most of them here—
perhaps another posting at another time.
I have also tried to list where these pieces can be found in score
and/or facsimile, for more information. The following sources are
the most commonly used:
“NMA IV:20ii” means the issue of the main section of the Neue
Mozart Edition [Series: Workgroup: Volume].
Konard “Sk” or “Skb” is the listing in Ulrich Konrad’s book ‘Mozarts
Schaffensweise’—and most of the time the listing in NMA volume
of Sketches [X:30:3].
A “Fr” number is the listing in the NMA volume of Fragments [X:
30:4].
Many times some of these pieces are in more than one volume of
NMA, so I only listed one.
I. Church Music
Sketch of 30 measures to beginning of a Gloria(?) and 9 measures
in the Credo (“Crucifixus”) for a Mass n C, perhaps K257; dating
1776. [Konrad Sk 1776a and Sk 1776b]
II. Music for Stage and Theater
Ballet for Ascanio in Alba -- On September 7, 1771, Leopold
Mozart reported Wolfgang had to compose the ballet to this
Serenata. In the autograph of ‘Ascanio’ after the last number are
three pages in a copyist’s hand of the bass part of 8 numbers of a
ballet. Nrs.2 and 3 of this ballet correspond to Nrs.4and 5 of Piano
Pieces K.Anh 207. [NMA II:5:v, Anh.—Ascanio in Alba]
Sketches for “Idees pour l’opera serieuse”—1st sketch of 8
measures headed “Presto” and text “ho risoluto’, probably for
introduction to Aria or section from Recitativo accompagnato.
Second sketch (8 measures) headed “Choro”. No doubt for a
planned opera. Dating 1787 [Konrad Sk 1787f].
Mozart contributions to Stein der Weisen -- In manuscript of
opera found in Hamburg sections attributed to Mozart. Opera
premiered in Vienna in 1790.
III. Arias
15 Italian Arias--In “Leopold Mozart’s list of 12-year old son”, he
cites “15 Italian Arias, composed partly in London, partly in The
Hague”. Neal Zaslaw has identified 5 of these (K21, K23, K.deest
“Quel destrier”, K78, 79).
“Quel destrier, che all’albergo e vicino” (Lost)--Constanze Mozart
told B & H in 1799 she owned this Aria, contained in the Capricci
booklet. Perhpas one of 15 Italian Arias listed in “Leopold Mozart’s
list of 12-year old son”.
Aria for daughter of Joseph Wolf Olmitz (Lost)— In letter of May
28, 1778, Leopold Mozart writes of Dr. Wolf: “It was for his little
daughter that Wolfgang composed his Aria at Olmitz long ago”.
The Mozart’s were in Olmitz in November 1767 and December
1767.
5 Metestasio settings (Lost) -- In his letter from Vienna of July 30,
1768, Leopold Mozart wrote Wolfgang wrote music for Metestasio
Arias placed before him at the houses of 5 different persons.
“Cara. Se le mio pene”— Soprano Aria discovered in set of parts;
no doubt belongs to 1760’s. Because of apparent solo setting of
accompaniment, probably for house use. Plath speculates possibly
above Aria for daughter of Dr. Wolf. [NMA II:7:I—Arias v.1]
Aria for Gretl Marchand—(Lost) On July 21, 1784, Mozart wrote
home he would compose Aria for Gretl but she should choose a
text. Most commentators believe Aria was either lost or never
started.
Sketch of a bass aria in B flat—28 measures in one part without
text. Konrad believes possibly to German Opera K416a; dating
1783. [Konrad Sk 1783c]
Accompanied Recitative “Ah cosa veggio” to “Vado, ma dove”
K583--Recitative found in conducting score of ‘Il burbero di buon
cuore’ in Vienna. Aria dated October 1789, and revived opera
premiered in Vienna on November 9, 1789.
Accompanied Recitative “No caro fa corragio”—Recitative to insert
Aria of Cimarosa in opera ‘Laquacquera spirtuosa’ given in Vienna
in August 1790. Recitative attributed to Mozart in score.
Accompanied Recitative "Ah, da me s’allontani" to Aria “che non
sei capace” K419—Found in bundle of music given in a Vienna
performance of extracts from Paisiello’s ‘Fedra’ in April 1791,
connected to Aria.
IV. Lieder
Song (Lost)--In 1807 Mozart’s sister Nannerl asked the publisher
Breitkopf & Härtel to return to her “a little song which he
composed between his 7th and 8th year” that she had sent to
them. No mention of title or words.
"Lustig sey[n] die Schwobemedle"—88 measure sketch for voice
and piano sold at auction in 1979. From watermark appears to
date from 1777-1779.
“Alexis und Naide”--On same half sketchpage with Duet K626b/
26. This sketch contains 7 and 1/2 measures of Mozart’s music to
the first strophe of a Weisse poem with the title “Alexis und Naide”
for Soprano and Piano. Other sketch on page dates from 1785.
2 “Arie scocesi”—Autograph purchased in auction in 1929 and
since unlocatable. Contents known from copy made for Otto Jahn.
One side contained small portion of "Se vuol ballare, signor
contino" from 'Le Nozze di Figaro'. Other side contained 16
measure sketch to Scottish song “Roslin Castle” and 18 measure
sketch to Scottish song "Queen Mary's Lamentation". Possible
dating1785 [Konrad Sk 1785a].
5 Masonic Songs (Lost)---From printed librettos of Masonic
Lodges Philippe Autexier found Mozart set the following texts to
music for ceremonies:
Zur Eröffnung der Meisterloge (“Des Todes Werk, der Faulniss
Grauen”)
Zum Schluss der Arbeit der Meister (“Vollbracht ist die Arbeit der
Meister”)
Bey Eröffnung der Tafelloge (“Legt für heut des Werkzeug
nieder!”)
Lied im Nahmen der Armen (“Brüder! Hört das Flehn der Armen”)
Kettenlied (“Wir singen, und schlingern zur Wette”)
Texts of the first two songs were formerly attributed to Gottlieb
Leon, but now known to be by August Veit von Schittlersberg. Two
different datings appear in sources for these 2 songs: 1786 or
1790. The last three songs were written in June 1790 on poems of
Gottlieb Leon.
V. Vocal Ensembles
Duet for Soprano & Tenor in F-major/d-minor—7 measure sketch
in 2-parts. Unknown what work could belong. Dating 1785/86?
[Konrad Sk 1785f].
Duet for Soprano & Tenor in A—22 measure sketch; probably in
connection with one of Mozart’s Vienna works of 1786/86
(Schauspieldirektor?). [Konrad Sk 1785i].
Terzet in A -- 6 measure sketch, no doubt to work with German
text as word “Ja” in all voices. Perhaps belongs to
Schauspieldirektor. [Konrad Sk 1785j].
VI. Canons
Sketches to solutions of Riddle Canons of Pare Martini—dating
probably 1772 or 1773. [Sk 1772e, Sk 1772f, Sk 1772g, Sk 1772h
, Sk 1772j, Sk 1772j, Sk 1773h].
8-voiced circle Canon in a-minor consisting of 8 measures, dating
probably from 1770 or later. The Canon shows a melodic
similiarity to K90. [Sk 1773l].
Canon a 4 in F -- 14 measures, written on page 149 of Attwood
Study Book. Probably dating August 1786, or earlier. [NMA III:10,
28].
8 Interval Canons – Written into the Attwood Study Book as a
continuation of the six Canons K508a Nrs.3-8. Probable dating
sometime between June 3 and August 1786. [NMA III:10, 26]
VII. Symphonies & symphonic movements
Symphony (Lost?)--In Nannerl’s memoirs of her brother she stated
while in London their father was dangerously ill, Wolfgang
composed his first symphony and she copied it out. This
Symphony was for all the instruments in the orchestra, “but
especially for Trumpets and Timpani”.
Symphony in G ("Neue Lambach") – 2 manuscripts for symphonies
in G found in Lambach monastary—one to Wolfgang the other to
Leopold. Once thought title pages had been switched, Later
proved Lambach attributions correct.
"Ultimo Allegro per una sinfonia" – Autograph sketchpage in
Steiermark contains melody sketch of 18 measures with this
heading. Dating 1785/86, perhaps somehow connected to Prague
Symphony. [Konrad Sk 1786g].
VIII. Orchestral dances
Minuet in C (fragment) – Of back side of page with sketch to
Minuet Nr. 10 of K106. In slightly altered form used in Symphony
K73. Plath dated fragment in 1772, but Symphony is from 1769/
70. [NMA-Fragments Fr 1772c].
Minuet in Eb (Fragment) -–Found in Lisbon. Dated most likely after
premiere of Lucio Silla on December 1772 in Milan. Due to lack of
violas, was intended for Ballroom.
2 Dances in D—2 melody outlines of “un Pair marche” of 16
measures each on page with drafts for Symphony K297.—Dating
first part of 1778. [Konrad Sk 1778a]
Beginning of an Instrumental composition in G (Contredance?)—8
measure sketch in 2-parts. Fuchs believed beginning of a Rondo
for Violin and Bass, while Plath saw it as a Contredance. Probably
from 1786 [Konrad Sk 1784b].
Melody sketch in G—8 meaures in one-part, conceivable for dance
scene in Don Giovanni—dating 1787. [Konrad Sk 1787a].
IX. Serenades, divertimenti etc.
Orchestral Movement in g – On reverse of page which finished Trio
of K186, handwriting points to 1764/65. Also possibly to a
symphony movement. [NMA VII/17/1-Critical Report]
Cassation in C (Lost)--In letter of August 18, 1771, to his wife,
Leopold Mozart asks Nannerl to pick out some music including
“the little Cassation by Wolfgang in C”.
Instrumental Piece in Bb—18 measure 4-part sketch on page with
Oboe parts to K175; possibly to a Divertimento, dating 1778/79.
[Konrad Sk 1778b].
X. Works for wind ensemble
Wind Arrangement of Die Entführung aus dem Serial (Lost)–- In
letter of July 20, 1782, Mozart states he has to arrange his opera
for wind instruments before someone else does. Bastiann
Blombert in 1980’s believed he found this arrangement in
Donaueschingen. Doubtful it is Mozart’s arrangement.
Beginning of a 1st(?) Movement to a Wind Serenade in c-minor
Stands on page 8v of autograph of K388, between 3rd and 4th
movements. Possibly beginning of original beginning of K388, but
has character of 1st movement. [NMA VII:17/ii, Anh 8].
Melody sketch fragment for winds On page 6r of K375, possibly
sketch to variation movement of K361. [NMA VII:17/ii, Anh 9].
XI. Cadenzas to Piano Concertos
To his Own Concertos
K246 – Unknown Cadenza in copyist hand to 1st movement found
in Paris copy of this Concerto.
For Other’s Concertos
Draft to unknown Piano Concerto in D-major – Written on last
page of Concerto K40 but appears not to be for that Concerto;
dating probably 1767. [NMA X:28:2].
XII. Concertos
3 Bassoon Concertos in C, Bb, Bb (Lost?)-- Jahn noted 3 Bassoon
Concertos were listed in Baron Thaddeus von Durnitz’s catalogue
of music. As Mozart composed Piano Sonata for Durnitz in Munich
in early 1775, assumed these Concertos written at that time.
However research has found the catalogue does not contain any
Bassoon Concertos by Mozart.
Flute Concerto (Lost?)-- The diary of Ferdinard von
Schiedenhofer of July 25, 1777, tells of a concert in Salzburg in
which music including “a Concerto for Transverse Flute” was
played, all music was “young Mozart’s work”.
XIII. Chamber Music
Piano/Violin Sonata in D -- Only known source is London music
dealer J. Bland issue, not dated but probably after 1780.
Stylistically similar to very early Piano/Violin Sonatas; considered
doubtful. [NMA X:29:ii--Works of Doubtful Authenticity v.2].
Solo for viola da gamba (Lost) -–Listed in Leopold Mozart’s list of
his 12-year old son as for Prince Joseph Wenzeslaus zu
Furstenberg. Dating perhaps 1766 in Munich.
Trio movement fragment in C -- 12 measures possibly for String
Trio or Piano and two strings. Dating ca. 1765. [NMA-Fragments
Fr 1765b].
Six Trios for 2 Violins and Cello (Lost) -- Listed in Leopold
Mozart’s list of 12-year old son.
Sketch for chamber music work in c-minor (String Trio?)—29
measures in one- to three-parts. [Konrad Sk 1783d]
4-Part(?) Fugue in c-minor—22 measures only written out in 3-
parts. Tentative dating second half 1783. [Konrad Sk 1783k]
Trio Movement for 2 Violins and Cello in C (?Andante, 12
measures-fragment); only 1st violin part written out; tentative
dating 1780’s. [NMA-Duos and Trios VIII/21, and Fragments Fr
178X/a]
String Trio in C -- Fragment of 16 measures (to a finale?). Melodic
similiarity to K465 composed in beginning of 1785. [NMA
Fragments Fr 178Xd]
Instrumental Theme in Bb—16 measures in one-part with heading
“thema”. Probably for a variation movement of undetermined
chamber piece. [Konrad Sk 1785k].
1st movement of String Quartet in E -- 10 measures, on same
page as Mozart arrangement for string quartet of J.S. Bach’s fugue
in b-minor; tentaive dating 1782. [NMA Critical Report to VIII:20:1:
ii—String Quartets and NMA-Fragments Fr 1782r].
Fugue fragment g-minor for String Quartet--12 measures, on
same page as sketch to Bass Aria Sk 1783. Tentative dating 1782
-84. [NMA VIII:20:1:iii –String Quartets and Konrad Skb 1783e].
Fugue in c for String Quartet --10 measures, known only in Fuchs
copy; no dating possible. [NMA- VIII:20:1:iii--String Quartets ].
4-part Fugue in a-minor—28 measures of Exposition; probable
dating 1788 or earlier. [Konrad Sk 1788d].
Clarinet Variations for Joseph Beer on March form March from Les
Mariages Samnites” (Lost?)--In a review of 1808 it was reported on
April 19 Beer gave a concert that included variations by Mozart on
the March of the Samniter that “he alone possessed”. In February
1809 another review stated Beer will be heard playing “Variations
by Mozart on the Clarinet”. Nothing known of these variations in
any other source. Carl Bär belived Mozart wrote out variations for
Beer after a Vienna concert on March 4, 1791—they most likely
were an arrangement of his Piano Variations on this theme, now
for Clarinet and Piano.
XIV. Piano Music
Divertimento in C for Piano 4-hands (lost)-- In numeorus letters
to & H from 1800 to 1807 Nannerl speaks of sending the firm a
4-hand piano composition of her brother’s written “in London in
his eighth year”. In “B&H Manuscript Catalogue” is found two 2-
measure incipits with heading “Divertim. a 4” for Cembalo 1 and
Cembalo 2. Wolfgang Plath believes this is actually for Piano 4-
hands and is piece Nannerl refered to. In his Mozart Biography,
Georg Nissen wrote that Leopold Mozart wrote to Salzburg on July
9, 1765: “In London Wolfgangerl composed his first work for 4-
hands”. [Until Plath research it was believed this refered to K19d].
12 Variations in C on an original(?) theme – copy in Graz from
around 1800 attributes to Mozart, and in B & H Manuscript
Catalogue. If authentic thought to be a very early work, but
considered very questionalbe. Incipit of theme very similar to
theme in “9 Pieces” K.Anh 207 Nr.3. [NMA IX:26, Critical Report
Anh I:2—Piano Variations].
2 Piano fragments of Undetemined Affiliation in Bb and Eb -- 18
measures in Leopold Mozart’s hand, possible dating 1768, or even
earlier in London. Stood on reverse page of later version of Credo
to K49. Possibly one or both a Leopold Mozart composition. [NMA
IX:27:I, Anh II— Notebooks and Sketchbooks].
Piece in G -- Nr.50 from Nannerl Notebook [NMA IX:27/I].
Sonata movement in C -- 25 measures, on same page as final
chorus of Grabmusik, K42/35a; crossed out by Mozart? Probable
dating Salzburg 1771. [NMA IX:25/ii, Fragments, Nr.1—Piano
Sonatas].
Adagio in b-minor -- 6 measures, dating March 1788. Probable
first attempt of Adagio in b, K540. [NMA IX:27:ii, Anh 3--
Indiviudal Piano Pieces].
Modulating Praludieum (F – e) -- Dating 1776/77, Salzburg;
written for Nannerl’s use. [NMA IX:27:ii,Nr2--Individual Piano
Pieces].
Fugue fragments in e-minor -- 60 measures, dating most likely
Vienna 1782. Actually 6 different drafts for a fugue. [NMA IX:27:ii,
Anh 17--Individual Piano Pieces].
Fugue fragment d-minor-- 31 measures, recently discovered
autograph (on reverse of page with instrumental fragment NMA Fr
1765b) dates Fugue 1771. [NMA IX:27:ii, Anh 22--Individual Piano
Pieces and NMA Fragments Fr 1771b].
2 Fugue fragments in Eb-- 10 measures and 6 measures, dating
most likely Vienna 1782. Included in instruction book for Barbara
Ployer. [NMA IX:27:ii, Anh 18-- Individual Piano Pieces].
Fugue in Eb (Tubingen/Basel fragments) --Two page fragments
placed together equal 25 measures (of probable 28 meaures) of
Fugue that probably originated in 1782 and had connections to
Mozart’s Fugue activity of that time. [Konrad Sk1 784c].
2 Contrapunctual Studies in Eb and c-minor -- 11 measures each,
dating beginning of 1780’s, perhaps 1782. On same page with
Fugue fragment K153. [NMA IX:27/ii, Anh 16-- Individual Piano
Pieces].
5 Piano Exercises -- Nr. 52 from Nannerl Notebook [NMA IX:27/I]
3 sets of fingered excercises -- 4/4, 8, 8 measures. No doubt
connected to Mozart’s teaching. [Konrad Sk 1785l].
Piano Arrangement of Entfuhrung aus dem Serial (Lost?)--
On December 28, 1782, Mozart told his father he was finishing
the piano arrangement of this opera. On May 12, 1785, Leopold
told Nannerl that Wolfgang has not finished arranging it yet: he
may have only completed Act I. On December 16, 1785, Leopold
reported to Nannerl someone else arranged the opera and it had
appeared in print, so Wolfgang wasted his time arranging the
whole of the first two acts. Preserved to us are only the (complete)
Overture, and portions of “Martern aller Arten” and “Welche
Wonne, welche Lust”.
Larghetto and Allegro in Eb for 2 Pianos -- 108 measures
(completed by Stadler), dating 1781 to 1783 in Vienna. [NMA IX:
24:I, Supplement-- Works for 2-Pianos]
XV. Arrangements of Other Composer’s Works
Timpani parts to Mass of C.G. Reutter (copy? or addition?) – In a
copy made in Salzburg of Mass in C by the Vienna composer,
Timpani parts (and some tempo indications elsewhere) are in
Mozart’s hand. Dating unsure, but probably later Salzburg period.
Mozart's corrections to Leopold Mozart's Litanie de Venerabili in D
– Wolfgang made corrections to his father’s music in the
autograph. Leopold apparently had sent Litanie to Wolfgang in
Vienna in 1783 and Wolfgang made corrections there. [NMA X:28:
3-5:1—Leopold Mozart’s Litanie de Venerabili]
Mozart's Oboe version of Angus Dei to Leopold Mozart's Litanie
Lauretanae in Eb – Wolfgang arranged the solo Viola part in this
movement for Oboe; dating 1773/74. [NMA X:28:3-5:1a—Leopold
Mozart’s Litanie Laurentanae].
Alterations to Haydn’s "Cara, sarò fedele" from Armida— (actually
it is manuscript 4 under K506a, but not mentioned as what it
really is)—dating sometime in Mozart’s later Vienna time.
String Quartet arrangement of J.S Bach Fugue in b-minor --BWV
891 transposed to c-minor. 39 measures, completed by Abbe
Stadler; on same page with above String Quartet in E-major
sketch. Possibly 6th Fugue to K405, tentative dating 1782.
6 String Quartet arrangements of J.S. Bach Fugues with new
introductions – in Austrian National library, no author indication.
No doubt for van Swieten circle, but doubtful if by Mozart.
3 String Quintet arrangements of J.S. Bach Fugues with new
introductions -- in Austrian National library, no author indication.
No doubt for van Swieten circle, but doubtful if by Mozart.
String Quartet arrangement of Johann Froberger’s Fantasia for
harpsichord. Plath believed Nr.1 for K405 arrangements. From
handwriting thought to originate not before 1785/86.
String Quartet arrangement of Fugue from Hândel’s Keyboard
Suite Nr.2 in F—20 measures headed “Fuga Ima del sig: Händel”;
dates from ca. 1782 in Vienna.
Arrangement of Contredance for Piano (Lost)--On December 6,
1777, from Mannheim Mozart writes his father he has already
transcribed a contredance for piano for Cannabich. [Mozart also
writes that Cannabich finds him useful to transcribe selections of
his ballet music, as Cannabich cannot. However Mozart does not
specifically write that he does this.]
XVII. Copies of Other Composer’s Works
Copy of Allegri’s Miserere-- Leopold Mozart writes in letter from
Rome of April 14, 1770, that Wolfgang copied out this work—
supposedly forbidden to be removed or copied-- from memory.
Violin/Piano Sonata of "Madamoiselle" – Copy of Sonata by Louise-
Maria-Therese Bathilde d’Orleans, made by Mozart in 1764 in
Paris.
Terzett “Venerabilis barba capucinorm” -- In library in Stockholm
is an untexted manuscript of Terzett (a printing of Terzett listed
as K.Anh C9.07 in K6 with Matthias Fishcer mentioned as author)
no doubt in a copy by Mozart. Heading and description of this
manuscript same as unlocatable “Excersies in Counterpoint”
K626b/40. Probably this is K626b/40.
Subject: Contemporaries of Mozart: Chevalier de Saint-Georges
From: Gary Smith
To: All
Date Posted: 11:05:40 05/09/04 ()
Email Address:
Message:
CONTEMPORARIES OF MOZART:
Joseph Boulogne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges (1739? -1799)
This is another posting in an irregular series on the various contemporary composers from Mozart's lifetime. The material is mostly derivative from general sources as noted. These are the people that Mozart:
Competed for work with.
Considered friends and colleagues.
Knew from reputation.
Taught to and nurtured as pupils and students.
(From the journal of John Adams, the 2nd President of the United States, then serving as a representative of the Continental Congress on assignment in Paris)… "17 May 1779…Landais gave us an account of St-George at Paris, a mulatto man…St-George is the most Accomplished man in Europe, in riding, running shooting, fencing, dancing, music. St-George will hit the button, any button on the coat or waistcoat of the greatest masters. He will hit a crown-piece in the air with a pistol ball."
St-George, in an age filled with remarkable men, was one of the more remarkable. He was an excellent athlete in an age that did not prize this much. He was a master fencer and accomplished shot. He was an officer in the French army. He was a noted violin virtuoso as well as composer. He was the conductor of one of the two premier orchestras in Paris. He was the archetypal romantic hero; spectacularly gifted but destined to play the role of the outsider. Only now have his works and story been resurrected after lying dormant for 200 years.
Son of a former councilor of Parliament and a black woman from Guadeloupe in the Caribbean, the family lived in the New World until 1749, when they moved to Paris in 1749. In his teens, St-George became a pupil of the famous arms master La Boessiere for six years and as well took riding lessons from Dugast. His skill was such that he undertook his first public fencing match in Paris at the age of 27 and, while losing, was predicted to be come the finest swordsman in Europe.
St-Georges musical background is very sketchy. He appears to have taken violin studies with the family's plantation manager on St. Dominque, and then in France studied with Leclair. He did take compositional studies with Gossec as well. Since the six years with Le Boessiere were devoted to physical training and school studies, it is assumed that St-Georges studied and practiced after that, from say 1758 up until 1769, the year of his first professional engagement as a first violinist in Gossec's Concert des Amateurs, one of the two best orchestras in Paris (and by extension, all of France). Again, there is no documented evidence that he actually WAS Gossec's pupil; he may have only received advice and encouragement from the older composer. However, the records do show that St-Georges made his public debut at the Concert des Amateurs in 1772 as a soloist, performing his two violin concerti Op.2. The regard the authorities had for St-Georges and his abilities were such that when Gossec became a director of the rival Concert Spirituel in 1773, St-Georges succeeded him as musical director/conductor of the Amateurs, improving it into being considered the finest orchestra in France.
The year 1773 saw St-Georges publish the above mentioned violin concerti as well as 6 string quartets. Within the next two years, he composed another 6 violin concerti as well. In 1777, he switched to the new rage in Paris, the symphonia concertante, issuing four in that year. Between 1777 and 1785, he composed a total of 10 such works. As well, his first opera debuted, the comedy Ernestine. This was followed in 1778 by another, La Chasse, which is unfortunately lost, after apparently appearing only three times on stage.
1778 also saw Mozart and his mother arrive in Paris. This would have been at or near the height of St-Georges reputation. So, it is strange that nowhere in the Mozart correspondence do we see a mention of this remarkable man. As the musical director of one of the two great orchestras in France, it seems very odd that Mozart would not have sought out a meeting in order to establish contact with this most influential man within the French musical establishment. Granted that when Mozart began his rounds of contacts (such as they were, he was not keen on making such efforts), the Concert des Amateurs season had concluded and so he would not have been able to make any immediate sales, the contacts and introductions St-Georges could have offered were of great value to be able to get established in Paris. Still, even the chance to have simply seen him at a party at a notable Paris salon should have triggered some sort of effort to gain a meeting. Unless there is a missing letter or two from the Paris correspondence, this appears to be an inexcusable lapse on the parts of Leopold, Wolfgang and Grimm, Mozart's Paris patron and contact.
Unless….
Mozart's Paris output of works includes a fairly complete sketch of a ballet work. There is no known use for it, as the one ballet work he did complete, Les Petits Riens K.299b, is not derived from it in any way. The slender plot of this unfinished work, as well as it can be made out from Mozart's sketches, deals with a man who dares to dance with another woman while his wife is absent. (Those pre-revolutionary cads!). Unusual for Mozart, this ballet fragment was given a title. Which is La Chasse. The same title, be it noted, as St-Georges lost opera mentioned above. From the same year 1778, as well. The small but tantalizing question is: Did Mozart actually meet St-Georges and plan in some way to add this ballet to his opera? Mozart had added material to a Miserere K.297a by another composer while in Paris, why not another? Could either of them changed their minds about this project and allowed the ballet to drop? Did perhaps St-Georges pull back when Mozart became closer to Le Gros, of the rival Concert Spirituel? Or, did the death of Mozart's mother cause him to withdraw from composing at the pace he had been at before, and so cause St-Georges to continue on without him? The opera did premiere in October 12th of 1778; Mozart's mother having died in July. With the requirements of the opera needing attention from certainly August on, could Mozart's depression have caused him to opt out? Is this all just a pipedream? We can't know unless either the lost opera La Chasse turns up, missing Mozart correspondence comes to light, or some other paperwork comes to light in an archive somewhere to shed light on this area.
Due to financial problems, the Concert des Amateurs was disbanded in 1781. Undeterred, St-Georges founded the Concert de la Loge Olympique that same year. In order to promote it better and gain more renown for it, it commissioned 6 symphonies from Joseph Haydn (the so-called "Paris" Symphonies), St-Georges himself traveling to Vienna in 1784 to deliver the commission. These works by Haydn were composed to a higher level than previous works by him, once again putting him at the forefront of critical and popular acclaim.
The balance of the 1780's were given over to composition and directing the Concert de la Loge Olympique. There is evidence as well that St-Georges became a member of the Freemasons during this time. A tour to London occurred in 1785, where he gave fencing exhibitions.
With the outbreak of the French Revolution, the Concert de la Loge Olympique was dissolved. The ideals of the revolution appealed to nearly all the blacks in France at the time; it was no different for St-Georges. The year 1789 saw him volunteer and enroll in the National Guard in Lille and secured the rank of captain within a year. By 1792, the Assembly in Paris decreed the formation of a corps of light troops of blacks known as the Legion Nationale du Midi. St-Georges was appointed colonel in command and the unit quickly became unofficially titled Legion St-Georges. However, all revolutions devour their children in one way or another, and in 1793 accusations were brought against many individuals for imagined wrongdoings; St-Georges unfortunately getting caught up in the fury of it all. He was accused in front of the Revolutionary Council of misappropriation of public funds for personal profit, which would mean in this context stealing his men's pay. He was able to clear himself of this charge, but was relived of command. Tellingly, when cleared he was FORBIDDEN to live or reside anywhere near his former legionnaires, men who had supported him in his efforts to clear his name.
However, this did not stop the efforts of those in power that were made to look foolish in their attempt to punish St-Georges. Within three months of clearing his name, he was again imprisoned on corruption charges. This time, he remained in jail for 18 months while the charges were investigated. However, the National Convention's Committee of Public Security ordered him released finally in October of 1794, cleared of the charges but ruined as an officer. He took up touring to make a living, and managed to scrape by well enough to book passage back to St. Dominque in 1796. He stayed for less than a year, returning to Paris in 1797, where he served as director of a new musical organization, the Cercle de l'Harmonie. He published a few more works, but died in 1799 at the age of 60, forgotten by the musical establishment.
Many of St- Georges works are now available on the Avenira label, with 5 CD's issued so far. This series offers the public 12 violin concerti, 6 symphonia concertante and one symphony. As well, Naxos has one CD available with 3 violin concerti on it. St-Georges is not Mozart (who is?), but his music is virtuosic without going overboard, his closing rondeaus have appealing themes and overall the works are well thought out and constructed. If there is any criticism to be made, it might be that for my taste, his opening movements tend to be cooler and less engaging than other composers with whom I am familiar. Never the less, the works issued that I have heard are all of a high caliber and worthy of attention.
Sources for this paper are from the liner notes to the CD's themselves, especially the Avenira ones. His story is told progressively from CD to CD in this five CD series, and is filled with many, many facts and details that illuminate this remarkable man. This has to be about the best series of CDs on a composer's works to actually inform the listener about the history of the person behind the music.