Mystery of Mozart's Skull!

[robert newman]

Dear Droell,

Someone else asked the same question a few months ago. I think it astonishing that anyone would ever suggest that Mozart did not die in December 1791. There are witnesses to his state during his final days, next of kin in attendance at the moment of death, the testimony of those who prepared his remains for burial etc. The death certificate (Ok, maybe a botched job) but, also, the memorials to him in Prague and Vienna etc etc. One would think he would have lived to approximately the same age as Leopold, for sure. I don't think he faked his own death.

P.S. If you find some examples of his writing after 1791 let me know - I will take it seriously ! But I don't think you'll find any.

[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 01-11-2006).]

[HaydnFan]

Originally posted by Droell:
We have no corpse, we have no grieving widow, we have no death certificate (do we?), we have no burial service, we have no grave. We presume this is all typical. It isn't. We have a missing person who is presumed dead. For 214 years we've been trying to make sense of this, and still no resolution. Why not start over?

We do have a funeral and burial service...at least van Swieten would have hoped so! Otherwise, where did all the money go that was meant to pay for the funeral? The lack of a body is explained by a lack of grave markers; It was only common, as I understand it, among the more wealthy classes to have grave markers; 18th century Vienniese burials were not at all like out burials today.

Has anyone ever looked at the various letters & documents in the possession of Mozart's immediate family at the time of their demise? Mozart was a prolific letter-writer. Presuming he survived December, 1791, he would have eventually written, even if under an assumed name. Handwriting analysis of surviving letters would put my little theory to rest.

True, you are right here, that Mozart was not only a prolific writer of letter, but also of music, interesting enough. Something tells me that if he had survived, he wouldn't have been able to NOT write. Compositions would have turned up somewhere sometime. They haven't.

Where was the shock when Mozart died?

I'm sure there was shock, but neither of us were there, so it is hard to say. For one thing, death from disease was relatively common, even for such a young person. I'm sure people were upset but not necessarily surprised. Consider too, the religious beliefs at that time, where death could be interpreted positively. (but still extremely upsetting of course)

The only person was recorded as being shocked at Mozart's death was Haydn...here's my theory on that:

Mozart faked his own death to escape his creditors, fled Vienna and went to London where he murdered Haydn (stole his wig) and formed some type of epoxy which he spread onto his face to make himself look like the old man.

Next, Mozart came back to Austria and took up Haydn's position, living the good life at Esterhaza (with no financial worries) and nobody the wiser to it. Mozart still composed of course, but he didn't feel like trying so hard anymore which explains both the pieces inferior to those of the "late" Mozart, and the increase in quality over those works of the late Haydn.

This went on until 1809 when Mozart, posing as Haydn, really died of rheumatic fever. Mozart is now entombed at Eisenstadt.

[Droell]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:


The only person was recorded as being shocked at Mozart's death was Haydn.

Who was in London at the time.

Originally posted by HaydnFan:

Mozart faked his own death to escape his creditors, fled Vienna and went to London where he murdered Haydn

Up to the murdered part, I've had the same thought. Haydn was brought to London by the impressario Salomon, who, as it happens, was a native of Bonn. I don't know that he ever met Mozart, but the two certainly knew of each other. If I was in Vienna, looking for someplace to escape, London might be a useful first (but not final) destination.

Originally posted by HaydnFan:


Mozart still composed of course, but he didn't feel like trying so hard anymore which explains both the pieces inferior to those of the "late" Mozart, and the increase in quality over those works of the late Haydn.

If what Robert Newman says has merit, then, once away from the continent, Mozart is cut off from his sources, so has less new music. He is also, by definition, in a less culturally developed area, so, even if still working at the typical Mozart level of genius, there would simply not be much audience to appreciate it. Finally, incessant touring is a young man's pleasure. Like as not, if Mozart survived, he toured less & less. So it is possible that even if Mozart escaped to that new republic on the shores of the western Atlantic, he may have passed the remainder of his life entirely without notice.

Robert has a compelling death-bed scenario, but I have no doubt that someone will come along and poke holes in it. Just as holes have been poked in every other explanation of Wolfgang's death. So why not reconceptualize?

[Droell]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:
We do have a funeral and burial service...at least van Swieten would have hoped so! Otherwise, where did all the money go that was meant to pay for the funeral? The lack of a body is explained by a lack of grave markers; It was only common, as I understand it, among the more wealthy classes to have grave markers; 18th century Vienniese burials were not at all like out burials today.

By the time of his death Mozart may have been a pauper, but he was not an obscure one. At no time have notable people ever been neglected at the moment of their passing. Mozart may have had enemies, but he also had friends & family. No self-respecting friend would tolerate the charade that ensued after Mozart's death.

Nor is it conceivable that no one, NO ONE knew where his body lay. That his wife was so disinterested she simply couldn't be bothered - for a full decade! If fears he had died of plague were true, then his body would have been most carefully examined before burial & the results recorded carefully. Burial, in fact, might well have been delayed to ensure the body was not contaminated. Failure to perform these elementary steps could put the entire city - including its rulers - at mortal risk.

So far as murder is concerned, if Mozart was murdered under orders, or as a result of a general conspiracy, then the first, no. 1 demand of the guilty party will be a grave with a marker on it. That the guilty parties will know, forever, that here the man lies, without any doubt, without any possibility of cheating, without any possibility of escape. Here, at this spot, dead. And if any question should ever arise, a shovel will put them to rest.

Some 35 years after Mozart, Beethoven died. In the day-to-day life of Vienna, little had changed. Yet Beethoven's funeral attracted 25,000 mourners, practically the entire city. And this for a man who had been a recluse for more than a decade, who had, during that time, composed little, and who, among certain parties, was thought to have been washed up, a man who was, so far as I can tell, actually out of favor. A man who had numerous run-ins with the local constabulary (re: Carl). Yet Beethoven's body went immediately into a clearly marked grave. You can still see it today.

There is no harm in speculation about Mozart's mysterious death in December 1791. But neither is there harm in other kinds of speculation. Somewhere there is truth, and, one way or another, we can know it, and we can know, with reasonable certainty, that it is the truth.

[Peter]

Originally posted by Droell:


I don't know that he (Haydn) ever met Mozart, but the two certainly knew of each other.

I'm sorry Droell but the fact that you are even unaware of the famous meeting between Haydn, Mozart and leopold in 1785 shows you really do not have any serious knowlegde of the subject to come up with such a bizarre theory of Mozart faking his death. Robert is absolutely correct in stating that we have well documented evidence from family members including his own son.

A quote from Constanze herself who wrote in Mozart's own Stammbuch on Dec 5th 1791 reveals also that she was far from uncaring about his death and her grief explains her absence from the funeral: "dearly beloved husband! Mozart, unforgettable to me and to the whole of Europe - Now you are well - well forever! At one hour past midnight between 4th and 5th Decemeber of this year he left in his 36th year - O! only too suddenly! - This good but thankless world - O God! Eight years long we were joined in the most tender and in this world inseparable bond, O! Would I were soon joined to you forever. His most distressed wife Constance Mozart."


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

[This message has been edited by Peter (edited 01-11-2006).]

[robert newman]

There's a Japanese researcher (Fujisawa) who has spent a long time looking in to Mozart's last years. He's completely convinced Constanze Mozart was involved in his death. He makes many good points. But in the 18th century almost anything was possible and intrigue and cabal was never far away. It's the murky side of the real world of that time that's the main feature of the latest biographies (this largely ignored in earlier works) and it certainly has a bearing on Mozart's last days. There was rivalry between Italians and Germans, between the Austrian reformers of Joseph 2nd and the Church, between the Freemasons and the Church, between the Illuminati and the Freemasons, and all other combinations. In recent years there has been a remarkable biography by Volker Braubehrens 'Mozart in Vienna' with all kinds of revelations about these undercurrents of Vienna society as it was at this time. His is one of the best and has opened up a whole new area for modern study - that of social realism. I think that's the main feature of most biographical study of the composer today.

I've taken a slightly different course by trying to track Mozart's relationship with the Holy Roman Empire. This has opened up quite remarkable new sorts of evidence. For example, almost everyone knows about a series of begging letters Mozart wrote to his friend Michael Puchberg. Puchberg is described as having been either a banker, a merchant, an amateur musician or all three. Very little information is available on him although we know he lived in the townhouse of Count Walsegg (the man who supposedly commissioned Mozart to write the Requiem). Puchberg could easily be regarded as nothing more than a fellow Freemason who was specially generous in difficult times. But in actual fact (if the information is right) he was far more than that. He was a link between Bonn and Mozart and between Haydn and many others. Only a few days ago I saw remarkable evidence that this man may even have been a friar, a head monk of a religious Order. If this is right (and I'm looking in to this) then the begging letters (which never made sense anyway because Mozart was doing quite well in these years) become some sort of negotiated credit related to his musical output. Further interesting data is with Maximilian Stadler ( a musician who was at one time Abbot of the great Kremsmunster abbey). He is credited with having taken over Mozart's manuscripts immediately after his death and some of them he completed. There is too Sussmayer, a composer credited with having written large parts of KV626. But he was a monk too from the very same abbey in Kremsmuster. (A place famous for music).Add to this Mozart's break with the Prince Archbishop Colloredo in Salzburg and emnity between them both right the way through Mozart's career. And then the strange prosecution of Mozart in a secret trial of the aristocracy by Prince Lichnowsky, the very man who had toured with him only a year or so before. Finally, there is the strange fact that Maximilian Stadler, the musical abbot and musicologist, now deep in to looking at Mozart's manuscripts, is also credited with having actually worked on the Requiem himself. And when he finished on this he (unknown to many people) was then employed in the secret church court at Linz. In the same year that Mozart died Stadler was already in touch with the very court where Mozart was prosecuted.

Gottfried Weber (a musical editor) condemned Mozart's Requiem as a clever forgery but it was the same Maximilian Stadler who lept to its defence. Mozart (according to the image being carefully cultivated) had to have died as a loyal and faithful son of the church.

So all these cross currents exist. And this at a time when the French revolution was the huge event that affected everything else. Mozart, now associated with the hugely controversial 'Marriage of Figaro' had enemies and business dealings that he could not easily extract himself from, even had he wished to. Like the great Beethoven there is plenty of evidence that he became more and more reclusive. These sorts of things, plus of course the awful truth that he was shunned and neglected by many of the elite within Vienna society, combined when he died and are certainly factors that shaped the earliest biographies (both written by men who at different times were to be employed as censors - Niemetscheck and also Mozart's second husband, Nissen).

It's true that we could speculate forever with the evidence we have regarding his actual death, burial etc. I feel that the image we have of Mozart is most true as seeing him as a musical genius who, like Shakespeare, perhaps, did deals and was far more pragmatic, earthy and clever than the dreaming fool he has so often been portrayed as. Whether or not dozens of works attributed to him were written by others including Luchesi is, to me, of secondary importance. He was the nucleus around which others used him. And but for him we would not have this glorious music, almost all of which he personally shaped and oversaw in his own quite amazing way. To others this is heresy but to me it's a sort of tribute. I'm shocked and of course sad that such a great man should have died in such obscurity. If nobody followed him it was no doubt because nobody could.

[HaydnFan]

I was being completely sarcastic in my post about the murder plot, I'm sorry nobody caught that. Of course the entire theory is unthinkable and completely untrue.

Droell, I know of the relationship between Mozart and Haydn very well. Not only did they meet, but they were the best of friends who often spent time together when Haydn was in Vienna. In fact, when Mozart was rehearsing his opera (not sure which one, it might have been Cosi?), Haydn would accompany Mozart to the theatre every morning, the two composers walking arm in arm. I'm sure you know as well that Mozart called Haydn "Papa Haydn".

By the time Beethoven died, Vienna HAD actually changed a lot. The French Revolution had taken place and perhaps society was now a little more 'open' to the lower classes so to speak. Foe example, in Mozart's day, composers were mere servants but Beethoven may have been the first composer to be recognized as an artist of the highest calibre and swept him among the upper classes. This might be one reason why Beethoven received a marker and Mozart did not. To me, it is perfectly conceivable that Mozart would not have received a marker (in fact, I have read this to be common in the 18th century).

[Droell]

Originally posted by Peter:
I'm sorry Droell but the fact that you are even unaware of the famous meeting between Haydn, Mozart and leopold in 1785 shows you really do not have any serious knowlegde of the subject...

Guilty as charged! I am entirely self-taught. The two music appreciation classes I had in college did not cover most things I already knew. Like all self-taught folks, there are broad holes in what I know, even what I think I know. The only formal music reference I have is Oxford's Concise 3rd edition of 1980 (that, and 8 million web pages, when I'm not lazy). In it, under Salomon, I find he promoted Mozart's symphonies. Given that I know that Mozart toured London, it can be deduced that they met, but I did not have that square in front of me. Someday I will pick up a used set of Grove. Someday. Apologies.

I don't know how to say this any more clearly, but Mozart's death, as a death, simply reeks. And death I do know a few things about. When more than two centuries of study cannot determine if he was murdered, or died of natural causes (much less how he was murdered or what the natural causes may have been), it's time to take a step back & do a reality check. All that wasted brain-power is telling us we may be barking up the wrong tree.

We can agree that Mozart was alive and in Vienna on 4 December 1791. Robert Newman has done some interesting work suggesting that Mozart was being pushed into a legal corner that fall, from which it may be that he was not expected to survive. In this context, rumors of poisoning, or of a mysterious stranger & a requium commission, may have been imposed on Mozart as a means of frightening him into doing away with himself in advance of a very real deadline (see Tchaikovsky).

Did Mozart succumb, did he die, or did he hit on the idea of faking his death & fleeing the city to parts unknown? If so, then it looks to me as if it was last minute & improvised. But if correct, this simple theory might explain nearly every puzzle.

So we look at Constanza's archives, for letters in a certain hand, post-1791. We make a guess that he went up the Rhine to London, where he may have been aided by Salomon before leaving for more remote locales. On hunch, we search the history of early German music in America for German-speaking strangers in the mid-1790's. Or maybe Russia. Or maybe Indonesia (via a Dutch contact).

If you say that Mozart really did die on 5 December 1791, then let's have the real story of his death. One we can all agree on, one that is not silly on its face. Such as:

Mozart died. The doctor certified his death. The undertaker took him away & prepared the body. Friends & enemies in the region were notified. A requiem mass was said. He was interred in a modest, but marked, grave or crypt, perhaps outside the city, perhaps in some neighboring town. If he lacked the means, some friend donated the money, or his own (future) grave site, for the purpose.

This is what death is. This is what people do when people die, or what they try to do. Death is a very, very formal thing: Both religion and law make it so. That none of these specific events happened in Mozart's case casts grave doubt on the actuality of the death itself. (Yes, yes, I know: A requium a week later, without the body. I can go there if you want, but it won't be pretty.)

But all that is just my fancy. So Mozart died on 5 December 1791, and that was that.

[Peter]

Originally posted by Droell:
Guilty as charged! I am entirely self-taught.

No need to apologise Droell about being self taught - but I think reading a few more books on the subject might be useful before coming up with such wild if amusing theories!

Mozart is not the only historical figure whose cause of death is uncertain. Inevitably two centuries on it is virtually impossible to determine these things - they simply didn't have the knowledge and science available to us now. Amongst many others, there has also been uncertainty about Beethoven, but I'm sure you're not going to suggest he faked his own death!

We have testimonials not only from the family and doctors that Mozart died but it appears in the city registry of deaths 5th dec 1791 thus "Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus, from acute military fever, his corpse examined, 36 years old.

Another witness Ludwig gall "Quite appalled I rushed at once to the apartment still doubting the news, but alas i was soon convinced of its truth. Mad.Mozart herself opened the door of the apartment and led me to a little room on the left, where I saw the dead master on the bier, lying on a coffin, in a black suit with a cowl down over his forehead."

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

[robert newman]

Hi Droell,

You have some really good points. I personally wouldn't give up on this since it's highly original, certainly more simple than what we deal with normally and maybe, just maybe, be right. But how you yourself (the person who has this idea) proceeds next is the real issue. I can say for sure that Mozart's handwriting underwent some remarkable changes in his short life. (This is being confirmed by detailed studies by researchers such as Plath). It's certainly a very interesting idea. And its always been curious that the last letters written by Mozart are many weeks before his death - this never accounted for beside the fact that Constanze is known to have burned some.

There is too (in the Mozart letters a really cryptic reference to 'N.N' or 'N.N.'s) that keeps appearing in some of his later letters. If I'm not mistaken he calls himself at one point an 'N.N.'. If a concert was hissed it was due to the 'N.N.'s'. Constanze is said by him to be far too concerned about 'N.N.' and so on. I believe his very last letter has a P.S. in which Mozart says, to Constanze, 'But do what you like with N.N.'

I have my own ideas on this but, since you are mentioning unusual things you reminded me of this strange feature in many late letters. NN can mean 'anonymous' or 'a person with no name given', of course.

So there are puzzles and I don't think you should stop being interested in what you think instinctively may one day provide some evidence. In my own case the view is that I 'detract from the reputation of Mozart' by voicing criticisms of the established version of his life and works. Well, what is one to do ?

Regards

Robert

[Droell]

Originally posted by robert newman:


Hi Droell,

There is too (in the Mozart letters a really cryptic reference to 'N.N' or 'N.N.'s) that keeps appearing in some of his later letters.

I will "Spiro Agnew" you (one-time vice-president of the US) N.N. is Nattering Nabob, as in, "nattering nabobs of negativity." Used that phrase a lot in his speeches back around 1970. (Yes, that's a joke.)

I lack the means to take the study much of anywhere. I'm stranded in the states, have no access to the university system, do not speak nor read German, so even if I had access to source materials, I could make no use of them. The most I could do is nose around on the net, looking for interesting German-speaking strangers c.1793.

Back ten years ago I had a clairvoyant partner. We did the most remarkable investigations, but that phase of my life ended a long time ago.

[Droell]

Originally posted by Peter:

Mozart is not the only historical figure whose cause of death is uncertain. Inevitably two centuries on it is virtually impossible to determine these things - they simply didn't have the knowledge and science available to us now.

Hello Peter,

I am a Dave, by the way.

As you say, mysterious deaths are not rare. Ambrose Bierce simply disappeared. Edgar Allan Poe was said to have died of drink. And whatever happened to King Arthur, if he ever really lived, and who was Jack the Ripper?

Mysteries are first defined, and then, over time, progressively solved. It is if we shone a progressively greater & greater light (and heat) on a fog, watching carefully as it gives up its details.

In the case of Bierce, someone found he had gone off to Mexico & been killed a few weeks later. Someone discovered that Poe died of rabies, not drink. Someone else took a delightful hunch & looked for the elderly Arthur in Normandy. And found him, or so it was claimed. Jack the Ripper may have been an early 20th century painter. His one claim to fame was that he always painted from life. One of his paintings is of a gruesome murder, similar to one of Jack's.

In every normal case, the mystery, if it is solved at all, progressively gives up its clues until resolved. When we are forced back to the very beginning, again & again, we should suspect we are being mislead, and make the necessary adjustments.

From time to time science can help, but only if we know to ask the right questions, look in the right direction, construct the right framework. This thread started with the disappointing news that the skull believed to be Wolfgang's did not belong to other bones believed to be those of his family. Science can confirm our hunches, it cannot make us better sleuths.

[Joy]

Anyone ever heard of this story? I think this is how it goes: Sophie Haibel, Constanze's sister who Wolfgang often visited Sophie and her mother, so when he fell ill Sophie went to visit him often. On the day before he died, Wolfgang's condition had improved and Sophie returned to her mother bringing the good news. The next day, however, Sophie decided she would not visit Mozart since he must be better. When she was sitting at home, staring into an oil lamp it suddenly went out for no reason and she took it as a sign. She rushed to Mozart's house and found him nearly dead. Her account of his death may not be entirely accurate. She claims he sat up to greet her, however at this point Mozart had already suffered a stroke and was half-paralyzed on his left side. Moving was nearly impossible for the composer, sitting up would have been a struggle, if even attainable.

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

[HaydnFan]

Haven't heard that one Joy, but it is indeed realistic.

I personally, am sick of the conspiracy theories on this board. This one about the fake death takes the cake. I agree with Mr. Newman that not everything in history should be taken at face value and everything should be scruitinized. But that does not mean constructing theories based on circumstancial evidence in order to provide the OPPOSITE theory to the one commonly accepted by historians.

Remember, history must still be supported by evidence!

[Joy]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:
Haven't heard that one Joy, but it is indeed realistic.

I personally, am sick of the conspiracy theories on this board. This one about the fake death takes the cake. I agree with Mr. Newman that not everything in history should be taken at face value and everything should be scruitinized. But that does not mean constructing theories based on circumstancial evidence in order to provide the OPPOSITE theory to the one commonly accepted by historians.

Remember, history must still be supported by evidence!

Oh, I agree and I cartainly don't believe everything I hear (or read for that matter).
There's so many 'theories' out there about everything it's hard to sort them all out in order to get to the truth.



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