The Provenance of Cantatas WoO87 and WoO88

[robert newman]

Various members of this board would like to know why the two cantatas Wo087 and WoO88 are not in fact works by Ludwig van Beethoven. But they also believe their traditional attribution to the 19 year old Beethoven is supported by all kinds of evidence.

Holding a very different view, I believe that these two cantatas are not by Beethoven but are, in fact, by Andrea Luchesi. I further believe (and have said so many times on this board) that Beethoven assisted with the birth of these two same cantatas only after they had been composed by Luchesi.

This quite lengthy article will focus entirely on this question. It will not refer to the fact that various works attributed to Beethoven from this time are clearly not by Beethoven (this having been proved beyond reasonable doubt in other posts). It will not discuss in detail the fact that at least 3 works by Beethoven were indeed composed by him in Bonn. (For this too was first discussed by me here on this site less than 2 days ago). We will focus only on this question of the two cantatas, the first of these being WoO87 (on the death of the Emperor Joseph 2nd) and the second being Wo088 (the cantata written to mark the inauguration of the new Emperor Leopold 2nd).

Here are a list of facts that indicate that Beethoven was NOT composer of these works -

FACT 1. Contrary to over a century of assumption neither of these cantatas is in the handwriting of the young Ludwig van Beethoven.

This fact (which was of course bitterly resisted by traditionalists who always assumed otherwise) has been established beyond reasonable doubt by researchers such as Andrea Holschneider who made detailed analysis of the handwriting on these and other scores. Holschneider concludes that these two manuscripts are definitely NOT Beethoven's. (1970)

FACT 2. Nowhere in the whole of Beethoven's writings or in his recorded conversations does he claim to have been the composer of these two cantatas.

FACT 3. That no dedication or dedication letter by Beethoven has ever been suggested or found in association with either of these pieces.

FACT 4 That no performance of these two works is recorded at Bonn during the time that Beethoven was in Bonn.

FACT 5 That the known performance at Frankfurt of a cantata for the accession of the new Emperor was undoubtedly that cantata which we today call WoO88. For the known title of the cantata performed that day is the very same as that of Wo88

FACT 6 That Beethoven at this time was still studying at Bonn chapel during the time when he is assumed to have composed these cantatas

FACT 7 That the Literary Society of Bonn has no history of providing cantatas for the death or coronation of Emperors

FACT 8 That the Literary Society of Bonn has no record whatsoever of receiving any commission to write such music for the coronation of Emperors

FACT 9 That surviving Minutes ofthe Literary Society of Bonn have frequently been claimed by traditionalists to 'prove' that Beethoven was commissioned to write these two cantatas. But, in fact, these Minutes prove no such thing.

FACT 10 That the young Beethoven, coming near to the end of his study at Bonn, was at this time taking on work in full knowledge of the Bonn chapel that included such tasks as orchestrating and preparing musical works composed by members of the chapel.

FACT 11 That it is the normal course of events for the Kapellmeister to provide music for the Emperors

FACT 12 That the Kapellmeister at Bonn (employed by Max Franz) and a renowned writer of church music over more than 25 years already was Kapellmeister Andrea Luchesi

FACT 13 That music for the coronation of the new Emperor was not the product of a 19 year old student at Bonn who was commissioned by the local literary society, but was instead (and of course) music made as an official function of the Bonn chapel, whose responsible head was the same Kapellmeister.

and finally

FACT 14 That Beethoven is recorded as having been involved with preparing this work for performance and is even said by some to have composed it.

The traditionalist will ignore all of this. He will tell you that these works are by Beethoven. He will insist that they must be his. But the mere fact of tradition or the fact that men have clearly confused orchestration and preparation with the business of actually composing these works has led, ultimately, to others actually attributing these works to Beethoven - something which, on the above grounds alone was not the case.

These were important works. The traditionalist wants you to believe that Luchesi was not involved in them. I rest my case saying that despite two centuries of trying to obscure facts they show plainly and beyond reasonable doubt that Luchesi was composer of these two works and also (beyond reasonable doubt) that the commission to write them came to Luchesi through Max Franz, this as a duty of Luchesi being Kapellmeister at Bonn, the most prestigious music centre of the Empire at that time outside of Rome.

Thus, I conclude, that facts and reason make this attribution to Luchesi and this help by the emerging genius Beethoven the correct attribution that we, today, should give for these two works.

Robert Newman



[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 01-05-2006).]

[Peter]

FACT 1 - there is no record of Luchesi being commissioned to write these cantatas by Max Franz or anyone else.

FACT 2 - the surviving minutes prove that the literary society did not automatically assume Luchesi would write these Cantatas.

FACT 3 - Beethoven wasn't the only composer at the Bonn Chapel, the Rombergs regularly provided music, nothing unusual in that.

FACT 4 - Beethoven was no ordinary student. His exceptional talent had brought him to the attention of many musicians who all spoke of him becoming the next Mozart.

FACT 5 - Simrock and Wegeler make no mention of Luchesi in connection with the Cantatas, but they do Beethoven.

FACT 6 - The Beethovenhaus are satisfied the cantatas are by Beethoven.

If the hand-writing is not Beethoven's can you prove (rather than assume) it was Luchesi's? If you believe Beethoven was responsible for the orchestration why is the hand-writing not his?

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[robert newman]

Peter,

REFERENCE YOUR FACT 1 – There are centuries of evidence against your view. They confirm that the Kapellmeisters wrote music for state fumerals and coronations of kings, queens and emperors. Please deny it if you can. To suggest this was not the case is to contradict what is historical, logical, clearly established and entirely reasonable. You are simply arguing that the absence of any documentary record supports your position. It does not. The absence of documentary evidence actually leaves the situation neutral until that evidence is considered. It remains neutral until we accept the plain fact that the Kapellmeisters were, as just said, the very people who wrote such music and who were also normally expected to do so as part of their office. Of this fact your silence speaks volumes. Thus, your Fact 1 illustrates that what is historical, reasonable and logical forms no part of your argument. You must now invent something that borders on absurdity – that despite this and despite the Kapellmeister at Bonn, a local literary society commissioned and paid for composition of both the music of the old Emperor’s funeral and for that of the new Emperor’s coronation. Would it not be fair to say that on this issue your argument is on extremely thin ice ?

REFERENCE YOUR FACT 2 - The surviving Minutes of the Literary Society at Bonn certainly do not record commissioning Luchesi. Of course not. For the Literary Society of Bonn has nothing to do with Luchesi or with commissioning compositions for civic/state coronations and funerals. Such a blatantly obvious fact seems to have escaped you.

REFERENCE YOUR FACT 3 – There were indeed many composers at the Bonn chapel in 1790. This must surely have reduced (rather than increased) the possibility that Beethoven was commissioned to write these two cantatas.

REFERENCE YOUR FACT 4 - Certainly, Beethoven was no ordinary student. He was an emerging musical genius. This was clearly recognised by the Bonn Chapel who allowed him to be involved at Bad Mergentheim with preparations for the coronation cantata to be orchestrated, parts made, rehearsed etc. – which occurred – and the very fact of which proves beyond all reasonable doubt that the commission for these works originated NOT from the Literary Society of Bonn, but, instead (as per longstanding practice) from the official channel of the Elector of Bonn, Max Franz, none other than the employer of Kapellmeiser Luchesi of Bonn Chapel (who had at this time been acting as Kapellmeister for almost as long as Beethoven had been alive) – Max Franz the younger brother of the new Emperor. How much more clear can that possibly be ? (In fact Beethoven was urged to become the new Mozart 1 year later - at the time when he left for Vienna. Andm contrary to your claim, ‘many’ musicians in 1790 did not claim he was a new Mozart. That came much later. He had still to write his first major work).

REFERENCE YOUR FACT 5 – Simrock and Wegeler make no mention of Luchesi but mention Beethoven. The simple reason is that prior to him founding his publishing business Simrock ran in Bonn a copying house. That is why he was present (as you know) when Beethoven was at Bad Mergentheim trying to sort out orchestration. He was undoubtedly aware of which copyist made the manuscript of WoO88 – since it;s neither in the hand of Beethoven nor of Luchesi. He mentions Beethoven because this was Beethoven's assignment as a finishing student – to prepare this work for public performance from a score. A score that had been composed by the Kapellmeister Luchesi.

REFERENCE YOUR FACT 6 – The Beethovenhaus in Bonn have their view. They agree completely (and I know it myself having just finished writing to them and receiving their replies) that the attribution of these two works has always been contested. This is a simple fact of music history. They know very well too that many people (and I mean many) have not been happy to automatically attribute these two works to Beethoven despite manuscripts being labelled ‘Beethoven’. They know too that it was actually not until the late 19th century that these works were first attributed to Beethoven, and even then there were critics who disagreed. The fact that today we can see all the clues lined up together begs the question of whether our knowledge, common sense, and understanding of convention will allow common sense to prevail on this issue. I believe they do in us seeing Luchesi and Beethoven working together in these two works of state as just described.
You will look in vain for recognition of Luchesi’s considerable service to Bonn chapel because it has been airbrushed out just as it has been airbrushed out of Beethoven biography as a whole. But history has that habit of reminding us. That is what truth does.

Robert

[Peter]

Robert,

Firstly I was wrong in assuming the sinfonia sketches pre-date the piano quartets. Regarding Kappelmeisters alone writing music for state occasions, I believe Mozart was commissioned to write la Clemeza di Tito for the coronation celebrations of leopold ll in Prague.

If Luchesi wrote the cantatas surely we can prove the handwriting is his and also why would he have had Beethoven orchestrate the works? According to you Beethoven wrote nothing of significance at Bonn yet apparently Luchesi chooses him to orchestrate such important works rather than do it himself. If he was unable to orchestrate his own work, why not have Reicha or the Rombergs who clearly had more experience in such matters having written symphonies and operas that were performed at Bonn?

On what strength was Beethoven sent to Vienna as Haydn's pupil? On what grounds did Waldstein and Neefe predict a great future? 3 minor pieces written in just 6 years! Surely you must admit it odd given that we know Beethoven was a genius that he hardly wrote a thing before the age of 25?



------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Luis Mariano]

Robert:

Going through your facts one by one,

FACT 1. Handwriting has been always a matter of discussion. We all know that Beethoven’s handwriting would depend on his mood. Sloppy (mostly), but also neat in several times. The WoO 4 Concerto survives in a copyist’s copy with corrections made by Beethoven.

FACT 2 . Beethoven never claimed to be the composer of the Ritterballet WoO 1 either. On the contrary.


FACT 3. Many works (mostly minor works but also as important as the Piano Sonata No. 31 in A flat) have no dedication nor a letter mentions a specific person as source of inspiration.

FACT 4. If the performance of a composition is a proof of the authorship, then… !Poor Schubert¡ Precisely, it is strange that if these cantatas were written by Luchesi, it is quite strange that were not performed being the Kapellmeister of the Bonn Chapel.

FACT 5. I have no argument against this fact since I don’t have evidence that the title of the cantata performed in Frankfurt is the same.

FACT 6. Beethoven was a student still during his first years in Viena (Albretchsberger and Salieri just to name two composers of reputation). Studying, composing and performing at the same time; just like his early years in Bonn.

FACTS 7-8. We do not have any record of any Literary, Eclesiastic or other official institution mentioning the commission to write the cantatas made to Luchesi.

FACT 9. I agree with this fact.

FACT 10. This is pure speculation, just an assumption.

FACT 11. If it is the “normal course of events”, an imposed task, a duty to write music as Kapellmeister; Why no composition by Ludovicus Van Beethoven Senior has been preserved? Do his compositions (if any) remain anonymous?

FACT 12. 25 years of experience can be a sort of credential of Luchesi’s skills but not a proof of any assignment.

FACT 13. I have to admit that this sounds very logical. But we have also to admit that Beethoven’s talent was very well appreciated by the Elector. Max Franz was familiar with Beethoven’s compositions. You already mentioned the letter that Haydn sent to Max Frank talking about the compositions of his pupil: “a quintet (which I have been unable to identify), an eight voice Parthie (Partita- The Octet in E flat later published as Op. 103), an (unfortunately lost) oboe concerto, some variations for pianoforte (which ones?), and a fugue”. The answer of the Elector was: “with the exception of the Fugue, the rest of the compositions were already written and performed here in Bonn before he left, so they are not proof of any progress…So I wonder if…”

FACT 14. Certainly in 1791 there were some rehearsals of one of the cantatas, but apparently the difficulties made no possible a public performance. It seems that Beethoven left behind the orchestra capabilities, a typical attitude of him during his whole life as a composer when written for the orchestra. I don’t think that Luchesi, a musician with his experience and knowledge about official events, could assume that behavior against what was usual.


Regards

[robert newman]

Peter,

You write - (quote)

Firstly I was wrong in assuming the sinfonia sketches pre-date the piano quartets. Regarding Kappelmeisters alone writing music for state occasions, I believe Mozart was commissioned to write la Clemeza di Tito for the coronation celebrations of leopold ll in Prague.

If Luchesi wrote the cantatas surely we can prove the handwriting is his and also why would he have had Beethoven orchestrate the works? According to you Beethoven wrote nothing of significance at Bonn yet apparently Luchesi chooses him to orchestrate such important works rather than do it himself. If he was unable to orchestrate his own work, why not have Reicha or the Rombergs who clearly had more experience in such matters having written symphonies and operas that were performed at Bonn?

On what strength was Beethoven sent to Vienna as Haydn's pupil? On what grounds did Waldstein and Neefe predict a great future? 3 minor pieces written in just 6 years! Surely you must admit it odd given that we know Beethoven was a genius that he hardly wrote a thing before the age of 25? ' (unquote)

Well Peter, yes, thanks for mentioning your small error about the Sinfonia. (I make worse mistakes all the time). Now, to address your many questions one by one as well as I can.

1. The commission to write the opera 'La Clemenza di Tito' was actually given first to Antonio Salieri. He was the senior court composer at the time. But Salieri (for reasons that have not been established) only managed to write a few pages and then gave up. Then Mozart (who was also a composer of the court and who, by this time, had an upaid assistant post at the Vienna Cathedral - one he had himself applied for but which was given to him only in the last summer of his life) held. Thus Mozart was left with a few weeks to produce that opera.

2. You ask if Luchesi wrote these works why he would have given the job of preparing them (of orchestrating them and overseeing the part making, the rehearsals etc) rather than he himself, Luchesi. I think that there was definitely a relationship developing between Beethoven and Simrock etc. Simrock was in on the preparations because (I suggest) he was employer of copyists who came along with him, players, singers, Beethoven and various copyists to the ancestral home of Max Franz, the castle of Mergentheim. (The same castle which, only a few years later (1794) received the music archives of the Bonn chapel. And it was there that Beethoven's first real musical responsibility was given to him. To oversee all of this up to the time of performance in Frankfurt. Simrock and others refering to Beethoven working on this piece at Mergentheim is therefore (I suggest) entirely right. The fact that he was working on it at Mergentheim (rather than Bonn) strongly suggests that a vital part of the work was still to be done - the arranging of parts and their copying out, rehearsal etc. etc. Such things were trusted to him, the emerging genius. And he did them before copyists produced what we know today as WoO88. The copy we have today is not, of course, the original score. And this is explained by the fact that its handwriting is that of a copyist but not that of Beethoven or of Luchesi.

Such things no doubt took days. They were a real responsibility and I believe Beethoven was well aware of it. But the Kapellemeister (himself with a thousand other considerations) did not stay at Mergentheim. His best pupil was trusted. And so, years later, Beethoven is attributed this work - especially since the minutes of the Bonn literary society appear to show him (Beethoven) as composer of these cantatas.
(I will post on their actual content soon).

3. I didn't say that Beethoven wrote nothing of consequence at Bonn. I said that in the records held at Modena we see Beethoven's name against 3 works, one of these a fugue. Thayer tells us that in total the young Beethoven wrote perhaps as many as 50 works before he left Bonn. Well, setting aside some of the WoO's (which I think we've already spoken of) I see no reason why that figure is hugely wrong. Some of them may have been mere exercises or bagatelles etc. Some simply thrown away. But one thing I am quite sure of - Beethoven was already recognised as being a far superior prospect than all others attending the chapel. I am sure too that this was recognised by Luchesi and by all other staff. Luchesi was a phenomenally gifted musician. He was by now middle aged and in his prime. He recognised (perhaps from a distance in the end) his star pupil and gave him the chance to shine. He did. And by this time there were many others helping him on a daily basis. People he did not forget to be grateful for. Those people (normally mentioned in Beethoven biographies) certainly did teach him things. Of this there can be no doubt at all. Neefe, Reicha, etc. etc. Yes, all of them. And all of them not half the skill and experience of Kapellmeister Luchesi. This is why in 1783 Neefe writes in praise of Luchesi to a musical journal listing various works then at Bonn by the celebrated Luchesi. He, Luchesi, was by this time deeply involved in working for Mozart and Haydn. So, to this extent, it's perhaps not too surprising that his name is so often never refered to. But to Beethoven he did nothing but good. (Honestly, the Sonatas Op.1 of Luchesi will surprise you and will at least show that he was one influence on the great Beethoven at this time).

4. Why was Haydn chosen to be the teacher of Beethoven in Vienna ? I think that by the time he took was with Haydn in Vienna the older man was a huge celebrity who could do a great deal. And why was Haydn in Bonn anyway ? He was there because he had business to do. (But that's another story). Haydn, nominally, was then, from 1792, 'Beethoven's teacher'. We know better now but that, at the time, was a huge plus for the young Beethoven. It opened doors. And this was exactly what Max Franz wanted. Little did they appreciate that soon Ludwig van Beethoven would not conform to expectations. The rest is history.

Rgds

Robert

[robert newman]

Dear Mr Mariano,

REFERENCE FACT 1 – I entirely agree that handwriting has always been a matter of discussion. The Beethovenhaus in Bonn recognise this also. Less than 2 days ago I received a letter from them admitting that Beethoven’s handwriting seems to have dramatically changed the moment he came to Vienna ! But they of course assume the works now under discussion are in Beethoven’s handwriting. They are not. You understand this perfectly yourself. The WoO4 concerto survives in a copyists copy with corrections made by Beethoven. That is precisely my point. There are two hands involved in that copy – one is the copyist and the other is, as you rightly say, that of the young Beethoven. Notice too please that the copyist of WoO4 is the very same one whose handwriting we see on the Cantata Wo88. Thus Beethoven’s corrections on WoO4 prove beyond all doubt that this handwriting on Wo88 is that of a copyist and is not Beethoven’s. That copyist was one of Simrock’s employees from Bonn.
REFERENCE FACT 2 – I totally agree that Beethoven is the composer of the Ritterballet WoO 1 and have never suggested differently.
REFERENCE FACT 3 - I again agree.
REFERENCE FACT 4 - Well, there are two cantatas here. One for the memorial to Joseph 2nd (of which several were written in Germany, by the way) and the cantata for the accession of Leopold 2nd held in Frankfurt. In saying they were not performed I mean that there is no evidence they were performed at Bonn.
REFERENCE FACT 5 - I did provide a reference for the titles being exactly the same in a post made yesterday. If you require one please let me know.
REFERENCE FACT 6 – I agree
REFERENCE FACTS 7 AND 8 – True, we do not have any surviving record of the Kapellmeister being instructed to write music in commemoration of Joseph 2nd nor of the coronation of his successor, Leopold 2nd. We also do not appear to have surviving record in the mountain of Beethoven literature that Luchesi actually existed. But, as proposed before, this duty was the norm.
REFERENCE FACT 9 - I agree with your agreement.
REFERENCE FACT 10 – I base this on many precedents.
REFERENCE FACT 11 - There can be many reasons why the compositions of Ludwig van Beethoven Senior have not been preserved. Frstly, he may not have written many. Secondly, it is known that many works of the Bonn chapel were sold in years before Max Franz became Kapellmeister. (I do have the date of this sale but do not have it close to my hand). His compositions held at the Bonn chapel would normally be unsigned up until the time when he either retired, was replaced, or died. That is the normal procedure right across Europe and was for centuries. At the time of an inventory this too was a chance for attributions to be made.
REFERENCE FACT 12 – 25 Years of experience can be a sort of credential as you rightly say. It strongly suggests that he, Luchesi, was actually by far the most experienced man in Bonn (besides the fact that he was in charge of the entire music of Bonn under the Elector, Max Franz). In addition, that he was a celebrated composer (as is stated in various European publications. And that he was himself a graduated pupil of some of the finest teachers of music in Europe (including Galuppi and others). Galuppi had been employed by the Empress of Russia to improve the chapel in St Petersburg. So you see that the credentials of Luchesi (not even mentioning his keyboard skills, his own compositions, or his teaching) speak sufficiently for themselves. So too does the silence in works on Beethoven and indeed on the musical history of the Vienna School as a whole. But now, I think you see, fairness is possible.
REFERENCE FACT 13 – We both agree this is logical.
REFERENCE FACT 14 – At the time when these cantatas were written and performed there was no record of this characteristic in Beethoven. But yes, I entirely agree with you that this feature of Beethoven’s career is not perhaps his strongest. But this is clear evidence of the value of him having such responsibility even as a student in Bonn. This would no doubt have been quite a test for Beethoven.

Regards


R. Newman

[Luis Mariano]

Robert:

Well, I am not even middle-trained in handwriting as to distinguish Beethoven’s autographs of different periods. In fact, I tend to joke with myself when I read a facsimile manuscript of any of his works, thinking: “If I can read it, it is not Beethoven’s handwriting”.

I am also open to some kind of co-authorship between Luchesi and Beethoven, but I am also open to think that Beethoven wrote the two cantatas alone. If Luchesi —as you stated— was such a busy man with thousands of responsibilities and writing for others in the meantime; couldn’t be possible that Luchesi himself asked Beethoven to write the cantatas giving him the opportunity to show his skills? That could be a possibility too. May be Luchesi recommended Beethoven directly to the Elector to compose the cantatas under his guidance. Beethoven composing the whole thing and Luchesi correcting him.

It is hard for me to imagine a musician with that transformation capability, a sort of a man with multiple faces being Haydn, Mozart, Beethoven and himself at any time and any circumstance, but who knows. It is well known that Beethoven was able to imitate quite accurately any style of piano playing during his career as a virtuoso.

Regads

[robert newman]

Dear Louis Mariano,

You are open to the possibility that Kapellmeister Luchesi and Beethoven co-operated in the writing of these two cantatas. I would like to ask if you agree that these are works for state performance rather than commissions from a local club. Music for the coronation of an Emperor, for example.

You ask if I am open to the possibility that such a duty was granted solely to Ludwig van Beethoven by Luchesi himself. Well, my mind is open to this suggestion. But I cannot go along with the idea that Luchesi is entirely out of the picture on these two very important civic works. (And you see that for almost 200 years Luchesi may just as well never have existed, according to what we see in textbooks).

I have real problems accepting that this is likely. Given the importance of these works I think it highly likely that Luchesi knew of the duty to have these works available in a form that his best student could work on. And in the case of Luchesi (a case in which his works seem to have disappeared in great numbers, with his name virtually unspoken of) I do think the fairest and most likely solution is one along the lines I've suggested. But I do not dogmatically rule out this as a possibility. Nor should Beethoven fans and Beethoven researchers.

Can you imagine the conversation where somebody asks Luchesi around 1794 the question - 'What have you actually done here at Bonn since 1771 - during which time you have been Kapellmeister of Bonn - second in status only to Rome' ? And Luchesi's answer being -

'Nothing at all. In fact I never taught anyone. Nor did I write a single piece of music. Those who say so in the future are only conspiracy theorists'.

Some balance is need in recogising Luchesi as an important figure. Not only in the young Beethoven's career in Bonn (which has long been an area shrouded in mystery), but also because, according to the available evidence he was in fact a greatly gifted musician and one who has till now been almost totally ignored and overlooked. To credit him with having employed the young Beethoven on these two works is the very least, I think, that he deserves for students of Beethoven's early career.

Regards

Robert

[Peter]

Originally posted by robert newman:

Peter,

You write - (quote)

Firstly I was wrong in assuming the sinfonia sketches pre-date the piano quartets. Regarding Kappelmeisters alone writing music for state occasions, I believe Mozart was commissioned to write la Clemeza di Tito for the coronation celebrations of leopold ll in Prague.

If Luchesi wrote the cantatas surely we can prove the handwriting is his and also why would he have had Beethoven orchestrate the works? According to you Beethoven wrote nothing of significance at Bonn yet apparently Luchesi chooses him to orchestrate such important works rather than do it himself. If he was unable to orchestrate his own work, why not have Reicha or the Rombergs who clearly had more experience in such matters having written symphonies and operas that were performed at Bonn?

On what strength was Beethoven sent to Vienna as Haydn's pupil? On what grounds did Waldstein and Neefe predict a great future? 3 minor pieces written in just 6 years! Surely you must admit it odd given that we know Beethoven was a genius that he hardly wrote a thing before the age of 25? ' (unquote)

Well Peter, yes, thanks for mentioning your small error about the Sinfonia. (I make worse mistakes all the time). Now, to address your many questions one by one as well as I can.

1. The commission to write the opera 'La Clemenza di Tito' was actually given first to Antonio Salieri. He was the senior court composer at the time. But Salieri (for reasons that have not been established) only managed to write a few pages and then gave up. Then Mozart (who was also a composer of the court and who, by this time, had an upaid assistant post at the Vienna Cathedral - one he had himself applied for but which was given to him only in the last summer of his life) held. Thus Mozart was left with a few weeks to produce that opera.

2. You ask if Luchesi wrote these works why he would have given the job of preparing them (of orchestrating them and overseeing the part making, the rehearsals etc) rather than he himself, Luchesi. I think that there was definitely a relationship developing between Beethoven and Simrock etc. Simrock was in on the preparations because (I suggest) he was employer of copyists who came along with him, players, singers, Beethoven and various copyists to the ancestral home of Max Franz, the castle of Mergentheim. (The same castle which, only a few years later (1794) received the music archives of the Bonn chapel. And it was there that Beethoven's first real musical responsibility was given to him. To oversee all of this up to the time of performance in Frankfurt. Simrock and others refering to Beethoven working on this piece at Mergentheim is therefore (I suggest) entirely right. The fact that he was working on it at Mergentheim (rather than Bonn) strongly suggests that a vital part of the work was still to be done - the arranging of parts and their copying out, rehearsal etc. etc. Such things were trusted to him, the emerging genius. And he did them before copyists produced what we know today as WoO88. The copy we have today is not, of course, the original score. And this is explained by the fact that its handwriting is that of a copyist but not that of Beethoven or of Luchesi.

Such things no doubt took days. They were a real responsibility and I believe Beethoven was well aware of it. But the Kapellemeister (himself with a thousand other considerations) did not stay at Mergentheim. His best pupil was trusted. And so, years later, Beethoven is attributed this work - especially since the minutes of the Bonn literary society appear to show him (Beethoven) as composer of these cantatas.
(I will post on their actual content soon).

3. I didn't say that Beethoven wrote nothing of consequence at Bonn. I said that in the records held at Modena we see Beethoven's name against 3 works, one of these a fugue. Thayer tells us that in total the young Beethoven wrote perhaps as many as 50 works before he left Bonn. Well, setting aside some of the WoO's (which I think we've already spoken of) I see no reason why that figure is hugely wrong. Some of them may have been mere exercises or bagatelles etc. Some simply thrown away. But one thing I am quite sure of - Beethoven was already recognised as being a far superior prospect than all others attending the chapel. I am sure too that this was recognised by Luchesi and by all other staff. Luchesi was a phenomenally gifted musician. He was by now middle aged and in his prime. He recognised (perhaps from a distance in the end) his star pupil and gave him the chance to shine. He did. And by this time there were many others helping him on a daily basis. People he did not forget to be grateful for. Those people (normally mentioned in Beethoven biographies) certainly did teach him things. Of this there can be no doubt at all. Neefe, Reicha, etc. etc. Yes, all of them. And all of them not half the skill and experience of Kapellmeister Luchesi. This is why in 1783 Neefe writes in praise of Luchesi to a musical journal listing various works then at Bonn by the celebrated Luchesi. He, Luchesi, was by this time deeply involved in working for Mozart and Haydn. So, to this extent, it's perhaps not too surprising that his name is so often never refered to. But to Beethoven he did nothing but good. (Honestly, the Sonatas Op.1 of Luchesi will surprise you and will at least show that he was one influence on the great Beethoven at this time).

4. Why was Haydn chosen to be the teacher of Beethoven in Vienna ? I think that by the time he took was with Haydn in Vienna the older man was a huge celebrity who could do a great deal. And why was Haydn in Bonn anyway ? He was there because he had business to do. (But that's another story). Haydn, nominally, was then, from 1792, 'Beethoven's teacher'. We know better now but that, at the time, was a huge plus for the young Beethoven. It opened doors. And this was exactly what Max Franz wanted. Little did they appreciate that soon Ludwig van Beethoven would not conform to expectations. The rest is history.

Rgds

Robert

I think a distinction needs to be made between the two cantatas and the circumstances surrounding their commission. There is no doubt that the literary society planned a memorial for Joseph ll on March 19th 1790 which was to include a musical setting of a poem they had received by Averdonk. There is no doubt that in thinking of a composer from within the society they meant Neefe or Reicha, though they were prepared for someone outside the society to write the music. There is no doubt that Waldstein was both an influential member of the society and a close friend of Beethoven, according to Wegeler he was the most important man in Beethoven's life at this time.

Now I put forward a new theory - because of the short time available to write the work, suppose Beethoven only wrote sections of the work, and years later salvaged that that was his for Leonore? I simply don't know, but in the absence of further evidence we cannot automatically assume the whole thing was written by Luchesi and merely orchestrated by Beethoven.

Now regarding Beethoven as Luchesi's favourite pupil. In 1785 it is reported by Franz Ries that Luchesi was 'astonished' by Beethoven's playing, odd for a teacher to be astonished by a talented pupil. In Bossler's musical correspondence for July 13th 1791 listing the court musicians, only four names are mentioned as composers, Joseph Reicha, Perner and the two Rombergs -no mention of the star pupil - again odd. So had the Joseph cantata been a court commission and Luchesi in need of assistance his natural choice would have been Reicha.

Regarding the Leopold cantata there is much less to go on, so no firm conclusions can be reached. This work is generally considered inferior at any rate and Beethoven's reputation hardly nose-dives because of it!


------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Rod]

Originally posted by Peter:


Regarding the Leopold cantata there is much less to go on, so no firm conclusions can be reached. This work is generally considered inferior at any rate and Beethoven's reputation hardly nose-dives because of it!

Check this link relating to the Leopold:
http://www.unheardbeethoven.org/sear...e=woo88caz.mid

------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[Peter]

Originally posted by Rod:
Check this link relating to the Leopold:
http://www.unheardbeethoven.org/sear...e=woo88caz.mid

Very interesting Rod and I think the evidence of sketches for a soprano aria in WoO88 show Beethoven contributed more than mere orchestration.


------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Joy]

Very interesting information indeed. Thanks for that.

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

[robert newman]

Rod's posting is very good and deserves a detailed reply. I will give one later today. Sorry, but again people have somehow got this all confused. But I will try to explain what I think is a far more simple explanation for this sketch (one which is completely different from the many assumptions of the article which Rod has focused on). Anyway, I will first reply to Peter's letter of today.

Regards

Robert