Luchesi and the Bonn Court

[robert newman]

Joy,

Dunfermline is an ancient city with a present population of about 55,000 in the county of Fife. It was for several centuries the capital of Scotland (before Edinburgh). I suppose its chief claim to fame is that it was the birthplace of King Charles 1st of England (the one who literally lost his head after the English Civil War) and was also the birthplace of the 'rag to riches' philanthropist Andrew Carnegie (who ended up building most of the railway system of the USA in the 19th century) - the same man who built many libraries and concert venues such as Carnegie Hall.

Yesterday I was reading that in the archives of the New York Philharmonic there are some 80 letters from the violinist Bridgetower (friend of Beethoven) to the man who established the New York Philharmonic Orchestra. One day I would like to hear that great orchestra and also that of Chicago.

(I think the current thread has almost run its course). I wanted to ask why they called the city of Phoenix by that name ? Maybe it was somehow burned down and then rebuilt in its early days so the city rose from the ashes, so to speak ?

Anyway, best regards

Robert

[The Master]

The mutlow Bridgetower's "friendship" with Beethoven was just fleeting although he was the original dedication of the violinsonaten a major op47.Beethoven gave that honour to Kreutzer.

In rehersals Bridgetower struggled to read the score, the frequent fermatas, coupled with the feigned confused begining of the recapitulation was too much for him.

[Hofrat]

Dear Droell;

Beethoven was spared the drudgery of concert tours because he received stipends from three nobles. Beethoven was perhaps the only major composer of his day that never set foot in Paris, London, and Rome.


Hofrat

[Hofrat]

Originally posted by robert newman:

I think the current thread has almost run its course. I wanted to ask why they called the city of Phoenix by that name ? Maybe it was somehow burned down and then rebuilt in its early days so the city rose from the ashes, so to speak ?

Dear Robert;

Yes, the name "Phoenix" was chosen because the present city (founded in 1868) "arose" from an earlier Indian settlement that was abandoned in the 1400's.


Hofrat

[robert newman]

Thanks for that - I didn't know Bridgetower struggled with the 'Kreuzer' but it's very interesting. Beethoven is always amazing us, it seems. His 'Archduke' Trio is exquisite. There are things he is doing in his sonatas, even early ones, that are simply wonderful.

(I have never studied his music in the great depth that it no doubt deserves though I do love and have heard most of his works. I mean that some composers beg us to look closely at the technicalities of what they are doing - but in my case I simply just enjoy Beethoven). There is one sonata in particular that has such a 'luminous' feeling to it that I'd like to ask about it in another post). You will perhaps forgive me thinking that Luchesi's Sonatas Opus 1 were known to Beethoven and had some influence on him. But it's difficult to imagine hearing any sonatas by Beethoven on the pianos that existed at the time they were written. I wonder if they would be bearable to my ear and will look at this some time.

Thanks for the info on Phoenix.

Thanks

Robert

[Droell]

Originally posted by Hofrat:
Dear Droell;

Beethoven was spared the drudgery of concert tours because he received stipends from three nobles. Beethoven was perhaps the only major composer of his day that never set foot in Paris, London, and Rome.


Hofrat

Dear Hofrat,

Thanks for your note, it is helpful. Now, since everything is in the air, can we find out why they did so? Ie, who put them up to it? Beethoven was the new guy in town, only 23 or so - and he thought himself perhaps 18. Why was he not asked to first prove himself, ie, make a grand tour?

Elsewhere, we have not established some essential baselines.

We have presumed an 18th century kapelmeister would function as we would imagine a 20th century kapelmeister, but we already have evidence that this was not so.

It has been stated several times in this thread that music found to be in the possession of the kapelmeister (at times of inventory) were to be attributed to the kapelmeister of the day. Which would seem to be regardless of their actual provenance, even when that was known.

This implies a medieval concept of ownership, one based not on ability, but on rank. It implies that all music produced inside the domain of the kapelmeister, by any citizen whosoever, was the property of the kapelmeister of the day. Of course, given the educational opportunities in any given kapelmeister's domain, he or one of his subordinates or predecessors was probably the composer's teacher. Which means that not only would the composer be known to the kapelmeister, but would probably report his various creations to the kapelmeister anyway. (It might be that he was required to do so.) We may here discount self-taught shepherds with pan pipes. Beyond simple melodies, such untrained fellows were unlikely to compose anything of interest & could therefore be ignored.

If what Haydn was running in Esterhazy was essentially a big kapelmeister-thing, then the dispute with Pleyel comes into focus. Pleyel offers his work to his teacher, Haydn, because that's what was expected of him. Haydn takes it as his property, because that was his right. The dispute presumably arose from the clash of medieval rights, based on rank, and modern rights, based on original source. Pleyel asserted his right to publish his work under his own name. Haydn asserted his right to publish any work produced in his domain, under his name. Pleyel, having been his student, was in this light eternally Haydn's subject, regardless of his actual whereabouts. (Recall that The Marriage of Figaro was about the Droit de Seigneur, the right of the local lord to do what he wanted with any of the local women.)

The inventory, taken at Bonn in 1784, seems to have been unique in that instead of blindly attributing all works on the premises to the current kapelmeister, attempts were made to sort them out according to actual or purported authors. Additionally, it was undertaken without the presence of the kapelmeister himself, which, to put it politely, is a grave breach of protocol. We may presume it was not done to the standards typical of the kapelmeister in question, whatever those standards may have been.

Yet, puzzlingly, none of this seems to have attracted the attention of the locals. And we are here not talking of any kapelmeister, in any little dusty town, but that town which produced the most famous composer of all time. Everything these people ever did, every word they ever spoke, every thought they ever had, has already been recorded & analyzed ten times over. Either what has been alleged never actually happened, or, nothing that happened was at all unusual. Bear with me while I explore the second possibility.

So, suppose that aside from the wealth of details recorded in the inventory, there was nothing at all unsual with the works found? The nature of the kapelmeister position is one in which a large mass of music will, over time, be accumulated. Only a small part of this will be actual work of any given kapelmeister.

This horde of music was presumably the personal asset of the kapelmeister of the day. So what did kapelmeisters do when they got together at their annual conventions? (Aside from drink & chase women, of course.) By "conventions", I am not being facetious. Were musicians (and kapelmeisters) one of the usual medieval crafts & guilds? If so, then they were known to each other and presumably, from time to time, in contact with one other.

Which brings up horse trading. Suppose the local Elector is at death's door, suppose he had only been in office six months, suppose further that his predecessor had also died, and then suppose that for whatever reason, in those six months you had never gotten around to composing a new funeral ode? That's your job, you cannot be caught out! In a panic, you send a hurried request to a friendly kapelmeister in a neighboring province. You know he has a nice, unheard funeral ode. You also know his Elector is alive & well. Your friend is agreeable to helping you out of a jam, but he has a price: That lovely Christmas cantata that is your pride & joy. Grumbling, you agree to the swap, and neither court is ever the wiser.

From this, we can extrapolate that kapelmeisters freely exchanged works in their possession. Which, more than anything else, would necessitate inventories from time to time.

(The medieval world was far stranger than this. In The Traveler's Key to Medieval France, by John James (Alfred A. Knopf, New York, 1986), he relates that when 13th century French clergy stole sacred relics from competing abbeys, the theft was rationalized as the dead saint being unhappy with his treatment & seeking improved arrangements elsewhere.)

I look again at Haydn at Esterhazy. During his tenure there, Esterhazy grew into a musical powerhouse. Presuming Haydn "owned" all the music produced in his region, then as Esterhazy grew, so did the sheer number of works that "Haydn" was credited with. To both his & our everlasting confusion. If what Robert Newman alleges is true, Haydn's panicky attempts to create "autographs" of works that turned up in Esterhazy indicates that ownership & property rights were changing during his lifetime & that he was adapting as best he could.

Further, I get the impression that what Leopold was hoping for was to meet up with someone very like Max Franz: A noble with the power to appoint his son to a plum position, but one lacking detailed knowledge of what I might term the "music industry". Hence Luchesi's ability to turn tables to his benefit, although, if I am correct, Franz would have had pretty much the same luck with most any other kapelmeister. Which might be why Max & Leopold never tried again. (Leopold must have been hoping for a prince with more backbone.)

In these notes I am trying to construct a reality in which the actions of the Mozarts, Haydn, Beethoven, Luchesi & others are essentially normal & what anyone would have done in similar circumstances. I have no idea if I am right or wrong.

This is all speculation, but until a baseline is established, in what way can it be claimed that Luchesi's tenure in Bonn was anything out of the ordinary? My theory has the additional advantage of making Luchesi's position, not Luchesi himself, the real source of his power. It is not necessarily that Luchesi wrote the works that are now to be attributed to Haydn and Mozart, but that he, as kapelmeister, had access to libraries (both in Germany & in Italy) containing them. Perhaps Luchesi wrote no significant music & was simply a dealer in scores?

[robert newman]

Droell has made so many good points that I really must comment on them.

One of the few German scholars to have studied Luchesi's career at Bonn is Claudia Valder-Knechtges ('Die Kirchermusik - A. Luchesi - Kassel 1983) and although she was focusing on church music her findings are very significant. She says of the practices that existed with Kapellmeisters -

'When the copyist does not mention the name of the composer on the manuscript it was always quite easy to attribute it as such to the local Kapellmeister then in office, while with works of foreign or ancient authors it was in general indicated whose works they actually were, when they had been copied, and for what particular reason they had been copied'. (p.134)

Thus, unsigned works in a music archive were typically attributed to the current Kapellmeister at the time of any inventory nd this practice truly was in place and understood right across Europe. (I have many examples of this occurring). When works were entered in to the archive of a chapel the Kapellmeister was responsible for recording this. If copies were made of works already in the archive the Kapellmeister was responsible to oversee this also. But we never see such a thing occurring as happened in the 1784 inventory, where whole armfuls of manuscripts are not attributed to anyone. The whole point of an Inventory is surely to record what is in the inventory. If no name is there the system, as already stated, attributes these works to the Kapellmeister. Many Kapellmeisters died with their entire works not signed by them - these, in exactly the same way, were attributed to them at the time of their death. Johann Sebastian Bach's cantatas were in many cases not signed by him too. Yet they were attributed to him because he was the Kapellemeister.

So the irregularities of the Bonn Inventory (at which the Kapellmeister was not even present) are obvious.

Droell is right that at Bonn (which was one of the great centres of music in all of Europe - second only to Rome itself) Inventories were made with real precision. The music there was more or less officially surveyed on an ongoing basis. We know there was an Inventory at Bonn in 1723 after the death of the Elector Prince Joseph Clemens (1688-1723). There was another in 1764 and again in 1766 (the second of these being made by Ludwig van Beethoven senior and details of this published in 1924 by Adolf Sandberger (who strangely confused it with the one of 1784). Some of the French works contained in the 1766 inventory are today at Modena and are further proofs that the Luchesi archive there came from Bonn.

It must also be stated that Neefe and Fries did not make an inventory of all music then in Bonn but confined it to theatrical, instrumental and sacred works with orchestra. They did not touch the chamber music, for example.

Since this thread may end at any time I would like to say that certain things in this affair are now hotly disputed. Official history is that the Bonn archives arrived at Modena around 1836. No proof in support of this date has yet been offered. But, in fact, after it left Bonn in 1794 we know that it was at Max Franz's castle until 1801, the year of his death (and the year too of Luchesi's death). But in 1814 the French rule of Bonn ended. That is the year when the entire archive should have been restored to the chapel. In fact, after that date, anyone who owned or was holding this property of the Bonn Principality was technically a thief. And yet we are told that the Bonn archives nevertheless arrived at Modena only around 1836.

It's for these reasons that I and others believe the Bonn archives actually left Germany by around 1814, not later. It would be interesting to know what musical activity there was at Bonn chapel during the years immediately following 1814 ?

The murky history of these great archives as they were carried across Europe is matched only by their equally murky journey back to Vienna some time during the late 19th century. For the works we find today at Modena are only a fraction of the Bonn archives - the vast majority of the music was returned to Vienna to the library of the Emperor before being split in to various parts which went to various archives and libraries across Vienna. But, amazingly, no documentation has yet been produced that would tell us who received what, when, and where it went.

And so the secret history of the Bonn archives is truly that of a conspiracy, in the sense that these works, property not of Max Franz or any other individual, were taken away from Bonn by mysterious means, kept between 1801 and perhaps 1814 somewhere other than Bad Mergentheim, returned only partially to Vienna at a date we still do not know, allowed to be divided and split between different libraries and archives by people whose names we do not know. And, to this day, this property of Bonn is not returned to Bonn. If this is not a conspiracy it is (to be diplomatic) an act of gross irregularity. For the German characteristic of meticulously recording such precious things seems to have entirely vanished in this case, both in the removal of these works from Bonn, and in the story of their return to Vienna in the 19th century.

When Taboga and others started to make enquiries about these matters from experts in Germany etc. the subject of Luchesi, the Bonn archives etc. had almost never been discussed. It was not until 1987 that the then head of the Beethoven Archive in Bonn (Dr Brandeburg) published the first description of this story of the archives in the Beethoven Yearbook. But even this version, welcome though it was, made a number of important errors and tells us little about its return to Vienna.

Please therefore do not think that anything is being hidden. The opposite is true. An attempt is being made here to understand why these things occurred. And the answer seems to be one that involves the reputations of those two great composers, Haydn and Mozart. Thus, details are hard to find. But of those that have been found a picture is emerging that has been, I think, at least sketched in its broad outline on this thread.

Thanks

Robert

[Joy]

Originally posted by robert newman:

Joy,

Dunfermline is an ancient city with a present population of about 55,000 in the county of Fife. It was for several centuries the capital of Scotland (before Edinburgh). I suppose its chief claim to fame is that it was the birthplace of King Charles 1st of England (the one who literally lost his head after the English Civil War) and was also the birthplace of the 'rag to riches' philanthropist Andrew Carnegie (who ended up building most of the railway system of the USA in the 19th century) - the same man who built many libraries and concert venues such as Carnegie Hall.

Yesterday I was reading that in the archives of the New York Philharmonic there are some 80 letters from the violinist Bridgetower (friend of Beethoven) to the man who established the New York Philharmonic Orchestra. One day I would like to hear that great orchestra and also that of Chicago.

(I think the current thread has almost run its course). I wanted to ask why they called the city of Phoenix by that name ? Maybe it was somehow burned down and then rebuilt in its early days so the city rose from the ashes, so to speak ?

Anyway, best regards

Robert

Hi Robert,

Very intresting about Dunfermline, sounds like a historic town. Also thanks for mentioning some of the U.S. accomplishments in music. I don/t think we get as much credit in the music world as we could or should. I have heard the Chicago Symphony live and they are superb, one of the best in the country.
Here's a little history of Phoenix,
By 1868, a small colony had formed approximately four miles east of the present city. Swilling's Mill became the new name of the area. It was then changed to Helling Mill, after which it became Mill City, and years later, East Phoenix. Swilling, having been a confederate soldier, wanted to name the new settlement Stonewall after Stonewall Jackson. Others suggested the name Salina, but neither name suited the inhabitants. It was Darrell Duppa who suggested the name Phoenix, inasmuch as the new town would spring from the ruins of a former civilization. That is the accepted derivation of our name.
Phoenix officially was recognized on May 4, 1868.
The city was named for the mythical bird Phoenix as it did 'rise' out of the desert so to speak.




------------------
'Truth and beauty joined'

[Hofrat]

Originally posted by Joy:
Hi Robert,

Very intresting about Dunfermline, sounds like a historic town. Also thanks for mentioning some of the U.S. accomplishments in music. I don/t think we get as much credit in the music world as we could or should. I have heard the Chicago Symphony live and they are superb, one of the best in the country.
Here's a little history of Phoenix,
By 1868, a small colony had formed approximately four miles east of the present city. Swilling's Mill became the new name of the area. It was then changed to Helling Mill, after which it became Mill City, and years later, East Phoenix. Swilling, having been a confederate soldier, wanted to name the new settlement Stonewall after Stonewall Jackson. Others suggested the name Salina, but neither name suited the inhabitants. It was Darrell Duppa who suggested the name Phoenix, inasmuch as the new town would spring from the ruins of a former civilization. That is the accepted derivation of our name.
Phoenix officially was recognized on May 4, 1868.
The city was named for the mythical bird Phoenix as it did 'rise' out of the desert so to speak.

Dear Joy;

Not only that, but the Phoenix bird appears in the seal of the city!

Hofrat

[robert newman]

Dear Joy,

Thank you for this. I take the view that civilization (however we define that term) has travelled in history like the sun, from east to west and that the USA is tremendously important. Your country was visited by the great Mahler, Tchaikowsky and of course Dvorak (who wrote some wonderful masterpieces including the 'New World', the Cello Concerto, and several great chamber works).

My mother loved Dvorak very much but had never heard the Cello Concerto. And since there was a great recording with Rostropovitch I remember sharing it with her. The slow movement on that recording (which Dvorak wrote after seeing some Indian encampments) is, for me at least, one of the most touching of all pieces in music. I really can see in my mind's eye Dvorak being humbled by America as he saw it.

I'm a person who still wants to write music myself and the sheer expanses of your country are so nice to read about.

Thanks for the information on Phoenix. Do we know much of the Indians who lived in this part of Arizona ? Again, I am so ignorant and would gladly read of them. (I did some reading on certain Indian tribes in Canada who were very friendly to missionaries and who were also very musical. But I don't know if any study was done at any time of their musical traditions or their music itself).

Ives, Copland, Gershwin, and many many others have already achieved so much for music that I think nobody could possibly criticise your great country musically. In fact, with the exception of Handel (who was German) and Samuel Wesley (who was greatly influenced by Bach etc.) it's difficult to to note any major British composer during the centuries of its Empire prior to the 20th century.

Best regards

Robert

Thanks to Hofrat for explaining the phoenix is shown on the seal of the city. Place names are really interesting to me - Dunfermline is (apparently) derived from a person named Dun who once owned a farm next to a small river called 'Line'.

I understand that Bonn, birthplace of Beethoven, comes from 'Bonna' (meaning 'good') - a site mentioned by one Roman writer around 7BC as suitable enough to the ancient Romans to accomodate up to 7,000 Roman soldiers during their rule of the Rhine area at around the time of Christ.

Robert

[Droell]

Originally posted by robert newman:

In fact, with the exception of Handel (who was German) and Samuel Wesley (who was greatly influenced by Bach etc.) it's difficult to to note any major British composer during the centuries of its Empire prior to the 20th century.
Robert

How could you forget Purcell?

[robert newman]

You're absolutely right. Henry Purcell (died 1695) was a really wonderful musician and, for sure, England was already starting to make an Empire at that time. Sorry that I forgot him.

After the death of Queen Victoria (1901) - which is roughly around the decline of the British Empire there was of course Elgar, Delius, Bax, Butterworth, Finzi, and a special favourite of mine, Ralph Vaughan Williams and Benjamin Britten etc.

Thanks

Robert

[Hofrat]

Originally posted by robert newman:


Thanks for the information on Phoenix. Do we know much of the Indians who lived in this part of Arizona ? Again, I am so ignorant and would gladly read of them. (I did some reading on certain Indian tribes in Canada who were very friendly to missionaries and who were also very musical. But I don't know if any study was done at any time of their musical traditions or their music itself).

Dear Robert;

It was the Pueblo indians, living there from 700-1400.

Hofrat

[robert newman]

Thank you. I see that the first recorded contact between them and the Spanish was through a Franciscan missionary named Marcos de Niza in 1539. That must have been a remarkable moment !

It has nothing to do with Beethoven but these Pueblo Indians must have had some sort of musical tradition.

Thanks again

Robert

[Joy]

Originally posted by robert newman:


Thank you. I see that the first recorded contact between them and the Spanish was through a Franciscan missionary named Marcos de Niza in 1539. That must have been a remarkable moment !

It has nothing to do with Beethoven but these Pueblo Indians must have had some sort of musical tradition.

Thanks again

Robert

This has nothing to do with Beethoven either but I hate to leave questions unanswered, especially if I can answer them so here goes,

Native Americans have inhabited Arizona for 400 generations. The Sinagua and Navajo (still living in northeast AZ) and the Papago Indians who are a descendant of a larger tribe called the Hohokam originally located in the desert regions of the northern Sonora and Arizona. The Papago are also known as the Tohono O’Odham which means “Desert People”. Many are currently located in three reservations in southern Arizona, Gila Bend, and several are located in villages in northwestern Sonora. For a book about the music of this culture check out “The Indians and Their Music” written in 1926 by Francis Densmore. Hope that helps!



------------------
'Truth and beauty joined'