OTTFRIED, Baron van Swieten, was a man who exercised, in more than one
respect, an important influence on Mozart's career. He was born in
1734, the son of the Empress Maria Theresa's celebrated and influential
physician Gerhard van Swieten, who had removed with his family from
Leyden to Vienna in 1745. Gottfried devoted himself to the study of the
law, and pursued a diplomatic career,[1] but from his youth up he had
been passionately fond of music, and had turned his studies in the art
to practical,
{MUSIC IN BERLIN.}
(375)
though not very successful account. In 1769 Favart's "Rosière de
Salency" was produced in Paris with music by different composers; Van
Swieten wrote several of the songs, but they failed to attract much
praise.[2] He also composed eight symphonies "as stiff as himself," as
Haydn said.[3] In 1771 Joseph II. appointed him ambassador to the Court
of Prussia,[4] and there Nicolai made his acquaintance, and speaks
of him as "an enthusiastic amateur and connoisseur, and even a
composer."[5] His residence in Berlin was important for the development
of his musical taste and the ideas which he afterwards undertook to
introduce in Vienna.
In 1740, Frederick the Great had erected the Berlin Opera House, and
produced the Italian opera seria of the time with all the brilliancy
of first-rate performers and scenic accessories.[6] Grand operas
(interrupted, however, by the Seven Years War) were regularly given; the
King used to sit in the pit immediately behind the conductor, so as
to be able to look over his score.[7] He held firm to his original
principles of taste; would admit nothing but opera seria, and no new
works except those of Hasse and Graun. The Kapellmeister Carl Heinrich
Graun (1709-1759) was obliged to compose the operas (to which the King
furnished libretti in French, to be turned into Italian[8]), and hurried
over his uncongenial task; they were always submitted to the King,
and what he disapproved of had to be altered.[9] He preferred Hasse's
composition on account of his greater fire and passion, while Graun
(highly prized as a singer by his royal master)[10] heard little but
blame for his shortcomings as a composer.
Notwithstanding this, he had to produce his opera year
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(376)
after year, and matters continued unchanged.[11] Johann Friedrich
Agricola (1720-1774), who succeeded Graun in 1760, wrote little himself,
except some pieces for insertion in old operas, which are kept in the
same style. The King would have nothing to say to any other composers,
and received Reichardt with the advice: "Have a care of the new
Italians; the fellows write like pigs."[12]
Reichardt, in applying for Agricola's post after the death of the latter
in 1775, was obliged to support his claims by the production of
an opera, "modelled on the pattern of Graun and Hasse";[13] as
kapellmeister, he must not dream of striking out in any other direction.
For the last ten years of his life the King took little interest in
musical matters; Italian opera lingered on with the pieces of Graun and
Hasse, but it sank lower and lower.[14]
Side by side with the opera, however, which followed so closely the
Italian tradition, there arose in Berlin a peculiar form of instrumental
music founded on the Saxon school. The King, as is well known, gave
a private concert every evening, and performed on the flute pieces
composed by himself or his master Quanz, who wrote over three hundred
such for Frederick.[15] Johann Joachim Quanz (1697-1773)[16] to whom the
King had been much attached from his earliest years, was supreme in all
matters musical, and was nicknamed the "Pope of the Berlin music."[17]
He was the only man who presumed to cry "Bravo!" to the King's
playing.[18] Next after Quanz in Frederick's favour stood Franz Benda
(1709-1786),[19] an artist of originality and a first-rate
{THE BACH SCHOOL IN BERLIN.}
(377)
violin-player; his manner of execution was peculiar to himself, and rested
mainly on a pure and expressive delivery. His brother Joseph (1724-1804)
and the sons of both followed in his footsteps, and the Concertmeister
J. Gottlieb Graun (1698-1771) highly esteemed as a violin-player and
instrumental composer, may be said to have belonged to the same school.
By these distinguished artists the Berlin orchestra was formed and
trained to a degree of excellence second only to that of Dresden, and
not until later surpassed by Mannheim and Vienna.
The highest rank among the artists of Berlin must be accorded to Philipp
Emanuel Bach (1714-1788).[20] He was summoned to the Prussian capital in
1738 as accompanist to the then Crown Prince, and after 1756 he shared
the office with Fasch. He was an accomplished and tasteful accompanist,
but the wearisome monotony of the royal concerts disgusted him, and as
an artist he could not but be annoyed at the King's narrow prejudices.
He revenged himself by refusing to comply when Frederick, who liked to
play in "various times" required his accompanist to give way to him.
This led to a dislike on the King's part, which prevented him from duly
appreciating Bach;[21] and the latter willingly obeyed a summons to
Hamburg in 1767, to fill Telemann's place. His technical studies,
founded on J. Sebastian Bach's system of fingering, and his
clavier sonatas entitle him to be considered as the father of modem
pianoforte-playing, and Haydn acknowledged him alone as his model.[22]
He was held in unbounded reverence as a creative and original artist,
especially in Berlin and Hamburg,[23] and deserved equal respect as
a man of cultivation and good-breeding. Nicolai declares that what
Quintilian says of Cicero may be applied
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(378)
with equal truth to Bach: that those who have learnt to appreciate his
works above all others have made a marked advance along the path of
knowledge.[24] The school of Joh. Sebastian Bach was represented in all
its severity and scholarly learning by his son Wilhelm Friedemann Bach
(1710-1784), who passed the later years of his life in Berlin, as much
admired as an artist of genius and scholarship[25] as he was dreaded and
disliked by reason of his overbearing egotism and eccentric fancies.[26]
Agricola was also a pupil, and like all his pupils, an enthusiastic
admirer of Seb. Bach, but Kirnberger was undoubtedly his greatest
apostle. It was he who represented the school of Bach in Berlin, side
by side with the operatic school of Hasse and Graun, and he was mainly,
though far from exclusively,[27] active in developing the instrumental
style, which determined the taste of the Berlin musical world.[28]
The position of music in Berlin was peculiar in that it had gained
recognition for itself, even in respect of its literature. Not a few
musicians were cultivated and scientific men, ready with their pen and
anxious to employ it in the
{KIRN BERGER--MARPURG.}
(379)
musical cause. Quanz's "Course of Flute-Playing" (1752) was followed
by Ph. Em. Bach's "True Art of Playing the Clavier" (1753, 1761) and
Agricola's "Introduction to the Art of Song" (1757); and together
with these may be noted Marpurg's "Art of Playing the Clavier" (1750),
"Introduction to Clavier-Playing" (1755, 1765), and "Introduction to
Music and Singing" (1763); it was no small honour for Leop. Mozart's
"Violin Method" to find recognition in this circle (Vol. I., p. 16). The
writings of the advocate Krause on musical poetry (1752), of Nichelmann
on melody (1755), and Marpurg's "Introduction to Vocal Composition"
(1758) must not be omitted from the list.
The theory of harmony and counterpoint was studied with equal zeal, and
Kimberger and Marpurg have earned for themselves a place of honour in
the history of music.
Joh. Phil. Kimberger (1721-1783), Kammermusicus to the Princess Amalie,
a pupil of Seb. Bach, was of small merit as a composer, but, being a
sagacious man, and fond of research, he busied himself in tracing the
principles and maxims of composition through the works of his revered
master.[29] The gift of literary expression was denied to him by his
education and manner of life; and unless he were assisted by friends
such as Agricola, Sulzer, or his pupil Schulz, he found it difficult
to express his views with clearness.[30] His intellect, knowledge, and
study were considerable, his character open and estimable;[31] but he
was embittered by the want of the recognition which he believed to be
his due. Want of refinement led him to turn his critical acumen into
a weapon of attack, which he often used in a manner both spiteful and
unjust.[32] Quanz had maintained that a
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(380)
genuine duet admitted of no bass, and published some duets to prove his
point; Kimberger played the duets on the church organ while Quanz was
receiving the communion, with a bass added.[33]
Friedr. Wilh. Marpurg (1718-1795) thereupon took up the cudgels, and
endeavoured to prove from Kimberger's fugues that he was the last man
who had a right to make himself conspicuous as a critic. This gave rise
to a feud, which was carried on with great bitterness on both sides,
respecting various principles of musical theory. Marpurg had the
advantage of a thorough school and university education. As private
secretary to General Bodenberg he had enjoyed intercourse with Voltaire,
D'Alembert, and Maupertuis, and a lengthened stay in Paris in 1746 had
made him familiar with the French cultivation of the time. After 1749 he
lived in Berlin. In his youth he had been the friend of Winckelmann[34]
and the companion of Lessing, in his jovial hours as well as in his
studies and controversies.[35] Shrewd and thorough in matters of
research, and of passionate temper, he could neither brook contradiction
nor control his violence;[36] and superior as he was to Kirnberger
in powers of expression, he yielded nothing to him in coarseness and
virulence of attack.[37]
Yet another influence on musical affairs in Berlin remains to be noted,
viz., the musical journals edited by Marpurg and the musicians and
scholars associated with him--"The Musical Critic on the River Spree"
(1749-1750), "Critical and Historical Contributions to the Study of
Music" (1754-1762), and "Critical Letters on Music" (1760-1764).
Music was treated also by literary men from a more general point of
view. Sulzer included music in his
{LIBBHABERCONCERT IN BERLIN}
(381)
"Treatise on the Fine Arts" (1771-1774), and sought counsel of
professional men better versed in the art than himself. He selected
Kirnberger as the fittest man for his purpose, and after him his
pupil J. A. P. Schulz, who was inferior to his master in scholarly
acquirements, but far superior to him in clearness and facility.[38]
The great influence which Sulzer's work exercised in Germany caused his
views upon music therein expressed to be appealed to as a sort of final
authority. Fr. Nicolai was exceedingly fond of music, and made it a
practical study.[39] He was personally acquainted with all the great
musicians, especially Agricola, Marpurg, and Reichardt, and he
set himself seriously to form musical opinions founded on his own
observation. When he undertook the German Universal Cyclopedia in 1765,
he included music in the list of subjects treated. Nicolai's influence
in Berlin was great,[40] and a literary organ of so much importance
could not fail to give weight and consideration to musical criticism.
The practical result of these musical efforts, so far as they did
not proceed immediately from the King, consisted mainly in the
"Liebhaberconcert," founded in 1770, and held every Friday evening under
Nicolai's direction.[41] All available forces were assembled on these
occasions; orchestral works, native or foreign, were performed,
vocal and instrumental virtuosi found an audience, and great vocal
compositions were frequently produced, such as Graun's and Ph. Eman.
Bach's sacred music, and what is more noteworthy, Handel's oratorios,
especially "Judas Maccabæus," the "Feast of Alexander," and the
"Messiah."[42] Earnest and
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(382)
upright intention, and efforts after intellectual comprehension in art,
deserve all recognition, even when united with partiality, pedantry, and
quarrelsomeness. The supremacy claimed by Frederick the Great's capital,
even in music, extended to South Germany, and especially to Vienna.
Wagenseil and Steffan, at that time men of considerable note in Vienna,
are complacently taken to task by Marpurg.[43] Nicolai openly says[44]
that after Fux's death Vienna had various good composers, but no
extraordinary genius worthy to rank with Seb. and Ph. Em. Bach,
Telemann, Graun, or Hasse, men who had determined the course of musical
progress in North Germany until Haydn appeared. The Viennese, on the
other hand, were entirely ignorant of all that concerned music in North
Germany, and especially in Berlin.[45]
Youthful impulses could not altogether fail, however, to stir the
musical world of Berlin. The French operetta, conducted for a long time
by Schulz,[46] and still more the German opera after 1771,[47] had the
effect of gradually reforming the taste of the general public. Prince
Henry, who had an excellent band in his pay, was by no means so devoted
to old music and the old composers as the King.[48] His concertmeister
Joh. Pet. Salomon (1745-1815), whom Reichardt heard perform Bach's
violin solos without accompaniment exceedingly well,[49] produced
Haydn's symphonies and quartets
{HAYDN'S MUSIC IN BERLIN.}
(383)
with zeal and energy.[50] His successor, J. A. P. Schulz (1747-1800),
a pupil of Kirnberger's, who had made a lengthened tour in Italy,
and become personally acquainted with Haydn,[51] followed his natural
inclination--to the great dissatisfaction of his master--in composing
after the new style,[52] and wishing to produce not only Haydn's but
Gluck's music. His attempts were unsuccessful, but Haydn's music was
admired by others besides the more youthful of the public. There were,
it is true, supporters of the old music, who made a noisy exit whenever
Haydn's music was performed; but others, such as Marpurg, laughed at
such folly, and did not withhold their recognition of his genius;[53]
Nicolai speaks of him with frank and enlightened approbation.[54]
Reichardt, as kapellmeister to the king, could not afford an independent
judgment;[55] but he endeavoured, by the "Concert spirituel''[56] which
he set on foot, and by his compositions and writings,[57] to turn the
interest of the public in new directions.[58]
It was into this peculiar musical atmosphere, so different from that
of Vienna, that Van Swieten entered at Berlin. His turn of mind being
essentially rational and methodical,[59] disposed him to sympathy with
the severe Berlin school, and to a partiality for a concise style; he
was enchanted with the music of Handel and Bach, which he brought back
with him to Vienna, and turned to account by means of his personal
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(384)
friendship with Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven. He commissioned Ph. Em.
Bach to compose, in 1774, six grand orchestral symphonies, with the
express wish that he would allow his genius full play, without any
regard to difficulty of execution.[60] In Berlin also Van Swieten became
better acquainted with Haydn than was possible in Vienna, and like
Mozart and the youthful Beethoven, he' loved and reverenced him next to
Handel and Bach. "As far as music is concerned," he writes (December,
1798), "I have gone back to the times when it was thought necessary
before practising an art to study it thoroughly and systematically. In
such study I find nourishment for my mind and heart, and support when
any fresh proof of the degeneracy of the art threatens to cast me down.
My chief comforters are Handel and the Bachs, and with them the few
masters of our own day who tread firmly in the footsteps of the truly
great and good, and either give promise of reaching the same goal, or
have already attained to it. In this there can be no doubt that Mozart,
had he been spared to us, would have succeeded; Joseph Haydn stands
actually at the goal."[61] On his return to Vienna (which took place
about 1778) he at once assumed a position of great importance. He
succeeded to his father's office as Prefect of the Imperial Library, was
appointed President of the Education Commission in 1781, and intrusted
with the conduct of the educational scheme which was introduced
throughout the Empire in 1783. Knowledge, intelligence, and zeal he
certainly possessed;[62] but he was wanting in the energy and decision
necessary to carry out the projects he conceived.[63] His influential
position, rank, and wealth, the hereditary fame of his family, and the
importance of his mission at the court of Frederick the Great, gave him
the right to a place among the most distinguished society. He exerted
all his influence in the cause of music, even for so subordinate an
{VAN SWIETEN'S PERSONAL INFLUENCE.}
(385)
end as to enforce silence and attention during musical performances.
Whenever a whispered conversation arose among the audience, his
excellency would rise from his seat in the first row, draw himself up
to his full majestic height, measure the offenders with a long, serious
look, and then very slowly resume his seat. The proceeding never failed
of its effect.[64] Van Swieten was not liberal in money matters; he
always had it in his power to collect money among his friends of high
rank for musical purposes, and he did not fail on such occasions to
contribute his own quota;[65] but he was not by any means generous for
a wealthy and childless man. Haydn's experience supported this view,[66]
and the eulogies pronounced on Van Swieten's benevolence to Mozart's
family after his death[67] have no foundation; in fact, he did nothing
worth mentioning for them. In his intercourse with artists, however
highly he might estimate them and their works, his demeanour was always
that of a grand seigneur, and he enforced his own views with an air of
somewhat overbearing superiority. This was again Haydn's experience,[68]
and Mozart can scarcely have escaped some measure of annoyance from the
same source.
But such personal failings as these are cast into the shade by the merit
which is due to Van Swieten as the man who awoke interest in Vienna for
severe and classical music. His influence upon Mozart is unmistakable.
At the beginning of 1782 we find them in constant intercourse, and
Mozart habitually present at Van Swieten's musical Sunday mornings, at
which music in the severe style only was performed. He had, as Mozart
writes to his sister (April 20, 1782), "a stock of music good in point
of value, but small in quantity"; and in order to add to it, Mozart
requests his father to send him both his own church compositions, and
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(386)
some select works of Michael Haydn and Eberlin, which he had formerly
copied (Vol. I., p. 238); they were performed with great applause in
the little circle, These performances were clearly not intended for
an audience; for Van Swieten sang tenor, Mozart alto (at the same time
playing the pianoforte), Starzer[69] tenor, and young Tebery,[70] who
had just returned from Italy, bass (Märch 12, 1783). But in this
way they became familiar with the best works of masters who had been
hitherto unheard in Vienna. "It is a fact," writes Mozart (April
12,1783), "that the change of taste has extended even to church music,
which is much to be regretted; so it comes that the best church music
lies worm-eaten in the garret."[71]
Clavier music of the same school also found a place in Van Swieten's
musical meetings. Mozart writes to his father (April 10, 1782):--
I wish you would send me Handel's six fugues and the toccata and fugues
by Eberlin. I go every Sunday morning to the Baron van Swieten, and
nothing is played there but Handel and Bach. I am making a collection of
the Bach fugues, Sebastian's as well as Emanuel's and Friedemann's, and
also of Handel's, and I want just these six. Also, I should like to let
the Baron hear Eberlin's.
Concerning the latter, however, he writes soon after to his sister
(April 20, 1782):--
If my father has not yet had Eberlin's works copied, pray countermand
them. I have found them here, and see (now that I refresh my memory of
them) that they are very trivial and unworthy of a place with Handel
and Bach. His four-part movement deserves all respect, but his clavier
fugues are simply _versetti_ spun out to great length.
{PIANOFORTE FUGUES.}
(387)
We have seen already how Mozart's interest in the study of these masters
was still further kindled by the pleasure his wife took in fugues (Vol.
II., p. 267). When he sent his sister a three-part fugue with a prelude,
he wrote to her (April 20, 1782) that if time and opportunity served,
he meant to write five more fugues, and present them all to Van Swieten;
she must therefore keep this one to herself, learn it by heart, and play
it; "it is not so easy to play fugues." A second (39 Anh. K.) has only
the theme with one answer written down:--[See Page Images]
A third is rather more finished (40 Anh. K.), and its very original
subject promises an interesting elaboration--
which causes the more regret that it should have stopped short of
completion.
Mozart twice projected arranging Frohberger's "Phantasia supra Ut,
re, mi, fa, sol, la" for the pianoforte,[72] but neither time did he
accomplish his intention (292 Anh. K.). The three-part fugue in C major,
which has been published (394 K.), probably the same that Mozart sent to
his sister with a prelude, gives an idea of his intentions. A four-part
fugue in G minor, wanting only a few bars, was finished and published by
Stadler (401 K.). Only sketches remain of other clavier fugues. The most
finished (26 bars) is a fugue in G major (23 Anh. K.):--[See Page Images
(next page)]
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(388)
To the same time and school belongs the great fugue for two pianofortes
in C minor, composed on December 29,1783 (426 K.). The beginning is
preserved of another fugue for two pianofortes in G major of a totally
different character (45 Anh. K.):--[See Page Image]
We may judge of the manner in which Mozart wished his fugues to be
played from an expression to his sister, when he sent her the first of
them (April 20, 1782):--
I have taken care to write "andante maestoso" on it, that it may not
be played too fast; for, if a fugue is not played slowly, the recurring
subject is not distinctly and clearly heard, and so loses its effect.
Afterwards (in June, 1788) Mozart arranged the C minor fugue for his
string quartet, and wrote "a short adagio" as an introduction (546 K.),
probably for Van Swieten, with whom he was then in closer intercourse
than ever, in consequence of the instrumentation and performance of
Handel's oratorios.
The ease and distinctness with which four-part movements of this
metrical style could thus be executed, had already suggested to Mozart
the arrangement of five fugues from Bach's "Wohltemperirte Klavier," for
stringed instruments (405 K.). The handwriting points to 1782 or 1783,
when Van Swieten's influence was at its highest. The fugues selected,
doubtless with a view to their suitability for the purpose, were (in
Breitkopf and Härtel's edition):
{KLAVIERSUITE, 1782-1783.}
(389)
No. 2, in C minor; No. 7, in E fiat major; No. 9, in E major; No. 8,
transposed from D sharp major to D major; and No. 5, in D major.
An interesting illustration of the pleasure with which Mozart sought to
follow in the steps of Handel and Bach, is afforded by the unfinished
"Klaviersuite" (399 K.) belonging to 1782 or 1783. It begins, according
to rule, with an overture (C major) consisting of two movements, a slow
introduction in imitation, and a fugued Allegro closing on the dominant.
Then follows, after traditional usage, an Allemande (C minor), a
Courante (E flat major), and a Sarabande (G minor); of this last,
however, only six bars are written. The imitation of the older masters
is unmistakable in the design and many of the details of the movements,
the only novelty being the changes of key. They may, in this sense,
be considered as studies; but Mozart's originality constantly asserts
itself, and the Courante in especial is completely imbued with it.
Still more original and free is the "Short Gigue for the Klavier,"
which Mozart wrote on May 17, 1789, "in the album of Herr Engel, court
organist in Leipzig" (574 K.), no doubt in remembrance of Bach, whose
motetts he had there heard for the first time with unbounded delight.
The light and flexible gigue had been transformed by Bach's freer, and
at the same time severer, treatment into a fantastic, almost humorous
movement, which took the same place in the suite that was afterwards
given to the scherzo in the sonata. Mozart selected the severer
style, and the intellectual skill with which the strictest forms of
counterpoint, harmony, and rhythm are so freely and archly treated,
as to make both player and listener hold their breath from surprise,
renders this little composition a masterpiece. It causes regret that the
suite, containing as it did so many elements capable of development, was
not seriously taken up and carried to perfection by Mozart.
It must not be supposed that Mozart's study of Bach and Handel had no
result but to teach him to write fugues; his earlier compositions show
him to have been no novice in the art of counterpoint. What he found
most admirable in
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(390)
these masters was their power of making forms strict even to rigidity
the medium of a natural expression of their musical ideas and emotions;
their use of all the available wealth of contrapuntal combinations was
no mere trick of barren speculation, but a deliberate selection of a
means of expression from the inexhaustible fund of their productive
powers. That this was the sense in which Mozart reverenced his masters
is proved by his criticism of Eberlin and of Hassler, who had learnt
Bach's harmonies and modulations by heart, but was unable to work out
an original fugue; and it is proved more satisfactorily still by his own
works.
Even in compositions avowedly written as studies, Mozart's originality
appears, and in his later works there is no trace of any attempt at
servile imitation of Bach or Handel.[73] He imitated, not their work,
but their way of working, drew from the sources to which they had given
him access, and employed that which he received from them in accordance
with his own nature and the task before him.[74]
Master-strokes of genius in many pieces of his chamber music--as also
in the last movement of the C major symphony, and in the overture to
the "Zauberflote," where art reaches its highest pitch in the union of
strictest form with freest fancy--may be ascribed in no small degree
to the impulses arising from his study of Bach and Handel. But their
influence reaches beyond his compositions in the severe style. The
perfection of _polyphonic_ composition which characterises all Mozart's
works, and wherein consists one of his chief merits, rests, even in its
broadest and freest development, upon the foundations laid by those
{PIANOFORTE FUGUES.}
(391)
masters. So, too, the fertility and boldness of Mozart's harmonic
treatment may be traced back to the same source. Harmonic beauties,
novel and striking transitions and turns, are frequent enough in his
earlier works, but they are simply harmonic combinations, whereas in his
later works they appear as a free and intellectual development of the
polyphonic principle.
Again, the influence of the older masters and their works is observable
in a certain harshness occasioned by independence in the disposition of
parts, which Mozart does not by any means seek to avoid. In this respect
he makes demands upon his audience as great and greater than those, for
instance, of Bach and Beethoven, and may be compared to Sophocles, who,
admired as he justly was by the ancients for his sweetness and charm,
did not hesitate upon occasion to startle his hearers with his harsh
severity. Mozart's severity is never the result of clumsy workmanship,
but is a conscious and deliberate choice of means; neither is it
employed as a stimulant, but rather as an incentive to a better
appreciation of passages of perfect beauty. The sense of deliverance
from conflict and obscurity, and passage into calmness and light, is
so striking that it cannot be wondered at if the means whereby it is
attained are little analysed.[75]
Among the compositions in precise or metrical style special interest
attaches to the three-part pianoforte fugue in C major (394 K.). It
opens with an introduction, more elaborate than a prelude, and entitled,
therefore, a "fantasia." Such introductions, not always in free form
(sometimes called "toc-cate"), were usually prefixed to a fugue or
other composition in order to give it the character of an improvisation;
several others by Mozart exist. The one in question, after a few slow
bars, is a lively movement, varies its key continually, and does not
carry out fully any motif or passage; this agitated unrest gives it
a pathetic character, and excites expectation; the whole movement is
brilliant and effective.
It closes on the dominant, thus announcing its nature as an
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(392)
introduction. The fugue which follows is in striking contrast, firm and
quiet, yet full of life and latent emotion:--[See Page Image]
The two first bars, with their intervals of fourths, announce a more
serviceable than individually expressive subject, but the agitated motif
which follows has a very original character, heightened by its auxiliary
notes and by its rapid succession of sharp dissonants. A gentle, almost
melancholy, tone pervades the whole fugue, and is expressed also by its
frequent passage into a minor key. Apart from its interesting technical
elaboration, it is important by reason of its characteristic expression,
and may serve as an illustration of Mozart's complete mastery of the
fugue form. To this it may be added that the fugue we are considering
is essentially adapted for the pianoforte both in conception and
composition. This is not the case in the same degree with the G minor
Fugue (401 K.), which is artistically worked out, but not equal to the
C major either in breadth of expression or adaptation to the nature of >
the instrument. The same may be said of the three-part fugue in D major,
of which Mozart has written thirty-seven bars (443 Anh., 67 K.). The
effect of the C minor fugue (426 K), also, rests neither on the sound
effects of the pianoforte nor on those of the stringed instruments. It
is so broadly conceived, so earnestly and with such ruthless severity
carried out, that the external means of expression fall into the
background before the energetic enunciation of the laws of form, obeyed
consciously, but without servility.[76] Quite otherwise is the
{FUGUE FOR STRINGED INSTRUMENTS.}
(393)
case with the introduction, which, written originally for strings, is
expressly adapted to their peculiarities of sound effect. The
harmonic treatment, and more especially the enharmonic changes, are
of extraordinary beauty and depth, and occasion remarkable effects of
suspense and climax. Most admirable is the art with which the character
of the movement as an introduction is maintained, and the defiant style
of the following fugue clearly indicated, at the same time that the mind
is tuned to a pitch of longing and melancholy which makes the entry of
the categorical fugue a positive relief and stimulant.
A fugue for four stringed instruments in D minor, of which the first
elaboration is indicated in the sketch (76 Anh. K.)--[See Page Image]
appears well suited to the instruments. Whether it was to form a
movement in a quartet or an independent piece we have no means of
ascertaining.
It appears fitting to cast a glance in this place on two works belonging
to a later time, but falling within the same school of composition.
These are the two "Pieces for an
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(394)
organ in a clock," in F minor,[77] which have been published, and are
well known as Fantasia and Sonata for the Pianoforte, for four hands.
They both consist of a slow movement and another in lively, metrical
style; their design is similar, but not identical. The first, composed
in December, 1790 (594 K), opens with a solemn Adagio, whose impression
of great gentleness is not disturbed by some harmonic harshness; it
keeps strictly within the limits of an introduction. The Allegro in
F major, formed by the imitative treatment of an agitated motif, is
divided sonata-like into two parts, and returns through an harmonic
transition to the Adagio, which is modified in a masterly way, and leads
to a calm conclusion. The whole piece is marvellously rounded off; and
the restlessness of the Allegro contrasts with, but does not oppose, the
gentle expression of the Adagio. Each forms the fitting complement to
the other.
The second piece (608 K.), composed on March 3, 1791, is more broadly
planned, and has a greater depth of feeling. It begins with the Allegro,
the first bars of which serve to introduce a fugue, admirably disposed
and full of lovely melody, with a general tone of serious contemplation.
When the fugue has been brought to a close by a stretto with the subject
inverted, a striking harmonic transition leads back to the opening
motif, which passes into the Andante in A flat major. Its treatment as
a middle movement is more weighty and elaborate. A well-developed motif
recurs again and again in varied figuration, connected by different
interludes, and gives a general impression of pure and satisfied
grace, touched with a breath of melancholy recollection, the natural
development of the powerful feeling and contemplative spirit of the
Allegro. But this happy calm is of short duration. The first movement
returns; the fugue recommences, rendered more animated than before by a
countersubject, and breaks off with a passionate conclusion.
{CHURCH MUSIC IN VIENNA, 1782.}
(395)
These two compositions are a fresh proof of Mozart's deep insight into
the nature of the forms of counterpoint, which gave him power to use
them as the free expression of his individual nature; he is entitled to
the praise of having brought these forms to their fullest perfection,
an incalculable gain to the development of music, which has proceeded in
other directions since his time. It is sometimes regretted that Mozart
should have wasted his genius and his labour upon compositions for a toy
clock.[78] We may rather remark how like a true artist he set himself to
perform the task before him, and produced a work which, keeping within
its given conditions, forms, nevertheless, a great and harmonious whole.
Mozart, having become acquainted through Van Swieten with the vocal
compositions of Handel, Bach, and other masters of the church style,
turned, as might be expected, with renewed zeal to this branch of
musical art. Unfortunately, upon the introduction of the new regulations
in church matters in 1783, the Emperor Joseph prohibited the performance
of figured or instrumental church music in the churches of Vienna, and
it was only at the court chapel or St. Stephen's cathedral, when the
Archbishop celebrated, that musical masses could be performed. German
congregational singing was substituted in other cases;[79] it was not
liked, and many complaints were made that the total abolition of church
music should have been deemed the only remedy for its abuses.[80] Thus
Mozart was deprived of all hope of success in this direction. But he
had undertaken in 1782, in performance of a vow, to compose a Mass for
Salzburg; and this work bears distinct traces of the studies which were
occupying him at the time. Mozart completed the Kyrie, Gloria, Sanctus,
and Benedictus of this Mass in C minor (427 K.); the first movement of
the Credo is
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(396)
complete as to the choir parts and bass, and the essential points of the
accompaniment are indicated; in the same way the voices, obbligato wind
instruments, and bass of the Incarnatus are fully written out, the rest
of the accompaniment being only indicated. The whole plan and treatment
of the Mass differ from those of the earlier ones. In the latter,
limitation to a narrow standard and the subservience of the parts to the
whole are the prevailing principles, while in the former the effort
is evident to give as wide a signification as possible to each part
in itself. With this object each section of the text is treated as an
independent movement; the Gloria consists of seven completely detached
pieces. The mechanism corresponds to its external divisions, and the
treatment throughout is thematic and elaborate, for the most part in
strict form. A wealth of resource is displayed in the means employed to
give the desired effect; several of the choruses are five-part, one is
eight-part, and then again four solo voices are introduced in various
ways. The orchestra necessarily complies with the usual Salzburg
conditions; the brass instruments are completely appointed, but neither
flutes nor clarinets are used with the oboes and bassoons--all the
effect of independence possible is given, chiefly by the skilful
introduction and treatment of obbligato instruments. It cannot be said,
however, that the instrumental part of this work is as brilliant and
full of colour as others composed at the same period; the tone-colouring
is on the whole monotonous; but there are not wanting some original
instrumental effects, principally of the wind instruments. Such is the
employment of the trombones (usually only a support to the voices), with
independent effect in several parts of the Kyrie and Sanctus. The effect
of the whole accompaniment consists mainly in the independence with
which it contrasts with the voices, and is produced partly by effective
passages and partly by skilful contrapuntal elaboration. That which most
strikes us on a careful examination of this Mass is the dissimilarity of
the movements in many respects, suggesting that it was undertaken as
a study. The solo movements are the most important, more especially by
reason of their bravura
{THE C MINOR MASS, 1782.}
(397)
treatment. Bravura was not considered by any means out of place in
church music, and even the classical masters of the last century--such
as Handel and Bach--did not exclude it from their sacred works. But it
is curious that Mozart, who only introduced bravura into his dramatic
music from complaisance to the singers, should have made concessions
to the taste for it in this Mass. The first grand soprano solo is quite
after the pattern of an old bravura aria, and displays little or nothing
of Mozart's originality. It is so suggestive of the style of Graun or
Hasse that we are inclined to suspect the influence of these masters
through Van Swieten. More of Mozart's own character is given to the
Incarnatus est, accompanied by the wind instruments, and containing
touches of delicacy and grace; but the bravura goes beyond all bounds,
especially in the twenty-two bars of cadenza for the voice and wind
instruments. The duet for two sopranos, Domine Deus, and the terzet for
two sopranos and tenor, Quoniam tu solus, are written in stricter form,
both for voice and accompaniment, and are simpler and more dignified in
expression.
But the inflexibility of form has something in it of pedantry; the
work seems to be done as an exercise, and we seek in vain for the fresh
wellings-up of inspiration which delight us even in less important
compositions of Mozart. The same remark holds good of the choruses. The
first five-part choral movement of the Credo accords most in design with
the style of the earlier Masses. A lively subject shared between the
strings and wind instruments forms, as it proceeds, the thread which
binds the choral passages together; the latter are contrapuntally
treated, and the whole movement is more solemn in tone than was usual in
earlier works. The long fugue "Cum Sancto Spiritu" is admirably worked
out, and, in spite of its difficulty, very clear. Notwithstanding all
this, the nervous force of individual life is wanting to the work,
and cannot be replaced by the artistic workmanship displayed in the
different parts, even when these have force and character of their own,
as for instance in the magnificent ending, when the voices in unison
maintain the theme against a florid accompaniment.
{VAN SWIETEN AND CLASSICAL MUSIC.}
(398)
The Osanna has more of independent life; it is a long, elaborately
fugued movement, the technical interest of which has engrossed the
composer longer than was necessary.[81] The Benedictus in four parts,
and worked out at length, is remarkable on account of its earnest,
somewhat dry tone, which effectually distinguishes it from the same
movement in other masses, to which a soft and pleasing character was
given. The Kyrie, Gloria, and Sanctus are very fine movements, in
which the skilful rendering of strictest form does not overpower the
expression of feeling and the truly musical proportions of the work. The
varied expression of the different passages is so suitable, so clear and
telling, that we may see at once how firm a grasp Mozart had taken of
the true spirit of church music. The crown of the composition, however,
is the five-part Gratias with the eight-part Qui tollis, which are
planned and executed in masterly fashion, and are penetrated with
Mozart's spirit and life. Their earnestness, severe even to harshness,
their breadth of outline and massive effects, are worthy of the great
examples who were vividly present to his mind; and we cannot fail to
discern the master who was stimulated by these very examples to draw
more deeply on the resources of his own creative genius, and to soar to
higher realms of art by the exertion of his own powers.
After the first performance of the Mass in its unfinished state at
Salzburg, in 1783, Mozart laid it aside for more pressing work. But when
in 1785 he was commissioned to write an oratorio for the concert for the
Musical Fund
{DAVIDE PENITENTE," 1785.}
(399)
(March 13 and 14; Vol. II., p. 174), he determined to make use of the
Kyrie and Gloria to which, with slight alterations, the Italian words of
the "Davide Penitente" (469 K.) were adapted. He added (on March 6 and
11) two new arie for Mdlle. Cavalieri and Adamberger.[82] The work
lost in unity of style more than it gained by the addition of these two
songs, of which the orchestral accompaniment is in Mozart's later style,
and the design and treatment are different from those of the other
movements. They are both in the style of the concert arie of the time,
and are quite equal to the best in expression and treatment of the
voice. The Mozart-like character is more marked than in the rest of the
work, but it does not reach its fullest development; and the arie
are too florid for an oratorio. But the mixture of styles was then
customary, and indeed brilliant solos were looked for by the public as a
relief to the more serious choral movements.
At the present day there cannot be two opinions as to the impropriety
of such a mixture.[83] The important point to be noted, however, is
that just at the time when the instrumental and operatic music of Vienna
threatened to banish altogether the severer and more classical style,
Mozart
{MOZART AND FREEMASONRY.}
(400)
became familiar through Van Swieten with the works of the classical
masters. They laid deep hold on his imagination and intellect, giving
him a powerful impulse to classical studies, without which his genius
would not have arrived at a full mastery of his art; these studies,
combined with his ever-growing powers of production, have impressed
their indelible stamp upon the works of this period.[84]
FOOTNOTES OF CHAPTER XXX.
[Footnote 1: He travelled with the Duke of Braganza, in 1768 (Zimmermann, Briefe,
p. 96).]
[Footnote 2: Grimm, Corr. Litt., VI., pp. 263, 314.]
[Footnote 3: Griesinger, Biogr. Not., p. 66. One was performed by Mozart (Vol.
II., p. 284).]
[Footnote 4: Müller praises the liberal support which he received from him in
Berlin, in 1776 (Abschied, p. 116).]
[Footnote 5: Nicolai, Reise, IV., p. 556.]
[Footnote 6: Schneider, Gesch. d. Oper in Berlin, p. 14.]
[Footnote 7: Burney, Reise, III., p. 67.]
[Footnote 8: N. Ztschr. für Mus., IX., p. 130.]
[Footnote 9: Zelter, Fasch, p. 22.]
[Footnote 10: Reichardt, Kunstmagaz., I., p. 158.]
[Footnote 11: Zelter, Fasch, p. 49. The parallel which Reichardt (Briefe cine»
aufmerks. Reisenden, I., p. 15) institutes between Hasse and Graun well
expresses the general views.]
[Footnote 12: Rtlchardi, Mus. Monatsschr., p. 69. A. M. Z., XV., p. 680.
Schletterer, Reichardt, p. 261, where detailed and interesting
information is given.]
[Footnote 13: A. M. Z., XV., p. 605. Schletterer, Reichardt, I., p. 257.]
[Footnote 14: Reichardt, Mu. Zeitg., I., p. 74.]
[Footnote 15: Burney, Reise, III., p. 116.]
[Footnote 16: Autobiographische Mittheilungens. in Marpurg's Histor. Kril
Beitr., I., p 197.]
[Footnote 17: Burney, Reise, III., p. 111. Zelter, Fasch, p. 47.]
[Footnote 18: A. M. Z., III., p. 171. Reichardt, Mus. Wochenblatt. p. 70.]
[Footnote 19: His autobiography is given in N. Berl. Mus. Ztg., 1856, No. 32.]
[Footnote 20: His autobiography; s. Burney, Reise, III., p. 199. Cf. Rochlitz, Für
Freunde der Tonkunst, IV., p. 273.]
[Footnote 21: Zelter, Fasch, pp. 14, 47.]
[Footnote 22: Griesinger, Biogr. Not., p. 15. Rochlitz, Für Freunde der Tonkunst,
IV.', p. 274. Bach told him once that he was the only man who had ever
quite understood his works (Dies, Biogr. Nachr., p. 38).]
[Footnote 23: Compare, for instance, Burney's account (Reise, III., p. 209) with
Reichardt's opinions expressed at different times (Briefe e. aufmerks.
Reisenden, I., p. m; II., p. 7. Kunstmagaz., I., p. 24. Musik. Alman.,
1796. A. M. Z., XVI., p. 28. Schletterer, Reichardt, I., p. 163).]
[Footnote 24: Nicolai, Reise, IV., p. 558.]
[Footnote 25: Zelter, Briefw. m. Goethe, V., p. 210: "His extemporising,
especially when he was in the vein, was the admiration of men such
as Marpurg, Kirnberger, Benda, Agrikola, Bertuch, Ring--most of them
excellent organ-players, who all felt how far he surpassed them." He
used to say of his brother, Ph. Emanuel, with a compassionate air: "Mein
Bruder, der Hamburger, hat einige artige Sächelchen gemacht"; and the
latter made use of the same family expression in speaking of the London
brother (Reichardt, Musik. Zeitg., II., p. 159).]
[Footnote 26: Forkel, Musik. Alman., 1784, p. 201. Reichardt, Musik. Alman.,
1796. Zelter, Briefw., V., p. 209.]
[Footnote 27: I need only allude to the vocal compositions of Ph. Em. Bach; and
the union of both schools in Graun's "Tod Jesu" is very apparent.]
[Footnote 28: A. M. Z., II., p. 585: "Berlin is perhaps the only place in Germany
where the most ardent enthusiasm for modern music is still (1800)
combined with a zealous defence of the older school. Joh. Seb. Bach and
his celebrated sons still strive for pre-eminence with Mozart, Haydn,
and Clementi." Zelter writes (Briefw. m. Goethe, V., p. 208): "I have
been accustomed to honour the Bach genius for the last fifty years.
Friedemann died here, Emanuel Bach was royal chamber musician here,
Kirnberger and Agrikola were pupils of old Bach; Ring, Bertuch, Schmalz,
&c., performed scarcely anything but the old Bach pieces, and I myself
have taught here for the last thirty years, and have pupils who play all
Bach's music well."]
[Footnote 29: A characteristic instance of this reverence is given by Zelter
(Briefw., V., p. 163).]
[Footnote 30: A. M. Z., III., p. 598. Zelter, Briefw., III., p. 17.]
[Footnote 31: This testimony is afforded by his grateful pupil, Schulz, and also
by Eberhardt (A. M. Z., II., p. 872) and Z[elter] (Berlin Mus. Ztg.,
1793, p. 129. Cf. Zelter, Fasch, p. 59. Rintel, Zelter, p. 116).]
[Footnote 32: Reichardt was badly received by Kimberger (Schletterer, I., p. 98),
who retaliated by a highly coloured picture of a theoretical critic
in his "Briefen eines aufmerks- Reisenden" (I., p. 128), which was
recognised as Kimberger (A.M. Z., II., p. 597). But in after-times he
did him honourable justice (A. M. Z., III., p. 169),]
[Footnote 33: Thus Reichardt relates (A. M. Z., III., p. 17a) what is alluded to
in the critical letters (I., pp. 15, 23, 41, 175, 231).]
[Footnote 34: Justi, Winckelmann, I., p. 48.]
[Footnote 35: Spazier, A. M. Z., II., pp. 569, 593.]
[Footnote 36: The anecdotes which he published with the title of "Legende
einiger Musikheiligen von Simeon Metaphrastes d. j." (Cölln, 1786), are
characteristic of his bitterness and his cynicism.]
[Footnote 37: He spared Ph. Em. Bach as little as the latter spared him (Zelter,
Briefw. m. Goethe, VI., p. 321).]
[Footnote 38: Schulz gives an account of this himself, which does not altogether
agree in details with Reichardt's story (A. M. Z., II., p. 276; III., p.
597).]
[Footnote 39: Glocking, Fr. Nicolai's Leben, p. 95 (cf. 29). Schletterer,
Reichardt, I., pp. 97,140.]
[Footnote 40: Burney, Reise, III., pp. 58, 74.]
[Footnote 41: Reichardt, Brief, e. aufmerks. Reis., I., p. 32. Schletterer,
Reichardt, I., p. 139. Muller, Abschied, p. 117. It existed, together
with other similar institutions, until the beginning of this century
(Cramer, Mag. d. Mus., I., p. 565. A. M. Z., II., p. 586).]
[Footnote 42: Nicolai mentions these three oratorios as well known to him in 1781
(Reise, IV., p. 534). An enthusiastic account of "Judas Maccabæus" after
a performance at a Liebhaberconcert in 1774, was given by Reichardt in
Briefe e. aufmerks. Reis., I., p. 82. Zelter describes the great effect
which a performance of the "Messiah" in 1783 made upon him (Rintel,
Zelter, p. 137). The "Messiah" had been performed in Hamburg as early as
1775 (Joh. Heinr. Voss, Briefe, I., p. 295).]
[Footnote 43: Marpurg, Krit. Briefe, II., p. 141.]
[Footnote 44: Nicolai, Reise, IV., p. 525.]
[Footnote 45: Reichardt, A. M. Z., XV., p. 666 (Schletterer, Reichardt, I., p.
325).]
[Footnote 46: A. M. Z., III., p. 601. It was certainly not to the taste of
Frederick the Great. When it was proposed to sing the choruses in
Racine's "Athalie," the King put a stop to it with the remark (January
10,1774): "La musique française ne vaut rien, il faut faire déclamer le
chour, alors cela revient au même (Preuss, Friedrich der Grosse, III.,
p. 310).]
[Footnote 47: L. Schnieder, Gesch. der Oper in Berlin, p. 49.]
[Footnote 48: Burney, Riese, III., p. 149.]
[Footnote 49: Schletterer, Reichardt, I., p. 140.]
[Footnote 50: Rochlitz, Fur Freunde der Tonkunst, III., p. 191.]
[Footnote 51: A. M. Z., III., p. 176.]
[Footnote 52: A. M. Z., III., p. 605. Even the Princess Amalie expressed to
Schulz her dislike to his choruses to "Athalie" (A. M. Z., III., p. 614)
in two very emphatic letters (Echo, 1857, Nos. 10, 14).]
[Footnote 53: A. M. Z., II., p. 575. Cf. Nohl, Musikerbr., p. 76.]
[Footnote 54: Nicolai, Reise, IV., pp. 526, 534.]
[Footnote 55: He has given some interesting particulars as to his position to
Frederick (A. M. Z., XV., pp. 601, 633. Schletterer, Reichardt, I., p.
260).]
[Footnote 56: Cramer, Mag. d. Mus., I., p. 565. Schletterer, I., p. 357.]
[Footnote 57: At the same time he published the Musical Magazine (1-4, 1782),
and was concerned in Nicolai's "Allgemeiner Deutscher Bibliothek." Cf.
Schletterer, I., P. 432.]
[Footnote 58: The influence exerted by the Crown Prince, afterwards King
Frederick William III. upon the musical taste of Berlin, belongs to a
later time than that under consideration.]
[Footnote 59: Griesinger, Biogr. Not., p. 69.]
[Footnote 60: Reichardt, A. M. Z., XVI., p. 28 (Schletterer, Reichardt, I., p.
163).]
[Footnote 61: A. M. Z., I., p. 252.]
[Footnote 62: Nicolai, Reise, III., pp. 358, 363.]
[Footnote 63: G. Forster, Sämmtl. Schr., VII., p. 273. Van Swieten's activity and
influence are very differently estimated by R. Kink (Gesch. d. Univers,
in Wien, I., p. 539).]
[Footnote 64: So Neukomm informed me. G. Forster was affronted by Van Swieten's
stiff, cold manner (Sämmtl. Schr., VII., p. 270). Cf. Jahrb. d. Tonk.,
1796, p. 72.]
[Footnote 65: Dies, Biogr. Nachr., p. 158.]
[Footnote 66: Dies, Biogr. Nachr., p. 210. Griesinger, Biogr. Not., p. 66.]
[Footnote 67: Musik. Corresp., 1792, p. 4) Niemetschek, who had called him the
father of Mozart's orphan children, omitted this in the second edition.]
[Footnote 68: Dies, Biogr. Nachr., p. 180.]
[Footnote 69: He often played at Van Swieten's with the famous lute-player Kohaut
(Griesinger, Biogr. Not., p. 66).]
[Footnote 70: I cannot say whether Anton Teyber (b. 1754), whom Mozart met
at Dresden in 1789, or Franz Teyber (b. 1756) is intended. Both were
natives of Vienna, probably brothers of the two female singers of the
same name (Vol. I., p. 69), and they both died at Vienna--Anton as court
chamber composer in 1822, and Franz as kapellmeister and court organist
in 1810.]
[Footnote 71: Nicolai's opinion is in accordance with this; he speaks of the
church music in Vienna, in 1781, as inferior both in composition and
performance (Reise, IV., p. 544).]
[Footnote 72: Kircher, Musurgia, I., p. 466. Weitzmann, Gesch. d. Klavierspiels,
p. 214.]
[Footnote 73: Rochlitz's assertion (A. M. Z., I., p. 115) that Mozart wrote a
great deal in Handel's style that he did not publish, is unfounded.]
[Footnote 74: It is observed in Reichardt's Musik. Zeitg., I., p. 200, that J. S.
Bach was in advance of his age, and that long after his death his mantle
had descended upon Mozart, who was the first thoroughly to admire and
reverence the spirit of his art, and to reproduce it in his own works.
Zelter also declares that Mozart is a truer successor of Seb. Bach
than his son Philipp Emanuel or Joseph Haydn (Briefw., IV., p. 188); he
recalls how the music of Seb. and Eman. Bach was at first unintelligible
to him; how Haydn was blamed for having travestied what was intense
earnest to them; and, finally, how Mozart appeared and gave the proper
interpretation to all three (Briefw., II., p. 103).
[Footnote 75: Rochlitz is mistaken in trying to discover a mixture of Bach's
gloominess with Mozart's youthful fire in the latter's Salzburg
compositions (A. M. Z., II., p. 642).]
[Footnote 76: Beethoven wrote out this fugue in score; the autograph is in the
possession of A. Artaria.]
[Footnote 77: Muller, proprietor of the art museum on the Stockameisenplatz,
announces (Wien. Ztg., 1791, No. 66, Anh.) that he has on view
there "the magnificent mausoleum erected to the memory of the great
Field-Marshal Laudon. There will be performed also funeral music
composed by the famous Kapellm. Mozart, which is very well suited for
the occasion which has called it forth."]
[Footnote 78: The Andante composed on May 4, 1791, "for a waltz on a little
organ" (616 K.), is a graceful little piece, with no pretence alter
anything deeper, either in execution or expression.]
[Footnote 79: Nicolai, who notices this reformation (Reise, IV., p. 550), has
adduced proofs of it (Beil., X., z, 2).]
[Footnote 80: Forkel, Musik. Alman., 1784, p. 187.]
[Footnote 81: A four-part vocal fugue, "In Te Domine speravi," of which Mozart
has written thirty-four bars (23 Anh., K.), appears to belong to this
time, and is very fresh and forcible:--[See Page Image]]
[Footnote 82: Rochlitz, A. M. Z., III., p. 230; cf. XXVII., p. 447. The parts of
the Mass are made use of in the following manner:--[See Page Image]]
[Footnote 83: Reichardt criticises favourably on the whole a cantata composed of
the last numbers (8, 9, zo) of the oratorio arranged by Hiller (Musik.
Zeitg., I., p. 368; cf. 382); another cantata borrowed from it is
mentioned (A. M. Z., IX., p. 479).]
[Footnote 84: Gerber's assertion in the Tonkünstlerlexicon, I., p. 976: "Lucky
for him that he was moulded into perfect form while still young by the
pleasing and playful muses of Vienna; otherwise he could hardly have
escaped the fate of Friedemann Bach, whose soaring flight could be
followed by few mortals," is only half true, for Mozart's deepest
studies were made not in Salzburg, but in Vienna.]