Immortal again!

[Joy]

Thanks!

[ShakeandBeet]

Who is the Immortal Beloved? Did they ever figure it out? This is like the 8th Wonder of the World.

[Joy]

I think that will remain a mystery for all eternity!

[Eline]

I think that will remain a mystery for all eternity!

Alas, I think so. However, it would be very, very interesting if the truth was discovered someday - so many different opinions have been told and written, one can imagine what would happen if we suddenly knew this secret

[Preston]

Beethoven wrote the letter on paper that he only used in 1812 (watermark SG 337 and 357). It is proven by all documentary sources that Beethoven arrived in Teplitz on 5 July 1812. Beethoven had himself registered in the Teplitz 'Anzeigs-Protocoll' on 7 July 1812. The Oberpostamtszeitung of Prague notes Beethoven's departure on 4 July 1812. The dating is also corroberated by Count Esterhàzy's trip to Teplitz which Beethoven refers to in the letter.

Do you know where you got the information about the type of paper? I am pretty sure Solomon says that there is no evidence that it was written in a certain time period. And while his translation of the German language may not be the best I think he is a pretty smart guy when it comes to Beethoven's life.

I am rereading Solomon: Beethoven; and that came to my mind.

It is possible that if Beethoven felt that Antonie was his "Immortal Beloved" then marriage laws or friendship wouldn't have mattered. I mean could you imagine a very serious side of Beethoven thinking she was his immortal beloved. That would mean that she would be his forever, so I think that if he felt that, then he would easily disturb friendship and even marriage vows. Although, I think that whoever the "Immortal Beloved" was, probably didn't love him back the way he loved her, and that he was just writing, like Beethoven would do.

Kind Regards,
Preston

[Peter]

It is possible that if Beethoven felt that Antonie was his "Immortal Beloved" then marriage laws or friendship wouldn't have mattered.

Then how do you square that with Beethoven's words "It is one of my foremost principles never to occupy any other relations than those of friendship with the wife of another man. I should never want to fill my heart with distrust towards those who may chance some day to share my fate with me, and thus destroy the loveliest and purest life for myself."

[Preston]

Then how do you square that with Beethoven's words "It is one of my foremost principles never to occupy any other relations than those of friendship with the wife of another man. I should never want to fill my heart with distrust towards those who may chance some day to share my fate with me, and thus destroy the loveliest and purest life for myself."

Those are touching words. I don't understand them entirely, the part where he writes "those who may chance some day to share my fate with me".

You are probably right, but I just imagine that if he loved her as much as the letter's said (forever), then breaking marriage vows would be utterly meaningless, in my opinion.

By the way Peter, I was reading through a book and it said about Thayer's Beethoven biography that there were a lot of different revisions, by different people. Is there a certain one that you suggest?

[Cetto von Cronstorff]

Do you know where you got the information about the type of paper? I am pretty sure Solomon says that there is no evidence that it was written in a certain time period. And while his translation of the German language may not be the best I think he is a pretty smart guy when it comes to Beethoven's life.

Beethoven, Ludwig van, Briefwechsel, Gesamtausgabe, Sieghard Brandenburg (ed.), 7 vols, Henle-Verlag, Munich 1996-98.

Brandenburg's footnote referring to the dating reads as follows:

Beethoven hat den Brief während der Niederschrift dreimal datiert, Ort und Jahreszahl jedoch nicht angegeben. Die Mitteilung des Wochentags führt aber zu deren Bestimmung. Der 6. Juli fiel in den in Betracht kommenden Jahren nur 1795, 1801, 1807, 1812 und 1818 auf einen Montag. Von diesen ist das Jahr 1812 das wahrscheinlichste. Beethoven schrieb den Brief auf einem Papier, das er nur im Sommer 1812 verwendete (Wasserzeichen SG 337 und 357: Brief 583 vom 14.7.1812 an Varnhagen von Ense; Brief 586 vom 17.7.1812 an Breitkopf & Härtel; Brief 588 vom 24.7.1812 an Breitkopf & Härtel; Brief 591 vom 9.8.1812 an Breitkopf & Härtel und Brief 592 vom 12.8.1812 an Erzherzog Rudolph). Es ist dokumentarisch belegt, daß sich Beethoven seit dem 5.7.1812 in Teplitz zur Kur aufhielt. Das Datum "Teplitz 6./7. Juli 1812" wird in der Beethoven-Forschung heute nicht mehr bestritten.[sic!]

Note the last sentence: 'The date 6/7 July is undisputed in Beethoven scholarship.' Brandenburg obviously does not count Solomon among the Beethoven scholars. Solomon's translation is not only 'not the best', it's plainly flawed. And smartness is not enough, if it doesn't lead you to the archives and the primary sources proper.

[Preston]

Beethoven, Ludwig van, Briefwechsel, Gesamtausgabe, Sieghard Brandenburg (ed.), 7 vols, Henle-Verlag, Munich 1996-98.

Brandenburg's footnote referring to the dating reads as follows:

Beethoven hat den Brief während der Niederschrift dreimal datiert, Ort und Jahreszahl jedoch nicht angegeben. Die Mitteilung des Wochentags führt aber zu deren Bestimmung. Der 6. Juli fiel in den in Betracht kommenden Jahren nur 1795, 1801, 1807, 1812 und 1818 auf einen Montag. Von diesen ist das Jahr 1812 das wahrscheinlichste. Beethoven schrieb den Brief auf einem Papier, das er nur im Sommer 1812 verwendete (Wasserzeichen SG 337 und 357: Brief 583 vom 14.7.1812 an Varnhagen von Ense; Brief 586 vom 17.7.1812 an Breitkopf & Härtel; Brief 588 vom 24.7.1812 an Breitkopf & Härtel; Brief 591 vom 9.8.1812 an Breitkopf & Härtel und Brief 592 vom 12.8.1812 an Erzherzog Rudolph). Es ist dokumentarisch belegt, daß sich Beethoven seit dem 5.7.1812 in Teplitz zur Kur aufhielt. Das Datum "Teplitz 6./7. Juli 1812" wird in der Beethoven-Forschung heute nicht mehr bestritten.[sic!]

Note the last sentence: 'The date 6/7 July is undisputed in Beethoven scholarship.' Brandenburg obviously does not count Solomon among the Beethoven scholars. Solomon's translation is not only 'not the best', it's plainly flawed. And smartness is not enough, if it doesn't lead you to the archives and the primary sources proper.

Thank you, Cetto. I used Babel translation program and got this:

Beethoven dated the letter during the minute three times, did not indicate place and year however. The report of the weekday leads however to their regulation. 6 July fell in the which are possible years only 1795, 1801, 1807, 1812 and 1818 on one Monday. From these the year 1812 is the most probable. Beethoven wrote the letter on a paper, which he used only in the summer 1812 (water-mark SG 337 and 357: Letter 583 of 14.7.1812 at Varnhagen of Ense; Letter 586 of 17.7.1812 at broad head & Haertel; Letter 588 of 24.7.1812 at broad head & Haertel; Letter 591 of 9.8.1812 at broad head & Haertel and letter 592 of 12.8.1812 at ore duke Rudolph). It is documentarily proven that Beethoven was since that 5.7.1812 in Teplitz to the cure. The date "Teplitz 6./7. July 1812" is not no more denied in the Beethoven research today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The key thing is that they tested the paper in 96-98, when the technology, to do so, was available. That was my main concern.

Peter, any word on which edition of Thayer to get? Thanks in advance.

Thanks Again,
Preston

[DavidO]

One wag has suggested that:

Karl Amenda = The Immortal Beloved

[Peter]

Peter, any word on which edition of Thayer to get? Thanks in advance.

Thanks Again,
Preston

The edition edited by Eliott Forbes - it usually comes in two volumes, but it is available combined in one tome - I have this edition.

[Peter]

One wag has suggested that:

Karl Amenda = The Immortal Beloved

Except that in 1802 Amenda became a pastor and married Jeanette Benoit - by 1815 he was still married to her and had 5 children!

One other slight problem with this amusing Amenda theory is that the letters to the Immortal beloved were without any doubt written to a woman.

[Peter]

You are probably right, but I just imagine that if he loved her as much as the letter's said (forever), then breaking marriage vows would be utterly meaningless, in my opinion.

Beethoven regarded marriage as sacrosanct. Beethoven is also known to have condemned adultery on many occasions and is surely unlikely to have regarded the affair as "truly founded in heaven - and what is more, as strongly cemented as the firmament of heaven" if it were adulterous?
In anycase a divorce for the Brenatanos was out of the question and would not have been granted.

So either Beethoven was a complete hypocrite, cheat and liar ignorant of the law or else Brentano was not the Immortal beloved.
Solomon as has been shown by Cetto is a most unreliable source and you'd do better not to rely on his amateur psychology.