Mystery of Mozart's Skull!

[Joy]

Some interesting Mozart's news in yesterday's paper. Here's the article:
" - It's a Mozart mystery as haunting as his Requiem, and apparently it won't be solved any time soon.
After months of sophisticated DNA sleuthing forensics experts admitted Sunday on national television that they still can't say with certainty whether an old skull belonged to the composer as some believe.

Past tests on the skull also were inconclusive, and a joint analysis conducted by the Institute for Forensic Medicine in Innsbruck and the U.S. Armed Forces DNA Identification Laboratory in Rockville, Md., raised more questions than answers, lead researcher Dr. Walther Parson conceded.
"For the time being, the mystery of the skull is even bigger,"
Since 1902, the skull, which is missing its lower jaw, has been in the possession of the International Mozarteum Foundation in Salzburg, the elegant Austrian city where Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was born on Jan. 27, 1756.
Parson, an internationally renowned forensic pathologist, said genetic material from two teeth removed from the skull was analyzed and compared with DNA samples gathered in 2004 from the thigh bones of two skeletons exhumed from the Mozart family grave at Salzburg's St. Sebastian Cemetery.
Experts had assumed the remains were of Mozart's maternal grandmother and a niece. But DNA analysis showed that none of the skeletons in the grave was related.
"The dead took their secrets to the grave," they concluded.
Mozart died in 1791 at age 35 and was buried in a pauper's grave at Vienna's St. Mark's Cemetery. The location of the grave was initially unknown, but its likely location was determined in 1855."

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

[Rod]

I don't know why they bother, there's not a chance of finding Mozart's body (or parts of it!) now.

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

[This message has been edited by Rod (edited 01-10-2006).]

[robert newman]

It's unfortunate that the graves of Haydn and Mozart were both desecrated, each within a few years. In the case of Haydn within days of his burial (his own skull being taken by 'phrenologists' and returned only after many intrigues, this decades decades later). In the case of Mozart it was 'phrenologists' associated with Vienna University and Dr Gall. These pseudo-scientists clearly knew where his remains were (though no-one else, it seems, including Constanze Mozart, who first tried to visit her late husband's grave for the first time only a decade or more later). When asked why the actual site had been lost Constanze's answer was that she 'expected it to be marked'. (That was typical of the neglect and indifference that prevailed in Vienna). There's a Vienna newspaper advertisement from the 1790's posted by a foreigner who, some years later, sought to know the exact gravesite of Mozart. He was to be disappointed nobody knew it.

In Haydn's case it was a student of Haydn many years later who finally erected a marker over his gravesite, without which even his would have been lost.

The actual evidence, contrary to popular myth, is that Mozart died with surprising indifference from the people of Vienna . Stories of the procession to the Cathedral, and that of a procession from there to the city gates were invented many years later. The evidence (such as we have) indicates that the body of Mozart was taken from his home the evening after his death to St Marx. (Laws in place at that time demanded that burials could only occur after sunset). Bells were certainly tolled at the Cathedral (for a price) and a hearse was certainly provided these recorded as having been paid for at the Cathedral). But on the pretext that Mozart had died of a communicable epidemic illness (something claimed by the doctors who were in charge of his case in later years) he actually received no public funeral of the kind that is so often assumed. As a contrast, tens of thousands attended a memorial to Mozart days later in Prague. It was on 10th December 1791 in Vienna, some days after his unescorted burial, that a small group of friends (none of them family members) made a hastily organised church memorial to Mozart (Emanuel Schickaneder organising this with his colleagues of the Freihaus Theatre) at which a work composed by Mozart, his real Requiem, was performed. This modest affair is recorded by a handwritten newspaper of the time put out by one Herr Staudinger. (A work very different than that which has always been assumed was sung that day without orchestra - an a capella work - the Requiem that Mozart DID finish - and the work we have today (KV626) manufactured only in the years that followed). This a capella work (now lost but for a time in the possession of Schickaneder) was last known of in the possession of one Anton Herzog, who was a musician in the employment of Count Walsegg - Walsegg being wrongly credited with having commissioned Mozart for KV626. The a cappella work (still highly controversial in Mozart studies today) was mistaken as being a quintet arrangement of KV626 before disappearing completely along with many other manuscripts once in the possession of Count Walsegg.

Whether the skull of Mozart held for years at the Mozarteum is actually his has been hotly
disputed for decades. I agree that with such a succession of errors and blunders over the site of Mozart's relatives there is little prospect of this being settled in the near future.

R

[HaydnFan]

What are you talking about?

Nobody knew or knows exactly where Mozart was buried; his body was not dug up or played around with by scientists and the skull in Salzburg is NOT Mozart's. Mozart is buried somewhere in St. Marx...the only think that was ever done to him was his bones were probably crushed some years after his death to make room for more bodies in the cemetery. I don't know where you got this desecration and phrenologist story from.

If you have a good source for this, please provide it because nobody I know has ever suggested this.

[robert newman]

Dear HadynFan,

You never heard it before and so you can't accept it. I hope this has not been your attitude throughout your entire life or we are in serious trouble. Please consider the possibility that what we learn may actually (just sometimes) be things we hear newly, no-one having told us them before.

The phrenologists (founder of which was Dr Gall of Vienna University) published works in the early 19th century, one of which is an illustration of Mozart's skull. If you say they never published such a book, fine. But they did.

The story of Haydn's skull is also well known. Perhaps not to your goodself also. But anyway. Do you require references for both of these ?

Robert

[HaydnFan]

Where did I say I couldn't accept it? I am simply asking you to provide a source.

[HaydnFan]

No, I know the Haydn story is true. The Mozart one, I am more skeptical...searching for and reading information recently about the whole Mozart skull issue, I did not come across anything to suggest that anyone found his grave after he was buried. (except the probably incorrect story about the gravedigger Rothmeyer). If it was true that Mozart was dug up by scientists, do you not think that this information would have appeared somewhere, namely, on the Mozart Forum? I bet if I ask them, they will say that Mozart has not, to their knowledge, been dug up and/ or analyzed since his death.

[Joy]

Hi Robert, could you please explain when you said "But on the pretext that Mozart had died of a communicable epidemic illness (something claimed by the doctors who were in charge of his case in later years)." Does this mean he did not die of a communicable ilness? Was he buried in a common grave? Also you mentioned Constanze not knowing where her husband had been buried? What's the story on that? Just curious. Thanks for any information to help clear this up.

Regards,

Joy

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

[HaydnFan]

Joy, I would ask these questions on the Mozart Forum, because there are many Mozart experts there who can give you accurate information (but I'm sure the answer will always be, we really do not know for sure, lol).

[robert newman]

Well, we know for sure that Constanze Mozart did not attend the funeral of her husband. The reasons given for this are many. The most common one is that she was gravely ill. And yet we have accounts of her receiving visitors the morning after Mozart's death, of her having meetings to discuss sale of Mozart's manuscripts (amongst others with a representative from Bonn to whom she wrote in confirmation some weeks later) etc. She also had an audience with the Emperor in an appeal that she merited a pension (a quite brazen untruth since Mozart had not worked in his court position for the required time. This was nevertheless given to her). She also attended various functions, including several benefit concerts arranged by van Swieten. She was, in fact, remarkably mobile. Enough so that by the end of December she is deep in negotiations with all sorts of people such as music publishers, the Abbe Maximilian Stadler, Sussmayer, Eybler, and various other composers whom (she claims) she employed at various times to work on the Requiem. In one case she wrote a contract to employ one composer who, having second thoughts, backed out). Then of course other negotiations with Count Walsegg etc.

The simple fact is that she did not know where Mozart was buried and did not visit St Marx cemetery until well over 10 years after his death. (It was around the same time as she sent an itemised bill for food and lodging to Hummel, now an adult, who had once stayed with them as a young student in the mid 1780's. When Hummel laughed at such meanness she threatened to sue him. That correspondence still survives). I am sorry to say that Constanze Mozart has been less than truthful on many important matters related to Mozart's last days, not only on the affair of the Requiem, the supposed 'rehearsal' of it days before his death, and many, many other things.

To be fair, in recent years there have been several books which have attemptd to rehabilitate Constanze from these and many other criticisms (not least, in 'editing' many letters of Mozart and simply burning others). Perhaps the most sympathetic view of her is that written by Agnes Selby.

I can find the date when she voiced surprise that no monument or marker to Mozart was at St Marx Cemetery though I do not have this to hand. It was definitely in the first decade of the 19th century - over 10 years after Mozart's death.

Constanze was a quite superstitious, devout Catholic, woman. She had steely qualities and was definitely what we would call an early businesswoman. In Mozart's lifetime she never really appreciated her husband. But she quickly learned the value others began placing on his music. A complex and contradictory woman but one who (like most of us) proved her fallibility.

R

[robert newman]

Dear Joy,

The whole subject of Mozart's last few weeks is shrouded in mystery, half truth, censorship and downright falsehood. By 'last few weeks' I mean the time between the court judgement being served on him until the time he died. During those few weeks he was definitely ill. In fact his illness began around the first performance of the 'Magic Flute', not long before he left for Prague to perform his 'La Clemenza di Tito'. By the time of his return he was really quite ill. He managed to attend a local Freemason meeting (at which he presented them with a lovely cantata well worth hearing). One some days he looked quite well. But then came his growing convinction of his own impending end.

In Viennese history there had been various epidemics. The worst being of course plague which ravaged the city several times in the 16th and 17th centuries. There had been a flu epidemic in 1790 but not (as is claimed) at the time of his death. Still, the precedent existed at the Cathedral that the mere suggestion of a person dying of a communicable disease (which is the word that got out, falsely, about his cause of death) was enough to ensure that he was never taken to the Cathedral as is often supposed.

But discussion of Mozart having powerful enemies etc. is of course a 'conspiracy theory' and so we have really two camps on this issue. Mozart's own son kept notes of his memories. In later life he remembered that his father died with every sign consistent with him having been poisoned.
This was the belief Mozart himself had weeks before his death. In fact, on the evening of his death two long time colleagues, Van Sweiten and Schickander, were at the house of Mozart within an hour of his death, which occurred after midnight - making us wonder if they were in the vicinity expecting something unusual to happen. There was no examination of his body and no autopsy. I personally think that he died of trichinosis but the actual end of his life caused by mercury having somehow been inhaled as he was being attended to by Dr Closset. A towel was brought close to his head area just before he gasped for breath. (Whether such a treatment was meant to shock his system or not we will probably never know).

In any event, the official cause of death was 'acute miliary fever' which, in reality, means no more today than it did then. Witnesses complained at the poor treatment he received at the hands of his two doctors, one of which was watching a theatrical production and would not come until it was ended.

In attempts to call a priest, they too refused. The whole affair was a shambles.

R

[robert newman]

Dear HaydnFan,

Here in London it's really quite late. I will get your source. A book from the early 19th century written by 'phrenologists' and which talks of Mozart's skull. This book has an illustration of it. I've seen it several times and simply don't have the anwer to hand.

Give me a few days please and I will tell you the book and other details.

R

[Droell]

I've read Robert Newman's reappraisal of Mozart's life & career & final days, and, in particular, the strange behavior of his survivors in the immediate days after his death.

I've been entertaining the notion that Herr Mozart faked his death, fled Vienna, fled the continent, to parts unknown. Newman has an interesting & original theory about Mozart's final days, but it does not explain Constanza.

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?

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.

George Gershwin was seriously ill, very visibly so, in his final year. He complained of severe headaches, would fall uncontrollably to the floor. As I understand it, the people around him thought he was a spoiled rich kid acting out & were most cruel. His sudden death shocked everyone. Literally destroyed his brother Ira.

Where was the shock when Mozart died?

[HaydnFan]

Robert, the last few things you have written I agree with for once! They were quite well said. Except for the diagnosis...in reality, we really do not know what killed him; we can make educated guesses and as you say, mercury poisoning is one possibility, but it is only, as I say, one of the possibilities.

I look forward to the source on Mozart's REAL skull.

[robert newman]

I think the 'phrenologists' were quite a crazy bunch of people but, at least, they were definitely collecting skulls including those of musicians, convicts, writers etc. That of Haydn is an example though of course from some 18 years after the death of Mozart. Dr Gall was so extreme in his ideas that he was kicked out of Vienna by Joseph 2nd. He and Mesmer went to Paris and other places. Since they definitely published books (one of which features a quite detailed image of his skull) it was the basis for a posting of mine around a year ago on the old openmozart site. Anyway, I'll definitely track it down. On balance I think the story is credible. There was also (as you may know) a plaster mask made of Mozart (later broken) and a waxworks image of Mozart for several years in Vienna that disappeared around 1807. Gall made it quite fashionable to make death masks and that fashion continued even in to the 1850's. Some say that a metal copy of the plaster mask was made and one has recently turned up (in an antique shop) that many believe is taken from it. A photograph of that can be found somewhere on mozartforum.

Regards


Robert