1791 – The Music part 2 - Just getting started!

Hob I:	NC	HRL	Key	Name	Instruments
95	95	95	c		Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns, 2 Trumpets, Timpani & Strings
96	96	96	D	The Miracle	2 Flutes, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns, 2 Trumpets, Timpani & Strings

The Old London Bridge
by Samuel Scott

The early symphonies of 1791 are nearly impossible to date chronologically; indeed, there is no reason to suppose they weren't composed nearly simultaneously. As we have already seen, Haydn carried two symphonies with him to London, N^o.90 and N^o.92. Landon's detective work has demonstrated quite neatly that the symphony played at the first Concert of the series, and repeated at the second Concert, was N^o.92, a hard work to beat as an introductory calling card to a new city! From this point forward, though, it is difficult, using only the most subtle clues, to say which works were performed next.

Someone who has been in the background of Haydn's life and career since as early as 1780 or so is Hofrat (Councilor) Franz Bernhard Ritter (Sir Knight) von Kees. According to Adalbert Gyrowetz' memoir, Kees was "… recognized as the first friend of music in Vienna". His personal 'house' orchestra gave regular concerts of all the latest and greatest music being produced in the area, and both Mozart and Haydn were gratified to have their works played there. But Kees serves another purpose which we can appreciate now because of the magnitude of the favor he did us. He was a passionate collector of manuscripts, and his collection of Haydn symphonies surpasses even the Esterházy collection, not least because they weren't gutted by fire. Haydn, as it turns out, sent copies of all his works to Kees. In fact, when Haydn made another try at a catalog of his works, in 1805, he used Kees' catalog of his own collection as a resource for the 'Symphonies' section. So with this as background, we are able to put this previously omitted postscript to the January 8^th letter to Marianne Genzinger into some perspective:

[To MARIA ANNA VON GENZINGER, VIENNA. German]

London, 8^th January 1791.

Nobly born, Gracious Lady!

[big snip]

At present I am working on symphonies, because the libretto of the opera is not yet decided on, but in order to have more quiet I shall have to rent a room far from the center of town. I would gladly write you in more detail, but I am afraid of missing the mail-coach. Meanwhile I am, with kindest regards to your husband, Fraulein Pepi and all the others, most respectfully,

Your Grace's most sincere and obedient servant,

Joseph Haydn.

[PS] - Now I have a request to make of Your Grace. I don't know whether I left the Symphony in E flat [N^o.91], which Your Grace returned to me, in my apartments at home, or whether it has been stolen from me en route. I missed it yesterday and need it urgently, and so I beg you to get it from my kind friend, Herr von Kees, and to copy it in your own home on small-sized paper for mailing, and send it here in the mail as soon as possible. Should Herr von Kees hesitate about this, which I don't think likely, Your Grace can always send him this letter.

In the event, the third Vienna symphony didn't arrive in time for the 1791 season, and ended up being performed in 1792, as we will see. But further proof of the relationship between Haydn and Kees shows up in the dating of Symphony 95 & 96. Kees has copies (of course) of all the London symphonies, and he shows the order to be N^o.96 in D followed by N^o.95 in c minor. Despite all that, the status quo inexplicably changed at some point, and the original order of 95 preceding 96 was reestablished. Even so, many musicologists don't accept it. I think it is fair to say that there is simply no way to determine with certainty which came first.

By the time we arrive at Concert N^o.4 on April 1^st, the press release announcing 'This Evening's Concert' begins with an overture by Gyrowetz, followed by a new string quartet by Koželuch, two composers who were quite popular in London, even though they were being thrown to the lions by being played during the extended period of seating and settling in. Part 2, however, opens with a "New Grand Overture, MS (in manuscript) by Haydn". Given the time frame, i.e. - the opera was essentially finished (in more ways than one, I must add) and it was time for a new work, as promised, and given our surmise that No.96 was the first new work completed, we will postulate that the April Fool's crowd of 1791 indeed saw the new Symphony in D major.

                       Woodfall's Register, April 2^nd:

HANOVER SQUARE

The Fourth performance of the Concerts under the direction of the celebrated HAYDN and Mr. Salomon, took place at these rooms last night, and was such as might be expected from the great musical talents employed in the conduct of them.

Of the instrumental pieces, though all excellent, nothing occurred that could bear any comparison with the new overture of HAYDN, which exhibited all the fire and perfection of his genius.

The whole of this charming composition, was received by the most intelligent amateurs, with the highest admiration…

Hob. I:96 Symphony in D - The Miracle
Mvmt.	Tempo	Meter	Key
I (intro)	Adagio	3/4	D
I	Allegro	3/4	D
II	Andante	6/8	G
III	Menuet: Allegretto	3/4	D
	Trio	3/4	D
IV	Vivace [assai]	2/4	D
Instruments - 2 Flutes, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (in D & G), 2 Trumpets (in D & C), Timpani, 2 Violins, Viola, Cello, Basso

As do so many Haydn symphonies, this one has a name, and like so many of those, it is undeserved! We hear the story originally from A.C. Dies, in his Biographical News (Biographische Nachrichten):

When Haydn appeared in the orchestra and sat down at the pianoforte to conduct a symphony himself, the curious audience in the parterre left their seats and crowded towards the orchestra, the better to see the famous Haydn quite close. The seats in the middle of the floor were thus empty, and hardly were they emptied when the great chandelier crashed down and broke into bits, throwing the numerous gathering into great consternation! As soon as the first moment of fright was over, and those who had pressed forward could think of the danger they had luckily escaped and find words to express it, several persons uttered the state of their feelings with loud cries of "Miracle! Miracle!". …. And the Londoners thus named the symphony 'The Miracle".

All of which is a very nice story, and it is even true! The only drawback to it, as applied to Symphony N^o.96, is that according to the newspapers, it occurred on February 2, 1795, which was the premiere, not of N^o.96, but of N^o.102! Oh well… Should we lobby to get a name, at last, for N^o.102?

Like all but one of the London symphonies, this one begins with a slow introduction, an extraordinarily attractive Adagio in which the main rhythm of the subsequent Allegro is established along with a strong sense of minor key potential, which will show up again at the climax of the Allegro. The trumpets and drums are held in reserve for now, all the better to make a big impression when they show up later. The other thing to note in the introduction is the wonderful way Haydn uses the bassoon to weave high and low among the strings. Finally, a long held note in the oboe leads us into the Allegro.

One of the leading impressions which the listener takes away from this superb movement is the great series of fanfares in the trumpets which accentuate the rhythm throughout the movement. The brass seem to own it from beginning to end. The other part which stands out especially is the way the bassoon and the flute are constantly playing off each other. Indeed, it could be argued that the bassoon is the most pivotal instrument in the entire movement, since no matter which of the themes is being played, the bassoon plays a prominent part in establishing the rhythm.

The second movement, Andante, features the winds playing varied solos against the backdrop of the strings providing a steady harmonic rhythm. The flute, oboe and bassoon all provide a counter melody to the strings, ending up in a tutti, all of which repeats in various ways. The last minute is devoted to a series of trills on the various winds against a backdrop of very interesting and attractive chords.

The third movement is instantly recognizable as a classic, big band minuet. It brings to mind the minuets of the 1780's, with their regal style. The Trio, however, is much more in Haydn's Ländler style, strong on the solo oboe played over an oompah rhythm, it ends in a nicely virtuosic, tiny cadenza before heading back to the minuet proper.

The Vivace finale is based on a traditional song, it is a rondo, which has become Haydn's standard finale since around the time of the Paris Symphonies. It is a fast movement, the only speed regulator being the capability of the players! The final section, a coda, ends with fanfares in the winds in a way which is reminiscent of the opening movement. It is a thrilling conclusion!

Hob. I:95 Symphony in c
Mvmt.	Tempo	Meter	Key
I	Allegro moderato	2/2	c - C
II	Andante	6/8	Eb
III	Menuet: Allegretto	3/4	c
	Trio	3/4	C
IV	Finale: Vivace	2/2	C
Instruments - Flute, 2 Oboes, 2 Bassoons, 2 Horns (in Eb & C), 2 Trumpets (in C), Timpani, 2 Violins, Viola, Cello, Basso

The second symphony in the London set has some unique characteristics going for it: it is the only one of the twelve written in a minor key, and it is also the only one which doesn't have a slow introduction. In addition, it remains the only one for which a first performance date cannot be determined, or at least strongly hinted at. Still, the autograph manuscript is very clearly dated in Haydn's hand: London 1791.

The opening movement resembles other late minor mode symphonies, the ones since 1780 or so, in that they are constructed of two quite contrasting ideas, one very powerful, the other rather more delicate and dancelike. The contrast is not as sharply defined as we found in N^o.80 in d or N^o.83 in g, but it is still there, serving the same purpose, which is, to my mind, to diffuse the power of the other theme in an anti-Sturm und Drang sort of way. The power is certainly not diminished at the end though, as it closes out with a great finish!

The second movement Andante is a set of very attractive variations on a lovely melody, the most attractive of all being for the solo cello, just the sort of section he used to include in his early Esterházy symphonies, although perhaps a bit more sophisticated in the instrumentation of the ritornello. It must have been then, as it is today, a special treat for the cellist!

The Menuet is one of the few movements in later Haydn which both begins and ends in the minor. Although it was certainly not meant to be danced to, it actually could have been, maintaining a strongly regular beat throughout. As so often, though, we find the Trio to be where Haydn went his own way. The cello once again is the star, displacing the usual wind instrument as the soloist. Haydn makes the most of being in C major here, since he uses the open, thus very resonant, C and G strings on the cello quite extensively to good effect.

The finale is a rondo, which is about the only thing in this symphony which matches Haydn's current style! The rondo itself alternates a theme which is very modern with one which has strong elements of a much older style. This refrain gets progressively shorter upon each repeat until there is nothing left but to close in the modern style. It is a very fine finale, as is the entire symphony.

It is interesting how one or another of these symphonies, as with any other set of works, achieves great popularity relative to its brethren. I have speculated on this before with little reward. Neither of these first two symphonies, easily the match of any of the final twenty-five in inventiveness and execution, gained great fame and popularity, although in fact, they were probably written, as were the first of the Paris set, with exactly that thought in mind. Haydn was looking to discover what his audience wanted and where their taste lay. N^o. 96 was by far the more popular, although a long way from some others in the series, but N^o.95, even though it was in a minor key and had all the other features which usually guarantee success, was not a good seller in the reprint market or in its arrangement as a piano trio. This is likely the reason why Haydn abandoned both the minor mode and also structuring works with no introduction for the remainder of his time in London. Those are better indicators than applause when it comes to judging what really met with approval!

The 'new music' concert series didn't only depend upon symphonies, next time we will take a look at some of the other little gems which Haydn conjured up for the amusement of the 'Nobility and Gentry'!

Thanks for reading!