1771 – The Music part 3 - Beyond the familiar

Hob. #	Genre	Key	Opus	No.	Instruments / Notes
11:89	Trio	G	Book 4		Baryton, Violin & Cello
11:90	Trio	C	Book 4		Baryton, Violin & Cello
11:91	Trio	D	Book 4		Baryton, Violin & Cello
11:92	Trio	G	Book 4		Baryton, Viola & Cello
11:93	Trio	C	Book 4		Baryton, Viola & Cello
11:94	Trio	A	Book 4		Baryton, Viola & Cello
11:95	Trio	D	Book 4		Baryton, Viola & Cello
11:96	Trio	b	Book 4		Baryton, Viola & Cello
16:18	Sonata	Bb		20	Keyboard solo
16:20	Sonata	c	fragment	33	Keyboard solo
23b:2	Salve Regina	g		2	Solo voices (S-A-T-B), Solo Organ & Strings

 

Spine of Book IV of the Baryton Trios

24 DIVERT. DEL GIU.[SEPPE] HAYDN   PER IL PARITON COL VIOLA E BASSO TOM. II

24 DIVERTIMENTOS BY JOSEPH HAYDN   FOR THE BARYTON ACCOMPANIED by VIOLA & BASS BOOK 2

The sole survivor. Mysteriously called here "Book II", but certainly Book IV. Published in December 1771, and given, probably, as a birthday gift to the Prince. Amazing that even one of these survived, given the hardships suffered at Eszterháza at the end of World War II, when the castle was occupied by the victorious side and systematically looted and vandalized. This book is in the Hungarian National Library. I am delighted to be able to show you a picture of it, there doesn't appear to be another on the Internet. László Somfai, a major Haydnisto of the 1960's - '90's, says it isn't actually a book, it is a leather-bound box which the manuscript parts were kept in, but when stood on a shelf it looked like a book. It contains all of the parts for the trios Hob 11:73-96.

The latest group, placed (by me) in this year, as circumstances would have it, contains some oddities for the group as a whole. The first one is rather obvious, as we note the second of the two in the entire oeuvre which is in the minor, #96 in b. Both of the minor key works (#87 in a minor) are in this volume, maybe a trend? Possibly it would have been in the event the earlier pace of production had kept up. But as we will see, there will be only one more 'volume' following this one, and it won't reach the production stage until the accumulation has gained critical mass in 1778. However, this is the time when Haydn is using minor keys in some symphonies and his three string quartet opuses of the period have at least one each, as well as do several of the keyboard sonatas, so apparently his interest in minor mode is reflected throughout his work output at the time. As is not uncommon with all composers of the period, the minor mode tended to bring out the extra bit of workmanship when it is employed. Of the twenty-four trios in this volume, these two are among the finest.

So did you spot the anomaly yet in the list? Yes, right at the top, three trios in a row in which the viola is replaced by a violin! A bold experiment, which in the playing places the baryton as an accompanist rather than the top dog. I wonder what Nicholas thought of this. It was never repeated, so probably he just took it as a passing fantasy or an opportunity to be more well-rounded. In any case Haydn took advantage of the idea and wrote three particularly nice trios. Or perhaps they sound particularly nice because they place the melody back in the soprano voice where we are used to hearing it. So you really should seek out these three works. I have yet to see them on any recording save the Esterházy Ensemble's Complete Works for Baryton box, but you never know when there will be a glut with every baryton ensemble trying to hit the market first with their version!

A 1746 cembalo con martelli by Ferrini

Eva Badura-Skoda, wife of world-famous pianist Paul, and brilliant music historian in her own right, has published an essay in David Wyn Jones' book, Music in Eighteenth Century Austria, which gives a challenging new look at received wisdom vis-à-vis the presence of the Hammerflügel in Vienna and its environs at a much earlier date than previously thought, certainly at least as early as 1726! She goes on to give a fascinating but lengthy explanation of why this was so, most of which I won't reference here but will heartily commend to you. What the thrust is for our purposes in deciding which instrument Haydn wrote for was this: when Cristofori invented the hammer action for keyboard, he simply gutted a harpsichord and replaced the parts. Note in the picture how the instrument is still long and slender like a harpsichord rather than wider like a fortepiano. As a direct result of this, he continued to call his new instrument a cembalo (harpsichord), occasionally branching out in his descriptions as far as calling it cembalo con martelli (harpsichord with hammers) or the cembalo col piano e forte (the harpsichord with soft and loud). An underappreciated fact of the time is this: Austria and Italy were far more closely aligned in all ways, especially culturally, than were Austria and the other German-speaking states such as Prussia. So when an Italian invention invaded Austria at the beginning of the 18^th century, they followed the lead of their neighbors and called it a Klavier (keyboard) or a cembalo (a harpsichord). The point of this seemingly off-topic dissertation is this: there was certainly no lack of fortepianos in Greater Vienna even by mid-century, they simply weren't given a special name and so documentation is sparse unless you know what you are looking for. As far as Haydn goes, his works have been divided up into 'fortepiano' and 'pre-fortepiano' mainly on the basis of this sort of documentation ("there is no mention of a fortepiano at Eszterháza…") and perhaps this assumption is off-base. Why would Nicholas, with his cutting edge view of music and the hottest composer in town, limit himself to an already obsolete keyboard instrument? Doesn't add up, does it?

I mentioned last year about the 'Six Progressive Sonatas'. These were not composed as an opus nor is anything tangibly linking them together beyond close stylistic similarities. This year we have another, and the remnants of yet another, Hob 16:18 (#20 in Bb) and the fragment of Hob 16:20 in c minor. I say fragment, but it still requires some clarification as to exactly what the real story is with Hob 16:20. There is one recording available of the fragment itself, the frequently-touted-here Christine Schornsheim box set. It is only 2'20" long, and Schornsheim plays it on a clavichord, undoubtedly the instrument on which it was composed, if not intended for. She says in the liner notes that Haydn simply stopped writing it in the middle of the development section. The entire work was not completed until 1778-9 when it became the 6^th member of the Opus 30 set, dedicated to a pair of sisters he knew from the salon, the Auenbrugger's. Or at least this is what we believe today. The possibility of him finishing the work in 1771 and keeping it for his own use, only to have part of the manuscript get lost or destroyed has never been discounted either. In any case, these six are among Haydn's finest keyboard works, and were very forward looking versus their contemporaries. To get back to the point, these are the earliest keyboard works which actually sound as though they were composed for fortepiano. I say this only after having listened to several performances, on all sorts of instruments, many times over. The frequent answer to this assertion is recounted above, that Haydn didn't have a fortepiano in the 1768-71 time frame. However, I have presented E. Badura-Skoda's documentation, and suggest you listen for yourself. It is an interesting experiment for an early keyboard fan.

The final work we look at for the year was probably also the first work composed in the year, the lovely Salve Regina in g minor, likely composed in gratitude for his recovery from a serious illness. As mentioned earlier, Haydn was a devout believer in Mary as his personal link to God. He composed some Marian Antiphons as well as a Stabat Mater. This antiphon is a four verse work for chorus (actually four soloists who also sing chorus when called upon) and organ. Strings are provided for but apparently optional since the finest version I have (Tafelmusik / Bruno Weil) dispenses with them. Haydn gets his money's worth from the organist in places, we aren't talking continuo here! It is rather certain he wrote this part for himself, and its difficulty is part of his gift of thanks. If, like me, you are a devotee of later 18^th century Austrian church music, this is one of those many smaller pieces which you simply should have.

Next time we will move on to 1772. Haydn's instrumental music reached a pinnacle of sorts in this year, and I think we will really enjoy going over this music.

Thanks for reading!