Haydn Seek

1785 – The Music part 3 - Accompanied Sonatas or more?

Hob. #	Genre		Key	Number	Instrument(s)		Notes
08:06	March		Eb		2 Clarinets, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns, Trumpet & Serpent
15:07	Accompanied Sonata		D	20	Keyboard, Violin & Cello		15:06, 07 & 08 were Artaria's Opus 40
15:08	Accompanied Sonata		Bb	21	Keyboard, Violin & Cello
15:09	Accompanied Sonata		A	22	Keyboard, Violin & Cello		15:02, 15:09 & 15:10 - published as a set by Forster in London
15:10	Accompanied Sonata		Eb	23	Keyboard, Violin & Cello
17:deest / 09:08	Minuet w/Trio				Solo Keyboard - reductions		Original orchestrations lost
Hob. #		Genre				Character / Opera / Original Composer
24b:07		Replacement Aria - Signor, voi sapete				for 'Rosina' (Sop) - "Il matrimonio per inganno" by Anfossi
24b:08		Replacement Aria - Dica pure chi vuol dire				for 'Modesta' (Sop) - "Il geloso in cimento" by Anfossi

[To ARTARIA & Co., VIENNA. German]

Estoras, 10^th December, 1785.

Mon tres cher Amy!

Day before yesterday I received the pianoforte Sonatas¹, and was astounded to have to see such bad engraving and so many glaring errors in all the parts, especially the pianoforte part. I was at first so furious that I wanted to return the money to you and send the score of the Sonatas instantly to Herr Hummel in Berlin; for the sections which are occasionally illegible, and the passages omitted or badly spaced will bring little honor to me and little profit to you. (edit: but I came to my senses, of course!)

Everyone who buys them will curse the engraver and have to stop playing, especially on page 8, and on the 1^st page of the 3^rd Divertimento, page 15, where the [ (measures) ] marked in red are especially badly laid out, and this really seems to be the result of complete torpidity. I would rather pay for two new plates out of my own pocket than to see such confusion. (edit: but see edit above)

Even a professional would have to study before disentangling this passage, and then where would the dilettante be? Four notes are missing on page 18, and in the last line the engraver was too lazy to write out the whole of the bass part: such abbreviations and signs are all very well in the viola part of symphonies, but not in piano-forte parts.

And so on for three more paragraphs.

1 – Hoboken 15:6 - 7 – 8 Artaria's Opus 40

(H.C. Robbins-Landon – The Collected Correspondence and London Notebooks of Joseph Haydn 1959)

I wish I had the time to type out the whole letter; it is a combination of genuine concern for the musical public and acid sarcasm for the typesetter/engravers employed by Artaria. In addition, here is proof that the viola jokes in our present time began long before any of us were born! I love that! The other great benefit for modern musicology to come from this letter is in the part I can't transcribe, but I did put a picture there for you to see, and you can estimate the value for yourself, as this goes on for quite some time. A diatribe of value, then.

Where did this 'accompanied sonata' music spring from though? I have often seen it merely attributed to an extension of the Baroque trios for two violins with continuo, and/or the Italian concerto grosso tradition. And while this may have been true in some places, it was not so in Vienna. In their article on 'Accompanied Keyboard Music', The New Grove points out that;

Vienna was isolated from most of these developments – and these foreign publications – until the 1770s. Early Viennese chamber music with keyboard was an indigenous tradition dependent on Austrian models. In the 1750s and 60s the genre was cultivated by the leading keyboard players, Wagenseil, Hofmann, Steffan, Vanhal and especially Haydn, whose early keyboard trios are the expression and summit of this style. The duo sonata with violin was virtually unknown there; the Viennese preferred the left hand of the keyboard to be doubled by a string instrument (cello or viola). The keyboard trio and the concertino or divertimento for harpsichord, two violins and bass were the scorings of choice. The ad libitum string texture was restricted for the most part to the keyboard quartet scoring. The keyboard trio reveals a strong tradition of obbligato violin writing, inspired by the Austrian trio sonata and string trio. In the absence of a local publishing industry, this repertory was disseminated in manuscripts; Wagenseil's op.5 (1770) is the only Viennese print of chamber music with keyboard during this period. And the genre was virtually abandoned in Vienna in the 1770s by all but Vanhal and the Pressburg composer Anton Zimmermann.

Frontispiece from Artaria's later publication of Hob 15:10

So Vienna, as usual, is different. In this case, the 'foreign publications' mainly emanated from Berlin (C.P.E. Bach) and Paris (Schobert, Edelmann). So what we see here is the roots of 'Keyboard Trios' in the Early Classic era, but also being an indigenous genre. As we have seen already, and which is reinforced by Grove here, the musical form was on hiatus for a bit over two decades. Haydn wrote only one trio in the period of his employ with the Esterházy's before now, this being Hob 15:2, back in 1772 where its composition (or arrangement from a concertino/divertimento, to be more precise) fell about halfway between the last of the early trios and the first of the late ones. We see it finally finding a home this year though, along with Hob 9 & 10 in London.

Things change though. The 'modern' accompanied sonata was suddenly all the rage, and as we see here, this was both in Vienna and London, as well as elsewhere. What we are seeing here is not just a change in musical taste, nor even a change in usage of certain types of music; but it is still nothing short of a social revolution. Whereas the wonderful social custom of young ladies of the aristocracy learning to play the (always ladylike!) keyboard as a prerequisite to marriageability had been going on for over a century, the spread of Enlightened thought now allowed the nouveau riche middle classes to act like aristocrats too. I doubt that Joseph II was adumbrating Hoover with a 'pianoforte in every home' slogan, but this initial surge in that direction led to a 19^th century which very nearly accomplished this goal! And above all, what was needed to stoke this flame was music, music, ever more music!

Which is not to overlook the continued value of the salons, whose denizens were no doubt delighted with the sheer musicianship required to play and appreciate even these early efforts. Every advance Haydn had made over the years in symphonic, quartet and sonata writing was lavished on these works too. For a hundred years and more, and even today for a few incorrigibles, the wisdom concerning Haydn's keyboard trios was that the string parts were totally superfluous and need not be played at all, since they merely doubled the keyboard. Surprisingly, this bit of lunacy came from the

Publication by Nadermann of Piano Trio Hob 6 arranged as a String Trio, allegedly by Haydn himself

top tier of the critical ladder, from people who should have known better. That they didn't know better speaks volumes about the age in which they lived. As early as the 1930's, Donald Tovey led the charge to demonstrate what works of genius these trios actually are. It only took another 40 years for a complete cycle to be recorded, by the Beaux Arts Trio, and eventually the period instrument groups' adoption of Haydn swept these along in their wake. We will be seeing a lot of this genre in the next few years, because Haydn wrote twenty-eight of them between 1784 and 1796, a number which is surpassed only by the thirty-four string quartets from that same span!

I have been attempting to acquire and provide accurate numbers for the next topic for discussion, but so far, not possible. This would be arrangements and reductions of works from their primary setting into more marketable form for Artaria and other publishers to sell. The problems arise from more than one source; was there even a setting? If so, who did it, Haydn or someone else? As we see from the picture here, one can be hard pressed to prove the claims by publishers. Did Haydn actually do this? If so, it would have been this year, since this was published in Paris in 1785. It is a question which possibly has been answered by Hoboken, although I haven't got his books and can't read German even if I did have them, and apparently the topic isn't sexy enough for multilingual dispersal. I like them though. Most of what I have found so far has been in an incidental sort of way, and an expanded essay on this topic is still in the future. Why bring it up now then? Well, one of the other genres which benefitted from the expansion of interest in playing at home is the dances written for the Redoutensaal. Haydn wasn't the only beneficiary of this side interest insofar as preservation of his works was concerned. Our current Hoboken 9:08, along with 03, 11, 12 & 20, as far as I know, only exist as

The Redoutensaal, home of elegant dance - Meytens - 1760

keyboard reductions, the original orchestral parts being lost. But Beethoven's 6 Minuets (WoO 10) and 7 Ländler (WoO 11) and 12 German Dances (WoO 13) would also be lost in their entirety without surviving keyboard reductions. The unusual fact of Mozart's entire dance oeuvre remaining intact, as far as we know, is a combination of two factors; he had a publisher (Artaria) ready at hand who published his dances immediately even in the orchestral version, as well as the keyboard reduction, and secondly, later on when he was official court composer, his original scores went into the Imperial archives. But there were thousands of dances composed in the last two decades of the 18^th century and obviously for the entire 19^th century, and only a relative handful exist in any other way. The newly acquired Viennese 'play-at-home' habit saved the day!

In the period between 1780 and Nicholas' death in 1790, Haydn likely only composed one march for the Princely Grenadiers, and it is this one. Note the clarinets, the Grenadiers had two of them in their band. This is a classic military style march in every way, a delightful miniature for wind band. Looking forward as far as 1793, when Haydn was arranging some of his works for Flötenuhr (Musical Clock), he transposed this piece to D major and added it to the thirty or so other works there. If you have the set, you can hear it now, as #25 (Hob 19:25). Of course, a recording of the original is more desirable. The one pictured, the only recording available at all, albeit on modern instruments, is wonderfully played; a worthwhile investment for certain.

Our last works for the year are two 'replacement' arias, both for Polzelli. Five years into their relationship, he was still watching out for her and cementing her career with the Eszterháza Opera. There are many other changes and edits to the operas of this year, but the general feeling is that it is too difficult to enumerate them, not least because when changes were made, the original parts were thrown away, and so attributing them with no documentation is without value. While conceding the validity of this, I would also point out; 'who else would have made the musical changes?'. But for all that, the 'Polzelli' arias will live on, firmly established as a loving gift from a lonely composer to his illicit sweetheart.

Next time we will look at 1786, and like a snowball rolling downhill, the Haydn story just gets larger and larger!

Thanks for reading!

1785 – The Music part 2 - Opus 42 Quartet: A polished gem

Hob. #	Genre		Key	Number		Instrument(s)		Notes
03:43	Quartet		d	35		2 Violins, Viola & Cello		Possibly sole survivor of a larger opus commissioned for Spain

Original Hoffmeister 1st Violin part - 1785

Joseph Haydn: International Man of Music! In this year of the 'Paris' Symphonies, we are certainly not limited to France in our travels. The works listed here represent commissions from Spain and England, as well as Vienna, and something for the home-front too.

[To ARTARIA & Co., VIENNA. German]

Estoras, 5th April 1784.

Nobly born, Most highly respected Sir !

Although I have always received more than 100 ducats for my quartets by subscription, and although Herr Willmann promised to give me this sum, I agree to your offer of 300 fl. with following stipulations; first, that you are patient until July, though all six should be finished by then; secondly, I demand either 12 copies or my choice of the dedication. If this proposal is agreeable to you, I shall await your draft of a contract, those quartets which I am at present working on, and of which half are finished, are very short and consist of three pieces only; they are intended for Spain….

(H.C. Robbins-Landon – The Collected Correspondence and London Notebooks of Joseph Haydn 1959 pg. 45)

In the event, the first quartets referenced here, the ones we now call Opus 50, didn't end up on Artaria's presses until December, 1787. The second works mentioned, which I have bolded above, are now presumed to be the germ of our present Opus 42. I will tell you something here and now; I wish I had access to the original of this letter, so I didn't have to rely on someone else's translation. I'm sure Robbins-Landon was a highly competent translator, probably even of 18^th century Viennese as well as German. But his use of the English word 'pieces' here is tremendously ambiguous. It didn't take any time at all for every interpreter since then (including Landon himself) to have taken this to be saying 'an unstated number of works, each consisting of three movements…". I, however, read this as saying 'there are three works, very short; intended for Spain…" How one extrapolates 'movements' from 'pieces' escapes me. I have given you the original translation by Landon though, so you can make your own judgement.

If you will stipulate three quartets, compact but otherwise standard, one then doesn't need to go through various gyrations to justify the presence of a minuet in Opus 42. In my own view, Haydn sent off the three commissioned quartets to Spain, where they no doubt delighted the intended recipient, and sadly were eventually lost by great misfortune. End of that line of the story. But he kept a copy of the d minor quartet, for any of many possible reasons, the most likely being 'he liked it' or 'he saw another opportunity for it', and when his friend, Franz Anton Hoffmeister, solicited a work to help start off his new publishing business, Haydn sent over a copy of this one, along with the overture Hob 1a:4, both already written. Mozart sent over K 499. Occam's Razor leans heavily in favor of this sort of solution rather than, for example, the one proposed by Grave & Grave, which requires retrofitting a minuet and adjusting the harmonic contours to match those of the other three movements. This retrofitting requires making adjustments to the surrounding movements, so that, for example, the first movement ends on a D major chord, so the minuet transition can happen smoothly. If this is so, how then did Movement 1 end when it transitioned directly into the current third movement, the Adagio e cantabile in Bb? In my proposed scenario, it never did that, and so the problem goes away with no further explanation needed. Of course, this bit of iconoclasm is brought to you on the basis of Landon's published translation being correct. Which brings us back full-circle to 'I wish I had access to the original of this letter…'

I	Andante* ed Innocentemente	d	2/4
II	Menuetto: Allegretto – Trio	D / d	3/4
III	Adagio e cantabile	Bb	2/2
IV	Presto	d	2/4
	*originally 'Allegretto', but scratched out by Haydn and replaced by 'Andante'

As far as reception goes, we have 19^th century Haydn biographer Carl Pohl, among others, to thank for the downgrading of this work for many years, since its slight stature seemed to indicate it had to be an early work, thus without much value (werth). Even Karl Geiringer, an early and influential champion of Haydn, in his 1932 first edition of Creative Life in Music called it a "foreign body in the firm suite of quartets up to now". Later commentators, though, recognized this work for the jewel it is. Tovey pointed out that the beautiful slow movement, Adagio e cantabile, is nothing more nor less than a cavatina, an operatic form of aria, and says that if Haydn had only had the luck or cunning to name it that, then people would have had a different perception of it. It took Beethoven, forty years later, to again realize that placing a cavatina in a string quartet (Opus 130 in Bb 5^th movement (Cavatina: Adagio molto espressivo)) might be a good idea.

This has always been considered to be a great work for amateur quartets, it's fifteen and a half total minutes being enough of a challenge for the non-professional. However, don't be deceived by this; it is a beautiful work with enough challenge for professional interpreters to trip over, and opportunities to win over an audience. Haydn is good that way!

Next time we will look at accompanied sonatas, and also at accompanied arias.

Thanks for reading!

1785 – The Music part 1 - Taking Paris by Storm!

Hob I:	Key	NC	HRL	Name	Instruments
87	A	84	84		Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns & Strings
85	Bb	85	85	La Reine	Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns & Strings
83	g	86	86	La Poule	Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns & Strings

 

Symphony 83 in g minor
I certify that this symphony is entirely written by the hand of my teacher, Joseph Haydn
S(igismund) Neukomm, Paris - 1854

It is a fair thing to say; from this point forward, nearly all things Haydn will be painted with an international color. His music had far outgrown the boundaries of Eszterháza or even Vienna. London and Paris were calling!

As we saw in the previous look at Freemasonry, Haydn formally applied for membership at the very end of 1784, and he was approved almost immediately in January, and formally inducted in February. Certainly there were many factors involved in the decision to join, we looked at some of them already, but another one also looms; it is highly likely that the Olympic Lodge made tentative feelers to Vienna through Masonic connections there. Above all else, it was necessary for Haydn to be a Mason. When this came to fruition on 11 February, 1785, the door was now open to commission six symphonies at a phenomenal price.

Why Haydn, why now? Haydn was not an unknown quantity to Paris, although Paris was an unknown quantity to him. Beginning in the late 1770's a Cult of Haydn had grown up, with its roots in the Concert Spirituel. Of the various works which Haydn had written by this point in time, one would have been hard-pressed to have guessed what the groundbreaker was; Paris fell in love with Haydn's Stabat Mater!

It is hard to impress on anyone just what heights Haydn reached in Paris in the 1780's, so I took some numbers which were compiled by Bernard Harrison in his Cambridge Handbook on Haydn's 'Paris' Symphonies and charted them here:

Claude-François-Marie Rigoley, Comte d'Ogny was the music coordinator for Le Concert de la Loge Olympique (Orchestra of the Olympic (Masonic) Lodge), the elite Masonic Lodge in Paris. This orchestra was made up of the finest musicians in Paris, with the membership qualification being membership in the Freemasons. Since he saw these numbers from the Concert Spirituel, and was

Chevalier de Saint-Georges in 1787 - Gabriel Banat

doubtless a Haydn fan himself, he determined for the Lodge to have Haydn music of their own. The commonly held story is that d'Ogny prevailed upon Joseph Bologne, Chevalier de Saint-Georges (Le Mozart Noir), to make the deal with Haydn. It is a pity none of this correspondence remains: no doubt Haydn was familiar with Saint-Georges' music, his violin concertos were played in Vienna, as elsewhere. I recommend you read the biographical link provided; this is a fascinating man of many parts! Haydn was to be paid 25 louis d'or for each symphony plus 5 louis for the French publication rights (from Imbault). Comparatively, Mozart had only received 5 louis in 1779 for his Paris Symphony. This information is disputed, since it was first published in 1873, and the sums involved are so astronomical as to be unbelievable. Other 'facts' given in the account are demonstrably incorrect (Saint-Georges was not the 1^st violin (concertmaster, that is), and Sieber was not the publisher, for example), so this one may well be too. Nonetheless, the payment was well above the going rate. At standard exchange rate of the time, it was equivalent to 1300 gulden, about 70% of his annual salary from the Prince! Also about five times the going rate for symphonies. If it IS the correct number, it was indeed phenomenal! Since I haven't seen any attempt to refute these doubts put forth by Daniel Heartz, I would begin by merely pointing out the chart above; with Haydn being the main 'cash cow' of the foremost music palace of Paris, even a fee which was this far out of line would have been easily recouped in the first season.

What sort of orchestra would Haydn be composing for? There were sixty-eight members, including 14 1^st Violins, 14 2^nd Violins, 7 Violas, 10 Cellos, 7 Double-Basses, 4 Horns, 3 Flutes, 2 each Oboes, Bassoons, Clarinets & Trumpets, plus Timpani. Many of the players are known even today; 1^st flute was François Devienne, Jean-Louis Duport was a cellist, 1^st horn was Jean LeBrun. Imbault was a 2^nd violin, and newly minted music publisher. Not everyone will have played every concert, of course, for example, Haydn never used the clarinets. Overall though, on any given night, this orchestra was easily twice the size of any which Haydn wrote for regularly.

I am not going to change my ways and suddenly begin doing in-depth analyses of these works. There is plenty of literature out there on them, since we are now looking at famous works. No paucity of information or recordings either! If you would like a few recommendations, I have footnoted the ones which I found most informative. The order of the works here is that given by Haydn to Artaria, but not followed by any particular publisher. In 1785 we find #87, 85, 83. In 1786, 84, 86, 82. And so the last shall be first, and the first, last. Here, though, is a summary of my listening adventure.

#1 Hob. I:87

I	Vivace	A	4/4
II	Adagio	D	3/4
III	Menuet	A	3/4
IV	Finale: Vivace	A	2/2

Instrumentation: 1 Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (A alto & D), 1^st & 2^nd Violins, Violas, Cellos & Basses

In his Cambridge Music Handbook on the 'Paris' Symphonies, Bernard Harrison proposes that Haydn's choices for the ordering of these symphonies was based on the sorts of appeal which these works were designed to have. He chose #87 to be first in the first set of three, and #84 in the second set, because he felt these two had the greatest 'popular appeal'. It is the sort of subtle commercial sense which shows again how Haydn the Entrepreneur wished to make the most from each of his works.

Given this angle, it seems reasonable to see, then, how this symphony in A would be the lead work of the entire set. Before the Cult of Haydn was firmly instituted in the early 1780's, the main source of symphonies in Paris was from the Mannheim school. The leading symphonist in Paris before Haydn was, in fact, Carl Joseph Toeschi, a prominent Mannheimer. We can recall Mozart's description to his father of his Paris Symphony beginning with a premier coup d'archet, i.e. – everyone attacking perfectly the first note, and also his use of a Mannheim crescendo. This symphony begins, if not in that exact tradition, then in one closely related, since it uses an initial tutti, and then we are off and running, Vivace! In many ways it harks back to his earlier symphonies with which the French were not only very familiar, but also very fond. Knowing, as we now do, Haydn and Mozart were very close at the time, it is not outrageous to suggest Mozart may well have told Haydn about how good the French wind players were, thus explaining another feature taken from Haydn's earlier style, solos in the Adagio for the flute and the first oboe, and a section for winds alone which closes the first part. We have seen this before, and it would have been familiar to the French audience, so a nice touch for making friends with the orchestra and audience. This Adagio is typically Haydn in its great beauty, but also typically French in its resemblance to a Sinfonie concertante (hereafter – SC), the most popular genre in Paris at the time. Like an SC, it doesn't propel forward by the making of new melodic material, but rather it repeats much of the same material with different orchestration and decorations. As Harrison tells us, altogether, the cadenzas and decorations make up fully one fifth of the entire movement! The Menuet itself wasn't going to put off anyone in Paris; it is a standard minuet, recognizable anywhere. But the trio is virtually a solo! The oboe's tour de force has some notes at the top of its range, capping a wonderful melody, and steals the show. The finale introduces Haydn the jokester to his new audience, with a false ending which foreshadows the famous #90 when played properly with all repeats taken. Generally considered the weak sister of the sextet, one can only say 'if this is the worst of the lot, what must the rest be like?'!

#2 Hob. I:85

I	Adagio - Vivace	Bb	2/2 - 3/4
II	Romance: Allegretto	Eb	2/2
III	Menuetto: Allegretto – Trio	Bb	3/4
IV	Finale: Presto	Bb	2/4

Instrumentation – 1 Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (in Bb alto & Eb), 1^st Violins, 2^nd Violins, Violas, Cellos & Basses

And so we go from the least known to the most played: The Queen of France. Recognized then and now as unconventional and touched by genius, while there may be no evidence supporting the claim of it being Marie Antoinette's favorite, there can be another meaning placed on the name also: the premiere symphony in the set! In my own view, it could be lifted wholesale from the Paris stage and dropped into London ten years later, and its quality would allow it to slip in unnoticed among those peaks of Haydn's creation.

There are any number of fine analyses of this work available, it is surely deserving of them. Since this is not one, I will touch on a few impressions I have. The first movement, after the introduction, is a series of contrasts between agitated, highly dynamic sections and much quieter, almost pastoral ones. This alternation continues throughout, the quiet sections usually dominated by solo oboe, sometimes by the horns, once by the flute, but always suddenly broken off by the orchestra coming back with a more excited treatment of the main theme, which is essentially playing scales. The result of this is almost unsettling, since one's expectations are thwarted to some extent. The theme seems to have traveled a great distance without having actually gone anywhere! However it is played, it is always an alternation between the two main parts.

This is Haydn's first Romance. It is called so because it is based on an opéra comique sort of folk tune called Le gentile et jeune Lisette (Dear little Lisette). It is a set of four variations, and Haydn plays it straight in keeping the strophic (verse) song form consistent throughout. The second variation is clearly in the minor mode, and the third features a prominent role for the flute, while the fourth features the bassoon. He provides the variation then, not by changing any part of the song, but rather by changing the orchestration, accompaniment or mode. This is just the sort of gavotte-style Romance: Allegretto which Haydn used in Symphony #100. The minuet is called 'courtly' by some, but I must not be hearing it correctly then. I find it to be rather on the sassy side, with rhythmic slides and Scotch snaps in the strings along with some nice accompaniment for the horns. Here again, if we were connoisseurs or Kenner, we would see Haydn's humor at work, as he uses seventeen measures of the Trio to harmonically prepare just an eight measure phrase at the end! In any case, the Trio is a Ländler, as we have seen Haydn use often before, with yodeling implied.

The finale is another unique Haydnism. It is a rondo, which we have seen Haydn using almost exclusively lately. But instead of the second part of each refrain being a different theme, each of the second parts is a variation of the original theme. The result is an actual monothematic rondo, which is almost an oxymoron! In any case, it is a brilliant ending to a brilliant symphony, the one which would be the progressive member of this threesome.

#3 Hob. I:83

I	Allegro spiritoso	g	4/4
II	Andante	Eb	3/4
III	Menuet: Allegretto – Trio	G	3/4
IV	Finale: Vivace	G	12/8

Instrumentation – 1 Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (in G & Eb), 1^st Violins, 2^nd Violins, Violas, Cello obbligato, Cellos & Basses

So in this typical Haydn works grouping, we have seen, so far, popular style and progressive style. It should come as no surprise, then, to see the third member of our group is humorous and perhaps slightly fantastic. It is a grouping which Haydn felt would best show the multiple facets of the composer's art. This is a minor mode work, but one which doesn't stay long in, or even return to, the minor, it seems to be there for the express purpose of allowing the work to set a tone, called 'angry' by some, but 'adventurous' by me! It is bold and takes off right from the beginning by repeating the opening theme three times, then relaxing the tension a bit with a brief respite in which the oboe repeats the dotted rhythm opening theme several times while the orchestra prepares to attack the main theme yet again. While this seems like an interruption of the flow, it is actually a device which connects the main material together in a great bit of continuity and allows it to regain its force. Those who fancy it sounds like a hen clucking are welcome to the idea, oboists the world over either love you or hate you for it. 'Mock-heroic' sounds more like it to me, but to each its own. It does serve the purpose of reinforcing the unusual rhythm being played in the strings just then, almost to the point of being a parody of the theme itself. The whole development climaxes with a great buildup of the minor mode theme into a tutti crescendo, and then we leave all of it behind and finish in the major with everyone playing the delightful second theme which has been used as a tension release since the beginning. Stylistically I find it reminiscent in many ways of the d minor first movement of #80, which we saw just last year. Perhaps the second theme is a trifle less outrageous than the country dance used there, similar idea though. As a thought I wouldn't want to impose on you, it seems to me as though Haydn is almost mocking the seriousness which had been attaching to minor mode works since the early 1770's. The very few works he has written all seem to poke fun at both Sturm UND Drang!

The lovely Andante, is totally serene, major mode charm. Almost. A short way along (22 measures to be exact), a blast of tension-filled dissonance erupts from the violins. It only lasts for a moment, but you know it will come around again, and indeed it does, led into this time by a falling scale figure which sort of previews the interrupting dissonance. And each time it reoccurs, these things are expanded, with what can really only be thought of today as a lovely dissonance, but which, at the time, must have brought the audience up short! Finally, and defying expectations, the movement comes to an end in tranquil serenity with no closing bit of dissonance. While the minuet has a surface conventionality, the rhythm is distinctly off-beat so it is asymmetric. Thus the usual strong and weak beats which guide the dancers are not necessarily on the right beat! Never having danced a minuet, I can't be sure, but I think this one would be a challenge. The finale is another dance, a gigue this time, but pushed to its limits. The melody itself is non-existent, but the material is more than adequate to construct a hard-driving yet joyful sounding finale to a symphony which sets new standards for Haydn and symphonies in general.

And this is just the first music of the year. Next time, perhaps a short trip to Spain and England? Why not?

Thanks for reading!

Suggested Reading:

1. Haydn The 'Paris Symphonies' A Cambridge Music Handbook by Bernard Harrison (Cambridge University Press 1998)
2. The Life of Haydn    by David Wyn Jones (Cambridge University Press 2009)
3. Mozart, Haydn and Early Beethoven – 1781 – 1802 Daniel Heartz (W.W. Norton 2009)
4. Joseph Haydn – Chronicle & Works vol. II H.C. Robbins-Landon (Indiana University Press 1978)

 

1785 – The Year Haydn, Mozart & Freemasonry were the news

By now, Haydn has managed to get involved with many things which we didn't necessarily expect to discover on this journey through his life. If you have followed this series for the last (nearly) two years, you have certainly poked your nose into some mysterious corners of European culture, such as the relationship with the Turks, Punch & Judy shows, Tasso and Ariosto, the open-house salon, the Applausus cantata tradition and Name Days, among dozens of others. None of those things were intended to be secret by their nature, they merely became so because styles and interests change. But this year we will be looking at something which was rather on the covert side, which is very likely a reason for its impending demise in Austria; this year Haydn decides to become a Freemason. As you will see, this will be our only opportunity to have this discussion, but it may be for reasons you haven't anticipated as yet.

Title page from Artaria's first edition of Mozart's "Haydn Quartets"

Before we go there though, let us review the balance of the year. It certainly had events, and to spare! The opera season was truncated this year, no explanation, but the results were gratifying for Haydn, since he spent more time than usual in Vienna. The season proper began in April instead of February and ended in mid-November rather than mid-December. The result was a mere eighty-nine performances. No mention if Haydn managed this pittance with one hand tied behind his back. Still, there was no shortage of preparatory work involved, we will see/hear a very nice insertion aria for Polzelli to sing as 'Rosina' in Anfossi's Il matrimonio per inganno, and another for her to sing as 'Modesta' in Il geloso in cimento, again by Anfossi.

Another project of interest is the dramma per musica (opera seria) Montezuma. Nominally it is a performance of the 1781 Neapolitan work by Niccolò Zingarelli. However, Haydn treated it to such a reworking one could scarcely call the finished product a Zingarelli opera! In his essay on this subject, musicologist John Rice goes into some depth as to what, exactly, we should call this work. Traditionally, it has been said to be a 'major revision' by Haydn. By the time Haydn was done with it, it had become a collection of arias and ensembles by various composers. It was presumably Haydn who replaced most of Zingarelli's orchestral music with music by other composers, thus transforming the opera into a pasticcio containing as few as five items by Zingarelli: the overture, three accompanied recitatives, and a march.

There is truly a lot going on here for an opera historian or enthusiast to, um, enthuse over. For example, the subject of the work itself, a New World topic instead of mythology or chivalry or European history. There were very few operas written on New World subjects, and previous efforts at telling the Montezuma story, both one-offs, by Vivaldi and Graun, were finely done, but didn't start any trends. Then too, operatic conventions couldn't simply be flouted with impunity, so Montezuma's death was an historical fact which was tough to handle. As was the necessary portrayal of Christian conquerors in their factually raw state. The censors would have never allowed it. It was as recently as 1765 when these problems got resolved, with artful obfuscation, it must be said, by Vittorio Amedeo Cigna-Santi. This libretto met the criteria required by both the opera-loving public and the censors, although an historian may have been distraught! If you decide to look further into this topic yourself, and I commend it to any interested party, you will also discover some interesting tidbits, such as a fair amount of the music which Haydn used to replace Zingarelli's is still unidentified, and may actually be by Haydn. There is a topic worth digging around in!

In January, Haydn was still in Vienna. He composed a set of minuets (12 Minuets Hob 9:8) which he sold to Torricella. Of course, we saw last year Torricella's dire situation; in the event, these works, too, like the symphonies 76-78, were acquired and published (as keyboard reductions though) by Artaria. And this is what is left today, the original orchestral arrangements are lost, presumably gone forever.

Dedication page from Artaria 1st edition

January was a good month for Haydn on other fronts, too. On 15 January, Mozart arranged to have all six of the 'Haydn' Quartets played at a private party which he gave for Haydn at his own house. On February 12, Mozart's father, Leopold, had arrived in town for an extended visit, and the last three of the quartets were played once again, this time with Haydn and Leopold as audience. The next day, Leopold wrote to Nannerl, still in Salzburg;

[16 February 1785 Leopold to Nannerl]

On Saturday evening Herr Joseph Haydn and the two Barons Tinti came to see us and the new quartets were performed, or rather, the three new oneswhich Wolfgang has added to the other three which we have already. The new ones are somewhat easier, but at the same time excellent compositions. Haydn said to me: 'Before God and as an honest man I tell you that your son is the greatest composer known to me either in person or by name. He has taste and, what is more, the most profound knowledge of composition.

Emily Anderson - The Letters of Mozart & His Family

This now famous sentence was not intended to flatter Leopold, it was doubtless a completely sincere and heartfelt expression on Haydn's part.

September brings this:

[Letter from Mozart to Haydn – Sept 1]
[Used by Artaria as the score dedication – Original in Italian, familiar form]

To my dear friend Haydn,
A father who had resolved to send his children out into the great world finds it advisable to entrust them to the protection and guidance of a highly celebrated Man, especially since this man, by a stroke of luck, is his best Friend. Here then, celebrated Man and dearest Friend, are my six sons. They are, it is true, the fruit of a long and laborious endeavor, yet the hope inspired in me by several Friends that it may be at least partly compensated encourages me, and I flatter myself that this offspring will serve to afford me solace one day. You, yourself, dearest friend, told me of your satisfaction with them during your last Sojourn in this Capital. It is this indulgence above all which urges me more than anything else; and thus I entrust them to your care and hope they are not altogether unworthy of your favor. Do but receive them kindly, be their Father, Guide and Friend! From this moment I cede to you all my rights over them, begging you however to look indulgently upon the defects which the partiality of a Father's eye may have concealed from me, and in spite of them to continue in your generous Friendship for him who so greatly values it, in expectation of which I am, with all of my Heart, my dearest Friend, your most Sincere Friend,

W.A. Mozart

General Francisco de Miranda
by Martin Tovar y Tovar

In October, there is yet another reminder of the New World. A visit from General Francisco de Miranda, Venezuelan revolutionary, friend of Washington and Hamilton in America, is recounted from his diary:

[October 26, 1785 – Diary entry] …the famous Hayden [sic] for whom I was carrying letters, accompanied me directly and showed me the whole of the palace… The theater which performs the whole year 'round costs the Prince 30,000 florins a year… in the evening we went to the opera, saw the Prince, his niece and his mistress (a vulgar woman)… the orchestra was twenty-four instruments, Haydn played the harpsichord (el clave).

[October 28 -] The next day early, Hayden came and we went together in a coach sent by the Prince to see the garden…. Talked a lot about music with Hayden, and he agreed with me about the merit of Boccherini…

Overall, this innocuous tidbit of daily life speaks more to us than it might otherwise do. Miranda was a genuinely famous man, if one checks out the biographical link above. Yet here he is, carrying letters to Haydn! Of course, that was probably just a sidelight to the nearly mandatory visit to Eszterháza which was a Grand Tour quality attraction by 1785. We see Nicholas openly hobnobbing with his mistress, we get some solid information on the band and Haydn's continuing position as a mere continuo player in it. And we see yet another example of Haydn's gracious opinions about other composers.

The main thing which Haydn and Miranda had in common, though, was Freemasonry. Miranda actually had founded a major Lodge in London, Haydn was a highly respected member of a Viennese Lodge which was currently under close scrutiny from the government. Perhaps this was the source of the letters Miranda carried, if indeed they existed beyond being a pretext (letters from Spain perhaps? Would I dare even speculate that they might have anything to do with the concurrent commission for The Seven Last Words ??).

While 1785 is the only year of public record concerning Haydn and Freemasonry, it must be remembered that it was also the year in which Emperor Joseph II shut down nearly every Lodge in the empire and consolidated the Viennese Lodges into one over which he had control. So the small things you may have read about Haydn's feelings about The Order can be very deceptive. Early times (1959), Landon speculates Haydn's lack of attendance stemmed from being uninterested after his initiation and discovering what it was all about. Geiringer says Haydn's Catholic faith overcame any interest he might have in this proscribed secret society. To put those two to bed right away, let us point out a bit of history; Haydn was initiated in February, 1785. He then left for a season in Eszterháza from which he didn't return to Vienna until early December. On December 11, 1785, Joseph II issued the Freimaurerpatent, which closed his Lodge completely down before he ever got an opportunity to attend another meeting there! Geiringer's point is a two-edged sword; if one examines the books in Haydn's library, of which there are many, a great proportion of them are written by people who are influential Enlightenment thinkers and writers. Freemasonry went hand-in-hand with the Enlightenment, as we have seen. Of books which could be considered 'devotional'; i.e. – faith-based, the sum total is zero. So Haydn's faith didn't proceed from intellectual stimulation but rather was at a deeper, personal level. It should also be mentioned here that there were several hundreds of Freemasons in Haydn's Vienna, and they all shared his deep Catholic faith and background. So if Masonic philosophy would put Haydn off, what of these others?

Some further points which I find interesting; Haydn's 'best and dearest friend', Mozart, was an active and enthusiastic Freemason, belonging to the Lodge 'New Crowned Hope'. If Haydn was looking for social stimulation, this would seem like the logical place for him to join the Order, made even easier because while Leopold was in town for the quartet party described earlier, he joined 'New Crowned Hope'. However, Haydn ended up joining Zur wahren Eintracht (True Harmony) instead. The reasons for this can only be, dare I say it, intellectual! True Harmony was the Lodge which was most dominated by the cream of the literati, arts and science. It was well-known to be the meeting place for the foremost representatives of the various fields of art and thought. Haydn rubbed elbows with these men regularly at salons, and an invitation to join them could only be considered the highest form of compliment.

Aloys Blumauer

If Geiringer wished to do so, he could have overlooked the moral code of the corrupt Church and instead looked at the Journal of True Harmony, in which it was written by poet and Journal editor Aloys Blumauer;

The purpose of our Masonic Journal is to prevent the lamentable consequences of indifference on the part of (ou)r often most-esteemed members; to present our Order to the Masonic public in its special, most beautiful and dignified form; to guide the searching spirit of our members only to fruitful paths which run parallel to the welfare of humanity; in short, to provide Masonry with genuine workers devoted to its purpose, and through them to give mankind just as many benefactors.

Whew! How revolutionary is that? Nonetheless, it proved impossible in the event, for the Powers That Be to take any of this at face value. True Harmony was hit harder than any other Lodge by the edict of December 1785. Haydn's failure to join another Viennese lodge, which is what Mozart did, can be ascribed to many other things than lack of enthusiasm. Research still continues into lodges outside of Vienna, such as in Pressburg, and possibly in Eszterháza itself, since Nicholas I was sympathetic to Masonry and Nicholas II was to be the Master of Mozart's new Lodge in 1790! It is Haydn's own statement to Greisinger twenty years in the future which speaks volumes about his true attitude towards Masonry and Enlightened principles;

I did my duty and I was useful to the world…

It could have been his epitaph.

Next time we'll head to Paris to eat some fruit from the Masonic Tree.

Thanks for reading!