Review Article

Dexter Edge

Mary Sue Morrow, Concert Life in Haydn s Vienna: Aspects o f aDeveloping Musical and Social Institution, Sociology of Music

No. 7 (Stuyvesant, New York: Pendragon Press, 1988). 552 pagesIt is one of the peculiarities of human perception that our attention can become so intently focused on an object that its background seems to disappear: we don’t see the wood for the trees. This homely observation applies to historical perception as well; great men and women can so monopolize our attention that we fail to see the background from which they sprang. To take a familiar example: between approximately 1760 and 1830, Vienna and its immediate neighbourhood were home to five composers whose works now comprise much of the core of the standard concert and operatic repertory. The late operas of Gluck, the mature works of Haydn and Beethoven, the astonishing outpouring of masterpieces from Mozart’s final decade, and the entire corpus of Schubert’s works were all produced in or around Vienna within this seventy-year span. It might seem self-evident, then, that a thorough understanding of the cir­cumstances of public and private music making in the city would be fundamental to understanding the context in which these composers lived and worked. Yet Eduard Hanslick’s engagingly written but thinly documented history of Viennese concert life, published in 1869, remained the standard treatment of the subject for over a hundred years.1 The first modern attempt at a re-examination was undertaken by Otto Biba in a series of important articles in the late 1970s.2 By digging into previously neglected archival sources, Biba was able to sketch a new picture of concert life during the era of Haydn, Mozart and Beethoven and to uncover much new information about certain facets of it. But his findings

1 Eduard Hanslick, Geschichte des Concertwesens in Wien (Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller, 1869). Hanslick’s study is divided into four parts: ‘Die patriarchalische Zeit’ covers the years 1750-1800, ‘Association der Dilettanten’ the years 1800-1830, and the remaining two parts the years 1830- 1868. I wish to thank Janet K. Page and Stanley Sadie for their thoughtful readings of the text of the present review, and Mary Sue Morrow for graciously consenting to read the appendix and for pointing out a few errors and omissions.

3 Otto Biba, ‘Concert Life in Beethoven’s Vienna’, in Beethoven, Performers, and Critics: The International Beethoven Congress, Detroit, 1977, ed. Robert Winter and Bruce Carr (Detroit: Wayne Stale University Press, 1980); idem, ‘Beispiele für die Besetzungsverhällnisse bei Aufführungen von Haydns Oratorien in Wien zwischen 1784 und 1808’, Haydn-Sludien 4 (May 1978): 94-104; idem, ‘Grundzüge des Konzertwesens in Wien zu Mozarts Zeit’, Mozart-Jahrbuch 1978/79 (Salzburg, 1979): 132—43; idem, ‘Beethoven und die Liebhaber Concerte in Wien im Winter 1807/08’, Beiträge ‘76-78: Beethoven-Kolloquium 1977: Dokumentation und Aufführungs­praxis, ed. Rudolf Klein (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1978); idem, ‘Geselliges Musizieren rund um Wien’, Wiener Figaro 43 (January 1976): 8-18.

108

clearly demonstrated the need for a new, comprehensive monograph on the topic.

Thus music historians welcomed the appearance of Mary Sue Morrow’s dissertation, Concert Life in Vienna, 1780-1810 (Ph.D. diss., Indiana University, 1984). Pendragon Press has now published a lightly revised version of that dissertation under the title Concert Life in Haydn’s Vienna: Aspects of a Developing Musical and Social Institution (Number 7 in Pendragon’s Sociology of Music series). Since the book is going to be subject to a good deal of criticism in this review, it is best to begin by praising its virtues. Morrow’s study is the fruit of a tremendous amount of original research. If used cautiously, it will provide scholars with a rich source of new information on Viennese musical life. The sheer quantity of documentary material the author has examined will astonish anyone who has struggled with the short hours and byzantine complexities of Viennese libraries and archives. She has also gone a long way toward imposing rational order on this vast and unruly mass of data, and many of her insights into it are incisive and original. For the years 1780-1810, her calendars of public and private concerts offer a full and (apart from a few oversights) mainly accurate picture of Viennese concert life. These calendars are exceedingly useful and interesting, and one finds oneself referring to them and citing them repeatedly.

The remainder of this article is divided into three sections: a close examination of Morrow’s text, followed by some comments on the overall accuracy of the book, and concluding with a brief look at the concert calendars. The review is supplemented by an appendix listing addenda and corrigenda to the concert calendars for the years 1780-1800. I

I

Morrow’s book consists of roughly equal parts text and appendix. Following a brief preface, the text is divided into eight chapters: ‘Private Concerts’, ‘Public Concerts’, ‘Public Concert Locations’, ‘Business and Financial Aspects of Concert Giving’, ‘Public Concert Programs’, ‘Performers and Performance Practice’, ‘The Treatment of Viennese Concerts in Periodicals’, and ‘The Cultural Context of Viennese Concerts’. The first of five appendices is a 126-page calendar of public concerts in Vienna from 1761 to 1810, the second appendix a similar, although much shorter calendar of private concerts over the same span. The third appendix provides an index to all performers and composers in the two concert calendars, the fourth lists patrons of Viennese private concerts, and the last gives in original languages all passages quoted in translation in the body of the book. The first three appendices cover 236 pages, exactly matching the length of the text; these three appendices form the heart of Morrow’s study and are the foundation of its bid to become a standard reference.

109

The inclusion of Haydn’s name in the title suggests an emphasis the book does not have. True, his music was often featured on Viennese concert programmes, especially after 1790, and the stated boundaries of Morrow’s study - from ‘the ascension [sic] of Maria Theresia’ in 1740 to ‘the founding of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in 1812’ (p. xxi) - correspond closely to the period between Haydn’s arrival in Vienna as a boy and his death in 1809. But the composer was a regular resident of the city only when quite young and quite old. If he played any role in Viennese concert life before 1760, nothing is known about it (except for what can be surmised from a handful of works known to have been composed before that date) and Morrow does not mention it. His participation in Viennese concert life in his later years was by and large restricted to performances of his oratorios, Die Schöpfung and Die Jahreszeiten. A desire to include a famous name in the title is understandable, but why not include Mozart and Beethoven as well? They, at least, made part of their living from performing in concerts in Vienna.

Although Hanslick’s study unquestionably needed to be superseded, some of Morrow’s criticisms of him seem unjustified. She takes Hanslick to task for interpreting eighteenth-century musical life according to anachronistic nine­teenth-century criteria. Thus, according to Morrow, Hanslick based his treatment of what she calls the ‘pre-Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde period’ (that is, before 1812) largely on nineteenth-century periodicals. Furthermore, he is said to have applied the standards of the 1820s to the eighteenth century, taking ‘a “virtuoso” approach, devoting much of his discussion to a chronicle of performers . . . whose potential usefulness is destroyed by the absence of an index or list of sources’ (p. xviii). Yet in the first hundred pages of his book, Hanslick thoroughly discusses the social and cultural context of public and private concerts in Vienna before 1800, basing his discussion on contemporary eighteenth-century sources that he almost always identifies in footnotes. Several of the sources Hanslick cites are reused by Morrow in her own book. Although Hanslick does not consistently give sources in his chapter on public concerts and performers before 1800, it is not difficult to see that he drew most of his information from notices in the Wiener Zeitung and from a small number of concert posters in the archive of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. While such documentation may be inadequate by modern standards and for modern needs, it is hardly worthy of censure - after all, Hanslick’s book was published in 1869. And Hanslick’s book does have an index of names - although by no means a comprehensive one.

Morrow’s own discussion of primary sources is scattered throughout her book, partly in the preface, partly in Chapter 3, ‘Public Concert Locations’, partly in Chapter 5, ‘Public Concert Programs’, and partly in Chapter 7, ‘The Treatment of Viennese Concerts in Periodicals’. A more centralized discussion and a critical evaluation of primary sources would have been helpful. Some important primary sources and secondary research tools are

110

not mentioned. In her concert calendars, Morrow draws heavily on the correspondence of the Mozart family and on C. F. Pohl’s history of the Tonkünstler-Societät, but she discusses neither source in her text.3 Nor does she cite Gustav Gugitz’s useful Bibliographie zur Geschichte und Stadtkunde von Wien (Vienna, 1947), which lists the dates and page numbers of all concert notices and advertisements published in the Wiener Zeitung during the period covered by Morrow’s study.4 Although Morrow lists Gugitz’s book in her bibliography, it is mentioned nowhere in her text. She thereby gives the impression that she searched through seventy years of the Wiener Zeitung herself. If so, she duplicated Gugitz’s effort; in fact, she has overlooked several concert announcements listed by Gugitz (particularly for the years before 1780) and found none he missed.

Morrow outlines a scheme for classifying concerts which serves as the framework for her first two chapters. She draws a basic distinction between ‘public’ and ‘private’ concerts, using those words in their modern senses, although the words had not fully assumed those senses by the late eighteenth century. Morrow further subdivides private concerts - or perhaps more accurately, private occasions at which music was made - according to social setting and the music’s function within that setting: informal music at social gatherings, after-dinner music,5 formally organized music for parties and celebrations, participatory chamber music, music for gala occasions (by which Morrow means mainly private oratorio performances such as those organized by Baron Gottfried van Swieten), and regular musical salons. Public concerts, on the other hand, are subdivided according to sponsor: virtuoso benefits, charity fundraisers, entrepreneur subscription series, and concerts organized by music societies.

While this taxonomy is reasonable enough, it seems to have led to the exclusion of several types of event that probably ought to have been included. Among the kinds of musical performances that are missing from Morrow’s book are outdoor serenades (a perennial favourite with the Viennese during this era), concerts in churches, concerts in Masonic lodges,6 private domestic concerts at court,7 and

7 C. F. Pohl, Denkschrift aus Anlass des hundertjährigen Bestehens der Tonkünstler-Societät (Vienna: Selbstverlag des ‘Haydn’ in Commission bei Carl Gerold’s Sohn, 1871). Pohl lists complete programmes for the society’s biannual pairs of concerts, which began in 1772.

4 The list of concert notices in the Wiener Zeitung is found in volume 1 of Gugitz’s bibliography (pp. 375-6). Gugitz also gives an (incomplete) list of concert announcements in other Viennese periodicals and in theatre almanacs, and he lists references to Viennese concert life in such descriptions of Vienna as Pezzl’s Neue Skizze von Wien.

5 Perhaps inaptly so called, since all examples cited by Morrow are performances of wind-band arrangements of operas during dinner (that is, Tafelmusik), in the manner depicted in Don Giovanni.

6 See, for example, the concert on 15 December 1785 listed in the appendix to this review.7 Concerts of this sort are described in the diaries of Maria Theresia’s court chamberlain Johann

Joseph Khevenhiiller-Melsch. Entries in those diaries having to do with theatre and music are collected in Elisabeth Grossegger, Theater, Feste und Feiern zur Zeit Maria Theresias, 1742-1776' 111

111

concerts associated with court ceremonies and festivities, such as imperial birthdays and weddings - gala occasions, one would think, but absent from Morrow’s book. Also missing are concert performances of the operatic pasticci L ’ape musicale in Lent 1789, and L ’ape musicale rinnuovata in Lent 1791.8 These performances, which were for the benefit of the singers in the Viennese Italian opera company, should clearly be classified as benefit concerts.

Morrow nowhere defines precisely what she understands by the word ‘concert’, nor does she discuss the welter of eighteenth-century Viennese terms for musical performances, such as ‘musikalische Akademie\ 'Concert', ‘Tafel­musik’, or simply 'Musik' (the last was often used to mean ‘musical work’ or ‘musical performance’, as well as ‘music’ in the modern sense). In modern usage, ‘concert’ implies a distinction between performer and audience, but this distinction was perhaps more fluid in the eighteenth century than it is now. For the sake of convenience, however, I shall continue to refer to the musical performances discussed in Morrow’s book as ‘concerts’.

Musical life in the homes of the Viennese first and second aristocracies in the late eighteenth century has hitherto received little attention, and Morrow’s opening chapter on private concert life is a good introduction to it. She includes several entertaining contemporary descriptions of private concerts; most of these descriptions appear here for the first time.9 Her list of patrons of private concerts (Table 3, pp. 16-17) is interesting, if incomplete. Her list of Viennese concert patrons during the 1790s, for example, omits several names given in the following passage from the end of Johann Ferdinand von Schönfeld’s article ‘Dilettanten­akademien’ in his Jahrbuch der Tonkunst von Wien und Prag of 1796:

There are yet many other houses where, without fixed times, several large and small academies are held during the year. To this number belong: His Serene Highness Prince von Lobkowitz, His Princely Grace von Lichnowsky, His Excellency Count Straffoldo, Count von Hoyos, Exalted Stale Counsellor von Isdenzy, Royal Court Counsellor Baron von Bartenstein, Court Counsellor von Kraus, Court Counsellor von Schröder, Herr von Puthon, Herr von Natorp, wholesaler, Herr von Puchberg, wholesaler, Baron von Lang, and still more.10

Nach den Tagebucheintragungen des Fürsten Johann Joseph Khevenhüller-Metsch, Obersthofmeister der Kaiserin (Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1987).

8 Both were revues of hit numbers from recent operas, built around librettos concocted for the occasion by Lorenzo Da Ponte.

9 Many of the descriptions come from the diaries of Joseph Carl Rosenbaum; most of Morrow’s citations from Rosenbaum have apparently not been published elsewhere. Most are not in Else Radant, ‘Die Tagebücher von Joseph Carl Rosenbaum 1770-1829’, Haydn Yearbook 5 (1968), which gives only those entries directly concerning Haydn.

10 Johann Ferdinand von Schönfeld, Jahrbuch der Tonkunst von Wien und Prag (Vienna, 1796), facsimile reprint, with afterword and index by Otto Biba (Munich, Salzburg: Musikverlag Emil Katzbichler, 1976), 73: ‘Noch sind viele andere Häuser, wo, ohne bestimmte Zeit, mehrere große und kleine Akademien im Jahre gehalten werden. Unter diese Zahl gehören: Se. Durchlaucht Fürst V. Lobkowitz, Sr. fürstl. Gnaden von Lignowsky, Se. Exzell. Graf Straffoldo, Herr Graf v. Hoyos, Herr geh. Staatsrath von Isdenzy, Herr Reichshofrath Baron von Partenstein, Hr. Hofrath

112

Also conspicuous by its absence from Morrow’s Table 3 is the Habsburg court, an industrious organizer of musical events, especially during the reign of Maria Theresia. Musical performances at court functioned as Tafelmusik, as enter­tainment on so-called Gala Tage (mainly birthdays and name-days of imperial family members), and as showcases for the musical accomplishments of the imperial children. Morrow’s treatment of Viennese private concerts should be seen as a point of departure for further study, rather than as a definitive statement on the topic. Private musical life in Vienna in the eighteenth century remains vastly und er-researched.

Morrow’s second chapter covers public concerts. Her summary of public concert life in cities other than Vienna omits London, where public concerts can be traced back to the 1660s. The Parisian Concert spirituel series is also not discussed, although its concerts, which began in 1725, were surely the models for similar concerts organized by the administration of the Viennese court theatres a few decades later.”

Morrow wisely restricted the chronological scope of her dissertation to the years 1780 to 1810. By attempting to extend the coverage of her book back to 1740, she has more than doubled the scope of the dissertation; yet the only important new source used for the book is a daily chronicle of the Viennese court theatres compiled by Philipp Gumpenhuber during the theatrical administration of Count Durazzo in the late 1750s and early 1760s. Morrow has examined four volumes of this chronicle housed in Harvard’s Houghton Library, volumes covering the repertory of the Burgtheater in 1758, and of the Kärntnertortheater in 1758/59, 1761, and 1763.12 Morrow includes in her text transcriptions and translations of several of the fifteen concert listings in the 1758 Bürgt heater volume, the only one of the four volumes to contain such listings (inexplicably, these fifteen concerts are not included in her concert calendar). The listings from the 1758 volume are especially interesting for their descriptions of the elaborate stage settings used in the concerts.

Unfortunately, Morrow did not draw upon three additional volumes of Gumpenhuber’s chronicles housed in the Music Collection of the Austrian National Library.13 These volumes are much richer sources of concert information

von Kraus, Hr. Hofrath von Schroder, Hr. v. Puthon, Hr. v. Nalorp, Großhändler, Hr. v. Buchberg, Großhändler, Hr. Baron von Lang, und andere mehr’. For a list of Austrian aristocrats who maintained private musical Kapellen in the eighteenth century, see Julia Moore, ‘Beethoven and Musical Economics’ (Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1987), Appendix 3, 562-597.

" The Concert spirituel series is mentioned in passing on page 38.12 Cambridge, Massachusetts, Houghton Library, Harvard University, MSThr. 248-248.3.13 Philipp Gumpenhuber, ‘Repertoire...’ A-Wn, Mus. Hs. 34580/a-c (R/Gumpenhuber I/XVIII).

These volumes have been in the collection since the 1970s. They were described by Gerhard Croll in ‘Neue Quellen zu Musik und Theater in Wien 1758-1763: Ein erster Bericht’ in Festschrift Waiter Senn zum 70. Geburtstag (Munich, Salzburg: Katzbichler, 1975): 8-12. This article is listed in Morrow’s bibliography, but not cited in her text.

113

than the Harvard volume from 1758: they record the repertory of the Burgtheater in 1761, 1762 and 1763, and include references to 124 public concerts and 35 private concerts (mainly ‘services à table’ at court).

In general. Morrow’s coverage of sources before 1780 is less thorough than her coverage from 1780 onwards. She has overlooked many crucial items and has sometimes relied on inaccurate second-hand descriptions of others. For example: the Hofkammerarchiv in Vienna preserves quarterly account books from the Viennese court theatres in the 1750s and 1760s. These account books contain numerous references to concerts, generally reporting the number of concerts in each quarter and their total receipts. The account books also list payments to some of the performers in the concerts. Morrow discusses these account books, but her discussion is based on incomplete descriptions of them published in studies by the theatre historians Franz Hadamowsky and Gustav Zechmeister. Zechmeister, while correctly stating that 68 concerts took place in the season 1755/56 (a figure derived from the account books, and duly quoted by Morrow), omits similar figures for the seasons 1756/57,1757/58,1759/60,1760/61,1761/62, 1762/63 and 1763/64, and Morrow consequently omits them as well.14 Morrow’s Table 5, ‘Concert Participants, 1754-1764’ likewise omits many instrumental performers who are listed in the account books, but are omitted from a list compiled by Hadamowsky.15 Morrow’s Table 4, ‘Oratorios Presented in the 1750s’, is borrowed from Zechmeister, whose list is based, in turn, on the pamphlet Répertoire des Theatres de la Ville de Vienne depuis l’Année 1752jusqu’à l ’Année 1757, a source Morrow does not cite. Although this pamphlet does not list individual concerts, it does list the names of the singers and instrumentalists who had appeared in concerts during those years, information which surely ought to have been included in any comprehensive discussion of early Viennese concert life.16

14 Zechmeister, Die Wiener Theater nächst der Burg und nächst dem Kärntnerthor von 1747 bis 1776, Theatergeschichte Österreichs Band III, Heft 2 (Vienna: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf., 1971): 234. The account books are: Vienna, Hofkammerarchiv, Hofzahlamtsbücher, 334 (for the season 1753/ 54)and 335-371 (quarterly reports for the seasons 1754/55 to 1763/64; reports for some individual quarters are missing). Concerts in Lent 1758, and from Lent 1761 to Advent 1763 are also recorded in detail in the Gumpenhuber chronicles.

15 Morrow cites Hadamowsky’s article ‘Leitung, Verwaltung und ausübende Künstler des deutschen und französischen Schauspiels, der italienischen ernsten und heiteren Oper, des Ballets und der musikalischen Akademien am Burgtheater (Französischen Theater) und am Kärntnerthorthealer (Deutschen Theater) in Wien 1754-1764’, Jahrbuch der Gesellschaft für Wiener Theaterforschung 12 (1960): 113-33. Morrow is incorrect in stating that no concert performers are named in the financial reports for the season 1763/64 (page 4 1, note 15). For example, Hofzahlamtsbuch 371 (31 December 1763 to 20 April 1764) includes payments to the following instrumentalists for performing solos or concertos during the period: Luigi Boccherini (cello), Johann Baptist Gumpenhuber (pantaleon), Matthias Tretter (violin and harp), Joseph Buttler (harpsichord), Franz Bierfreund (harp), the flutist de Camp, Joseph Beyer (violin), Joseph Mayer (‘Chalumeau- und Hautboisten’), and Johann Georg Sch wend a (violin).

16 The Répertoire was published in Vienna in 1757 by van Ghelen, (copy in Vienna, Stadt- und Landesbibliothek, A 12518).

114

Morrow has likewise overlooked key sources from the 1770s. The most important of these is the Keglevich Archive, housed in the Hungarian National Archive in Budapest.17 Count Joseph Keglevich was one of a group of creditors who assumed control of the Viennese court t heatres in 1772 upon the bankruptcy of the previous theatrical administration. The Keglevich Archive contains expense records, contracts, and box-office reports for the Kärntnertortheater and Burgtheater for the years 1772 to 1776. Among the box-office reports are several from musical academies; these reports give the date, attendance, gross and net income, and occasionally the name of the performer who organized the academy. Morrow also fails to mention many concert announcements published in the Wienerisches Diarium before 1780, and she has overlooked most of the concerts described in the diaries of court chamberlain Johann Joseph Khevenhiiller-Metsch. Concert information published in Viennese theatrical almanacs in the 1770s is also missing. Although Morrow calls Charles Burney’s account of his visit to Vienna in September 1772 one of the most important sources of information on musical life in the city in the 1770s (p. xx), she does not cite this information anywhere.18 Nor has she included Dittersdorfs descriptions of concerts in the late 1750s and early 1760s.19 All told, Morrow has overlooked several hundred concerts in Vienna between 1745 and 1780.20

These oversights have occasionally led Morrow to draw mistaken conclusions about Viennese concert life before 1780. Khevenhüller, in describing the first of a series of concerts under the auspices of the court theatres in Lent 1755, states ‘mann bezahlte die Entrée; jedermann kirnte darunter spillen’, which Morrow translates as ‘you pay the admission fee, anyone can play in it’.2' On the basis of this statement. Morrow concludes that the concerts ‘must have had some of the characteristics of an amateur night’ (p. 39). Perhaps the one mentioned by Khevenhüller did (although ‘spillen’ more likely referred to gambling); but everything known of the subsequent history of court-sponsored public concerts in Vienna in the 1750s and 1760s attests to their thoroughgoing professionalism. These concerts regularly featured some of the finest singers and instrumentalists in Europe, including the soprano Catharina Gabrielli, and the violinists Pietro Nardini and Gaetano Pugnani. These soloists were accompanied by an ensemble made up of professionals drawn from the theatre orchestras, and the whole enterprise was directed by Gluck.22

'7 Budapest, Hungarian National Archive (Magyar Orszâgos Levéltâr), Keglevich Family Archive, P.421, V/l 5-23.

18 Charles Burney, The Present State o f Music in Germany, the Netherlands and United Provinces (London, 1775).

19 Carl Ditters von Dittersdorf, Lebensbeschreibung, Seinem Sohne in die Feder diktiert (Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1801).

20 I intend to treat Viennese concerts before 1780 in a subsequent article.21 The passage is from Khevenhtiller's diary entry for 16 March 1755. Morrow omits the date.22 For a good discussion of these concerts, see Bruce Alan Brown, Gluck and the French Theatre in

Vienna (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1991), pp. 108-142.

115

Morrow’s treatment of concerts after 1776 is more thorough. Although the concerts of the Viennese Tonkünsller-Societät are listed in Morrow’s concert calendar, she gives them little attention in her text, even though they make up around a quarter of all known public concerts between 1772 and 1800. She justifies this lack of attention by saying that these concerts ‘have been accorded a position in Viennese concert history that overstates their actual significance’ (p. 49, note 37). This may well be true; but it perhaps underrates their importance to devote only a single paragraph to them, as Morrow does.

Mozart is known to have organized several series of subscription concerts for his own benefit, but little documentation survives of similar series organized by Mozart’s contemporaries. Morrow nevertheless feels that such subscription series were common, and her explanation of the lack of documentation is plausible: ‘. . . since subscription tickets were sold in advance with targeted appeals to patrons and music lovers, advertising probably realized little’ (p. 51). She is incorrect, however, in stating that the only subscription series advertised in the Wiener Zeitung before 1810 was one organized by the cellist Bernhard Romberg in 1808 (p. 51, note 40). A subscription series given in the Mehlgrube by mezzo-soprano Luisa Rosa Todi was announced in the Wiener Zeitung on 2 March 1782:

Tomorrow, the 3rd of this month, Madama Todi will give her first subscription concert in the Mehlgrube. Those who have not subscribed, and yet want to honour these concerts with their presence can also obtain tickets at the door.23

To be sure, the publication of this notice may imply that subscriptions had already been privately solicited; perhaps Todi had not secured enough sub­scribers and was trying to drum up business at the last minute. In any case, documentary evidence of such series is rare, and there is little justification for assuming they were common. It could just as easily be assumed that financial risk and uncertain returns made such schemes unattractive.

Morrow’s treatment of other types of public concerts - namely those she calls ‘charity fundraisers’, ‘entrepreneur subscription series’, and ‘series organized by a friends of music society’ - is quite good. I can offer evidence of one additional amateur concert series held by a ‘Gesellschaft der Musikliebhaber’ in the summer of 1789 in the gardens of the palace of Prince Liechtenstein; the complete text of the notice for the final concert of this series is given in the appendix to this review under the date 27 September 1789. Also listed in the appendix are announce-

23 ‘Morgen den 3. dies wird Madama Todi ihr erstes abonirtes Konzert auf der Mehlgrube geben. Diejenigen, die nicht aboniet [sic] sind, und doch diese Konzerten mit Ihrer Gegenwart beehren wollen, können auch beym Eintritte an der Thüre Billets erhalten’. {Wiener Zeitung, Saturday, 2 March 1782, page 18). Also see the listing in the Addenda and Corrigenda to the present review. Hanslick mentions these concerts in Geschichte des Concertwesens, p. 103.

116

ments from Viennese periodicals for a previously unknown concert series in the Trattner Casino in Advent 1784 (a series in which Mozart could conceivably have taken part) and for a concert of wind music in the Augarten in March 1785 organized by the entrepreneur Philipp Jakob Martin, whose activities between 1782 and 1791 have not hitherto been documented.

Vienna did not have a hall devoted exclusively to concerts until well into the nineteenth century. Morrow’s third chapter covers the principal venues for public concerts before such a hall was built: the Burgtheater, the Kärntnertor­theater, the Theater in der Leopoldstadt, the Theater auf der Wieden (also known as the Freihaus theater), the Theater an der Wien, the Mehlgrube, Ignaz Jahn’s restaurant, and various public gardens.24 Morrow’s discussion of these venues concentrates on dimensions and seating capacities. She erroneously refers to the standard unit of length in eighteenth-century Vienna as a ‘Claster’; it should be ‘Clafter’ (modern spelling ‘Klafter’), a unit analogous to the English fathom, and corresponding to the distance between the tips of the middle fingers of a man with outstretched arms. The floorplan of the Kärntnertortheater reproduced as Plate 10 of Morrow’s book (p. 80) clearly shows the spelling ‘Clafter’. Morrow’s account of the metric equivalents of the unit is confused; she gives 5 ‘Claster’ as 9.5 meters, but 10 ‘Claster’ as 18.4 meters.25 The first is approximately correct: a standard Viennese Klafter was equivalent to 1.8965 meters, or, for most practical purposes, 1.9 meters.26

Scales in Klafter are found on many of the surviving floor plans of the Kärntnertortheater and the old Burgtheater, and Morrow has used these scales to calculate the dimensions of the theatres.27 The results of her calculations are

24 Two theatres are omitted, apparently because Morrow is not aware that concerts took place in them: the Bauernfeindischer Saal in the Josefsladt suburb and the Theater auf der Landstraße. Neither omission is especially grave, since the number of documented concerts in each theatre is relatively small. Concerts in both are listed in Emil Karl Bliimml and Gustav Gugitz, Alt-Wiener Thespiskarren (Vienna: Anton Schroll, 1925). Two concerts and an entr’acte in the Theater auf der Landstraße are listed in the appendix to the present review (the entr’acte, a flute concerto played by the boy Postpischei, is included in Morrow’s concert calendar index). Concerts in the Bauernfeindischer Saal will be included in my subsequent study of Viennese concert life before 1780.

25 Pp. 78 and 81. She gives no source for her conversion factors.26 See the article ‘Klafter’ by Fr. Noback in Allgemeine Encyklopädie der Wissenschaften und Künste,

ed. J. S. Ersch and J. G. Gruber (Leipzig: F. A. Brockhaus, 1884/Reprint, Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1984), Volume 36, p. 346.

12 Morrow is not the first to have done so; see Otto G. Schindler, ‘Der Zuschauerraum des Burgtheaters im 18. Jahrhundert: Eine baugeschichtliche Skizze', Maske und Kothurn 22 (1976): 20-53; idem, ‘Das Publikum des Burgtheaters in der Josephinischen Ära’, in Das Burgtheater und sein Publikum, ed. Margaret Dietrich (Vienna: Verlag der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1976): 11-95; and Konrad Zobel and Frederick E. Warner, ‘The Old Burgtheater: A Structural History, 1741-1888’, Theater Studies 19 (1972/73): 19-53. Daniel Heartz draws on Zobel and Warner in ‘Nicolas Jadot and the Building of the Burgtheater’, The Musical Quarterly 68 (January 1982): 1-31.

117

rather confusingly presented. Her measurements of the interior dimensions of the old Burgtheater, which she has derived from one of several surviving floor plans of the theatre dating from 1778, are given in metres in the text, but in feet in Table 7 (p. 75).28 Morrow states that her calculations indicate a total inter­ior length of 42 rather than 38 meters; she does not cite a source for the latter figure,29 and, since she does not list her Klafter measurements, it is difficult to evaluate her claim. My measurements of the original plan shows that the total length of the interior of the Burgtheater, from the inside of the structural wall at the rear of the auditorium to the inside of the structural wall at the rear of the stage house, was 23£ Klafter, or a bit over 44.5 meters. Her desig­nations of widths are misleading. What she calls ‘wall to wall’ in her Table 7 is the distance between the fronts of facing boxes at the auditorium’s widest point (a distance I calculate to be 6 Klafter, that is, 11.38 meters, or around 37 feet 4 inches, rather than the 39 feet she gives). Her ‘interior width’, on the other hand, is the distance between the insides of the main structural side walls of the theatre. Morrow states that the auditorium of the Kärntner tor- theater was wider than that of the Burgthealer (p. 81), although her own measurements show it to have been about one Klafter narrower. Morrow does not cite a source for her estimate of the seating capacity of the Burg- theater, but her figures of 1000 to 1350 are precisely those given by Otto Schindler in his careful estimation of the theatre’s capacity based on floor plans, box-office reports from the Kcglevich Archive, and subscription ticket sales.30

The caption to Morrow’s Plate 10, a plan of the Kärntnertortheater, gives a date of 1784 (the same date is given in the text), although ‘Marty 1748’ is clearly

n The caption to the facsimile of the floorplan (p. 74) gives the date as 1779, although the date is given in the text and in the heading to Table 7 as 1778 (p. 75). Morrow does not give the locations of any of the plans or pictures reproduced in her plates. The plan of the Burgthealer which she reproduces as Plate 5, is found in A-Wn, Albertina, Graphische Sammlung, Architekturzeichnungen, Mappe 64, Umschlag 3. Two slightly different arrangements of the rear of the auditorium are shown on different plans of the ground floor of the Burgthealer. One plan shows an extension of the auditorium back toward the rear structural wall of the theatre (this is the plan shown in Morrow’s Plate 5). Other plans lack this extension (see, for example, Abbildung 7 in Schindler, ‘Das Publikum des Burgtheaters’). It is not clear which of these plans was actually realized, although a seating chart from 1782 (see Morrow’s Plate 4) seems to suggest the extension was built. Measurements of the length of the auditorium obviously depend on which plan one measures; I have not attempted to sort out this problem here.

29 The source is apparently Zobel and Warner, ‘The Old Burgtheater’. However, Morrow claims incorrectly that Zobel and Warner derived their measurements from the 1778 plan, when in fact they derived them from an earlier plan that depicts anterooms to the rear of the stage. These anterooms were later removed, accounting for the discrepancy between Morrow’s measurement and that of Zobel and Warner.

10 See Schindler, 'Das Publikum des Burgtheaters’, 30-34.

118

legible on the facsimile.31 The date is of some importance, since the Kärntnertor- theater burned down in 1761, and the interior of the rebuilt theatre was quite different. Even so, Morrow’s measurement of the length of the auditorium of the old Kärntner tor theater is basically correct - 10 Klafter from the back of the boxes to the proscenium line (I measure 9\ Klafter) - but she converts this figure incorrectly using 1.84 metres per Klafter instead of 1.8965 metres. Her measurement of the width of the Kärntnertortheater is a bit narrow, and likewise incorrectly converted. I measure 5^ Klafter between the fronts of the boxes at the widest point of the auditorium (10.27 metres).

Morrow’s Plates 2 through 12 reproduce in facsimile several drawings, prints, and floor plans of the Burgtheater and the Kärntnertortheater. The reproductions are black and white, and rather murky; some have been so reduced in size that significant details have been lost. Plate 2, a pen drawing of the old Burgtheater, is dated in Morrow’s caption ‘before 1800’, but the drawing is certainly much earlier; the theatre still lacks the distinctive facade designed for it by Nicolas Jadot, and completed in 1759 by Paccassi.32 Morrow’s attempt to estimate the capacity of the Burgtheater and Kärntnertortheater using seating charts from the 1820s (see her Plates 6 and 11) is unjustified, since the interiors of both theatres were modified in the intervening years.

Morrow calls public theatres not under court jurisdiction ‘private theaters’, but this term is misleading. Such theatres as the Theater in der Leopoldstadt and the Freihaustheater were indeed private in the sense that individuals owned them; but performances in them were public. On the other hand, private theatres did exist in the homes of some aristocrats; only invited guests could attend performances in these theatres, and (presumably) no admission was charged. The theatres at Eszterhäza, Schönbrunn, and Laxenburg are the best known Austrian theatres of this type, but there were several others, such as the theatre in the palace of Prince Auersperg, where Mozart’s Idomeneo was performed in 1786.

Morrow gives an unclear account of the history of the Theater auf der Wieden (the Freihaustheater) and its successor, the still-existing Theater an der Wien:

The Theater an der Wien actually began its existence in 1787 as the Theater auf der Wieden under the direction of Christian Rossbach. Johann Friedl took over in March of the following year, but the real force behind the company was Friedl’s companion, Elenore Schikaneder. Upon his death, he inherited the theater and turned it over to her husband Emanuel, who moved the company to a new building on the other side of the Wien River. Renamed the Theater an der Wien, the new house opened on June 13, 1801. (p. 85)

31 The plan of the Kärnlnertortheater is found in the Historisches Museum der Stadt Wien, I. 2397. The plan comes from the archive of the Wiener Stadtbauamt, and is labelled ‘Ratificierler Riß, vermög Regi“: Decret / dt0: 12‘. und Stadt Räthl: Decret dt°: 14. Martÿ [1]748. / die Vergrösserung des Com(m]oedien Haus, beÿm / Kärntner Thor betreffend]’. The plan itself is dated 13 March 1748.

33 See Heartz, ‘Nicolas Jadot’, 13. Zobel and Warner date this drawing 'ca. 1743’ (op. cit., p. 23).

119

This is literally true, but implies that Schikaneder moved the company to the new theatre shortly after Friedel’s death. However, Friedel died in March 1789, whereas the company remained in the Theater auf der Wieden until 1801.33 Morrow confuses the Theater auf der Wieden and the Theater an der Wien elsewhere in the book: she states, for example, that Constanze Mozart gave a concert on 11 April 1797 in the Theater an der Wien, which had yet to be built at the time.34 To avoid confusion, I shall refer to the Theater auf der Wieden as the Freihaustheater.

As Julia Moore has pointed out in a recent article, music historians have generally proved to be poor economists, but Morrow has delved more deeply into musical economics than music historians usually have done.35 In her fourth chapter, ‘Business and Financial Aspects of Concert Giving’, Morrow surveys incomes, inflation, and the cost of living in Vienna during the last decades of the eighteenth century. This survey is subject to many of the weaknesses typical of other treatments of musical economics by music historians: she draws unjustified comparisons between historical and modern incomes, and non-cash aspects of the economy are not taken into account; but the reader is referred to Moore’s writings on these issues. My comments will be confined to a few small factual points.

Most writers on eighteenth-century Viennese music have treated the ducat as if it were uniformly worth 4\ gulden (or 270 kreuzer, there being 60 kreuzer in a gulden); but the imperial ducat had this value only from I February 1786. Morrow attempts to rectify this misunderstanding, but her explanation does not go far enough: The gold Austrian Ducat originally was worth 250 Kreutzer, but its value steadily increased to 270 Kreutzer (4j Gulden) by 1786’ (p. 110). In fact, the situation was more complicated. Several sorts of ducat were in circulation in Austria, including the ‘imperial’ (which Morrow refers to as the ‘Austrian’), the ‘Kremnitz’, and the ‘ordinary’. Each had a slightly different value based on the quality of gold from which it was made, and these values, rather than climbing gradually and continuously, increased by jumps upon imperial decree. One such decree, issued in 1786, set the value of both the imperial and the Kremnitz ducat to 270 kreuzer, or 4\ gulden.36

33 See Otto Erich Deutsch, ‘Das Freihaus Theater auf der Wieden’, Mitteilungen des Vereines für Geschichte der Stadt Wien, Band XVI (1937): 30-73; this article is not cited by Morrow. Morrow states that the Theater auf der Wieden continued to operate until 1809 (see p. 85, note 36, citing Anton Bauer’s 150 Jahre Theater an der Wien), but this is certainly incorrect. FriedePs name was more commonly spelled with the second ‘e’.

3< P. 124. Morrow uses the abbreviation ‘W’ to refer to ‘Theater an der Wien’ in her public concert calendar, but has no separate abbreviation for the Theater auf der Wieden. She erroneously uses ‘W’ throughout for concerts before 1801 that actually took place in the Theater auf der Wieden.

35 See Julia Moore, ‘Mozart in the Marketplace’, Journal o f the Royal Musical Association 114: 1 (Spring 1989): 18-42; idem, ‘Beethoven and Musical Economics’ (diss., University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1987); and idem, Beethoven in the Market-Place (forthcoming).

36 All official proclamations concerning currency in the Habsburg empire during this period are transcribed in Siegfried Becher, Das österreichische Münzwesen vom Jahre 1524 bis 1838 in historischer, statistischer und legislativer Hinsicht..., 2 voi., (Vienna: In Commission bei Mösle’s sei.

120

In spite of her awareness of the changing rates for the ducat, Morrow nevertheless occasionally errs in converting it. On page 122 she writes: ‘For the star singers at a gala oratorio, the honorarium sometimes reached 50 Ducats or 230 Gulden, quite a tidy sum’.37 But her figure of 230 gulden, equal to 13,800 kreuzer, implies conversion at a rate of 276 kreuzer per ducat. No type of ducat was ever worth so much; 270 kreuzer was the maximum. At a rate of 270 kreuzer per ducat (in force beginning I February 1786), 50 imperial ducats would have been worth 225 gulden. On the same page, Morrow states that ‘Prince Colloredo tipped each of the Archbishop of Salzburg’s musicians 5 Ducats (23 Gulden)’. Yet, in 1781, when the event took place (the reference is from a letter of Mozart’s dated 24 March 1781), the imperial ducat was worth 256 kreuzer; thus 5 imperial ducats would have been equal to 21 gulden 20 kreuzer, not 23 gulden.38 The differences may seem trivial, but the gulden was relatively a large unit of currency.

Morrow similarly errs in calculating Mozart’s income from a series of subscription concerts in 1785: \ . . . with over 150 subscribers at 3 Ducats each (13£ gulden) (for 6 concerts) [sic] he would have taken in at least 450 Ducats, or 2025 Gulden, easily clearing 1400 Gulden’ (p. 135). But in 1785, the imperial ducat was worth 260 kreuzer, or 4 gulden 20 kreuzer. Thus 3 ducats were worth 13 gulden, and 450 ducats came to 1950 gulden. Again, not a huge discrepancy, but given the considerable heat generated by the literature on Mozart’s finances, it is best to be accurate. On page 123, Morrow states that \ souverain d’or was worth 9 gulden, but this is also incorrect. A souverain d’or was worth 3 ducats. At the time referred to (the citation is from Mozart’s letter of 16 February 1785), the imperial ducat was worth 4 gulden 20 kreuzer, and thus \ souverain d’or would have been worth 6£ gulden.39

It is generally held that the Viennese musical public was fickle, and its allegiance to popular virtuosi fleeting; Mozart is, of course, commonly supposed to have been the most prominent victim of this fickleness. Morrow is at pains elsewhere in her book (as well as in an earlier article based on her dissertation research) to challenge the notion that Mozart’s popularity declined drastically during the last years of his life. But in her chapter on the economics of concert giving, Morrow implies that he and other Viennese performers were at the mercy of rapid changes in musical fashion.40 In the course of arguing that performers

Witwe und Braumiiller, 1838). For a more detailed discussion of ducat values, see my ‘Mozart’s Fee for Così fan lutte', Journal o f the Royal Musical Association 116: 2 (1991): 211-235.

37 No source is cited for the claim about singers’ honoraria.38 At this time, a Kremnitz ducat was worth 258 kreuzer, and an ordinary ducat (as well as a Salzburg

ducat) was worth 254 kreuzer. Thus 5 Kremnitz ducats would have been worth 2I£ gulden, and 5 ordinary ducats 21 gulden 10 kreuzer.

39 Some confusion is possible here; the value of a ‘ganzer oder .. . doppelter Souverains-d’or’ was 3 ducats. A second coin, called 'ein halber, oder . . . einfacher Souverains-d’or’ was worth half as much; see Becher, Das österreichische Münzwesen, 328 (which gives a table of coins in circulation in the empire in 1779, and their gulden equivalents).

40 See Mary Sue Morrow, ‘Mozart and Viennese Concert Life’, Musical Times 126 (August 1985): 453-454.

121

normally built audiences for their public concerts by first appearing in private concerts. Morrow states:

. . . but the time span during which a particular artist was in demand was relatively short, since the semi-social private world thrived on the newest and the most sensational. Thus, even though the young Mozart declared a musician could easily earn a living giving lessons and playing at private concerts, it - as Mozart himself was to learn - definitely did not provide long-term security.41

If the musical public ‘thrived on the newest and most sensational’, it should be possible to show, using Morrow’s concert calendars, that local Viennese virtuosi typically appeared in concerts for two or three years, then disappeared from the scene. In fact, the concert calendars show something quite different.

First, it should be noted that documentation of private concerts is too skimpy to justify generalizations about what may or may not have been in fashion. Although Mozart’s participation in private concerts is well-documented in his correspondence, exceedingly little is otherwise known about performers in private concerts and what they performed. The few surviving particulars belie Morrow’s hypothesis; in several instances, celebrated performers appeared in documented private concerts only after having performed in public for many years. The violinist Franz Clement’s first documented appearance in a private concert took place in Advent 1804, although his first recorded public appearance in Vienna was in 1788. The first documented private appearance by either of the cello-playing Kraft brothers took place, according to Morrow’s calendar, on 16 March 1802, although the brothers performed together in a public con­cert at least as early as 1792. While all three artists may well have appeared in undocumented private concerts much earlier, the point is that Morrow’s data do not support her hypothesis. In fact, one is hard pressed to come up with any examples of performers who appeared privately before appearing publicly.

The theory of fleeting popularity does not hold up any better when Morrow’s data on public concerts are taken into account. It is important here to draw a distinction between singers and instrumentalists, although Morrow does not do so. Almost all of the principal singers from the Italian opera, and some from the German opera as well, appeared regularly on Viennese concert programmes throughout their engagements in Vienna. According to Morrow’s calendars, Caterina Cavalieri appeared in 53 concerts between 1776 and 1792, Therese Gassmann in at least 71 between 1793 and 1809, and Aloysia Lange in 27 between 1780 and 1794; the list could go on at some length. It is not surprising that singers appeared frequently, since oratorios like those produced by the Tonkiinstler- Societät regularly required their services as soloists. My Table 1 shows, however, that many local instrumentalists also gave concerts regularly, sometimes over spans of more than 30 years. This could hardly have happened if the public had been as fickle as Morrow maintains.

41 P. 121. It is not clear what is meant by ‘semi-social private world’; perhaps ‘semi-private social world’ was intended. ..

122

Table I

Viennese instrumentalists other than Mozart who appeared as soloists in concerts over periods ofmore than three years, 1776-1810

All data are drawn from the concert calendars in Mary Sue Morrow, Concert Life in Haydn's Vienna. The column ‘Number of Appearances’ counts both public and private concerts. Appearances as a composer or director are not counted, but appearances as a member of a chamber group are. Only performers who appeared five times or more are included. Decimals are rounded to the nearest tenth.

Period Spanned Number o f AppearancesPerformer by Concerts Appearances per YearJosepha Auernhammer, pianist 1782-1806 20 .8Franz Josef Bär, clarinetist 1791-1803 7 .5Ludwig van Beethoven, pianist 1795-1804 20 2.0Franz Bernardi, flutist 1803-1806 5 1.3Mane Bigot de Morogues, pianist 1804-1809 5 .8Franz Böhm, violinist 1797-1804 9a 1.1Bazyli Bohdanowicz, violinist 1785-1802 6 .3Franz Clement, violinist 1788-1810 27 1.2Josef Czerwenka, oboist 1795-1806 9 .8Anton Eberl, pianist 1784-1808 8 .3Peter Fuchs, violinist 1787-1799 6 .5Sebastian Grohmann, oboist 1798-1806 6 .7Anton Heberle, flutist 1806-1810 7b 1.4Joseph Hofmann, violinist 1782-1793 5C .4Fräulein Hohenadel, pianist 1803-1807 5 1.0Marianne Kirchgessner, glass harmonica 1791-1806 5d .3Anton and Nikolaus Kraft, cellists 1792-1810 14' .7Conradin Kreutzer, pianist 1804-1810 7 1.0Joseph Mayseder, violinist 1800-1810 17 1.5Josepha Miiflner, harpist 1784-1809 28 1.1Maria Theresia von Paradis, pianist 1787-1798 6 .5Friedrich Ramm, oboist 1776-1787 6 .5Cäsar Scheidl, pianist 1785-1792 6 .8Philipp Schindlöcker, cellist 1781-1804 10f .4Ignaz Schuppanzigh, violinist 1797-1810 At least 14* 1.0Anton and Johann Stadler, clarinetists 1773-1806 19" .6Teimer brothers, oboists' 1793-1807 9 .6Alois Tomasini d. J., violinist 1794-1806 & .5JoserTriebensee d. J., oboist 1792-1799 7k .9Anton Weidinger, trumpeter 1798-1805 6 .8Maximilian Willmann, cellist 1784-1801 5' .3Anton Wranitzky, violinist 1785-1805 6m .3Joseph Zisller, violinist 1772-1789 7" .4

Average frequency .8

Notes to Table 1

a. Most appearances in entr’actes.b. Four appearances in Advent 1810.c. All known appearances in Tonkünstler-Societäl concerts.d. Three appearances in 1791 and two in 1806.e. Includes performances by either Anton or Nikolaus alone, or both together.f. A performance by a ‘Herr Schindlöcker d. J.’ of a violin concerto on 24 May 1804 is omitted

from the total.

123

g. Schuppanzigh probably performed more often than indicated here in the concert series that he organized, but only 14 performances by him are securely documented in Morrow’s calendars.

h. Since it is not always known which of the two Stadler brothers performed in a given concert, the number given here includes performances by either brother individually, or by both together. Morrow’s concert calendar index has Johann playing in three concerts after his death.

i. Johann, Franz, or Philipp.j. It is not certain that all of these concerts are rightly assigned to the younger Tomasini rather

than to his father Luigi.k. All known appearances at Tonkünstler-Socielät concerts.l. A concert on 4 April 1789 listed under Willman’s name in Morrow’s concert calendar index is

not included in the calendar itself.m. Performances on 19 Feb 1796 and 8 Nov 1785 possibly by Paul Wranitzky.n. Morrow’s calendar index has three separate listings for Zistler.

My Table 1 is analytically unsophisticated. It does not take into account the relative paucity or abundance of concert reports in various years or for various performers, nor does it distinguish between performers who appeared as members of a Kapelle, and those who, like Mozart, appeared completely at their own risk and for their own benefit. Even at this coarse level, however, certain patterns are evident. Contrary to Morrow’s implication, quite a lot of Viennese instrumental soloists appeared in concerts over periods of many years. It is also evident, however, that most of them did not appear often; the average fre­quency is less than once a year. Some musicians - such as Beethoven, Franz Clement, and Joseph Mayseder - appeared more frequently, others only once every two or three years. Given the inconsistency of the documentation, the figures in Table 1 have little absolute validity, but it is probably safe to take them as indicative.

In marked contrast to his contemporaries, Mozart appeared extremely often. He appeared as a soloist in public or private concerts at least 71 times in the six years from 1781 to 1786, that is, almost 12 times a year on average. In 1784 alone, he appeared at least 28 times.42 Even allowing for the relatively greater documen­tation of his activities, the difference between Mozart and his contemporaries is striking. It suggests that he may have suffered not so much from the fickleness of the Viennese public as from over-exposure; even a gourmet dish palls if eaten daily. In any event, the apparent dramatic decline in Mozart’s concert appearances after 1786 does not necessarily indicate an eclipse in his popularity. Mozart may simply have tired of giving concerts or found that the financial return did not justify the effort. Alternatively, it may be, as Morrow points out elsewhere, that Mozart did indeed continue to give concerts regularly after 1786, and we simply do not know about them.43 At any rate, it is significant that Mozart’s music did not disappear from Viennese concert programmes, even if he himself did.

n These figures are based on Morrow’s concert calendars, with additions and emendations as listed in the appendix to this review. Doubtful concerts are not included.

° Morrow herself points out in her final chapter that the apparent decrease in the number of Mozart’s concerts could be due to uneven preservation of documentation. She likewise makes the point that Mozart may have tired of giving concerts (page 234). Also see her ‘Mozart and Viennese Concert Life’.

124

Morrow also attempts to estimate the costs of putting on concerts and to trace the steps in obtaining permission to do so. As she rightly points out, documentary sources bearing on these questions are extremely thin. Most of the police records dealing with concerts were destroyed in the burning of the Viennese Justizpalast in 1927. Oddly, the financial records of the court theatres preserve no trace whatsoever of concerts between 1776 and about 1792: no rental fees, no box-office receipts, no expense records, no gifts to performers,44 not even records of the cost of the guards required at every theatrical performance. This lack of documentation is especially strange, because the financial records were otherwise scrupulous. Receipts and expenses of the public balls held in the large and small Redoutensäale during carnival season - events resembling concerts in certain organizational respects - are included in the theatrical records, whereas those of concerts are not.45 As a consequence, we have almost no idea how one went about arranging a concert in the court theatres during Mozart’s lifetime. Morrow extrapolates backward from a handful of facts known about the process under the theatrical regime of Peter von Braun in the 1790s, but evidence suggests that von Braun’s operating procedures differed considerably from those of his predecessors. Box-office reports in the Keglevich Archive show that concerts in the court theatres in the 1770s were at least occasionally organized on a percentage basis: 50% of the net to the theatre and 50% to the concert organizer.46 An entry in the theatrical account book for 1795 shows that the singer Catherina Plomer-Salvini likewise received one half of the net receipts from her concert on 20 June of that year - the relatively modest sum of 104 gulden 29 ̂kreuzer.47 If this arrangement was also in effect in the 1780s (and, it must be pointed out, there is no known evidence that it was), a performer’s potential receipts would have been considerably lower than Morrow and most other writers have assumed.

Morrow gives no source for her statement that ‘substituting musicians at the court theatres, regardless of their instrument, received anywhere from 2 to 6

44 With the exception of rewards to the performers in a concert held in honour of the ‘Countess of the North’ on Christmas 1781 (see the listing in the appendix to this review).

45 Morrow notes this absence (p. 123). Most surviving theatrical financial records from this period are in the form of annual or semi-annual reports summarizing income and expenses (Vienna, Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Generalintendanz der Hoftheater, Sonderreihe 11-34). Surviving weekly theatrical ledgers for the years 1789-1797 (Vienna, A-Wn, Theatersammlung M 4000) likewise contain no entries regarding rental fees or concert receipts.

46 This point will be discussed in more detail in my subsequent study of Viennese concert life before 1780.

47 See the listing for 20 June 1795 in the appendix to this review.

125

Gulden for their services’ (p. 128).48 My investigation of theatrical records from the 1780s and early 1790s strongly suggests that substitutes in the theatres were paid only one gulden per performance. Some payments of a single gulden are recorded, and multiple services are sometimes compensated with a prime number of gulden (such as 17 or 19), almost certainly implying a rate of payment of one gulden per performance.49 It seems plausible that one gulden may have been the going rate for orchestral players in concerts too, although there is no known direct evidence that this was so. Morrow’s analysis of other concert expenses - advertising, lighting, and so on - is well thought out, although she does not take into account bureaucratic fees, taxes, or bribes.50

Morrow lists in her Table 17 (p. 136) the documented receipts from several concerts. Some of these receipts are extraordinarily high; six of ten before 1800 exceed 1000 gulden, the highest being the 4088 gulden 30 kreuzer Joseph Haydn reaped from a performance of Die Schöpfung in the Burgtheater in 1799. Morrow might have pointed out that such large sums cannot be accounted for by ticket sales alone. Theatrical records show that operas and plays in the Burgtheater -even extremely successful ones - rarely grossed more than 800 gulden before 1797; thus a significant portion of the sums garnered at these concerts must have consisted of gifts, perhaps supplemented by the resale of subscription seats and boxes.51 One omission from her table is Leopold Mozart’s report that the violinist Norman earned ‘95 duggate’ (411 imperial gulden 40 kreuzer) from a concert in Advent 1785.52

** She cites 'VIENNA-INTENDENZ’ [sic] (that is, Vienna, Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Generalintendanz der Hoftheater) without further specification as her source for this statement.

49 Data from the weekly ledger, A-Wn, Theatersammlung, M 4000. Examples of single-gulden payments to substituting instrumentalists include those to Philipp Korner in the week 31 July to 6 August 1790, and to Franz Pössinger in the period 5-8 March 1791. Compensation for appearances in private concerts and operas could be much higher. According to an uncatalogued document in the Hausarchiv Liechtenstein, Vienna, orchestral players in a performance of a Righini opera at the Liechtenstein palace received two gulden per rehearsal and one ducal per performance (at that time, an imperial ducat was worth 4 gulden 20 kreuzer). The leader of the orchestra, Franz Asplmayr, was paid one ducal per rehearsal and two ducats per performance. My thanks to Julia Moore for bringing this document to my attention.

50 Compare Dittersdorfs description in his autobiography of the considerable costs (‘ansehnliche Kosten’) of his Viennese concerts of 1786, cited in the appendix to this review under the date 20 May 1786.

51 A complete list of the box-office receipts from all plays and operas performed in the Burglhealer in the seasons 1789/90 and 1790/91 is given in my ‘Mozart Reception in Vienna, 1787-1791’ (forthcoming). These receipts are recorded in the ledger, A-Wn, Theatersammlung, M 4000. Concert receipts may sometimes have been higher than the average receipts for plays and operas: whereas all boxes were normally subscribed during the theatrical season (at least during the late 1780s), individual box tickets may have been sold separately for concerts.

52 Further documentation of concert receipts survives in the Keglevich Archive, and in the archive of the Tonkünsfler-Societät (Vienna, Stadt- und Landesarchiv, Haydn-Verein Archiv). 1 intend to report on these receipts in my subsequent study of Viennese concert life before 1780, and in a separate study of Mozart’s relationship to the Tonkünstler-Societät. The farewell concert given by the soprano Nancy Storace, listed in Morrow’s Table 17 as having taken place in 1788, took place on 23 February 1787 (the concert is given correctly in Morrow’s public concert calendar).

126

In Chapter 5, Morrow analyzes the content of Viennese public concert programmes. Because this analysis appeals, at least tacitly, to statistics (although Morrow claims it does not) it is worth adding some general observations to those made by Morrow. Her calendar includes 419 public concerts between 1770 and 1799.” Relatively complete programmes are preserved for 229 of these, or around 55%. Of those for which complete programmes are known, fully 103 are Tonkünstler-Societät concerts. After 1800, the proportion of concerts whose programmes are preserved increases somewhat, although not as much as Morrow suggests. Of 349 public concerts between 1800 and 1810, relatively complete programmes are preserved for 201, or 58%. Of these, 44 are Tonkünstler-Societät concerts, and 80 others are similar oratorio performances or special benefit concerts for charity. These oratorios and benefits taken together account for almost two-thirds of the known complete programmes in the first decade of the nineteenth century. Clearly, generalizations about programme content need to be evaluated in the light of the sparsity and unbalanced distribution of the data.

That said, Morrow is perfectly right in claiming that eighteenth-century concert programmes were typically much more various in content than their modern counterparts:

An audience . . . expected to be entertained with variety, to be dazzled by an instrumentalist’s virtuosity, to applaud a favorite opera aria, to hear the latest symphony, all in one evening. Even cantatas and oratorios, varied genres in and of themselves, were often preceded by unrelated symphonies or overtures and almost invariably featured a concerto during the intermission. The single-medium concert actually originated during the nineteenth century, when the con­templation of music became a much more sober affair, and when admiration of virtuosos intensified into the form of personality cults, (p. 141)

She then proceeds to make a number of well-supported generalizations: individual performers never appeared in public without an orchestra; performers who organized concerts for their own benefit usually invited other virtuosi to appear with them; and symphonies, which invariably opened such con­certs, typically started with a bang to signal to the audience that the concert had begun.54 According to Morrow, surviving evidence indicates that eighteenth-century concerts were not normally the marathon affairs they are usually said to have been. With the aid of estimated timings for indiv­idual numbers, she derives an average length of 2£ hours to 2 hours 40 minutes, only slightly longer than an average modern concert; however, she

w Morrow’s listings of concerts before 1770 are omitted from these totals because of the shortcomings pointed out earlier.

54 On the other hand, concertos, which never opened concerts, sometimes began softly; on this point, see my dissertation on the Viennese concerto. One well-known example of a concerto that starts softly is Mozart’s Concerto in G-major for piano (K. 453).

127

has probably underestimated to some extent, since she has omitted set-up time and intermissions from her calculations. Count Bentheim-Steinfurt, writing of a concert given by Mozart in Frankfurt on 15 October 1790, states: ‘The music lasted for three hours, which came about because there were very long pauses between each piece’.55

Morrow’s analysis of programme content is not always consistent with the data in her concert calendars. She states that concert performances of operas (which she oddly refers to as ‘performances of operas as oratorios’) were rare, and she cites only three examples. But she omits at least three other concert performances of operas listed in her calendar: Traetta’s Ifigenia in Tauride on 3 March 1776 (the second Sunday in Lent), ‘Orfee’ (probably Gluck’s Orfeo ed Euridice) on 11 March 1786 (the second Saturday in Lent), and Paisiello’s La serva padrona in 1793.56 She also overlooks the operatic pasticci L'ape musicale and L ’ape musicale rinnuovata, which are not listed in her calendars.

Since documentary evidence of concerts is quite inconsistently preserved, using such evidence by itself as the basis for an analysis of the concert repertory is bound to be unsuccessful. Morrow does not comment on the discrepancy between what is known to have been performed, what is known from catalogues and advertisements to have been composed and marketed, and what survives in modern collections. Around 90 concertos by Wagenseil are known, but no performance of a Wagenseil concerto is listed in Morrow’s calendars. Other prolific Viennese composers of concertos, such as Leopold Hofmann, Joseph Anton Steffan, Johann Baptist Vanhal, Franz Anton Hoffmeister, Emanuel Förster, and even Joseph Haydn, appear seldom or not at all in Morrow’s calendars.57 Yet it is virtually certain that most of the concertos by these com­posers were written with specific public or private performances in mind. Similarly, Morrow’s discussion of the repertory of Viennese instrumental concertos overlooks concertos for winds, concertos for cello, concertos for contrabass, violin concertos before 1800, and concertos for more than one soloist.

55 ‘La Musique dura dont trois heures ce qui provient puisque entre chaque Piece il eut des pauses très longues.’ Cited in Otto Erich Deutsch, Mozart: Die Dokumente seines Lebens (Kassel, etc.: Bärenreiter, 1961), 330.

56 The opera La serva padrona was, as Morrow points out, almost certainly Paisiello’s version, not Pergolesi’s. An additional performance of the opera in 1786 (not cited by Morrow) is recorded by Zinzendorf, who explicitly states that Paisiello, not Pergolesi, was the composer. A copy of Paisiello’s opera (with his signature on the dedication) is found in A-Wn, Mus. Hs. 17802. This copy formerly belonged to the Viennese imperial library.

57 On page 155, Morrow states that Haydn ‘wrote few instrumental concertos’, although he composed perhaps as many as ten concertos for keyboard and more than twenty for other instruments.

128

Table 2

Chamber works performed in Viennese public concerts, 1778-1799, but not listed in Morrow’sTable 20

Date Chamber Work(s) Performed16 Mar 1778 Duets for violin and cello, performed by Janitsch and Reicha.23 Jan 1780 ‘Salterio’ sonata with accompaniment of Bassetl, performed by Regina Heiss.17 Mar 1782 Oboe and bassoon duo, performed by Wenzel Kautzner and Josef Triebensee.18 Aug 1782 Arrangement of Die Entführung aus dem Serail for wind band {Harmonie).

6 Apr 1783 Wind band music by Johann Went, performed at concert of the Tonkünstler- Socie ta t -

1 Sep 1783 Six string quartets by Hoffmeister at a concert organized by the publisher Christoph Torricella.

29 Apr 1784 Mozart sonata for violin and piano, performed with Regina Strinasacchi.21 Dec 1784 Six string quartets by Ignaz Pleyel, at a concert organized by Torricella.12 Mar 1785 Concert by ‘Musicians of the Emperor’ (the emperor’s Harmonie).2 Mar 1787 Wenl’s arrangements for wind band of pieces from Una cosa rara.

24 Mar 1787 Duet for cello and violin by Reicha, performed by Peter Fuchs and Christian Smrczka.

I Apr 1787 Arrangement for wind band of pieces from Una cosa rara.13 Oct 1787 Unaccompanied horn duets, performed by the Böck brothers.22 Feb 1788 Went’s arrangements for wind band of pieces from L'arbore di Diana.29 Feb 1788 The same.22 Dec 1789 Mozart’s Clarinet Quintet, K.581, at a concert of the Tonkünstler-Societät.16 Apr 1791 Druschetzky, music.for 21 winds.19 Aug 1791 Mozart, Quintet for glass harmonica, flute, oboe, viola, and violoncello, K.6I7.14 Jan 1792 Solo and accompanied pieces for assorted flutes, performed by Francesco Vicaro.28 Feb 1792 ‘Quintet on the viola d’amour’, Johann Toschi.11 Mar 1792 Mandolin trio by Johann Hofmann.28 Dec 1792 ‘Quartet on the violin’ performed by Franz Clement.23 Dec 1793 Trio for two oboes and English horn by Went.23 Dec 1797 Beethoven, variations on ‘Là ci darem la mano’, for two oboes and English horn

/ U / n A Q O \

2 Apr( W O v J AÖ),

1798 Beethoven, Quintet for piano and winds, op. 16.

129

All data are drawn from Morrow’s public concert calendar. This table does not list unaccompanied solo performances, nor does it list works designated in Morrow’s concert calendars simply as ‘piece’, although these could also have been chamber works.

Morrow states that ‘[performances ofl works which can be considered chamber music - for piano and solo instrument, for two solo instruments, or for small instrumental ensemble - increased dramatically after 1 8 0 0 . . (p. 161). But her Table 20, which includes only seven performances of chamber works before 1800, does not take full account of the data in her concert calendars. My Table 2 lists 25 further performances of chamber works before 1800 culled from her public concert calendar; when combined with her seven, the total exceeds the 25 that she lists for the years 1800 to 1810. To be sure, several of the works in Table 2 are arrangements for Harmonie, the wind ensemble so fashionable with the Habsburg nobility in the latter part of the eighteenth century. Morrow was perhaps misled by her own use of the term ‘wind band’ into thinking of these works as something other than chamber music - and it could be argued that operatic arrangements for wind ensemble should not properly be classified as

chamber music. Be that as it may, more than half of the works in Table 2 are chamber works by any definition. Morrow also makes the perplexing statement that ‘no public performance of a string quartet was uncovered’ (p. 161), when, in fact, her own calendar includes at least two, and possibly three, depending on whether or not one interprets Clement’s ‘quartet on the violin’ in 1792 as referring to a string quartet.58

The beginning of Chapter 6, ‘Performers and Performance Practice’, is weak. Much of the section on keyboard instruments is devoted to a rather confusing discussion of the extent to which the harpsichord was used as an accompanying instrument after 1780. Few significant Viennese performers, and almost none of the significant keyboard composers before 1800 are discussed (excepting, of course, Mozart and Beethoven). Anton Eberl is called ‘a rising star’ at the turn of the century, although he was 35 in 1800, and had been performing publicly in Vienna since at least 1784. Morrow does not point out that the keyboard soloists listed in her calendars are almost exclusively local; interestingly, her data seem to show that performances in Vienna by travelling keyboard virtuosi were almost unknown before 1800.

The discussion of prominent string and wind soloists is superficial. Performers on flute and oboe are omitted completely, although both instruments were featured frequently in concertos. Such important oboists as Venturini, Colombazzo, Le Brun, the Triebensees (father and son), Czerwenka, and the various members of the Besozzi, Feriendis and Teimer families are not mentioned, nor are such flutists as Wendling, Rhein, Gehring, and Diilon. The hornist Joseph Leutgeb, for whom Haydn and Mozart composed concertos, is missing from the discussion of important virtuosi on that instrument.

Morrow goes on, in the same chapter, to discuss such aspects of performance practice as orchestral size and the placement of soloists and orchestra. She could have given a more detailed account of the sizes of Viennese theatre orchestras based on the abundant material in Viennese archives; but her figures, showing that the court theatre orchestras averaged around 35 players, are essentially accurate.

It does not follow, however, that concert orchestras must have consisted of 35 players as well, a point Morrow herself makes. She offers no evidence for her estimate that concert orchestras averaged 22 to 23 players; indeed, as she points out, documentation of the size of Viennese concert orchestras is sparse. However, Adalbert Gyrowetz stated in his autobiography that Mozart employed ‘the entire theatre orchestra’ for his subscription concerts in the Mehlgrube.59 Several

SK The two quartet evenings given by the publisher Torricella were dearly promotional in nature, but no less public for being so.

” Biographie des Adalbert Gyrowetz (Vienna: Mechitharislen-Buchdruckerei, 1848), p. 11: ‘Die Sinfonie [i.e,, the symphony by Gyrowetz that Mozart had graciously offered to include in his concert] wurde im Conzert = Saale auf der Mehlgrube durch das vollständige Theater = Orchester aufgeführl, und erhielt allgemeinen Beifall.’

130

reports speak of concert orchestras of 40 players, although this number may have been a convention, similar to the oft-cited figure of 180 for the combined orchestra, chorus, and soloists at concerts of the Tonkünsller-Societät, a group typically numbering around 150.60 At the other end of the spectrum, Count Ludwig von Bentheim-Steinfurt, who attended a concert given by Mozart in Frankfurt in 1790, reported that the orchestra included only five or six violins.61 It is possible that even such modest-sounding forces as those posited by Morrow overstate the norm. If a performer selected works carefully, trumpets and drums could easily have been omitted. Two oboes (perhaps doubling on flute) and two horns would have sufficed for most of the orchestral repertory until at least the early 1790s. Given the financial pressures under which performers laboured, one can easily imagine that symphonies may sometimes have been performed with as few as three first and three second violins in order to minimize expenses. Together with a single violist, cellist, and contrabassist, plus two oboes and two horns, this would have made an orchestra of 13. Orchestras probably also varied in size according to the dimensions of the spaces in which they performed.

Chapter 7, ‘The Treatment of Viennese Concerts in Periodicals’ fits rather uncomfortably with the rest of the book. Reviews of concerts were rare in contemporary Viennese periodicals - indeed, such reviews were almost non­existent before 1800. Nevertheless, Morrow has included a great deal of interesting material in this chapter, although coverage is weighted heavily toward the years after 1800.62 A list of ‘German-Language Periodicals with Viennese Concert Information’ is useful, but incomplete. Among Viennese periodicals published in the years 1788-89, for example, Morrow’s list does not include Rapport von Wien (1788-89) and its successor, Neuster Rapport, von Wien (1789), Der Spion von Wien (1789), and Der Wienerbot he (1789), to give only an

40 On this point, see my ‘Mozart’s Viennese Orchestras’, Early Music (February 1992): 64-88. Orchestras of40 are mentioned in Dittersdorf, Lebensbeschreibung, p. 241 (cited in the appendix to this review under the dale 20 May 1786); in Das Wienerblältchen (12 August 1783, p. 116) in a report of a concert given by Archduke Maximilian at Schönbrunn (cited in the appendix under 10 August 1783); and in the Preßburger Zeitung (16 March 1778), in a report of a concert given by the contrabassist Joseph Kämpfer.

41 From Benlheim-Steinfurt’s diary, cited in Deutsch, Mozart- Dokumente, 330. For a more comprehensive discussion of the documentary evidence concerning the size of Viennese concert orchestras with specific reference to concerto performances, see my ‘Manuscript Parts as Evidence of Orchestral Size in the Eighteenth-Century Viennese Concerto’, in Mozart's Piano Concertos: Text, Context, Interpretation, (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, forthcoming); see also m y‘Mozart’s Viennese Orchestras’. Although the concert discussed by Bentheim-Steinfurt did not take place in Vienna, it may have reflected Mozart’s Viennese practice.

Éî Morrow has overlooked Forkel’s 1789 review of Dittersdorfs symphonies on Ovid’s Metamorphoses', this review is cited in Hanslick, Geschichte des Concertwesens in Wien, p. I l l , note 1 (from Forkel’s Musikalisches Almanach für das Jahr 1789).

131

incomplete list.63 Morrow states that the ßrünner Zeitung ‘restricted [its] coverage of musical events to local performances’, (p. 192) but the news­paper did occasionally, if irregularly, report Viennese musical events; see, for example, the two concerts in the summer of 1786 listed in the appen­dix to this review. Conspicuously missing from her survey of what she calls ‘State-of-Music Articles’ is the famous ‘On the Viennese Taste in Music’, published in a supplement to the Wienerisches Diarium in October 1766.64

II

Morrow’s book is marred by an unusually large number of factual errors, incorrect transcriptions, poor translations, and lapses in documentation, and her treatment of personal names is confusing and inconsistent. To be sure, most individual errors are relatively unimportant, but their number is disturbing.

Due to limitations of space, I must confined myself to a handful of representative examples. In fairness to the author, it must be pointed out that the book was clearly not edited. Numerous mistakes in the dissertation have passed unchanged into the book, suggesting that the publisher simply used the author’s word-processing files without revision. An editor would surely have caught ‘charletan’ (p. xviii), ‘collègues’ (p. 196, note 6), ‘a troop of French actors’ (p. 47), and ‘tred the fine line’ (p. 121), all of which are taken over unchanged from the dissertation. An editor might also have toned down some of the ungainly dissertationese (‘Only one reference to concert activity outside the two court theaters during the pre-1776 period was found’, p. 48), and rescued some of the nouns unwillingly conscripted as adjectives (‘the pre-Gesellschaft der Musik­freunde period’, p. xviii, and ‘popularity comparisons’, p. 163). There are many inconsistencies between transcriptions in Appendix 5 and translations in the text: the name ‘Werlen’ in the transcription of the Rosenbaum diary entry for 4 June 1808 becomes ‘Weilen’ in the translation (p. 6), ‘Scheiyer’ becomes ‘Schreyer’ (p. 7), and ‘Brandi’ becomes ‘Grander (p. 7). Even a passage taken from Otto Erich Deutsch, Mozart: Die Dokumente seines Lebens, is copied inaccurately.65 In a passage discussing the high cost of the orchestra at an academy of Josefa Dusek (p. 128, original p. 498), Morrow has ‘Dass Accombanement’ instead of ‘Das’, and ‘Wo es ehe bey unsern doch in Wahrheit höflichen Landsleuthen etwa 12 Dukaten gekostet hätte’ instead o f‘Wo es ihr

63 Exemplars of all four journals are preserved in Vienna, Stadl- und Landesbibliolhek (A-Wst). w This article has been published several times, but is perhaps most conveniently available in

English translation in H. C. Robbins Landon’s Haydn: Chronicle and Works, vol. II, pp- 128-131.

65 Morrow consistently cites Deutsch incorrectly as ‘DOCUMENTA'.

132

I

T ranscriptions from the diaries of Count Karl von Zinzendorf are often faulty; ironically, Morrow claims ‘ZinzendorPs French was exceptionally poor’ (p. 473). His French, it is true, was unsophisticated, and his grammar sometimes careless, but his command of the language was hardly incompetent. After all, he kept diaries in French for over 50 years and probably spoke it with his peers. But his handwriting is extremely difficult to decipher; hastily written, extremely small, and often written with a worn nib. When he switches to German script, as he occasionally does, his handwriting can be even more difficult to transcribe. Morrow’s transcriptions tend to call her mastery of French into question rather than ZinzendorPs. Consider, for example, some of the entries from ZinzendorPs diary for 1787:66

27 Jan: Morrow’s .. je puis du froid en mertant l’escalier. . should read *... je pris du froid en montant l’escalier . . . ’

23 Feb: ‘emmyeux’ should read ‘ennuyeux’. The sentence ‘Son compliment allemand lise des equvoci [sic] feroil un joli air’ should read ‘Son compliment allemand tiré des Equivoci fesoit un joli air’.6’

14 Mar- ‘chalimau’ should read ‘chalumeau’. ‘Ramm’ in Morrow’s transcription is inadvertently changed to ‘Raum’ in the translation.

16 Mar: *. . . se hautbois au servis du roi d’angleterre. 11 tire des sous biens doux, bien pars, bien soulerns, bien difficiles de cet instrument . . .’ should read ‘. . . et hautbois au service du roi d’angleterre. Il tire des sons biens doux, bien purs, bien soutenus, bien difficiles de cet instrument.. . ’

26 Mar (at a performance of Haydn’s Die Sieben Worte)'. ‘La seconde du Paradis la dernière Février soupir me punct bien experimee’ should read ‘La seconde du Paradis la derniere du dernier soupir me parut bien exprimée’.6* The sentence ‘[Je] ne vis pouit ma belle qui etoit un parlerre[!]’ should read ‘[Je] ne vis point ma belle qui etoit au parterre’.

/10 Apr: The song tities ‘amour je ne veux plus’ and ‘die Schuen [given as ‘Schüm’ in the text] welche gleichgültig blieb’ should read ‘amour je ne veux plus aimer’ [the last word omitted by Morrow] and ‘Die Schöne welche gleichgültig blieb’.

11 Apr: The song title should read ‘Hilf mir geliebt zu werden, die leichte Kunst zu lieben weiß ich schon’, not ’. .. die leichte Kunst zu linden.. .’

28 Apr: The woman playing the harp is ‘M,fc: Scheidel’, not ‘Mile Schewel’, and the opera from which the duo is extracted is Salieri’s La scuola de'gelosi, not ‘la Sarola de Gelosi’.

Almost every transcription from Zinzendorf contains errors of this sort.

66 Given in translation, pages 229-231, originals on pages 517 and 518.67 She has omitted the middle of the sentence from her translation. Zinzendorf was probably

referring to the opera Gli equivoci by Stephen Storace.6* This passage is cited in C. F. Pohl, Joseph Haydn (Berlin: Verlag von A. Sacco Nachfolger, 1875),

vol. Il, 215. Morrow translates ‘la dernière Février soupir’ a s ‘the last of the Last Supper’, an event not depicted in Haydn’s work. The translation of the corrected transcription should be ‘the last of the last breath’. The two sections referred to by Zinzendorf are Sonata II, ‘Hodie mecum eris in Paradiso’ and Sonata VII, ‘In manus tuas. Domine, commendo spiritum meum’.

133

Some translations from German also have problems. Some errors apparently stem from a lack of background knowledge. Morrow’s transcription of the Rosenbaum diary entry for 8 December 1803 (p. 476, translation p. 7) mentions that the text of an Umlauf cantata was written ‘vom seel. Lippert’; Morrow omits the abbreviation from her translation, evidently unaware that it stood for ‘seligen’, meaning, in this context, ‘the late Lippert’. The abbreviation ‘Durchl.’ in a passage from Hiller’s Wöchentliche Nachrichten in 1766 (transcription p. 482, translation p. 36) stands for ‘Durchlaucht’, not ‘Durchlaut’. The custom of adding ‘-in’ to feminine last names is not recognized; thus, in a translation of a concert announcement from the Realzeitung (p. 47) Morrow has ‘Madames Weiglin, Weisen and Kurzen’, while her transcription of the original (p. 485) has ‘Me. Weiglin, Weisen, Kurzin’, for women whose names should probably be rendered in English as Madams Weigl, Weis (or Weiß), and Kurz.

Morrow gives the following account of her policy on the spelling of names:

For well-known people where no confusion about identity exists, I have simply ignored the variants, and given the spelling as it appears in NEW GROVE. For lesser figures, or where any mis-idenlificalion would be possible, I have retained the spelling of the most significant source, then indicated in parenthesis [.y/c] the probably correct version. Only the latter is indexed, (p. 237)

Leaving aside the question of who is a lesser figure and which are the most significant sources, such a policy might have worked well, had she adhered to it. However, departures and discrepancies are abundant. The first names of several well-known Italian opera composers are given in German in the concert calendars, although her policy would have required Italian: ‘Johann Paisiello’, ‘Felix Alessandri’, and ‘Vincenz Righini’, among others. The English violinist John Abraham Fisher (about whom there is an article in New Grove) is consistently referred to as ‘Fischer’. Some names are simply misread: ‘Ventovini’ in the concert of 16 November 1781 is a misreading o f ‘Ventorini’ (the oboist Venturini), and ‘Joseph Christian Smrezka’ (a cellist who gave a concert on 24 March 1787) is a misreading of the admittedly even less likely looking ‘Smrezka’.69 Even names that ought to be well-known to a student of eighteenth- century Viennese musical life are given incorrectly. She has ‘Durrazzo’ in a translation on page 3 (although her original transcription correctly has ‘Durazzo’), and she consistently writes ‘Hildburgshausen’ for ‘Hildburghausen’. Baron de Lo Presti, director of the court theatres until 1751, is called ‘de La Presti’ (p. 39). The composer Cannabich becomes ‘Kannabich’ in Table 20 (p. 162). ‘Wranizky’ and ‘Wranizki’ in transcriptions are transformed in translation to ‘Wransky’ and ‘Wranski’ (p. 28 and 30).

The index to the concert calendars contains many peculiarities, due to inconsistent spelling, lack of background knowledge, or carelessness. There are

69 Both ‘Ventovini’ and ‘Venturini’ are in the concert calendar index; under ‘Venturini’ one is told to ‘See Ventovini’.

134

separate listings without cross-reference for ‘Toschi, Johann’ and ‘Herr Döschi’ even though both obviously refer to the same person. The entry for the ‘salterio’ player Regina Heiss gives her maiden name as ‘de Luca’, but there is another listing without cross reference for ‘Luka, Regina de’. Even more confusing are separate listings without cross-references for ‘Sperger, Johann’ and ‘Sperger, Joseph’ (again, clearly the same person), as well as for ‘Pichel’ and ‘Pichl’, and‘Panschab’ and ‘Ponschab’. There is also a listing without cross-reference for ‘Mme. Mombelli’, though the entry for Luisa Laschi recognizes her as the wife of Domenico Mombelli. The utility of the concert calendars is compromised by the lack of an index of titles and genres in addition to that of composers and performers. If one is searching for a concert performance of La serva padrona, for example, it is necessary either to search through both calendars until happening upon it, or to check every listing under Paisiello - assuming one remembers that it is to him that Morrow (correctly) attributes the opera.70

Several passages from diaries and periodicals cited in the text are left undated, among them a passage from Khevenhüller’s diary (p. 40, 16 March 1755), a passage from Pfeffer und Salz (p. 68,1786), a passage from Wenzel Müller’s diary (p. 122,27 December 1790), and a letter of Beethoven (p. 124, probably February 1808). Neither author nor date is given for a letter quoted on page 27, taken from Wilhelm Bauer’s collection Briefe aus Wien (the letter, written by Friedrich von Gentz to Karl Gustav von Brinckmann, is dated 16 March 1803). A passage in the Neuster Rapport von Wien describing a riot in the Mehlgrube, although attributed to 1789, is not dated more precisely (pp. 100-102). It comes from the issue of 4 November (the event, which took place on 3 November, is not included in Morrow’s concert calendar). The exact date is of some importance because the text begins: ‘Yesterday we had a scene â [sic] la Paris in miniature’.71 The author is comparing the riot to the events of the French Revolution.

Morrow often fails to distinguish between sources she herself has uncovered and sources already published elsewhere. A long passage from the Journal des Luxus und der Moden concerning a piano quartet by Mozart (pp. 18-19), to pick one example, appears in Deutsch’s documentary biography of the composer, although Morrow does not say so.72 Her bibliography is extensive and useful although rather confusingly organized. Why are the Zinzendorf diaries listed under ‘VIENNA-ZINZENDORF’, while the extracts from them published in German by Hans Wagner are listed under ‘Zinzendorf/DIARIES1 without a cross-reference? The book has a rudimentary, but not very helpful index. A few of

70 There were performances on 23 and 27 February 1793.71 ‘Gestern hatten wir einen Auftritt â [m'c] la Paris in Mignalure’. Morrow’s transcription (p. 494)

gives the date of the report as 2 November, and she gives the name of the journal as Rapport von Wien. The Rapport von Wien appears to have had difficulties with the censor; after briefly ceasing publication in early 1789, it reappeared a few months later as the Neuster Rapport.

77 Deutsch, Mozart: Die Dokumente seines Lebens, pp. 279-80.

135

the index entries are peculiar; under ‘Haydn, Franz Joseph’, for example, one finds ‘Isola, desabitata [sic], L \ 149’.

Ill

The concert calendars are too extensive for a comprehensive and detailed critique to be possible here. I shall simply make a few observations about their organization, layout, completeness, and general accuracy, and close with some speculations about prospects for further research. Morrow understandably lists concerts in abbreviated format; this format is, on the whole, clear and readily comprehensible, and I have adopted a modification of it in the appendix to the present review. The calendars would have been easier to use had she included the year in a running head; as it stands, much flipping of pages is necessary to become oriented. She also might usefully have included the day of the week in her listings, since concerts were sometimes held on particular days (such as Fridays in the 1750s and 1760s). Especially helpful would have been indications of holidays affecting concert life, particularly the dates of Ash Wednesday and Palm Sunday, the bounds of the traditional Lenten concert season. Morrow shows little cognizance of changing court policies toward theatrical performances in Lent and Advent. Although theatrical performances were banned during Lent in both court theatres through 1785 (thus making both theatres available for concerts), spoken plays were permitted during Lent in the Kärntnertortheater from 1786 and in the Burgtheater from 1788, thereby curtailing the number of days on which academies could possibly have been held. It would also have been illuminating to consider the possible impact on concert life of the war against the Turks in the late 1780s or of Napoleon’s invasion of Vienna. Morrow does not explain that there was no concert season at all in Lent 1790 due to the death of Emperor Joseph II on 20 February of that year.

Sometimes the condensed format Morrow uses for concert listings leads to the omission of significant information. Morrow records, for example, that the violinist Klara Lausch performed a violin concerto by Giornovichi at a concert in the Kärntnertortheater on 9 March 1787; but the poster states that Lausch performed the same concerto Giornovichi himself had performed in Vienna the previous year.73

Morrow’s calendars do not include performances of instrumental music between acts of oratorios, operas, or spoken plays (Zwischenakten, or entr’actes). Such performances - mainly of concertos - are listed in her concert calendar

13 The poster for the concert reads: ‘Das beliebte Violin-Konzert des Herrn Giornovichi, welches ervor einem Jahr mit so vielem Beyfalle gespielt hat, von Mlle. Lausch gegeigt’. A-Wn,Theatersammlung, Theaterzettel. The concert of Giornovichi was probably that reported byZinzendorf on 22 March 1786.

136

index, where their dates are marked with a ‘z’; but it is quite inconvenient to have to reconstruct who performed what and when, especially since she gives no sources for the Zwischenakten. Her concert calendar index includes over 60 such listings; some performers, such as the violinist Franz Böhm and the flutist Zacharias Hirsch appeared almost exclusively or only in Zwischenakten. Four performances in Zwischenakten of works by Mozart (apparently all piano concertos, and all around 1800) are also buried in the calendar index.74 The omission of Zwischenakten is unfortunate in light of the recent attention given to the role of instrumental music in Viennese spoken theatre.75

Apart from these shortcomings and a few significant omissions listed in the appendix to this review, the concert calendars themselves are reasonably accurate for the years 1780 to 1810, and can be used (with appropriate caution) as a resource and reference. Most errors in the calendars in the dissertation have been corrected in the book. Correspondence between the concert calendar index and the calendars themselves is not perfect. A few concerts listed in the index are missing altogether from the calendars, including Maximilian Willmann’s academy of 4 April 1789, and Mozart’s house concert on 31 October 1784 (at which Baron Bagge performed a violin concerto). Morrow has omitted from her calendars several concerts described in her text; I have included these in the appendix.

What are the prospects for uncovering more Viennese concerts? Morrow barely addresses this question, but it is worth speculating whether future research is likely to be productive. Morrow has covered major Viennese sources for the years 1780-1810 fairly thoroughly: that is, concert posters and major periodicals preserved in Viennese libraries, the Rosenbaum and Zinzendorf diaries, and Mozart’s correspondence. Further information about public concerts may turn up in less well-known Viennese periodicals, in non-Viennese periodicals, or in recovered copies of almanacs, periodicals, posters, or documents now thought to be lost, such as the 1786 issues of the Wienerblättchen, or Salomon Friedrich Schletter’s Vollständiges Verzeichniß aller Schauspiele und musikalischen Akademien, welche sowohl auf dem k. k. National Hof theater nächst der k. k. Burg als auch auf dem Theater nächst dem Kärntnerthor vom 1. Januar bis 31. December 1782 aufgeführt worden sind. Probably the greatest potential for new discoveries, however, lies in the realm of private concerts. The archives of many important aristocratic families (such as the Schwarzenberg archive in Cesky Krumlov) remain practically untapped. All in all, prospects for further significant discoveries about Viennese concert life are excellent.

74 The performances took place on 13 November 1799 in the Theater auf der Wieden, 21 March 1802 in the Theater an der Wien, and 2 and 14 April 1803 in the Kärntnertortheater.

75 See, for example, Elaine R. Sisman’s excellent ‘Haydn’s Theater Symphonies’, Journal o f the American Musicological Society 43 (Summer 1990): 292-352.

137

As noted at the beginning of this review, the brilliance of great composers has sometimes blinded musical scholarship to the context in which those composers lived and created. The requirements and expectations of audiences and other

musical consumers - the market forces if you will - must have played an important role, not only in determining what sorts of pieces were composed, but also in shaping musical style at deeper levels. Content and form surely followed function and expectation, at least to some degree. This thesis is just beginning to receive the attention it deserves, and Morrow’s book provides much useful raw material for its further investigation. It is unfortunate that her interpretation of that material is not more profound, nor her presentation of it more accurate.

138

Public and Private Concerts in Vienna,

1780-1800

Addenda and Corrigenda

Abbreviations

Sources:A-WnA-WsaBliimml/Gugitz

BZHadamowsky

HHStA Hoftheater, SR I-FcMichtner

Mozart: Briefe

Müller, Tagebuch

PZSpionWBWZZinzendorf

Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Vienna, Stadt- und LandesarchivEmil Karl Blümml and Gustav Gugitz, Alt-Wiener Thespiskarren (Vienna: Anton Schroll, 1925)Brunner ZeitungFranz Hadamowsky, Die Wiener Hoftheater (Staats­theater),Teil 1, 1776-1810 (Vienna: Georg Prachner, 1966). Vienna, Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv Generalintendanz der Hoftheater, Sonderreihe Florence, Conservatorio di Musica Luigi Cherubini Otto Michtner, Das alte Burgtheater als Opernbühne (Vienna, Graz, Cologne: Hermann Böhlaus Nachf., 1970). Mozart: Briefe und Aufzeichnungen. Citations include vol­ume and page number in, respectively, roman and arabic numerals: e.g. (III/188).Wenzel Müller, diary of performances at the Theater in der Leopoldsladt, 20 October 1781-September 1830. Vienna, Stadt- und Landesbibliothek, Handschriftensammlung, 51926 Jb.Preßburger Zeitung Der Spion von Wien Das Wienerblättchen Wiener ZeitungHHStA, Count Karl von Zinzendorf, Diaries

Concert Locations:A AugartenBel Belvedere Palace gardenBth BurgtheaterFth Freihaustheater (Theater auf der Wieden)Hof HofburgKth Kärntnertortheater

139

Lax LaxenburgMg MehlgrubeRS (Grosser) RedoutensaalSch Schönbrunn PalaceThL Theater in der LeopoldstadtTr Trattner Casino

Concerts not in Morrow’s calendars are preceded by an asterisk.

1780

*Fri 14 Jan Bth ‘Herr Kempffer’, contrabass

Joseph Kämpfer, contrabass virtuoso in the Kapelle of Archbishop Batthyâny, Preßburg

Mlle. Weber sang two arias.

‘Herr Schaurig’, flute virtuoso, performed (Albrecht Schaudig, flutist in the Kapelle of Archbishop Batthyâny).

A-Wn, Theatersammlung, Theaterzettel, announcement of forthcoming concert on posters of 6 January and 12 January.

Sun 23 Jan Bth? Regina Heiss

Hadamowsky lists two plays, Die Feldmühle and Nacht und Ungefähr in the Burgtheater on this date. According to Morrow (personal communication), the poster for Heiss’s concert states that it began at 4:30 P.M., and thus it would not have conflicted with the evening performances.

Fri 13 Oct Mg Chevalier Michael Esser

The report of this concert in the WZ (No. 84, 18 Oct 1780) specifies that Esser played the violin, the viola d’amore and ‘whistled artfully with his mouth in an especially dextrous manner’ (‘mit dem Mund künstlich pfeiffend auf eine besonders geschickte Art’). Morrow omits this information.

*Fri 17 Nov Bth Chevalier Michael Esser

The report of this concert in the WZ (No. 95,25 Nov 1780)

140

States that it is the last of four concerts Esser gave in Vienna, two in the large room of the Mehlgrube, and two in the Burgtheater:

‘On Friday, the seventeenth of this month, Chevalier Esser held his final musical academy in the k. k. Nationaltheater, after having already performed once there and twice in the large hall of the Mehlgrube on the violin and the viol d ’amour.’

(‘Freytags den 17. dies hielt im k. k. Nationaltheater der Ritter Esser, seine letzte musikalische Akademie, nachdem er sich schon einmal daselbst, und zweymal im Großen Salle auf der Mehlgrube, sowohl auf der Violin, als Viol d’amour, hatte hören lassen.’)

Morrow lists only the concerts on 13 October and 17 November. The dates of the two additional concerts are unknown, but can be assumed to have been between 13 October and 17 November.

1781

*The Allgemeiner Theater Allmanach von Jahr 1782 (Vienna: Joseph Gerold) states that, during Lent, six academies took place in the Burgtheater and eleven in the Kärntnertor theater. Of these, Morrow’s calendar accounts for three in the Burg- theater and four in the Kärntnertortheater (the four Tonkünstler-Societät concerts).

Fri 26 Jan Bth Concert

The oratorio performed at this concert is identified on the poster as Die donnernde Legion, composed by Josef Bârta. Morrow omits the title. The music for the oratorio is not known to survive.

*Sat 10 Mar Concert at Prince Golitsyn’s

A concert requiring the participation of Vittorino Colombazzo, Franz Asplmayr, Thaddäus Huber, Franz Stainmetz (or Steinmetz), and Josef Kammermayer. Golitsyn’s concert conflicted with the dress rehearsal for the forthcoming academy of the Tonkünstler-Societät, and the musicians requested permission to be absent from the rehearsal without suffering a penalty.

A-Wsa, Haydn-Verein, A2-1, Sitzungsprotokolle, item 12, 16 March.

141

*Summer Mg

Fri 16 NovKth

*Fri 23 Nov

* Mon 24 Dec Hof

*Tue 25 Dec Hof

Dilettante concerts in the Mehlgrube

In her text (p. 53), Morrow cites Philipp Jakob Martin’s announcement {Realzeitung, 10 July 1781, p. 446) of a series of dilettante concerts to be held in the Mehlgrube-, she also notes that Friedrich Nicolai confirms that the concerts took place, but the concerts are not listed in her calendar.

Mile Hauck

‘Ventovini’ is a misreading of ‘Ventorini’ (the oboist Venturini). The student o f‘Stamitz’ (i.e., Franz Steinmetz) who performed a horn concerto is said in the an­nouncement to be 12 years old. The final number on the programme is identified as ‘eine neue Simphonie’, thus showing it was not the final movement of the opening symphony.

Mozart and Josepha Auernhammer

Concerto for two pianos (probably that in E-flat, K.365, but possibly the concerto in F for three pianos, K.242, in an arrangement for 2 pianos).

Sonata in D for two pianos, K.448

The concert took place in Auemhammer’s home.

Mozart: Briefe (III/176), letter from Wolfgang to Leopold, 24 November 1781; Deutsch, Dokumente, 175.

Mozart-Clementi duel in the imperial palace before the ‘Countess of the North’

The Russian Grand Duke Paul (later Tsar Paul II) and his consort Maria Feodorovna, née Princess of Württemberg, were visiting Vienna at this time under the pseudonyms Count and Countess of the North. Mozart reports that he received 50 ducats for his appearance. At that time, 50 imperial ducats were worth 213 gulden 20 kreuzer.

Mozart: Briefe (ÏII/188), letter from Wolfgang to Leopold dated 22 December 1781 (portion written on 26 December).

Concert for the ‘Countess of the North’ in her apartmentsThe programme included a string quartet (probably from op. 33) by Joseph Haydn. The quartet was performed by Luigi Tomasini, Franz Asplmayr, Thaddäus Huber, and

142

Joseph Weigl. The WZ notes that performers of both sexes took part, thus indicating that other pieces were on the programme:

‘In the evening, His Imperial Majesty [and the visiting royalty] attended . . . a large concert held in the rooms of the Countess of the North, in which the most distinguished local performers of both sexes performed.’

(‘S(eine] kaiserliche] Majestät [und die höchsten Fremden Herrschaften] wohnten Abends . . . einem in den Zimmern der Frau Gräfinn von Norden gehaltenen grossen Concerte bey, in welchem sich die vornehmsten hier befindlichen Tonkünstler beederley Geschlechtes hören lienen [j/c, recte ‘ließen’].’)

The account book of the court theatres for this season (HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 18) lists a reward to the performers in this concert of 1177 gulden 36 kreuzer (276 imperial ducats).

WZ No. 103,26 Dec 1781 ; PZ No. 4,12 Jan 1782; HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 18, item 191.

1782

*Sun 3 Mar Mg Luisa Rosa Todi, mezzo-soprano

The WZ (No. 18 Saturday, 2 March 1782, p. 18) announced that Todi would give her first subscription concert in the Mehlgrube on 3 March. (‘Morgen den 3. dies wird Madama Todi ihr erstes abonirtes Konzert auf der Mehlgrube geben.’ This announcement is cited in Hanslick, Geschichte des Concertwesens, p. 103.)

In a letter to his father of 23 January 1782 (Mozart: Briefe, III/l93-94), Mozart mentioned his plan to give a concert in the Burgtheater on the 3rd Sunday in Lent (3 March), provided that the Emperor did not decide to allow performances of plays during Lent. In fact, plays were not given, and it has always been assumed that Mozart’s concert indeed took place. There is, however, apparently no independent verification that it did; it seems unlikely (although not impossible) that Todi and Mozart would have scheduled conflicting concerts. Mozart’s alleged concert is listed in Morrow’s calendar.

Deutsch, Dokumente, 176.

143

Summer A Dilettante Concerts

Organized by Philipp Jakob Martin. In a letter to his father of 8 May 1782 (Mozart: Briefe, III/ 208ff), Mozart mentioned that Martin planned 12 Sunday concerts in the Augarten, and 4 ‘grosse Nachtmusique’ in various city squares. Morrow discusses these concerts in her text (pp. 55-56), and lists the first of them, a concert on Sunday, 26 May in the Augarten, in her calendar. Another such concert on Sunday, 9 June (not in Morrow’s calendar) is attested by a notice in the WZ recording the attendance of Emperor Joseph II. Morrow believes the series ended prematurely sometime during the summer (see p. 56), but two outdoor evening concerts were held by Martin in the Neumarkt (a city square) on 11 August and 18 August; both concerts are listed incorrectly in Morrow’s calendar as having taken place in the Mehlgrube. These concerts were probably an extension of Martin’s series, which does not appear to have been interrupted; this inter­pretation is suggested by the wording of Martin’s notice in the WZ on 7 August. Both of the concerts in August took place on Sunday.

WZ No. 44, 1 June; No. 47, 12 June; No. 63, 7 August. All three notices transcribed in Otto Biba, ‘Grundzüge des Konzertwesens in Wien zu Mozarts Zeit’, 142-43; also see the discussion on 137-38 of that article.

Sun 3NovKth Josepha Auernhammer

Morrow places this concert in the Burgtheater, but the opera La contadina in corte was performed there on 3 November. Deutsch (.Dokumente, 183) places Auern- hammer’s concert in the Kärntnertortheater.

*Mon 2 Dec ThL Concerto as entr’acte

During a performance of Der Wittwer mit seinen Töchtern, a ‘Concert von Madam Heÿstig’ (perhaps Regina Heiss?).

Müller, Tagebuch.

144

1783

*Thu 23 Jan ThL Contrabass concerto as entr’acte

During a performance of Kaspars Schelmereyen, a ‘Concert auf dem Contrapaß von Herr [sic] Perschel.’

Müller, Tagebuch.

Thu 20MarBth Herr Schindlöcker, cellist

According to a notice in the WZ (quoted by Morrow on p. 196 of her book), Schindlöcker performed a concerto at this concert; Morrow omits this information from her calendar.

*Sun lOAugSch Archduke Maximilian

Music in the palace garden at Schönbrunn, performed by an orchestra of 40 (‘eine prächtige, mit 40 Tonkünstler besetzte Musik’).

WB, Tuesday, 12 August 1783, 116.

This concert may have been part of a series. A notice in the WB of Tuesday, 2 September 1783 (p. 31) states that the concerts in the Schönbrunn gardens had not taken place since the previous Tuesday (26 August) because Maximilian had been unwell.

*Tue 19AugBth Violin concerto as entr’acte

At Das Erdbeben zu Messina, a theatrical production staged for his own benefit by a student from J. H. F. Müller’s theatre school:

‘Between the two acts, another young virtuoso known from private concerts, having decided to do so merely out. of humanitarian goodwill, will play a well-chosen concerto on the violin.’

(‘Zwischen beyden Stücken wird ein anderer in Privat Concerten bekannter junger Virtuos, der sich bloß aus menschenfreundlichen Wohlwollen dazu entschlossen hat[,] ein gutgewähltes Concert auf der Violine spielen.’)

WB, Sunday, 17 August 1783, 11.

145

Tue 16MarBth

T u e 23 Mar

Thu 29 Apr Kth

*Sun 13Jun

*Sun 31 Oct

1784

Willmann family

According to Cramer’s Magazin der Musik, Ringbauer played a concerto by Giornovichi (cited in Hanslick, Geschichte des ConcerWesens, 114, note 3).

Ployer

A house concert at the Ployer residence. Barbara Ployer may have performed Mozart’s concerto in E-flat, K.449, which was composed for her.

Zinzendorf, Deutsch, Dokumente, 198.

Regina Strinasacchi

Morrow gives the Burgtheater as the location of this concert, but the play Nicht mehr als sechs Schüsseln was given in the Burgtheater on this date. Deutsch places the concert in the Kärntner tor theater, with the Emperor in attendance. Morrow speculates that this concert is identical to that given on 29 March 1784; but, since both concerts are attested in multiple sources, there is no reason to doubt that both took place.

Mozart: Briefe (III/311), letter of Wolfgang to Leopold, 24 April 1784; Deutsch, Dokumente, 199.

Ployer

House concert at the Ployer residence in Döbling, a suburb of Vienna. Barbara Ployer performed Mozart’s piano concerto in G, K.453, Mozart performed his Quintet for piano and winds, K.452, and he and Ployer together performed his Sonata in D for two keyboards, K.448.

Mozart: Briefe (III/318), letter of 9 June 1784, portion written on 12 June.

Mozart

A house concert at Mozart’s residence, including performances by some of his pupils:

‘On my son's name-day, he held a small concert in which his scholars (female pupils) also performed, and, on top of that, Baron Bagge from

146

Paris amused the company by playing a violin concerto. That was hilarious! he writes...’

(‘Am Nammenstage meines Sohnes hatte er eine kleine Musik wobey sich seine Scolarti /: Schülerinen :/ auch producierten, und obendrein H: Baron Bage von Paris der Gesellschaft den Spaß machte ein Violin = Concert zu spielen: Das war ein Gelächter! schreibt er...’)

Mozart: Briefe, (III/343), letter of Leopold to his daughter, 19 November 1784.

In Morrow’s concert calendar index, a concert is listed on this date for both Mozart and Baron Bagge, but she has omitted the concert from her calendar.

*Sun 5 Dec Tr First Advent Concert in Trattner Casino

‘Notice. Today, in the Casino in the Trattner Freyhof on the Graben, the first musical concert in Advent will be given, to which lovers of music are respectfully invited. The admission is uniformly 1 gulden. The officers of the garrison and the imperial royal noble guards pay as in the National Theatre. The concert begins at 7:30.’

(‘Nachricht. Heut wird in dem Casino, in dem von Trattnerischen Freyhof auf dem Graben das erste musikalische Concert im Advent gegeben werden; wozu die Herren Musikliebhaber höflichst eingeladen werden. Die Entree ist ohne Unterschied 1 fl. Die Herren O fficiers von der G arn ison , und von den K aiserlich-königl. adelichen G a rd e n b ezah len wie im N a tio n a lth e a te r . D er Anf ang ist um halb 8 U .’)

The notice clearly implies a series of concerts. It seems possible, even likely, that Mozart took part in some or all of the concerts in the series. The concerto K..459 was completed 11 December 1784, just in time for a concert on the following Sunday, 12 December, and there is no other known concert around that time with which to associate the work.

WB, Sunday, 5 December 1784, 16.

1785

Tue 15 Feb Bth MlleDistler

Based on a misreading of a letter from Leopold Mozart to his daughter. Morrow has Wolfgang performing a piano concerto in the Burg theater on 16 February as well as in Distler’s academy on the 15th; the letter, although finished

147

on the 16th, was written over the course of several days. Leopold’s statement ‘Heute abends ist wieder Concert.. was written on the 15th, and refers to Distler’s concert (Mozart: Briefe, III/373).

According to notices in the Wienerblältchen, concertos were performed at the academies of Josepha Hortensia Müller on 17 February, Mile. Ringbauer on 22 February, and the Le Bruns on 23 February. Morrow omits this information

Thu 10 Mar Bth Mozart

In addition to a performance of the piano concerto in C major, K. 467, the programme also included a fantasy on a fortepiano with pedal keyboard. Morrow omits this information.

From a handbill preserved in the Mozarteum in Salzburg, transcribed in Deutsch, Dokumente, 212.

*Mon28Mar A Concert of wind music, organized by Philipp Jakob Martin

i n order further to enliven the feast for the poor to be given tomorrow in the royal imperial Augarten, and to contribute something of his own to the amenity of the same, Herr Martin, director of the local Dilettante Concerts, has decided, on his own initiative, to give during dinner a well-appointed concert consisting of wind instruments alone; which, since everyone is allowed free admission, is hereby made known to the public.’

(‘Um das Fest, so den Armen im kais. königl. Augarten, morgen wird gegeben werden, mehr zu beleben, und zur Annehmlichkeit desselben auch an seiner Seite etwas beyzutragen, hat Herr Martin, Direkteur des hiesigen Dilettantenkoncerts, aus eigenem Antriebe sich entschlossen, während der Tafel eine wohlbesetzte Musik, allein von blasenden Instrumenten zu geben, welches, da jedermann der freye Eintritt hiebey gestattet ist, denn auch zur öffentlichen senschaft [sic; Genossenschaft, Gesellschaft?] hiemit bekannt gemacht wird.’)

This notice strongly implies that Martin’s dilettante concerts were still taking place in the mid-1780s. 28 March was Easter Monday.

WB, Sunday, 27 March 1785, 238.

*Sun 24 Apr Performance of Mozart’s cantata Die Maurerfreude,K.471, at a festival honouring Ignaz von Born in the Masonic lodge Zur gekrönten Hoffnung

Deutsch, Dokumente, 216.

148

Mon 8 Aug Bel Music Lovers’ Concert

*Thu 20 Oct

*Advent

*Thu 15 Dec

The Preßburger Zeitung (No. 65, 13 August) stated that the Music Lovers’ Concerts would take place every Monday ‘when weather permits’. This phrase is omitted by Morrow, whose listing implies that only a single concert took place.

Concert given by the Masonic lodges Zu den drei Adlern and Zum Palmbaum

This concert was given to benefit the basset hornists Anton David and Vinzent Springer. According to the invitation, Mozart and Anton Stadler were to take part in the concert, and Mozart was to improvise a fantasy (Phantasieren).

From a manuscript invitation, cited in Deutsch, Dokumente, 223-24.

Concert by violinist Norman

‘. . . . I’ve not yet had a letter from your brother. Herr Norman wrote Brunetti that Herr Fiala is staying with Wolfgang, and that Norman gave a concert with 95 ducats profit, and also hopes on New Year’s Day (the only Tafelmusik day) to play at the Emperor’s table. That would then be another 50 ducats, the usual reward.’

(‘Von deinem Bruder hab seit der Zeit noch keinen Brief. H: Norman schrieb dem Brunetti, daß H: Fiala beym Wolfgang wohnt, und daß Norman ein Concert von 95 duggatten profil gemacht, auch Hofnung habe am neujahrstag /: dem einzigen Tafelmusiktag :/ bey der Tafel des Kaysers zu spielen, das wären dann abermahl 50 duggatten, gewöhnliches Regal.’)

Mozart: Briefe (III/480), letter of Leopold to his daughter, 29 December 1785, portion written on 30 December.

The violinist Norman has not been identified. In 1785,95 imperial ducats would have been worth 411 gulden 40 kreuzer (not 427£ gulden as claimed in the commentary to this letter in Mozart: Briefe).

Musical academy in the Masonic lodge Zur gekrönten Hoffnung

Wranitzky Specially composed symphonyUnknown Concerto for two basset horns, performed

by Springer and David

149

Mozart Cantata, sung by AdambergerMozart Piano concertoStadler Parthie for 6 windsWranitzky Another symphony, also specially com­

posedMozart ‘Phantasien’

Programme from a manuscript invitation, transcribed in Deutsch, Dokumente, 226.

Perhaps Mozart played the concerto in E-flat, K.482, at this concert. Although he did not enter the work into his Verzeichnüß aller meiner Werke until the following day, it is the first of his piano concertos to require clarinets, parts which could easily have been taken by the two basset- horn players. If Mozart did not play K.482, perhaps he played one of the concertos composed for the preceding Lenten concert season (K.466 or K.467).

1786

*Fri 3 Mar Kth Signora Coltellini, member of the Italian opera company

*Sat 4 Mar Kth Herr Calvesi, member of the Italian opera company

On p.68 of her text, Morrow quotes the following notice from the WZ (Wednesday, 8 March 1786): ‘Since during this Lenten period plays are to be given by the Court theater actors in the Kärntnerthortheater for five weeks on Sundays, Mondays, Tuesdays and Thursdays, [they]began on March 2 __ On the remaining days each week,musical academies will be given in the same theatre; the first was to benefit Sig. Coltellini, and the second for Herr Calvesi, both members of the I. R. Italian opera troupe.’ [Morrow’s translation] Since 2 March was a Thursday (the day after Ash Wednesday), and the notice appeared the following Wednesday, the two concerts must have occurred on 3 and 4 March. The concerts are not in Morrow’s calendar.

*Sun 26 Mar ? Paisiello’s La serva padrona

‘Al the opera La serva padrona, new music by Paisiello in place of the old

150

by Pergolcsi. Benucci and Storace performed like angels; there were some nice numbers. Giornovichi, whom Louise doesn’t like much, played a violin concerto with much grace and sweetness’.

(‘A l’opera la Serva padrona musique nouvelle de Paisiello au lieu de l’ancienne du Pergolese. Benucci et la Storace jouèrent comme des anges, il y a de jolis morceaux. Giornovichi que Louise ne veut [?] pas fort, joua un Concert du violon avec beaucoup de grace et de douceur.’)

The location of this performance is unknown; there was a play in the Kärntner tor theater on this date, the fourth Sunday in Lent. If the opera was given in the Burgtheater, it was almost certainly a concert per­formance. Giornovichi’s performance was probably an entr’acte. According to later entries in ZinzendorPs diaries (cited in Morrow’s calendar). La serva padrona was also performed twice in 1793.

Zinzendorf, 26 March 1786.

*Sat 20 May Kth Dittersdorf

‘It was on 20 May that Herr Karl Ditters von Dittersdorf, encouraged equally by the high nobility and by discerning connoisseurs, had to repeat in the Karntnertorlheater his 6 allegorical symphonies, which he had already given to the greatest acclaim in the Augarten with the permission of His Majesty the Emperor. Everyone was enchanted by these allegorical symphonies, this ingenious original work, and everyone declared ita new triumph for Germany to be able to count this great man among her children.*

(‘Es war am 20 May, als der Herr Karl Ditters von Dittersdorf seine 6 allegorischen Symphonien, die er bereits mit dem größten Beifalle in dem Augarten mit Bewilligung Sr. Majestät des Kaisers gegeben halte, in dem Theater am Kärnthnerthore, bei eben so großem Zuspruche des hohen Adels und einsichtsvoller Kenner, wiederholen mußte. Jedermann wurde durch diese allegorischen Symphonien, durch dieses kunstreiche Originalwerk entzückt, und alle bekannten, daß es ein neuer Triumph für Deutschland sey, diesen großen Mann unter seine Landeskinder zählen zu können.’)

BZ, No. 50, Friday 23 June 1786, 397.

This passage clearly refers to Dittersdorfs symphonies on Ovid’s Metamorphoses. Dittersdorf describes both concerts in his autobiography, as follows:

‘So, since the weather had become good, I gave my first six Ovid symphonies in the Augarten, the last [six], however, eight days later in the theatre. After deducting the very considerable costs - apart from the copying, I had to pay an orchestra of forty persons - I earned three times as much as the cost of my trip [to Vienna] and back.’

151

*Mon26Jun Bel

Fri 2MarKth

(‘So wie die Witterung schön wurde, gab ich meine ersten sechs ovidischen Sinfonien im Augarten; die letzten aber acht Tage später im Theater. Nach Abzug der sehr ansehnlichen Kosten - außer der Kopiatur hatte ich ein Orchester von vierzig Personen zu bezahlen - gewann ich dreymal so viel als meine Hin- und Herreise kostete.’)

Carl Ditters von Dittersdorf, Lebensbeschreibung. Seinem Sohne in die Feder diktiert (Leipzig, 1801), 241.

The notice in the Brunner Zeitung incorrectly suggests that the concert in the Kärntnertortheater was a repeat of the concert in the Augarten.

Dilettante concert arranged by Dittersdorf

'The excellent musician Herr Ditters von Dittersdorf, who recently so pleasantly entertained the Viennese public in the Augarten with the so naturally imitated Metamorphoses of Ovid, began on 26 June, in conjunction with other musical dilettantes, to give a large, free musical academy consisting of the best musicians, in the garden of the Belvedere.’

(‘Der vortreffliche Tonkünstler Herr Ditters von Dittersdorf, der jüngst das Wiener Publikum mit den so natürlich nachgeahmten Verwandlungen Ovids in dem Augarten so angenehm unterhielt, hat am 26 Juny angefangen, in dem Garten des Belvedere, in Verbindung mit andern Musikdilettanten, unentgeldlich eine große musikalische Akademie zu geben, die aus den besten Tonkünstlern bestand.’)

BZ, No. 54, Friday, 7 July 1786, 429.

1787

Musicians of the Emperor (the Emperor’s Harmonie)

The poster for this concert makes it clear that the Emperor’s Harmonie performed all of both acts of Una cosa rara, not merely ‘pieces’ from the opera, as stated in Morrow’s calendar. The programme is listed on the poster as follows:

*1) Die besonders beliebte Sinfonie ù grand’ Orchester von Hrn. von Dittersdorf mit Trompeten und Paucken.

2) Der erste Aufzug [the first act] der Cosa Rara mit den acht blasenden Instrumenten.

3) Ein Stück aus einer Sinfonie.

4) Der zweyte Aufzug [the second act] der Cosa Rara.

5) Die große Sinfonie des ersten Aufzugs von Apotheker und Doctor.

152

6) Die beliebtesten Stücke aus dem Apotheker und Doctor.

7) Eine Beschluß = Sinfonie.’

A-Wn, Theatersammlung, Theaterzettel.

Sat 3MarKth Cäsar Scheidl

The poster states that Scheidl was ten years old at the time of this concert, not eleven, as given in Morrow’s calendar.

Wed 14 MarKth Herr Ramm, oboist

This concert was attended by Zinzendorf, who reports that Ramm performed a piece in which he imitated a ‘chalumeau’ (by which Zinzendorf probably meant the Schalmei or shawm, not the predecessor of the clarinet). This passage is cited in Morrow’s text (p. 230), but she omits the information about the ‘chalumeau’ from her calendars. The work referred to must have been one of the two ‘oboe’ concertos on the programme.

Zinzendorf.

Sat 17 MarKth Martin y SolerThe roles sung by Cavalieri, Willmann and Podleska in the cantata are identified on the concert poster as, respectively, ‘Nice’, ‘Egle’, and ‘Fileno’. The catalogue of the conservatory library in Florence lists a cantata for three voices by Martin y Soler entitled II sogno. This cantata includes the roles ‘Vice’ [sic], ‘Egle’, and ‘Fileno’ (I-Fc, A 201).

R. Gandolfi, C. Cordara, A, Bonaventura, Catalogo delle opere musicali teoriche e pratiche di autori vissuti . . . . Biblioteca del Conservatorio di musica di Firenze (Parma, 1929; reprint ed., Bologna: Forni, 1977), 203.

Fri 23 MarKth Vittorino Colombazzo

According to the poster for this concert, the oboe concerto on the programme was performed by Colombazzo, not Kirzinger, as stated in Morrow’s calendar.

A-Wn, Theatersammlung, Theaterzettel.

153

Tue 10 Apr ZinzendorfZinzendorf mentions the titles of three songs sung by Callenberg. Morrow does not include the titles in the concert calendar, although she cites the passage from Zinzendorf s diaries on p. 231 of her text (see corrections to two of the titles in the body of the present review).

Zinzendorf.Wed 11 Apr Herr von Manzi

Zinzendorf gives the title of a song sung by Callenberg as ‘Hilf mir geliebt zu werden, die leichte Kunst zu lieben weis ich schon’. Cited by Morrow on p. 231, but not included in the calendar.

Zinzendorf.Sat 28 Apr Venetian Ambassador

The duet is certainly from Salieri’s La scuola de’gelosi, not 'La Sarola de Galou’ as given by Morrow.

Zinzendorf.Mon 7 May Mme Starhemberg

Song titles are again given by Zinzendorf, and transcribed (not entirely correctly) by Morrow on p. 231, but omitted from the concert calendar. They are (accord­ing to Zinzendorf): ‘La bonne foi est ma chimere’ by Callenberg, and ‘Plaisirs d’amour ne durent qu’un instant, chagrins d’amour durent toute la vie’, with music by Mme. [?] d’Ursel.

*Wed 9 MayThL Waldhorn solo as entr’acteDuring a performance of Der Graf von der Ehre.

Müller, Tagebuch.

Fri 15Jun Brigida Giorgi Banti

This concert actually took place on Thursday, 15 June 1786.

1789

*Fri 27 Feb Bth L ’ape musicaleSpion, IX. Stück; Zinzendorf

154

*Sat 28 Feb Bth L ’ape musicale

Spion, IX. Stück; Zinzendorf.

*Wed 4 Mar Bth L ’ape musicale

For the benefit of Lorenzo Da Ponte

Spion, X. Stück, 16; Zinzendorf.

?Thu 5 Mar Bth L ’ape musicale

Spion, X. Stück, 16, reports that L ’ape musicale was performed on this date as a benefit for Luisa Laschi, but this is probably a mistake. Zinzendorf reports attending the benefit for Laschi on the following day, 6 March. Hadamowsky lists a performance of the play Agnes Bernauerinn in the Burgtheater on 5 March.

*Fri 6 Mar Bth L ’ape musicale

For the benefit of Luisa Laschi

Spion, XI. Stück; Zinzendorf.

*Sat 7 Mar Bth L'ape musicale

For the benefit of Adriana Ferrarese del Bene

Spion, X. Stück, 16, and XL Stück; Zinzendorf

Michtner has Una cosa rara on this date, but his assertion may rest on a mistaken interpretation of Zinzendorf, who reports that a duet from Una cosa rara was performed, along with numbers from other operas.

*W edllM arBth L ’ape musicale* Fri 13Mar Bth L ’ape musicale*Sat 14 Mar Bth L ’ape musicale

According to Spion (XII. Stück, 44), L'ape musicale was performed on 11, 13, and 14 March ‘mit neuen Ver­änderungen’. Zinzendorf attended the performances on 13 and 14 March.

Sat 14 Mar Hofrath von SpiegelfeldThis passage in Zinzendorf s diaries almost certainly has nothing to do with Mozart. It reads: ‘Le Hofrath Spiegelfeld jubilé. Moshardt a sa place vieux, s’enivre [?] le soir. Je finis apres midi mon travail___Le soir chez le F e:

155

Sat 21 MarThL

Wed 25 Mar Bth

Sat 28 Mar Bth

*Fri 10 Jul

Schwarzenberg . . . . [later] A l’opera . . .’ The next day, Zinzendorf writes ‘Moshardt fesoit sa cour au Cabinet, FEmp[ereur] l’a nom[m]é a la place de Spiegelf[eld] et le grand chancelier dit que cette place n’a pas besoin d’etre remplie.’

Clearly a court official named Spiegelfeld (perhaps Franz Xaver?) retired and was replaced by someone named Moshardt; even Zinzendorf, not noted for his good spelling, usually spelled ‘Mozart’ correctly by 1789. The latter part of the entry shows that Zinzendorf attended L'ape musicale on the evening of 14 March, not a concert.

Zinzendorf.

Herr Bondra

According to Der Spion von Wien, the Stabat mater performed at this concert was by Haydn:

‘...zum Vortheil des Herrn Pondera, das Aabat monter [s/c] von Hayden’.

Spion, XIV. Stück, 79.

Concert

According to Der Spion von Wien, this concert was a benefit for the oboist Johann Went. Zinzendorf, who attended the concert, described the music as ‘charmante’.

Spion, XVI. Stück, 112; Zinzendorf

Concert

According to Der Spion von Wien, this concert was a benefit for Madame Distler.

Spion, XVII. Stück, 128.

Concert in the Gardens of the Liechtenstein Palace

‘Grand academy in Prince Liechtenstein's garden in Rossau. Grand battle music performed by 110 persons, by Wenzel Müller, Kapellmeister. Herr von Kees organized the Concert. I received 50 fl. and a half an £/[?] of chocolate for the music.’

(‘Grosse Accademiee [sic] in Fürst Lichtensteinischen Garten in der Rossau. Grosse Battaile Musick aufgeführt von 110 Personen, von Wenzel Muller Kapellmeister, diese Musick hat HI; v. Kees veranstaltet, für die Musick hab ich 50 f: und einen halben EU: Chaccolade erhalten.’)

Müller, Tagebuch.

156

*Sun 27 Sep Gesellschaft der Musikliebhaber

‘Sunday 27 September at 4 in the afternoon, the Gesellschaft der Musikliebhaber will give, in the garden of Prince Liechtenstein in Rossau, weather permitting, a most special and, indeed, the final musical academy of this year with around 200 dilettantes. Persons of distinction, who want to take part in this entertainment, should ask for entry tickets from Herr Seidl at the coffee house on the Katzenstieg.’

(‘Sonntags den 27. September Nachmittags um 4 Uhr wird die Gesellschaft der Musikliebhaber im hochfürstlichen Lichtensleinischen Garten in der Rossau, wenn es anderst die Witterung zulast, eine ganz besondere, und zwar die letzte dießjährige Musikalische Akademie mit ungefähr 200 Dilelanlen geben. Personen von Distinkzion, die an dieser Unterhaltung Theilnehmen wollen, haben sich im Koffeehause am Katzenstieg bei Herrn Seidl um Eintritts = Billete anzufragen.’)

Der Wienerbothe, Friday, 25 September 1789.

These two concerts, on 10 July and 27 September 1789, strongly suggest that a concert series took place in the garden of the Liechtenstein palace during the summer of 1789. The entry in Müller’s Tagebuch further suggests that the series may have been organized by Franz Georg Ritter von Kees. Rossau was at that time a suburb of Vienna, and is now in the city’s 9th district. The Liechtenstein Palace still exists, and today houses a museum of modern art.

*Tue 3 Nov Mg Concert?

The event in the Mehlgrube described in the ‘Paris in miniature’ anecdote cited by Morrow (p.100, from Neuster Rapport von Wien, No. 3, Wednesday, 4 November 1789) is omitted from her calendar. Morrow has pointed out (personal communication) that it is not clear from the description whether the event is a concert.

1790

The Emperor Joseph II died on 20 February, the first Saturday in Lent. Morrow points out that no Tonkünstler-Societät concerts took place in Lent due to the Emperor’s death, but it is virtually certain that no public concerts whatsoever took place in Lent 1790.

Fri 9 Apr Count Hadik

Morrow lists this concert under 1791.

Mozart: Briefe (IV/105), letter from Mozart to Puchberg of 8 April 1790.

157

‘Leyer’ terzett as entr’acte*Mon 14 Jun ThL

At a performance of ‘Das Wienerfrüchtei’ (i.e., Die ungleich gesitlenen Landsleute, das ist: der ehrliebende Wiener und Kasperle, das böse Wienerfrüchtei).

Müller, Tagebuch.

*Mon 21 Jun ThL ‘Leyer’ terzett as entr’acte

Ata performance of Die Liebesgeschichte in Hirschau.

Müller, Tagebuch.

*Sat 18Sep RS Concert at Court

A concert, directed by Salieri, during a court dinner celebrating the betrothal of Archduchess Marie Clementine to Crown Prince Francis of Naples, the wedding of the Neapolitan Princess Maria Teresa to Archduke Franz, and the wedding of Neapolitan Princess Ludovica Louisa to Ferdinand, Grand Duke of Tuscany. All three ceremonies took place the following day, 19 September. The concert included a Haydn symphony

C. F. Pohl, Joseph Haydn, voi. 2, 245, cited in H. C. Robbins Landon, Haydn: Chronicle and Works, voi. 2, 748.

*Mon 27 Dec Programme of singing and dancing, given at PrinceAuersperg’s by the company of the Theater in der Leopoldsladt

‘On the 27th, we gave singing and dancing at Prince Adam Auersperg’s in the presence of the most high court - Emperor - K ing - Archdu kes, etc. Prince Auersperg gave the company 50 ducats to divide among themselves.’

(‘d[en]: 27l<:n: haben wir Gesang, und Tanz beÿ Fürst Adam Auersperg gegeben in gegenwart [sic], der Allerhöchsten Hofes - Kaiser - Könige [sic]-Erz[herzöge], [etc. etc.]. Fürst Auersperg gab der Gesellschaft 50 Ducaten zum verlheilen.’)

Morrow cites this passage in her text (p.122, without a date) in a slightly different translation, but does not include the event in her concert calendar, probably because the passage does not explicitly state that the event was a concert. It is clear from the context, however, that this programme was one of a series of musical events held in honour of the visit of the King and Queen of Naples (the ‘Könige’ in Müller’s entry); cf. below, the

158

*Sun 9 Jan

Wed 12 Jan

Mon 17 Jan

concerts held at Prince Auersperg’s on 9 and 17 January 1791, and at Kinsky’s on 12 January 1791.

Müller, Tagebuch.

1791

Prince Auersperg

‘Today their Neapolitan majesties are at Prince Adam Auersperg’s; the king will sing and Mademoiselle Ployer will play the keyboard’.

(‘Aujourd’hui les Maj. Nap. sont chez le P“ : Adam Auersperg, le roi chantera et Mdlc: Ployer jouera du clavessin’.)

Zinzendorf.

This is one of several concerts and balls that took place in December 1790, and in January and February 1791 during the visit to Vienna of the King and Queen of Naples. Perhaps Mozart completed his Piano Concerto in B-flat, K.595 for this concert or for one of the other concerts connected with the King’s visit (Mozart entered K.595 into his catalogue on 5 January 1791, two months before the alleged first performance on 4 March).

Kinsky

This concert was given in honour of the birthday of the King of Naples.

Prince Auersperg

This concert was also given in honour of the King of Naples. On Wednesday, 19 January, the WZ reported:

‘The day before yesterday, Their Sicilian Majesties and Their Royal Highnesses condescended to take the midday meal with the numerous invited nobles at Prince Adam von Auersperg’s. After rising from the table, there was a musical academy and then a ball, which Their Majesties the Emperor and Empress also honoured with their presence. The princely winter garden and the palace were illuminated most magnificently the whole night through’.(‘Vorgestern geruhten II. Sizilian MM. und II. KK. HH. mit dem zahlreich geladenem Adel, das Mittagmahl bey dem Fürsten Adam v. Auersberg einzunehmen. Rach [sic] aufgehobener Tafel war musikalische Akademie, und hierauf Ballfest, welches auch II. MM. der Kaiser und die Kaiserinn mit ihrer Gegenwart beehrten. Der fürstl. Wintergarten und der Pallast waren die ganze Nacht hindurch auf das herrlichste beleuchtet’.)

WZ, No. 6, 19 Jan 1791, 141.

159

All performances in Lent 1791 of II Davide, an oratorio with music by Giovanni Liverati and a text by Da Ponte, certainly took place in the Burgtheater. Morrow, following Zinzendorf, gives the title as Le roi David.

*Sat 19 Mar Music at Mme de Buquoy’s

Zinzendorf.

*Wed 23 MarBth L ’ape musicale rinnuovata

Zinzendorf.

*Fri 25 MarBth II Davide

Zinzendorf.

*Wed 30 MarBth L ’ape musicale rinnuovata

Zinzendorf.

*Fri I Apr Bth L ’ape musicale rinnuovata

Michtner; Hadamowsky.

*Wed 6 Apr Bth L ’ape musicale rinnuovata

Michtner; Hadamowsky.

*Thu 7 Apr Concert at Prince Golitsyn’s

Zinzendorf.

?Fri 8 Apr L ’ape musicale rinnuovata

Listed in Hadamowsky, but not Michtner. Zinzendorf attended a performance at the Freihaustheater that evening.

*Sat 9 Apr Bth L'ape musicale rinnuovata

According to Zinzendorf, Morelli danced a pas de deux as an entr’acte.

Zinzendorf.

Morrow’s date of 21 March for the concert given by the Mascheks should be 21 May.

*Thu 23 Jun Lax Musical Academy at Laxenburg

Cecilia Giuliani sang

Zinzendorf, cited in John A. Rice, Emperor and Impresario: Leopold II and the Transformation of Viennese Musical Theater, 1790-1792 (Ph.D. diss., University of California, Berkeley, 1987), p. 428.

160

Morrow cites notices (pp. 56-57) for a series of concerts arranged by Philipp Jakob Martin, to begin June 1791 and to take place in the Augarten, the Prater, and the square Am Hof but these concerts are not included in her concert calendar.

*Thu 17 Nov Performance of Mozart’s cantata ‘Laut verkünde unsreFreude’, K.623 (the Kleine Freimaurer-Kantate) during the consecration of a new temple at the Masonic lodge Zur neugekrönten Hoffnung.

Deutsch gives 18 November as the date of the performance without citing a source (.Dokumente, 361). A recently uncovered notice in the WB places the ceremony on Thursday, 17 November:

‘On the 17lh, the Viennese lodge Zur gekrönten Hoffnung celebrated the solemn consecration of its temple with a speech, with initiations, and a cantala set to music by Herr Mozart, for which printed public invitation tickets were given out.’

('Am 17lc" begieng die Wiener Loge zur gekrönten Hoffnung die feyerliche Einweihung ihres Tempels mit einer Rede, mit Aufnahme, und einer von Hrn. Mozart in Musik gesetzten Kantate, wozu gedruckte öffentliche Einladungsbillele ausgegeben wurden.’)

WB, Saturday, 26 November 1791,401.

1792

Sat 14 Jan Bth Francesco Vicaro von Navara

Vicaro’s performance followed the play Der gutherzige Murrkopf (adapted from Goldoni by Stephanie der Ältere). At the command of the Emperor, Vicaro was rewarded with 108 gulden (24 ducats) for this concert.

Vienna, HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 26, item 175.

Emperor Leopold II died on 1 March 1792. Both the Burgtheater and the Kärntner lor theater remained closed through 23 April, and it seems unlikely that concerts were held in the theatres during that period, apart from the Tonkiinstler- Societät concerts on 15 and 16 April.

161

1793

*Mon 10 Jun

Tue 10 Sep

Academy in the Theater auf der Landstraße

Majo

Martin y SolerPaisielloSalieri

Bravura aria, sung by Mme.Wachsmann

Bravura aria, sung by Mme. Huber Aria, sung by Herr Wachsmann Terzetto

The academy followed a performance of the play Der seltene Freier.

Blümml/Gugitz, 410.

Entr’acte, Theater auf der Landstraße

Between two one-act plays:

‘The famous concerlo by Herr Mozart, which Herr Dillong played to so much acclaim in the k. k. Hoftheater, performed on the flute by Herr Postpischel, a boy of 15.’

(‘....Das berühmte Conzerl von Hrn. Mozart, welches Hr. Dillong in dem k. k. Hoftheater mit so vielem Beifall spielte, von Hrn. Postpischel (ein Knabe von 15 Jahren) auf der Flöte geblasen’.)

Blümml/Gugitz, p. 413.

‘Herr Dillong’ was probably the blind flutist Friedrich Ludwig Diilon (1769-1836). Postpischel played the same concerto the following day, 11 September 1793, under which date it is recorded in Morrow’s concert calendar index under ‘Postpischel’ with no reference to Mozart. Dülon’s concerts took place on 26 March and 15 April 1791, but neither programme specified a concerto by Mozart.

Thu 12 Sep Bth Entr’acte, Lolli.

‘Joseph Lolli-Piki’ (the cellist Giuseppe Bichi-Lolli) was given a gift from the treasury of the court theatre for performing a concerto, probably as an entr’acte during the play Allzuscharf macht schartig. Morrow lists this entr’acte in her concert calendar index, but attributes the performance to Antonio Lolli. The poster for the play states:

162

‘The young Lolli, an artist of 9 years, in actual service of His Majesty, the King of Prussia, will have the honour of playing a concerto on the violoncello between the second and third acts.’

(‘Derjunge Lolli, ein Künstler von 9 Jahren, in wirklichen Diensten Sr. Majestät des Königs von Preußen, wird zwischen dem zweyten und dritten Akt ein Concert auf dem Violoncello zu spielen die Ehre haben.’)

HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 27, item 251; A-Wn, Theater­sammlung, Theaterzettel.

*Tue 15 Oct Final performance by the company of the Theater auf derLandstraße, for the benefit of Herr Postpischel, Herr Ossowsky and other members of the theatre orchestra.

Ossowsky SymphonyHaydn Baryton Divertimento, performed by

‘Hr. Fitz’ [Anton Filtz?]

[a play, Das listige Röschen]

Pissoletti Flute concerto, performed byPostpischel

Unknown ‘Abschiedsszene’, sung by Mme Huber

[the performance closed with a Kinderballet]

Blümml/Gugitz, pp. 266 and 415. The poster for the performance is reproduced in facsimile between pp. 268 nd 269.

1794

Thu lOAprKth? Giuseppe Feriendis

Feriendis was twice paid 180 gulden (40 ducats) by the court theatre for ‘Producirung’, perhaps implying several concerts and/or entr’actes. One of these was probably the concert on 10 April listed in Morrow’s calendar.

HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 28 (Mar-July 1794), item 120.

163

1795

Sat 20 Jun Kth Mme Plomer

Mme Plomer (‘Blomer’) received one half of the net proceeds from this concert, 104 fl 29£ xr. Plomer is identified by Morrow as the singer Catherina Plomer- Salvini.

HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 29, item 11.

Wed 1 Jul Bth Entr’acte, Feurich

At a performance of the one-act play Die abgenöthigte Einwilligung and the ballet Die wiedergefundene Tochter Otto des II. Kaisers der Deutschem

'Herr Feurich, a travelling musician, will have the honour to play, after the piece (the play?), an Adagio and various variations on the glass harmonica’.

(‘Herr Feurich, ein durchreisender Tonkünsller, wird nach dem Stück die Ehre haben, auf der Harmonica ein Adagio, und verschiedene Variationen zu spielen.’)

Feurich received 27 gulden (6 ducats) for this performance.

A-Wn, Theatersammlung, Theaterzettel; HHStA, Hof­theater, SR 29, item 294.

Tue 22 Sep Bth Entr’acte, Johann Teimer

Teimer received 54 gulden (12 ducats) for performing a concerto as an entr’acte; the performance is listed in Morrow’s concert calendar index. Morrow gives a date of 22 September 1795, but Teimer’s performance is not listened on the poster for the Burgthealer and Kärntner­tortheater on that date. I have been unable to confirm the date in any other source.

HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 29, item 259.

*Sun 13 Dec Cantata celebrating the birth of Archduchess Carolina

From the title page of a manuscript copy of a cantata by Franz Xaver Süssmayr preserved in the Schwarzenberg archive in Cesky Krumlov (CS-K). The title reads ‘Per la Nascita della Reale Arciduchessa Carolina Cantata

164

eseguita in Vienna in una privata Accademia tenuta la sera de 13 Decembre 1795. . . This cantata was probably intended to celebrate the birth of Archduchess Carolina Ludovica (4 December 1795-30 June 1799, daughter of Emperor Franz II).

0 CS-K, 140 K 19.

1796

* ? Kth? Entr’acte, Anton Polak

Polak received 27 gulden (6 ducats) for performing a waldhorn concerto as an entr’acte sometime in the 1796/ 97 season.

HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 30, item 166.

* ? Kth Andreas Romberg, violin, and Bernhard Romberg, cello

The Rombergs received a gratuity of 13 gulden 30 kreuzer (3 ducats) from Peter von Braun for a box at an academy they held sometime in the season 1796/97. Morrow’s first listing for a concert by the Rombergs is in 1806. The Rombergs’ presence in Vienna in 1796 is noted in Hanslick, Geschichte des Concertwesens in Wien, 114.

HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 30, item 297.

‘“Wed 20 Sep ThL Violin concerto as entr’acte.

At a performance of Der Rendezvous beym Feuer: ‘Concert von jungem Böhm’ (the young violinist Franz Böhm).

Müller, Tagebuch.

1798

Rewards for performing concertos as entr’actes given to Anton Weidinger, trumpet (28 November, 27 gulden), and Feriendis (probably the oboist Angelo, although the theatrical records have ‘Anton’, 19 September, 27 gulden). Both

165

entr’actes are noted in Morrow’s concert calendar index. (HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 32, items 165 and 170).

1799

Mon 25 Mar Fth Constanze MozartThe eight-year-old Josepha Hofer, who performed a piano concerto by Hoffmeister at this concert (probably as an entr’acte in La clemenza di Tito), was the daughter of Josepha Mayer (previously Hofer, née Weber), one of the vocal soloists in the opera and Constanze’s eldest sister.

Rewards for playing concertos as entr’actes given to Johann Berwald, violin (6 May, 27 gulden), Formaizka, flute (14 June, 13 gulden 30 kreuzer or 3 ducats), and Wilhelm Redlich, flute (29 August, 27 gulden). All three entr’actes are noted in Morrow’s concert calendar index. (HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 32, items 154 and 148, and SR 33, item 177).

1800

Wed 2 Apr Bth Ludwig van Beethoven

A gift to Beethoven for this concert is recorded in the theatrical payment records:

‘To V. Beethoven Ludwig, for the musical academy given on 2 April 1800, as a gift under N°: 147......, 21.- (that is, 6 ducats).

(‘dem V. Beethoven Ludwig, für die am 2Kn: April [1]800. gegebene musikalische] Akademie als ein Douçeur ut N°: 147........27.-’)

HHStA, Hoftheater, SR 33, item 147.

166