Mystery of Mozart's Skull!

[HaydnFan]

I think everyone has left this board except Droell and Robert, lol; And for good reason!

[Droell]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by robert newman:

Well, this is 18th century intrigue, for sure !

It is true that Dr Closset and also Dr Sallaba are not recorded as having said or written anything about the case during their lifetimes.
But are you including them in your list of accomplices ?

No. They are dupes. Remember that Mozart, by definition, is one of the brightest people who ever lived. The traditional story of Mozart's end makes Mozart a sad-sack, blown about by the winds of fate, powerless to control his destiny. My story makes him the principle actor, an equal on the stage with all the others, a force in his own right. Will he win? Will he loose? Watch as he risks his all in a desperate gamble! - Which sounds more like the man? Which would you rather Mozart to be?


You would not really go to London in such a situation since (I think) Haydn and Mozart were part of the same racket that he, Mozart, is presumably trying to escape from, according to your theory.

It's the aristocracy that Mozart is trying to escape, presumably in part from the unresolved scandal of Marriage of Figaro, among others. If the Austrian aristocracy includes the Jesuits, then he must escape the reach of Rome as well. Haydn can be trusted, but in any event, hard choices are made.

I am intrigued by the idea that Wolfgang's life fell apart after his father passed. I am also intrigued by the observation that Salomon seems to have functioned as a father-figure to the Germans & Austrians he brought to London. (Ever wonder how Ries got married so fast?) Therefore I deduce that Mozart may have seen Salomon as a father-substitute, someone he could run to for shelter. Whether Salomon thought so is another matter, of course.


So Mozart escapes from Vienna having already made his final farewell in the last scene of the Magic Flute, having written a short requiem for himself, and having ensured that his wife and children would be reasonably secure ?

Pretty much like that. In his final days, U.S. Grant, Civil War commander & US President, wrote furiously at his memoirs, that his family should be provided thereby. And they were.


The Jesuit involvement in Mozart's life and career is something I am working on. Frankly, I think it more likely that in your scenario he went to the USA, to Denmark or Sweden etc.


Possibilities. But of all those places, London was the best developed musically. London also had a big enough German-speaking populace that, in combination with the music, would have made the place attractive. So if you want a job of some sort, London's the place. And then there's the Jesuit angle.

At first I thought Mozart would have to lay low the rest of his life. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought, no, not necessarily. He has a different name. His real name, his real history, is known to some. He can no longer publish the music he composes, but, in an interesting inversion, he may have passed his work off to other composers. He may also have turned up as a soloist, both in recitals & at concerts, and have been employed as a teacher.


Besides, there is the curious clue of Mozarts being in the States, this begging the question of how they first got there.

Not conclusive. Many, many people, upon arriving at these shores, were renamed by US officers. Names were often truncated. "Rohelingsteinerhagen" gets truncated to "Rohel". Get out the Vienna phone book, look for the "Mozartbaumsteins" (or what you will). You will probably find many variations.

Anyway, I don't want to exhaust your imagination, mine, or the patience of readers of these notes.

True enough. Carrying on far past the limits of patience is a fault of mine!

[This message has been edited by Droell (edited 01-15-2006).]

[Droell]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:
I think everyone has left this board except Droell and Robert, lol; And for good reason!

Robert & I are dancing on a high wire. I doubt many could keep up.

Dave

[robert newman]

Dear HaydnFan,

That may be. But did Mozart leave Vienna - to be (continued) or not to be (continued) - THAT is the question.

Besides, Mozart himself once said that 'nothing is really beyond imagination'. The idea has merits. But it remains such until it finds factual support. It then becomes a theory.

For myself, it's a pleasant enough thing, just once in a while, to imagine, is it not ? But I confess that I do often when I sleep.

As for others, there are many threads.

And anyway, I have now finished this little exchange. Forgive if you can.

Robert


[This message has been edited by robert newman (edited 01-15-2006).]

[Droell]

Originally posted by robert newman:

Besides, Mozart himself once said that 'nothing is really beyond imagination'. The idea has merits. But it remains such until it finds factual support. It then becomes a theory.

If Mozart survived, then it is a challenge, a chance for greatness & fame almost beyond imagination, to find Mozart. Wish I were in London!

[HaydnFan]

Am I the only one who still believes Mozart died in his warm, cozy bed with Constanze at his side just after midnight on the 5th of December, 1791?

[robert newman]

Some of the best discoveries come from asking questions no-one has ever asked. But in this case I agree with HaydnFan since witnesses exist to the contrary and I see no reason for their testimony to be overthrown without some sort of evidence.

Your idea is credible. There are stories that in the final weeks of Mozart's career there arrived the assurance of commissions for new operas from admirers in both Hungary and also in Holland. But perhaps you are the person who, one day, can examine this in some detail.

Regards

Robert

[Peter]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:
Am I the only one who still believes Mozart died in his warm, cozy bed with Constanze at his side just after midnight on the 5th of December, 1791?

No Haydnfan, sanity hasn't deserted the board totally and I'm sure we are the silent majority!

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

[Teresa]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:
Am I the only one who still believes Mozart died in his warm, cozy bed with Constanze at his side just after midnight on the 5th of December, 1791?

No, Haydnfan, you certainly are not!

[Droell]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:
Am I the only one who still believes Mozart died in his warm, cozy bed with Constanze at his side just after midnight on the 5th of December, 1791?

Hello Haydnfan,

Myself, I've been spinning morning after scenarios.

Mozart has fled in the night. Constanza gets up & puts a dummy in the bed, drawing the blankets up, putting a sheet over its head. She contacts the authorities.

Soon enough, friends show up. One at a time, she shows them the death chamber. The last hours were horrible, she says. You don't want to see what he looks like. Better to keep the memory you have. And as they are discreet & polite, they do so. Afterwards, months & years later, the intensity of the day warps memories until they will all swear they actually saw Mozart's cold dead body. This process is normal, it is the secret behind the old story of Rashomon.

At some point the medical examiner arrives. Constanza is alone (aside from visitors, she has been alone all day). This is her moment, she has no choice.

Wailing, she leads the examiner into the room. Wolfgang, Wolfgang, why have you left me? She throws herself on the body, shrieking, Can you bring my husband back? (Both of which, in the flight scenario, would be literally true statements.)

The examiner has rules. Rule no. 1 is that he must personally examine the corpse. And when he arrived, he fully intended to do so. He enjoys his work. Study of the dead interests him. He likes puzzling out how people have died.

It's the living that are the problem. What to do with an hysterical woman? If he goes to the corpse against her will, will she attack him, mindlessly? Flail about with fists, rake him with nails, stab at him with a kitchen knife? Emotions never run higher than at times of death. And even if he gets past her, he is still at risk of meeting up with an unhappy brother or in-law a few hours later. Where the complaint would now be two-fold: Disturbing the dead, and abusing a grieving woman.

He doesn't need that. They don't pay him enough. So he asks discreet questions. How did he die? Did he spit blood? Were you there when he passed, etc. Apparrently, the answer to spitting blood was "yes", whereupon he wrote, "Acute Miliary Fever", checked the box that said he had examined the body, signed a receipt, put it on the table & left.

He still had three more deaths to examine before dark. Three more grieving spouses.

Constanza realized her mistake almost immediately (Mozart did not spit blood, some other excuse had been invented), but done was done. She was exhausted. She was upset. She was, in fact, grieving. Her man had left forever, her life had changed in unpredictable ways, the future, whatever lay ahead, was unknown. She closed her door & saw no one the rest of the day. The previous week she had made a large doll of stuffed cloths. Now she ripped it apart & scattered the pieces.

Earlier in the day she had sent word, indirectly, to the undertakers who worked with the local parish church, that they should come round at a certain hour. When they arrived, a distraught Constanza said there must be some mistake. I cannot afford the Church. The municipal service was here an hour ago. They have the body. And, stepping aside from the door, she lets them in & they see the empty bed.

Friends who went to the parish church the next day, expecting to see Mozart's remains, were told the body had already been transported miles out of the city & was even then being interred. So of course no one went to see the body buried. No one could.

My friends, the deceit was no harder than that. As for Mozart:

The gates to the city of Vienna, like the gates of all cities of the era, were closed for the night at a certain time of the day. But no city ever shuts completely. There is always a stream of people coming & going. These are locals, personally known to the night watchmen. They are rarely logged in or out. Mozart himself had come in & out of the city many times after hours.

Now, on the night we know of as his death, he has chosen his egress carefully. The watchman is the sleepy sort, and short-sighted as well. It is late in the evening, but not too late. There are still a fair number of Viennese coming in & out the gate.

"Evening, Fritz." "Evening, sir." And with that, Mozart disappears from history.

Waiting on the other side is a close family member (brother or sister, perhaps), with a horse. Singly or together, they ride through the night. Their destination is a remote village where the stage that passes does not start, nor end, in Vienna. Until he is many miles from Vienna, he is at risk of being recognized. So, for the first several days, he does not stop. News from Vienna does not reach him, he is moving at nearly the same speed as the post.

After several days he sends a letter to Constanza, delivered via some family member. Upon receiving it, her disposition changes. As she has been under constant, informal observation since the morning after, her change is noted & should be part of the historical record.
-------------------------------------

I made all this up. For two centuries people have been making up stories of Mozart's death, trying to square meager facts with an actual death, and after two centuries, all that has been agreed upon was that Mozart was dead. But if that's the only fact that is agreed, that isn't so very much. So what if he wasn't dead? If he wasn't dead, what does that tell us? What can it mean? How was it done?

[HaydnFan]

The problem with your argument Droell is that it is completely a work of fiction, it is interesting writing, but still fiction. There is not a shred of evidence in there other than (as I have said so many times), circumstancial evidence. Just because an opportunity exists, it does not mean that is what happened.

I want to make the point that Constanze was NOT adequately provided for, which is given by many many accounts. I would doubt that Mozart would have left his wife and children in this condition if he had fled purposely. And don't try to argue that she had a secret income from the exiled Mozart because that is crap and you know it.

[Droell]

Originally posted by HaydnFan:
The problem with your argument Droell is that it is completely a work of fiction, it is interesting writing, but still fiction.

So, Haydnfan, you have our attention. You have the floor. How did Mozart die? The definitive details, please.

[This message has been edited by Droell (edited 01-16-2006).]

[Peter]

Originally posted by Droell:
So, Haydnfan, you have our attention. You have the floor. How did Mozart die? The definitive details, please.

[This message has been edited by Droell (edited 01-16-2006).]

The problem Droell is that you consistently refuse to accept the evidence that PROVES Mozart died on 5th Dec 1791. As I have pointed out the only possible area for discussion is how he died, not when he died. And that really belongs on the Mozart forum.

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

[Droell]

Originally posted by Peter:
The problem Droell is that you consistently refuse to accept the evidence that PROVES Mozart died on 5th Dec 1791. As I have pointed out the only possible area for discussion is how he died, not when he died. And that really belongs on the Mozart forum.

Dear Peter,

Did Mozart die of poisoning? Did he die of tooth-ache? Was he smothered? Did he have TB? That's what the medical examiner seems to have meant with "acute miliary fever", and he should know, since he says he saw the body. Why hasn't the final medical report been taken with the seriousness it deserves? Was the examiner incompetent? Was he misled? If so, how, by whom, and why?

Yes, it should be on a Mozart board someplace. Years ago I took the poisoning story seriously, but then I learned of all the other theories. One of the things I've learned in life is that when there is no consensus, the fundamental principle itself is flawed.

In other words, something we think we know about Mozart's death is fundamentally wrong. Something we're convinced of, something we've overlooked for a long time. Peter, in all seriousness, what do you think it could be?

[HaydnFan]

Well, I completely agree with Peter on this, of course. As I have said before, there is always a probability that the most simple and obvious (and widely accepted) answer is false...but the probability is so small, it is barely worth considering. As a result, we can say with almost complete certainty that Mozart died on the date we think he did.

As Peter says, the cause of his death is somewhat more of a mystery. Medicine was far more informal (and really, much of it guesswork) compared to today so we can only make judgements of the cause of death based on the symptoms Mozart exhibited. Even then, it is merely a guess. Did Mozart die of poisoning? It's a possibility but it may not be the most likely. Mozart was not a doctor--just because he thought he was being poisoned, it does not mean that he really was.

[This message has been edited by HaydnFan (edited 01-16-2006).]