We come now to one of the most difficult hurdles concerning the chronology of Haydn’s music. How do we go from such a paucity to such a glut nearly overnight? Well, as I have been alluding to all along, I think the simplest answer is many of the works we are dealing with now, and in the next few years probably antedated the verifiable manuscript copies that we have of them.
It seems to be a popular misconception when we talk about ‘authentic manuscript copies’ we mean the fair copy the composer wrote as his final draft, so to say. But actually, ‘manuscript’ means nothing more than ‘hand-written’, and virtually everything is hand-written in those times. There was money to be made in being a copyist, both fairly and under the table. Haydn had professional, identifiable copyists for most of his career, and even though the actual names of the earliest ones are unknown, their handwriting most certainly is recognized! So we see names like ‘Viennese Professional Copyist #2’ or ‘Keszthely Castle Copyist #4’. Even if these manuscripts then pop up far away, we know who made the copy and who he worked for. This is an invaluable aid in both dating and authentication.
However, as I mentioned earlier, all it really aids is dating when the copy was made, not necessarily when the work was composed. When Haydn went to work for Fürnberg and the Morzin’s, he had at his disposal a group of 10 or more copyists who have been identified. Since he had to produce a certain volume of music to satisfy his job requirements, I believe some of the works he had them copy had been already composed, and thus the sudden proliferation of string trios, keyboard trios and divertimentos becomes more explicable. I am sure someone, somewhere, has made this surmise, but I have never seen it in print. If the question is addressed at all, the answer is 'it seems Haydn had reached a stage of maturity and a need to produce for his job so all these works simply flowed from his pen one after the next'. Well, maybe so….
So what sorts of works were produced in this watershed year? Here is a list of what is currently dated late 1756-57, compiled from various sources;
Hob 01:01 Symphony in D
Hob 01:37 Symphony in C
Hob 02:11 Divertimento in C for Winds & Strings
Hob 03:01 Divertimento in Bb for Strings Op 1 #1
Hob 03:02 Divertimento in Eb for Strings Op 1 #2
Hob 05:01 Divertimento á tre in Eb for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:02 Divertimento á tre in F for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:03 Divertimento á tre in b for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:04 Divertimento á tre in Eb for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:06 Divertimento á tre in Eb for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:07 Divertimento á tre in A for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:08 Divertimento á tre in Bb for Violin, Viola & Bass
Hob 05:10 Divertimento á tre in F for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:11 Divertimento á tre in Eb for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:12 Divertimento á tre in E for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:13 Divertimento á tre in Bb for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 05:15 Divertimento á tre in D for 2 Violins & Bass
Hob 14:03 Concertino in C for Keyboard & Strings (2 Violins & Bass)
Hob 14:07 Divertimento in C for Keyboard & Strings (2 Violins & Bass)
Hob 15:01 Trio in g for Keyboard & Strings
Hob 15:34 Trio in E for Keyboard & Strings
Hob 15:35 Trio in A for Keyboard & Strings
Hob 15:37 Trio in F for Keyboard & Strings
Hob 15:38 Trio in Bb for Keyboard & Strings
Hob 15:40 Trio in F for Keyboard & Strings
Hob 15:41 Trio in G for Keyboard & Strings
Hob 15:C1 Trio in C for Keyboard & Strings
Hob 16:G1 Sonata #4 in G for Keyboard
These works were produced for both Fürnberg and the Morzin’s. As we recall, they were (perhaps close) friends, and Fürnberg was essentially sharing his new discovery (Haydn) with his friends. Possibly he even encouraged Morzin to hire Haydn? In any case, the sudden appearance of all this music argues strongly (to me) that they were accumulated works looking for a venue. The string trios, for one, almost certainly were composed long before 1757, and the sudden flowering of keyboard trios is hard to explain, especially since they are so wonderfully written, hardly the work of a composer trying his hand at them for the first time!
All of which leads me to what I really wanted to talk about; the fact that once Haydn got beyond his 'schoolboy mistakes' phase, his inner genius took over and he was 'suddenly' a fully mature composer, brimming with musical ideas and fully capable of expressing those ideas in a professional and persuasive manner. The traditional view, expressed for the last 200 years, involves a long and gradual maturation process until voilà!, classical style was born. Well, my friends, this just isn’t true. After circa 1755, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of an immature, unsure student of composition. Do these works differ from the style of 1770, ‘80 or ‘90? Of course they do. Even if Haydn was the one who eventually created the styles, he still went through a process. He made improvements in his own idiom. But it wasn’t because what he was writing was poor and needed work. In fact, his contemporaries and the music loving audience instantly recognized him to be a jewel of the first water!
Music fails to meet our expectations in so many ways, and especially in this one; evolution of style doesn’t exist in the present. It only offers itself as subject for discussion when one takes the long, retrospective view; backwards! In other words, it doesn't exist in real time. It is an artificial construct that allows us to categorize something, and thus we have control over it. It is defined, we own it! But the whole notion of striving towards a classical ideal with a few humble bumblings is so much fairy dust. I urge you to give this music a listen. It doesn’t deserve to be left moldering in a trunk in music’s attic!
Next time, we will take a closer look at the works, until then,
Thanks for reading!