Beethoven's Ninth Symphony: Rehearsing and Performing its 1824 Premiere 1837651051, 9781837651054

Citation preview

BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Frontispiece: Ludwig van Beethoven, charcoal drawing by Stephan Decker, May 27, 1824 (Beethoven-Haus Bonn). See p. 169.

BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY REHEARSING AND PERFORMING ITS 1824 PREMIERE

Theodore Albrecht

THE BOYDELL PRESS

© Theodore Albrecht 2024 All Rights Reserved. Except as permitted under current legislation, no part of this work may be photocopied, stored in a retrieval system, published, performed in public, adapted, broadcast, transmitted, recorded, or reproduced in any form or by any means, without the prior permission of the copyright owner The right of Theodore Albrecht to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 First published 2024 The Boydell Press, Woodbridge ISBN 978 1 83765 105 4 hardback ISBN 978 1 83765 156 6 ePDF The Boydell Press is an imprint of Boydell & Brewer Ltd PO Box 9, Woodbridge, Suffolk IP12 3DF, UK and of Boydell & Brewer Inc. 668 Mt Hope Avenue, Rochester, NY 14620–2731, USA website: www.boydellandbrewer.com A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library The publisher has no responsibility for the continued existence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this book and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate Cover design: riverdesignbooks.com

This book is dedicated to the memory of George Yaeger and Anshel Brusilow.

CONTENTS Preface xi The Premieres of Beethoven’s Earlier Symphonies xiii The Schindler Problem xvii Thayer’s Assessment of Schindler xxxiii The Present Book xxxiv Mechanical and Organizational Matters xxxv Acknowledgments xxxvii Chapter 1: Composition of the Ninth Symphony The Pre-History of the Ninth Symphony Early Thoughts about a Symphony No. 9 Composing the Ninth Symphony (ca. February–December, 1823) Return from His Summer Retreats Schindler’s Summary of Summer–Fall, 1823 Work on the Finale Begins Completion in the New Year, 1824

1 1 3 6 11 12 13 18

Chapter 2: Petition, Preparations, Copying The Ludlamshöhle Petition, February, 1824 The Changing Orchestra of the Kärntnertor Theater Concert Preparations Begin in Earnest March 7: The First Planning Session Copyist Paul Maschek March 14: Sunday Dinner with Sontag, Unger, and Schindler Mid-March: Back to Work Copyist Peter Gläser

22 22 24 26 27 31 34 38 43

Chapter 3: Finding a Location Threatening Clouds on the Horizon More Copying Work The Theater an der Wien: Clement or Schuppanzigh? Der schwer gefasste Entschluss: The Kärntnertor Theater It Must Be The Ludlamshöhle Petition Is Published—Twice! Preparations for Rehearsals Detailed Rehearsal Plans Begin, April 27, 1824 The Problematic Ludlamshöhle Petition—Again Brotherly Encouragement

59 59 62 63 64 67 68 72 74 75

viiiCONTENTS

Chapter 4: Final Preparations/First Rehearsals Wednesday, April 28, 1824 The Final Week of Preparations: Friday, April 30 The Long-Awaited Agreement with Duport Saturday, May 1 Sunday, May 2—The First Rehearsal with Orchestra and Soloists The Ride Home and Dinner

76 76 79 80 82 87 90

Chapter 5: Rehearsals and Confusion Monday, May 3, 1824—Tabbing the Scherzo Tuesday, May 4—Morning Tuesday, May 4—Afternoon and Evening Wednesday, May 5—Morning Wednesday, May 5—Afternoon Wednesday, May 5—Evening Thursday, May 6—Morning Thursday, May 6—Afternoon Thursday, May 6—Evening

95 95 97 101 107 110 113 114 115 118

Chapter 6: Premiere and Celebratory Dinner Friday, May 7, 1824—During the Day Friday, May 7—The Evening of the Akademie Unger and the Applause during the Scherzo The Symphony Resumes Saturday, May 8—The Day after the Akademie Sunday, May 9—The Day of the Dinner Home on the Evening of Sunday, May 9 Monday Morning, May 10—A New Day

120 120 122 126 128 131 134 141 142

Chapter 7: One More Time 144 Monday, May 10, through Monday, May 17, 1824 144 Tuesday, May 18, and Wednesday, May 19 148 Thursday, May 20: Final Organization Begins 152 Thursday, May 20: The Invitation to Carl Czerny 153 Thursday, May 20: Late in the Day 156 Friday, May 21 157 Saturday, May 22: At Home in the Morning 160 Saturday, May 22: The General Rehearsal at the Grosser Redoutensaal 161 Saturday, May 22: Midday Dinner 162 Saturday, May 22: Later in the Day 164 Chapter 8: Second Premiere and Financial Reality Sunday, May 23, 1824: The Second Akademie Tuesday, May 25: Facing Financial Reality Epilogue: Thursday, May 27: Portrait of a Compassionate Composer

166 166 168 169

CONTENTS

ix

Appendix A: Anton Schindler’s Acquaintance with Beethoven (March, 1814–May, 1824) 170 Appendix B: The Ludlamshöhle Petition, Late February, 1824 194 Appendix C: Vienna’s Principal Theaters and Halls in Beethoven’s Time 200 Appendix D: Orchestral Personnel, Kärntnertor Theater, 1822/1824 203 Appendix E: Choral Personnel, Kärntnertor Theater, 1822/1824 224 Appendix F: Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s Volunteer Sign-Up Sheet, 1824 228 Appendix G: Schindler’s Account of Beethoven’s Post-Akademie Dinner in the Prater 231 Bibliography 233 Introduction to the Indices 246 Index of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony 247 Index of Beethoven’s Other Compositions 256 General Index 260

PREFACE The traditional story of the first performance of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 on May 7, 1824, is well known, especially the tale of the pitifully deaf composer who could not hear the applause that rewarded his music at the end. Earlier histories, beginning with Anton Schindler (1795–1864) and repeated (and elaborated upon) by Alexander Wheelock Thayer (1817–1897),1 as well as many subsequent mythmaking accounts, have related that Beethoven composed the Ninth Symphony on commission from the Philharmonic Society of London for a first performance there; that Beethoven composed the horn solo in the third movement for a hornist named Lewy, who possessed a valved horn; that he composed the contrabass recitatives in the finale with the virtuoso Domenico Dragonetti (1763–1846) in mind; that Beethoven possibly wanted to move the first performance from Rossini-loving Vienna to Berlin; that he received a mysterious petition imploring him to retain the first performance for Vienna; that Beethoven’s friends had a long debate over the hall in which the concert should take place; that there was an unpleasant and unprecedented plan to replace concertmaster Franz Clement (1780–1842) with Beethoven’s favorite, Ignaz Schuppanzigh (1776–1830); that there were a large number of amateurs in the orchestra; that there was an inadequate performance after only two rehearsals; that the Imperial box of the theater was insultingly empty; that Beethoven looked like a disheveled genius at the premiere; that cheers from the audience were unfairly suppressed by the police; and that Beethoven earned unexpectedly small profits from the May 7 concert and its May 23 varied repeat. Three recent book-length studies on the Ninth Symphony by Nicholas Cook (1993), David B. Levy (2003), and Harvey Sachs (2010) have essentially repeated the various received accounts of the premiere, the preparations for it, and the

1

Anton Schindler, Biographie von Ludwig van Beethoven, 3rd ed., 2 vols. (Münster: Aschendorff, 1860), II, pp. 54–75; Schindler, Beethoven as I Knew Him, ed. Donald W. MacArdle, trans. Constance S. Jolly (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1966, and various reprints), pp. 269–283; Alexander Wheelock Thayer, Ludwig van Beethovens Leben, 5 vols., trans. Hermann Deiters, ed. Hugo Riemann (Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1907–1917), V, pp. 17–95; and Thayer’s Life of Beethoven, ed. Elliot Forbes (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1967), pp. 886–913.

xiiPREFACE

reviews that followed.2 A long chapter in Thomas Forrest Kelly’s First Nights (2001), although intended for a popular audience, brings a number of interesting new details into play.3 Robin Wallace’s 2017 collection, translation, and edition of nineteen reviews of the first performances and editions from 1824 to 1828 does likewise.4 The various critical commentaries and introductory materials concerning recent scholarly editions of the Ninth Symphony by Jonathan Del Mar and Beate Angelika Kraus similarly contain details of considerable interest.5 Possibly the single most important post-Thayer contribution to the scholarly literature on the premiere of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, however, has been Shin Augustinus Kojima’s article “Die Uraufführung der Neunten Symphonie Beethovens: Einige neue Tatsachen” (The Premiere of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony: Several New Facts), dating from 1981/1984.6 It includes—among other points—the circumstances surrounding Beethoven’s receipt of the petition in late February, 1824; Schindler’s noninvolvement with it; its probable origins with the Ludlamshöhle group; the number of rehearsals, what type, and other important and minor details concerning preparations for the Symphony’s premiere. Moreover, and possibly more importantly, Kojima’s article demonstrates what an unexplored treasure trove of new factual material Beethoven’s conversation books

2

For instance, Nicholas Cook, Beethoven: Symphony No. 9 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993) is largely based on secondary sources with inexplicable factual lapses. David Benjamin Levy, Beethoven, The Ninth Symphony, rev. ed. (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 2003), is a focused compilation of received knowledge concerning the premiere, combined with analysis and reception history. Harvey Sachs, The Ninth: Beethoven and the World in 1824 (New York: Random House, 2010), is a rhapsodic mixture of fact and interpretation for popular consumption, with the memorable opening phrase of Part One: “Reeking, rotting garbage, overflowing from bins” (p. 9). 3 Thomas Forrest Kelly, First Nights: Five Musical Premieres (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2001), pp. 108–179. 4 Robin Wallace, trans. and ed., The Critical Reception of Beethoven’s Compositions by His German Contemporaries, Op. 125 (Boston: Boston University—Center for Beethoven Research, 2017). 5 Ludwig van Beethoven, Symphonie Nr. 9 in d-moll op. 125, with Critical Commentary, ed. Jonathan Del Mar; Imprints No. TP 909 and BA 9009 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1996/1999); and Ludwig van Beethoven, Symphonie Nr. 9 d-Moll Opus 125, ed. Beate Angelika Kraus, Beethoven Werke, Abteilung I, Band 5 (Munich: G. Henle Verlag, 2020). 6 Kojima, “Die Uraufführung der Neunten Symphonie Beethovens: Einige neue Tatsachen,” in Bericht über den Internationalen Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongress, Bayreuth, 1981, ed. Christoph-Hellmut Mahling and Sigrid Wiesmann (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1984), pp. 390–398. Kojima’s article was based on early readings of the recently published conversation books but was written in a telegraphic style that perhaps confused scholarly readers unfamiliar with the situations described or the sources themselves.

THE PREMIERES OF BEETHOVEN’S EARLIER SYMPHONIES

xiii

are.7 Strangely, few scholars have incorporated Kojima’s findings into their work over the past four decades, and even the petition itself has hardly been mentioned in the most-recent biographies and life-and-works studies of the composer.8

The Premieres of Beethoven’s Earlier Symphonies Beethoven undertook the Viennese premiere of his Ninth Symphony (and the three movements from the Missa solemnis with it) against almost impossible odds. All of his earlier symphonies had had at least partial financial support from various patrons to rent a hall, copy parts, and hold reading-rehearsals and even multiple public performances. For Symphony No. 1, premiered at the Burgtheater on April 2, 1800, probably either Prince Carl Lichnowsky (1761–1814) or Prince Joseph Franz Maximilian Lobkowitz (1772–1816) provided some of the aforementioned expenses, and even the theater’s manager, Baron Peter Anton Braun (1764–1819), provided a small subsidy of 27 florins.9 With Symphony No. 2, Beethoven was under contract with the Theater an der Wien for an opera, providing the use of the theater’s orchestra, chorus, vocal soloists, copyists, and two rehearsals (in this case a double rehearsal—two rehearsal periods on April 4) for his concert on April 5, 1803.10 In the case of Symphony No. 3 (ultimately called the Eroica), Prince Lobkowitz had become Beethoven’s principal patron and treated him to two readingrehearsals of the work with ca. 32 musicians (mostly hired from the Theater an der Wien) in the music room of his Viennese palace on June 10 and 11, 1804, with orchestral parts copied by Imperial Court music copyist Wenzel Sukowaty. 7 The

Ludlamshöhle connection with the February, 1824, petition is first encountered in the Konversationshefte and then discussed in Kojima’s article (1981/1984). Kojima, in turn, was summarized in Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven (1996), No. 344, but his findings were not mentioned at all in the edition of the petition in Brandenburg, Briefwechsel (1996), No. 1784. 8 For instance, Barry Cooper, Beethoven (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000); Lewis Lockwood, Beethoven: The Music and the Life (New York: Norton, 2003); William Kinderman, Beethoven, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009); and Lewis Lockwood, Beethoven’s Symphonies: An Artistic Vision (New York: Norton, 2015). 9 Theodore Albrecht, “Beethoven’s Expanding Orchestral Horizons, 1795–1800,” trans. Ernst Kobau, Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 84 (December, 2019), pp. 7–17. Hoftheater, Generalintendanz, S.R. 33, p. 85 (Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna). 10 Theodore Albrecht, “Hyperbole and High Drama: The Chronology and First Performance of Beethoven’s Oratorio Christus am Ölberge, Op. 85,” Bonner BeethovenStudien 13 (2022), pp. 10–63. At least some additional support seems to have come from Prince Carl Lichnowsky and his younger brother Count Moritz Lichnowsky (1771–1837). Count Moritz would leave Vienna for a long period but would return in time to join Beethoven’s circle before the composition and premiere of the Ninth Symphony in 1823–1824.

xiv

THE PREMIERES OF BEETHOVEN’S EARLIER SYMPHONIES

Thereafter it was performed privately at the prince’s Bohemian estates over the summer, again at his Viennese palace in December, semiprivately at the concerts at the hall of the bankers Fellner and Würth on January 20, 1805, with its first public performance with ca. 48 musicians—at a concert of concertmaster Franz Clement at the Theater an der Wien—on April 7, 1805.11 Symphony No. 4 was originally presented during a series of semipublic performances at Prince Lobkowitz’s palace in March, 1807, and features orchestral parts demonstrably composed for players from the Theater an der Wien.12 During the winter of 1807–1808, Beethoven’s symphonies written up to that time were repeated in the series of Liebhaber-Concerte (Amateur Concerts) held at the Aula (Great Hall) of the University of Vienna with an orchestra of ca. 51 players.13 Symphonies No. 5 and 6 (Pastoral), as well as the Choral Fantasy, Op. 80, were premiered at the Theater an der Wien, with many passages tailored specifically to that orchestra’s strengths, on December 22, 1808. Prince Lobkowitz may have sponsored a reading-rehearsal earlier for the two Symphonies. Much of the same program was repeated on December 23 on a benefit concert for concertmaster Franz Clement.14 During 1811 and 1812, Beethoven composed his Symphonies No. 7 and 8, and on April 21, 1813, in the spirit of Prince Lobkowitz’s earlier practice, Archduke Rudolph (1788–1831) treated the composer to a reading-rehearsal of the two works in his apartment in the Hofburg (Imperial Palace) and had had a set of orchestral parts extracted from the scores. These Symphonies would be performed 11 Theodore Albrecht, “‘Mit Verstärkung des Orchesters’: The Orchestral Personnel at the First Public Performance of Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony,” in The New Beethoven: Evolution, Analysis, Interpretation; Essays in Honor of Lewis Lockwood, ed. Jeremy Yudkin (Rochester, N.Y.: University of Rochester Press, 2020), pp. 161–202. The performance on April 7, 1805, probably represented the eighth time that over half of that augmented orchestra had played the work—surely the best-rehearsed public premiere of any of Beethoven’s major orchestral works. 12 Theodore Albrecht, “Beethoven’s Portrait of the Theater an der Wien’s Orchestra in His Choral Fantasy, Op. 80,” in Beiträge zu Biographie und Schaffensprozess bei Beethoven, ed. Jürgen May (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2011), pp. 1–26, especially p. 8. 13 Otto Biba, “Beethoven und die ‘Liebhaber Concerte’ in Wien im Winter 1807/08,” in Beiträge ’76–78: Beethoven Kolloquium 1977; Dokumentation und Aufführungspraxis, ed. Rudolf Klein (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1978), pp. 82–93; and Theodore Albrecht, “The Musicians in Balthasar Wigand’s Depiction of the Performance of Haydn’s Die Schöpfung, Vienna, March 27, 1808,” Music in Art, International Journal for Music Iconography 29 (Spring–Fall, 2004), pp. 123–133. The contrabassists, the wind players (with the exception of two), and the timpanist were all professionals, mostly from the Theater an der Wien. The other string sections were led by professionals but were otherwise talented amateurs. Three trombones and a contrabassoon that would have played for Joseph Haydn’s Schöpfung would not have been needed for Beethoven’s Symphonies No. 1–4. 14 Albrecht, “Beethoven’s Portrait,” pp. 10–26.

THE PREMIERES OF BEETHOVEN’S EARLIER SYMPHONIES

xv

by a composite professional orchestra of ca. 94–96 players on a series of four benefit concerts—two for the war casualties on December 8 and 12, 1813, and two for Beethoven himself on January 2 and February 27, 1814, the first two in the university’s Aula but the second two in the Grosser Redoutensaal (Large Imperial Ballroom). The musicians donated their services for the war benefit pair, but by the time that Symphony No. 8 was premiered on Beethoven’s benefit concert of February 27, he had to pay ca. 60 of them out of his own pocket. Beethoven could assume that expense because the box-office hit on all four concerts was Wellington’s Victory, which required another dozen players, mostly percussion, but guaranteed a house full of cheering patriots.15 By 1823–1824, however, when Beethoven composed and premiered his Symphony No. 9, among his earlier patrons, Prince Carl Lichnowsky had moved back to his country estates and died; Count Moritz Lichnowsky remained but was no major financial support; Princes Kinsky and Lobkowitz were dead. Archduke Rudolph was still living but largely away in Olmütz as cardinal, and even his support for the Missa solemnis (finished too late for his enthronement) was questionable. Many of the orchestral musicians for whom Beethoven had specifically written earlier were dead, had moved away, had retired, or had changed their places of employment among Vienna’s theaters or noble houses. In addition, Beethoven’s favorite copyist, Wenzel Schlemmer, had died on August 6, 1823. Beethoven had been encouraged—even, hypothetically, commissioned—by the London Philharmonic Society to compose a symphony.16 Aware of his own deteriorating health, Beethoven would not have ventured a journey to London, especially across the intimidating English Channel, but also would not have sent a new symphony there without having it performed under his own supervision. 15 Theodore Albrecht, “Two Contrabassoons and More: The Personnel in Beethoven’s Orchestras for Symphony No. 7, Symphony No. 8, Wellingtons Sieg, and Der glorreiche Augenblick (1813–1814),” in Beethoven und der Wiener Kongress, ed. Bernhard R.Appel and Julia Ronge (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2016); pp. 165–217, especially pp. 167–190. Archduke Rudolph paid for the orchestral parts for the reading-rehearsal of the two Symphonies, as well as the additional string parts needed for the gigantic performances of Symphony No. 7, but Beethoven himself had to pay copyist Wenzel Schlemmer for the additional string parts for Symphony No. 8. See Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, Nos. 181–182, for the pertinent payroll and copying bills. 16 On July 6, 1822, Beethoven had asked his former student Ferdinand Ries, then living in London, how much the Philharmonic Society might be willing to pay for a symphony. Ries presented the matter to the society, which voted to offer Beethoven 50 pounds. Ries sent that information to Beethoven on November 15, and Beethoven accepted the offer in principle on December 20, 1822, although he was not satisfied with the honorarium. In his next letter to Ries, on February 5, 1823, Beethoven spoke of a hypothetical, yet-uncomposed symphony, but it is clear that no formal agreement with the Philharmonic Society concerning a commission had been reached. See Thayer-Forbes, pp. 833–835; and Anderson, Letters of Beethoven, Nos. 1084, 1110, and 1133.

xvi

THE PREMIERES OF BEETHOVEN’S EARLIER SYMPHONIES

Since 1821, Vienna had been infatuated with Gioacchino Rossini’s music, and Beethoven momentarily considered Berlin for the premiere. Therefore, despite the Ludlamshöhle Petition of February, 1824, encouraging him to premiere the Ninth Symphony in Vienna, Beethoven was still without any major financial support to do so, and even the practical logistics were now an unknown factor. The task was impossible, and yet it had to be undertaken. For Beethoven as concert-giver it would be like starting anew in the city where he had lived for over 30 years. * This book will follow Beethoven’s progress with the Symphony No. 9, from his most recent professional orchestral premieres in 1813–1814, through the revival of his opera, Fidelio, at the Kärntnertor Theater in November, 1822, through the composition of the individual movements of the Ninth Symphony with their specific orchestral implications, to the work’s completion by February, 1824, and the realities of producing his own Akademie (concert), not only in a Vienna enthusiastic for Italian opera but also in a theater whose orchestral personnel had changed. It will cover the logistics of getting scores and parts for three movements of the Missa solemnis and the complete Ninth Symphony copied and duplicated in time for adequate rehearsals and the Viennese premieres of these works. Recent comprehensive collections of Beethoven’s correspondence and updated editions of his conversation books, as well as documentary research into the identities of the orchestral musicians with whom Beethoven was acquainted and for whom he wrote, allow us now to trace this progression of events—detailed though they be—more thoroughly, more accurately, with more elements of human interest, with more details of cause and effect, and with more emphasis on orchestral (and even choral) matters than ever before.17 The professional musicians themselves knew that they were participating in historically important events, even though most of them were not articulate or literate enough to express it effectively. In 1846, however, the clarinettist Joseph Friedlowsky (1777–1859)—for whom Beethoven had written solos in Symphony No. 4, Symphony No. 5, Symphony No. 6, and Symphony No. 8, among others—penned an apostrophe to Beethoven for Gustav Schilling’s commemorative Beethoven-Album: “Dear, unforgettable friend! With heartfelt emotion I recall the times when I was fortunate enough to collaborate at performances of your splendid works under your direction and was able to esteem them in full measure. Your honorable

17 Comparable studies, although different in their aims, have been Hans Busch’s admirable Verdi’s Aida: The History of an Opera in Letters and Documents (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1978) and his Verdi’s Falstaff in Letters and Contemporary Reviews (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997).

xvii

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

recognition of my successful renditions, and especially the many indications of your valued friendship, are my pride!”18

The Schindler Problem In his Biographie of Beethoven in 1860, Anton Schindler (1795–1864) stated that Friedlowsky “taught Beethoven the mechanics of the clarinet” and also mentioned violinist Ignaz Schuppanzigh, violist Franz Weiss, violoncellists Anton and son Nikolaus Kraft, traveling hornist Johann Wenzel Stich (aka Giovanni Punto), flutist Carl Scholl, and “the great hornist [Friedrich] Hradetzky”19 among Beethoven’s close orchestral colleagues.20 Of these, Schindler knew Schuppanzigh, Weiss, Scholl, Friedlowsky, and Hradetzky personally, and they all participated in the premiere of the Ninth Symphony in May, 1824. Since 1977, however, Schindler and his writings have come under severe, even vicious critical scrutiny that warrants attention here, especially because he himself was a very active participant in the premiere of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony. * Even during Beethoven’s lifetime, Schindler was not among the most popular of his acquaintances. The conversation books indicate that—within Beethoven’s circle—Schindler was perceived as immature, effeminate, arrogant, gossipy, and prone to hyperbole. But Beethoven needed a secretary and factotum who knew music and was literate. Therefore, starting in January, 1823, the former law-clerkturned-theater-concertmaster filled the bill. See Appendix A for details. He would serve in this capacity through May, 1824, and then again from December 8, 1826, through the composer’s death, and in various minor functions as his estate was being settled. In the process, Schindler—probably with the complete approval of Stephan von Breuning, the almost lifelong friend who was Beethoven’s executor—took possession of many documents that might assist his future role as Beethoven’s biographer. These included dozens of letters that 18 Beethoven-Album: Ein Gedenkbuch dankbarer Liebe und Verehrung, ed. Gustav Schilling (Stuttgart: Hallberger, 1846), p. 20. Schubert also wrote the clarinet part in Der Hirt auf dem Felsen for Joseph Friedlowsky in 1828, but his son Anton would play in the Viennese premiere on a flood benefit concert in 1830. 19 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, pp. 35 and 181; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 57–58 and 161. 20 In September, 1852, violinist Karl Holz (1799–1858) told Otto Jahn that Beethoven asked certain players whether various passages were possible for their instruments (irrespective of the difficulty) and mentioned Friedlowsky (clarinet), Joseph Czerwenka (oboe), and Hradetzky and Michael Herbst (horn); see Kopitz and Cadenbach, Vol. 1, p. 460. Holz’s reminiscences, etc. (pp. 460–479) are just as important but also just as prone to inaccuracy as Schindler’s.

xviii

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

the composer had received, the surviving conversation books, and Beethoven’s working score of the Ninth Symphony. After Beethoven’s death, Schindler’s career as a functional but minor conductor took him to Budapest, back to Vienna, then to distant Münster and Aachen, with visits to Paris, and finally retirement to Frankfurt’s western suburban Bockenheim. Early in 1840, Schindler published the first edition of his Biographie of Beethoven in Münster. A copy of that book found its way to London, where the pianist Ignaz Moscheles (1794–1870) had been living since 1825.21 Under circumstances that remain suspicious from a modern perspective, an English translation of Schindler’s biography, along with letters from Schindler and Beethoven that Moscheles and other Londoners had received, appeared from the publisher Colburn in London with Moscheles’s name alone as editor on the title page early in 1841.22 To be sure, Moscheles had corresponded with Schindler concerning his intention since November 2, 1838. Initially Moscheles hoped to publish a translation of Franz Gerhard Wegeler and Ferdinand Ries’s Biographische Notizen über Ludwig van Beethoven, which had just been published in Coblenz (1838). Eventually, Moscheles and Colburn decided to translate Schindler’s Biographie instead, and to add the correspondence from Beethoven’s deathbed and other supplements.23 On August 2, 1840, Moscheles assured Schindler that both their names would appear on the title page.24 On January 24, 1841, Schindler journeyed to Paris, where he remained until April 7, and made contacts with Hector Berlioz, Frédéric Chopin, Luigi 21 For a good biographical sketch of Moscheles and his relationship with Beethoven, see Clive, pp. 237–240. Moscheles had played the bass drum’s cannon shots in Wellington’s Victory in 1813 (and Beethoven found him too reticent); he had also made a piano version of Fidelio in 1814 (and Beethoven found him too self-effacing). Even though Beethoven and his circle found Moscheles’s piano playing and his compositions superficial, the composer lent Moscheles his Broadwood piano for concerts in Vienna on December 15 and 17, 1823; but the group chuckled among themselves when they learned that he was in bed with kidney stones in Prague in January, 1824 (see Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 46, Blätter 13r and 16r; Heft 47, Blätter 28r–33r; Heft 48, Blätter 23r–24r and 32r; Heft 54, Blätter 16v and 23v; and Heft 57, Blätter 16v and 32r). After his move to London in 1825, Moscheles continued to promote Beethoven’s works. Beethoven and Schindler remained in friendly correspondence, and Schindler even sent Moscheles two pages from the Scherzo of the working score of the Ninth Symphony (mentioned above) as a souvenir. 22 Anton Schindler, Biographie von Ludwig van Beethoven (Münster: Aschendorff, 1840); Ignace Moscheles, ed., The Life of Beethoven, Including His Correspondence with His Friends, 2 vols. (London: Henry Colburn, 1841). 23 The translation itself was not Moscheles’s work but that of an anonymous contracted translator. 24 Daniel Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss auf die Beethoven-Biographik (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2013), pp. 81–88 and 486–497.

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

xix

Cherubini, and Franz Liszt.25 During this time, Moscheles’s English translation of Schindler’s Biographie was published in London, with only “edited by Ignace Moscheles” on the title page,26 and soon made its way to Paris.27 We can only imagine Schindler’s chagrin at being in a foreign capital, there to experience his own work’s appearing with the name of another author on its title page. He was justifiably indignant over the apparent betrayal by Moscheles but, for the moment, seemingly kept it to himself. On March 29, he wrote to his student Bertha Hansemann: “The London edition of the Biographie is already being sold here…. There are two fat volumes and—O Heavens! What all is in them! If the English Beethovenlovers must know everything about this saint….”28 To add insult to injury, shortly after Schindler returned home to Aachen, Heinrich Heine (1797–1856), who had been living in Paris for ten years,29 25 Brenner,

Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss, p. 84. This was not just mere namecollecting. On April 8, 1823, Schindler had conspired to introduce the young Franz Liszt to Beethoven for the first time. See Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 28, Blätter 40r–40v. 26 This should have occasioned an immediate, sincere, and detailed apology from Moscheles to Schindler, but no such document seems to exist, nor are there any references in the surrounding or subsequent documents to suggest that it ever did. 27 A slightly altered reprint of the Moscheles edition appeared from Oliver Ditson in Boston, undated but presumably later in the 1840s, inadvertently denying Schindler the recognition due him on both sides of the Atlantic. It was possibly the first full-length biography of the composer known to the future biographer Alexander Wheelock Thayer (1817–1897). See Clive, pp. 364–365. 28 Autograph in the Beethoven-Haus Bonn, NE 253, No. 1; quoted in Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss, pp. 81–82. 29 Harry Heine (b. Düsseldorf, 1797; d. Paris, 1856) was one of the leading German literary figures of the early nineteenth century. Born to a mercantile Jewish family, he became Lutheran (evangelisch) in 1825, taking the baptismal names Christian Johann Heinrich. Heine had begun his career as a lyric poet, but by 1830 had also become an essayist and critic with a caustic wit and mocking tone. In 1829, he engaged in an ad hominem controversy with the homosexual author August von Platen (1796–1835). In 1831, he moved to Paris, where he took up with an uneducated shop clerk, whom he married in 1841. Bedridden for many years, he died as the result of long-term syphilis. See Henry and Mary Garland, The Oxford Companion to German Literature, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1986), pp. 374–375 (Heine) and p. 708 (Platen). See also Jeffrey L. Sammons, Heinrich Heine: A Modern Biography (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1979), pp. 141–147; and Alex Ross, “The Great Gay-Jewish Poetry Brawl of 1829,” New Yorker online (February 5, 2021), based on George Prochnik, Heinrich Heine:Writing the Revolution (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2020). For a discussion of German Jews—including Heine—and their attitudes and practices concerning baptism, see Mark Kroll, Ignaz Moscheles and the Changing World of Musical Europe (Woodbridge, Suffolk, U.K.: Boydell & Brewer, 2014), pp. 320–324.

xx

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

published a survey of the “Musical Season of 1841” in Augsburg’s Allgemeine Zeitung. Following a discussion of Liszt’s concertizing and Beethoven’s music, Heine, who was of Jewish birth and disliked homosexuals,30 launched a biting attack against “Beethoven’s friend, l’Ami de Beethoven, as he presented himself everywhere here, I believe even on his visiting cards. A black beanpole with a terrible white cravat and a funereal expression…. ‘How could the great artist put up with such an unedifying, spiritually impoverished friend?’ cried the French, who lost all patience with the monotonous chatter of this tiresome guest. They did not remember that Beethoven was deaf!”31 Beyond this—although Schindler may not have been aware of it—Heine was distantly related to Ignaz Moscheles’s wife, Charlotte, née Embden.32 And at about the same time, Moscheles himself described Schindler as a “tall and lanky figure, the image of Don Quixote.”33 Schindler’s reaction now becomes more understandable. Already in his Beethoven in Paris (Münster, 1842), he differentiated between his Biographie of Beethoven and the English translation produced by “Herr Moscheles and the book dealer H[enry] Colburn in London,” as sharing the responsibility. Schindler’s intentions were to provide the German reader with new material that had been For musical and liturgical developments within Vienna’s Jewish community during this period, see Theodore Albrecht, “Beethoven’s Quotation of Kol Nidrei in His String Quartet, Op. 131: A Circumstantial Case for Sherlock Holmes,” in Jewish Music and Musicians through the Ages, Studies in Jewish Civilization 19 2008), pp. 149–165. For principal hornist Elias Lewy, who was baptized in 1835, see Albrecht, “Elias (Eduard Constantin) Lewy and the First Performance of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony,” Horn Call 29 (May, 1999), pp. 27–33, 85–94, and cover. 30 Schindler was often perceived, already in his Viennese years, as being homosexual. For Heine’s homophobia and the famous “Platen affair,” see the footnote immediately above. 31 Oscar George Sonneck and Frederick H. Martens, “Heinrich Heine’s Musical Feuilletons,” Musical Quarterly 8, No. 1 (January, 1922), pp. 119–159; 8, No. 2 (April, 1922), pp. 273–295; and 8, No. 3 (July, 1922), pp. 435–468, specifically p. 437. Translated by Martens from the German; updated by the present author. The article was evidently dated “Paris, April 20, 1841.” The original German was excerpted in Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss, pp. 85–86; citing the [Augsburger] Allgemeine Zeitung (April 20, 1841), but no pagination. Initial reference to Heine in Musical Quarterly courtesy Dr. William R. Meredith (June 8, 2023). In fact, Heine’s original report was dated “Paris, April 20, 1841,” and it was published in the [Augsburger] Allgemeine Zeitung, No. 119 (April 29, 1841), Beilage, p. 945, col. 2. The Augsburger Zeitung had a wide circulation; Beethoven occasionally read copies in Vienna’s coffee houses. 32 Kroll, Ignaz Moscheles, pp. 321–323. 33 Helga Lühning, “Das Schindler- und das Beethovenbild,” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 2 (2001), p. 193; citing Eduard Hüffer, Anton Felix Schindler (Münster: Aschendorff, 1909), p. 31. As a source for the Heine article, she cites Hüffer, p. 35.

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

xxi

added to the English translation, to correct details in the English translation, to provide observations on the correct interpretation of certain Beethoven works, and to support them with documentary evidence. In doing so—with or without saying it—Schindler minimized Moscheles’s personal contact with the composer.34 On April 10, 1842, Moscheles wrote to Schindler in amazement that he would react in such a way.35 On March 26, 1843, Heine retracted his remark about Schindler’s calling card, writing that “he denies” it, but, again hedging, wrote, “I did not invent the tale, but, perhaps, gave it too ready a credence.” Even so, Heine reaffirmed his negative opinion of Schindler’s white cravat.36 In the third edition of his Biographie in 1860, Schindler carried his reaction to the plagiarist Moscheles further by denouncing him as a “darling of the public.” “We must mention another more important obstacle to any familiarity between Moscheles and Beethoven. This was Beethoven’s hatred for the children of Israel in the arts.” In an endnote to his modern English-language edition (1966), Donald MacArdle (1897–1964) wrote, “The present editor knows of no documented basis for such a charge of antisemitism against Beethoven. Schindler’s charge probably reflects his own attitude more accurately than that of Beethoven.”37 Thus it was probably MacArdle, in a ca. 1964 footnote, who openly accused 34 Anton Schindler, Beethoven in Paris (Münster: Aschendorff, 1842), pp. vii–xii and passim. Schindler’s Vorwort (preface) was dated “Aachen, October, 1841.” 35 Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss, pp. 81–88 and 486–497. Unfortunately, Brenner’s collection of Schindler’s correspondence appeared too late to be used by Mark Kroll in his Ignaz Moscheles (2014), pp. 232–242 and 329–330. Many reputable scholars are still unable to perceive why Schindler might have taken offense at Moscheles’s apparent plagiarism. 36 Sonneck and Martens, “Heinrich Heine’s Musical Feuilletons,” Musical Quarterly 8, No. 3 (July, 1922), pp. 435–468, specifically p. 454. According to William Meredith, the German text is taken from a report dated March 26, 1843, in the “Musikalische Berichte” section titled “Lutetia II,” in Heine’s Gesammelte Werke, 2nd ed., ed. Gustav Karpeles (Berlin: G. Grote’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1893), Vol. 7, pp. 214–215 (“Lutetia,” letter LVI). Martens’s 1922 translation in Musical Quarterly was not based on the report “Musikalische Saison in Paris. Paris, 20 März” in the Ausserordentliche Beilage zu Nr. 35 der Allg.[emeine] Zeitung, March 26, 1843, pp. 10–12 (which has a different date, is quite a bit shorter, and does not contain this visiting-card paragraph). There are also significant variants in the French version of “Lutetia,” though not apparently regarding this paragraph. Courtesy William R. Meredith (June 21 and 23, 2023). 37 Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 371–374, particularly p. 373; and endnote 397, p. 391. In the Biographie (1860), Vol. 2, p. 173, it reads, “Liebling des Publikums.” “Aber noch ein anderer gewichtiger Umstand muss bei dieser Gelegenheit zur Sprache kommen, der wie eine turmhohe Barre zwischen Moscheles und Beethoven jeden Umgang unmöglich gemacht: dies war Beethoven’s Hass gegen die Kinder Israels in der Kunst.” MacArdle, who died before his edition appeared in print, was an engineer by profession; his edition of Schindler’s biography was based on a translation prepared for him by Constance S. Jolly.

xxii

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

Schindler of antisemitism for the first time—especially unfortunate because Schindler (despite his typical garrulous hyperbole that, in this instance, generalized a specific complaint) was not actually an antisemite—he was just antiMoscheles and possibly anti-Heine as well! Also in the 1860 edition of his Biographie, Schindler wrote of his acquaintance with Beethoven, including specific occasions extending back to 1814. As a result, some scholars suspected that Schindler had exaggerated the length and closeness of that association, and they were also uncomfortable with the fawning language that he used to express it. The appearance of MacArdle’s translated edition in 1966 probably served to remind scholars of their irritation with Schindler, who, by this time, had been dead for a century. In the 1970s, the Viennese-born British pianist and music critic Peter Stadlen (1910–1996) – whose wife, Hedwig, or “Hedi” (1916–2004), was a political activist, anti-Nazi author, and collaborator in her husband’s research work— launched a frontal attack against Schindler, outwardly prompted by his inaccurate reporting of Beethoven’s metronome marks but also by his possible destruction of two-thirds of the original conversation books and, especially, his posthumous falsified entries in those conversation books that did survive. On March 14, 1971, Stadlen presented an angry, rambling tirade about the falsified entries on BBC radio—but then, strangely, waited until 1977 to publish a modified version of his script.38 In 1850, Richard Wagner had published his infamous essay “Das Judentum in der Musik.” Wagner had issues with the composers Giacomo Meyerbeer and Felix Mendelssohn, as well as the Parisian music publisher Maurice Schlesinger and Dresden hornist Joseph Rudolph Lewy. In his essay, he generalized those specific issues with Jewish musicians into a scathing attack on “Jews in Music” in general. This was the negative cultural and political environment in which Schindler could generalize his specific complaints against Moscheles a decade later. 38 Peter Stadlen, “Schindler’s Beethoven Forgeries,” Musical Times 118 (July, 1977), pp. 549–552; German version as “Zu Schindlers Fälschungen in Beethovens Konversationsheften,” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 32 (May–June, 1977), pp. 246–252. Stadlen also questioned Schindler’s abilities as a musician. He then continued his arguments in “Schindler and the Conversation Books,” Soundings, No. 7 (1978), pp. 2–18; translated as “Schindler und die Konversationshefte,” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 34 (January, 1979), pp. 2–18 (coincidentally identical paginations). In 1967, Stadlen had published a relatively more disciplined “Beethoven and the Metronome,” Music & Letters 48, No. 4 (October, 1967), pp. 330–349. Seemingly part 1 of a larger article, it dealt largely with the metronome marks of the Ninth Symphony (Trio of the Scherzo and march in the finale) and briefly with the Scherzo of the Eroica Symphony. Stadlen had harsh words for Anton Schindler and Elliot Forbes and patronizing ones for Emily Anderson. It seems that any part 2 was never published. Stanley Sadie characterized Stadlen thus: “His critical writings show his strongly committed standpoint on controversial matters and an unusually allusive style.” Sadie,

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

xxiii

Also in March, 1977, a more objective discussion of Schindler’s role came from the Konversationshefte’s modern editors, Dagmar Beck and Grita Herre,39 when they began systematically identifying the falsified entries. They also published a list of all the falsified entries discovered to date as a supplement to Volume 7 of their edition of the Konversationsefte (1978). At a Beethoven conference in Detroit in November, 1977, Karl-Heinz Köhler (1928–1997), director of the Konversationshefte project, briefly summarized his colleagues’ findings and ably defended them against the growing “criminal sensation.”40 Early reports of Schindler’s falsified entries had already reached English-speaking readers in Maynard Solomon’s psychologically influenced biography, Beethoven. In his preface, dated July 1977, he wrote of Schindler’s “unparalleled collection of four hundred … Conversation Books … but he destroyed two-thirds of [them].” Solomon noted that Schindler’s biography “largely shaped the nineteenth-century conception of Beethoven, and it has continued to exert its influence in our own time.” He also reported that at the Beethoven-Kongress in March, 1977, Grita Herre and Dagmar Beck confirmed “a long-held suspicion … that Schindler had fabricated more than 150 of his own entries in the Conversation Books…. Thayer had little confidence in Schindler’s testimony, [but] … relied heavily on [him].41 Bypassing an early—and largely unsaid—motivation that Schindler might have been an antisemite (which, as noted above, was not the case), several prominent scholars jumped onto the anti-Schindler bandwagon and often vilified him with a vehemence and vocabulary that exceeded the boundaries of rational and objective scholarship.42 As early as his 1967 review of MacArdle’s translation of Schindler’s biography, Joseph Kerman (1924–2014) had called Schindler a

“Stadlen, Peter,” The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 20 vols., ed. Stanley Sadie (London: Macmillan, 1980), Vol. 18, pp. 45–46; and New Grove, 2nd ed. (2001), Vol. 24, pp. 247–248. 39 Dagmar Beck and Grita Herre, “Einige Zweifel an der Überlieferung der Konversationshefte,” in Bericht über den Internationalen Beethoven-Kongreß, 20. bis 23. März 1977 in Berlin, ed. Harry Goldschmidt, Karl-Heinz Köhler, and Konrad Niemann (Leipzig: VEB Deutscher Verlag für Musik, 1978), pp. 257–294; and their “Anton Schindlers fingierte Eintragen in den Konversationsheften,” in Zu Beethoven, ed. Harry Goldschmidt (Berlin: Verlag Neue Musik, 1979), pp. 11–89. 40 Köhler, “The Conversation Books: Aspects of a New Picture of Beethoven,” in Beethoven, Performers, and Critics: The International Beethoven Congress, Detroit, 1977, ed. Robert Winter and Bruce Carr (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1980), pp. 160–161. 41 Maynard Solomon, Beethoven (New York: Schirmer Books, 1977), pp. ix–xiii. 42 These attacks often defy the principles in Father Charles M. Blasen’s Logic 201 course, St. Mary’s University, San Antonio, Texas, spring, 1964. Blasen warned against the fallacies of “begging the question” and “ad hominem” attacks (name-calling) that seem to abound in the anti-Schindler polemic.

xxiv

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

“lackey,” “so stupid, dull, and vindictive that he can hardly hold the modern reader’s attention,”43 adding, “He could not write.”44 In 1979, Standley Howell (b. 1952), a graduate student at the University of Chicago, published an article in England’s Musical Times demonstrating that Beethoven’s so-called Mälzel Canon was most probably a forgery by Schindler to support his claims as an authority on the composer’s tempos. In 1984, a German translation of that article appeared in Berlin in Harry Goldschmidt’s Zu Beethoven 2.45 Also in 1984, the American pianist and musicologist William S. Newman (1912–2000)—freely citing the work of Stadlen, Beck and Herre, and MacArdle— published an extensive article, “Yet Another Major Beethoven Forgery by Schindler?,” an attack on Schindler prompted by performance annotations that Beethoven supposedly made in an Etude by Johann [John] Baptist Cramer. In a patronizing biographical sketch of Schindler, Newman (coincidentally?) also called Schindler a “lackey” and now questioned his musical qualifications. He 43 Joseph Kerman, “Schindler’s Beethoven,” Musical Times 108, No. 1487 (January, 1967), pp. 40–41. This from a scholar who had made his sensational reputation from three words: “shabby little shocker” (Opera as Drama [New York: Knopf/Vintage, 1956], p. 254). Kerman’s reference to Schindler’s being “vindictive” is probably a reaction to Schindler’s negative opinion of the plagiarist Moscheles. Kerman notes, “In short, every statement of fact and every shade of implication requires verification or, if verification is not possible, the stern exercise of judgment.” In his 1992 introduction to Breuning’s Memories (noted below), Maynard Solomon carries it one step further: “Where verification is not possible, none of Schindler’s anecdotes, accounts, observations, or judgments may be relied upon.” Kerman’s use of the word “lackey” (not a commonly used term these days) for Schindler will be repeated in Newman’s 1984 comment (cited below). Likewise, Kerman’s (1967) and Solomon’s (1992) statements of blanket doubt about Schindler’s veracity will appear with very similar wording in Barry Cooper’s condemnation in 2000 (quoted below). 44 Perhaps Kerman forgot that one of the reasons that Beethoven engaged Schindler in the first place was because he was trained in law and could write well, including the projected formal invitations to subscribe to the Missa solemnis. 45 Standley Howell, “Beethoven’s Maelzel Canon: Another Schindler Forgery?,” Musical Times 120, No. 1642 (December, 1979), pp. 978–990; translated as “Der Mälzelkanon— eine weitere Fälschung Schindlers?,” in Zu Beethoven 2, ed. Harry Goldschmidt (Berlin: Verlag Neue Musik, 1984), pp. 163–171. It is interesting that the Musical Times had published articles by Stadlen, Kerman, and now Howell, all discrediting Schindler. In his essay, Howell echoed the language being used by elder scholars: “Schindler’s self-serving distortions of facts and his conspicuous lack of taste earned him the almost universal disdain of contemporary musicians.” He thanked Hans Lenneberg (1924–1994), music librarian, University of Chicago, for his assistance. In 2022, Howell retired from the Harold Washington Library, Chicago, after 22 years of service (Chicago Public Library, Board of Directors meeting, Minutes, May 17, 2022).

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

xxv

noted “Schindler’s wholesale forgeries” and “his transgressions,” “particularly about [Beethoven’s] tempos, rhythmic organization, and articulation.” Reproducing an “actual photograph” of Schindler (as he called it), Newman described “his somewhat gauche, grotesque, forbidding manner.”46 In 1992, I attempted to explain how Schindler’s anecdote about Beethoven’s supposed reference to Shakespeare’s Tempest in conjunction with his Piano Sonatas, Op. 31, No. 2, and Op. 57, might actually have been true, but it fell upon Miranda’s figuratively deaf ears.47 In the same year, 1992, Maynard Solomon essentially defied Karl-Heinz Köhler’s caution against a “criminal sensation” and declared that Schindler’s biography of 1860 had “tainted all subsequent biographical studies48 because of its author’s wide-ranging errors, prejudiced readings, deliberate misrepresentations, and forgeries.” Across the next several pages, Solomon invoked such musicologically incendiary language as “a complex web of fabrications,” “invented dozens of scenes,” “forged more than 150 passages in the conversation books,” and “posed as an expert” to characterize Schindler.49 In 1998, Solomon published a second edition of his biography Beethoven. He revised the preface to his first edition (1977) to indicate that Schindler had had only 137 of Beethoven’s conversation books, but most of the other material pertinent to this discussion remained unchanged and moderate in tone. In his actual preface to this second edition, however, Solomon wrote, “Although Anton Schindler’s extensive, deliberate forgeries in the Conversation Books became known in 1977, the extent of his unreliability in every other respect was not yet fully grasped…. I have now combed this book in an attempt to eliminate

46 William S. Newman, “Yet Another Major Beethoven Forgery by Schindler?,” Journal of Musicology 3, No. 4 (Autumn, 1984), pp. 397–422, particularly pp. 397–400. Newman (p. 397) even blamed Schindler for the delay in completing his own book Beethoven on Beethoven: Playing His Piano Music His Way (New York: W.W. Norton, 1988). 47 Theodore Albrecht, “Beethoven and Shakespeare’s Tempest: New Light on an Old Allusion,” Beethoven Forum 1 (1992), pp. 81–92. It was not mentioned in the appropriate discussion in Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss (2013), pp. 287–292. 48 Solomon’s declaration will find echo in Daniel Brenner’s Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss (2013). 49 Gerhard von Breuning, Memories of Beethoven: From the House of the Black-Robed Spaniards, ed. Maynard Solomon, trans. Henry Mims and Maynard Solomon (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), pp. 5–8. Solomon (1930–2020) himself possessed only a bachelor’s degree in psychology from Brooklyn College, but was co-owner, with his elder brother Seymour, of Vanguard Records. Similar to MacArdle’s edition of the Schindler biography, Solomon’s edition of Breuning’s 1874 book seems to be based largely on a translation by a third party.

xxvi

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

interpretations based on ‘evidence’ provided by Schindler, except where there may be supporting documentation or independent confirmation.”50 Also in 1998, David Wyn Jones attempted a balanced assessment: “Beethoven may have known [Schindler] for several years, but the friendship was cemented probably during the rehearsals and performances of The Consecration of the House. Schindler was first and foremost an enthusiast, keen to be associated with a great figure; he was also something of a gossip who liked to lord his favoured status. Beethoven soon had a nickname for him: Papageno.”51 But the outraged and indignant attacks on Schindler continued. In 1993, Barry Cooper had noted “his notorious propensity for falsification,”52 and, in 2000: “Schindler related [in his Biographie] a large number of stories about Beethoven and his music, but most have proved to be either completely or partly false. He even inserted numerous entries in Beethoven’s conversation books after the composer’s death, in order to enhance his own reputation.… Anything reported by Schindler must be assumed to be doubtful or false, unless supported by independent evidence (in which case, Schindler’s contribution is redundant).”53 In 2003, William Kinderman called Schindler “Beethoven’s dishonest biographer” and questioned not only his accounts but even his acquaintance with Beethoven: “Schindler reveals himself to be an imposter who was not actually at the scenes he describes; and in fact, there is reason to believe that he had little access to Beethoven before 1822.”54 50 Solomon, Beethoven, 2nd rev. ed. (New York: Schirmer Books, 1998), pp. ix– xiv and xviii. Similarly, when I began translating and editing Beethoven’s Conversation Books two decades ago, I was strongly advised to remove Schindler’s “falsified” entries altogether. Believing that they contained significant information about both Beethoven and Schindler, I retained them as an integral part of the documents as they have come down to us. I was also advised to contact political activist Hedi Stadlen (widow of Peter, noted above) for “the whole story” about Schindler, but she passed away before I could do so. See Albrecht, Preface, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, pp. xxxii-xxxiii. 51 David Wyn Jones, The Life of Beethoven (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998), p. 158. Similarly, Jones’s work was mentioned nowhere in Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss (2013). 52 Barry Cooper, “Schindler and the Pastoral Symphony,” Beethoven Newsletter 8, No. 1 (Spring, 1993), p. 7. 53 Barry Cooper, Beethoven (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), p. ix. What this seems to say is: “If an assertion by Schindler is supported by evidence elsewhere, then that evidence can be accepted and Schindler’s version dismissed.” Even so, Cooper’s condemnation is remarkably similar to those quoted from Kerman (1967) and Solomon (1992) above. 54 William Kinderman, “Beethoven’s Dishonest Biographer: Anton Schindler,” in Artaria 195: Beethoven’s Sketchbook for the Missa solemnis and the Piano Sonata in E Major, Op. 109, 3 vols. (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003), Vol. 1: Commentary, pp. 58–60, esp. p. 59, col. 2.

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

xxvii

In 2009, I made a strong case that Schindler had not destroyed any great numbers of the conversation books in Beethoven’s estate and defended aspects of his forged entries in the conversation books and inaccurate accounts in his Biographie within historical and historiographical contexts.55 Up to this point, most of the recent attempts to discredit Schindler in extravagant terms had been penned by British and American musicologists and pianists. In 2001, however, using highly selective documentary evidence in a disapproving comparative compendium, Helga Lühning (Beethoven-Haus Bonn) briefly discussed Schindler’s youth and education, Schindler as Beethoven’s Adlatus, his role after Beethoven’s death, the myth or lie of his friendship with Beethoven, and the Mälzel Canon. She omitted references to all of the British and American condemnations of Schindler except Standley Howell’s article about the Mälzel Canon, but even that, only in its German translation.56 In 2013, the German Daniel Brenner, working in conjunction with the Beethoven-Haus Bonn, published a study that followed up on Maynard Solomon’s 1992 assertion that Schindler had “tainted all subsequent biographical studies.” In doing so, however, he included a valuable collection of 162 letters to and from Schindler. In his introduction and analysis, Brenner repeatedly emphasized, for instance: “In 1822, he [Schindler] left the ‘circle of dilettantes’ and became concertmaster [Orchesterdirektor] of the Theater in der Josephstadt. Until this time, there is no indication of close personal contact between Schindler and Beethoven. Not until November, 1822, did Schindler himself write in a conversation book…. Therefore, not until Fall, 1822, did Beethoven and Schindler become closely acquainted.”57 In 2014, the American Jan Swafford summarized the accusations against Schindler but, like the British Jones a decade and a half earlier, attempted to present some balance: “In later years, before he sold the conversation books for a handsome price, Schindler forged a great many entries in the books to make Kinderman’s footnote 14 to the above cites William S. Newman, Beethoven on Beethoven (1984), following upon Stadlen; and Solomon, Beethoven (1998), p. xviii, as condemning Schindler. 55 Theodore Albrecht, “Anton Schindler as Destroyer and Forger of Beethoven’s Conversation Books: A Case for Decriminalization,” in Music’s Intellectual History, ed. Zdravko Blažeković and Barbara Dobbs Mackenzie (New York: RILM, 2009), pp. 169–181. Already in 1979, Grita Herre and Dagmar Beck had demonstrated that Schindler possessed only 137 conversation books, but that information did not consistently reach English-speaking writers, who continued to revile Schindler in the meantime. See Beck and Herre, “Anton Schindlers fingierte Eintragen” (1979), pp. 16–17. 56 Helga Lühning, “Das Schindler- und das Beethovenbild,” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 2 (2001), pp. 183–199. 57 Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss, p. 12. Even in his extensive and multifaceted bibliography (pp. 557–569), Brenner omitted any reference to the English-language literature, noted here, that attempted to portray Schindler in a balanced or positive light.

xxviii

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

it look like he was close to Beethoven years longer than he actually was. He also destroyed pages and perhaps whole books. All the same, if Schindler had not lifted those effects, they would have been scattered to all and sundry, as so many of the musical manuscripts and sketchbooks were.”58 Almost contradicting Swafford’s conciliatory conclusion, the 2020 biography of Beethoven by the Belgian Jan Caeyers stepped back a quarter century and angrily noted “the egregious treatment suffered by many of the source materials,” while also implying the willful destruction of ca. 8,000 pieces of correspondence: “The perpetrator of these acts was a man named Anton Felix Schindler…. obsessed with infiltrating the famous composer’s intimate circle of friends. Beethoven’s supposed regard for him … is a barefaced lie. “Schindler was not in a position to bring the [Biographie] project to a successful end. He had only known Beethoven for a short while.… He also knew too little about music to write effectively on Beethoven’s works. “Scholars worked out early on that Schindler … had destroyed many of the conversation books and ripped pages out of others.… But it was not until the 1970s that a far more serious offense was unearthed: the addition of fictitious exchanges between Beethoven and Schindler himself.”59 * Each of the charges leveled against Schindler since 1977 deserves a thorough discussion and resolution, but we can deal with only a few of them briefly here: Charge No. 1: Schindler possessed ca. 400 surviving conversation books and destroyed all but ca. 138 of them. Schindler often ripped pages out of the books. Defense: Beethoven may have used between 200 and 225 conversation books between 1818 and 1827 (never as many as 400).60 On October 31 or November 1, 1822, a chest containing conversation books, sketchbooks, and earlier 58

Jan Swafford, Beethoven: Anguish and Triumph (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2014), p. 930. 59 Jan Caeyers, Beethoven: A Life; trans. Brent Annable (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2020), pp. xxi–xxiv; endnotes, p. 544. The title page and dustjacket also bear the logo of the Beethoven-Haus Bonn. Caeyers attributes the detection of the falsified conversation-book entries to “researchers from the criminology department of Berlin’s Humboldt University” (p. xxiv). A great portion of Caeyers’s “March 29, 2007” preface is devoted to an attack on Schindler. Caeyers’s text dates from 2009. His bibliography has been selectively updated to 2019 but contains no reference to Daniel Brenner’s Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss (Beethoven-Haus Bonn, 2013), among others. 60 My own estimates of the number of booklets used have changed over the years. For instance, we have traditionally believed that loosely organized Heft 1 was used from ca. February 26, 1818, to shortly after March 2, 1818. Recent investigations by a British researcher who signs himself “Neville Churchill” have indicated that Beethoven used this booklet as late as ca. June 24, 1818. Similar discoveries could likewise lower the number

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

xxix

correspondence dropped off the cart carrying Beethoven’s possessions back to Vienna from his late summer in Baden and was lost. Beethoven himself probably ripped pages or half-pages out of the books to use for notes to acquaintances or directions for literate servants. The composer also lost several booklets and even gave two of them (Hefte 95 and 96) away as souvenirs.61 Charge No. 2: Schindler made hundreds of forged entries in the conversation books after Beethoven’s death to support false claims that he was closer to the composer than he actually was, to support his claims for authentic performance of Beethoven’s music, and to authenticate the anecdotes told in his biography. Defense: Once we know that the falsified entries exist at all, they often become obvious and transparent with their own phraseology, vocabulary, and so forth. Many of them are merely remarks of agreement or contradiction as Schindler surveyed a book’s contents later. Others reflect additional thoughts, not written at the time; whether they reflect authentic or pertinent thoughts must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Schindler’s wish that contrabassist Anton Grams were still alive to lead the collective bass section for the premiere of the Ninth Symphony must surely reflect the composer’s sentiments. His jottings regarding “2 Principe” of composition concerning the Pathétique Piano Sonata, Op. 13, are still open to discussion. For the most part, however, many of the sensationalized falsified entries, once identified, become routine, naive, pitiful, harmless, or even relatively invisible—a tempest in a teapot that does not survive critical scrutiny.62. Charge No. 3: Beethoven only knew Schindler a short while. Not until fall, 1822, did Beethoven and Schindler become closely acquainted. Defense: Appendix A demonstrates that Schindler had first met Beethoven in March, 1814, and that by November, 1822, he had met with the composer at least 12 verifiable times and that he had played violin in ca. 25–30 performances of ca. 12 of Beethoven’s compositions, including Symphony No. 7 under the composer’s direction. Charge No. 4: Schindler had little musical background and knew too little about music to write effectively on Beethoven’s works.

of booklets used before November, 1822. Courtesy Neville Churchill, emails, May–June, 2021. 61 Theodore Albrecht, “Anton Schindler as Destroyer and Forger,” pp. 169–181; and his preface to Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Vol. 1 (Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell & Brewer, 2018), pp. xiii–xiv. 62 Albrecht, “Anton Schindler as Destroyer and Forger,” pp. 169–181; and his preface to Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Vol. 1, pp. xxii–xxiii; as well as Dagmar Beck and Grita Herre, “Einige Zweifel” (1978), pp. 257–294.

xxx

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

Defense: Schindler was a talented product of a typical Moravian CounterReformation education when young, and studied violin, keyboard, and singing during his Gymnasium years in Olmütz. When he came to Vienna to study law at the university, he continued playing violin in several amateur ensembles. In ca. 1820, he decided to become a professional musician and spent a great deal of time practicing over the next two years, enough to be engaged as the concertmaster of the suburban Theater in der Josephstadt in summer, 1822. In 1825, he joined the rehearsal and conducting staff at the Imperial Court’s Kärntnertor Theater. In September, 1827, he obtained a similar position in (Buda-)Pest, moved to Münster in northwestern Germany as music director in 1831, and to nearby Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) in 1835. He returned to Münster in 1846 and from there moved to private teaching in Frankfurt am Main (and western suburban Bockenheim) in 1848.63 Along with his literacy and broad general education, Schindler was well prepared to write about Beethoven and his music. Charge No. 5: The pretentious Schindler visited Paris from January 24 to April 7, 1841, and had visiting cards printed that said “l’Ami de Beethoven” (Friend of Beethoven). Defense: Schindler was probably pretentious, basking in Beethoven’s reflected glory,64 but professional visiting cards were standard forms of introduction and legitimization. Even so, the story itself was the creation of the poet Heinrich Heine, who was of Jewish birth and disliked homosexuals and who, in April, 1841, launched a biting attack against “Beethoven’s friend, l’Ami de Beethoven, as he presented himself everywhere here, I believe even on his visiting cards.”65 Thus, Heine did not state outright that such cards actually existed but simply hedged his bets rhetorically with “I believe.” As William Meredith (director emeritus, Ira F. Brilliant Center for Beethoven Studies, San José State University) observes, “Heine was hostile to Beethoven’s music and was famous for mocking other people. Even he [Heine] said that he ‘believes’ that Schindler had the description on his visiting cards, which means that he himself had never seen one. The Heine Museum [Düsseldorf ] does not know of any copies. Neither the Beethoven-Haus nor the Beethoven Center owns a copy.”66

63

See Appendix A of this volume and Clive, pp. 312–314. Clive, pp. 312–314, for a summary of Schindler’s personal traits, more thoroughly discussed in Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss, passim. 65 Sonneck and Martens, “Heinrich Heine’s Musical Feuilletons,” Musical Quarterly 8, No. 3 (July, 1922), pp. 435–468, specifically p. 437. Initial reference to Heine courtesy Dr. William R. Meredith (June 8, 2023). 66 William R. Meredith, personal communication (June 8, 2023). 64 See

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

xxxi

As noted earlier, Heine himself reluctantly retracted his remark about Schindler’s visiting card on March 26, 1843.67 In fact, as long ago as 1894, Alexander Wheelock Thayer wrote to Sir George Grove that “the well known story of [Schindler’s] visiting card being engraved, ‘A. Schindler, Ami de Beethoven’ turns out to be a mere joke.”68 Charge No. 6: Schindler’s biography contains a large number of stories about Beethoven and his music that are either completely or partly false. Defense: Schindler wrote a romantic biography of Beethoven that was a product of its time, basically the early nineteenth century. He reports accurately those events that he witnessed personally but—typical of his time—does not hesitate to conflate elements to make his story more interesting, continuous, or dramatically effective. In the case of the Ninth Symphony, Schindler conflates his accompanying Beethoven home after the successful performance (Friday night, May 7) with the composer’s learning that the box-office receipts had barely covered his expenses (Saturday afternoon, May 8).69 Similarly, his conflations of what and when he heard parts of the Missa solemnis being composed may be excused for the most part as his attempt to make the protracted act of creation into something that the lay reader could comprehend.70 67

Sonneck and Martens, “Heinrich Heine’s Musical Feuilletons,” Musical Quarterly 8, No. 3 (July, 1922), p. 454. Courtesy William R. Meredith (June 21, 2023). 68 George Grove, “Schindler, Anton,” in A Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ed. Sir George Grove, 5 vols. (London & New York: Macmillan, 1894), Vol. 3, p. 251. By “a mere joke,” Thayer was certainly referring to Heine’s mocking assessment of Schindler in 1841. In the biographical preface to his edition of Schindler’s biography in 1927, Fritz Volbach stated that Heine “attacked him [Schindler] in a hideous way in the Zeitung, sought to make him look ridiculous, and made a false assertion [fälsche Behauptung] about the [visiting] card.” Schindler, in turn, called Heine “an excellent poet, but a miserable human being.” See Anton Schindler, Ludwig van Beethoven, 5th ed., ed. Fritz Volbach (Münster: Aschendorff, 1927), pp. xviii–xix. The story about Ami de Beethoven was seemingly believed as late as Lühning, “Das Schindler- und das Beethovenbild” (2001), pp. 192–194; and Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss (2013), pp. 84–86. The fact that neither Lühning nor Brenner provided a complete and accurate source citation for the Augsburger Allgemeine Zeitung suggests that they had never examined the source itself. In any case, neither mentioned Heine’s own retraction of the accusation concerning l’Ami de Beethoven in 1843. 69 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, p. 71; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 279–280. 70 One thinks of author Irving Stone’s description of Michelangelo’s years-long labors under the Sistine Chapel ceiling in his biographical novel The Agony and the Ecstasy (New York: Doubleday, 1961). See also the details of the dinner of Sunday, May 9, 1824, in chapter 6 and appendix G of the present book.

xxxii

THE SCHINDLER PROBLEM

When writing about events earlier in Beethoven’s life, Schindler had to rely on accounts by acquaintances who did witness them or on written documents and reports, as any historian would. In the case of Beethoven’s Triple Concerto, Op. 56, Schindler places its premiere at the Augarten concerts of 1808 because he read a report of it in the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung and was unaware of its rehearsals at Lobkowitz’s Palace on June 10 and 11, 1804, and its performance at Fellner’s bank concerts on January 20, 1805—information that would not come to light until the 1980s.71 Beethoven seldom spoke about his creative process or the extramusical associations in his works. Schindler relates that the composer made some sort of cryptic remark associating the minor-keyed Piano Sonatas Op. 31, No. 2, and Op. 57 with Shakespeare’s Tempest. Beethoven did not explain it further, and Schindler did not attempt to provide the kind of “inside” explanation that his detractors accuse him of fabricating. For that reason, this reference and others similar to it need repeated scrutiny in light of the latest research.72 As for Schindler’s role in determining, writing down, transcribing, copying, and transmitting the metronome marks for the Ninth Symphony and several other works, most performers might consult those metronome markings initially but still prefer to rely on their own musicianship in making such decisions.73 * As noted above, Schindler’s biography of Beethoven reflects an era just before the systematic influence of Leopold Ranke (1795–1886), one of the founders of modern source-based history—wie es eigentlich gewesen ist (as it actually happened).74 Even so, Schindler often includes accurate references to the sources of his information. Earlier studies, especially those critical of Schindler, fail to place his Biographie within Ranke’s historiographical continuum.75 Alexander Wheelock Thayer’s biography, however, did benefit from Ranke’s methods and

71 Schindler-MacArdle, p. 140; Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 81; Albrecht, “‘Mit Verstärkung des Orchesters,’” pp. 161–202. 72 Albrecht, “Beethoven and Shakespeare’s Tempest,” pp. 81–92. 73 See, for instance, Clive Brown, “Historical Performance, Metronome Marks and Tempo in Beethoven’s Symphonies,” Early Music 29, No. 2 (May 1991), pp. 247–250, 252–254, and 256–258. The literature on this subject alone is vast. 74 Diplomatic historian Irby Coghill Nichols Jr. (1926–2001) introduced me to German historiography many years ago. Even though Leopold Ranke advocated an objective approach to history, he himself possessed the biases of a North German Lutheran. For an example of Nichols’s work, see his The European Pentarchy and the Congress of Verona, 1822 (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1971). 75 For instance, Daniel Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss, does not include Ranke in his Sources (pp. 557–569) or in his Index of Persons (p. 577).

xxxiii

THAYER’S ASSESSMENT OF SCHINDLER

represented a significant step forward in thought, presentation, and documentation. Posterity cannot blame Schindler for not being Thayer.

Thayer’s Assessment of Schindler From late 1851 until January, 1853, William Mason (1829–1908), son of the famed American music educator Lowell Mason, lived in Frankfurt am Main as a sometime piano student. In his autobiography, Mason recalled that Schindler, “Beethoven’s most intimate friend during the last years of his life,” lived there.76 Schindler and Mason happened to be members of the same “club,” the Bürger Verein, where they both read the daily newspapers. As such, Mason often “enjoyed the pleasure of his company and heard much concerning Beethoven.” According to Mason, Schindler was so familiar with Beethoven’s works that the slightest mistake or change “jarred his nerves, or possibly he made a pretense of this.” He “carried his sensitiveness in regard to the interpretation of Beethoven’s works to amusing extremes.”77 * On Monday, August 6, 1860, Alexander Wheelock Thayer arrived in Frankfurt, where Schindler was still living. They had already had a pleasant meeting there in 1854. Still actively researching his biography of Beethoven, Thayer was keenly aware of the merits and failings of the previous writers in the field.78 After his first week there, Thayer sent his customary musical reports to Dwight’s Journal of Music 76 The customary portrait of Schindler is a photograph, ca. 1860, showing him standing, ramrod straight, stern-faced, and holding gloves. It has been reproduced frequently; for instance, in Robert Bory’s pictorial biography Ludwig van Beethoven (Zürich: Atlantis, 1960), p. 175. In 1852, however, (Carl) Adolph Mende drew a caricature of Schindler at his writing desk, pleasantly lost in reverie, with Beethoven’s bust in front of him and the “Moonlight” illuminating his work from behind. The original is in the Städel Museum, Frankfurt am Main (Inv-No 54434 D), reproduced, for instance, in Beethoven’s Conversation Books, trans. and ed. Theodore Albrecht, Vol. 4 (Woodbridge, Suffolk, U.K.: Boydell & Brewer, 2022), frontispiece. It represents very well Schindler as William Mason knew him. 77 William Mason, Memories of a Musical Life (New York: Century, 1902), pp. 65–86, 112, and 183. Mason comments, “Extreme sensitiveness is a role sometimes assumed by men in no wise remarkable, in order to enhance their own importance in the eyes of others.” I am grateful to the Thayer scholar Grant Cook for bringing this material to my attention. 78 See, for instance, Theodore Albrecht, “Thayer contra Marx: A Warning from 1860,” Beethoven Journal 14 (Summer, 1999), pp. 2–8, and (Winter, 1999), pp. 56–64. This was a scathing review of Adolph Bernhard Marx’s biography of Beethoven. Three years later (Dwight’s Journal of Music, 1863), Thayer summarized Marx: “Of all writers, he is one of the very worst; … you cannot trust him a moment.” Quoted in Alexander Wheelock

xxxiv

THAYER’S ASSESSMENT OF SCHINDLER

in Boston and privately wrote to editor John Sullivan Dwight that he had spent “the forenoons mostly with Schindler … indeed two or three afternoons also.” These conversations confirmed to Thayer that “the so much abused Schindler, however much mistaken in many minor points in his book, owing to insufficient data and to errors in correspondents, is a perfectly honest writer, and fired with the love and veneration for Beethoven’s memory, which seems to increase with advancing age.”79 “A perfectly honest writer,” even if “mistaken in many minor points in his [Biographie].” Who are we to judge otherwise?

The Present Book What it does: This book attempts to provide readers with a certain sense of “being there” when Beethoven composes the Ninth Symphony, but especially a sense of being present in the room as he makes the preparations for its first performance: the planning sessions, the copying of scores and parts, the selection of the soloists and performing venues. Readers who know the Symphony, and especially those who have ever attended or participated in orchestral or choral rehearsals, will be able to imagine these taking place day by day, even minute by minute, before their eyes. Readers will easily imagine themselves present at the first performances of the Ninth Symphony with a sense of reality that has never before been possible.80 Thayer, Salieri: Rival of Mozart, ed. Theodore Albrecht (Kansas City, Mo.: Philharmonia of Greater Kansas City, 1989), p. 18. 79 John Sullivan Dwight, prefatory note to Thayer, “The Diarist Abroad (Utile et Dulce),” Dwight’s Journal of Music 18, No. 2 (October 13, 1860), p. 225, col. 3; quoted in Grant W. Cook III, “‘Mr. Dwight’s Indefatigable Diarist’ and London’s ‘Literary Lion,’“ Beethoven Journal 34, No. 2 (Winter, 2019), pp. 58–59 and 66. I am grateful to Prof. Cook for sending copies of pages from Dwight’s Journal with this citation in its original form (December 16, 2020). What Thayer was implying, of course, was that Schindler was becoming a little crazy as he got older, something discernable in his personal correspondence, letters to journal editors, and observations by others. Brenner’s Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss provides sufficient evidence of this. Schindler’s permanent Biographie, however, seldom reaches those ephemeral extremes. Thirty years later, Thayer wrote a remarkably similar assessment to Sir George Grove, who reported, “Schindler has been the object of much obloquy and mistrust, but it is satisfactory to know, on the authority of Mr. Thayer, that this is unfounded, and that his honesty and intelligence are both to be trusted.” Grove, “Schindler,” in A Dictionary of Music and Musicians (1894), Vol. 3, p. 251. 80 Jake Green (CGO Studios, Los Angeles, ca. 2017–2019) has created a computerized reconstruction of the evening of the premiere: Beethoven’s carriage ride from his apartment, around the walled City to the Kärntner Gate, through it to the theater, into

MECHANICAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS

xxxv

This book picks up on little-known analytical or compositional clues, like Beethoven’s considering the Turkish march, the ensuing fugue, and the victorious 6/8 “Freude” statement in the Finale as a single gesture. Or that he viewed the customary pair of general rehearsals as “one for correctness, one for expression.” Readers will find their own favorites. This book also attempts to dispel many of the myths that have grown up around Beethoven, his circle, and the early performances of his works, especially the Ninth Symphony. It makes use of Beethoven’s conversation books, newly translated into English with their entries dated and supplied with locations more precisely than ever before. It integrates these with correspondence, sketchbooks, scores, performing parts, and reminiscences to flesh out the human “story” to an unprecedented degree and detail. Thus we learn that Beethoven’s haircut of May 24, 1824 (the day of the premiere of the Ninth Symphony) is reflected in the Decker charcoal portrait of May 27 and helps bring out the composer’s perceptible humanity to a depth seldom found in other accounts. What it does not do: This book, for the most part, does not deal with questions concerning the analysis, reception, interpretation, meaning, and intellectual context of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony. These issues are valid and pertinent but are covered more than adequately in the books by Levy (2003), Kelly (2001), and Wallace (2017) cited early in this preface.

Mechanical and Organizational Matters The chapter headings are functional and general, rather than clever and literary. The subheadings within the chapters are more descriptive and helpful, but even they often reflect the daily routine that accompanies even the most inspired musical work. Most persons are at least briefly identified in footnotes. Peter Clive’s Beethoven and His World: A Biographical Dictionary (2001) often proves a convenient reference guide for immediate and further investigation. Identifications or partial identifications are repeated periodically as aids to the reader. Because of the often rapidly changing and fragmentary nature of the material, the narrative herein includes many one-sentence paragraphs. Footnotes often contain an abundance of interesting information. To keep their length within reason, many bibliographical citations are in abbreviated form; their full information can usually be found in the bibliography. the theater and through the doors to the audience area, from where one sees the orchestra and chorus assembled onstage. Now part of EX LIBRIS: The Immersive Museum of History, it is remarkably lifelike.

xxxvi

MECHANICAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS

Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte refers to both the English edition by Theodore Albrecht and the earlier German edition by Karl-Heinz Köhler, Grita Herre, and Dagmar Beck. Footnotes that simply provide Heft and Blatt numbers are keyed to Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte to save bulk and space. Entries in Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte are cited by Heft (booklet, plural Hefte) and Blatt (sheet, plural Blätter), with r and v designating recto and verso, the front and back of the individual sheets. These Heft and Blatt designations allow the reader to locate the sources in both the English and German editions without having to differentiate the differing volume and page numbers of each edition. Conversation book entries may contain the designation “ // ” (where Beethoven replied) and “ [//] ” (where Beethoven probably replied). From May 2, 1824, the account includes as many pertinent direct quotes from the conversation books as possible, to provide the reader an incomparable sense of being present at these momentous events whose details now unfold before us, day by day, even hour by hour, often down to the minute! Theodore Albrecht Kent, Ohio March 26, 2023

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This book is the result of three major research projects that have rewarded me for over three decades: a collection, translation, and edition of more than 500 Letters to Beethoven and Other Correspondence (published in 1996), a study of the hundreds of Viennese orchestral musicians who played in Beethoven’s premieres from 1795 to 1824 and of the orchestral passages that he often wrote specifically for them (published beginning in 1999 and continuing in this volume), and my translation and edition of Beethoven’s Conversation Books (publication begun by Boydell in 2018 and continuing). For source materials, I am grateful to the staffs of many libraries and archives in Berlin and Vienna. In Germany, my thanks to Dr. Helmut Hell, Frau Grita Herre, and Dr. Martina Rebmann (Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz) and to the late Dr. Sieghard Brandenburg, Dr. Bernhard Appel, Dr. Julia Ronge, Dr. Beate Angelika Kraus, and Dr. Michael Ladenburger (Beethoven-Haus, Bonn), as well as to Breitkopf und Härtel/VEB Deutscher Verlag für Musik (Wiesbaden and Leipzig), who negotiated with Dr. Michael Middeke of Boydell & Brewer (Martlesham, Suffolk) to secure the rights for the English translation and new edition of the Conversation Books. In Vienna, I am grateful to Dr. Otto Biba, Dr. Ingrid Fuchs, and Frau Ilse Kosz (Library/Archive, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde), and the late Herr Karl Misar (Handschriften-Sammlung, Wiener Stadt- und Landesbibliothek, Rathaus). Much of my work has been done in nonmusical libraries and archives such as the Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv, where Dr. Michaela Laichmann, Dr. Susanna Pils, and Dr. Andreas Weigl, as well as their reading-room colleagues, Herr Mehmet Urhan, Herr Franz-Josef Schmiedl, and Herr Edmund Knapp (among others), have provided continued assistance over the years. At the Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, I am grateful to Dr. Joachim Tepperberg and its librarian Dr. Clemens Höslinger, both now retired. The Österreichisches Theatermuseum is located in the Lobkowitz Palace. Three rooms east of its famed Eroica-Saal is the library where, for over two decades, Herr Othmar Barnert provided expert (and seemingly effortless) reference assistance. Most of Vienna’s church records (for baptisms, marriages, and funerals) have now been placed online, but before they were, the following representative churches were particularly generous with access to these Matriken: Stephansdom, archivist Dr. Reinhard H. Gruber; Augustinerkirche, Frau Ursula Lechner, but also P. Matthias Schlögl and P. Albin Scheuch; Michaelerkirche, Frau Constanze

xxxviiiACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Gröger; the Evangelische Kirche in the Dorotheergasse, Frau Christina Pap; Paulaner Kirche, Frau Monika Bauer and Msgr. Franz Wilfinger; St. Joseph ob der Laimgrube, Frau Maria Doberer; and the Karlskirche, with Herr Josef Macháček, P. Milan Kučera, and especially Frau Stella Pfarrhund. For over two decades, the Gesellschaft der Freunde der Wiener Oboe has kindly supported my research of the orchestral instrumentalists in Beethoven’s time with a grant and, from 2014 to 2016, serialized the early first version of this study in its Journal. Josef Bednarik, Thomas Gröger, the late Dr. Bernhard Paul, and Dr. Ernst Kobau deserve special recognition in this connection. Likewise, the Wiener Beethoven-Gesellschaft has always been encouraging through Ing. Walther and the late Frau Vera Brauneis, Frau Rosemarie, and Prof. Martin Bjelik. Ing. Brauneis and Frau Bjelik kindly gave my wife Carol and me a tour of Beethoven’s apartment in the Obere Pfarrgasse (Laimgrubengasse). On the American side, Dr. William R. Meredith, Dr. Erica Buurman, Patricia Stroh, Dr. Richard Sogg, and the late Dr. William George of the American Beethoven Society and the Ira F. Brilliant Center for Beethoven Studies at San José State University in California have been friends and supporters for many years At the University of Vienna, Dr. Gerhard Kubik and Dr. Regine AllgayerKaufmann (ethnomusicology) have been supportive, as has Dr. Michael Lorenz (musicology), who probably knows more about archival work in Vienna than anyone and is always generous in offering many details as he discovers them. The violinist and conductor Dr. Eduard Melkus deserves special thanks for his encouragement and generosity. Living accommodations and meals were important to Beethoven, and Carol and I have learned firsthand the Viennese concept of a Stammlokal from Frau Grazyna Gierlichs and Frau Maria Ribar (Pension Lehrerhaus), Frau Sushma Sood (Oliva Verde), as well as Mag. Werner Kremser, Frau Dika Masić, Frau Leila Masić, and Frau Ana Mostić (Weinhaus Sittl, Zum goldenen Pelikan [Neulerchenfeld No. 1]). The Pelikan was first mentioned in documents by ca. 1740, and it is possible that Beethoven and Franz Oliva walked by it (or even stopped in for a glass of wine) on an excursion to or from the more distant Gallizinberg. Several colleagues at Kent State University have been encouraging and helpful over the years, especially the late former orchestra director John Ferritto, with whom I happily shared an office for nine years, and well matched in Vienna by our engaging and perceptive colleagues Prof. Eugenie Russo (retired professor of piano, Akademie der Musik, Wiener Neustadt) and her husband, Dr. Helmut Weihsmann (architecture historian and lexicographer). Several scholars around the world have read and commented upon my rough drafts as they have emerged over the years, among them Susan Lund (London), Dr. Susan Kagan (Hunter College), Dr. Edward Hafer (University of Southern Mississippi), Dr. Grant Cook (University of Mount Union), and especially Dr. Lewis Lockwood (Harvard University), who suggested this book in the first place.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

xxxix

Since 2015, the Boydell Press has assembled a cooperative team, who have dealt with a sometimes tempestuous and all-too-ebullient (and Texan) author to bring this book to fruition: Michael Middeke (editorial director), Crispin Peet (editorial assistant), Nick Bingham (deputy head of production, typesetter), Phil Dematteis (copyeditor), Latte Goldstein of River Design (cover designer), John Duggan (musical typesetting), and Antje King (marketing). My gratitude to them all! This book is dedicated to the memory of my conducting teachers George Yaeger, principal hornist and associate conductor of the San Antonio Symphony Orchestra, and Anshel Brusilow, former concertmaster of the Philadelphia Orchestra and music director of the Dallas Symphony Orchestra. But the final and most appreciative word must be reserved for my wife, Dr. Carol Padgham Albrecht, who—now retired from the University of Idaho— occupies the office in our home library in Kent, Ohio, directly above my own.

Chapter 1

Composition of the Ninth Symphony The Pre-History of the Ninth Symphony Beethoven’s large-scale composite concerts of 1813–1814 at the grand hall of the University of Vienna and the Grosser Redoutensaal (Large Imperial Ballroom)1 had included the premieres of his Symphonies Nos. 7 and 82 but also several occasional compositions that proved to be models for later works. Wellington’s Victory added contrabassoons to the antiphonal approaching military bands and juxtaposed sections of the larger orchestra in different keys. The cantata Der glorreiche Augenblick, some months later, gave him experience in setting an awkward text that he would use in the Missa solemnis. It would also include an extensive solo for concertmaster Ignaz Schuppanzigh that would foreshadow the violin solo in the Benedictus of that Mass. A swift and energetic chorus on the word “Vienna” would find echo in “Die Nebel zerreissen” (The Fog Parts) in Meeresstille und glückliche Fahrt (Calm Sea and Prosperous Voyage), 1 The composite orchestra for those concerts (two on December 8 and 12, 1813, as benefits for the casualties at the Battle of Hanau; and one each on January 2 and February 27, 1814, for Beethoven’s benefit) included 18 first violins, 18 seconds, 14 violas, 12 violoncellos, 7 contrabasses, and 2 contrabassoons (who also doubled on contrabass, to make a total of 9 basses in the symphonies), plus double or triple seating on each of the remaining wind parts, as well as percussion, brought the personnel up to between 96 and 120 members drawn from the Kärntnertor Theater, the Burgtheater, the Theater an der Wien, and various noble households (Lobkowitz, Rasumovsky, etc.) that still had regularly employed musicians. For biographical sketches of the orchestral musicians mentioned, see “Two Contrabassoons and More: The Personnel in Beethoven’s Orchestras for Symphony No. 7, Symphony No. 8, Wellingtons Sieg, and Der glorreiche Augenblick” (1813–1814),” in Beethoven und der Wiener Kongress, ed. Bernhard R. Appel and Julia Ronge (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2016), pp. 165–217. For an overview of these and other professional orchestras that premiered Beethoven’s works, see Theodore Albrecht, “Alte Mythen und neue Funde: Die professionellen Uraufführungen von Beethoven’schen Orchesterwerke in Wien,” Wiener OboenJournal, No. 50 (June, 2011), pp. 6–18. 2 The chromatic bass line in the coda of the first movement in Symphony No. 7 would be reflected in the coda of the first movement in the Ninth Symphony. The octaves in the timpani in the Finale of Symphony No. 8 (written for Ignaz Manker) would be repeated in the Scherzo of Symphony No. 9 (now written for Anton Hudler).

2

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

Op. 112, the next year. And Der glorreiche Augenblick’s final chorus with Turkish instruments would prove the model for the final chorus in the Ninth Symphony.3 On May 23, 1814, the final version of Fidelio premiered at the Kärntnertor Theater under Michael Umlauf (1781–1842).4 Not ready until a few days later was its new Overture, with a horn solo for low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky (ca. 1766/1769–1846), who had played Beethoven’s Horn Sonata, Op. 17, in 1809.5 After Fidelio, Vienna’s orchestral personnel—the musicians for whom Beethoven had written repeatedly in Symphonies No. 2 through 8—began to change markedly. The violoncellist Nikolaus Kraft (1778–1853) left for Stuttgart in mid-1814; then violinist Ignaz Schuppanzigh departed for Germany and Russia in ca. February, 1816. Timpanist Ignaz Manker died on December 4, 1817. Moreover, concertmaster Anton Wranitzky and violoncello virtuoso Anton Kraft (both formerly in the Lobkowitz employ, and for whom Beethoven had composed the Triple Concerto in 1804) died on August 6 and August 28, 1820, respectively. The Kärntnertor Theater’s principal oboist, Joseph Czerwenka, was forcibly retired in June, 1822. The Theater an der Wien’s Zauberflötist, Anton Dreyssig, had essentially retired in ca. 1813; but in any case, he died on June 20, 1820. Its principal oboist, Anton Stadler, had retired in ca. 1817,6 and its second, Stephan Fichtner, died on December 10, 1820. And when that theater’s principal bassoonist, Valentin Czejka, was passed over for the faculty of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s Conservatorium in 1821, he obtained a position as an army band director and left Vienna for Italy. Even dependable section players of the older generation were gone: violist Matthias Altmütter (who had played in the premieres of the Piano Concerto, Op. 19; as well as Symphonies No. 1, 7, and 8) died on September 14, 1821. Although Beethoven occasionally kept in touch with the surviving orchestral musicians for whom he had written in earlier years,7 by 1822, he felt isolated 3 For negative reviews of these works, but in academic terminology, see William Kinderman, Beethoven (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1995), pp. 167–180; 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), pp. 189–202; and Barry Cooper, Beethoven (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), pp. 225–233. 4 Umlauf had already conducted with Beethoven on the benefit concert of January 2, 1814, and would be the conductor for the premiere of the Ninth Symphony on May 7 and 23, 1824. For a biographical sketch, see Clive, pp. 374–375. 5 Theodore Albrecht, “Beethoven’s Sonata in F for Piano and Horn, Op. 17: New Light on Its First Performances, 1800–1801 and Beyond,” trans. Ernst Kobau, Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 93 (March, 2022), pp. 10–17. 6 Stadler (b. 1760) would commit suicide by drowning in the Danube on May 22, 1825. 7 One of these was the Bohemian-born Joseph Friedlowsky (1777–1859), principal clarinettist at the Theater an der Wien since 1802, for whom he had written prominently in Symphonies No. 4, 6, and 8, among other works. As noted in the preface, in 1846, Friedlowsky wrote an apostrophe to Beethoven, indicating their cooperation, in

EARLY THOUGHTS ABOUT A SYMPHONY NO. 9

3

from Vienna’s standing theater orchestras and alone among the city’s musicians, many of whom also felt abandoned by a public that craved Rossini’s Italian operas above all others.8 In this environment, then, he wrote on July 6, 1822, to his former student Ferdinand Ries (1784–1838), now living in London, hypothetically asking what fee that city’s Philharmonic Society might offer him for a grand symphony.9

Early Thoughts about a Symphony No. 9 Beethoven had been thinking about and even jotting occasional ideas for a Symphony No. 9 since the Scheide Sketchbook, probably in the first half of 1815;10 but then his brother Carl died on November 15, 1815, leaving the composer as the contested guardian of his nephew Karl (born September 4, 1806). Since then, Beethoven had busied himself not only with the care of Karl but also with a renewed study of the counterpoint of Johann Sebastian Bach and George

Gustav Schilling’s Beethoven-Album: Ein Gedenkbuch (Stuttgart: Hallberger, 1846), p. 20; Anderson, Nos. 1042 and 1108; Brandenburg, Nos. 1597 and 1598 (more accurately dated). See also Theodore Albrecht, “‘manchmal die oboist[en] Clarinet[tisten] Horn[isten] etc einladen’: Beethovens Gastfreundschaft 1823,” Wiener Oboen-Journal, No. 45 (March 2010), pp. 3–7. 8 As noted elsewhere, this preference was associated with the lease of the Court Opera to Italian impresario Domenico Barbaja, who was also Rossini’s manager. For further background on Rossini and Barbaja, see Clive, pp. 292–294. 9 Emily Anderson, The Letters of Beethoven, 3 vols. (London: Macmillan, 1961), No. 1084; Sieghard Brandenburg, ed., Beethoven: Briefwechsel; Gesamtausgabe, 7 vols. (Munich: G. Henle, 1996–1998), No. 1479. In his letter, Beethoven called the organization the “Harmonie Gesellschaft.” He also toyed with the idea of coming to England himself, but by 1822, that was probably no longer a realistic prospect. For a biographical sketch of Ries, see Clive, pp. 284–287. 10 Douglas Johnson, Alan Tyson, and Robert Winter, The Beethoven Sketchbooks: History, Reconstruction, Inventory (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985), pp. 241–246, etc. Two accurate and readable accounts of Beethoven’s early sketches for the Ninth Symphony, as well as his compositional process for the entire work, may be found in Kinderman, Beethoven, rev. ed. (2009), pp. 289–307; and Lockwood, Beethoven’s Symphonies (2015), pp. 187–220. See also Sieghard Brandenburg, “Die Skizzen zur Neunten Symphonie,” in Zu Beethoven 2: Aufsätze und Dokumente, ed. Harry Goldschmidt (Berlin: Verlag Neue Musik, 1984), pp. 88–129. The author provides material from the (a) Scheide Sketchbook (1815/1816); (b) Sketchbook aut. 11/1 and parallel pocket sketchbook (1819–1820); (c) Wittgenstein Sketchbook (1819–1820); (d) Sketches of fall, 1822–early 1823; (e) Sketchbook K/Engelmann (first half of 1823); (f ) Artaria 205/5 (April–May, 1823); (g) Sketchbook O/Landsberg 8–2 (April/May, 1823–May/June, 1824) and parallel pocket sketchbooks.

4

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

Frideric Handel11 and with composing a number of contrapuntal and motivically exploratory piano sonatas,12 leading to his current work (nearing completion) on the Missa solemnis and the Diabelli Variations. Now, during the summer of 1822, came the commission for music for the reopening of the renovated Theater in der Josephstadt. Beethoven’s Overture and incidental music to Die Weihe des Hauses (Consecration of the House), first performed on October 3, 1822, brought the composer into contact with many of the younger and reasonably competent orchestral musicians in Vienna and, as it turned out, intensified his earlier acquaintance with the theater’s new concertmaster, Anton Schindler (1795–1864), who would become his unpaid secretary by January, 1823 (see Appendix A). Then came more exploratory sketches for the Symphony.13 Beethoven’s Fidelio had been in the ready repertoire of the Kärntnertor Theater for five years through May 23, 1819,14 but now the theater determined upon a revival, to begin on November 3, 1822, partly to counter the accusation that it was neglecting German opera in favor of Rossini but also as a vehicle for the young Wilhelmine Schröder, daughter of the popular actress Sophie Schröder.15 As he had since 1814, Michael Umlauf (1781–1842) would conduct. The orchestra

11 Many authors are quick to lament this period as fallow in Beethoven’s creative output, but since his youth in Bonn, he had had periods of productivity followed by periods of relative inactivity and musical study and renewal, so this period (when Vienna witnessed several large-scale performances of Handel’s oratorios, and when Beethoven asked Breitkopf und Härtel in Leipzig to send him all their new publications of Bach’s work) must be seen as simply part of his customary cycle of productivity. 12 The Sonata, Op. 106 (“Hammerklavier”), and the final group of three, Opp. 109, 110, and 111. 13 In Sketchbook Artaria 201, sketches for Die Weihe des Hauses (chorus and Overture) are followed by early sketches for the Ninth Symphony. See Johnson-Tyson-Winter, pp. 273–278. On April 27, 1824, Schindler recalled, “You began it in December [1822], didn’t you?” See Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 63, Blätter 34v–35r. 14 Fidelio had been performed 22 times at the Kärntnertor Theater in 1814, 10 times in 1815, 10 times in 1816, 10 times again in 1817, then 5 times in 1818 and 3 times in 1819. By any reasonable standard, this was a long and respectable run. See the Zettel (playbill), Kärntnertor Theater, Bibliothek, Österreichisches Theatermuseum (courtesy librarian Othmar Barnert). 15 The performance on November 3 was scheduled to commemorate the evening before the name day of the current empress, Caroline (for St. Karl Borromeo, November 4), and the performance began at 6:30 p.m. with a singing of “Gott erhalte Franz den Kaiser.” The remaining performances (beginning at the customary 7 p.m.) took place on November 4 and 26 and December 2 and 17, 1822; and January 28, as well as March 3 and 18, 1823, for a total of eight performances, before Schröder took her interpretation to Dresden in spring, 1823, and to Berlin that summer. The next Viennese revival of Fidelio would not be staged until March 22–23, 1831. For Schröder, see Clive, pp. 325–326.

EARLY THOUGHTS ABOUT A SYMPHONY NO. 9

5

had been consistently strong since the reorganization of the Court Theaters in October, 1810, when the Burgtheater (in poor structural condition) had been designated for spoken plays, while operas and ballet (which required more of the mechanics of a theater) were assigned almost exclusively to the Kärntnertor Theater. Beginning early in 1822, however, as a result of false economies by the new Italian impresario Domenico Barbaja (and his resident manager, the former ballet dancer Louis Antoine Duport),16 the orchestra had already suffered through dismissals of some of its finer players, among them oboist Joseph Czerwenka and hornist Friedrich Starke. In view of this, high hornist Camillo Bellonci departed on tour on ca. August 1, 1823,17 never to return. Thus, the orchestra that played Fidelio in November, 1822, was already somewhat weaker than in earlier years, and Anton Schindler commented that the musical clock in the restaurant Zum goldenen Strauss (east of the Josephstadt Theater) played the Overture better than the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra did.18 Even so, Beethoven probably hearkened back to the strong Kärntnertor Theater orchestra that had performed the newly revised version of Fidelio in May, 1814, and probably in February or March, 1823 (after he and his new secretary, Anton Schindler, had sent out solicitation letters inviting Europe’s monarchs to subscribe to manuscript copies of the newly completed Missa solemnis),19 he began his serious work on the Ninth Symphony. By this time, the Philharmonic Society in London had resolved on November 10, 1822, to offer Beethoven £50 for a manuscript symphony to be received during March, 1823. Ferdinand Ries then communicated this to Beethoven in a letter of November 15, and Beethoven replied with his acceptance on December 20, 1822.20 He still had to put the finishing touches onto the Diabelli Variations, 16

For Barbaja and Duport, see Clive, pp. 97–98. Hofmusikkapelle, Akten, Karton 12 (1821–1823), fol. 67–69 (July 12–15, 1823); and K. 13 (1824), fol. 40 (April 4). Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna (courtesy Dr. Joachim Tepperberg). 18 He made the remark during a name day dinner for Carl Friedrich Hensler, manager of the Josephstadt Theater, presumably on the afternoon of Monday, November 4, 1822, before Beethoven attended the second performance of the revival that night. In any case, Schindler’s sarcastic remark was probably made in jest. See Heft18, Blatt 12r. 19 The known handwritten subscription letters date systematically from January 23 through March 1 and then sporadically through June, 1823. See Theodore Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven and Other Correspondence, 3 vols. (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1996), No. 303. 20 Anderson, No. 1110; Brandenburg, Nos. 1510 and 1517. Several modern authors (mostly British) have waxed indignant over Beethoven’s supposed promise of an unperformed symphony for the Philharmonic Society and his sending the Ninth Symphony only after two Viennese performances in May, 1824, with an arrival in London not until December, 1824. In realistic terms (then or now), however, Beethoven would never have sent a complicated secular work like the Ninth Symphony off for performance elsewhere 17

6

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

Op.120, but once that was finished by March, 1823, he could turn his attentions to serious and extended work on the Ninth Symphony.

Composing the Ninth Symphony (ca. February–December, 1823) First movement: Beethoven probably began continuous work on the first movement in February, 1823.21 With previous work on it already in earlier sketchbooks, he could finish sketching it and perhaps even start on the working score in March.22 In early March, Beethoven wrote to Joseph Friedlowsky (1777–1859), principal clarinettist of the Theater an der Wien since 1802: “I beg you, if possible, to give me a few minutes, and come to see me, because I have a small matter to discuss with you. Counting on the friendship that you have always shown me…,”23 and without first having heard it performed and making any necessary corrections. For a begrudgingly balanced view, see Pamela J. Willetts, Beethoven and England: An Account of Sources in the British Museum (London: British Museum, 1970), pp. 45–46. 21 Work on the first movement is found in the Engelmann Sketchbook; Landsberg 8, Bundle 1; and Landsberg 8, Bundle 2 sketchbooks. See Johnson-Tyson-Winter, pp. 279–298. 22 Beethoven, Symphony No. 9, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Mus. ms. autogr. Beethoven 2. This score is neither complete nor continuous. It contains passages that Beethoven altered structurally and whose orchestrations he refined, probably from March through December, 1823, and possibly into January, 1824. See Ludwig van Beethoven, Sinfonie Nr. 9 d-Moll Op. 125, reproduction of a facsimile edition (Leipzig: Fr. Kistner and C.F.W. Siegel, 1924), with additions (Leipzig: Edition Peters, 1975), 404 pp., 13¼ x 10¼ inches. Also: Ludwig van Beethoven, Sinfonie Nr. 9 d-Moll op. 125, facsimile edition (as above), with additional material (including trombone and contrabassoon parts) from the Beethoven-Haus, Bonn, and the Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris; with commentary by Lewis Lockwood, Jonathan Del Mar, and Martina Rebmann (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2010), 476 pp., 16 x 14 inches. Page citations here are from the Leipzig, 1975, edition. For a recent description, with sources for the working score and individual movements clearly specified, see Ludwig van Beethoven: Thematisch-bibliographisches Werkverzeichnis, ed. Kurt Dorfmüller, Norbert Gertsch, and Julia Ronge, 2 vols. (Munich: G. Henle Verlag, 2014), Vol. 1, pp. 813–832. There have been several recent editions of the final work itself, the most recent being Ludwig van Beethoven, Symphonie Nr. 9 d-Moll Opus 125, ed. Beate Angelika Kraus, in Beethoven Werke, Abteilung I, Band 5 (Munich: G. Henle Verlag, 2020), 381 pp. Page references to the finished works here are generally to the universally available Breitkopf und Härtel Gesamtausgabe (1863). 23 Anderson, No. 1108 (misdated); Brandenburg, No. 1597 (accurately dated). Beethoven added, “I may not go out so early; otherwise I would have come myself.” This implies that someone else brought the note and—possibly to this end—there is a conversation book entry in Beethoven’s hand, probably on the morning of Sunday, March

COMPOSING THE NINTH SYMPHONY (CA. FEBRUARY–DECEMBER, 1823)

7

shortly thereafter: “Because I am not dining at home today … please give me the pleasure of eating midday dinner with me tomorrow. I shall expect you at about 1:30.”24 Friedlowsky presumably had dinner with Beethoven on Monday, March 3.25 We do not know precisely what they discussed, but the first movement of Beethoven’s working score of the Ninth Symphony contains several passages where the composer entered second thoughts in the clarinet parts.26 At the recapitulation, Beethoven wrote a wrist-breaking passage for Kärntnertor timpanist Anton Hudler (1784–1857): 38 bars of almost unrelenting rolls fortissimo on the tonic D.27 As late as April 17, 1823, in his current conversation book, Beethoven sketched a six-bar alternate passage for the exposition, using extensive timpani rolls, marked “timpani,” “Pauken in D A,” and “immer ff Pauke,” but did not use it in the final version.28 The movement’s Coda develops in much the same way as the Coda of the first movement of the Seventh Symphony, with an undulating pattern in the violoncellos and contrabasses leading the crescendo from below, culminating in a final statement of the movement’s principal motive. Second movement: In early April, 1823, Beethoven stayed in his apartment in Obere Pfarrgasse, working for days on end rather than going out on his usual rounds of afternoon errands followed by coffee and newspapers in the early

2, 1823: “Friedlowsky, through my brother” (Heft 25, Blatt 43v). Beethoven had jotted Friedlowsky’s name on the morning of Saturday, March 1, with no further clarification (Heft 25, Blatt 38v). 24 Anderson, No. 1042 (misdated); Brandenburg, No. 1598 (accurately dated). My thanks to Michael Ladenburger (September 23, 2022) and his Blog 19 (“Beethovens ‘Nobilitierungen’ von Freunden und Bekannten—Systematik und Strategie”), p. 20, for reminding me of the chronological placement of these letters to Friedlowsky. 25 Beethoven had midday dinner with Anton Schindler on Tuesday, March 4 (Heft 26, Blätter 8v–14r). There are no surviving conversation book entries for Monday, March 3, so it is possible that Beethoven and Friedlowsky carried on their discussion with raised voices in the composer’s apartment. Schindler probably remembered that this meeting had taken place when he wrote that Friedlowsky “taught Beethoven the mechanics of the clarinet” (Schindler, Biographie [1860], I, p. 35; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 58). 26 For instance, Beethoven, Sinfonie Nr. 9, facsimile (1975), brief changes in the clarinet notes on pp. 6–7, 11, 17, and 20; as well as reworking of the clarinet and bassoon parts on pp. 37–38. In the fourth movement, Beethoven began scoring for Clarinets in C but changed them to Clarinets in B-flat (pp. 233–249) and then changed instruments to Clarinets in A with the change of key at the “Freude” theme (p. 249). 27 Breitkopf und Härtel, Gesamtausgabe, No. 9, pp. 39–44. Of course, the passage occasionally includes a motivic dominant A, adding the timpanist’s need for precision in the midst of all the fury. It is a test of any timpanist’s technique and endurance, even today. For a biographical sketch of Hudler and most of his orchestral colleagues, see Appendix D. 28 Heft 29, Blatt 7r. A cropped photo of this page appears in Köhler et al., Konversationshefte, vol. 3, facing p. 113.

8

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

evenings.29 As a result, by the time violinist Ignaz Schuppanzigh returned from seven years in Russia on ca. April 15, he had the second movement partially sketched. When Schuppanzigh (whose nickname was “Mylord Falstaff” because of his corpulence) did not come to visit the composer immediately, Beethoven wrote a canon, “Falstafferl, lass’ dich sehen” (Little Falstaff, Make an Appearance), before their reunion, which presumably took place on April 26.30 The sketch for the canon appears in Sketchbook Artaria 205/5, among drafts for both the second and third movements,31 and therefore probably dates from ca. April 22. In scoring the octave Fs in the timpani, Beethoven was surely thinking of Anton Hudler. Already in 1814, Hudler had successfully played the tritones in the timpani in Fidelio that Beethoven had written for the Theater an der Wien’s timpanist Ignaz Manker in 1805; and on December 25, 1817, three weeks after Manker’s death, Hudler had negotiated the octave Fs in the Finale of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 8 at the traditional Christmas Concert in the Grosser Redoutensaal to benefit the poor of St. Marx.32 Because the movement’s effect depends so integrally upon the colorful alternations between the timpani and the rest of the orchestra, Beethoven probably began entering it into the working copy of his score as soon as possible. Even so, on September 28, 1823, Johann Reinhold Schultz, a Prussian businessman living in London, visited Beethoven in Baden in the company of the composer’s long-time friend, publisher/dealer Tobias Haslinger, and reported about one portion of their dinner conversation: “For a particular composition that he was then composing, he wanted to ascertain the highest possible note of the trombone, and questioned Mr. H[aslinger] accordingly, but did not seem satisfied with his answers. He then told me that he had, in general, taken care to inform himself, through the artists themselves, concerning the construction, character, and compass of all the principal instruments.”33 By this time, Beethoven 29 For instance, Beethoven seems not to have left his apartment on Friday–Saturday, April 4–5, 1823 (Heft 28, Blätter 30v–31r). On Sunday, April 6, nephew Karl attempted to get him outdoors for a little diversion, but he evidently refused (Blatt 33r). On Monday, April 7, however, he did finally leave long enough for coffee and newspapers (Blatt 36r). 30 Heft 30, Blatt 13v. 31 Sketchbook Artaria 205, Bundle 5. The sketchbook has 24 leaves. The sketches for “Falstafferl” are almost in the middle, surrounded by those for the second and third movements. See Johnson-Tyson-Winter, pp. 397–400. 32 Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 20, No. 4 (January 28, 1818), col. 73. In this context, the beneficiary is the Bürgerspital (Old People’s Home) of St. Marx, near the southern Linie (outer defenses) around Vienna. Beethoven’s housekeeper Barbara Holzmann (ca. 1755–1831) would ultimately go to live there. For details on Holzmann’s death, see Rita Steblin, “Beethoven’s Name in Viennese Conscription Records.” Beethoven Journal 24, No. 1 (Summer, 2009), pp. 4–13. 33 See Schultz’s unsigned “A Day with Beethoven” in London’s Harmonicon 2 (January, 1824), pp. 10–11; reprinted in Sonneck, Beethoven: Impressions by His Contemporaries, p. 151. Schultz’s wordy original slightly copyedited here.

COMPOSING THE NINTH SYMPHONY (CA. FEBRUARY–DECEMBER, 1823)

9

had already finished the Missa solemnis but presumably had not yet begun the Finale of the Ninth Symphony. Therefore, this discussion probably concerns the Trio of the Scherzo second movement of the Ninth Symphony, which is lightly scored for 3 trombones, and suggests strongly that Beethoven did not finish scoring it until late September or early October, 1823. Third movement: As noted above, Beethoven had already started to sketch the third movement by mid-April, 1823. On Saturday, May 17, he moved to his earlysummer apartment in Hetzendorf, roughly a mile south of Schönbrunn,34 and on Pfingstsonntag (Pentecost Sunday), May 18, the Kärntnertor’s leading contrabassist, Anton Grams (for whom Beethoven had written difficult or prominent passages in the Trio of the third movement of Symphony No. 5, among many others), died of a Schleimschlag (mucous-induced stroke) at age seventy. Beethoven probably learned of it within the next several days, and it must have been a major blow to him.35 He continued to sketch the third movement in the Rolland Sketchbook, probably reaching the book’s midpoint by mid-June.36 On Tuesday, August 5, Beethoven (accompanied by Schindler) spent the day in Baden, looking for an apartment for the composer to occupy until the end of October. On August 6, Beethoven’s favorite copyist, Wenzel Schlemmer (b. 1758), died, and Schindler may have appeared presumptuous and premature in starting negotiations on the composer’s behalf with Peter Gläser, the head copyist at the suburban Theater in der Josephstadt.37 In any case, Beethoven suddenly became very angry with Schindler shortly after August 7, and the two did not reconcile until sometime between November 16 and 21, 1823. Beethoven himself would move to Baden on August 13.

34

Heft 32, Blätter 23v–27v; Heft 33, Blätter 1v–2v. See Theodore Albrecht, “Anton Grams: Beethoven’s Double Bassist,” Bass World 26 (October, 2002), 19–23. 36 Johnson-Tyson-Winter, pp. 401–403. In the middle of the 16-leaved booklet are two melodies in C major with the inscription “auf Sylbenmasse. Instrumental Melodien (schaffen) machen” (compose melodies in a syllabic manner). Beethoven had been conspiring to apply for a position in the Hofkapelle by writing a Mass in the simple style preferred by Emperor Franz. To learn firsthand of the emperor’s current tastes, on June 16, 1823, Beethoven had attended a simple Mass and Te Deum by Ignaz von Seyfried, celebrated at the Invalidenhaus (south side of the Glacis, across from the Stubentor, about where the Landstrasse/Wien Mitte subway station is today), at which Emperor Franz was present. This is the single instance recorded in the conversation books between 1819 and 1825 of Beethoven’s ever attending a Mass, and it was for reconnaissance purposes. See Heft 41, Blatt 1v; and the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 25, No. 31 (July 30, 1823), col. 500. 37 Heft 60, Blatt 17v. Beethoven may also have recalled the hastily and inaccurately copied orchestral parts of the Consecration of the House Overture made by Gläser and his staff in early October, 1822. 35

10

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

For this Adagio third movement, Beethoven must have conceived the lyrical Andante second theme in the alternating variations independently, because on September 23, nephew Karl jotted, “I am glad that you have incorporated the beautiful Andante.”38 Again, it is conceivable that Beethoven was already beginning to score this movement as well. At roughly the movement’s midpoint, Beethoven began a treacherous solo passage for the second hornist in the lower pair of horns, certainly the Kärntnertor Theater’s senior low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky. Hradetzky had probably been the first hornist after the traveling virtuoso Giovanni Punto (born Johann Wenzel Stich) to play Beethoven’s Horn Sonata, Op. 17, in public, with the composer’s student Carl Czerny, on April 30, 1809.39 In 1814, when writing a new Overture to Fidelio, Beethoven featured a horn solo for Hradetzky that began and ended like the opening motive in the Horn Sonata.40 Hradetzky was an outstanding hand-hornist but on February 20, 1822, had applied to play a Rondo by Joseph Leopold Eybler on a valved horn that he had invented on a Court Concert in the presence of the Imperial family.41 Therefore, Beethoven wrote a multifaceted solo for Hradetzky that could be played on either a hand horn or a new valved horn. While most members of the audience will detect only the exposed (and treacherous) ascending and descending scale passage, the solo for second horn in E-flat42 actually lasts for 38 bars, ending only with the fanfares. Interrupting the slow and even serene material earlier in the movement, the aforementioned fanfares seem to have a precedent in the fifth movement (out of six) in Joseph Haydn’s Symphony No. 60 in C (“Il distratto” or “Der Zerstreute”), dating from the summer of 1774. It had been popular when new, and on June 5, 1803, Haydn had written to Eisenstadt, requesting to borrow it for a few days

38

Heft 43, Blatt 26v. Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 11, No. 41 (July 12, 1809), col. 652; No. 42 (July 19, 1809), col. 669. 40 The Horn Sonata begins with a dotted motive on a rising fourth (basically V–I), while the Overture features a similarly dotted rhythm, with a descending I–V motive. Both solos end in a descending passage, ending on the instrument’s low C. Beethoven’s new Overture was not ready for the first performance of the revised Fidelio in 1814 and, when it was, occasioned a special orchestral rehearsal to prepare it; violinist Ludwig Sina (1778–1857), as related to Ignaz Moscheles in Boulogne, summer, 1839. Moscheles further reported it in a letter to Anton Schindler from Paris, September 20, 1839 (Beethoven-Haus Bonn, NE 103, IV, 107). See Daniel Brenner, Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss auf die Beethoven-Biographik (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2013), p. 491. 41 Hofmusikkapelle, Akten, Karton 12 (1821–1823), fol. 1822/12 (Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna). There is no indication that he was granted this performance. 42 The Horns in E-flat were the lower pair of horns used here; the other, higher pair was in B-flat. 39

RETURN FROM HIS SUMMER RETREATS

11

because the empress wished to hear it.43 In the summer of 1803, Beethoven was dividing his time between Vienna and Döbling, so he could easily have seen (or possibly even heard) the work while Haydn had it in town. In Haydn’s movement a serene quiet melody is suddenly interrupted by loud fanfares, at the end of which the quiet and serene mood resumes. In the third movement of the Ninth Symphony, Beethoven does much the same thing, except that, for formal (and psychological) balance, he plays his fanfares twice, with a quiet passage in between, and follows the second fanfares with a profound resolution that soon leads back to quiet passages that, in turn, lead to the Coda. In the Coda, Beethoven presents another challenge to the timpanist: playing two notes simultaneously within the chord. As with the opening of the Violin Concerto, the notes themselves are not difficult, but to tune them properly beforehand and balance them against the rest of the orchestra is still the test of an accomplished timpanist. Again, the Kärntnertor Theater’s Anton Hudler would prove a worthy successor to the late Ignaz Manker. Therefore, on the basis of the timpani solos for Hudler in the second movement, the double-stops for him in the third movement, and the low horn solo for Hradetzky in the third movement, it appears likely that Beethoven was composing the Ninth Symphony either with the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra in mind or for a composite orchestra (such as he had in 1813–1814) with a significant number of Kärntnertor musicians in it.

Return from His Summer Retreats By Wednesday, October 29, or Thursday, October 30, 1823, Beethoven had moved from Baden back to Vienna and was now in an apartment in suburban Landstrasse, in Die schöne Sklavin (the sign of The Beautiful Slave Girl) on the northeast corner of Ungargasse and Bockgasse (now Beatrixgasse) No. 323, through the building’s gate on Ungargasse, rear stairway in the courtyard, and up to the second floor (American terminology), door 12.44 On November 4, 1823, violinist Carl Wilhelm Henning, music directordesignate for the Königstädtisches Theater in Berlin, arrived in Vienna to recruit singers and to obtain The Consecration of the House for the upcoming opening of the theater. Accompanying him was Heinrich Bethmann, the theater’s directordesignate, another admirer of Beethoven’s. Schuppanzigh introduced Henning to 43

H.C. Robbins Landon, Haydn: Chronicle and Works, Vol. 5: The Late Years, 1801–1809 (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1977), pp. 262–263; Joseph Haydn, Sämtliche Symphonien, ed. H.C. Robbins Landon (Vienna: Universal Edition/Philharmonia, 1967), Vol. 6, pp. xiv and 64–65. The movement in question is an Adagio (di Lamentatione) lasting 78 bars (accelerating at the end); the fanfares occur once in bars 29–38. 44 Beethoven’s advertisement for a housekeeper in the Intelligenzblatt, No. 39 (February 18, 1824), p. 320, provides details for locating his residence. See also Heft 44, Blatt 1r.

12

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

Beethoven, probably on November 5. They concluded their business amicably, and by the time Henning and Bethmann left on December 11, Beethoven had an alternative location that—however improbable—he could use as leverage to get cooperation in Vienna for an Akademie to showcase his two latest works: the Missa solemnis and the Ninth Symphony.45 As noted above, on August 7, 1823, or shortly afterward, Beethoven had become very angry with Schindler, possibly because Schindler prematurely started casting about for a copyist to replace the trusted Wenzel Schlemmer, who had died on August 6, before Beethoven could properly mourn the loss and explore working with Schlemmer’s widow, Josepha, who was continuing the business, though on a reduced scale.46 Beethoven’s letters from Baden to nephew Karl in Vienna during this period suggest that Beethoven determined to make a permanent break with the fawning and presumptuous Schindler and to pay him off for any money that the composer might have owed him. On Sunday, November 16, with Beethoven moved back into Vienna and living in the Ungargasse, nephew Karl encountered Schindler at a midday Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde concert at the Grosser Redoutensaal and returned to Beethoven’s apartment with the news that Schindler wanted to get back into the composer’s good graces.47 Although Beethoven found Schindler irritating and openly told him so, he had taken him back for running errands by the following Friday, November 21.48 Therefore, Schindler knew nothing of the day-to-day compositional process in the second or third movements of the Ninth Symphony in Baden during August, September, and October—not that Beethoven was accustomed to telling him about such things anyway.

Schindler’s Summary of Summer–Fall, 1823 When Schindler’s firsthand account in his Biographie resumes (presumably reflecting mid-to-late November, 1823), Beethoven had already composed the first three movements, and the Symphony still lacked its Finale. Schindler writes, “The Master did not return to Vienna until the last migratory birds had left for the winter; it was already the end of October…. The new Symphony was 45 Heft 60, Blätter 5v–6v. Königstadt (called Königsstadt until 1873) was a near northeastern suburb of Berlin, located beyond the Königstor. The new “Theater in der Königstadt,” facing the Alexanderplatz, opened on August 4, 1824, was a privately financed and directed theater, modeled after the Boulevard Theatre in Paris and the Theater an der Wien in Vienna, and was to be devoted almost entirely to singspiels, farces, melodramas, comedies, and pantomimes. Operas and tragedies were expressly prohibited. Therefore, it would function more like Vienna’s Theater in der Leopoldstadt or Theater in der Josephstadt than like any of the Court-sponsored theaters. 46 Heft 38, Blatt 29r. 47 Heft 45, Blatt 30r. 48 Heft 46, Blatt 2r.

WORK ON THE FINALE BEGINS

13

finished up to the fourth movement; that is, he had it all in his head and the main ideas were fixed in the sketchbooks. Contrary to his usual method of working, he frequently put the music aside, especially the fourth movement, for he could not decide which verses to choose from Schiller’s ode An die Freude. Yet he was extraordinarily painstaking in writing out the score of the first movements; indeed among all his scores this one may serve as a model of neatness and clarity, and it is notable for its small number of corrections. The working out of the fourth movement, however, began a struggle seldom encountered before.”49 A few days before Schindler and Beethoven reconciled was the customary St. Leopold’s Day benefit concert at the Kärntnertor Theater on the evening of Saturday, November 15, 1823. It featured a typical potpourri program in which Beethoven’s Fidelio Overture was the seventh item and had to be repeated. Beethoven had written the horn solo in it for Friedrich Hradetzky in 1814. Perhaps unknown to either of them, this would be the last time that Hradetzky would play it before the KärntnertorTheater dismissed him in January, 1824.50 And of course, by this time Beethoven had already composed the extensive solo for him in the third movement of the Ninth Symphony.51

Work on the Finale Begins On ca. November 21, 1823, nephew Karl made a note in a conversation book: “Violoncello. // In accompaniment with Violoncello?” While it may reflect Beethoven’s work on the recitatives in the fourth movement, it more likely referred to chamber music,52 because on December 4, Karl made another note about “The best violoncellist in Europe in quartets,” presumably a reference to Joseph Linke (1783–1837), who played in Schuppanzigh’s Quartet. Also on December 4, however, is a 10-bar sketch for the “Freude” theme, not yet in the final form as we know it—a possible indicator that Beethoven’s work on the Finale had only just begun.53 The Sketchbook Autograph 8, Bundle 1, provides the transition: it opens with sketches for the third movement (now presumably finished or nearly so) and

49 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, pp. 54–55; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 269–270. Therefore, Schindler did not make any claims to knowing details of Beethoven’s life or compositional process during the months—August, September, October, and early November, 1823—when they were estranged. 50 Albrecht, Theodore. “Picturing the Players in the Pit: The Orchestra of Vienna’s Kärntnertor Theater, 1821–1822.” Music in Art 34, Nos. 1–2 (2009), pp. 203–213. 51 For the program, see the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 25, No. 52 (December 24, 1823), col. 865. The evening hour is specified in the Wiener Zeitung, No. 261 (November 12, 1823), p. 1056; and No. 263 (November 14, 1823), p. 1064. 52 Heft 46, Blatt 9r. 53 Heft 47, Blatt 38r, in the right margin.

14

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

includes sketches for the Finale, including the bass soloist’s recitative, with the trial text, “Let us sing the Song of the immortal Schiller.”54 The chronology is difficult to pace, but probably by the first week of December, Beethoven was working in Sketchbook Autograph 8, Bundle 2, that contains the annotations “Turkish music—first pianissimo—several trombones—then full strength” and “Forte trombone blasts on Welt and Sternenzelt.”55 On December 7, Count Moritz Lichnowsky showed Beethoven the program from that noon’s Court concert (for the Order of the Golden Fleece) on which Aloys Khayll (1791–1866), the principal flutist at the Burgtheater, had played a set of variations that he had composed. If Beethoven had not thought about it before, the entry of the “Turkish music” would require a piccolo and therefore Khayll, who had played piccolo in his scores from Symphony No. 5 in 1808 through Der glorreiche Augenblick in 1814.56 With his annotations concerning “Welt,” “Sternenzelt,” and “Posaunenstösse,” Beethoven had almost surely arrived at the text “Seid umschlungen, Millionen,” roughly corresponding to conversation book entries from December 8 below. And then a final Sketchbook Artaria 205, Bundle 4, that Beethoven used not only for the end of the Ninth Symphony but also for the String Quartet, Op. 127.57 Like Autograph 8, Bundles 1 and 2, above, its chronology is uncertain, but it could date from ca. mid-December, 1823, with the scoring of the Finale, possibly begun already, extending into February, 1824. On December 1, 1823, Beethoven and Schindler had discussed writing to Louis Antoine Duport, since the Akademie would largely depend upon him and the availability of “his” Kärntnertor Theater. They were also in the midst of discussions concerning Beethoven’s possibly writing an opera on Franz Grillparzer’s libretto Melusine for the theater,58 and Beethoven probably did not want to present any false hopes for that potential collaboration as a condition for using the theater for the Akademie.59 In late November or very early December, 1823, Schindler seems to have conducted a “concert” at the Josephstadt Theater with an orchestra that included

54 Johnson-Tyson-Winter, pp. 404–407; also citing Gustav Nottebohm, Zweite Beethoveniana (1887), p. 191. 55 Johnson-Tyson-Winter, pp. 408–410; also citing Nottebohm, Zweite Beethoveniana, p. 186. 56 Heft 48, Blatt 1r; Hof-Musikkapelle, Akten, K. 12 (1821–1823), Nos. 160–162, 188, 194, 196, and 200 (Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna). For Khayll, see Albrecht, “Two Contrabassoons and More,” and Appendix D. 57 Johnson-Tyson-Winter, pp. 411–414. 58 Still at the tenuous beginnings of his career, Grillparzer (1791–1872) would become one of Austria’s most prominent poets and playwrights of the Romantic era. Even so, Melusine was not the right material for Beethoven. 59 Heft 47, Blatt 15r.

WORK ON THE FINALE BEGINS

15

12 violins, 4 violas, 3 violoncelli, and 3 contrabasses. The program included Beethoven’s Symphony No. 2 in D.60 Schindler reported to Beethoven that Carl Friedrich Hensler, manager of the theater, refused to note the concert on the Zettel (playbills).61 This suggests that the “concert” was an intermission feature, possibly with one or two movements of Beethoven’s Symphony along with a concerto or concerto movement played by a member of the orchestra. This might also explain why concertmaster Schindler was allowed to conduct, rather than the theater’s Kapellmeister, Franz Gläser. On December 6, nephew Karl (probably reflecting the opinions of the older members of Beethoven’s circle) advised the composer that he could earn 5,000 fl. C.M. by composing Melusine, if it was well received, and that the projected Akademie would bring him 3,000–4,000 fl.62 In the case of the Akademie, however, most of these projections were based on the gross profit of admission sales and perhaps a few gifts and not on the net profit that could be realized after expenditures for theater rental, personnel, music copying, and so on. For most of his earlier symphonies, Beethoven had almost always had patrons among the nobility who defrayed some of these expenses. For Symphony No. 1, Prince Karl Lichnowsky probably helped to obtain the Burgtheater and its orchestra. For Symphonies No. 2–3 and 5–6, he had the Theater an der Wien at his disposal, probably paid for by Prince Lobkowitz. Moreover, in the case of the Eroica Symphony, Lobkowitz paid for the first set of performance parts, possibly two reading-rehearsals, and several private performances before it was ever heard in public at the Theater an der Wien.63 A similar pattern (except for private performances) had probably existed with Symphonies No. 5 and 6. In the cases of Symphonies No. 7 and 8, Archduke Rudolph would have paid for a set of parts and for a reading-rehearsal in April, 1813, before their first public 60 The Zettel of the period have not survived, and there is no indication in the calendars of productions in Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung of a half-evening devoted to a concert during this period. This reference may duplicate the activity described for December 12 (Heft 48, Blatt 25v) below, and the Consecration of the House Overture on February 14–15, 1824 (Heft 56, Blätter 5r–8v). 61 Heft 47, Blätter 40r–40v, ca. December 5 or 6, 1823. 62 Heft 47, Blätter 41v–42r. After Austria officially went bankrupt as a result of inflation during the Napoleonic Wars, the government initiated a Finanz-Patent on February 20, 1811, and ultimately a number of reforms in currency values, with figures given in Conventions-Münze (C.M., convention coinage) and in local paper currency, Wiener Währung (W.W., Viennese currency).8 Under this system, in effect during the entire period covered by the conversation books, 1 florin (abbreviated fl.) C.M. = 2½ fl. W.W. 63 See Theodore Albrecht, “‘Mit Verstärkung des Orchesters’: The Orchestral Personnel at the First Public Performance of Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony,” in The New Beethoven: Evolution, Analysis, Interpretation—Essays in Honor of Lewis Lockwood, ed. Jeremy Yudkin (Rochester, N.Y.: University of Rochester Press, 2020), pp. 161–202.

16

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

performances in December, 1813, and February, 1814, respectively. The duplication of parts for Symphony No. 7 (and Wellingtons Victory) would have been borne by the organizers of the war benefit concerts of December 8 and 12, 1813, but by the premiere of Symphony No. 8 on February 27, 1814, Beethoven himself had to pay for copying the additional orchestral parts needed and for 60 of the ca. 112 orchestral musicians who performed. In the case of the Ninth Symphony and the Missa solemnis, Beethoven had no special patronage to cover the preliminary expenses of copying the parts for two large-scale works involving vocal soloists and chorus in addition to the orchestra, and he had no prospect of reading-rehearsals paid for by a patron. Moreover, he was not under contract with any theater for an opera (as he had been with the Theater an der Wien), and so he would have to rent a theater and, with it, its orchestral and choral personnel. At age 53, this was a situation that Beethoven had never had to face, and—especially with his hearing problems, and despite his recognition as Vienna’s foremost composer—negotiating it would pose a real challenge. On Sunday, December 7, Josepha Schlemmer, who was copying subscription scores of the Missa solemnis, told Beethoven that she held back the first and last sheets of every movement from a copyist whose confidentiality she did not trust.64 On the afternoon of the same day, December 7, Beethoven and his nephew Karl visited Count Moritz Lichnowsky, and Beethoven seems to have improvised for him. That evening, Karl commented, “If you improvise at your Akademie the way you did today, you would have a splendid success.”65 On Immaculate Conception, December 8, probably late in the morning, Beethoven wrote in a cryptic way about the horn quartet and trombones ceasing, probably looking to the 6/8 interludes before the “Freude” statement and subsequent “Seid umschlungen.”66 As noted above, Beethoven had already reached similar material for the Ninth Symphony in his Sketchbook Autograph 8, Bundle 2, with its references to “türkische Musik,” “Welt,” and “Sternenzelt.” On Thursday, December 11, Schindler noted that Beethoven’s Symphony No. 2 in D would be played the next evening (Friday, December 12) at the Josephstadt Theater.67 Probably coincidentally, on Sunday, December 14, the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s largely amateur orchestra performed the same symphony in the Grosser Redoutensaal.68 In the evening of December 14, probably to celebrate Beethoven’s upcoming birthday, brother Johann treated him and nephew Karl to the first performance 64

Heft 47, Blatt 44v. Heft 48, Blatt 4r. See also Heft 47, Blätter 40r–40v (ca. December 5 or 6, 1823). 66 Heft 48, Blatt 6r. 67 Heft 48, Blatt 25v. 68 Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 3 (January 15, 1824), col. 43. Beethoven’s Symphony No. 2 in D, Op. 36, was quite popular, so two performances so close together remains a distinct possibility. The Gesellschaft’s performance took place in the afternoon. 65

WORK ON THE FINALE BEGINS

17

of a new German-language production of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart’s Marriage of Figaro (as Die Hochzeit des Figaro) in the Kärntnertor Theater at 7 p.m. The cast included Anton Forti (1790–1859) as Figaro,69 Henriette Sontag (1806–1854) as Susanna, Ignaz Dirzka (1779–1827) as Dr. Bartolo, and Joseph Gottdank (1779–1849) as Basilio. The audience was large; the Overture and several numbers (including Forti’s “Non più andrai” in its German version) had to be repeated. Three of the cast would play roles in Beethoven’s Akademie of May 7, 1824, to premiere the Ninth Symphony: Sontag as soprano soloist, Dirzka as choral director, and Gottdank as a personnel manager.70 On December 20, 1823, less than a week after the Figaro performance, Schindler suggested soprano Sontag as someone who could sing on Beethoven’s upcoming Akademie and indicated that she had long wanted to visit the composer.71 On December 21, Beethoven’s financial adviser, Franz Christian Kirchhoffer (1785–1842), asked if Beethoven was giving an Akademie; and nephew Karl, writing on behalf of Beethoven’s brother Johann, reported that Louis Antoine Duport (1783–1853), the resident manager of the Kärntnertor Theater, had asked whether an opera, presumably Melusine, might be finished by April, 1824.72 After returning home from attending the traditional Christmas Day benefit concert for the St. Marx Hospital (old people’s home), nephew Karl reported that Raphael Georg Kiesewetter (1773–1850) had told him that the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde could help with the choruses for the Missa solemnis but that Joseph Weigl (1766–1846) should conduct and Schuppanzigh should be the concertmaster, and that Beethoven should get soprano Sontag, mezzo-soprano Caroline Unger, and men from the Opera as vocal soloists.73 On Saturday, December 27, Beethoven jotted a note from the Wiener Zeitung’s Intelligenzblatt about court trumpeter Anton Weidinger (ca. 1766–1852), maker of the keyed trumpet and keyed horn.74 By this time, the third movement must surely have been completed, with the solo for the second hornist of the low pair of Horns in E-flat already scored for low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky (ca. 1766/1769–1846). Beethoven might, however, have had ideas for chromatic trumpets in the fanfares that begin the Finale of the Symphony and then recur

69

Much to Beethoven’s satisfaction, Forti had taken over the role of Pizarro from Michael Vogl in the 1814 production of Fidelio and had retained it in its November, 1822, revival. 70 Heft 49, Blätter 3r and 6r. For a full report of the Figaro performance and cast list, see Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 16, No. 154 (December 25, 1823), pp. 615–616. 71 Heft 50, Blatt 5v. For Sontag, see Clive, pp. 343–345. 72 Heft 50, Blätter 6r and 6v. 73 Heft 50, Blätter 18v–19r. For Kiesewetter, see Clive, pp. 182–183; for Weigl, Clive, pp. 391–392; for Unger, Clive, pp. 375–376. 74 Heft 51, Blatt 1r. Nearly three decades earlier, Haydn had composed his Trumpet Concerto for Weidinger.

18

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

before the entry of the baritone soloist; but he could not rely upon their universal availability, and so his trumpets in the Finale remained “natural.”

Completion in the New Year, 1824 On January 17, 1824, Caroline Unger visited Beethoven, and he seemingly offered her the alto parts in the Missa solemnis and Ninth Symphony.75 On January 21, Schindler enumerated those who wanted to help with the organization of the Akademie: Sonnleithner, Kiesewetter, and himself.76 On Sunday afternoon, January 25, Schuppanzigh included Beethoven’s Septet, Op. 20, on his chamber music series. Nephew Karl attended with Beethoven’s brother Johann and reported that the horn solo was applauded.77 The hornist in this case was Michael Herbst (1778–1833), solo player at the Theater an der Wien, for whom Beethoven had written the middle-lying third horn part in the Eroica Symphony.78 As was so often the case lately, “dilettantes” attending the concert asked brother Johann about the prospects of Beethoven’s giving an Akademie. Johann himself reported to Beethoven about the Septet—“They didn’t play, but merely sang with their instruments. Schuppanzigh sang so infinitely beautifully [with his violin]”—and discussed financial matters: that an Akademie would allow Beethoven to pay music publisher and dealer Sigmind Anton Steiner (who had lent Beethoven money several years before) and still have money for the summer.79 They discussed potential vocal soloists at the Kärntnertor Theater in general; and nephew Karl asked, “Does the Symphony last longer than the Sinfonia eroica?”80 This suggests that the Ninth Symphony was either newly finished or would be very soon. As Schindler reported in his Biographie, “In February of … 1824, this colossal creation was finished down to the last detail.”81 On January 29, Beethoven made a note to himself concerning “Mälzel’s metronome,” referring to Leonhard Mälzel, and not his elder brother Johann

75 Heft 53, Blätter 10v–13r. Unger’s conversational entries indicate that they had met before. Henriette Sontag would not meet Beethoven until March 14, 1824 (see below). 76 Heft 53, Blätter 22r–23r. 77 Heft 54, Blätter 40v–40r; the entries here and in several following citations were written from back to front in the booklet. 78 See Albrecht, “‘Mit Verstärkung des Orchesters,’” and his “Benedict Fuchs, Franz Eisen, and Michael Herbst: The Hornists in Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony at Its First Performances in Vienna, 1805–1809,” Horn Call 34 (October, 2003), pp. 39–49. 79 Heft 54: Blätter 39v–38v (note reverse page order). 80 Heft 54, Blätter 38r–37v (reverse page order). Karl may have asked this on behalf of brother Johann, who was present. 81 Schindler (1860), II, p. 56: Schindler-MacArdle, p. 270.

COMPLETION IN THE NEW YEAR, 1824

19

Nepomuk, and then discussed with Schindler where Mälzel lived.82 Perhaps he wanted a new one, or he might have wanted to get his old metronome repaired. After Schuppanzigh’s quartet concerts of February 1 and 8, nephew Karl noted his sliding from one note to another on the same string,83 suggesting that he played with more portamento than might have been customary. Actually, Antonio Salieri had decried the custom in general in 1811, likening it to a cat’s meowing, so it may have been perceived as a facet of the new “Romantic” style.84 On February 11, Schindler remarked to Beethoven that Haydn would not have appreciated the Hammerklavier Piano Sonata in B-flat, Op. 106.85 Beethoven may have reacted negatively, knowing that he himself had recently modeled the third movement of the Ninth Symphony (slow, with lyrical passages interrupted by fanfares) after the fifth movement of Haydn’s Symphony No. 60 in C (“Il distratto”), which the elder composer may have shown him in 1803.86 On January 17, Caroline Unger had visited Beethoven with Anton Schindler for the appearance of propriety; on March 14, she would bring soprano Henriette Sontag with her. On February 13, however, Unger impetuously visited Beethoven alone.87 On February 14, nephew Karl attended a rehearsal of the Consecration of the House Overture at the Josephstadt Theater and reported that the extra musicians hired from the army, presumably including trombones, did not play well. This was confirmed by Schindler’s report on February 15.88 The same day, Johann confirmed the success of the Overture’s rehearsal and performance and later reported that Franz Gläser conducted (in Der Feldtrompeter). Thus, Beethoven’s music was being recycled silently for use in other plays. In this case, the Overture contains trumpet fanfares, so it would have been appropriate to open Der Feldtrompeter.89 Also on February 14, Karl projected Carl Czerny’s possibly playing Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 5, Op. 73, on the upcoming Akademie.90

82 Heft 54, Blätter 18r–18v. At the time, Mälzel lived on Jägerzeil (today’s Praterstrasse) No. 17, on the south side, the ninth building before coming to the Prater. 83 Heft 55, Blätter 1v and 8r. 84 Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 13 (March, 1811), cols. 207–209. For an English translation, see “Salieri on String Playing, 1811,” in Alexander Wheelock Thayer, Salieri, Rival of Mozart, ed. Theodore Albrecht (Kansas City, Mo.: Philharmonia of Greater Kansas City, 1989), pp. 163–165. 85 Heft 55, Blatt 13r. 86 Landon, Haydn: Chronicle and Works, Vol. 5, pp. 262–263. 87 Heft 56, Blätter 1r–2r. 88 Heft 56, Blätter 5r, and 6v–8r. 89 Heft 56, Blätter 15r–15v and 19r. 90 Heft 56, Blatt 5v.

20

COMPOSITION OF THE NINTH SYMPHONY

When visiting Beethoven on Sunday, February 15, Schindler commented on the character of singers Sontag and Unger. He also opined that the designation Alla breve was best for some passage, possibly in the Finale of the Ninth Symphony.91 On the same day (February 15, 1824), a member of the musical Glöggl family came to visit Beethoven. The composer could understand him when he spoke loudly but seemingly still preferred that Glöggl write much of his conversation.92 Such incidents, when witnessed firsthand in the conversation books, help to dispel the notion that Beethoven was completely deaf at the time of the Ninth Symphony’s premiere.93 On February 17, Schindler commented negatively against Peter Gläser’s copying;94 this represented quite a reversal from early August, 1823, when Schindler was quick (probably uncomfortably quick) to recommend Gläser after the death of Wenzel Schlemmer on August 6. On Wednesday, February 18, 1824, Beethoven advertised in the Intelligenzblatt for a housekeeper and gave his address as Landstrasse, Ungargasse No. 323, in the rear stairway, on the first floor (second floor, American), door 12.95 The advertisement appeared only once but provides useful information about the location of Beethoven’s apartment within the building on the corner of Ungargasse and Beatrixgasse. On February 19, Schuppanzigh advised Beethoven to make arrangements for the Akademie then, because the vocalists would have to study their parts, and because dilettantes would be needed to supplement the orchestra, but likewise noted that there were many good amateurs from whom to choose.96 On Wednesday, February 25 (in a varied repetition of what Schindler told Beethoven on January 21), attorney Leopold Sonnleithner (1797–1873)97 said that he, Schuppanzigh, and Ferdinand Piringer (the amateur conductor of the 91

Heft 56, Blatt 9v. Heft 56, Blätter 12v–14r. This visitor was unidentified in the German edition of the Konversationshefte (conversation books), but he seems to have been a professional shoemaker, presumably in the Esterházy employ, ca. thirty-eight to fifty years old, but an accomplished amateur string player, possibly a son of Joseph Glöggl (1759–1821), and therefore a nephew of Franz Xaver Glöggl (1764–1839), for whom Beethoven had composed his Equale for Trombones, WoO 30, for All Souls’ Day (November 2) in Linz in 1812. 93 See Albrecht, “The Hearing Beethoven: Demythifying the Composer’s Deafness,” Beethoven Journal 34, No. 2 (Winter, 2019), pp. 44–56. 94 Heft 56, Blatt 21v. 95 Intelligenzblatt, No. 39 (February 18, 1824), p. 320; see also Heft 56, Blatt 25v, footnote. 96 Heft 56, Blätter 28v–29r. 97 Sonnleithner was an accomplished amateur violinist, singer, and conductor, who had known Anton Schindler since late 1813. See Clive, pp. 342–343. 92

COMPLETION IN THE NEW YEAR, 1824

21

Concerts spirituels) would take care of organizing the Akademie and projected that Beethoven’s income from it would be great. At about this time, there was also a reference to the famous petition that Beethoven received from Vienna’s friends of art.98

98

Heft 57, Blätter 2r, 3r–3v.

Chapter 2

Petition, Preparations, Copying The Ludlamshöhle Petition, February, 1824 The petition that Beethoven received was of indeterminate authorship, signed by thirty of Vienna’s most prominent music lovers and dated simply as “Vienna, in February, 1824” (see Appendix B).1 It is long and written in the most flowery, convoluted, and self-important language possible. It declares that the signers are representatives of Vienna’s wide circle of lovers of art, that they know that Beethoven has great new works that have not yet been heard, and that they hope that he will not allow these works to be performed elsewhere (implying Berlin or even London) until they have been heard in this, his second native city. With the exception of a half-dozen members of the nobility, including Prince Eduard Lichnowsky, Count Moritz Lichnowsky, and Count Moritz von Dietrichstein, most of the signers are wealthy (or at least prominent) lovers of music and theater, music dealers, government officials, and so on. With the exceptions of Carl Czerny, Anton Halm, and Abbé Stadler, no one in the list could be considered a professional musician.2 Thanks to Beethoven’s conversation books, we now know the document’s origins. On May 1, 1824, Joseph Carl Bernard, the editor of the Wiener Zeitung, told Beethoven that the “letter” was “a product of the Ludlamshöhle” group, who met in “a beerhouse next to the Trattnerhof,3 where Castelli, Kuffner, Deinhardstein, Bäuerle, and many others congregated. They wanted to strike

1 Schindler and Thayer included it in full in their biographies, though subsequent authors, especially those concentrating on analysis, have paid it less attention. See Schindler (1840), pp. 144–148; Schindler-Moscheles, pp. 97–99; Schindler (1860), pt. 2, pp. 60–63; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 273–275; Thayer-Deiters-Riemann, V, pp. 67–69; Thayer-Krehbiel, III, pp. 153–155 (omits list of names); Thayer-Forbes, pp. 897–899 (restores list of names); Landon, Beethoven: A Documentary Study (New York: Macmillan, 1970), pp. 359–360. 2 See Brandenburg, No. 1784, and Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 344. 3 The Gasthaus of J. Haidvogel in the Schlossergasse No. 599. The narrow street at the south end of the Graben, like the Paternostergassel on the north end of the Graben, disappeared when their respective islands of buildings, extending out into the Graben in front of them, were demolished later in the century.

THE LUDLAMSHÖHLE PETITION, FEBRUARY, 1824

23

a blow against the Italians with it.”4 And sure enough, the poet and playwright Ignaz Castelli (1781–1862), poet Christoph Kuffner (1780–1846), and poet Johann Ludwig Deinhardstein (1794–1859) were among the signers.5 Earlier, on Tuesday, April 27, Schindler had told Beethoven that Carl Czerny had assured him that Stainer von Felsburg was the author,6 but the document’s length and tone suggest that several hands had a role in drafting it. Similarly, we can now be clearer about when it was delivered. On Wednesday, February 25, nephew Karl told Beethoven that there had been a visitor while he (Beethoven) was gone from his apartment.7 The implication was that the visitor had brought Beethoven an important message and was somewhat irritated at not finding the composer at home so he could deliver it personally. On Friday, February 27, Karl asked Beethoven if he had read the petition (called “die Schrift”) that had been sent “yesterday” (“gestern”).8 Confused terminology aside, it appears that the petition was delivered on Wednesday, February 25, 1824, and if not then, at least the next day, Thursday, February 26.9 Seven or eight weeks later, as the date of the Akademie approached, the petition was published in Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung on April 15 and

4 Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 64, Blätter 16v–17r. Bernard, editor of the Wiener Zeitung, added that they had earlier used Carl Maria von Weber (whose Euryanthe had premiered in the Kärntnertor Theater on October 25, 1823) in the same way. Weber had actually been named a member of the group. Much earlier, Beethoven had learned of their adolescent names and games and seemingly wanted nothing to do with them. The Trattnerhof was a large, fashionable apartment building on the east side of the Graben. Kuffner had written the text for Beethoven’s Choral Fantasia in 1808. 5 Adolf Bäuerle (1786–1859), who did not sign the petition, was a poet-playwright associated with the Theater in der Leopoldstadt and editor of Vienna’s respected Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung. He was probably too busy to have much leisure time to sit at the Ludlamshöhle, drinking with friends. 6 Heft 63, Blatt 33r. Probably Joseph Jacob Stainer (or Steiner) von Felsburg (1786– after 1852), liquidator in the Austrian National Bank, living at Minoritenplatz, No. 38. See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, pp. 233 and 713. 7 Heft 57, Blatt 4r. 8 Heft 57, Blatt 11v. 9 Therefore, Schindler’s oft-quoted anecdote that he was present when Beethoven received the petition is a piece of fiction. Indeed, Schindler asked Beethoven if he might read the petition on March 4 and again on March 8 (Heft 57, Blätter 25v and 38v–39r). This fact, and the number of rehearsals held prior to the Akademie on May 7, 1824, were already noted by Shin Augustinus Kojima in “Die Uraufführung der Neunten Symphonie Beethovens—einige neue Tatsachen,” in Bericht über den Internationalen Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongress, Bayreuth, 1981, ed. Christoph-Hellmut Mahling and Sigrid Wiesmann (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1984), pp. 390–398; but they have hardly ever been mentioned in the subsequent literature concerning the composer.

24

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

Kanne’s so-called Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung on April 21.10 As we shall see later, Count Moritz Lichnowsky (who had signed the petition) was so offended that his noble name had been published among the nonnoble signers that he eventually withdrew from the circle around Beethoven that actually did help him with logistical matters before the May 7 Akademie. As for Beethoven himself, while he was certainly flattered and even emotionally touched by the flowery-worded petition, the document did not seem to alter significantly the practical preparations that were necessary between February and May.

The Changing Orchestra of the Kärntnertor Theater On February 26, Schuppanzigh commented on the poor condition of the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra, confirming a report that had been published in the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung on February 19.11 At the same time, he advised Beethoven not to include a piano work on the Akademie but reassured him that Piringer would get the best amateurs.12 As early as fall, 1823, the Kärntnertor Theater’s new first Kapellmeister, Conradin Kreutzer (1780–1849),13 had begun to hire orchestral musicians, often from afar and not representing Austrian and Bohemian traditions, to replace those dismissed by Barbaja. On November 23, the new principal bassoonist, Theobald Hürth (b. Landau, 1795; d. Vienna, 1858), arrived from Switzerland by way of Speyer14 and probably took his place in the orchestra by the end of January, 1824. Another new hire at the same time15 was principal hornist Elias Lewy (b. St. Avold, 1796; d. Vienna, 1846), probably the first practicing Jewish musician to be employed in the orchestra, who arrived from Bern, Switzerland.16 10 Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 17, No. 46 (April 15, 1824), p. 182; and Wiener AmZ 8, No. 22 (April 21, 1824), p. 87. 11 Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 8 (February 19, 1824), cols. 121–122. 12 Heft 57, Blätter 4v–5v. 13 See Clive, pp. 194–195. 14 Wiener Zeitung, No. 272 (November 26, 1823), p. 1101. The arrivals published in the Wiener Zeitung were always selective and in this case did not note the arrival of Lewy, certainly at about the same time as Hürth. 15 Several musical dictionaries in the 1800s place Lewy’s arrival in 1822, but the facts do not bear this out. 16 See Theodore Albrecht, “Elias (Eduard Constantin) Lewy and the First Performance of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony,” Horn Call 29 (May, 1999), pp. 27–33, 85–94, and cover portrait. Eventually, in order to apply for a position in the Christian Hofkapelle, Lewy converted to Catholicism on June 24, 1835. An earlier musician of possible Jewish origin was violoncellist Franz Deabis (or De Abis), born ca. 1746/1747 or 1752; died April 13, 1838. Already converted to Christianity, he joined the Kärntnertor Theater in October, 1785, and remained until it closed in

THE CHANGING ORCHESTRA OF THE KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER

25

If they had not known each other before, Hürth and Lewy soon became fast friends, and Kreutzer wrote a “Concertante” to showcase their talents on a halfevening’s concert at the theater on January 23, 1824. The AmZ’s correspondent commented, “Two honorable artists; the hornist, especially, possesses significant facility. They are said already to have been engaged for service in the theater, and this is indeed needed, because when most of the players left and moved to more comfortable service in the Burgtheater, the old well-established reputation of this [Kärntnertor Theater] orchestra naturally declined, and so the addition of new capable musicians is all the more to be wished.”17 The two section leaders were evidently together when Beethoven met them for the first time after the orchestral rehearsal on May 2, 1824.18 Hürth and Lewy later approached Franz Schubert to write a concertante piece for them, but that composer arrogantly and even abusively refused their request.19 But Barbaja’s orchestral bloodbath still had two more victims. Joseph Melzer (or Mölzer, 1763–1832), the senior-most contrabassist after the death of Anton Grams and also a doubler on the contrabassoon, employed at the Kärntnertor February, 1788. He then probably joined the Theater auf der Wieden, returning to the Kärntnertor in 1795 or 1796, essentially remaining there until June, 1822, when he “retired” to the Burgtheater, possibly until 1825. Information concerning Deabis’s Jewish origins courtesy of Dr. Michael Lorenz (University of Vienna), December 27, 2019. 17 Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 8 (February 19, 1824), cols. 121–122. The other half of the evening was a ballet, a frequent combination. The other items on the concert were Beethoven’s Prometheus Overture (popular for such functions), a Concertino for Horn by Agostino Belloli; Allegro from a Bassoon Concerto by Carl Bärmann; and an aria by Rossini, sung by Madame Grünbaum. 18 Heft 64, Blätter 22v and 27v. 19 The incident took place in summer (probably the summer of 1826), supposedly at ca. 1 a.m. in a coffee house in the central City, after Schubert, Bauernfeld (1802–1890), Franz Lachner (1803–1890), and others had spent the afternoon drinking Heuriger in Grinzing and walked the two hours or so back to Vienna. Schubert’s group had continued to drink great quantities of punch, when Hürth and Lewy walked in. Bauernfeld did not know them by name, just that they were prominent members of the Opera orchestra. Spying Schubert, they came over to his table, tried to make conversation, and asked if he would compose a work for their upcoming concert. Schubert (by now probably quite drunk) replied disparagingly about them and their instruments (from these remarks, we can determine that they were bassoon and horn) and refused to do so. Bauernfeld described one of the musicians as tall (probably Hürth) and the other inclined to stoutness (probably Lewy). See Eduard von Bauernfeld, “Some Notes on Franz Schubert (1869),” in Schubert, Memoirs by His Friends, ed. Otto Erich Deutsch, trans. Rosamond Ley and John Nowell (New York: Macmillan, 1958), pp. 230–232. Schubert spent the summer of 1824 as music teacher to the Esterházy daughters in Zseliz and the summer of 1825 traveling in Upper Austria, and so 1826 seems the likely summer for this encounter. See Rudolf Klein, Schubertstätten (Vienna: Verlag Elisabeth Lafite, 1972), pp. 75–77, 83–98, and 103–104.

26

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

Theater since March 1, 1800, was dismissed, effective the end of November, 1823. Similarly, low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky was dismissed from the theater’s orchestra, effective the end of January, 1824, although he continued to play in the Hofkapelle until his death in 1846.20 Perhaps Barbaja believed that Lewy would be a replacement for Hradetzky, but Hradetzky was a traditional low hornist, and Lewy was a high hornist, although (like the Theater an der Wien’s Michael Herbst) among the more modern variety who also developed their middle and even low registers to a certain degree. To Beethoven, who had just written the third-movement solo for Hradetzky, these dismissals must have come as a blow and caused him to question whether the Kärntnertor Theater was actually the best place to hold his Akademie.

Concert Preparations Begin in Earnest Now that Beethoven had the petition in hand and was reassured that his music might still receive a positive reception in Rossini-crazed Vienna, preparations for the Akademie started in earnest. On Sunday, February 29, Karl reported that Haslinger estimated that the copying work (for the performers’ parts) would take another month.21 Later that day, Karl reported that Sonnleithner would engage Josepha Schlemmer to copy the choral parts. Often more a hindrance than a help, brother Johann had his own ideas for the contents of the program, including a suggestion that Beethoven include (or even compose) an aria for soprano Henriette Sontag. And again, there was more discussion of dividing the organizational duties.22 Beethoven seldom provided hints about his own compositional process, but on March 1, he noted in his current conversation book, “Once the ideas are in place, nothing more stands in the way of working them out.”23 Even so, the remark may pertain to pianist Ignaz Moscheles, who had visited back in Vienna, or possibly his own ideas for improvising variations. On Ash Wednesday, March 3, Beethoven made note of an advertisement for W.A. Müller’s Das Wichtigste über Einrichtung und Beschaffenheit der Orgel (Meissen, 1823) in the Wiener Zeitung’s Intelligenzblatt, as he had on January 29,24 suggesting that he was thinking about an organ part for the Missa solemnis. On March 4, Schindler told Beethoven about a recent revolt in the orchestra of the Josephstadt Theater, although the motivation and details remained unclear 20 Melzer’s

and Hradetzky’s dismissals are documented in their appeals for reemployment in 1826–1827, in Hoftheater, Akten, Karton 70, 1827, new 96/Op. (with 3 Beilagen); Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv. 21 Heft 57, Blatt 16r. 22 Heft 57, Blätter 18r–20r. 23 Heft 57, Blatt 23r. 24 Heft 54, Blätter 22r–22v; Heft 57, Blatt 24r.

MARCH 7: THE FIRST PLANNING SESSION

27

from his report written in the conversation book. Seemingly in a humorous response, the composer jotted a hypothetical title, “Die Befreiung [The Liberation], set to music by B[eethoven].”25 On the same day, Joseph Blahetka (1783–after 1847) offered to provide the printed tickets for the Akademie,26 although later, Beethoven opted to have them provided as part of the package deal from the Kärntnertor Theater. Nephew Karl also suggested that Beethoven should improvise on the piano at the concert.27 Some time on March 4 or 5, Beethoven wrote out a variant in the “Seid umschlungen” passage in the Symphony’s Finale. Surely he had been finished with the composition of the work the month before, but he was now perhaps toying with refinements to various details. We must remember that while Beethoven had had private reading-rehearsals of virtually all of his symphonies up to this time (paid for by his noble patrons), the Ninth Symphony would have no “off-Broadway” trial before it was heard by the general public. On Thursday, March 4, Karl attended a Concert Spirituel performance, at which the Burgtheater’s principal oboist, Ernest Krähmer (1795–1837), played, and reported seeing his clarinettist wife Caroline Krähmer, née Schleicher (1794– 1873) in the audience. Even though Beethoven had never composed specifically for them, it was obvious that he knew who they were and admired them.28 Karl also seemed to perceive Beethoven as relying too heavily upon Piringer, conductor of the Concerts spirituels, to complement the ranks of the professional orchestral musicians with talented dilettantes, and warned, “Piringer is surely very good, but … it would be unfair to neglect Schuppanzigh, who has done the most for you.”29

March 7: The First Planning Session On Sunday, March 7, at 1 p.m., Beethoven met with Schuppanzigh, publisher Tobias Haslinger, the composer’s longtime friend Count Moritz Lichnowsky (1771–1837), and (possibly by chance) the young violinist Joseph Böhm 25 Heft 57, Blätter 25v–26v. Probably a play on Abbé Maximilian Stadler’s popular oratorio Die Befreiung von Jerusalem (The Liberation of Jerusalem), dating fom 1813. 26 Blahetka was the father of the young piano virtuosa Leopoldine (1809–1887), a student of Joseph Czerny, and essentially managed her career, probably including ticket sales for her concerts at the Landständischer Saal (assembly hall of the Lower Austrian Provincial Government). 27 Heft 57, Blatt 29r. 28 Heft 57, Blätter 31v–32r. For details, see also Theodore Albrecht, “Ernst Krähmer und seine Frau Caroline (geb. Schleicher)—musikalische Pioniere in der Wiener Biedermeierzeit,” trans. Ernst Kobau, Wiener Oboen-Journal, No. 53 (March, 2013), pp. 8–9. Caroline died in Fünfhaus (not yet a western suburb) on April 19, 1873; courtesy Dr. Michael Lorenz (University of Vienna), December 16, 2020. 29 Heft 57, Blatt 34r.

28

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

(1795–1876)30 at the Stern restaurant on the Stephansplatz, opposite the cathedral’s entrance,31 with the express purpose of planning the Akademie and the roles of its various organizers. Schuppanzigh sat next to Beethoven and wrote in a clean conversation book on behalf of himself and others at the table. Schuppanzigh asked Beethoven if the copyist Frau Schlemmer had been to see him the day before, and evidently she had not. Schuppanzigh asked whether the score of the Symphony had been copied; evidently it had not, and Schuppanzigh recommended Wenzel Rampl (1783–1851)32 to do the job. He offered to go and see Rampl on Beethoven’s behalf. As for orchestral parts, Schuppanzigh made note that they would need 6 first violin parts, 6 second parts, 4 viola parts, 5 violoncello parts (presumably combined with contrabasses), and doubled wind parts.33 At this time, the Kärntnertor Theater probably had ca. 13 violins, 4 violas, 4 violoncellos, and 4 contrabasses,34 and so Beethoven and his circle were already projecting an orchestra of that size, augmented by professionals, such as Schuppanzigh and members of his quartet, as well as by several talented dilettantes, especially in the upper strings. Haslinger advocated having the choral parts copied out one time each, and then having 9 or 10 parts of each lithographed, for a total of 40 choral parts. He offered to do this at cost and without charging interest, as a favor to Beethoven. So that no one could overhear him, Beethoven jotted a note into his conversation 30 Schuppanzigh had been Böhm’s teacher for a period up to early 1816 and seemingly took this opportunity to introduce him formally to the composer. 31 By noon on Sunday, March 7, there were only six blank pages left in Heft 57, and so Beethoven took a small but new Heft 58 with him to use at the 1 p.m. meeting and shortly thereafter. Then he returned to Heft 57 on Monday afternoon, March 8, finishing it over the next day or so. 32 Rampl was also a copyist for the Hoftheater and had worked with both Wenzel Schlemmer and, after his death, his widow, Josepha. Rampl was noted as having a slovenly appearance but also as having produced good copying work. He lived in the northern suburb of Rossau, on the corner across the street from the back door of the Servitenkirche. See also Totenbeschauprotokoll, 1851, R, fol. 14r; April 13, 1851 (Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv). 33 That is: 2 first flutes, 2 second flutes, and so on. 34 Ziegler, Addressen-Buch der Tonkünstler, pp. 78–80. That list, of course, reflected fall, 1822, before the death of contrabassist Anton Grams in May, 1823, and the dismissal of contrabassist Joseph Melzer in November, 1823, for example, but provides a sufficiently accurate figure from which to work, especially as Schindler and Beethoven negotiated directly with manager Duport for use of the Kärntnertor Theater. Since the 1780s, Viennese theater orchestras had usually worked with a contrabass section roughly equal in number to their violoncellos, and if the Barbaja-Duport team intentionally lessened the number of contrabasses, it may have been to make the balance more consistent with Italian tastes.

MARCH 7: THE FIRST PLANNING SESSION

29

book that Haslinger should say nothing more about having the Missa solemnis engraved, because he was just about ready to send it off to the subscribers of manuscript copies. Haslinger also volunteered to have a circular printed and sent to the dilettantes who played string instruments. At the end of the meeting, Schuppanzigh was joined by another of his students, whom he humorously introduced to the composer: “This is a wooden student of mine; his name is Holz.” (The German noun Holz means wood.) Then, motioning to Böhm, he added: “This was a more intelligent one.”35 Therefore, on one afternoon, Beethoven met Böhm, who would become among his finest musical interpreters in the next generation, and Carl Holz (1798–1858), the second violinist in Schuppanzigh’s current Quartet, who would become the composer’s unpaid secretary from July, 1825, through late 1826. And two violinists who would surely participate on his Akademies in May. While Beethoven was at the planning meeting, his brother Johann and nephew Karl attended the Krähmer couple’s concert in the Landständischer Saal at 12:30 p.m. In addition to oboe, Ernest Krähmer played the czakan, and in addition to clarinet, his wife, Caroline, played violin. With seven pieces on the program (including Mozart’s Le nozze di Figaro Overture), the concert must have lasted until ca. 2 p.m.36 The small orchestra would probably have been made up of Ernest’s colleagues from the Burgtheater, including his almost lifelong friend, bassoonist August Mittag (1795–1867), and the flutist/piccolo player Aloys Khayll (1791–1866).37 Presumably Karl and Johann drove in Johann’s carriage, while Beethoven walked, but all three of them probably arrived back at Beethoven’s apartment within a few minutes of each other. It seems that at the concert, Karl and Johann had talked to various acquaintances, including possibly the Krähmers themselves, and Karl reported, “The enthusiasm with which everyone offered to participate is astonishing. It would be a shame if this were in vain.”38 It is therefore possible

35

Heft 58, Blätter 1r–2v. The first of many such puns and wordplays on his name. Wiener Zeitung, No. 54 (March 6, 1824), p. 242; Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 18 (April 29, 1824), cols. 281–282. 37 Aloys Khayll (1791–1866) was the piccolo player for whom Beethoven wrote in Symphony No. 5 (when he was still a very young member of the Theater an der Wien’s orchestra), Egmont, Wellingtons Sieg, and Der glorreiche Augenblick. If Beethoven required 2 flutes and piccolo in the score of the Ninth Symphony, and since the Kärntnertor Theater had only a “normal” complement of 2 flutes, then Aloys Khayll would have been the logical person to add, possibly on the Kärntnertor Theater’s normal extended payroll. See Theodore Albrecht, “Die sagenhafte Geschichte der Familie Khayll—Orchestermusiker in Wien zur Zeit Beethovens,” Wiener Oboen-Journal, No. 47 (October, 2010), pp. 4–10; No. 48 (December, 2010), pp. 7–17. 38 Heft 58, Blatt 3r. 36

30

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

that both Ernest and Caroline Krähmer, Mittag, and Aloys Khayll offered their services for the upcoming Akademie. Just as it had at Beethoven’s planning session, the subject of a fair copy of the score of the Ninth Symphony must have come up, along with a suggested solution: “The copyist’s name is Gebauer. // The best and most dependable. // But it must be copied out one time.”39 Benjamin Gebauer (ca. 1758–1846) had been an oboist at the Theater auf der Wieden and Theater an der Wien and by 1802 had become its primary copyist. He had copied substantial parts of Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony in summer, 1804; Beethoven had not been happy with his work and had resisted several subsequent suggestions that he employ the copyist again.40 At the same time, Karl (probably having talked to Haslinger’s senior partner, Sigmund Anton Steiner, who also frequented such concerts) confirmed that only the choral parts would be lithographed. And as for the proofreading, Karl assured Beethoven that Schuppanzigh could help if he had the score.41 The next day, Monday, March 8, Schuppanzigh himself paid Beethoven a visit in late morning or early afternoon to ask him whether he wanted the vocal soloists’ parts to be provided with bass parts beneath, to make individual practice easier.42 The same day, probably shortly afterward, Schindler visited to say that he had heard that the logistics concerning the Akademie had been resolved and to discuss Unger’s range. He also asked if Beethoven had determined who would conduct, and the composer probably told him that he had Michael Umlauf in mind. Schindler asked yet again whether Beethoven would allow him to read the petition that had been delivered on February 25, and this time Beethoven apparently let him do it. Schindler then told Beethoven that he had been approached by Christian Carl André (1763–1831), who edited the arts-oriented Hesperus in Stuttgart, to supply him with correspondence articles from Vienna. Schindler asked Beethoven if he could send an article about the petition, and the composer apparently rejected the idea.43 It becomes clear that up to this point, Schindler had not been heavily involved in the preparations for the Akademie and really wanted to have a greater role. 39

Heft 58, Blatt 3r. Theodore Albrecht, “Benjamin Gebauer (ca. 1758–1846): The Life and Death of Beethoven’s ‘Copyist C,’” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 3 (2003), pp. 7–22. 41 Heft 58, Blatt 3r. 42 Heft 58, Blatt 4v. Adding the bass line would provide at least some harmonic context for the vocal part above. 43 Heft 57, Blätter 38v–39v. The mention of the Hesperus becomes significant when we consider that someone did supply the Viennese press with copies of the petition and its signers’ names and that that act ultimately cost Beethoven his close friendship with and support from Count Moritz Lichnowsky, who had attended the March 7 planning session. 40

31

COPYIST PAUL MASCHEK

Historians have often quoted Schindler’s colorful “Minutes of March 2,” a meeting supposedly attended by Beethoven, a Musikus; Count Lichnowsky, an amateur; and Schindler, a fiddler; but with Schuppanzigh, a fiddler and representative of Mylord Falstaff, “not yet present today.” But in fact, Schindler falsified this entry later, probably to suggest that he had had an important role in Beethoven’s plans, even before Schuppanzigh did.44

Copyist Paul Maschek Late in the morning of Tuesday, March 9, Schuppanzigh brought the copyist Paul Maschek (1761–1826) to meet with Beethoven and discuss copying the vocal soloists’ parts for the Symphony and probably the orchestral parts as well. “I’ve [copied] 80 Bögen [bifolia] in one night,” the copyist boasted to Beethoven. Schuppanzigh admonished Beethoven that progress on the project depended upon him, the composer: “It is more than high time.”45 First, however, Maschek needed to have a fair copy of the score to the Symphony, and he evidently set to work copying one from Beethoven’s working copy.46 That afternoon, Schuppanzigh returned and advised Beethoven to place the Akademie on April 8, the Thursday before Palm Sunday and a day that would not conflict with the Tonkünstler-Societät’s large-scale Lenten benefit concerts on Sunday, April 11, and Monday, April 12.47 He also offered to persuade brother Johann that this was the best solution. They probably discussed Joseph Blahetka’s offer to have tickets printed, and Schuppanzigh persuasively opined, “It would be better if you were to get the theater tickets from [resident manager] Duport, because tickets cause hellacious confusion, and by doing so, you spare yourself 44 Heft 60, Blatt 2v (but placed physically among entries of March 19 and March 20, 1824). 45 Heft 57, Blätter 40v–41r. 46 Beethoven’s working copy survives in the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin and has been published in several facsimile editions. The most easily available isLudwig van Beethoven, Sinfonie Nr. 9 d-Moll Op. 125 (Leipzig: Edition Peters, 1975). It contains a sheet not included in the similar facsimile edition of 1924. In 2010, Bärenreiter issued an expensive, physically awkward edition with the large pages of the Finale at correct size and commentary by Lewis Lockwood, Jonathan Del Mar, and Martina Rebmann. Maschek’s copied score (probably supplemented by additional work from Peter Gläser) was used to extract the orchestral and vocal parts, was probably used by conductor Michael Umlauf at the premiere on May 7, 1824, and was sent to B. Schott’s Söhne in Mainz for publication. For an early description, see Jonathan Del Mar, “The Text of the Ninth Symphony,” in Nicholas Cook, Beethoven: Symphony No. 9 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), pp. 110–117. For a later description by Del Mar, see his Beethoven Symphonie Nr. 9 in d-moll, op. 125: Critical Commentary, Imprint no. 9009 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1996/1999). 47 See Carl Ferdinand Pohl, Denkschrift … Tonkünstler-Societät, p. 71.

32

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

much confusion. And it is certain that, with these tickets, no one can make a mess of it.”48 Beethoven wondered who might receive complimentary tickets, and Schuppanzigh replied, “Except for the Imperial Court, no one.” Then reality overtook him, and he added, “Now I must go and earn some bread again.”49 Later that day, Schindler came to discuss the arrangements that he had voluntarily undertaken to coordinate the vocal soloists for the Akademie, authorizing alto Caroline Unger to invite soprano Henriette Sontag and bass Joseph Preisinger, while he himself still wavered between tenors Franz Jäger and Anton Haitzinger. Schindler asked Beethoven whether the Akademie would take place at night and indicated that that time would be best: “It would merely be a matter of reaching an agreement with Duport. If he gives a ballet, the concert won’t hurt him a bit.” Then Beethoven probably expressed serious concern about the Kärntnertor orchestral musicians who had been dismissed over the past nine months, and Schindler replied, “It’s more of a question of from where the good orchestral players who depart in this way are replaced. It merely depends upon talking it over with him [Duport]; then he will make the arrangements in the way you want and need them.” As a parting shot, he wrote, “It would be just as unpleasant to see your works being performed first in foreign countries—Enough!”50 This exchange helps to confirm that Beethoven had indeed composed the Ninth Symphony with the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestral musicians in mind but that he probably invoked the specter of a first performance in Berlin or even London when he was irritated. The next day, Wednesday, March 10, brother Johann came to report that he had spoken with Schuppanzigh and had gone to see Duport about April 8. Duport, in turn, said that he could not give Beethoven the Kärntnertor Theater (or even the Grosser Redoutensaal) for an evening concert without the approval of Count Dietrichstein, the Hofmusikgraf (Court musical administrator). They realized that a concert in the evening would probably bring Beethoven 1,500 fl. more than one during the day, but if they had to accept the midday hour (12:30 p.m.) for the Akademie, then Duport would schedule an old opera or old ballet (less attractive to a novelty-seeking audience and less taxing on the orchestra and chorus) in the evening.51 Johann also reported that he had just spoken with copyist Paul Maschek, who lived in the Wieden, at the corner of Neuwieden Strasse (today’s Margareten Strasse) and Ziegelofengasse. Beethoven had initially wanted Maschek’s copyists to come to his apartment to copy the parts from the score. Maschek had evidently agreed to this earlier but now protested that his people would be too tired if they had to walk to Beethoven’s, and they simply did not want to do it. This is 48

Heft Heft 50 Heft 51 Heft 49

59, 59, 59, 59,

Blätter Blätter Blätter Blätter

1r–1v. 1v–2r. 2v–4r. 4v–5v.

COPYIST PAUL MASCHEK

33

understandable: the walk from Maschek’s apartment to Beethoven’s would have taken 45 minutes. Maschek further noted that if the copyists worked at his own place, they could start at 4 o’clock in the morning and work more efficiently.52 Begrudgingly, Beethoven seems to have agreed. That afternoon, nephew Karl returned home and expressed surprise that the Redoutensaal was now considered as a possibility for the Akademie, but he allowed that there was also talk about the Theater an der Wien.53 While the Kärntnertor Theater and the Grosser Redoutensaal were under the administration of Barbaja’s leased Court Opera (with Duport as resident manager), the Theater an der Wien was owned (and, to an extent, directly managed) by Count Ferdinand Palffy. The theaters had a relatively dry acoustic, while the ballroom was more reverberant. In any case, Karl thought that the Redoutensaal would be best.54 Possibly on the afternoon of Friday, March 12, Karl passed along a report from Beethoven’s maid (who was illiterate and could not have written in the conversation book herself ) that she had been to Maschek’s apartment (probably to deliver or pick up material to be copied) and learned that his staff of copyists were copying in their own apartments, rather than at Maschek’s (as projected), and that one of them had brought Maschek copied parts while she was there. Karl allowed that it depended upon how far from Maschek’s that the copyists themselves lived, but that the maid had reported that when she was there, Maschek was at work copying, still in his sleeping shirt. Karl also reported that brother Johann “believes that you should trust Schindler to get the winds and other instruments from the [Josephstadt] theater, because, first, he knows the people, knows where they live, and said that most of them would come without payment. Schuppanzigh, on the other hand, is not as well known, because he was gone [to Russia] for so many years. Schuppanzigh is too easygoing.”55 Already too many cooks were threatening to spoil the broth. Brother Johann was not a musician and had little idea of what Beethoven needed musically. In assembling an orchestra now, as in the gigantic benefit concerts of 1813–1814 (when Schuppanzigh had served as witness), Beethoven wanted to draw upon Vienna’s most experienced professional orchestras—the Kärntnertor Theater, the Burgtheater, or the Theater an der Wien—without extending his recruitment to the smaller suburban theaters in the Leopoldstadt and Josephstadt. For a quarter century, Schuppanzigh’s role in Beethoven’s circle had been as a musical collaborator and advisor, while Schindler (although nominally concertmaster at the 52

Heft 59, Blatt 6r. This would become reality on Saturday, March 20, when Schindler and Lichnowsky, without Beethoven’s prior consent, went to see Count Ferdinand Palffy, owner of the Theater an der Wien, about holding the Akademie there. 54 Heft 59, Blatt 6v. 55 Heft 59, Blätter 7v–8r. 53

34

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

Josephstadt Theater) assisted Beethoven in logistical (rather than purely musical) matters. Moreover, Schuppanzigh was known to Vienna’s best professional players, while Schindler, a relative newcomer among suburban professionals, was not. Probably on Saturday, March 13, the copyist Maschek visited Beethoven and explained how he was having parts copied for the Kyrie, Credo, and Agnus of the Missa solemnis, then proofread, and subsequent parts duplicated from these. Maschek was literate, far more so than the functional and phonetical Schlemmer had been, and he tried to impress upon Beethoven the most efficient way to get the large numbers of copies made within a limited period of time.56 On February 29, Haslinger had estimated that copying the parts would take a month, but, by this date, there was no way to get the job done in time for the April 8 date that Schuppanzigh had projected on March 9. Realistically speaking, the earliest that the Akademie could have taken place was in mid-April.

March 14: Sunday Dinner with Sontag, Unger, and Schindler Now comes an incident that has sometimes been misreported and misinterpreted in the literature.57 As noted above, Schindler was trying to create a function for himself within the preparations for Beethoven’s Akademie and ultimately became the contact person for the solo singers. Probably on Tuesday, March 9, Beethoven had asked Schindler to inquire whether Henriette Sontag and Caroline Unger would be available to come to dinner on Sunday, March 14, and presumably for Schindler to report back to him about it, so he could make the necessary preparations, especially grocery shopping on Saturday. Schindler never reported back to Beethoven, who then entered the weekend assuming that the two singers were previously committed elsewhere. Imagine Beethoven’s surprise, then, when Schindler appeared at his apartment, probably late in the morning of Sunday, March 14, with news that Unger and Sontag were free to come to dinner that afternoon. Beethoven must have been furious, and Schindler protested that one of them had not let him know until that morning.58 With few provisions in the apartment, Beethoven sent his housekeeper, Barbara Holzmann (1755–1831), on an emergency shopping expedition, but she returned and reported that everything was closed, although she had a hen and two portions of meat from the restaurant as well as salad and a Gugelhupf for a pastry. 56

Heft 59, Blätter 10v–11v. The incident, implying that Beethoven was an alcoholic, is reported in Martin Cooper, Beethoven: The Last Decade, 1817–1827, rev. ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), p. 60; but Edward Larkin’s Medical Appendix to that volume, pp. 453–455, dismisses any notion that Beethoven was an alcoholic. 58 Heft 59, Blatt 11v. Two weeks later (Heft 60, Blatt 37v), Schindler said that he did not know any earlier than 9 o’clock that morning. 57

MARCH 14: SUNDAY DINNER WITH SONTAG, UNGER, AND SCHINDLER

35

Probably between 1 and 2 p.m., Schindler arrived with Sontag and Unger, who had been occupied with a rehearsal of Daniel-François-Esprit Auber’s Der Schnee, scheduled for its premiere at the Kärntnertor Theater on the next Friday, March 19.59 They arrived to find Beethoven still shaving and so waited, in order not to disturb him. Embarrassed, Beethoven probably apologized for having so little food on hand, and Sontag graciously replied, “I haven’t come to eat well, but rather to make your valued acquaintance, to which I have so long looked forward.” Unger said that Schindler had told them that Beethoven had decided to give his concert, and they hoped that the composer would find them worthy to sing on it. Beethoven’s Broadwood piano was in the next room, which Unger described as “filled to the ceiling with orchestral parts,”60 and they asked if they could sing something for him, possibly Fidelio (which Beethoven actually did not have). Probably while the two singers were trying to find something suitable, Beethoven pulled Schindler aside and admonished him for creating this social mess. Schindler replied in writing, once again, that he did not know until that morning. When the singers observed what was happening, they rushed to Schindler’s defense.61 And so the four of them ate what little food the composer had in his apartment, and he might have compensated by offering more wine than was advisable with such a meagre repast. * Even so, Sontag and Unger probably departed at a reasonable hour, because the next morning, Monday, March 15, at 10 o’clock, they were both scheduled to sing at a rehearsal for a Court concert. Held in conjunction with the leased administration of the Kärntnertor Theater, the concert was projected for 11 a.m.

59 Nephew Karl was not at home. He may have been attending the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s all-Mozart concert (Symphony in D Major [“Prague”?] and Davidde penitente), beginning at 12:30 p.m. and lasting until ca. 2 p.m. As he had projected the previous Tuesday, Karl surely attended Schuppanzigh’s subscription concert at the Musikverein’s hall in the Rother Igel at 4 p.m. On the program was Franz Schubert’s new String Quartet in A Minor, D. 804, and Beethoven’s popular Septet in E-flat Major, Op. 20. Eighteen months later and after the premieres of Beethoven’s String Quartets, Opp. 127 and 132, nephew Karl told his uncle, “I heard [a quartet] of his [Schubert’s] this winter [sic]; it was very pretty, but no spoken account can describe it. In all, it is his own spirit, but one sees how you always strive further.” See the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 18 (April 29, 1824), cols. 282–283; and Heft 59, Blätter 6v and 12r; and Heft 97, Blatt 8r. 60 Caroline Unger, letter to Ludwig Nohl (1873), published in Nohl, Mosaik (1881), p. 282; repr. in Friedrich Kerst, Die Erinnerungen an Beethoven, 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Stuttgart: Julius Hoffmann, 1913), II, pp. 77–78. 61 Heft 59, Blätter 12r–13v.

36

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

on Tuesday, March 16, before the dinner hour in the Ceremonial Hall of the Hofburg. The typical potpourri program,62 as projected, included: Part I Overture to Adrien..........................................................................Méhul Duettino from Semiramide.............................................................Rossini Demoiselles Sontag and Unger Aria with Chorus from Bianca e Falliero........................................Rossini Madame Grünbaum Variations for Violin................................................................... Mayseder Joseph Mayseder, violinist “Lob des Bacchus” from Alexander’s Feast...................................... Handel Herr Preisinger with full chorus First Finale with Chorus from Mahometto Secondo.........................Rossini Dlles. Sontag and Unger, Messrs. Barth and Forti Part II Double Chorus from Israel in Egypt.............................................. Handel Aria and Chorus......................................................................Mercadante Demoiselle Sontag Duet from Semiramide...................................................................Rossini Madame Grünbaum and Herr Forti Variations on the Czakan............................................................ Krähmer Ernest Krähmer, czakan player Quintet with Chorus from Zelmira................................................Rossini Madame Grünbaum, Demoiselle Unger; Messrs. Barth, Forti, and Preisinger Siegesgesang..................................................................................... Haydn Arranged by Court Kapellmeister Eybler Sontag and Unger were also scheduled to sing in Conradin Kreutzer’s opera Der Taucher at the Kärntnertor Theater at 7 p.m. on Monday night. * 62 Hof Musikkapelle, Akten, Karton 13 (1824–1826), 1824, fols. 22, 49–51, and 63–64. Such concerts at Court were held fairly regularly, and the performances themselves did not always include all the music programmed, depending upon whether Emperor Franz wanted to hear a particular piece or artist, or whether he happened to be tired, otherwise busy, etc. Joseph Mayseder (1789–1863) was a former student of Schuppanzigh’s and now the “solo player” in the violin section of the Kärntnertor Theater. Ernest Krähmer (1795–1837) was principal oboist at the Burgtheater and played the popular czakan (Hungarian walking-cane flute) on the side.

MARCH 14: SUNDAY DINNER WITH SONTAG, UNGER, AND SCHINDLER

37

On Tuesday, March 16, however, Schindler reported to Beethoven: “Now an unpleasant piece of news from Sontag, which will certainly trouble you. The few drops of wine from the first pressing caused a great explosion in her, so that the performance of Der Taucher had to be canceled yesterday. The night before last [Sunday], she vomited 15 times. Yesterday evening, however, it was better. “Unger’s reaction was just exactly the opposite [diarrhea]. They are heroines! They are not accustomed to drinking wine. Sontag was supposed to have gone to a rehearsal for a Court concert yesterday [Monday, March 15] morning. Because she would have lost the 24-ducat fee,63 she sent word that she was already feeling better and would come.”64 * Schindler’s tale must surely have troubled Beethoven. In fact, the Court concert projected for Tuesday, March 16, was postponed two weeks until Tuesday, March 30, and its rehearsal, scheduled for Monday morning, March 15, postponed until Monday, March 29.65 Sontag and Unger probably received notification when they arrived home from Beethoven’s on Sunday evening, or at the latest on Monday morning—and therefore no heroics in attempting to attend a rehearsal that had been canceled. Similarly, Schindler’s story about the canceled operatic performance on Monday is not supported by the evidence. According to the Theater Zettel (posters), the performance of Der Taucher on Monday, March 15, took place as scheduled with both Sontag and Unger singing.66 Therefore, Schindler may have been exaggerating to repay Beethoven for his anger over the confused invitation, but in any case he contradicted himself in parts of his report on March 16. * 63 The 24-ducat fee mentioned here is consistent with the 108 fl. soloists’ fees found in contemporary documents (a ducat was equivalent to 4½ fl.). See Hof-Musikkapelle, Akten, Karton 13, 1824, fols. 22, 49–51, and 63 (Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv). 64 Heft 59, Blätter 15r–15v. 65 Hof-Musikkapelle, Akten, Karton 13, 1824, fols. 22, 49–51, and 63 (Haus- Hofund Staatsarchiv). 66 Saturday, March 13, and Sunday, March 14, were ballet evenings at the Kärntnertor Theater. Monday, March 15, was Kreutzer’s opera Der Taucher with Sontag and Unger; Tuesday, March 16, was a ballet evening; and Wednesday, March 17, was Der Taucher again with Sontag and Unger. The performances began at 7 p.m. No performances were seemingly canceled owing to any indisposition on Sontag’s part. If they had been, then the official Zettel-of-record would have been altered (usually with a paste-over), retained by the Court Opera secretary, and bound in the year’s official Zettel book. See Kärntnertor Theater, Zettel; Bibliothek, Österreichisches Theatermuseum (courtesy Othmar Barnert); confirmed in Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 17, No. 36 (March 23, 1824), p. 143; and No. 40 (April 1, 1824), p. 159.

38

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

Only on Sunday, March 28, two weeks after the incident, did Schindler tell Beethoven that Sontag’s illness during the night of Sunday, March 14, was actually due to a vinegar salad that she had eaten in the evening after she had arrived home, and not the wine she had drunk at his apartment.67 Therefore, while the image of Beethoven’s attempting to get the two young singers drunk is attractive to the sensationalistic voyeur, it is also wildly inaccurate. The incident, however, might have demonstrated to the composer how unreliable Schindler could be if not closely supervised.

Mid-March: Back to Work Meanwhile, by Tuesday, March 16, Beethoven was becoming impatient that Maschek’s copying of the orchestral parts was not progressing any faster. Schindler asked, “To whom are you to give it now, since it is so pressing? // If we had the string parts, then we wouldn’t have to be in such a hurry with the wind instruments. // I’m coming in the afternoon; maybe by then he’ll have brought it.”68 Unfortunately, there are no more surviving conversation book entries until, probably on Friday, March 19, Beethoven himself projected his rehearsals and their function: “One rehearsal for correctness. ___________ for expression.” He then jotted a reminder to himself or a copyist about the trombones’ entry at “Seid umschlungen”: “Three trombones at the end of the March.”69 It also suggests that, structurally, Beethoven considered the fugue following the March and the ensuing choral repeat of “Freude, schöner Götterfunken” in 6/8 to be an integral extension of the March, rather than disjunctive episodes. If that be the case, then the March is the approach to battle; the gigantic fugue the battle itself; the soft repeated notes in the horns the breathless panting after the battle; and the 6/8 “Freude, schöner Götterfunken” (with its fanfare-like figures between its phrases) the expression of “Joy” after the battle.

67 Heft 60, Blatt 37v. Since only Sontag became ill, and not Unger, a reaction to her eating a salad in the evening makes the most logical sense. 68 Heft 59, Blatt 15r. 69 Heft 60, Blatt 1r. Heft 60 has few, if any, chronological points that can be dated with certainty. One solution (favored by Köhler and accepted by Brandenburg) posits a ca. 10-day gap between Heft 59 and Heft 60, with the result that Heft 60 is dated ca. March 26–April 8 (and a reasonable time of passage for a letter from Schott in Mainz to reach Vienna). The other (favored here) points to a theatrical benefit concert on March 25 (Annunciation) and results in a chronology from March 19 to April 1, with a week’s gap between Heft 60 and Heft 61.

39

MID-MARCH: BACK TO WORK

Possibly on the evening of Friday, March 19, Schindler and Maschek visited Beethoven and discussed the size of paper to be used for the Ninth Symphony, and Maschek asked for the first movement to take with him, so it could be started.70 * We have seen that, despite changes in its personnel, Beethoven had probably composed the Ninth Symphony to be played, at least initially, by the orchestra of the Kärntnertor Theater and was willing to negotiate with Duport to get the players whom he wanted. But now, on Saturday morning, March 20, Schindler once again interfered: “The Archangel Gabriel came to me today in a dream to tell me that I should inquire at Palffy’s concerning your situation.” Count Ferdinand Palffy (1774–1840) was the owner of the suburban Theater an der Wien, where most of Beethoven’s premieres between 1803 and 1808 had taken place. Through Schindler and Count Moritz Lichnowsky, who accompanied him, Palffy offered Beethoven the Theater an der Wien (whose audience capacity was roughly 50 percent more than the Kärntnertor Theater’s), its orchestra, chorus, lighting, appurtenances, and so forth for 1,000 fl. for the evening, provided that the composer give a second or even third Akademie there. If Beethoven were to raise the seat prices, they reckoned that his income could be over 4,000 fl.— that is, 2,000 from the first concert but 3,000 from the second one, where the expenses of copying the parts would no longer be a factor. On the other hand, Schindler argued, if Beethoven held the concert at the Grosser Redoutensaal, then Duport would take 300 fl.; setting up the stage would cost 300 fl.; and the lighting would cost 300 fl., and so Beethoven would already have 900 fl. invested in it in addition to his other expenses, and all sorts of miscellaneous frustrations. Schindler had even inquired about Schuppanzigh’s serving as concertmaster and Umlauf as conductor, and Palffy seemed willing to allow it, including the displacement of longtime concertmaster Franz Clement,71 for whom Beethoven had composed his Violin Concerto in 1806, but whom he had grown to distrust in the years since then.72 Beethoven must have protested that he needed an orchestra double the size of a normal theater orchestra, and Lichnowsky said that at the Theater an der Wien a smaller orchestra was more effective than a larger one in the Redoutensaal 70 Heft 60, Blätter 2r–2v. This discussion seems to have concerned the score of the Symphony, not the orchestral parts themselves, which would have been copied on fairly standard-sized manuscript paper. 71 Heft 60, Blätter 3r–3v. See Clive, pp. 72–74. 72 Although still as amazingly talented as ever, Clement (b. Vienna, November 17, 1780; d. Vienna, November 3, 1842) had led a bizarre and idiosyncratic career. For details not easily found elsewhere, see Ignaz von Seyfried, “Clement, Franz,” in Gustav Schilling, Encyclopädie … oder Universal-Lexicon der Tonkunst, Vol. 2, pp. 260–261.

40

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

and added that Beethoven should avoid unnecessary expenses. Schindler chimed in that the orchestra of the Theater an der Wien would not cost Beethoven a kreuzer, and then he could supplement it with orchestra members from elsewhere, be it the Kärntnertor Theater or Piringer’s dilettantes from the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. To make a second concert more attractive, Lichnowsky believed that all Beethoven needed to do was compose a new duet for Sontag and Unger to be sung on that occasion. In this context, Schindler asked Beethoven to authorize him and Lichnowsky to negotiate further with Palffy.73 Beethoven probably gave them permission to explore these avenues tentatively, but Schindler seemingly took it as carte blanche: “I’ll speak with Schuppanzigh today at midday, but Lichnowsky is going earlier to see Palffy, to advise him tentatively of your decision.”74 Possibly early that afternoon, Saturday, March 20, nephew Karl announced, “The copyist is here; you made an appointment for him to come.”75 We do not know what Beethoven and Maschek discussed, but the composer must have felt that matters were getting out of control, because he noted in his conversation book that afternoon, “About the concert: Scores [of ] Symphony, Mass, etc. This pell-mell can only be organized through them.”76 Another, possibly related, item on that to-do list was to get “Zmeskall’s metronome from Stein.” Given the amount and complexity of the new music on the upcoming Akademie, not to mention the number of conductors and assistant conductors who might be preparing various components, Beethoven probably felt the need to have a second metronome to supplement or confirm his own in establishing tempos when he could not be present to establish them himself.77 Presumably the next day was a rehearsal of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 6 (“Pastorale”), conducted by the amateur Baron Eduard von Lannoy, for an upcoming Concert spirituel. Lannoy apparently took one of the movements at the wrong tempo, and it seems that Schindler corrected him (possibly using the metronome marks published in the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung in December, 1817),78 and the movement went well the second time.79

73

Heft 60, Blätter 5v–8r. The lowest practical value in Austrian coinage and currency in Beethoven’s time was the kreuzer (sometimes spelled kreutzer). It took 60 kreuzer to equal 1 florin. 74 Heft 60, Blatt 7v. 75 Heft 60, Blatt 8r. 76 Heft 60, Blatt 8r. 77 Beethoven’s role in the actual performance of May 7 has been described as setting the tempo. For a brief discussion of Beethoven’s metronome markings, see Martin Cooper, Beethoven: The Last Decade, pp. 467–468. 78 Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 19, No. 51 (December 17, 1817), cols. 873–875. 79 Heft 60, Blatt 11v.

MID-MARCH: BACK TO WORK

41

On the morning of Sunday, March 21, Schindler came to Beethoven’s apartment and reported that Schuppanzigh was very glad that Beethoven had resolved himself to deal with Palffy and that he [Schuppanzigh] would make use of the theater’s entire orchestra.80 Schuppanzigh had also commented that the choruses at the Theater an der Wien were good, but that the women’s chorus of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde was not the best because it was made up only of young girls.81 Early that afternoon, Sunday, March 21, copyist Paul Maschek visited Beethoven, probably accompanied by at least two of his staff copyists, and seemingly brought at least a portion of a newly copied score, presumably of the Ninth Symphony. He projected that one of the copyists could finish 5 or, at most, 6 bifolium sheets (20–24 pages) per day because he worked very accurately. He projected that it might be finished in two weeks if the Finale (which he evidently had not yet seen) were not too large-scaled. He asked Beethoven if 30 fl. C.M. would not be too much for copying the score. He asked for another movement (perhaps the Scherzo) yet that day, so that the copyists who came with him would have work to do, rather than go their separate ways.82 This surely refers to the copyist’s score that Jonathan Del Mar calls Source “C” and describes as in the hand of one copyist with “a vast amount of revision” in Beethoven’s hand, resulting in “quite a mess,” plus recopied pages by four other copyists.83 Later, on March 23, Schindler, who had been in touch with Gläser, recommended to

80 Schindler will report Schuppanzigh’s saying exactly the opposite on April 24 (Heft 63, Blatt 2r). 81 Heft 60, Blatt 9v. This is corroborated by Felix Weingartner, “Eine Begegnung mit einer Zeitgenossin Beethovens,” Allgemeine Musikzeitung 27 (1900), pp. 7–8. In 1899, Weingartner interviewed a Frau Grebner (age 91), who had been one of the young members of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s chorus. She was probably Helene Görgen (born Vienna, May 27, 1808), the daughter of a prominent physician and later married to Franz von Grebner. Frau Grebner described her fellow female choristers as very young, as well as noting Beethoven’s intensity, his bass voice, and his kindness. She also described seeing him on the streets, looking into various shop windows with his lorgnette. For further details, see chapter 5 under “Tuesday, May 4—Morning.” 82 Heft 60, Blätter 10r–11r. 83 Del Mar, “The Text of the Ninth Symphony,” pp. 110–111. Probably based on the identification of handwriting proposed in the Berlin edition of the Konversationshefte, Del Mar believed that this copyist’s score was largely in the hand of Peter Gläser. It is possible that Maschek’s and Gläser’s work looked similar, but the narrative in the conversation books points to Maschek’s work up to this point, making a transition to Gläser to finish the work shortly afterward (Heft 60, Blätter 18r–18v). Beethoven ultimately sent copyist score “C’ to publisher Schott in Mainz. It was later acquired by the Juilliard School in New York and is available, digitized, through Juilliard Manuscript Collection online.

42

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

Beethoven that he have the Finale copied before all the others, since it involved the vocal parts.84 At about the same time on Sunday, March 21, Schindler and Schuppanzigh attended a rehearsal of the orchestra and chorus of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in the Grosser Redoutensaal. They confirmed that the Verein’s women’s chorus was, in fact, weak, but that the male chorus was sufficiently trained.85 The chorus numbered 20–24 singers per part, and—while observing the orchestra (with its 12 first violins and 12 seconds) in the rehearsal—they chose the 6 best ones to invite to play in Beethoven’s Akademie. When reporting this to Beethoven later that afternoon, Schindler also said that Palffy would be sending his written offer of the Theater an der Wien through Lichnowsky and that he (Palffy) wished that concertmaster Franz Clement would be treated as gently as possible when replacing him with Schuppanzigh. Schindler then went so far as to propose that Schuppanzigh sit as concertmaster for the first performance, while Clement sat principal second violin; and that Clement be restored to the concertmaster’s position, while Schuppanzigh sat principal second for the second performance. As reported by Schindler, this arrangement was evidently agreeable to Schuppanzigh, especially because Ferdinand Piringer (as an official in the Imperial High Commission) would be prevented from participating in a concert at the Theater an der Wien, and Joseph Böhm would be sitting in the inside seat at the first stand.86 Extenuating circumstances notwithstanding, Beethoven probably did not like the idea of alternating Schuppanzigh and Clement as concertmaster, because Schindler felt compelled to present the argument, including Schuppanzigh’s supposed agreement to it, a second time. Since mid-February, Carl Friedrich Hensler, the manager of the Josephstadt Theater, had evidently sent the materials for the Overture to the Consecration of the House to Pressburg, where he also managed the theater. At the same meeting on March 21, Schindler reminded Beethoven to ask Hensler to have the Overture’s performing parts returned to Vienna so they would arrive in good time for the Akademie,87 and the composer did so.88

84

Heft 60, Blätter 18r–18v. At the end of this conversation, Schindler noted that by comparison, the Singing Institute run by Ludwig Schwarzböck (1793–1839) at the Theater an der Wien was in the best condition and that all of its members would participate in Beethoven’s Akademie, if held there. See Heft 60, Blatt 15v. 86 Heft 60, Blätter 11v–13v. 87 Heft 60, Blatt 13v. 88 Anderson, No. 1286; Brandenburg, No. 1800 (accepting the dating of Heft 60 as a week later than posited here). 85

43

COPYIST PETER GLÄSER

Copyist Peter Gläser Probably on the morning of Tuesday, March 23, Schuppanzigh visited Beethoven with the revelation, “We shall probably not be finished [with the copying] by April 8” and, probably after some frustrated shouting back and forth, added, “Send Schindler to see me, so that I can speak with him. I’ll be home until 3:30.”89 Probably later that afternoon, Schindler (who apparently had not seen Schuppanzigh in the meantime) came to Beethoven’s apartment with the Josephstadt Theater’s principal copyist, Peter Gläser (1776–1849)90 in tow. Gläser evidently surveyed the situation, determined how Beethoven wanted the dynamic markings written, and assured him that he would oversee the work for accuracy. He said that the fair copy of the score had to be completed91 and told Beethoven that he would copy the “Quartett” parts first.92 He also reassured Beethoven that he would never have done anything to offend Josepha Schlemmer after her husband, copyist Wenzel, died the previous summer.93 When Gläser left, Schindler seemingly remained at Beethoven’s apartment, following up on the meeting. He noted that the choral parts (presumably of the Missa solemnis) were there, but that the remainder needed to be copied. He said that when he saw Gläser again, later that day (presumably at the Josephstadt Theater), he would ask him if he would be willing to undertake the parts still missing. In any case, he advised Beethoven to have the Finale of the Symphony copied before anything else, so that individual parts could be extracted from it. Maschek’s apartment in the Wieden lay to the distant west, and Schindler still had to get back to the Josephstadt (to the northwest) for the evening’s performance, but he told Beethoven that he would visit Maschek the next day (presumably Wednesday, March 24) to tell him that his services were no longer needed.94 89

Heft 60, Blatt 17r. Like several of his colleagues in the Theater an der Wien of 1801, as well as his own wife, Gläser had been born in Oberleitensdorf, Bohemia. He began at the Theater an der Wien as a trumpeter but probably soon supplemented his income with copying, presumably learned from that theater’s principal copyist, Benjamin Gebauer (1758–1846). By October, 1822, he was copyist at the newly renovated Josephstadt Theater, where his son Franz (1798/1799–1861) was second Kapellmeister. Although seven children (born between ca. 1798 and 1810) survived to adulthood, Gläser and his wife, Elisabeth (ca. 1776–1833), lived apart by 1822. 91 Compare with Jonathan Del Mar’s description of the copyist’s score, Source “C,” in Del Mar, “The Text of the Ninth Symphony” (1993), pp. 110–117; and his Beethoven Symphonie Nr. 9: Critical Commentary (1996/1999). 92 This could be the four string parts to use as models for duplication, but more likely the vocal quartet in the Missa solemnis, because of the reference to Sontag’s part for the Mass, which had already been copied by Thursday, March 25 (Heft 60, Blatt 24v). 93 Heft 60, Blätter 17r–17v. 94 Heft 60, Blätter 18r–18v. 90

44

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

All of these developments ultimately served two functions. They placed the copying of the Ninth Symphony into the hands of an active theater copyist who was accustomed to creating and overseeing a great number of orchestral and vocal parts on a daily basis and who probably had a ready-made cadre of assistants among his theater’s personnel or his family (as Schlemmer had). And they finally gave Schindler a clearly definable role in the preparations for the Akademie: he could help proofread parts and carry the newly generated performance materials back and forth from the Josephstadt to Beethoven’s apartment in the Landstrasse, likewise on a daily basis. As for Beethoven, he started the next day’s list of items to buy with: “Red pencil”!95 Probably after seeing Maschek on Wednesday, March 24, Schindler came to Beethoven’s apartment and advised him that if he was going to have any of Gläser’s copyists working at the apartment, then he should designate a specific place for it, so that all the materials would remain together and so that the copying could be supervised more easily.96 Beethoven probably opted to allow Gläser’s copyists to work in the Josephstadt, rather than come all the way to Landstrasse. Probably later that day, nephew Karl came home and reported seeing “Two large bookcases for sale for 25 fl.” Evidently interested, Beethoven must have asked him where, and Karl replied, “At the book dealer Mayer’s.”97 The bookshop of Jacob Mayer and Co. was located in the Deutsches Haus, Singerstrasse No. 879; in fact, a bookshop remains there even today. It is possible that Beethoven was thinking about buying a bookcase or two to help organize the room that was already full of orchestral parts that Caroline Unger had noted during her visit on March 14, not to mention the additional orchestral and choral parts that would be generated over the next weeks in conjunction with the upcoming Akademie. Early on Thursday, March 25 (the Feast of the Annunciation), Schindler visited Beethoven and asked him to look at the first and second violin parts of the Credo that morning, so he could come and take them with him in the afternoon. He noted that, except for three copies of the violoncello/contrabass part in the Agnus Dei, all the string parts for the Kyrie and Agnus were ready, but that he would take a bassi part for the Agnus with him then, to get it copied. He also asked 95 Heft 60, Blatt 19r, using the term rother Bleystift. Later, he added “inks” to the list (Blatt 20r). The other term often encountered for the former item is Rötel (today Rötelstift), still meaning a red pencil. Many English-speaking musicologists attach great mystery and significance to the word Rötel and croon its first syllable when pronouncing it. In fact, Beethoven in 1823–1824 used a red (or red-orange) pencil for essentially the same purposes that we do today—no mystery about it. Beethoven would remind himself again (“red pencils”) on April 9, noted below. Conductor Michael Umlauf used a red pencil at the rehearsals too. 96 Heft 60, Blatt 19v. 97 Heft 60, Blatt 21r.

COPYIST PETER GLÄSER

45

Beethoven for the Finale of the Symphony (presumably the working copy of the score) to take with him then, but it is not certain whether he got it.98 At the customary “noon hour” (12:30 p.m.), there was a holiday theatrical benefit concert, presumably at the Grosser Redoutensaal, with readings by the popular actors Ferdinand Esslair and Heinrich Anschütz, and possibly compositions by Franz Krommer and Beethoven, with Schuppanzigh playing violin and Schindler conducting. Nephew Karl attended and later came home, bringing Schindler and Schuppanzigh with him. Brother Johann had probably left for Linz and his newly acquired estate at Gneixendorf (near Krems, roughly 40 miles up the Danube from Vienna), shortly after March 10,99 without having reserved a hall for the Akademie. “I already told your brother two weeks ago that reserving the date was the first thing to do,” Schuppanzigh complained to Beethoven, adding that the time was too short.100 In fact, on March 13, Johann had applied to the High Chamberlain’s Office (Obersthofmeisteramt), but his application was for the Redoutensaal (which one was not specified) on the evening of April 7.101 Despite Beethoven’s attempts to get the newly copied performance materials to the vocal soloists, details sometimes went awry. Karl reported, “Schindler gave Sontag’s part for the Mass to one of the orchestra members to take to her, but instead he took it home with him.” Schindler protested, “I really didn’t have any time.” Even with Schindler present, Schuppanzigh could not resist taunting him a bit: “Schindler is a strange director; he beats time poorly.” On a more positive note, Karl reported, “Krommer asked Schuppanzigh what else would be on the Akademie.”102 Therefore it becomes clear that both public and professionals were looking forward to hearing Beethoven’s newest works. Probably in early-to-midafternoon on Friday, March 26, Schindler was back at Beethoven’s apartment, asking for the score of the third movement of the Symphony: “Please give me the Andante103 for Gläser; I’ve promised to hand it to him personally by 5 o’clock; the string section parts as well, if you are finished.”

98

Heft 60, Blätter 22v–24r. Johann’s most recent entries in the conversation books were made on March 10 (Heft 59, Blätter 4v–6r). 100 Heft 60, Blatt 24r. 101 See Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 348. This accounts for Anderson, No. 1272 (March 21, noting that a concert for April 7 had been denied but asking for the Grosser Redoutensaal at noon on April 8), and No. 1273 (asking for the Grosser Redoutensaal on the evening of April 8). 102 Heft 60, Blätter 24r–25r. 103 This surely means the whole slow third movement, rather than just the section of it specifically marked “Andante moderato.” 99

46

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

As he left, Schindler asked Beethoven to proofread the other parts, so he could take them and two remaining solo parts the next day.104 Shortly afterward, Beethoven made an annotation for himself: “Have the Mass [parts] sewn in binding as soon as the trombones are added.”105 This does not imply that Beethoven composed the trombone parts after everything else was written106 but instead that the trombone parts were often included on sheets separate from the basic orchestration because they played only infrequently. Nephew Karl came home in midafternoon of Friday, March 26, and evidently started to help Beethoven with the proofreading. Probably reading through the score or parts to the second movement, with its prominent timpani part written for Anton Hudler, Karl commented, “The timpanist will think to himself: ‘He owes me a dinner.’”107 Karl then reminded Beethoven about the remainder of the parts and that Schindler needed to take one first violin part for the Kyrie with him for duplication. At this point in the conversation books, among nephew Karl’s entries probably made during the evening of Friday, March 26, Schindler later entered a conversation that, although falsified, must have reflected an authentic conversation that took place during the copying of or rehearsals for the beginning of the Finale of the Symphony. In it, Schindler asks Beethoven how many contrabasses were to play the recitatives, and Beethoven replies that all of them should. Schindler continues, “There is no difficulty if it’s strictly in tempo, but to perform them in a singing manner will cost a great deal of work during rehearsals.” Beethoven evidently replied that the recitatives needed to be in a singing style, to which Schindler replies, “If old Grams were still alive, one could let them go without worry, because he led 12 basses who had to do what he wanted.”108 104 Heft 60, Blätter 26v–27r. The solo parts were the tenor and bass for the Mass movements; see Heft 60, Blatt 33v. 105 Heft 60, Blatt 28r. 106 Some writers mistakenly continue to assert this concerning the first performance of Beethoven’s Christ on the Mount of Olives in April, 1803. See Theodore Albrecht, “Hyperbole and High Drama: The Chronology and First Performance of Beethoven’s Oratorio Christus am Ölberge, Op. 85,” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 13 (2022), pp. 10–63. 107 Heft 60, Blatt 29r. The term was Mittagmahl. As noted elsewhere, Beethoven had invited clarinettist Joseph Friedlowsky for dinner and, seemingly on May 20, 1824, after the premiere of the Ninth Symphony, would make a note to himself to invite choral director Ignaz Dirzka to dinner (see Heft 68, Blatt 9r). 108 Heft 60, Blatt 30v. Schindler found this page essentially blank (except for one reminder to buy vinegar) after Beethoven’s death and re-created this conversation, spelling Grams’s name phonetically as “Krams.” It basically confirms what is indicated in the printed score: that the passages for the violoncello and contrabass sections alone should be played as if a sung recitative, but in tempo. Even so, it allows for certain subtle modifications of the tempo reflecting the context of the passages and musicianship of the conductor and executants. The fact that Schindler invokes Anton Grams’s name

COPYIST PETER GLÄSER

47

In the early afternoon of Saturday, March 27 (in time to have dinner at ca. 2 p.m.), Schindler brought some materials from Gläser and assured Beethoven that everything had been copied up to the first violin part of the Credo. He noted that the copying work that Gläser himself did was certainly good, but that he was not strict enough with his assistants. Collectively, they had done things that produced the quickest results, but now they would take greater care with the remainder of the parts. Schindler also had made an appointment to see Duport at the Kärntnertor Theater that afternoon at 5 o’clock, possibly to tell him about Palffy’s offer of the Theater an der Wien for the Akademie. He also asked Beethoven whether he had decided to have Umlauf or Weigl as conductor, and Beethoven probably assured him of Umlauf. When he left Beethoven’s apartment, Schindler took with him the solo parts for the tenor Jäger and the bass Preisinger.109 Later that afternoon, Gläser himself appeared at Beethoven’s apartment with the fair copy of the Finale to the Symphony, ready for Beethoven’s inspection. He noted that in the clarinets, there were three bars that were not orchestrated and that he was reluctant to write them as “unison.” In fact, he may have been referring to the passage, just before the March, where the clarinets lay out of “und der Cherub steht vor Gott” long enough to change their pieces de rechange from A to B-flat. He also noted that the trombones were not clear at “Seid umschlungen” (Andante maestoso), and so they made a supplemental annotation to what today is pp. 341–342 of the working score to clarify what the trombones were to play. Gläser also brought a string part (presumably to a movement of the Missa solemnis) and asked Beethoven to proofread it so that he could take it with him to have it duplicated. He noted that the basic string parts (presumably of the first three movements of the Symphony) were finished, and that the Harmonie would be finished by the next day (Sunday, March 28). He asked how many times the choral parts needed to be copied and said that he needed to keep his copyists busy, and therefore could have them copy the parts just as efficiently and just as cheaply as having the Lithographic Institute print and duplicate them.110 Late the next morning, Sunday, March 28, Schindler came to Beethoven’s apartment to report that he had seen Duport, who had no difficulties in accommodating Beethoven’s wishes, and that he would write to Beethoven yet that

here means that Beethoven must have openly lamented his death on May 18, 1823, on at least one occasion. Grams was reputed as a fine section leader, and it was because of that virtuosity and leadership that Beethoven could compose the rushing passages for violoncellos and contrabasses in the trio of the third movement of the Fifth Symphony, premiered at the Theater an der Wien (where Grams was then principal bassist) on December 22, 1808. Thus these “falsified” entries have a demonstrable air of authenticity. 109 Heft 60, Blätter 31v–33v. 110 Heft 60, Blatt 34r–35r.

48

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

day.111 Schindler also brought the news that the new Königstädtisches Theater in Berlin, even before it opened, had experienced administrative difficulties, and its director, Heinrich Bethmann, had resigned.112 If Beethoven were still harboring any ideas about an easier venue for the premiere of the Ninth Symphony (which he almost surely was not by this time), Berlin was closed for the foreseeable future. Schindler and nephew Karl then set out for a concert by the young violinist Léon de Saint-Lubin, “solo player” of the Josephstadt Theater, to be held in the hall of the Lower Austrian Landstand at 12:30 p.m., and, afterward, stayed long enough to hear part of a rehearsal of an upcoming Concert spirituel, with a program devoted entirely to Beethoven’s works, with amateur violinist Ferdinand Piringer conducting. Schindler also reported that Sontag and Unger were there, in a different room, rehearsing for a concert at Court on Tuesday, March 30. Beethoven had asked Schindler to relay his apologies for not being more hospitable when they visited on March 14, and Schindler said that they accepted the apologies graciously. Schindler repeated his excuse that he had not known until the morning of the dinner that Sontag could come, and then finally conveyed the message that it was a salad that she had eaten at home that night that had made her sick, and not Beethoven’s wine. On another bittersweet note, Schindler had seen Stephan Franz (1785–1855), a violinist in the Hofkapelle, who told him that the Tonkünstler-Societät was considering obtaining Beethoven’s Missa solemnis as its exclusive property but evidently had no honorarium to do so.113 For a quarter-century, the TonkünstlerSocietät had frequently performed Haydn’s Die Schöpfung and Die Jahreszeiten (in the early days under the direction, or at least protection, of Antonio Salieri) on its Lenten and Advent benefit concerts. At least in 1803 and 1808, Salieri had made Beethoven’s life miserable for holding benefit concerts of his own on those days. And now the Tonkünstler-Societät possibly wanted a potentially profitable work of Beethoven’s to add to Haydn’s but did not have any honorarium to pay. Fortunately, this matter seems to have developed no further than this discussion of March 28. At midday dinner the next day, Monday, March 29, Beethoven must have shown nephew Karl the letter from Duport of Sunday, where it presumably offered Beethoven the Kleiner (Small) Redoutensaal instead of the Grosser (Large)

111 In

his letter, Duport evidently offered the Kleiner, rather than the Grosser Redoutensaal for a repeat concert. For Beethoven’s reaction, see March 29 or 30 (Heft 60, Blätter 41r–43r) below. 112 Heft 60, Blätter 35v–36r. In fact, Bethmann had been dismissed and a committee of four actors installed in his place. By the time that the theater opened on August 4, 1824, its director was Karl Friedrich Carl, who remained until his death in 1845. 113 Heft 60, Blätter 36r–38v.

COPYIST PETER GLÄSER

49

for the repeat of his Akademie.114 Since most private concerts were on a smaller scale and took place in the Kleiner Redoutensaal, and since Schindler had reported that Duport understood Beethoven’s needs, Karl reasoned that Duport’s wording must have been a mistake. Karl also reported that Tobias Haslinger had advised that, with the proofreading’s taking so much time, Beethoven should postpone the Akademie until shortly after Easter (April 18–19 in 1824), so that the necessary rehearsals could be held at a more advantageous time. Haslinger also told Karl that Count Moritz Lichnowsky came to Steiner’s (and Haslinger’s) music shop in the Paternostergässchen (northeast corner of the Graben) every morning after 9:30 and talked about nothing other than Beethoven’s upcoming Akademie.115 After dinner, however, a visitor who was expected at 2 p.m. did not come, and so Beethoven probably sat Karl down to help him draft an excited reply116 to Duport’s offer of the Kleiner Redoutensaal, in which he hyperbolically concluded that he would give no concert.117 While Beethoven probably did not finalize the letter or send it, the draft itself is instructive, because it indicates that Beethoven was realistically concerned that the admission income from a larger hall was necessary to offset his expenses of at least 600 fl. for copying and 4,500 fl. for the authorities, plus the costs of a great number of performers.118 By Wednesday, March 31, brother Johann had returned from his business trip to Linz and Gneixendorf and reacted angrily to the accusation (made by Schuppanzigh on March 25) that he had left without making arrangements to secure the Kärntnertor Theater: “That is an infamous lie; I went to see him [manager Duport] two times.” In comparing Beethoven’s financial prospects with those elsewhere, he added, “In Paris, [violinist Joseph] Böhm had to give half of his proceeds to the theater.” Johann further noted that if Beethoven did not have a piano score (presumably of the new works), Carl Czerny could make one.119 114 Duport’s

letter itself seems not to have survived. 60, Blätter 39v–40r. 116 Heft 60, Blätter 41r–44r. 117 The draft letter is found in Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 352 (in English), and Brandenburg, Briefwechsel, No. 1798 (in the original French). 118 While the orchestra and chorus of the Kärntnertor Theater would have been included in any agreed-upon fee for the use of the theater for the first concert and the Redoutensaal for the second, Beethoven was also calculating that he would have to pay the soloists plus any additional professional orchestral personnel (clarinettist Friedlowsky from the Theater and der Wien, possibly dismissed hornists Hradetzky and Starke, and the dismissed contrabassist Melzer, plus others from the Burgtheater, and so forth) who had not volunteered to play for free. In 1814, the fee for each separately contracted musician had been 3 fl. for the concert itself and 2 fl. for each rehearsal (see Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181). By 1824, the fee might have risen by at least 1 or 2 fl. per service. 119 Heft 60, Blätter 45v–46r. Reflecting his Rhenish origins and pronunciation, Johann spelled Böhm’s name as Behm. This also suggests that Johann and Böhm may have 115 Heft

50

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

Word was getting out about Beethoven’s plans for an Akademie and even the music to be performed on it. On March 31, Franz Schubert wrote to his friend Leopold Kupelwieser, then in Rome, “The latest in Vienna is that Beethoven is to give a concert at which he is to produce his new Symphony, three movements from the new Mass, and a new Overture.”120 Significantly, Schubert did not hint at any complete performance of the Missa solemnis. Probably on the late morning of Thursday, April 1, Schindler visited Beethoven and told him that Government Councillor Joseph von Sonnleithner (1766–1835), the original German librettist of Fidelio in 1804–1805, had come to see him at the Josephstadt Theater and believed that Beethoven should ask the Court musical administrator, Count Moritz Dietrichstein (1775–1864), to give him the Burgtheater for a midday concert, before the concert scaffolding was taken down on Easter Monday, April 19, for a ball.121 Schindler also lamented that Piringer had not sent Beethoven complimentary tickets to that day’s Concert spirituel at the Landstand, consisting of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 6 (“Pastorale”), Credo from the Mass in C, Overture to Coriolan, and the Trio and choruses from Christ on the Mount of Olives.122 In Piringer’s defense, however, he probably knew that Beethoven would not have attended anyway. Probably later that day (Thursday, April 1), Beethoven made a note to himself that the bass trombone part was missing from the copied materials he had received

discussed Johann’s reported plan to drive Schindler off after the Akademie and possibly to replace him as secretary with the semiliterate Böhm. See Heft 66, Blätter 14r–14v. Johann’s reported original was ausbazen, ausbeitzen, Viennese expression for “fortjagen”—to chase off, drive off, expel, kick out. See Julius Jakob, Wörterbuch des Wiener Dialektes (Leipzig/ Vienna, 1929), p. 28. 120 Otto Erich Deutsch, ed., The Schubert Reader: A Life of Franz Schubert in Letters and Documents, trans. Eric Blom (New York: W.W. Norton, 1947), p. 339. The British edition appeared under the title Schubert: A Documentary Biography. Deutsch’s century-old German original is most recently represented by Schubert: Die Dokumente seines Lebens, rev. 1964 (Wiesbaden: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1996), p. 235. An earlier translation of the letter appeared in Otto Erich Deutsch, ed. Franz Schubert’s Letters, and Other Writings, trans. Venetia Savile (London: Faber & Gwyer, 1928; repr. New York: Vienna House, 1974), p. 80. Both the Savile and the Blom translations are fine; the Blom marginally better. 121 Two Beethoven letters survive, one to Dietrichstein, the other to Prince Ferdinand von Trauttmannsdorf, though seemingly earlier in March, asking for the Grosser Redoutensaal on April 7 or, failing that, April 8. See Anderson, Nos. 1272 and 1273; Brandenburg, Nos. 1791 and 1795. Later that afternoon, nephew Karl said that he thought that the Burgtheater was better (Blatt 48v). 122 Heft 60, Blatt 47v.

COPYIST PETER GLÄSER

51

and that one of Gläser’s copyists liked to make slurs (or ligatures) where none existed.123 Unfortunately, Beethoven’s conversation book that must have been filled between Friday, April 2, and Wednesday, April 7, is missing,124 but, with help from other sources, we can place at least a few activities within this period. As noted above, on March 29, Haslinger had sent advice that Beethoven should postpone the concert until after Easter (April 18–19), rather than trying to press for April 8. In light of the delays and external interference, Beethoven probably now realized that such a delay was the best solution. With it, he had time to vent his frustration, while he himself considered which of the many options to follow. Therefore, he wrote individual brief, but undated, notes to: Lichnowsky: “I despise treachery. Visit me no more. There will be no Akademie.”125 Schuppanzigh: “He [= You] shall visit me no more. I am not giving an Akademie.”126 Schindler: “I request you not to come again until I send for you. The Akademie will not take place.”127 These three notes have been famous in the literature since Schindler included them in his Biographie.128 Like the concluding passages of Beethoven’s draft letter to Duport of ca. March 29, they all include the hyperbolic threat to cancel the concert. And—like that draft to Duport—they were probably never sent.129 It is much more likely that, once his frustrations subsided after April 1, Beethoven settled back into practical preparations for the Akademie. On April 4, through the French embassy in Vienna, he received a gold medal from King 123 Heft

60, Blatt 47v. unresolved inconsistency in dating Heft 60 could place Blatt 15v on ca. March 29, with the following entries extending perhaps through April 6 or 7. 125 Schindler-MacArdle, p. 278; Brandenburg, No. 1803; Anderson, No. 1283; Beethoven-Haus Bonn, NE 67. 126 Schindler-MacArdle, p. 278; Brandenburg, No. 1801; Anderson, No. 1279; Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, aut. 36,78. 127 Schindler-MacArdle, p. 278; Brandenburg, No. 1802; Anderson, No. 1282; Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, aut 36.63. 128 By the time Schindler published the three notes in the third edition of his Biographie in 1860, the two other nominal recipents, Schuppanzigh and Lichnowsky, were both dead, so they could not confirm or deny that they had received such a missive from the composer. This brings to mind two other “letters” in Beethoven’s possession when he died—the Heiligenstadt Testament and the letter to the Immortal Beloved—and the question of whether they, too, were ever seen by their nominal recipients. 129 Two of the three autographs are in the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, among the materials received from Schindler; the other is recently acquired by the Beethoven-Haus Bonn through unknown early provenance. 124 An

52

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

Louis XVIII, and on ca. April 8, he wrote to the Austrian Imperial Court, belatedly asking for permission to accept a diploma from the Royal Swedish Musical Academy that he had already received early in 1823.130 These honors represented the kinds of external validation that he probably needed to forge ahead with those preparations. On the afternoon of April 8, the Thursday before Palm Sunday, there was another of Piringer’s Concerts spirituels at the Landständischer Saal, featuring works by Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven. It is perhaps fortunate that Beethoven’s hope to schedule his own Akademie on that evening went unfulfilled; otherwise, there might have been unintentional competition between the events. Although Beethoven did not attend the Concert spirituel on April 8, nephew Karl did, but before leaving noted that once the Symphony had been sent to London (and Ferdinand Ries), it could be recopied on fine vellum paper and sent, with a dedication, to the king of France.131 Therefore, having recently received the gold medal from King Louis XVIII, Beethoven was now considering dedicating the Symphony to him. After the Concert spirituel, Schindler came to visit, followed shortly by Schuppanzigh. In discussing publicity for Beethoven’s upcoming Akademie, Schuppanzigh said that someone had told him that the censor would not allow the titles “Credo” and “Agnus Dei” to be placed on the theater’s Zettel (playbill). Schindler added that the French had allowed it since 1809.132 Napoleon had done a great deal to secularize and modernize France as an extension of the Enlightenment, but Emperor Franz’s regime since 1792 had stubbornly retained as many of the old practices as it could. Beethoven might even have expressed just this as he replied verbally to his visitors. Continuing his advocacy for the Theater an der Wien as the Akademie’s location, Schindler told Beethoven that he should write to Wilhelm Vogel (1772–1843), the theater’s business manager, stating that he accepted Palffy’s conditions and wished to have April 22 (the Thursday after Easter) as the date for the concert. Schuppanzigh added that Beethoven also needed to write to conductor Michael Umlauf to confirm his participation in the Akademie, and Schindler said that the Theater an der Wien’s principal conductor, Ignaz von Seyfried, was in such poor health that he would not raise any objections. At the same time, Schuppanzigh cautioned that in rejecting Duport’s offer of the Kärntnertor Theater or the Redoutensaal, Beethoven needed to handle Duport “very gently and courteously, because he can make things hellacious for us.”133 Schuppanzigh liked to use the word “hellacious” (höllisch). Indeed, Beethoven must have written such a conciliatory letter to Duport, because on Saturday, April 130 See

Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, Nos. 353 and 354. 61, Blatt 2v. 132 Heft 61, Blatt 4r. 133 Heft 61, Blätter 4r–5r. 131 Heft

53

COPYIST PETER GLÄSER

10, Schindler reported that he had twice tried unsuccessfully to find Duport on Friday and so ultimately had left it at the Kärntnertor Theater’s office with the request that he reply soon.134 The next day, Friday, April 9, nephew Karl was looking over the score of the Finale, where the text reads, “über Sternen muss er wohnen” (He must dwell above the stars), and he commented to Beethoven about the way that “über Sternen” (above the stars) would be accented in spoken declamation. Beethoven then explained to him, using musical examples, how and why he had set the Albrecht chapter 2 example (a) passage—one of the few times when Beethoven provided details of his own 135 compositional process.

     Albrecht chapter 2 example (b)   über

 über

über





Sternen





Albrecht Sternen chapter 2 example (c) 

Ste



 rnen 

He also added another reminder to buy “red pencils.”136 That night, brother Johann took Karl to see François-Adrien Boieldieu’s opera Johann von Paris at the Theater in der Josephstadt. While there, Karl visited Gläser, saw several copyists at work, and reported this visible industry to Beethoven when he returned home that night. Karl also complained to Beethoven that as part of his own proofreading activities, he was spending a great deal of time entering the articulation markings. He called proofreading “damnable work!”137 Beethoven seems not to have received the parts for the Overture to Consecration of the House yet and, seemingly on the morning of Saturday, April 10, made a note to himself to get them. He also noted that the three movements from the Missa solemnis would have to be called “3 Hymns” and, without noting their titles, called them Hymn 1, Hymn 2, and Hymn 3.138

134 Heft

61, Blatt 10v. 61, Blatter 5v–6v. 136 This time plural: Rothe Bleystifte; see Heft 61, Blatt 6v. For an earlier appearance on a shopping list see March 24, 1824, above. 137 Heft 61, Blätter 6v–7r. 138 Heft 61, Blätter 7v–8r. 135 Heft

54

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

By that afternoon, Schindler had gone to see Wilhelm Vogel at the Theater an der Wien, and he now met Beethoven over refreshments and newspapers at a coffee house. Vogel had confirmed that titles of Mass movements could not be used. Vogel also told him that because they were rehearsing for Die Gaben des eisernen Königs (The Gifts of the Iron King), a complicated theatrical production set to premiere on Saturday, April 24, Beethoven could not have the theater until after that date. Schindler said that Beethoven ought to go on Monday and persuade Vogel to postpone the theatrical piece until Monday, April 26, so that he could have Saturday, April 24, for his Akademie.139 Beethoven must have felt increasingly uncomfortable with Schindler’s presumptuousness and pressures for him to act contrary to his original plans of premiering the Ninth Symphony at the Kärntnertor Theater. Reading the day’s issue of the Wiener Zeitung’s Intelligenzblatt, Beethoven momentarily considered a summer apartment in Breitensee140 and asked Schindler’s opinion. Schindler’s extreme reaction is worth quoting verbatim: “Do you know how Breitensee is situated? // You would die of boredom in Breitensee. // All around it, no shade for at least the distance of a half hour’s walk, and also not much in the village itself. In this respect, Penzing is decidedly preferable. // Not the way it is in Hietzing.”141 Ultimately, Beethoven went to Penzing for the first part of the summer of 1824, and Breitensee today is a tree-filled western suburb of Vienna. In the conversation books there is almost no record of Beethoven’s attending church services on Sunday mornings, and Palm Sunday, April 11, was no exception. At about 9 o’clock, Schindler arrived to pick up materials that Beethoven had been proofreading. Evidently, Gläser was still working on the score to the Finale, and so the format for the “supplement” (presumably the auxiliary percussion instruments and possibly even the trombones) was in question to avoid crowding on the page. Evidently, one of Gläser’s assistants was planning to come a half or three-quarters of an hour later, after a rehearsal at the Josephstadt Theater, but if not, then Schindler said that he himself would return later to see Beethoven. Beethoven had evidently written a letter to Clement, concertmaster at the Theater an der Wien, asking him to defer to Schuppanzigh if the Akademie were held there, and had asked Schindler to deliver it. Schindler now told Beethoven that he had not spoken to either Clement or Vogel about it, and that he did not want to deliver the letter to Clement personally, because he did not want to have to hear his comments about it. There was also some confusion concerning the whereabouts of the orchestral parts to the Overture to the Consecration of the House, and Schindler said that

139 Heft

61, Blätter 9r–10v. Nr. 83 (April 10, 1824), S. 604. The address was Breitensee No. 15. 141 Heft 61, Blatt 11r. 140 Intelligenzblatt,

COPYIST PETER GLÄSER

55

he would ask the Josephstadt manager Hensler about it and go looking for them himself. Meanwhile, Schindler asked that Beethoven write a letter to Dr. Franz Sartori (1782–1832), supervisor of the Central Book Revision Office (the censor’s office), for permission to perform movements from the Missa solemnis under the title Hymns. Schindler assured Beethoven that he knew Sartori personally, and that he could pick the letter up for delivery the next morning (Monday, April 12).142 Evidently nephew Karl had attended Mass on Palm Sunday morning and, that afternoon, told Beethoven that the day before, Piringer had sent out the written invitation to the dilettantes to participate in the Akademie. Beethoven needed constant reassurance that in Rossini-mad Vienna enough people would come to hear a German composer’s work. Karl told him that since he had recently received a gold medal from French King Louis XVIII, the Austrian Court would be curious and that the public would attend just to hear music by someone who had been honored in this way.143 They went on a walk and evidently stopped by the Theater an der Wien so Beethoven could look over the audience area once more. Karl commented that the theater had a great number of loges, that all of them would be occupied, and that Beethoven would earn more income than in the Redoutensaal.144 They walked farther around the outer edge of the Glacis and up the hill at Kaiserstrasse (today’s Josefstädter Strasse) to the Theater in der Josephstadt, and there met with Gläser. He told Beethoven that he would be receiving an unbelievable amount of copying work the next morning, presumably because of Easter, a week away. Even so, he said that copying the score of the Finale would be finished in a week. He specified Easter Monday, April 19, seemingly for the score, but could not give a precise prediction about when the parts would be ready. While Beethoven was there, though, Gläser took the opportunity to ask him questions about details in the working autograph of the Finale’s score. Was the bass soloist’s entry an unmeasured recitative or should it go in rhythm? Gläser advised having textual underlay for all the wind parts, to assure correct entrances. When changing from clarinets in A to clarinets in B-flat at the alla Marcia (the “Turkish music,” as Gläser termed it), Beethoven had inadvertently left an inappropriate flat sign in their line, so Gläser asked for a clarification. Gläser said that he was bad on his feet and always had to take a carriage for long distances; therefore, he would send his maid to bring materials to Beethoven the next day.145 The next morning, Monday, April 12, Schindler and Lichnowsky visited Vogel, the business manager at the Theater an der Wien. He told them that the 142 Heft 61, Blätter 14r–14v. Beethoven’s letter to Clement has not survived. His undated letter to Sartori appears as Anderson, No. 1278, and Brandenburg, No. 1810. 143 Heft 61, Blätter 15v–18r. 144 Heft 61, Blatt 19v. 145 Heft 61, Blätter 20r–22v.

56

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

theater’s treasury was empty and that its hopes were riding on income from Die Gaben des eisernen Königs that would be premiered on Saturday, April 24. Vogel believed that the theater’s chorus could prepare Beethoven’s works within four days of efficient rehearsal and therefore said that Beethoven’s Akademie could take place as early as April 27 or 28. While Vogel preferred to arrange with the censor’s office for the necessary permissions, he believed that Beethoven had to deal with replacing concertmaster Clement. When Schindler reported all this to Beethoven, shortly thereafter, he said that he would deliver Beethoven’s letter to Clement yet that day.146 After running a few more errands in the City, Schindler returned to Beethoven’s apartment early that afternoon to say that alto Caroline Unger was very enthusiastic about her part and would come out with bass Joseph Preisinger (1792–1865) to visit Beethoven later. Schindler reported that she was having difficulties with her part and wanted to ask Beethoven’s advice.147 Beethoven and Schindler then went to dinner and, after that, to a nearby coffee house to read the newspapers but left word with the maid to come and get them when Unger arrived. In midafternoon, she and Preisinger came to visit. She brought along her part for the Mass movements and thought there might be some mistakes, so she asked to look at the score. She hoped that she might try to sing it a bit, but there are no further details in the conversation books. Preisinger, who was also a pianist, played a theme on the piano, and Unger asked Beethoven to improvise on it. We cannot be sure, but Beethoven probably declined to do so.148 Now Unger told Beethoven that she would be attending the second of the Tonkünstler-Societät’s benefit performances of Haydn’s Die Jahreszeiten (The Seasons) that evening. She noted that soprano Sontag, tenor Barth, and bass Seipelt would be singing and that Umlauf would conduct, and she asked Beethoven to join her in her loge. Beethoven declined, but Unger confided to him a bit of local politics, with which the composer could identify: Preisinger came from a wealthy family, was intended for the banking profession, and, in fact, had been a clerk in the National Bank before joining the Kärntnertor Theater in January, 1824. As Unger now told Beethoven, Preisinger was originally to have sung the bass solos for these performances of Die Jahreszeiten in the Burgtheater (the Tonkünstler-Societät’s customary venue), but Duport did not want him to sing there, and so he “became ill” in order to withdraw and to accommodate Duport. Unger said that she would be true to Beethoven’s banner forever and that no one could persuade her to be untrue. Unger commented, “In the long run, who is he [Duport], really?” Beethoven must have replied that 146 Heft 61, Blätter 23r–24r. See Clement’s reaction to the letter, reported in Heft 61, Blatt 30v. 147 Heft 61, Blätter 24v–25r. 148 Heft 61, Blatt 28r.

COPYIST PETER GLÄSER

57

Duport was an administrator reputed to be willful and capricious, and Unger concluded, “Blame it on the fact that he was a dancer.”149 For Beethoven, however, this political news might have been instructive and cautionary. Even though he had originally negotiated with Duport for the Kärntneror Theater for his Akademie, Schindler and Lichnowsky were now negotiating for the Theater an der Wien at possibly a better price. If they succeeded, would Duport, out of spite, refuse to allow Sontag and Unger to sing for Beethoven at the Theater an der Wien? His fears would not have been unfounded: in December, 1808, Salieri had threatened that anyone who performed at Beethoven’s Akademie at the Theater an der Wien, rather than at his Tonkünstler-Societät’s concert at the Burgtheater, would be expelled.150 Later that afternoon, after Unger and Preisinger had left, Schindler reminded Beethoven to write a second note to Leopold Sonnleithner, inviting the choruses of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde to participate. He also noted that Ludwig Schwarzböck, choral director at the Theater an der Wien, hoped that his boys’ chorus might get their parts that coming week so he could get right to work with them.151 On Palm Sunday, probably as speculative thought, nephew Karl had briefly discussed with Beethoven the self-publication of the Symphony by subscription, much as he was already doing with the Missa solemnis.152 Beethoven now explored the idea with Schindler, who said that the complete score would have to be lithographed.153 Schuppanzigh visited Beethoven, probably on the morning of Tuesday, April 13, and reported that Clement was said to have been infuriated by Beethoven’s letter asking him to defer to Schuppanzigh. He had learned that the tenor Franz Jäger had turned down the solo part, saying that it lay too low for him. He reminded Beethoven that Sonnleithner needed another invitation for the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s choral singers and had also asked how many choral singers there usually were at the Theater an der Wien. He also confirmed that Schwarzböck needed the choral parts soon, because the boys learned only with great difficulty. Similarly, he reminded Beethoven to get the parts to the

149 Heft 61, Blätter 28v–29r. The next day, Schindler confirmed to Beethoven Unger’s (and Preisinger’s) resolve to sing, even if it made Duport angry (Heft 61, Blatt 32v). 150 On January 7, 1809, Beethoven had lamented this to Breitkopf und Härtel in Leipzig (see Anderson, No. 192; Brandenburg, No. 350). Many earlier writers have dismissed this complaint as unwarranted paranoia on Beethoven’s part, but a closer examination for a historical pattern suggests that Salieri had disapproved of Mozart’s Advent and Lenten concerts for similar reasons. 151 Heft 61, Blätter 29r–29v. 152 Heft 61, Blatt 15v. 153 Heft 61, Blätter 29v–30r.

58

PETITION, PREPARATIONS, COPYING

Overture to the Consecration of the House from Hensler because it was better to have them in hand than having to worry about getting them. Schuppanzigh further noted that it would be good if they could hold a “quartet” rehearsal at the end of that week—probably meaning the string section leaders rather than the vocal quartet, because he added that it would be good if the copyist could give Beethoven those parts earlier.154 Already on March 5, nephew Karl had told Beethoven that Schuppanzigh had done more for him than his other advisers,155 and it becomes apparent here that Schuppanzigh’s logistical advice was as consistently sound as any that Beethoven was receiving. Schindler also visited Beethoven on April 13, bringing news that tenor Jäger had changed his mind and could sing at the Akademie if it was not on April 22. Schuppanzigh had also told Schindler that he believed that Anna Wranitzky (1801–1851) should sing soprano and Joseph Seipelt bass, but that there was presently no good alto in Vienna.156 Probably later that same day, violinist Ferdinand Piringer, who would be in charge of contacting the dilettantes, visited Beethoven to ask if he knew when the first rehearsal would take place. Presumably Beethoven did not. And possibly the next day, Wednesday, April 14, Schuppanzigh visited to ask about the progress in copying the individual parts, adding, “Is everything all copied out already?”157 This seems to indicate that Beethoven told him that the parts were finished or nearly so.

154 Heft

61, Blatter 30v–31v. 57, Blatt 34r. 156 Heft 61, Blätter 32v–34r. Anna Catharina Wranitzky was the daughter of Anton Wranitzky (1761–1820), Prince Lobkowitz’s concertmaster, for whom Beethoven wrote the violin part in the Triple Concerto in 1804. She was a member of the Kärntnertor Theater by 1821. See Albrecht, “‘Mit Verstärkung des Orchesters,’” pp. 161–202. 157 Heft 61, Blätter 34v–36v. 155 Heft

Chapter 3

Finding a Location Threatening Clouds on the Horizon As Beethoven may have feared several days earlier, Duport, the resident manager of the Kärntnertor Theater, must have assumed that Beethoven would give his Akademie there1 and seems to have threatened reprisals if soprano Henriette Sontag and mezzo soprano Caroline Unger sang with Beethoven if he held it at the Theater an der Wien.2 Probably during the afternoon of Maundy Thursday, April 15, 1824, Schindler came to Beethoven’s apartment at the corner of Ungargasse and Bockgasse (today’s Beatrixgasse) and reported briefly, “Unger is quite indignant about Duport. Both girls [Unger and Sontag] are going together to see him today. She doesn’t doubt a successful outcome.”3 Nephew Karl commented that in public, Duport always spoke highly of Beethoven and that he was curious to learn what he would say to the girls.4 But Beethoven had never felt comfortable with Count Palffy, the current owner of the Theater an der Wien. Possibly encouraged by the publishers Steiner and Haslinger, whose shop in the Paternoster Gässchen he visited frequently, the composer started exploring the feasibility of holding his Akademie on Sunday, April 25, at the relatively small Landständischer Saal, where he could employ a composite orchestra drawn from the Kärntnertor Theater, the Burgtheater, and the Theater an der Wien, all under Ignaz Schuppanzigh as concertmaster, the way he had in the Aula of the University of Vienna and the Grosser Redoutensaal in 1813–1814. Again, nephew Karl chuckled, “Count [Moritz] Lichnowsky is really an old lady. He chanced to learn from your brother your decision to give the Akademie in the Landständischer Saal. He lamented terribly about the enmity that Palffy is developing toward you.” That evening, Count Lichnowsky arrived with a carriage and invited Beethoven, with Schindler in tow, to spend the evening at his apartment in the Bauernmarkt, 1

For Beethoven’s part, he might have feared that he might not get use of the Kärntnertor Theater unless he had a contract with it to write an opera, as had been the case when he premiered the Symphony No. 2 (among others) at the Theater an der Wien on April 5, 1803, when he also had a contact to compose an opera for that theater. 2 For the characteristics of Vienna’s major theaters and concert halls, see Appendix C. 3 Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 62, Blatt 1v. 4 Heft 62, Blatt 2r.

60

FINDING A LOCATION

basically to reason with the composer about the venue for his concert. Before leaving, through Karl, he informed Beethoven that Sontag and Preisinger could sing at the concert if it was on April 25, but that Unger could not. Later, Lichnowsky himself argued that the effect of Beethoven’s music would be lost in such a small hall (the Landständischer Saal), and Schindler humorously interjected, “The Viennese already have a joking bon mot—that the great Beethoven wants to give a concert in a nutshell.” Lichnowsky continued that there would be no political difficulties at the Theater an der Wien, the city’s largest theater, where Beethoven would also earn more income. Schindler argued that because the Gesellschaft der adeliger Damen zur Beforderung des Guten und Nützlichen (Society of Noble Women for the Promotion of the Good and the Useful) was giving a concert at the Grosser Redoutensaal at 12:30 p.m. on April 25, the members of the nobility would not return if Beethoven gave his concert at the same location that evening. The arguments again swung back to the ineffectiveness of the Landständischer Saal for large-scale concerts, the possibilities of securing various soloists, the political conflicts among the theaters, and so forth. Beethoven evidently proposed getting most of the performers from the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, and Schindler countered decisively, “The forces of this Verein are simply too weak for these colossal works. Where will the power and the effects be that lie therein? Is it possible to awaken them with this orchestra? No, by God, it is not!” As for the Landständischer Saal itself, he added that at young Leopoldine Blahetka’s recent piano concert there with a small orchestra they stuffed 540 people into the hall, but with the larger forces that Beethoven required, the hall could hold a relatively smaller audience, and the profits would likewise be relatively smaller.5 Probably back home, late that evening, nephew Karl summed up the arguments: “I cannot contradict the count that the Akademie would be more worthy of you in the theater [an der Wien]. It is enough knowing that the Landständischer Saal will only hold 500 people. No one from the high nobility will come there, and even fewer from the Court.… The Court will certainly come to the theater.”6 On Good Friday, April 16, nephew Karl told Beethoven that Duport had given Unger and Preisinger permission to sing with him and that they would be coming to see him, though they seemingly postponed it until Saturday and brought news that there might be a conflict with a new operatic production.7 On the evening of Easter Sunday, April 18, Schindler reported, “There is nothing standing in the way except getting everyone together for rehearsals, and 5

Heft 62, Blätter 4r–8r. Heft 62, Blätter 9r–9v. The Landstand was the provincial government. The high nobility and the Court would consider it beneath their dignity to attend a concert in its assembly hall. 7 Heft 62, Blätter 10v, 12–13r, and 23v–24r. Even so, we do not have any direct conversation book entries from that visit. 6

THREATENING CLOUDS ON THE HORIZON

61

that is really so easy to get changed that there shouldn’t be any difficulties to it”; adding, “Evenings are and remain best for music on a grand scale.”8 Schindler did not attend the Easter Sunday benefit concert of the Women’s Society at the Kärntnertor Theater but told Beethoven, “I heard some of the rehearsal yesterday, among others the Overture to Fidelio, where the new hornists made audible blunders. // Every minute, they get more foreigners. // Hensler [manager of the Josephstadt Theater] also says that he could get as many as he wants—pupils from the Prague Conservatory. [//] Many of them are already here, even at our [Josephstadt] Theater, earning 600 fl. W.W.”9 Since ca. January 1, 1824, the Kärntnertor Theater’s new principal (high) hornist had been Elias Lewy (b. St. Avold, 1796; d. Vienna, 1846). Because the senior low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky (b. Swietlau, Bohemia, ca. 1766/1769; d. Vienna, 1846), for whom Beethoven had written the exposed horn solo at the beginning of the allegro central section of the Fidelio Overture in 1814, had been dismissed effective January 31, 1824, a new (low) hornist may have been negotiating the solo for the first time at that rehearsal. As we shall see, Beethoven would not meet Lewy until May 2, 1824. Another new foreigner was the principal bassoonist Theobald Hürth (b. Landau, Pfalz, 1795; d. Vienna, 1858); both he and Lewy had most recently played in Switzerland and had been hired to come to Vienna by the recently appointed Kapellmeister Conradin Kreutzer. Similarly, for decades, Viennese orchestras had hired players from Bohemia, but these were often musicians who had established reputations or at least employment back home. The frequent hiring of graduates from the Prague Conservatory was a new phenomenon. Already in early 1823, the young imported Bohemians at the Kärntnertor Theater may have included second oboist Mollnik (first name and dates unknown), bassoonists Joseph Nowak (b. Prague, 1796) and Karl Bettlach (b. Prague, 1801), and hornists Johann Janatka (b. Trznboratitz, 1797/1800) and Joseph Kail (b. Bozi Dar, 1795; d. Prague, 1871).10 As late as a few days before Easter, some of Beethoven’s friends were still giving him the false hope that the entire Missa solemnis could be done as a concert work in at least some theater or hall in Vienna, despite the fact that church authorities and the police had never allowed it in the past. From his own experiences with his concert of December 22, 1808, where only two individual movements from the Mass in C could be included under the title “Hymns,” Beethoven probably realized this. Refusing to heed the precedents, those friends held out, saying that 8 Heft 62, Blatt 21v. The original “große Musik” in this context could also mean “grand concerts.” 9 Heft 62, Blätter 23r–23v. 10 Actually, Bettlach, Janatka, and Kail had attended the Prague Conservatory. Most of these musicians stayed in Vienna for only a few seasons, some returning home even before the Opera closed for a year in April, 1825.

62

FINDING A LOCATION

a Mass by Franz Stockhausen with 6 harps and 4 horns would be given on the Damen-Verein’s Akademie on Sunday, April 25. To this end, Beethoven wrote an undated letter to Franz Sartori (1782–1832), director of the censor’s office (ZentralBücher Revisionsamtes), asking for permission to perform “3 Kirchenstücke” (3 church pieces) under the title Hymnen.11 Then, on Saturday, April 17, Schindler brought the news that the performance of the Stockhausen Mass was being allowed only with a nonliturgical text supplied by Wiener Zeitung editor Joseph Carl Bernard.12 And so it seems that all of the orchestral parts were not yet finished, especially for the Missa solemnis, and probably because Beethoven was holding off until confirming that it could be performed at all, and if so, how much of it.

More Copying Work Therefore, on Easter Sunday evening, Schindler advised Beethoven to look through the parts to the Kyrie, Credo, and Agnus Dei of the Missa solemnis to check for proper text underlay. He believed that Maschek had corrected the ones that he had done but was not certain that Gläser had done so, since the materials that he copied for the Theater in der Josephstadt were often inconsistent.13 As a result, probably at midday on Easter Monday, April 19, Beethoven made two notes to himself: “+ Duplicated [choral] parts; small [sectional?] rehearsals can be held with these. “+ Send the second movement to Gläser.”14 At ca. 1:302 p.m., just before midday dinner, Schindler arrived with news concerning the Kärntnertor Theater and copyist Gläser: “The rehearsals with the chorus can begin at Duport’s already on Saturday [April 24]. However, Duport asks that you keep it to 2 full rehearsals. “By about 5 o’clock, Gläser will send to you for work. It would be good if you sent him the Overture [Consecration of the House]. Also he wishes to have the Mass for the trombones.”15 11

Anderson, No. 1278; Brandenburg, No. 1810. Brandenburg dates the letter as “kurz nach dem 10. April 1824” (shortly after April 10, 1824). 12 Heft 61, Blätter 25v–26r; Heft 62, Blätter 14v–15r. 13 Heft 62, Blätter 22v–23r. 14 Heft 62, Blatt 27r. This may refer to the unspecified “duplicated parts” in Beethoven’s undated note to Gläser, also mentioning that in the Adagio, the second horn in E-flat part was missing. This would have included the complicated low horn part originally written for Hradetzky. See Brandenburg, No. 1822; Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 193 (dating based on an earlier, erroneous Russian reading of the key as “G”). Otherwise, see Schindler’s reference to Harmonie parts on Saturday, May 1, 1824, below. 15 Heft 62, Blatt 27v.

THE THEATER AN DER WIEN: CLEMENT OR SCHUPPANZIGH?

63

Therefore, it seems clear, even this early, that Duport never intended to allow Beethoven more than two full rehearsals with all the participants present. By midmorning of Tuesday, April 20, Schindler probably brought Beethoven the remaining parts to the Missa solemnis, ready for proofreading, and said that Gläser had nothing more to do until the next day. When reckoning the number of choral parts needed, he told Beethoven that the Kärntnertor Theater’s chorus numbered 16 each for the high voices, including the boys, and 16 or 17 each for the men’s voices, giving him a chorus of roughly 66 from the theater. Joseph Gottdank (b. Brünn, 1779; d. Vienna, 1849), a singer and stage director at the theater, had told Schindler that their tenors were somewhat weaker and that it might not hurt to invite 3 or 4 from the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Otherwise, he said, they needed no reinforcements. Even so, with further additions from the Gesellschaft’s chorus, Schindler projected that the combined choruses could number about 80 or 90.16

The Theater an der Wien: Clement or Schuppanzigh? Late that afternoon, Schindler returned and reported, “Now, though, you must know that there were the greatest obstacles with Schuppanzigh at [the Theater] an der Wien. Clement doesn’t contest his right to this honor of being concertmaster for your Akademie, [but] the orchestra is entirely on his side and is said to have declared that it doesn’t want to play under Schuppanzigh. I also discussed this with Palffy, and he is very dismayed about this point, because even if he can order the orchestra to play, he still cannot guarantee against the intrigues and petty tricks that the entire personnel will inflict on Schuppanzigh. This is therefore the greatest stumbling block, which does not exist at the Kärntnertor, because Duport has already expressed himself to be entirely for it.”17 Orchestral musicians will easily recognize this situation; the personality of longstanding ensembles has not changed much in two centuries. There is possibly a page missing from the conversation book at this point, but in any case, on the next surviving page, Schindler summarized the situation at this critical juncture and proposed taking action: “I already learned of this conspiracy by the orchestra several days ago, but I didn’t want to mention anything until I was convinced of it. Today I heard it from several members of the orchestra themselves. “If Palffy still wishes, as he did earlier today, that you give it to Clement, I am entirely for ceding it to Duport, because it can and will be impossible for you to stop the intrigues of his [Palffy’s] orchestra.

16 17

Heft 62, Blätter 28v–29r. Heft 62, Blätter 30r–30v.

64

FINDING A LOCATION

“Therefore, in an hour, I’ll go to Duport and apprise him of it earlier; he already knows of your wish to repeat the Akademie if it is successful, and has already agreed to it.”18 Perhaps in indirect response to Schindler’s visit, resident manager Duport wrote to Beethoven on April 20, saying that he had heard from the theater’s lesseedirector Domenico Barbaja, then in Naples, that he would be very interested in receiving a new opera by Beethoven if he continued his lease with the Court beyond December 1, 1824.19 Probably on Tuesday, April 20, or Wednesday, April 21, Beethoven wrote a long letter to Gläser, detailing how he wanted the words (especially consonants in connection with extended vowels) to be written. With the letter, he also sent the second movement of the Symphony with the Coda that he seems to have inadvertently omitted earlier.20 Probably later that same day, Beethoven sent the trombone parts that Gläser also seemingly requested on April 19, and he, in turn, requested that the copy work be sent to him the next day, and that Gläser press forward with those choral parts needing duplication, because without duplicated parts, he could not have any sectional rehearsals.21

Der schwer gefasste Entschluss: The Kärntnertor Theater It Must Be Without a location and a date determined, Beethoven could not hold sectional rehearsals in any case, but he was probably inclining strongly toward the Kärntnertor Theater in his own deliberations and probably told Schindler so. Then, late on Friday, April 23, brother Johann, who often interfered in sensitive situations for the composer, enthusiastically reported, “I spoke with Clement this afternoon. He sends you greetings, [and says that] you should not be angry with him, because he is prepared to do everything for 18

Heft 62, Blätter 31r–31v. Briefwechsel, No. 1816; Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 358. In fact, Barbaja and the Court failed to reach an agreement in December, 1824, and so the Court Opera was essentially closed between April, 1825, and March, 1826, during which time the Orchestra members were without employment or salary. During this period, first hornist Elias Lewy (1796–1846) went on tour to Germany and France with a pair of newly invented valved horns and, when opera performances resumed on April 29, 1826, brought his brother Joseph Rudolph Lewy (1802–1881) back with him from Stuttgart to play third horn. See Albrecht, “Elias (Eduard Constantin) Lewy and the First Performance of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony,” Horn Call 29, No. 3 (May, 1999), pp. 27–33 and 85–94 (particularly pp. 85–87). 20 The letter is Anderson, No. 1275; Brandenburg, No. 1814. See also Heft 62, Blatt 27r, noted for April 19 above. 21 Brandenburg, No. 1855 (accurately dated); Anderson, No. 1255 (misdated as 1823). 19 Brandenburg,

THE KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER IT MUST BE

65

you. But, because he knows his orchestra very well, he wanted me to tell you that you should put Schuppanzigh down as directing [i.e., concertmaster], and [he] will put himself down as [section] violin.”22 On Saturday morning, April 24, Schindler came to Beethoven’s apartment with the news that Hensler, the manager of the Theater in der Josephstadt, had seen the score of the Ninth Symphony (probably in Gläser’s library), sent his congratulations, and reiterated proudly that Beethoven was also including the Consecration of the House Overture that he had composed for Hensler a year and a half before. Schindler had also seen Schuppanzigh and reported, “Schuppanzigh is ‘very hellishly’ glad that he has nothing more to do with the Bohemians of the [Theater an der] Wien’s orchestra.”23 Probably at this point and probably supervised by Beethoven, Schindler penned a formally worded letter to Duport, dated April 24, addressing many of the concerns that had troubled the composer and his circle for the past several weeks: “As agent for Herr Ludwig van Beethoven, I have the honor to notify you herewith of his wish—since he intends to hold his grand musical Akademie in the I.R. theater near the Kärntnertor—that you will kindly let him have for this purpose all the solo singers, the entire orchestral and choral personnel, as well as the necessary lighting for the sum of 400 fl. C.M. Should the success of this Akademie occasion Herr van Beethoven to repeat it once or twice in the next week or at most ten days, he wishes in addition to obtain the I.R. Court theater near the Kärntnertor again under the above conditions. Further, Herr van Beethoven has decided to entrust the leadership of the Akademie to Herren Umlauf and Schuppanzigh; therefore he wishes that the administration will decree all that is necessary, so that the orchestra will not make any difficulties for him because of it. “Herr van Beethoven wishes to give the solo parts to Delles Sontag and Unger, and to Herr Preisinger, and hopes that the administration will also accede to his wish in this respect. “As a favor to Herr van Beethoven, the Musik Verein has undertaken to supplement the orchestra with its very best members, so that, altogether, this comes to 24 violins, 10 violas, 12 violoncellos and basses, as well as doubled winds. Therefore it is also necessary to place the whole orchestra on the stage, as is generally the case with large oratorios. 22 Heft 63, Blatt 1r. Beethoven experts who complain about the composer’s spelling and grammar should read Johann’s for a comparison! 23 Heft 63, Blatt 2r. Perhaps patronized by Prince Lobkowitz, the Theater an der Wien had sent Ignaz von Seyfried to Prague in spring, 1802, to recruit six new members for its orchestra. In any case, it had traditionally had a higher percentage of Bohemians than the Burg or Kärntnertor Theaters and, after two decades, seemingly retained an identifiably Bohemian character, at least in Schuppanzigh’s mind. Moreover, Schuppanzigh had hoped on at least one occasion to become concertmaster there but had been passed over.

66

FINDING A LOCATION

“Finally, I have yet to add only that the earlier arrangement with His Excellency Count von Palffy has come to nothing because, with the current shortage of capable singers [at the Theater] an der Wien, the solo parts could not be filled according to the wishes of Herr van Beethoven; also His Excellency expressly wished that Herr Clement should direct the orchestra, which Herr van Beethoven had long ago intended for Herr Schuppanzigh, and which he must insist upon for many reasons. “I now request you most urgently to declare yourself in writing about all this immediately, also to reserve the first evening for this Akademie as soon as possible, and only not to postpone it past the 3rd or 4th of May.”24 With the letter written, Schindler probably left Beethoven’s suburban apartment and went into the City to deliver it to Duport at the Kärntnertor Thearter25 and presumably received a favorable response.26 Later, Schindler warned Beethoven that Duport had told him that he could not give Beethoven all of the boxes, because they were already subscribed for the season, but that he could make 20–30 available to the composer, set the tickets for each box at 25 fl., and raise the seat prices somewhat to 5 fl., with the parterre (orchestra) and four galleries to 3 fl. in compensation for the lost seats, but it would involve time and the approval of the emperor.27 Schindler had also stopped by the Grosser Redoutensaal, presumably to hear a bit of the rehearsal of Stockhausen’s adapted Mass with 6 harps and 4 horns, with Sontag and Unger among its soloists.28 Sontag told Schindler that she was glad that Umlauf would be conducting the concert (presumably Beethoven’s) “because she is especially accustomed to him.”29 Also during that rehearsal, Leopold Sonnleithner told Schindler that he preferred that Beethoven not use any of the proffered singers from the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s chorus, especially the boys, because they could not produce the high B-natural, and that although the women sopranos could, they were too weak for this work.

24

Albrecht, No. 359; Brandenburg, No. 1818. Heft 63, Blatt 2r: “Ich gehe jetzt noch in die Stadt, und werde die Ehre haben zu kommen.” The letter opens, “Ich habe die Ehre” (I have the honor), a phrase also repeated in its complimentary close; the German original of the conversation book entry is the same phrase, but in future tense. Schindler seldom used this formula in conversation with Beethoven, and so it may reflect its use in the letter shortly before. See Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 359; Brandenburg, No. 1818, dated April 24, 1824. 26 If Duport wrote a reply, it has not survived. 27 Heft 63, Blätter 3r–4r and 6r. 28 The rehearsal may have lasted from 9 a.m. until 2 p.m. See Heft 64, Blatt 3r. 29 Heft 63, Blatt 2v. 25

THE LUDLAMSHÖHLE PETITION IS PUBLISHED—TWICE!

67

As Beethoven and Schindler were discussing this, copyist Peter Gläser’s maid arrived, either to pick up or deliver some copy work.30

The Ludlamshöhle Petition Is Published—Twice! Shortly afterward, on Saturday and again on Sunday, April 25, the subject of the Ludlamshöhle Petition of late February came up again. Schindler told Beethoven that Archduke Karl (1771–1847), who had commanded Austria’s armies during the Napoleonic Wars, wanted to sign the petition but learned about it only after it had been delivered to Beethoven.31 Meanwhile, with preparations for the Akademie about to reach some sort of climax, Adolf Bäuerle published the petition under the title “Erhebendes Ereigniss für Freunde deutscher Musik” (Edifying Occasion for Lovers of German Music) in his Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung on April 15. The next week, on April 21, Friedrich August Kanne reprinted it word for word in his Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung. Both periodicals included the list of signers.32 There was considerable finger-pointing in Beethoven’s circle, and indeed around Vienna, accusing this person or that of having leaked this private petition, with its 30 signers, to the press for unauthorized or otherwise inappropriate publication. In truth, however, we probably need look no further than editor Adolf Bäuerle himself, who was not one of its signers but surely had access to the petition before Beethoven even received it. In the case of the Wiener AmZ, it was published by the music dealer Steiner, whose shop was a few hundred feet north of the Ludlamshöhle’s meeting place on the Graben. Schindler told Beethoven that in any event, Count Moritz Lichnowsky became very angry with Beethoven’s entire circle when he saw his name displayed in the Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung “among so many middle-class people,”33 and indeed—after over two decades of friendship and support—he would distance himself from the composer in the future.34 30 Heft 63, Blätter 2v–3r and 4r. Ultimately, a few of the most secure women and boys from the Gesellschaft joined in the performance. 31 Heft 63, Blätter 5r–5v. If this was true, Count Moritz Lichnowsky’s reaction to being associated with the petition stands in stark contrast, as we shall see below. 32 Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 17, No. 46 (April 15, 1824), pp. 181–182; Wiener AmZ 8, No. 22 (April 21, 1824), pp. 87–88 (with closing editorial commentary). The Wiener AmZ was published by music dealer Sigmund Anton Steiner; Kanne was its editor. 33 Heft 63, Blätter 10v–11r. Lichnowsky’s most recent entries in the conversation books date from Maundy Thursday, April 15 (Heft 62, Blätter 4v–7v, and the surrounding conversations with nephew Karl and Schindler). Other than a few third-person references, Lichnowsky essentially dropped out of Beethoven’s circle of friends after April, 1824. 34 Indeed, it may have been Count Moritz (rather than Prince Karl) Lichnowsky who provided the refreshments during the double rehearsal of Beethoven’s Christ on the Mount

68

FINDING A LOCATION

Preparations for Rehearsals And so at last, on Sunday, April 25, Beethoven and Schindler could start to map out rehearsals for the orchestra (or at least the amateurs) and the Kärntnertor Theater’s chorus. As Schindler wrote, “Schuppanzigh can arrange that with the dilettantes in the rehearsal room of the Redoutensaal. The rehearsal rooms are very large, for they often rehearse with the entire orchestra there. These small rehearsals can also be held in the afternoon. So Schuppanzigh, along with Umlauf, must now take care that these small rehearsals already get scheduled today. “If one could give Herr Dirzka the choral parts tomorrow, or, at latest, the day after tomorrow, that would be well and good. If only they have something to study in the meantime.”35 Ignaz Dirzka (1779–1827) had joined the Court Opera and the Kärntnertor Theater by 1808 and sang prominent bass roles in Mozart operas, among others. He had only recently been appointed choral director and was essentially an unknown quantity to Beethoven and his circle. He lived close to the theater in the Bürgerspital apartment complex.36 Schindler was also worried that they had not located the score to the Consecration of the House Overture. Hensler did not have a copy, and Gläser, probably before its premiere in October, 1822, had only made a violin part with cues. Schindler was sure that it had to be somewhere in Beethoven’s apartment, because the copy that had been sent to Ries in London had been made from it. They were still looking for it on the morning of Friday, April 30.37 Beethoven had evidently had a question about playing a trill in the flute part, presumably the high F-sharp trill in the “et incarnatus est” section of the Credo of the Missa solemnis, at the transition from Adagio to Andante,38 and had asked Schindler to check with Karl Scholl (1778–1854), principal flutist at the Kärntnertor Theater, about it. Also on that Sunday, April 25, Schindler reported, “I talked with the flutist Scholl concerning the F trill; he immediately

of Olives on Holy Monday, April 4, 1803. See Albrecht, “Hyperbole and High Drama: The Chronology and First Performance of Beethoven’s Oratorio Christus am Ölberge, Op. 85,” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 13 (2022), pp. 10–63. 35 Heft 63, Blätter 7v–8r. 36 Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten (1821/1823), p. 366; Portrait-Katalog, p. 351 (no surviving portrait); Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 75; and Grant Cook’s pathbreaking study, “Beethoven’s Choral Director, Ignaz Karl Dirzka (1779–1827),” Choral Journal 46, No. 6 (December, 2005), pp. 48–53. 37 Heft 63, Blätter 8r–8v; Heft 64, Blatt 1r. 38 Beethoven, Gesamtausgabe, Series 19, No. 1, p. 114, bars 2–3.

PREPARATIONS FOR REHEARSALS

69

demonstrated it to me very well, although he assured [me] that the way that it can be done easily is not generally known among skillful players.”39 When he left Beethoven that night, Sunday, April 25, Schindler took the solo parts for soprano Henriette Sontag and bass Joseph Preisinger with him for delivery early the next day.40 At noon or shortly thereafter on Monday, April 26, Schindler and Beethoven met in the City and took a carriage out to Penzing and perhaps other villages near Schönbrunn to look for an apartment for the composer to rent over the summer. On the way, Schindler told Beethoven that Duport intended to talk to the police president, Count Sedlnitzky, himself about raising the price for seats. Duport would also notify Schindler later that afternoon about a date for the concert, which Beethoven wanted to take place before the departure of the Kaiser on a journey to Prague on Wednesday, May 5. Schindler also promised to send copyist Peter Gläser to see Beethoven the next day (Tuesday) for precise instructions about the details remaining to be done. He had also run into Falstafferl (“Little Falstaff”—Schuppanzigh) and the dilettante violinist Piringer that morning, and Schuppanzigh had also indicated his intention to come and see Beethoven the next day. Schuppanzigh had told Schindler that he wanted to hold rehearsals for the string section leaders on Thursday, April 29, and Saturday, May 1. Duport was also beginning to determine how the Zettel (posters) for the Akademie needed to be worded, what works were brand-new and which had previously been performed, and to what extent Beethoven might conduct with Michael Umlauf, so they left this last detail off of the Zettel’s draft for the moment. As Schindler commented to Beethoven: “You can already conduct the Overture entirely alone. Conducting the whole concert would strain your hearing too much; therefore, I would advise you not to do so.”41 This was not empty flattery on Schindler’s part; this was a frank and practical discussion of what Beethoven might be capable of conducting on the Akademie: the relatively straightforward Overture to Consecration of the House, with its slow

39 Heft 63, Blätter 9v–10r. Karl Hieronymus Nikolaus Scholl (1778–1854) had played flute in the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra since May 1, 1797. Schindler’s Biographie (1860) mentions Scholl as the flutist who exerted influence on Beethoven. As is so often the case, however, Schindler merely relates what he knew firsthand after ca. 1822; by this time Theater an der Wien flutist Anton Dreyssig (ca. 1753/1754–1820), for whom Beethoven had written during the period 1802–1813, had retired and died. See Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten (1821/1823), p. 379 (nevertheless called Joseph there); Wurzbach, Vol. 31, p. 205; Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, p. 35; II, p. 169; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 58 and 370; and Hoftheater, Generalintendanz, S.R. 30, p. 58 (Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna). 40 Heft 63, Blatt 12r. 41 Heft 63, Blätter 16v, 16a-r and 16a-v, 17r–18r.

70

FINDING A LOCATION

introductory March at one basic tempo and the fugal Allegro at another basic tempo (and a work that Beethoven had conducted, with help from concertmaster Schindler, at the reopening of the Josephstadt Theater on October 3, 1822), as opposed to the untried Ninth Symphony and three movements from the Missa solemnis, which would have been difficult under ideal conditions. Thus it is contrary to our customary image of the “stone-deaf ” Beethoven that he and Schindler would even momentarily consider his conducting the Overture on the Akademie. Already before Schindler’s letter to Duport of April 24, the resident manager must have assured him and Beethoven that there would be no opposition in the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra to Schuppanzigh’s replacing concertmaster Joseph Katter (ca. 1771–1841) for the Akademie. Now, however, Schindler reported to Beethoven, “Only Herr Hildebrand, the second concertmaster, wanted to protest against Schuppanzigh, but Little Napoleon [Duport] said to him quite dryly, ‘Do you want to have your contract back? It’s either this or that.’ Thus it was settled. I had to laugh heartily when Duport laughingly told me about this yesterday in his broken German language…. You can tell all of this to Schuppanzigh tomorrow, if you’d like.”42 For his concert on February 27, 1814, Beethoven had used percussionist Anton Brunner as his personnel contractor, while Schuppanzigh served as witness.43 Now it becomes clear that for his Akademie in 1824, Beethoven would largely rely on Schuppanzigh to contract the additional professional musicians needed.44 On Monday, April 26, Schindler’s last conversational entries during the carriage ride to Penzing concerned Schuppanzigh’s hiring the second group of wind players (probably 1 flute, 2 oboes, 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, and 2 horns) from outside the Kärntnertor Theater’s current roster, as well as when they would rehearse and be paid. For his February, 1814, concert, Beethoven had used only selected winds in a smaller rehearsal on a Friday, before a general full rehearsal on Saturday, in preparation for the concert on Sunday. Schindler’s conversational entries are not entirely clear but make more sense when considered in the context of a rehearsal pattern similar to that of 1814: “Schuppanzigh can certainly take the 2nd Harmonie without that of the [Kärntnertor] theater. // I believe only at the first rehearsal, so that one treats

42

Heft 63, Blätter 18r–19v. Johann Hildebrand (b. 1790) had only been employed at the Kärntnertor Theater since fall, 1823. 43 Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181. The occasion was the premiere of Symphony No. 8. 44 Piringer and Sonnleithner seem to have been in charge of contacting the dilettante instrumentalists. Schuppanzigh did not like dilettantes, who, in his opinion, took paying jobs away from hardworking professionals.

71

PREPARATIONS FOR REHEARSALS

the theater’s Harmonie with consideration. // Otherwise, you must perhaps pay the theater’s Harmonie.”45 Among the wind players whom Beethoven would have wanted Schuppanzigh to hire were flutist Aloys Khayll (Burgtheater), for whom he had written piccolo parts since 1808; clarinettist Joseph Friedlowsky (Theater an der Wien), for whom he had written many solo passages between 1803 and 1814; hornist Friedrich Starke (dismissed from the Kärntnertor Theater nearly two years before), a personal friend; and low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky (recently dismissed from the Kärntnertor Theater), for whom he had composed the demanding and multifaceted solo in the third movement in the Ninth Symphony itself. He might also have hired back contrabassist Joseph Melzer (also recently dismissed from the Kärntnertor Theater) because he could have doubled on the contrabassoon.46 It is not documented whom Beethoven hired for his supplementary oboes and bassoons, but he already knew Ernest Krähmer, the Burgtheater’s principal oboist, in a positive light and, possibly on Krähmer’s recommendation, may have hired August Mittag, the Burgtheater’s principal bassoonist, as well.47 * When Beethoven and Schindler returned to the City from their apartmenthunting trip to Penzing, late in the afternoon of Monday, April 26, 1824, Schindler said that he was heading to see Duport to confirm details about using the Kärntnertor Theater for the upcoming Akademie and that he would come

45

Heft 63, Blätter 19v–20r. He could also have hired contrabassists Anton Pollack (ca. 1774–1848) and Ignaz Raab (1766/1769–1838) from the Burgtheater, because they also doubled on contrabassoon, and both had already played that instrument in Beethoven’s concert of February 27, 1814. In fact, he may have hired them to supplement the Kärntnertor Theater’s contrabassists for the upcoming Akademie in any case. See Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181. 47 Albrecht, “Ernest Krähmer und seine Frau Caroline (geb. Schleicher)—musikalische Pioniere in der Wiener Biedermeierzeit,” trans. Ernst Kobau, Wiener Oboen-Journal, No. 57 (March, 2013), pp. 3–10. It would be tempting to speculate that Beethoven might have hired Krähmer’s talented wife, Caroline Schleicher, as a clarinettist or even on her secondary instrument, the violin; but if she had played in an otherwise all-male orchestra, someone in the press or in reminiscences would have mentioned it, and such a mention is simply not there. The Theater an der Wien’s principal oboist, Joseph Sellner, seems not to have been among the hires, because Beethoven seemingly did not meet him until September 2, 1825 (see Heft 93, Blatt 13v). See the discussions after dinner on May 2 and on May 5 concerning the hiring of Prince Liechtenstein’s entire Harmonie, which, given Beethoven’s other preferences, probably did not take place. 46

72

FINDING A LOCATION

to report developments to Beethoven the next morning at 9 o’clock.48 Nephew Karl was waiting for Beethoven at home and told him that copyist Peter Gläser had been there and even waited an hour before taking his carriage back to the Josephstadt.49 Beethoven made an annotation of the things he needed to discuss with Gläser: “+ Errors corrected in the first Soprano. “+ Take along the parts to the Finale.”50 Gläser must have been at Beethoven’s door very early the next morning, Tuesday, April 27. He told Beethoven that he had given the score to the Consecration of the House Overture to Schindler a few days before, after it had been used for a performance at the Josephstadt Theater. There was confusion concerning the whereabouts of various materials still to be copied or corrected, and Gläser told Beethoven, “I want to do it here tomorrow, if it is all right with you, and will bring along the copyist who copied the score, and everything should be corrected immediately…. The violas are written separately, because I will have to make 3 firsts and 3 seconds.”51 This is probably the passage with the divisi violas at “Adagio ma non troppo, ma divoto” (simply called “Adagio divoto” in the working autograph) in the fourth movement of the Ninth Symphony, where the text reads, “Ihr stürzt nieder, Millionen?”

Detailed Rehearsal Plans Begin, April 27, 1824 After Gläser departed, Schindler must have arrived at 9 a.m. or so and confirmed that Schuppanzigh would hold a small rehearsal, probably with just the string section leaders, on Thursday, April 29.52 As promised, Schindler had been to see Duport, though not until earlier that morning, and the theater manager had told him that owing to the illness of one of his singers, he might have to cancel an operatic performance and therefore might be able to schedule Beethoven’s Akademie for some time later that week. Duport, of course, would have had no idea of how difficult these new compositions of Beethoven’s were, but Schindler— knowing of their difficulty, the need for every possible rehearsal, and that at least some of the orchestral parts needed additional proofreading and revision—told

48

Heft 63, Blatt 25v. Heft 63, Blatt 26r. Gläser had trouble walking long distances and so took a carriage to Beethoven’s apartment in the Landstrasse and back. Nephew Karl said that because Gläser had waited for an hour for Beethoven to return home, he had paid for his carriage. 50 Heft 63, Blatt 26v. 51 Heft 63, Blätter 26v–27r, 28v–29r. Gläser turned two pages in Beethoven’s conversation book, leaving Blätter 27v–28r blank. See Beethoven, Gesamtausgabe, Series 1, No. 9, pp. 237–240; Beethoven, Sinfonie Nr. 9, facsimile, pp. 346–351. 52 Heft 63, Blatt 29r. 49

DETAILED REHEARSAL PLANS BEGIN, APRIL 27, 1824

73

Duport that it would hardly be possible to hold the concert before Tuesday, May 4.53 While Schindler was there, Ignaz Schuppanzigh arrived and proposed, “Dear Beethoven, let us have the first rehearsal by Sunday morning [May 2], then let’s have 2 more general rehearsals, namely on Monday and Tuesday morning [May 3 and 4].”54 We do not know exactly what Beethoven replied, but we can still watch the rehearsal sequence as it initially took shape. Probably referring to choral director Ignaz Dirzka, Schindler commented, “We might send him only the parts, but he can’t rehearse anything before tomorrow.”55 Now Shuppanzigh started to project the initial rehearsal with a smaller orchestra of dilettantes under professional leadership, along with the vocalists: “Let’s leave the small rehearsal until Sunday morning [May 2].” If, for some reason, Umlauf did not conduct that rehearsal, Schindler noted Schuppanzigh’s reputation for efficient rehearsing: “If Schuppanzigh takes it over, he will soon beat them into shape.” Addressing Beethoven in the third person, Schuppanzigh seems to have noted that the composer would probably have to pay his orchestral professionals for the Sunday rehearsal, which would not be covered by his contract with the Kärntnertor Theater: “The rehearsal creates too much expense for him [= you]; if he wants [= you want] it, however, it will naturally be all the better.”56 Knowing that as early as mid-to-late March, Beethoven had wanted a rehearsal for “correctness,”57 Schindler added one more advantage of holding a rehearsal on Sunday morning: “It is to be considered like a proofreading rehearsal.”58 Schuppanzigh presented a rationale for the function and location of Sunday’s projected rehearsal: “We want to hold this rehearsal in the Landständischer Saal; there are [music] stands and all possible conveniences, and we would be to ourselves.” Schindler, too, thought it better to keep curious eyes and ears out of the rehearsal: “Keep it closed [to outsiders]; that is the best.”

53 Heft 63, Blätter 29r–29v. The bass singer Antonio Ambrogi was ill, and soprano Henriette Sontag was also rumored not to be well. To complicate matters, Sontag was also scheduled to sing on Beethoven’s Akademie. 54 Heft 63, Blatt 31r. These rehearsals would be in addition to the rehearsal for the string section leaders on Thursday, April 29. 55 Heft 63, Blatt 8r. 56 Schuppanzigh customarily addressed Beethoven humorously in the third person, thus this reference is somewhat unclear. 57 Heft 60, Blatt 1r (dating unclear). 58 Correctur-Probe: perhaps this is the term that Beethoven and his contemporaries applied to reading-rehearsals like those at Prince Lobkowitz’s palace in ca. 1804–1808 or Archduke Rudolph’s apartment in the Hofburg in ca. 1810–1813.

74

FINDING A LOCATION

Now Schuppanzigh began to project rehearsal order and who would be present and when: “I’ll tell Piringer59 that he might call all of his dilettantes for 8:30 a.m.; that way, one can begin punctually at 9 o’clock. One might give the [men and women] singers the hour after 10 o’clock, because before then we will be dealing with the Overture and the Symphony. // The women soloists might want to attend such a rehearsal; the choristers are not necessary for this rehearsal.” Schindler gave his view that “Only the dilettantes are coming to the rehearsal,”60 but Beethoven probably persisted in his desire to have at least some professionals present on Sunday morning to provide leadership and musical continuity in those sections (especially the winds) where there would be few if any amateur players with the skills required to perform these difficult scores.

The Problematic Ludlamshöhle Petition—Again With their planning session finished late in the morning on Tuesday, April 27, Schuppanzigh departed, and Schindler and Beethoven walked out to brother Johann’s apartment in the Kothgasse in suburban Windmühle, probably arriving at about 1 p.m.61 In the course of events, the Ludlamshöhle Petition of February came up again. Schindler told Beethoven, “As Czerny62 assured me, this Herr Steiner [Stainer von Felsburg]63 is the author of this essay; therefore it is nothing but putting on airs by Herr Steiner. // It went through so many hands, no one can have copied it. // Take absolutely no notice of this nonsense. // Kanne64 himself 59 Ferdinand Piringer, whose name Schuppanzigh spells “Puhringer” (without Umlaut) here. Schuppanzigh did not like working with dilettantes or sitting next to Piringer in an orchestra. Perhaps the misspelling is a wordplay on purren (or puhren), meaning to purr or buzz, terms that might have been applied negatively to Piringer’s tone. 60 Heft 63, Blätter 31r–32v, covering the entire planning session. 61 Heft 63, Blätter 29v (projected time) and 34r. 62 Carl Czerny (1791–1857), prominent pianist, former student of Beethoven’s, and one of the signers of the February petition. 63 Among the signers of the Ludlamshöhle Petition were Joseph Jacob Steiner [Stainer] von Felsburg (1786–after 1852), liquidator in the privileged Austrian National Bank, living at Minoritenplatz No. 38; and his father, Johann Baptist Steiner [Stainer] von Felsburg (1756–1832), Court secretary in the I.R. United Court Chancellery, likewise living at Minoritenplatz No. 38. Joseph Jacob is probably meant as the author. See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus (1824), I, pp. 233 and 713; Schindler (ed. Kalischer, 1909), p. 587; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 416; Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 344. 64 Friedrich August Kanne (1778–1833), author, composer, and music critic. He was born in Delitzsch, Saxony, and in 1808 came to Vienna in the service of Prince Joseph Franz Maximilian von Lobkowitz. He was, however, soon active as a freelance author. Creative and multitalented, Kanne was editor of the Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung (published by music dealer Sigmund Anton Steiner) and also wrote reports for Bäuerle’s Wiener Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung and Schickh’s Wiener Zeitschrift, among others.

BROTHERLY ENCOURAGEMENT

75

made several comments about it in his newspaper, so who will now believe that it was done through you?65 A jackass and not an intelligent person.”66 Later Schindler added, “I shall tell Herr Schickh, so that he reprints the essay and makes the annotation that the name Lichnowsky absolutely did not appear in the original.”67 But it was too late: Lichnowsky had distanced himself from Beethoven’s circle and, rightly or wrongly, blamed Schindler for the initial leak to the press.68

Brotherly Encouragement And so, in the early afternoon of Tuesday, April 27, Beethoven, his brother Johann, and Schindler set out from Windmühle in Johann’s carriage on their way to look for more summer rental apartments in Hietzing and Penzing. Johann talked about his marital problems and the concert that past Sunday with the Stockhausen Mass. Then he began speculating about how much (or how little) money Beethoven might make from the Ninth Symphony. Writing on behalf of Johann, Schindler asked, “Your brother wants to know if you had worked an entire year on the Symphony. // You began it in December [1822], didn’t you?” Then Johann himself took the conversation book and wrote, “In any case, an opera is more lucrative at 2,000 fl. C.M., and then you can sell it afterward.”69 With friends like Schindler and relatives like Johann, Beethoven certainly did not need any enemies or any more calamities before the first performance of his Ninth Symphony.

See Frimmel, Handbuch, I, pp. 247–249; Seyfried, pp. 205–207; and Wurzbach, Vol. 10, pp. 438–440. 65 See Kanne’s Wiener AmZ 8, No. 22 (April 21, 1824), p. 87; and Bäuerle’s Wiener Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 17, No. 46 (April 15, 1824), p. 182. Heft 57, Blatt 2r and 3r–3v, identifies the “author” of the petition as the Ludlamshöhle and names Bäuerle among them. Bäuerle did not sign the document but could have already had a copy of it in February, with later publication in mind. 66 Heft 63, Blätter 33r–33v. 67 Heft 63, Blatt 34v. Schickh evidently did not agree to Schindler’s proposed deception; there is no trace of either a printing of the petition or any report about it in his Wiener Zeitschrift. 68 Heft 63, Blätter 43r–43v. 69 Heft 63, Blätter 34v–35r.

Chapter 4

Final Preparations/First Rehearsals Wednesday, April 28, 1824 Early on the morning of Wednesday, April 28, brother Johann appeared on Beethoven’s doorstep to get the Symphony—presumably a copy to be sent to Ferdinand Ries in London in order to raise some much-needed cash. With the practical preparations for the premiere in Vienna, Beethoven had not had time to order or proofread a copy for Ries. As a result, Johann sarcastically reproached the composer for his seeming neglect and left.1 When Schindler arrived later in the morning, after running errands, he found Beethoven still in a bad mood: “Just don’t be so glum.” Otherwise, Schindler had good news and bad news. In order to provide the Kärntnertor Theater’s choral director, Ignaz Dirzka, material to rehearse, he had borrowed the choral parts (presumably for the Missa solemnis) already supplied to the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde and temporarily gave them to Dirzka. By that afternoon, Schindler projected, he could have everything.2 On the negative side, Schindler had learned that the police president, Count Sedlnitzky, would not allow Beethoven to raise the price of theater tickets. Because the Kärntnertor Theater, when jam-packed, could hold as many as 2,400 people, raising the prices by even a few kreuzer would have sweetened Beethoven’s budget considerably.3 Schindler left, taking some more chorus parts with him, promising to be back in the afternoon to pick up the scores of all the music and (using the maid 1

Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 63, Blätter 38v–39r. At least some of the choral parts to the Missa solemnis and Ninth Symphony seem to have been lithographed by Steiner and Haslinger in the Paternostergassel on the Graben. See Brandenburg, No. 1827. 3 Heft 63, Blatt 39v. For theater capacities in Vienna, see Appendix C and Stefan Weinzierl, Beethovens Konzerträume (Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Erwin Bochinsky, 2002), p. 65. Weinzierl lists their capacities in 1828 as Kärntnertor Theater, 2,400; Burgtheater, 1,800; Theater an der Wien, 2,800; Theater in der Josephstadt, 1,400; Theater in der Leopoldstadt, 1,400 persons. These seem a bit high, but one must remember that people in general were smaller in Beethoven’s day than today. For a comparison, see Archduke Karl’s seemingly diminutive uniform on display at the Heeresgeschichtliches Museum, Vienna. 2

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 28, 1824

77

as his packhorse in order to save carriage fare) take them to conductor Michael Umlauf, so that “he gets everything today.”4 At some time during the day, copyist Peter Gläser came to Beethoven’s apartment with one of his staff and probably copied, double-checking with Beethoven to be sure that he was satisfied, until late afternoon. Around midafternoon, Schindler arrived back at Beethoven’s apartment, reporting that Duport was committed to doing everything possible for the composer at the theater, but also that Count Moritz Lichnowsky had visited Bäuerle and took him to task about making the Ludlamshöhle Petition public; and that Vogel, the assistant manager at the Theater an der Wien, possibly influenced by Lichnowsky’s indignation, had refused to allow the tenor Jäger to sing at the Kärntnertor Theater. Therefore, Beethoven would have to find another tenor. Because Gläser was sitting within earshot, Schindler wrote his side of the conversation very extensively. Schindler noted that the choral parts had all been distributed as necessary. Gläser, however, was evidently not yet finished with copying the trombone parts to the Missa solemnis, and so Schindler could not take the score to Umlauf that day. Similarly, Gläser still needed to work from the score to the Symphony (perhaps trombone parts there, as well, since—as Ferdinand Ries had noted as early as April, 1803—the trombone parts were the last to be copied out), and so, in disappointment, Schindler wrote, “Tomorrow, perhaps.”5 Schindler needed to see Duport once more before the day (Wednesday, April 28) ended. When he returned, probably an hour and a half later,6 Gläser noted that he had finished what he had come to do, was feeling ill, and wanted to go home. Schindler noted that there was still some work to be done on the Consecration of the House Overture (unspecified, but probably additional string parts). Gläser said that he would do that at home, that he also wanted to supplement the score (again unspecified, but possibly writing in the trombone parts), and that he would send the finished work on it back to Beethoven the next morning (Thursday, April 29).7 Early on Thursday, Beethoven started to draft a letter—possibly to Stainer von Felsburg and probably to the Wiener Zeitung as well—violently denouncing the publication of the Ludlamshöhle Petition and the insinuation that he had any part in it. Later on, Schindler calmed him down: “The Wiener Zeitung may 4 Heft 63, Blätter 40r–40v. Schindler also said that he was going to see Adolf Bäuerle about the Ludlamshöhle Petition that afternoon. 5 Heft 63, Blätter 44r–44v. 6 Heft 63, Blatt 45r. Schindler promised to return in an hour, but the walk alone from the corner of Ungargasse and Bock-/Beatrixgasse to the Kärntnertor Theater and back would have taken that long. Therefore, an interval of an hour and a half is more likely. 7 Heft 63, Blätter 45v–46r.

78

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

not take essays of that sort. Leave it now, before the Akademie. But still give these fellows [presumably Bäuerle and Kanne] no rest; then thunder at them after the Akademie.” More pertinent to the business at hand, Schindler told Beethoven that “the girls”—meaning soprano Henriette Sontag and alto Caroline Unger—might want a little “preliminary rehearsal” at the piano at home with Umlauf some time before Sunday’s scheduled rehearsal.8 Beethoven and Schindler spent much of the rest of Thursday, April 29, working out the details for Beethoven to rent an apartment in Penzing for the first half of the upcoming summer. His landlord was to be Johann Hörr, a master tailor who had done work for Archduke Rudolph. Over an afternoon meeting and meal at Zum goldenen Steg [At the Golden Footbridge] on the Alserbach, Hörr told Beethoven that he had often heard him play piano at the archduke’s and especially remembered a performance of the Horn Sonata, Op. 17, but could not recall the name of the hornist. There is no clue to Beethoven’s reply in the conversation book, but it must have been either Friedrich Hradetzky (who had played it in public with Carl Czerny in spring, 1809) or Friedrich Starke (who had reputedly played it at Beethoven’s apartment and who probably enjoyed moving in the upper levels of Viennese society).9 Returning to the City late that afternoon, Schindler went (still again) to try to get a final declaration of terms from Duport, while Beethoven went to a beer house (rather than a coffee house, as was his custom), presumably read the day’s newspapers, and continued drafting a letter of protest against the publication of the petition. Nephew Karl joined him there and reported that Schuppanzigh had programmed his Symphony No. 5 in C Minor for the upcoming early-morning Augarten concert of Saturday, May 1. In fact, Schuppanzigh opened the concert with movements 1 and 2 of that work and closed it with movements 3 and 4.10 That afternoon, too, Beethoven encountered the actor Joseph Spitzeder (1795– 1832), who was about to finish an engagement at the Theater an der Wien before moving to Berlin. Born in Bonn, Spitzeder had come to Vienna from Weimar, where he seemingly knew Johann Nepomuk Hummel (1778–1837), who had been there since 1819. As he reported to Beethoven: “On his last journey to Russia, Hummel made a net profit of 15 [thousand] fl. C.M. in four months. A Beethoven would earn just as much in this country, where there are money and a feeling for Art, without having to do anything but sit at the piano and, merely 8

Heft 63, Blätter 46r–46v; 48r–48v. Undeterred by Schindler’s discouragement that he not write the letter, and probably obsessing about the conflict of interests that the publication of the petition implied, Beethoven continued drafting the letter on the afternoon of Thursday, April 29 (see Heft 64, Blätter 13v–14r). 9 Heft 63, Blätter 48v–49v. 10 Heft 64, Blätter 13v–14v, 5v, and 8v (entries made out of chronological order); and Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 27 (July 1, 1824), col. 436.

THE FINAL WEEK OF PREPARATIONS: FRIDAY, APRIL 30

79

through his presence effect the performance of his immortal works. This is my sincerest belief—without flattery. You are known everywhere better than here.”11 Spitzeder, of course, was pointing to the by-then archaic custom of the composer’s sitting at the piano to lend authority to the performance of an orchestral work and conducting from that position, such as Haydn had done in London in the 1790s. Nonetheless, Beethoven’s presence in the orchestra, seated (or standing) near the actual conductor, Michael Umlauf, for the premiere of the Ninth Symphony only seven days away, could be viewed as an extension of the old practice and a reflection (although already planned) of Spitzeder’s advice.

The Final Week of Preparations: Friday, April 30 Probably late on Friday morning, April 30, Schindler visited Beethoven with the news that Dirzka’s rehearsal of the choral part of the Symphony would take place on Saturday morning at the earliest, because he had begun with the Missa solemnis movements on Thursday and would continue them on Friday. Even so, Schindler reported, Dirzka said that “he is satisfied with how the choristers are doing.”12 With Franz Jäger (1796–1852) reportedly forbidden to sing at the Kärntnertor Theater, Schindler sought out Joseph Barth (1781–1865) to sing the tenor part. But Barth was about to depart for Bohemia with his primary employer, Prince Joseph von Schwarzenberg, and so Schindler managed to engage Anton Haitzinger (1796–1869), also employed by the Theater an der Wien but evidently allowed to sing at the Kärntnertor Theater. Therefore, that detail was now, on Friday, April 30, under control. Even so, Jäger would not give the music itself to Haitzinger until Sunday morning, May 2, just before first rehearsal.13 Relaxing his energies for a moment, Schindler commented, “Just think! It is good to hold the rehearsal on Sunday morning, because all the dilettantes don’t have any business affairs. They can rehearse from 9 o’clock until 2 o’clock. // The singers won’t arrive until 11 o’clock. // It will go better than you yourself believe.” Then he suddenly thought of an overlooked detail: “What we have forgotten is the note to the secondhand fiddle dealer Rzehaczek. Since I am meeting him, as well as all these dilettantes, at Schuppanzigh’s rehearsal now, it would be very 11 Heft 64, Blätter 15r–15v. From an earlier reference in their conversation, it appears that Spitzeder had known Beethoven from several years before and certainly before his current engagement at the Theater an der Wien. His singing wife, Henriette (1800–1828), was likewise finishing an engagement at the Kärntnertor Theater. See Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 27 (July 1, 1824), col. 437; Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 83; François-Joseph Fétis, Biographie universelle des musiciens (Brussels: Meline, Cans & Co., 1838–1844), Vol. 8, p. 247; rev. ed. (Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1884), Vol. 8, p. 82; and Schilling, Vol. 6, p. 446, and Vol. 7 (Supplement), pp. 404–405. 12 Heft 64, Blatt 1v (numbered out of chronological order). 13 Heft 64, Blätter 2r–2v, and 26r.

80

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

nice if you would write it now.”14 Whether Schindler was being sarcastically humorous or serious, Franz Rzehaczek (b. Lichtowitz, Bohemia, 1758/1764; d. Vienna, 1840), Schuppanzigh’s brother-in-law, was a senior draftsman in the Imperial Court Chancellery and a member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde as a violinist. He possessed a collection of historical string instruments, including the makers Stradivari, Amati, and Jacob Stainer.15 Therefore, probably early in the afternoon of Friday, April 30, 1824, Beethoven wrote the following note: “My dear Herr von Rzehaczeck! “Schuppanzigh has assured me that you are going to be so kind as to lend me the necessary instruments for my concert. Encouraged by this assurance I ask you to let me have them; and I hope that I shall meet with no refusal if I earnestly beg you to send them. “Your most devoted servant  ​  “Beethoven”16 Beethoven’s note is both formal and awkward, indicating that he did not know Rzehaczek well (or possibly even at all) and felt uncomfortable asking for the loan of valuable instruments that had been promised to him through others.17 Whatever the circumstances, Beethoven must have gotten the use of at least several historical violins and possibly other instruments for his concert, because, on the afternoon of Thursday, May 6, Schindler noted among those who were to receive two free tickets to the Akademie: “Rzehaczek (for his violins).”18 A week after the first concert, on Saturday, May 15, Piringer reminded Beethoven to write a thank-you note: “Rzehaczek, a note concerning the instruments.”19

The Long-Awaited Agreement with Duport For all of Schindler’s visits to Duport to obtain a finalized contract or statement of terms for the upcoming Akademie at the Kärntnertor Theater and possibly a repeat of it shortly afterward, he had been unsuccessful at pinning the manager down. On Friday afternoon, April 30, Wiener Zeitung editor Bernard called 14

Heft 64, Blatt 3r. Heinrich Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten der Haupt- und Residenz-Stadt Wien (Vienna: B.Ph. Bauer, 1823), pp. 360 and 389–390 (reflecting 1821); Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 139 and 225–226; and Heft 52, Blätter 10r–10v. Schuppanzigh had already offered Rzehaczek’s services as early as January 7, 1824. 16 Brandenburg, Briefwechsel, No. 1820; Anderson, Letters, No. 1284. 17 Böckh, p. 390, indicates that anyone with a knowledge of the subject was welcome to visit the collection and inspect the instruments for himself, suggesting that Rzehaczek was generous with them, as proved to be the case here. 18 Heft 65, Blätter 38r–38v. 19 Heft 67, Blatt 34r. 15 Franz

THE LONG-AWAITED AGREEMENT WITH DUPORT

81

Duport a “scoundrel” (Schuft) and told Beethoven that he had to ask for the Grosser Redoutensaal for the repeat concert, and if Duport did not cooperate, then the composer needed to appeal to Police President Sedlnitzky, who had recently had occasion to reprimand Duport for his administrative tactics.20 Shortly after Bernard left, and while Schindler was visiting, nephew Karl reminded Beethoven that brother Johann had reported that Duport had already consented to the use of the Redoutensaal when he had visited him on March 9 or 10 about the prospects of an Akademie. This, in fact, had not been the case, because, when Duport told Johann that he would think it over, Johann had assumed a threatening tone and offended the manager, who dismissed him without a decision. Believing that Johann was a mouthpiece for Beethoven’s own thoughts, Duport took the matter to the high chamberlain, Prince Ferdinand von Trauttmansdorff-Weinsberg (1749–1827), and they had evidently agreed that Beethoven should not be allowed to force Duport into any disadvantageous conditions.21 Once he realized that Duport’s hesitancy was probably the result of Johann’s boorish behavior nearly two months before, Beethoven quickly wrote an explicit letter to Duport (and perhaps even a second one to Trauttmansdorff)22 on the afternoon of Friday, April 30. The letter is now lost, but it probably requested the Kärntnertor Theater for an Akademie, possibly as early as Tuesday, May 4, and the Grosser Redoutensaal for a repeat concert. It may also have touched on the use of the orchestra, chorus, and soloists for a specified total fee and allowed for participants from elsewhere without prejudice. In any case, he asked Schindler to deliver it personally by the end the business day.23 On Saturday, Schindler reported back, “The letter of yesterday [Friday, April 30]24 has affected Duport most dreadfully. He feels very much sickened by it, but ‘because Beethoven is a great artist, one must not take offense,’25 he would therefore give [you] Tuesday [May 4], but only with one general rehearsal, because the theater can be schedule-free for only 1 day.” Beethoven must have said that he

20

Heft 67, Blätter 3v–4r. Heft 67, Blätter 4v–5r. For Johann’s earlier discussion with Duport, see Heft 59, Blätter 4v–5v. 22 Beethoven might not have hesitated writing directly to Trauttmansdorff, as he had done so as recently as March 21, 1824 (Anderson, No. 1272, with incorrect addressee; and Brandenburg, No. 1795, noting the correct addressee), about obtaining the Grosser Redoutensaal for April 8. 23 That Schindler did so is evidenced by his entry the next day, Saturday, May 1; see Heft 64, Blatt 11v, immediately below. 24 The potentially disturbing letter from Beethoven to Duport, April 30, 1824, does not appear in the Brandenburg Briefwechsel and seems not to have survived. 25 Schindler’s annotations indicate his imitation in writing of Duport’s foreign speech patterns. 21

82

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

needed the previously promised two rehearsals for these difficult works26 and that Duport’s assumption that he could get by with only one was presumptuous. And Schindler seemingly responded, “Not only presumptuous, but also ridiculous.”27

Saturday, May 1 On Saturday morning, May 1, Beethoven wanted Karl to attend Schuppanzigh’s opening concert in his Augarten summer series, featuring the Fifth Symphony, but Karl had to attend his history and philosophy classes at the university. In his own defense, Karl reminded the composer that only the day before, he had told Karl to be diligent in preparing for his examinations.28 On Saturday afternoon, Schindler came to report that he himself had been at Schuppanzigh’s concert that morning and had arranged for extra basses (meaning violoncellos and contrabasses) to play for Beethoven. If he had not done so, Schindler reasoned rightly, none would have come, because neither Schuppanzigh nor Piringer had specifically arranged for them. He also noted that on Friday, he had arranged for several dilettantes to join the chorus. With an air of deserved satisfaction, he told Beethoven, “The rehearsal for tomorrow is now taken care of as well as possible.”29 Just as importantly, Schindler reported that he had been to see Duport again the day before [Friday, April 30] and that everything was now in order. The first concert would be held in the Kärntnertor Theater, and a different location would be found for the second one. Since Duport also had control of the two Redoutensäle and the Landstand (for concerts), and since the Kleiner Redoutensaal and the Landständischer Saal were too small for Beethoven’s needs, that left the Grosser Redoutensaal, whether specified or not, for the repeat concert. Ticket 26 It is not clear what element of Beethoven’s lost letter of April 30 might have disturbed Duport so deeply. Possibly he attempted to shift the blame for the delay to Duport. Perhaps Schindler was simply exaggerating, as he often did. From the context of this discussion, however, it is possible that Beethoven pressed for two rehearsals spread over two days, and Duport was prepared to allow him only one day, but with the possibility of a double- rehearsal on that day. Beethoven had already had such an experience with an exhausting double-rehearsal at the Theater an der Wien to prepare Symphony No. 2, Piano Concerto No. 3, and the oratorio Christus am Ölberge on April 4, 1803 (with performance on April 5), and he did not want to repeat it with the difficult Missa solemnis and Ninth Symphony, especially with questionable choral forces and an orchestra that was recovering from troubled times. See Theodore Albrecht, “Hyperbole and High Drama: The Chronology and First Performance of Beethoven’s Oratorio Christus am Ölberge, Op. 85,” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 13 (2022), pp. 10–63, specifically pp. 26–28 and 34–35. 27 Heft 64, Blatt 11v. 28 Heft 67, Blätter 5v–6r. 29 Heft 64, Blätter 8r–9r, and 10r.

SATURDAY, MAY 1

83

prices would have to remain as usual. Schindler had actually already been to Beethoven’s lawyer, Johann Baptist Bach, about them, and Bach said that the composer would have to be content with them.30 In view of this, Schindler added, “Just let Duport go for now, until the Akademie is past. I myself have already briefed Bäuerle and Pilat,31 as well as Kanne today, about the whole thing.”32 In addition to informing Beethoven that Emperor Franz and the empress were now planning to depart from the Court on Wednesday, May 5, Schindler turned to other details, done and remaining to be done. Among the dozen or so items, he noted, “I have not looked through the Harmonie parts, because I haven’t had any time.” In this connection we must consider an undated note that Beethoven sent to Peter Gläser, perhaps now, or possibly as early as April 19: “The duplicated parts must still be checked, since several mistakes have been found. N.B. In the Adagio, the second horn in E-flat is missing.”33 That second horn in E-flat part included the multifaceted low horn solo that Beethoven had composed the previous summer, surely with Friedrich Hradetzky in mind.34 Already on Friday, Schindler had given Umlauf and Schuppanzigh notes, presumably signed by Beethoven, that would constitute his official “invitation” for all of the members of the combined orchestra and chorus to participate in the Akademie. Schindler now reported back: “It really pleased me that several of the winds at the Kärntnertor declared that they would take nothing for the rehearsal tomorrow [Sunday, May 2].35 // They said expressly: Anything for Beethoven.”36 30

Heft 64, Blätter 8r–8v. Adolf Bäuerle, of course, was editor of the Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung, and Friedrich August Kanne was editor of the Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung. Court Secretary Joseph Anton Pilat (1782–1865) was editor of the Österreichischer Beobachter from 1811 to 1848. See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 54; and Wurzbach, Vol. 22, p. 281. 32 Heft 64, Blatt 10r. 33 Brandenburg, Nr. 1822 (with the key read as “Es”); Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 193 (with an earlier Russian reading of the key as “G”). The autograph of the letter is in the Wissenschaftliches Forschungsinstitut für Theater, Musik und Film (F.2, op. 2, ed. Chr. 18), St. Petersburg. 34 See Wiener Oboen-Journal 61 (March, 2014), pp. 9–10. 35 The fact that those wind players would attend a rehearsal without a fee must have pleased Beethoven as well. This gesture in 1824 may provide a clue to the inconsistencies in the fees that Beethoven paid orchestra members for the concert of February 27, 1814 (see Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181, for the 1814 payroll). The Kärntnertor’s current winds who had been documented among Beethoven’s 1814 composite orchestra included clarinettist Joseph Dobihal, trumpeter Anton Khayll, and the trombonist Segner. Perhaps flutist Scholl had been there as well but was unlisted. Low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky, who had played for Beethoven in 1814 and surely on other occasions, had been dismissed from the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra effective the end of January, 1824. See, among others, Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 80–81. 36 Heft 64, Blatt 11r. 31

84

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

Copyist Peter Gläser was also to get an invitation. As Schindler observed, changing the subject with almost every sentence, as Beethoven replied in between: “He has already made his profit. // But he breathes quite heavily, as if he had asthma.37 // The smallest thing excites him dreadfully. // I wouldn’t doubt it, if you just go to see him on Monday [May 3] in order to give him a special invitation.”38 The rehearsal scheduled for Sunday, May 2, was to take place at the Landständischer Saal with a portion of the orchestra—seemingly the Kärntnertor winds, the amateur strings (but with the professional leaders, including Schuppanzigh, present), as well as the vocal soloists. To this end, Schindler requested, “I ask you for a note to Umlauf today, so that he will be sure to appear at the Saal of the Landhaus tomorrow [Sunday] at 9 o’clock.”39 Beethoven must have changed the subject, and Schindler brought him back on course, writing, “Later—write it now.”40 As to an extra rehearsal, Schindler wrote, “Dirzka would like a choral rehearsal with you and Umlauf on Monday [May 3] afternoon. Nothing can be done in the theater in the evening.”41 Turning back to the Kärntnertor Theater’s Kapellmeister, Schindler wrote, “[Umlauf lives] in the Untere Breunerstrasse, only I don’t know the [house] number.”42 After a few more turns in the conversation, Schindler finally wrote, “Now be so kind as to write the note to Umlauf; I must leave now.”43 Even so, possibly while Beethoven himself was writing to Umlauf, Schindler remembered to add a logistical necessity: “Tomorrow [Sunday, May 2], it will be necessary for you to engage a Lohnkutscher [rental carriage or fiacre] for half a day, because there will be several errands to be done in a hurry: Sontag and 37

For an earlier reference to Gläser’s health, see Heft 61, Blatt 22v. Heft 64, Blatt 12r. 39 Heft 64, Blatt 12r. The original German reads: “Um ein Briefchen an Umlauf bitte ich Sie heute, daß er Morgen um 9 Uhr sicher im Landhaus Saale erscheint.” The hall where the rehearsal was to be held was the Landständischer Saal. Schindler and Beethoven must have enjoyed this sentence with three uses of “um” in it! Beethoven’s note to Umlauf has not survived. 40 Heft 64, Blatt 12r. 41 Both theaters were already scheduled for that evening. On Monday, May 3, Giovanni Paisiello’s Die Müllerin (a German version of La molinara) was given at the Kärntnertor Theater as a farewell for Henriette Spitzeder (see also Heft 64, Blatt 15v). On the same evening, the Theater an der Wien gave Schiller’s play Maria Stuart (Zettel, both theaters, Theatermuseum, Bibliothek; courtesy Othmar Barnert). 42 Heft 64, Blatt 11r. Michael Umlauf lived in Untere Breunerstrasse No. 1130. Dirzka lived in the Bürgerspital (large apartment complex) No. 1100, Courtyard 2, stairway, 1st floor [2nd floor, American]. See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 73 and 75. 43 Heft 64, Blatt 12v. 38

SATURDAY, MAY 1

85

Haitzinger, who live [at the Theater] an der Wien,44 must be called for and then driven back home. The others live nearby. The coach will cost 5–6 fl. at most. By doing so, you will save several sedan-chair carrier fees. // I have already told Sontag that she should be ready at 10:30, when I’ll pick her up with Haitzinger.”45 In addition to the note to Umlauf, Beethoven probably gave Schindler a note to take to Tobias Haslinger, who was lithographing choral parts for the performance, asking for additional parts for the new members of the Gesellschaft’s chorus who would be joining them. Concerning the reinforcements for the orchestra, he added, “Piringer has been instructed to seek out the 8 best violinists, the 2 best violists, the 2 best contrabassists, [and] the 2 best violoncellists—even if some of them wear wigs [i.e., are old-fashioned]—because the orchestra is to be augmented by that many.” Next to the contrabasses, Beethoven indicated the note “C,” probably indicating that they needed the capability of playing their written C, two lines below the bass clef.46 Therefore, probably late in the afternoon on Saturday, May 1, Schindler left to run his errands. Nephew Karl arrived home, possibly bringing some wine as a gift from brother Johann. “From his estate,” he commented. Then Beethoven and Karl seemingly walked into the City to go to the tailor’s shop. On the way, they may have encountered violinist Joseph Mayseder, possibly even exchanged pleasantries with him, but afterward Beethoven seemingly asked Karl if he knew the violinist’s name, because Karl answered, “Mayseder.”47 Probably somewhere in the center of the City, Beethoven and Karl went to a coffee house to read the newspapers. On this particular day, they encountered Wiener Zeitung editor Joseph Carl Bernard. Beethoven was still obsessing about the late-February petition, and it was now, from Bernard, that he learned its origins and larger political purpose:

44 In late 1822, Haitzinger’s address was—and probably remained in 1824—Laimgrube (an der Wien), No. 26, in the theater building. See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 82. The young Sontag was not yet listed when Ziegler was published. 45 Heft 64, Blatt 12v. 46 Anderson, No. 1277 (with incomplete and garbled text); Brandenburg, No. 1827 (with newly discovered sources); Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 360 (also with recent sources). With this note, Beethoven sent annotated copies of the choral parts already lithographed, so the plates could be corrected before printing new parts from them. The contrabass is an octavating instrument, and Beethoven actually wrote the C as the middle-C above the bass clef as some sort of “wordplay.” 47 Heft 64, Blatt 16r. Joseph Mayseder (1789–1863) was young, handsome, talented, and a fashionable teacher. He was initially a student (1797) of Joseph Suche (ca. 1745 or 1751/1753–1840), concertmaster at the Theater auf der Wieden at the premiere of Mozart’s Die Zauberflöte; then of Anton Wranitzky (1798); and thereafter with Schuppanzigh, through whom he met Beethoven early on. He had joined the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra on September 23, 1810, and was now its “solo player.”

86

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

“Concerning the letter,48 I can tell you that it is the product of the Ludlamshöhle,49 a beer house next to the Trattnerhof, where Castelli,50 Kuffner,51 Deinhardstein,52 [editor] Bäuerle, and many others congregate. They wanted to strike a blow against the Italians with it. Earlier they used Weber53 in the same way.”54 Concerning relatively recent performances of Beethoven’s Mass in C, Bernard continued, “Three pieces from your Mass were given in the Concerts spirituels. Sanctus, Benedictus, and a third one.”55 His information was probably not entirely accurate, but his enthusiasm was certainly evident.

48 The petition or address sent to Beethoven in late February, 1824 (discussed repeatedly above); among its thirty signers were Ignaz Castelli, Christoph Kuffner, and Johann Ludwig Deinhardstein. 49 The Ludlamshöhle, a social organization of artists, authors, and merchants, held their meetings in the Gasthaus of J. Haidvogel in the Schlossergasse. In 1826, the organization was forbidden because of its alleged danger to the state. See Castelli, II, pp. 1–3. 50 Ignaz Castelli (1781–1862), Austrian poet and theatrical author. See Wurzbach, Vol. 2, pp. 303–305; and Clive, pp. 68–69. 51 Christoph Kuffner (1780–1846), musically gifted poet; an official in the Court War Council since 1803. Carl Czerny reported that he participated in the creation of the text of Beethoven’s Choral Fantasy, Op. 80, in 1808, confirmed by Klaus Martin Kopitz, “Wer schrieb den Text zu Beethovens Chorphantasie? Ein unbekannter Bericht über die Uraufführung,” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 3 (2003), pp. 43–46. See Albrecht, “Beethoven’s Portrait of the Theater an der Wien’s Orchestra”; as well as ADB, Vol. 17, pp. 302–304; Frimmel, Handbuch, I, p. 313; Kinsky-Halm, p. 212; Clive, pp. 198–199. 52 Johann Ludwig Deinhardstein (1794–1859), dramatic poet; assistant professor of aesthetics since 1822; professor of aesthetics and classical literature at the Theresianum from 1825. See Goedeke, IX, pp. 88–90; Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, II, p. 143; Wiener Zeitung, No. 283 (December 13, 1825), p. 1187. 53 During his stays in Vienna in 1822 and 1823, Carl Maria von Weber had been named a member of the Ludlamshöhle. On the occasion of the performance of his opera Euryanthe on October 25, 1823, he was supported by this organization in its exchanges with adherents of Italian opera. See Max Maria von Weber, Carl Maria von Weber (Berlin, 1912), pp. 415–417. 54 Heft 64, Blätter 16v–17r. 55 Heft 64, Blatt 17r. None of the recent concert reports matches Bernard’s description exactly. The Viennese Concerts spirituels performed the Credo of Beethoven’s Mass in C, Op. 86, on April 1, 1824, and the Agnus Dei/Dona nobis pacem on April 8, 1824. On the basis of remarks in Heft 65, Blatt 33r, the German editors believed that Bernard was referring to the Concerts spirituels in Paris, where Beethoven’s Benedictus and Agnus Dei (possibly even movements from the Missa solemnis) were performed. Given the problems that Beethoven was currently having with the copying work for the Missa solemnis and Ninth Symphony, this seems virtually impossible. See the Leipzig AmZ 26, No. 21 (May 20, 1824), cols. 342–343; No. 34 (August 19, 1824),cols. 549 and 551; as well as the

SUNDAY, MAY 2

87

They went on to other topics, and then Bernard chanced to look around the coffee house, noting, “Herr von Tuscher56 is sitting at the table in the middle. Tuscher says that they [the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde] can no longer perform great music. // There are nothing but house concerts.”57 Schindler may have joined the group just before Bernard departed and advised Beethoven that the editor’s advice was sound. From his own errands, he had confirmed and learned several things: “Tomorrow [Sunday], there is no Sontag at the theater.58 He [presumably Umlauf ] cannot rehearse anymore today; it will go together right away tomorrow morning. // Tomorrow I am coming at 8 o’clock and beseech you to be ready, like a Musketeer, so we can then march off at 8:30.”59 Schindler probably headed back to the Josephstadt, where he lived and worked, and Beethoven and Karl probably headed to the tailor’s shop to get some new clothes for the upcoming Akademie. Afterward, the composer and his nephew may have spent the rest of the evening proofreading his unchecked Harmonie parts. And so matters stood before the first large-scale—but still partial—rehearsal.

Sunday, May 2—The First Rehearsal with Orchestra and Soloists60 As he had projected the day before, Schindler arrived at Beethoven’s apartment at 8 o’clock61 on Sunday morning, May 2, probably already in the fiacre that Wiener AmZ 8, No. 25 (April 28, 1824), p. 98; No. 29 (May 8, 1824), p. 114; No. 30 (May 12, 1824), p. 117; and No. 31 (May 15, 1824), p. 122. 56 Mathias Tuscher (ca. 1775–1860), councillor in the Magistrat (City Administration), belonged to the Representative Board of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde and was simultaneously a practicing member (singing). From March 26 to July 5, 1819, Tuscher was guardian of Beethoven’s nephew Karl. See Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten, 1823 (reflecting 1821), p. 353; Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 668, and II, p. 341; ThayerDeiters-Riemann, IV, pp. 139–141 and 144; and Clive, pp. 373–374. 57 Heft 64, Blatt 19r. Because of a case of childhood smallpox, Beethoven was nearsighted and probably could not discern Tuscher from a distance. 58 Original German: kein Sonntag (in the masculine form), meaning “no Sunday,” but probably also a wordplay on soprano Henriette Sontag’s name. In this case, there were performances in all three of Vienna’s major theaters (Kärntnertor, Burg, and an der Wien) on Sunday, May 2, 1824, but Henriette Sontag did not perform in any of them. Therefore, Schindler is indicating that she would probably be available for rehearsal that day. 59 Heft 64, Blatt 21r. 60 From this point, the narrative includes as many pertinent direct quotes from the conversation books as possible, to provide the reader an incomparable sense of being present at these momentous events. 61 On Heft 64, Blatt 21r, Schindler projected arriving at Beethoven’s apartment at 8 o’clock the next morning.

88

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

he had hired for half a day. Even though Umlauf lived only a ten-minute walk from the Landständischer Saal, he had the heavy and awkward scores of the Missa solemnis and Ninth Symphony to carry, and so, probably before Beethoven was ready to leave his apartment, Schindler went to pick up the conductor: “I’ll get Umlauf with the carriage.” Returning a little later, Schindler reported, “He has already left his house.”62 The rehearsal at the Landständischer Saal63 was scheduled to begin at 9 a.m. for the winds and amateur strings (with professional section leaders). As they were setting up, two new members of the Kärntnertor Theater orchestra approached Beethoven and Schindler, probably seated in the audience area: “The bassoonist [Hürth]64 and the first hornist [Lewy]65 wish to pay you their compliments.” Beethoven surely greeted them warmly and later asked Schindler to repeat their names for him. Having had a chance to look at the scores overnight (!), Kapellmeister Umlauf came to Beethoven with his concerns, written by Schindler on his behalf: “Umlauf believes that it will not come together well in two rehearsals; he himself does not know his way around [the scores] yet.”66 As Beethoven and Schindler still sat in the audience, Umlauf began the rehearsal with the Ninth Symphony. It occasioned a number of remarks and even recriminations from the indignant Schindler: “The winds [Harmonie] are going to the devil. // Do it only with strings. // Why didn’t [concertmaster] Schuppanzigh take care of that? He surely knew that.”67 Beethoven’s oral replies, interspersed, probably attempted to calm his garrulous secretary. The problem in the Scherzo seems to have been the repeats, the Da Capo, and other designations. Schindler asked Beethoven, “What is going on with the Scherzo, then? Is it written out?”68 The page turns were seemingly awkward and unclear; this problem would need attention before the next rehearsal!

62

Heft 64, Blatt 22v. The location was designated on Heft 64, Blatt 12r. 64 For new principal bassoonist Theobald Hürth, see references from Heft 64, Blatt 27v, under “The Ride Home and Dinner” below. 65 For new principal hornist Elias (later Eduard Constantin) Lewy, see references from Heft 64, Blatt 27v, under “The Ride Home and Dinner” below. 66 Heft 64, Blatt 22v. Umlauf had not received at least one of the scores, presumably the Ninth Symphony, until the evening of Saturday, May 1 (see Heft 64, Blätter 10v–11r), for a rehearsal at 9 a.m. the next day! 67 Heft 64, Blatt 23r. 68 Heft 64, Blatt 23r. The nine original string parts owned by the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde show no signs of written-out repeated passages in the Scherzo; see Heft 64, Blatt 26r, and Heft 65, Blatt 6v. 63

SUNDAY, MAY 2

89

The third movement occasioned no comments in the conversation book, possibly because Schindler had left at ca. 10:15 to pick up soprano Sontag and tenor Haitzinger at 10:30 and returned at ca. 10:45.69 With all four soloists present, the basic reading of the Finale seems to have gone well up to the Allegro energico and a problem with its meter. Umlauf must have brought Beethoven’s working score (with the designation 3/2 written in it) out to the composer for a decision. As Schindler wrote on the conductor’s behalf, “6/4 time; Umlauf believes so, as well.”70 By the break after the rehearsal of the Symphony, probably at 11: 30 or so, it had become apparent that Duport’s projection for a performance on Tuesday, May 4, was impossible and that Beethoven’s circle would have to concoct an alternate plan. Schindler negotiated his way through their collective reasoning: “The flyers for Wednesday [May 5] are supposed to be posted already tomorrow [Monday, May 3]. If it doesn’t work, this would have to be altered. // But if it [the performance] is not Wednesday, it must wait until Friday, because Thursday is an Italian opera.”71 And so Friday, May 7, emerged as the best date for Beethoven’s Akademie under the newly revised plan. As Schindler put it in writing for Beethoven to see: “Hold choral rehearsals tomorrow afternoon [Monday, May 3], large-scale [rehearsals] on Tuesday [May 4] and Wednesday [May 5], and then another on Thursday [May 6], and then it will work.” Beethoven probably asked if they were sure that this plan would work, and Schindler responded, “It is better, though.”72 Schindler’s conversation turned briefly to the Missa solemnis, probably as the break ended and performers returned to rehearsing, but the references are not clear: “Is the Mass out…. // Pray perhaps.”73 Schindler’s attentions turned to the solo singers: “I am going to see Preisinger.”74 // “The girls [Sontag and Unger] don’t understand their parts; they must have a rehearsal for themselves alone.”75 //

69

Heft 64, Blatt 12v. 64, Blatt 23r. The “Allegro energico, sempre ben marcato” reads “3/2” in Beethoven’s working autograph but correctly “6/4” in the GA. See Beethoven, Gesamtausgabe, Series 1, No. 9, pp. 237–240; Beethoven, Sinfonie Nr. 9, facsimile, pp. 346–351. 71 On Thursday, May 6, Rossini’s opera Edoardo e Cristina was performed for the second time in the Kärntnertor Theater. See Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 17, No. 59 (May 15, 1824), pp. 234–236. 72 Heft 64, Blätter 23v–24r (all three conversational items in this sequence). 73 Heft 64, Blatt 24r. 74 Bass Joseph Preisinger (1796–1865), recently engaged by the Kärntnertor Theater, earlier active as an amateur pianist. 75 Heft 64, Blätter 24r–24v. 70 Heft

90

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

Schindler probably consulted briefly with others in charge of scheduling and came back with the best scenario: “Therefore the unanimous conclusion, with your consent, is [to postpone the performance] until Friday [May 7]. Tomorrow [Monday, May 3], a rehearsal with the solo singers; Tuesday [May 4], a large-scale rehearsal; Wednesday [May 5], a small-scale [rehearsal]; Thursday [May 6], the general [dress] rehearsal.”76 After the rehearsal, the concertmaster Schuppanzigh came out into the audience area to talk about the difficult situation: “This music defies efforts to clean it up; it will be better if we can get a few more days.” He too confirmed, “The women solo singers don’t know a note yet.”77 Knowing that the conductor wanted more time to study them, Schindler reminded Beethoven, “The score for Umlauf.” Thinking ahead, he wrote, “We could also hold the large-scale rehearsal here [Landständischer Saal] on Tuesday [May 4]; I’ll take care of getting more stands. There is no light in the Redoutensaal.” He also noted, “The chorus is sitting below,” probably in the pit in front of the Kärntnertor Theater’s stage, similar to the arrangement visible in Balthasar Wigand’s famous depiction of the performance of Haydn’s Creation in the university’s Aula on March 27, 1808.78

The Ride Home and Dinner Beethoven and Schindler probably rode with Sontag and Haitzinger back out to the Theater an der Wien, dropped them off, and continued around the Glacis to Beethoven’s apartment in the Ungargasse. Possibly during the ride, once they were alone, Schindler wrote, “The theater’s Harmonie [wind section] is really miserable. // There are no dilettantes in addition to the theater winds here now.”79 Once they arrived back at Beethoven’s apartment at ca. 2:30 p.m., Beethoven paid the coachman:80 “He has enough with 7 fl. 30 kr. // He has driven a great deal.”

76 Heft 64, Blatt 24v. This rehearsal schedule represents a refinement of the schedule proposed as recently as Blatt 24r. 77 Heft 64, Blatt 25r. 78 Heft 64, Blätter 25r–25v. Seemingly the placement of the chorus in front of the orchestra, either below a raised stage at the Landstand, or in the pit—in front of and below the stage where the orchestra would be seated—in the Kärntnertor Theater. See Albrecht, “The Musicians in Balthasar Wigand’s Depiction of the Performance of Haydn’s Die Schöpfung, Vienna, March 27, 1808,” Music in Art, International Journal for Music Iconography 29 (Spring–Fall, 2004), pp. 123–133. 79 Heft 64, Blatt 25v. 80 The coachman had been engaged at ca. 8 a.m. on Sunday, May 2; see Heft 64, Blatt 22v.

THE RIDE HOME AND DINNER

91

They probably carried upstairs to Beethoven’s apartment the orchestral parts to the Scherzo that still required work the next day. Schindler projected, “Gläser is coming tomorrow [Monday, May 3] by 10 o’clock and will do everything here [Beethoven’s apartment]. [//] And the way he will do it is the shortest and surest.”81 They probably continued this conversation at dinner,82 presumably in Beethoven’s Stammlokal (favorite restaurant), the spacious Goldene Birne (Golden Pear) in the Landstrasser Hauptstrasse, only a block and a half away from his apartment: “God preserve you from new corrections. // To have the Scherzo written out [is better, I believe].”83 But there would not be time to copy the Scherzo anew with written-out repeats or to insert written-out repeats into the existing parts, both of which would have presented new problems in proofreading and continuity. Evidently Schindler came up with the idea of pasting tabs onto the outer margins of the existing pages of the Scherzo to facilitate page turns for the various repeats and the Da Capo: “It will be better, the way I have shown him. // For example, it will be done that way with tabs pasted in.”84 Nearly two hundred years after the premiere, it is almost inconceivable that a conductor could conduct the premiere of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony with only overnight to look at the manuscript score before the first rehearsal. But Schindler’s entry after the rehearsal seems to indicate that Umlauf now had the scores and could study them before the next rehearsal. As Schindler now reassured Beethoven, “Since all of them are accustomed to him [conductor Umlauf ], it will go all right by the time he himself knows the score. // But he also goes with the orchestra.”85 But there were still worries about the solo singers and a projected extra piano rehearsal for the girls: “Haitzinger did not receive the [tenor solo] part from Jäger until today and learned it quite passably well—but the two girls [Sontag and

81

Heft 64, Blatt 26r. Beethoven and Schindler could not have arrived at the Birne much before 2:45 p.m. There is no discussion of food in the conversation book, but since Beethoven was a Stammgast, a regular guest (and Schindler would have been familiar as well), there may have been little discussion about what they could be served at that late hour, even on a Sunday, and the waiter would surely have brought something to their taste. 83 Heft 64, Blatt 26r. If Gläser was going to write out the repeated sections of the Scherzo (as it appears from Blatt 23r above, and the entries immediately below), he would need space (such as was probably available at the Landstand) to spread the orchestral parts out for easier assembly. Schindler added the bracketed words later. 84 Heft 64, Blatt 26r. Angle brackets indicate a crossed-out word. Schindler’s word for “tabs” is Klammern. See the session for inserting them into the orchestral parts under “Monday, May 3” in chapter 5. 85 Heft 64, Blatt 26v. 82

92

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

Unger] don’t know what they are singing. // I am least concerned about him. [//] For the poor girls.”86 About the extra choral rehearsal at the Kärntnertor Theater, projected already on Saturday, Schindler wrote, “I forgot about it. // Herr Dirzka will do it tomorrow afternoon [Monday, May 3].”87 Probably fifteen minutes or so after Beethoven and Schindler arrived, an acquaintance, possibly Liechtenstein clarinettist Wenzel Sedlak, entered the restaurant,88 and Schindler commented, “He came with one of the orchestra members.” Beethoven may have lamented that the current clarinettists at the Kärntnertor were not at the level he would have liked. Schindler commented, “Don’t take it badly, but does [clarinettist] Friedlowsky have time?89 // If there aren’t any large-scale works [at the Theater an der Wien], his son substitutes for him; ergo audiamus [therefore, let us hear him].”90 Indeed, Joseph Friedlowsky had been Beethoven’s customary clarinettist in the years 1803–1814 and would have been his preferred performer now. Turning to another subject momentarily, Schindler asked, “Who was the stranger from Mainz?” He may have been referring to Christian Rummel (1787– 1849), wind band Kapellmeister for the Second Nassau Infantry Regiment, who

86

Heft 64, Blätter 26v–27r. A Monday afternoon choral rehearsal at the Kärntnertor Theater; see Heft 64, Blätter 10v–11r. 88 The number of orchestra members mentioned suggests that Beethoven and Schindler might have repaired to a restaurant close to the Landstand, but since the others are not mentioned as being present there and then (and given Beethoven’s logistical need to return home right after the rehearsal), the location is still most likely his Stammlokal, the Birne on Landstrasser Hauptstrasse, and the arrival of the two musicians mentioned here was essentially coincidental. It is also possible that the orchestral musicians knew that the Birne would be the logical place to find Beethoven and went to eat there for that reason. 89 Joseph Friedlowsky (1777–1859), clarinettist, member of the Theater an der Wien, teacher at the Conservatory of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, and later member of the Hofkapelle. The Czech-born Friedlowsky had come to Vienna in 1802. Beethoven wrote prominent solos for him in Symphonies No. 4, 6, and 8, as well as the Violin Concerto and Choral Fantasy. In 1828, Schubert would write the clarinet part in Der Hirt auf dem Felsen for him; it was premiered, however, by his son Anton in 1830. See Böckh, 1823 (reflecting 1821), p. 367; Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 87 and 118; and Albrecht, “Beethoven’s Portrait of the Theater an der Wien’s Orchestra in His Choral Fantasy, Op. 80” in Beiträge zu Biographie und Schaffensprozess bei Beethoven, ed. Jürgen May (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2011), pp. 1–26; and Clive, pp. 116–118. 90 Anton Friedlowsky (1804–1875), son of Joseph Friedlowsky and part of a large musical family, had joined the Theater an der Wien’s orchestra as second clarinettist between 1818 and 1822. On March 21, 1830, he premiered the clarinet part in Schubert’s Der Hirt auf dem Felsen (originally written for his father). See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 87; Weston, p. 170; Schilling, III, pp. 58–59. 87

THE RIDE HOME AND DINNER

93

arrived in Vienna on April 28, 1824, and delivered to Beethoven a letter from the publisher B. Schott’s Söhne in Mainz.91 Now Schindler continued, “The other is Sedlak, Prince Liechtenstein’s Harmonie director;92 they are coming right from the start.”93 It is unclear whether Theobald Hürth and Elias Lewy were present at the restaurant or whether Beethoven simply remembered them from meeting them that morning and asked Schindler about them again: “The 94 bassoonist and hornist of the Kärntnertor [Theater]. // All of them were from the Kärntnertor. // They were Hürth95 and Lewy;96 both have only recently been called here from Switzerland.”97 After dinner, Schindler and Beethoven walked back to the composer’s apartment, where there were pen and paper. Schindler noted in the conversation book, “What I am asking you very nicely to do is to write a note to [choral 91

See Heft 69, Blatt 1v. Sedlak (1776–1851), clarinettist, Kapellmeister to Prince Johann von Liechtenstein. See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 47; Pohl, Tonkünstler-Societät, p. 109 (joined 1805; member No. 209). In the Wiener Zeitung, No. 27 (January 27, 1815), p. 107, the publisher Artaria advertised Sedlak’s 1814 arrangement of 11 movements from Beethoven’s Fidelio for 9-part Harmonie; see also Kinsky-Halm, p. 185. 93 This seemingly refers to the whole Liechtenstein Harmonie. In fall, 1822, they had consisted of Wenzel Sedlak (1776–1851), principal clarinet and leader; Joseph Freyberger (1799–1830), second clarinet; Gotthart Gebauer (1796–1839) and Emanuel Erler (b. 1790), oboes; Franz Bubenik (b. 1795) and Johann Holub (b. 1790/1793), horns; and Anton Soyka (1800–after 1856) and Wenzel Gruss (b. 1798), bassoons. See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, passim. 94 This was a slip of the pen (or pencil), but the flutist in the Kärntnertor Theater best known to Beethoven was Karl Scholl (1778–1854). In Heft 63, Blatt 9v, Schindler, on Beethoven’s behalf, had asked Scholl about a trill on F. At the rehearsal on Sunday, May 2, Scholl’s walking stick was stolen; see Heft 65, Blatt 12v–13r. Beethoven would also have wanted to engage the Burgtheater’s principal flutist, Aloys Khayll (1791–1866), for whom he had written piccolo parts since the Fifth Symphony in 1808. 95 Theobald Hürth (1795–1858) arrived in Vienna from Switzerland on November 23, 1823, to become principal bassoonist of the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra. See Wiener Zeitung, No. 272 (November 26, 1823), p. 1101; Wurzbach, Vol. 9, p. 405. 96 Elias (later Eduard Constantin) Lewy (1796–1846) came to Vienna from Switzerland late in 1823 and became principal hornist in the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra. Although he had a wide range, Lewy was essentially a high hornst. The horn “solo” in the third movement of the Ninth Symphony is for a low hornist, surely composed with the Kärntneror Theater’s long-time low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky in mind. See Wiener AmZ 8, No. 10 (March 24, 1824), p. 39; Wurzbach, Vol. 15, pp. 48–49; and Theodore Albrecht, “Elias (Eduard Constantin) Lewy and the First Performance of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony,” Horn Call 29 (May, 1999), pp. 27–33, 85–94, and cover illustration. 97 Heft 64, Blatt 27v. 92 Wenzel

94

FINAL PREPARATIONS/FIRST REHEARSALS

director] Herr Dirzka, in which you ask him to take pains with the training of the choruses. You can be assured that a few words from you will work wonders. And, at the same time, ask him to assemble his collected personnel on Tuesday [May 4] at 10 o’clock at the Landständischer Saal.”98 Nephew Karl was home by now, late in the afternoon of Sunday, May 2, perhaps preparing lessons for a class in Old German linguistics, and chatted about the subject with Beethoven and Schindler. Before leaving, Schindler returned to the subject of the extra rehearsals, either for the young women soloists or for the chorus: “At 5 o’clock. If it stays the same, I shall tell you for sure tomorrow [Monday, May 3].”99 Projecting the next day’s work, making changes to the orchestral parts to the Scherzo of the Symphony, Schindler reassured Beethoven, “Gläser knows everything; I have already indicated it to him.” And a few minutes later, “I am coming tomorrow, in any case earlier than Gläser, so we can do everything very quickly.”100 As seems often the case, Schindler refused to leave until Beethoven had written one remaining letter: “Now my only wish is that you would make arrangements with Herr Dirzka.”101 Schindler remained long enough for Beethoven to write the note to Dirzka and then departed with it. Then Beethoven, as was his custom, went to a coffee house late in the afternoon to have a cup of coffee and perhaps a pipe of tobacco, and took Karl with him.102 Thus ended a busy and eventful Sunday, May 2, 1824—five days before his Akademie.

98

Heft 64, Blatt 28r. For a projected rehearsal for Sontag and Unger on Monday (but at an undetermined time), see Heft 64, Blatt 24v. For a choral rehearsal projected for Monday afternoon, see Heft 64, Blätter 24r and 27r. 100 Heft 64, Blätter 28v and 29v. 101 Heft 64, Blatt 29v. 102 Karl later referred to being in a coffee house on Sunday, May 2, and encountering a former teacher from Cajetan Giannatasio del Rio’s school who wished Beethoven well and projected that he would make 10,000 fl. from the concert, because the nobility would pay well; see Heft 64, Blatt 30v. 99

Chapter 5

Rehearsals and Confusion Monday, May 3, 1824—Tabbing the Scherzo On Monday, May 3, copyist Peter Gläser (possibly accompanied by a member of his staff) arrived at Beethoven’s apartment in the Ungargasse by 10 o’clock in the morning.1 Schindler had presumably arrived prior to that time2 to set up the assembly line for pasting tabs into the orchestral parts for the Scherzo of the Ninth Symphony to facilitate page turning. Beethoven probably indicated where they should be placed; Gläser tipped them in; and Beethoven double-checked their placement.3 Assuming two players per stand in the strings, this would have entailed work on at least 6 first violin parts, 6 seconds, 5 violas, and a total of at least 6 violoncello/contrabass parts; plus 2 flute parts, 2 oboes, 2 clarinets, 2 bassoons, 4 horns, 3 trombones, 2 trumpets, and 1 timpani part, for a total of at least 41 orchestral parts.4 The project probably took several hours.

1 For plans and library activities projected for Monday, May 3, starting by 10 a.m., see Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 64, Blätter 23r, 26r, 28v, and 29v. 2 Heft 64, Blatt 29v. 3 Heft 64, Blatt 26r. Schindler’s word for “tabs” is Klammern, and the physical application is unclear from the conversation book entry alone. The nine original orchestral parts (3 first violins, 3 second violins, 3 violoncello/contrabass) for the Scherzo preserved among the “Uraufführung” (premiere performance) parts for the Symphony No. 9 in the Archive and Library of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, Vienna, however, clearly show the remnants of tabs that were pasted onto the outer margins of the pages (with the tabs probably extending beyond the outer edge) to facilitate speedy and accurate page turns. The parts do not exhibit any later written-out repeats, as are periodically suggested in these discussions. My gratitude to Dr. Otto Biba, Dr. Ingrid Fuchs, and Frau Ilse Kosz for allowing me access to these materials in June, 2014. 4 Trombone parts from the premiere, with corrections in Beethoven’s hand, formerly in the possession of B. Schott’s Söhne, Mainz, and now in the Juilliard Manuscript Collection, New York, were used for a new edition by Dr. Beate Angelika Kraus (Beethoven-Haus, Bonn), published by Henle early in 2020. In the Scherzo, the trombones play only in the Trio and would not have needed the tabs. A contrabassoon part is in the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, but does not play in the Scherzo and so would not

96

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

There are no conversation book entries from this session. Probably Beethoven was busy checking the work, possibly because there were plenty of cut or leftover slips of paper to use in writing questions, but more likely they simply spoke loudly among themselves when they needed to. Schindler presumably worked along with the others but evidently took some time out in the afternoon to run various errands, including going to the Kärntnertor Theater to remind stage director Gottdank and manager Duport to call the orchestra for a rehearsal the next morning.5

have been supplied with tabs. My thanks to Dr. Kraus for her helpful correspondence, March 11, 2015. Most of the manuscript materials for the Ninth Symphony at the Juilliard School originated from the collection of its first publisher, B. Schott’s Söhne in Mainz: (a) full score, copyist’s copy with annotations in Beethoven’s hand, including “wieder nicht gut” (again not good), third movement, bar 55 (fourth horn part); “du verfluchter Kerl” (you accursed fool), fourth movement, bar 291 (rests in the trumpet and timpani lines); and “asinoccio.” The score includes red markings, probably in the hand of conductor Michael Umlauf, and was probably used by him at the premiere. This is Jonathan Del Mar’s source “C.” For its origins, see the sections on copyists Paul Maschek and Peter Gläser in chapter 2 of this book; (b) early sketches for the first movement, one leaf (ca. 1817); (c) four chorus parts without autograph annotations, apparently used for the first performances; (d) four solo vocal parts without autograph annotations, apparently used for the first performances. (e) three trombone parts probably copied from autograph parts (Beethoven-Haus, Bodmer Mh 28); a few corrections seemingly in Beethoven’s hand; (f ) “performance annotations” (housed with the soprano solo part), indicating where rehearsal letters A, B, C, D, etc. were to be placed into the vocal parts. These may have originated in Mainz rather than Vienna. Lockwood cites his own observations and those of Jonathan Del Mar, Critical Commentary to his edition of the Symphony, imprint no. 9009 (Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1996/1999), pp. 16–17 and 22–23. Lockwood’s description will be published in a guide to the Juilliard Library’s Manuscript Collections, ed. Jane Gottlieb, forthcoming. Courtesy Lewis Lockwood, Boston, February 4–10, 2023; and Juilliard Manuscript Collections (website, its materials fully digitized). Beethoven’s annotations in the Maschek-Gläser score (above) have been described as “furiously entered into the margins,” but in fact they are legible, disciplined, faintly written comments, obviously made after he had checked the score once before, and his requests for corrections still not made to his satisfaction. These are merely grumbles, made under his breath, so to speak. For an example of Beethoven truly furious (and in a scribbled draft reply that was never sent), see copyist Ferdinand Wolanek’s note to Beethoven, ca. March 23–25, 1825 (Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 399; and Brandenburg, Briefwechsel, Nos. 1952, 1953, and 1953a). 5 Schindler reported concerning this the next day, in Heft 65, Blatt 1r.

TUESDAY, MAY 4—MORNING

97

With the orchestral parts for the Scherzo tied up in revisions, it would have been difficult to hold an orchestral rehearsal during this period. It is also questionable whether Beethoven would have been able to get away long enough to walk the ca. 35 minutes to the Kärntnertor Theater, where Dirzka’s choral rehearsal was being held in the afternoon.6 In any case, nephew Karl attended that choral rehearsal, returned home, and reported, “For a first time, it went very well. The basses got going like blazes. It will be splendid when all the participants are present for the whole thing. I’m going to the general rehearsal on Thursday [May 6] in any case.”7

Tuesday, May 4—Morning On Tuesday, May 4, the orchestra and chorus were supposed to hold separate rehearsals at the Landstand at 10 a.m.; but when Beethoven arrived, shortly before they were to begin, he was astounded to learn that the chorus was present but the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra was not. “The orchestra received absolutely no notification about a rehearsal from Duport,” reported Schindler, who had taken pains the previous day to remind the theater administration of the event, and who had engaged a fiacre for half a day in order to run errands more efficiently. “I’m on my way to see Duport.” To save the morning, he recommended, “Dirzka is already rehearsing with the entire chorus; go to that with [concertmaster] Schuppanzigh in the meantime.”8 And so Beethoven and Schuppanzigh went upstairs to the choral rehearsal. Schuppanzigh commented, “They [the combined choruses] are singing it for the first time; they want to sing a little slower at the beginning. They must really take their time, because they don’t know it yet.” After sitting there for a little while, Schuppanzigh became restless: “Meanwhile, I’ll look downstairs to see what’s going on with the orchestra.”9 He must have encountered conductor Michael Umlauf, who came up to tell Beethoven, “We won’t be able to hold any rehearsal today; nothing has been said to the theater orchestra.”10

6 For a projected afternoon rehearsal with Dirzka (presumably at the Kärntnertor Theater), see Heft 64, Blatt 27r. For an idea that Beethoven and general conductor Umlauf might attend the choral rehearsal, see Heft 64, Blatt 10v. 7 Heft 64, Blätter 30r–31r. Karl also confirmed with Beethoven the way in which the baritone’s recitative “summons” (Aufruf) took place, and the way that the selected excerpts from Schiller’s “An die Freude” were presented, with choral refrain after the soloists initially sang a stanza. 8 Heft 65, Blatt 1r. 9 Heft 65, Blatt 1v. 10 Heft 65, Blatt 2r, written in red pencil.

98

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

Schindler probably returned from the theater at about 11 a.m., bringing apologies from Duport, and the explanation that Gottdank had forgotten to reserve the orchestra.11 Duport himself had promised to take care of it for the next day: “The orchestra is reserved for 9:30 [on Wednesday morning]. // It would be nice. // In the 2nd Violins. // If everyone pays close attention to what’s going on, then there can be absolutely no confusion.”12 Whereas Schuppanzigh was generous in his estimate of the progress of the choral rehearsal, Schindler was characteristically less so: “The solo singers of the Verein are singing along; those of the theater only with difficulty.” Schindler’s real value, however, was running errands as long as he did not interfere, and so he asked Beethoven, “Give me the other score now, so he can bind them.”13 Beethoven’s autograph working score indicates that up to p. 278 (the end of the bass singer’s recitative in the Finale), the composer consistently used 16-stave paper. Starting with p. 279 (the bass’s statement of “Freude, schöner Götterfunken,” etc.), he used 23-stave paper, especially when the soloists and chorus were involved, although extended passages are on 16-stave paper, as well. In any case, the score was evidently in two distinct parts that needed to be bound.14 While he was out running errands, Schindler had also taken the liberty of consulting with Beethoven’s lawyer (and Schindler’s earlier employer), Johann Baptist Bach, about what might happen if Duport failed to honor his agreement for a second concert at the Grosser Redoutensaal. Schindler now reported, “Today we agreed upon the following with Bach: that if you were resolved to repeat the Akademie, he would be prepared to make immediate arrangements that the university hall [Saal or Aula] would be cleared out for you. He wants you to be assured that he is able to do this for you without fees, except for the arrangements for the orchestra.15 // In this case, he has entirely approved my plan, namely [to use] only a simple orchestra [without supplemental personnel] and the chorus and the solo singers, as now—then it would be of benefit. [//] This year, he is adviser and executive secretary of the university.16 Then Schindler continued his rationale: “You will not make much profit the first time, but will lose [money]—by no means. However, this is too little—but it is the only way possible to acquaint the public at large with the greatness of 11 Heft 65, Blatt 8v; Schindler reported the same meeting, emphasizing different details. 12 Heft 65, Blatt 3r. 13 Heft 65, Blatt 4r. 14 See Beethoven, Sinfonie Nr. 9, d-Moll, Op. 125, facsimile (Leipzig: Peters, 1975); and Gesamtausgabe, Series 1, No. 9, pp. 197–198. See also Heft 65, Blatt 36r. 15 For the costs associated with this possibility, see Heft 67, Blatt 2r. 16 In 1820, Dr. Johann Baptist Bach was “Procurator of the Austrian Nation” at the University of Vienna. In 1824, there is no longer reference to him in this office. See Hofund Staats-Schematismus, 1820, II, p. 89.

TUESDAY, MAY 4—MORNING

99

the work—without defraying extraordinary costs. // At the second performance, this expenditure of energy is no longer necessary. The public will already know beforehand what it will hear.”17 By this time, Beethoven was probably counting on having additional professional players like the Theater an der Wien’s clarinettist Joseph Friedlowsky, the Kärntnertor’s recently dismissed low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky, and the Burgtheater’s piccolo player Aloys Khayll, among other longtime associates. Schindler (who had known Beethoven well only since fall, 1822) and especially lawyer Bach would not have been aware of many of these earlier personnel preferences, although Schuppanzigh, who had cosigned Beethoven’s personnel payroll on February 27, 1814, would have.18 Schindler now turned the blame for this “mess” [Säurey] on brother Johann, who had acted arrogantly toward Duport. In fact, he was largely correct in that accusation, because (as noted in the section “Copyist Peter Gläser”) Johann had visited Duport two times and then hurriedly applied to the high chamberlain’s office on March 13 to secure the Redoutensaal on April 7, before he himself left for two weeks on his estate in Gneixendorf. In the midst of all this, Schindler reassured Beethoven that he had reserved the musicians, and he asked the composer to be ready to go by 9 o’clock the next morning so he could look over the whole placement of the orchestra earlier, before the rehearsal began, adding, “Rest assured that Umlauf will do everything that he can, and if there are also other things left to be desired, then these should be of no great importance. // Yesterday [Monday, May 3], I really admired how, at first glance, he knew his way around the score.” Schindler then departed for the Redoutensaal to arrange everything there.19 Left alone to observe the choral rehearsal at the Landstand, probably late in the morning, Beethoven began jotting ideas in his conversation book: “In all the parts: D.S. with red pencil, going forward and back,” pertaining to the Scherzo. Also one articulation refinement each for the violoncello and (with red pencil) the violins. And then: “Check the trombones in the Overture again. “‘angenehmere;’ Preisinger ad libitum; slower; ‘und freudevoll.’ [sic]. “Apply red pencil to crescendo. “Check Violino I in the first Allegro [the first movement]; “Bassi and contrabassoon of the Mass taken along; the Overture taken along.” One of the sopranos from the chorus of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, a

17

Heft 65, Blätter 4v–5r. See the discussion concerning Friedlowsky in Heft 64, Blatt 27r; and Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181. 19 Heft 65, Blätter 5v–6v. 18

100

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

later Frau Grebner,20 then perhaps 16 years old, recalled that “Beethoven was placed among the performers at the rehearsals and performance. In front of him, he had a desk on which his manuscript lay.… His voice was a sonorous bass, but he spoke only seldom; rather, he mostly read contemplatively in his score. It appeared, as he read along, that he leafed further in the score when the individual movements had been played to the end.”21 Frau Grebner’s recollections reflect that Beethoven seemingly leafed back and forth in the score, as can be observed in his conversation book jottings immediately above. When Schindler returned again, possibly around noon, he reported that Schuppanzigh had not yet engaged the second Harmonie and expressed surprise 20 Weingartner does not relate Frau Grebner’s maiden name or her given name, but a family named Grebner (actually Krebner in the 1820s) was associated with the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde: Georg von Krebner, k.k. Secretary, Alter Fleischmarkt, No. 701 (singer, Executive Committee of the Representatives; committee of the Conservatorium); and Frau Anna Krebner (listed with Georg as “supporting members”). Georg Krebner (d. before 1862) had also sung tenor in the chorus at the relatively large-scale “salon concerts” held by the Sonnleithner family from 1815 to 1824. See Franz Heinrich Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten der Haupt- und Residenz-Stadt Wien (Vienna: Bauer, 1823), pp. 352–353 (reflecting 1821); and Ziegler, Addressen-Buch von Tonkünstlern (1823), pp. 112, 117, 128, and 171; and Leopold von Sonnleithner (with Wilhelm Böckling), “Musikalische Skizzen aus Alt-Wien,” Recensionen und Mittheilungen über Theater und Musik 8, No. 24 (June 15, 1862), p. 375. Without supporting documentation, the Berlin-based Klaus Martin Kopitz identified her as Helene Görgen, born in Vienna on May 27, 1808; later married an officer Franz von Grebner; and moved to Brussels in 1880. See Kopitz and Rainer Cadenbach, eds., Beethoven aus der Sicht seiner Zeitgenossen, 2 vols. (Munich: G. Henle Verlag, 2009), I, pp. 371–373. Very likely, she was the daughter of the prominent physician Bruno Görgen (b. Trier, August 22, 1777; d. Vienna, May 29, 1842), known for his inclusion of music into the treatment of the mentally ill. At first a general physician, Görgen had a clinic in Gumpendorf by 1819 and later moved to the Henikstein building in Döbling. Unfortunately, his name does not appear in the directories by Böckh and Ziegler, the “Skizzen” by Leopold von Sonnleithner, or the directories of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. See a brief mention of him in Heft 8, Blatt 45 (March 1, 1820). 21 Felix Weingartner, “Eine Begegnung mit einer Zeitgenossin Beethovens,” Allgemeine Musik-Zeitung 20 (1900), pp. 7–8. Weingartner had met Frau Grebner in Brussels in 1899, when she was 91. Her daughter, Frau von Vogri, a singing teacher (and already “an old lady”), brought her to hear a concert that had included Beethoven’s Violin Concerto (performed by Karl Halir, 1859–1909) and Symphony No. 5, all conducted by Weingartner (1863–1942). In 1898, Mme Fanny Vogri, living at 66, rue de Stassart in Brussels, advertised in several magazines that she taught “Italian singing” and the “Lamperti Method.” See Le Guide Musical 44, No. 21–22 (May 22–29, 1898), p. 475, among others. If she was known as Fanny, her given name must have been Franziska, and she may have been born in the 1830s. Carl Ferdinand Pohl did not list her among the pupils at the Conservatorium in his history of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde.

TUESDAY, MAY 4—AFTERNOON AND EVENING

101

when Beethoven indicated that he intended to pay Schuppanzigh for this service. Again, Beethoven probably hearkened back, if only to himself, to the fact that he had paid percussionist Anton Brunner 10 fl. to act as orchestral contractor for his Akademie of February 27, 1814.22 The amateur instrumentalists from the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde were starting to arrive, as planned, expecting to join the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra. Without the professional orchestra, however, they were not numerous or balanced enough to hold any sort of effective rehearsal on their own. “What will happen now with the dilettante [orchestral players]?” asked Schindler. Schuppanzigh replied, “It is better if the Chorus rehearses diligently today,” adding, “The dilettantes are all here; I shall ask them all, in your [Beethoven’s] name, to appear tomorrow at 9 o’clock.” Writing with his customary red pencil (Rötel), conductor Umlauf clarified, “stesso tempo” (the same time), probably meaning that he wanted an hour or two with the professionals alone the next day, before being joined by the dilettantes.23 It had become evident that the bass Joseph Preisinger could not negotiate the baritonal solo part, and so, probably shortly after noon, Schindler drove off to see if the bass Joseph Seipelt would agree to step in at the last minute. He was also going to see soprano Henriette Sontag (who had been ill for several days) and alto Caroline Unger, to advise them of the latest developments.24

Tuesday, May 4—Afternoon and Evening After asking Beethoven to stay there and wait for him, Schindler left the Landstand on a third round of errands, probably shortly after noon. Returning somewhat later, probably around 1 p.m., he reported, “Unger is also sitting at home with a bandaged throat. She will be better by tomorrow.”25 Schindler quipped, “I met both of them together—one comforted the other.” Schuppanzigh or Beethoven may have reacted sarcastically, and Schindler quickly explained, “That was a joke. She must sing today.”26 Indeed, Unger’s condition would improve by that very evening, when she sang the part of Edoardo in Rossini’s Edoardo e Cristina at the Kärntnertor Theater.27 22

Heft 65, Blatt 8r; Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181. Heft 65, Blätter 8r–9r. 24 Heft 65, Blätter 9r–9v. Schindler brought Seipelt’s affirmative response on Heft 65, Blatt 23v. 25 Heft 65, Blätter 9v–10r. 26 Heft 65, Blat 10v. This would logically explain Unger’s not wanting to rehearse Beethoven’s difficult music during a day before a performance. 27 This was the Rossini opera’s first performance at the Kärntnertor Theater, therefore an important occasion for Unger. See the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 27 (July 1, 1824), col. 437; and Kanne’s Wiener AmZ 8, No. 32 (May 19, 1824), p. 128. 23

102

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

With the fiacre rented until 2 p.m., Schindler and Beethoven projected going to Zum wilden Mann in the Prater for midday dinner.28 Joseph Carl Bernard, the editor of the Wiener Zeitung, had stopped by the rehearsal and said that he would accompany them if he could get out of dinner at home.29 When he did not return by 1:30 p.m., Beethoven, Schindler, and Schuppanzigh piled into the fiacre and headed to the Prater.30 Their dinner conversation was long and touched on many topics. Schindler opened the exchange on a positive note: “I believe that, among all the singers, no one is participating more gladly in this Akademie than Sontag is. She was already ready to go when she saw me coming with the carriage and already met me on the steps. But the sad face, as she heard everything—and assures you that you have nothing unpleasant to expect on her part.”31 With his wry humor, Schuppanzigh commented, “If there were not a Schindler, the concert could not be given at all. Schindler deranges [derangirt] everything.” Catching the joke or not, Schindler was quick to reply, “or ar-ranges [arrangiert] everything.”32 They dined on young goose and baked chicken, and during the course of the afternoon, Schuppanzigh’s unattractive side, not often reported in the history books, emerged once or twice: “I told the waiter that he should bring water; he said, ‘Uh wodder,’ and I corrected him.”33 28 Heft 65, Blatt 10r. The restaurant Zum wilden Mann in the independently numbered Prater No. 48, near the street Zum Feuerwerks Platz (At the Fireworks Square, today’s Ausstellungs Strasse, probably between Venediger Au and Molkereistrasse), southeast of today’s Praterstern. It is not to be confused with a hotel and restaurant of the same name in the City in the Kärntnerstrasse (see Heft 95). See Hans Pemmer and Nini Lackner, Der Wiener Prater einst und jetzt (Vienna: Jugend und Volk, 1935), p. 165; and Heft 65, Blatt 13r. Ultimately, Bernard did not join Beethoven and his friends for dinner in the Prater but instead presumably went home and had dinner with his wife. He did seemingly come to see Beethoven at home or at a beer house that evening; see Heft 65, Blatt 21r. 29 After several years of a rather promiscuous love life, real and imagined (of which Beethoven did not approve), Bernard had married Magdalena Grassl on November 25, 1823. In 1824, they seemingly lived in his old apartment, Wieden, Untere Schleifmühlgasse No. 533, in the second block west of the Paulanerkirche. See Pfarre Wieden, TrauungsRegister, Tom 5 (1817–1826), fol. 137 (courtesy Frau Monika Bauer and Msgr. Franz Wilfinger); and Conscriptions-Bogen, Wieden, No. 784 [old No. 533], Wohnpartei 7 [new collation 784/8] (Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv). 30 Heft 65, Blatt 10v. 31 Heft 65, Blatt 11r. 32 Heft 65, Blatt 12r. Schuppanzigh had evidently not understood the joke that Schindler had made earlier, and now it was Schindler’s turn not to understand or not to appreciate Schuppanzigh’s linguistic joke. In any case, it points to underlying tensions within Beethoven’s circle of friends and colleagues. 33 Heft 65, Blatt 12v.

TUESDAY, MAY 4—AFTERNOON AND EVENING

103

Then he told a tale about the dilettantes, whom, as a group, he never liked: “Last Sunday [May 2], at the rehearsal, [flutist Karl] Scholl’s34 walking stick was stolen; there were nothing but dilettantes in the group. // Actually Piringer35 would have to be castrated for it; he is chairman and director.”36 Then Schuppanzigh looked to the future: “This summer, I’ll give quartet concerts at Benko’s in the mornings—here in the Prater on the Allée.”37 Beethoven might have questioned how much income he might project from chamber music in a remote location, and Schuppanzigh replied, “One must support Art, even when he himself has nothing to eat.”38 Schindler openly laughed at Schuppanzigh’s quasi-philosophical statement, and then, possibly because Schuppanzigh’s fingers were greasy, also wrote what he was saying, for Beethoven to reply: “In the evening, Schuppanzigh eats more than at midday, therefore [affecting] his agility. // He says that fried chicken is unknown in Berlin. [//] Schuppanzigh says if someone eats them for a long

34 Karl Scholl (1778–1854), flutist at the Kärntnertor Theater since 1797. For his presence at that rehearsal, see Heft 64, Blatt 27v. On ca. April 25, 1824, Schindler had consulted with him on Beethoven’s behalf about a trill on F-sharp; see Heft 63, Blätter 9v–10r. There is no indication that Scholl was lame, and so his walking stick was probably a fashion item, possibly even a Czakann (flute cut into a walking stick), popular with amateurs at the time. 35 Ferdinand Piringer (1780–1829), amateur violinist, and contact for many of the dilettantes who played in the orchestra. As noted elsewhere, Schuppanzigh did not like sitting next to him in orchestral situations. 36 Heft 65, Blätter 12v–13r. Somebody later crossed out the word “castrated” (castrirt). 37 Heft 65, Blatt 13r. Matthias Benko was the owner of the “first coffee house” on the Hauptallee in the Prater, No. 14. He was probably the brother of Joseph Benko (1739–ca. 1806), the father of conductor Michael Umlauf ’s wife, Maria Anna (1779–1830). When Umlauf and Maria were married in the Michaelerkirche on February 9, 1807, Joseph Benko must have died relatively recently, and Mathias Benko (noted as a coffee house owner) served as a witness. A short report on Ignaz Schuppanzigh’s organization of “Quartet Concerts” in the Prater in the summer months of 1824 appears in the Leipzig Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 32 (August 5, 1824), cols. 526–527. See Pemmer and Lackner, Der Wiener Prater einst und jetzt (1935), pp. 105–107; Pfarre St. Michael, Trauungs-Protokoll, 1804–1824, fol. 46 (courtesy of Frau Constanze Gröger); Heft 65, Blätter 10r and 20v. 38 Heft 65, Blatt 13v. Later, possibly at some time between Beethoven’s death in 1827 and Schuppanzigh’s death in 1830, Schindler may have added the following annotation in the conversation book: “Today Mylord Falstaff is all too very wise—in addition, spiteful and ultimately also annoyed that his fingers are filled with dropsy. But his jacket is filled with wine spots.” For Schuppanzigh’s own disturbing discussion of his health on May 20, 1824 (including stomach problems, shortness of breath, and trouble in walking), see Heft 68, Blatt 11r.

104

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

time, they are very healthy. // Since Schuppanzigh, they (baked chickens) are also known there—again proof that the Viennese spoil good taste everywhere!”39 The waiter must have brought the bill, and Schindler examined it first: “Let’s not come to the Prater anymore; it cost 12 fl. 3 kr.” Schuppanzigh laughed, “Schindler finds the bill too high. He forgets, however, that he himself quaffed 2 pints of wine.” But Beethoven was a generous host, paid the bill with 20 fl., and Schindler confirmed, “You get 7 fl. 57 kr. back.”40 Back to the matter of the concert, the three now had an extensive discussion about whether Beethoven’s honors and titles should appear following his name on the announcement for the concert. Beethoven was initially for the idea, but Schuppanzigh was definitely against it, and Schindler eventually agreed with Schuppanzigh. Ultimately, the composer’s name appeared as “Herr L. v. Beethoven,” without any artificial support on the personal invitations, but with the honors present on the public theater Zettel (poster).41 Now the subject turned to Schuppanzigh’s concert (which included Beethoven’s Symphony No. 5) in the Augarten Hall on Saturday morning, May 1. Schindler wrote the entries in Beethoven’s conversation book, largely on Schuppanzigh’s behalf: “Do you know the hall? // In the concert in the Augarten, the public could hardly wait for the Finale of the Symphony,42 without breaking out in the noisiest enthusiasm. [//] Schuppanzigh says that the public was shouting. // A musical layman told Schuppanzigh yesterday that nothing in his whole life had made such a great impression on him as this Symphony.”43 The hour was drawing late for Schindler, and the topic of conversation turned to the suburban Josephstadt Theater, where Schindler was concertmaster: “I am telling him [Schuppanzigh] that Herr Gläser44 is engaging nothing but boys in the orchestra.” Indeed, surviving Viennese Conscriptions-Bögen (census—actually, conscription—sheets) confirm that a significant number of the orchestra of the Theater in der Josephstadt were quite young. Of the twenty-seven regular members in fall, 1822, approximate ages can be determined for fifteen of them: 39

Heft 65, Blätter 14v–15r. Later, Schindler added “Backhühner” (baked chickens). Heft 65, Blätter 16v–17r. 41 Heft 65, Blätter 17v–18v; Thayer-Deiters-Riemann, V, p. 90; Thayer-Forbes, pp. 907–908. 42 On Schuppanzigh’s program, the first and second movements of Beethoven’s Fifth Symphony had opened the concert, while the “Finale” (actually the elided third and fourth movements) had closed the concert. See Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 17, No. 60 (May 18, 1824), pp. 239–240. 43 Heft 65, Blätter 18v–19r. 44 Franz Gläser (1798–1861), son of the copyist Peter Gläser. A composer, Franz had been a Kapellmeister at the Josephstadt Theater since 1822, where he played a significant role at performances of Beethoven’s works. From 1822, he lived in the Viennese suburb of Josephstadt, Kaiserstrasse (today’s Josefstädter Strasse) No. 34. See Böckh, 1823, p. 368; Frimmel, Handbuch, I, pp. 169–170; Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 94. 40

TUESDAY, MAY 4—AFTERNOON AND EVENING

105

only three were over 30; three were in their teens (the youngest two 16 or 17); with most in the 21 to 27 range. Schindler himself (b. 1795) was concertmaster, but the actual solo-player in the violins was Léon de St. Lubin (b. 1805).45 At ca. 10 o’clock that morning, Schindler had asked Beethoven if he might allow Karl to go to a “concert” that evening to hear the Overture to Fidelio. On the evening of Tuesday, May 4, the bill at the Theater in der Josephstadt consisted of two light plays, including Der Feldtrompeter. Conductor Franz Gläser had composed original music for this play but also used it as a vehicle to incorporate, variously, Beethoven’s Consecration of the House Overture (with its trumpet fanfares) and his Symphony No. 2 in D. Whether this was at Schindler’s instigation or not cannot be determined. For the performance on May 4, he evidently enlisted Beethoven’s Overture to Fidelio,46 but one is tempted to wonder whether he had the Overture known today as Leonore No. 2, with its offstage trumpet fanfare. In any case, Karl’s conversation book entries that evening suggest that he was at home and did not go to the theater.47 Noting that it was already 5:30 p.m., Schindler departed: “I must now bid farewell, for I must go to see Duport in order to arrange properly for the poster for tomorrow.” Beethoven and Schuppanzigh remained for a while longer until they too parted company.48 After Schindler left, Schuppanzigh took the opportunity (seriously, this time) to try to sabotage the unpaid secretary: “Böhm49 asked Schindler today, Why doesn’t 45 Conscriptions-Bögen (conscription sheets) do not survive for several of the western suburbs (especially those whose city administration was Stift Schotten; i.e., through the Benedictine Schotten Monastery) before 1830. 46 The Overture to Fidelio had become a convenient and popular concert overture during this period. It was performed at the Easter Sunday charities benefit concert at the Kärntnertor Theater on April 18 and would be performed again on the concert of Kärntnertor Theater cellist Friedrich Wranitzky, held in the Kleiner Redoutensaal at 12:30 p.m. on May 9. At the latter, Beethoven’s Overture opened the program, which also included Variations for two horns by Kreutzer, performed by the new principal hornist Elias Lewy and his 13-year-old student Robert Leser, and a vocal quartet by Schubert. For reasons unknown, Schindler customarily referred to such performances as “concerts,” though they may also have been intermission features. Schindler remarked sometime earlier that theater manager Hensler did not want the mention of Beethoven’s works to appear on the Zettel (playbill). See Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 17, No. 63 (May 25, 1824), p. 251; Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 28 (July 8, 1824), cols. 449–450; and Zettel, Kärntnertor Theater, April 18 and May 9, 1824 (Österreichisches Theatermuseum, Bibliothek). 47 See Heft 65, Blätter 21r–23r. 48 See Heft 65, Blätter 19v and 20v. 49 Joseph Michael Böhm (1795–1876), violinist, professor at the Conservatory, and member of the Hofkapelle; also closely associated with Schubert. Beethoven’s brother

106

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

Beethoven give his commissions to someone in whom he has confidence?”50 Then Schuppanzigh turned his attentions to Piringer: “At your Symphony [No. 5] in the Augarten the other day, Piringer sat next to me, and so I have seen what kind of weak little piece of work Piringer is. // The best [amateur player] is worthless.”51 And then he complained further: “My Expectant’s position is still lying unresolved with the emperor.”52 Now it was time to go. Schuppanzigh wanted to talk to Benko about his upcoming Quartet concerts53 and asked Beethoven if he was still going to the walled City, where he (Schuppanzigh) lived.54 Instead, Beethoven probably accompanied Schuppanzigh part of the way to Benko’s, southwest of Zum wilden Mann, and then walked west to the Franzens Brücke (Franz Bridge) over the Danube Canal, to suburban Landstrasse and home, a trek that might have taken 40–45 minutes. Once Beethoven arrived back at his apartment, probably between 6:30 and 7 p.m., nephew Karl told him that the announcement for the Akademie would appear on Thursday, May 6. Bernard arrived, and the three of them probably went to the restaurant on the ground floor of Beethoven’s apartment building for some refreshments. Bernard told him that the amateur violoncellist Vincenz Hauschka,55 who had been a du-friend of Beethoven’s for many years, would assist in the general logistics. They talked for a while; then Karl noted, “Bernard finds

Johann also hoped to remove Schindler as Beethoven’s unpaid secretary and replace him with Böhm. Unfortunately, the ambitious and self-serving Böhm could not write or spell well, traits that Schindler, the former law clerk, did possess. See Frimmel, Handbuch, I, p. 53; Elisabeth Hilscher, “Böhm,” ÖMl, I, p. 173. 50 Heft 65, Blatt 19v. 51 Heft 65, Blatt 20r. 52 Heft 65, Blatt 20r. In June, 1824, Schuppanzigh received an Expectant’s position as violinist in the Hofkapelle. His installation followed on September 1, 1827. See Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 32 (August 5, 1824), col. 526; Köchel, Hof-Musikkapelle, p. 97; Hans Jancik, “Schuppanzigh,” MGG, Vol. 12, cols. 327–328. 53 Heft 65, Blatt 20v. Matthias Benko was the owner of the first coffee house on the Hauptallee in the Prater, No. 14, as well as the second coffee house, where Schuppanzigh’s summer quartet concerts were to take place. See also Heft 65, Blatt 13r. 54 Heft 65, Blatt 20v. 55 Heft 65, Blatt 21r. Vincenz Hauschka (1766–1840), one of Beethoven’s few very close “du-” friends, had been trained as a professional musician and had even worked as such. He gave it up, however, to become a well-paid government financial councillor and had been among the cofounders of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, whose orchestra he occasionally directed. He belonged to the board of directors of the Gesellschaft and occupied the office of treasurer. See Frimmel, Handbuch, I, p. 201; Hof- und StaatsSchematismus, 1824, I, p. 144; Wurzbach, Vol. 8, pp. 78–79; Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 112 and 117.

WEDNESDAY, MAY 5—MORNING

107

the beer too strong,”56 and paid the bill (seemingly 4 fl. 1 kr.) on Beethoven’s behalf. Beethoven and Karl walked through the portal on Ungargasse, straight through the courtyard, and up the indoor stairway in the rear. Bernard left them and walked a half hour to his residence in the Wieden, just the other side of the Paulaner Church.

Wednesday, May 5—Morning By 9 a.m. on Wednesday, May 5, Schindler appeared at Beethoven’s apartment with a rented fiacre,57 with the idea that “Karl is to sacrifice one day” from his university studies in order to be present in the cashier’s office on Friday, as witness to the ticket sales.58 They drove to the rehearsal in the Grosser Redoutensaal, where the orchestra was already at work. As Schindler noted, “Out of high regard and esteem for the great Master, says Herr Seipelt,59 he is taking over the bass part, also in order to show the Germans that he is no Viennese.”60 Schindler now relayed some thoughts from the conductor about the Symphony: “Umlauf believes that it is no use without singers. // He would like to do it in order, and then the Finale two times. // First time without singers, the second with them. [//] The first time, however, is already going quite passably well.”61 Caroline Unger was already present, accompanied by the deep bass Nicola Bassi, whose voice was not appropriate for the recitative but who in any case offered to sing until Seipelt could join them.62 Schindler continued, “Tomorrow [Thursday, May 6], we are having another rehearsal, for it is really necessary; I shall ask the gentlemen and ladies in your name. [//] Therefore at 9 o’clock. [//] At least the most difficult passages can be rehearsed. // Just ask Umlauf and Dirzka personally.”63 56 Heft 65, Blätter 21v–23r. Perhaps coincidentally, the restaurant on the ground floor of the building where Beethoven lived in May, 1824, is today called Bierteufel (Beer Devil). Its custom-made beers are highly recommendable. 57 Time and location based on Schindler’s remarks on Heft 65, Blätter 6r and 8v. 58 Heft 65, Blatt 23v. This seems presumptuous of the student Karl’s time, and indeed, he balked at being in the box office on Friday evening, May 7; see Heft 66, Blatt 4r. 59 Schindler said that he was going to see Seipelt on Tuesday morning, May 4; see Heft 65, Blatt 9r. 60 Heft 65, Blatt 23v. Joseph Preisinger (1796–1865), who withdrew the previous day, had also been projected to be the bass soloist in the benefit performances of Haydn’s Die Jahreszeiten on April 11 and 12, 1824, but had withdrawn at the last minute. See Heft 61, Blatt 28v. 61 Heft 65, Blätter 24r–24v. 62 Heft 65, Blatt 24v. Nicola Bassi (1767–1825), buffo, member of the Italian Opera Company at the Kärntnertor Theater from 1822 to 1825. See Portrait-Katalog, p. 417. 63 Heft 65, Blatt 25r.

108

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

* At this point in the current conversation book, Schindler later added entries that at least partially reflected the situation at the rehearsal on Wednesday, May 5: “The recitatives for the contrabasses are overwhelmingly difficult. // 20 [bassi] absolutely cannot play [or] perform in tempo. But not the way that you want.”64 He also added an entry that surely reflected Beethoven’s sentiment in May, 1824: “If old Grams were still alive, one could let them go without worry, because he led 12 basses who had to do what he wanted.”65 Indeed, this is essentially confirmed by Leopold Sonnleithner (1797–1873), who, in 1864, remembered, “I attended … most of the orchestra rehearsals [and] all subsequent performances. Beethoven had the contrabass recitatives performed at a rushed tempo, not exactly presto, but also not andante. The entire symphony, especially the last movement, seemed very difficult and confusing to the orchestra the first time it was played, even though the city’s best musicians (like Mayseder, Böhm, Jansa, Linke, and so forth) were among them. The contrabasses had no idea what to do with the recitatives. One heard nothing but a raw rumbling of the basses; subsequently, the musicians … became used to it, and the clearer and purer it sounded (with the exception of some thoroughly and unnaturally difficult vocal passages).”66 64 Although falsified, Schindler’s entries probably reflect his own thoughts on May 5, 1824. Contemporary sources indicate that Beethoven had a total of 12 bassi (combined violoncellos and contrabasses) for the premiere of the Ninth Symphony. For his concert of February 27, 1814, however, Beethoven had employed 10 violoncellos and 7 contrabasses, with 2 contrabassoons (doubling on contrabass in Symphonies No. 7 and 8) probably reading from an extra cello/bass part, for a total of 19 “bassi,” not far from the “20” that Schindler mentions. By 1824, however, Beethoven’s 1814 section leaders, cellist Anton Kraft and bassist Anton Grams, were both dead, and the composer did indeed encounter difficulty in rehearsing the recitatives. See Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181; “Nekrolog” (Grams), Wiener AmZ 7, No. 62 (August 2, 1823), cols. 495–496. 65 Heft 60, Blatt 30v. Born in Bohemia in 1752, Grams had been principal contrabassist at the Prague premiere of Mozart’s Don Giovanni in 1787 and was reputedly an outstanding section leader. He came to the Theater an der Wien in 1802, and Beethoven had composed numerous works for him in his capacity as section leader, most notably the trio in the so-called Scherzo of the Fifth Symphony. Grams had died of a stroke on May 18, 1823, and Beethoven surely still missed him a year later. 66 Heft 65, Blatt 26r. Leopold Sonnleitner had arranged for the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s chorus to participate, and so he would have been present. The tone of his writings in general tends to be a little arrogant, but his accuracy is generally reliable. In this case, Sonnleithner remembered the violinist Leopold Jansa (1795–1875) as being present in the orchestra. Early in 1824, Jansa was still employed by Count Franz Brunsvik (1777–1849) in Hungary, but on ca. February 19, 1824, he was hired (over Schuppanzigh) by the Kärntnertor Theater (Heft 56, Blätter 24r, 28r, and 31v). He received an Anstellungs-Dekret (decree of employment) in the Hofkapelle and was a

109

WEDNESDAY, MAY 5—MORNING

* Schindler was to accompany Sontag and Unger home with the rented fiacre, and passed along the soprano’s opinion: “Sontag says that she has never sung anything so difficult in her entire life. // Because of that, it will go well, but only if the rehearsal tomorrow is rigorous.” The date for the repeat concert and its location had not yet been determined, and Beethoven was probably nervous that he might not get a date that would allow him these newly experienced performers. To this end, Schindler reassured him, “Next week is a Norma Tag67 in the Court Theaters. If there is to be a repeat [concert], one can have the whole theater and even more, since there is no performance in the other one.”68 Probably about noon, nephew Karl appeared to ask Beethoven for his “purse.”69 Schindler quickly chimed in that “I also request some money.70 I cannot pay the fiacre afterward.”71 member of that ensemble by 1825. Thus Sonnleithner’s memory was essentially correct. See Schilling, Vol. 3, pp. 679–680; Uwe Harten, ÖMl, Vol. 2, p. 883; Köchel, Die Kaiserliche Hof-Musikkapelle in Wien, p. 97; Hof-Musikkapelle, Akten, Karton 13 (1825: September 25), fol. 78, listing both Jansa and Schuppanzigh (Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv). See Leopold Sonnleithner, “Ad vocem: Contrabass-Recitative der 9. Symphonie von Beethoven,” Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, Neue Folge, No. 14 (April 6, 1864), cols. 245–246; revised as “The Contrabass Recitatives in Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony at Its 1824 Premiere,” trans. Walter Paul, Journal of the Conductors’ Guild 8, No. 1 (Winter, 1987), pp. 38–39. 67 Ferial days, the highest festival days in the Catholic Church, with a solemn church service and a ban on all public pleasures. In addition to liturgical days of celebration, there were also the anniversaries of the deaths of the most recent imperial couple. In the week between May 9 and 16, Friday, May 14, was a Norma Tag for the death day of the empress-mother, Maria Ludovica. In actuality, on May 14, the Kärntnertor Theater and Burg Theater were closed, but the Theater an der Wien was open. See Carl August Schimmer, Neuestes Gemälde von Wien (Vienna: Sollinger, 1837), p. 61; and Zettel from all three theaters, May 14, 1824 (Bibliothek, Österreichisches Theatermuseum; coutesy librarian Othmar Barnert). 68 Heft 65, Blatt 26v. 69 Heft 65, Blatt 27r. Karl may have had a break from his classes and needed money for part-time boarding expenses in the City. He may also have brought the news that 50 ducats were available to be picked up at Geymüller’s banking house. If Karl were interrupting a rehearsal in progress, then his discussion would have been brief, as it is here. 70 Late on Thursday, May 6, nephew Karl received 50 ducats (presumably the fee for a copy of the Missa solemnis) on Beethoven’s behalf at Geymüller’s banking house (see Blätter 34r–34v below, and Heft 66, Blatt 3r). Those 50 ducats equal 225 gulden/ florins. It is possible that Beethoven initially proposed that Schindler retrieve the 225 fl. on Wednesday, pay the fiacre driver 5 fl., and bring him the remaining 220 fl. 71 Heft 65, Blatt 27r.

110

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

Wednesday, May 5—Afternoon After the rehearsal ended, probably at 1 p.m., and after the vocal soloists had been driven home, Beethoven and Schindler probably took the rented fiacre from the Redoutensaal to the Birne restaurant in suburban Landstrasser Hauptstrasse, more customary territory than Zum wilden Mann in the Prater had been the day before. They probably arrived about 2 p.m., Beethoven’s customary dinnertime. Schindler began by telling Beethoven that Susanna Fischer, the mother-in-law of nephew Karl’s headmaster, Blöchlinger,72 had been buried the day before. Copyist Peter Gläser had attended the funeral and told Schindler the news that night in the theater.73 Schindler’s conversation now turned to the rehearsal that they had just attended: “As I noted, he [Michael Umlauf ] came with [Conradin] Kreutzer.74 [//] In this respect, Umlauf is not strict enough. // Now he will place it [the orchestra] on the stage [of the Kärntnertor Theater], he says, but in the [Landstand’s] hall, the basses made too great a noise and the viol[ins] lost strength.” Beethoven must have remarked that the singers had been undisciplined and that they especially laughed at something that Unger had said, and Schindler 72 Heft 65, Blatt 27r. Schindler called her “Frau von Blöchlinger.” It was not educator Joseph Blöchlinger’s wife but his mother-in-law, Susanna Fischer, who died of the weaknesses of old age (Alterschwäche) on May 2, 1824. Born in Pressburg in ca. 1753/1754, Susanna Fischer, née Zechmeister, a Lutheran, passed away at the Blöchlinger Institute on Kaiserstrasse in suburban Josephstadt, only 2 blocks west of the theater. Her funeral took place at the Evangelische (Lutheran) Church in the Dorotheergasse, and she was buried in the Gottesaker (cemetery) outside the Mariahilfer Linie on Tuesday, May 4. As if by fate, her surviving husband, (Carl) Emanuel Fischer (b. Saxony, ca. 1749/1750), a retired economic secretary to Duke Albrecht and also a Lutheran, died of bronchitis on May 25, 1824, and was buried on May 27. See Frimmel, Handbuch, I, p. 51; Wiener Zeitung, No. 105 (May 7, 1824), p. 447; and No. 124 (May 31, 1824), p. 523; and Evangelische Kirche Wien, Totenbuch, 1815–1827, pp. 267–268 (1824, Nos. 40 and 42); courtesy of church secretary Frau Christina Pap. 73 Peter Gläser, of course, had made or supervised much of the copying work for the concert now in rehearsal. This demonstrates that Schindler did return to the Josephstadt Theater in time for the performance that included Beethoven’s Overture to Fidelio, as projected on Tuesday, May 4, but also that Gläser was a supportive member of the neighborhood in the Josephstadt, whether its members were Protestant or Catholic. 74 Heft 65, Blätter 27r–27v. Always slightly peripatetic, composer-conductor Conradin Kreutzer (1780–1849) had been a student of (Johann) Georg Albrechtsberger, then held various positions in Switzerland and southern Germany until being called back to Vienna as Kapellmeister at the Kärntnertor Theater in 1822. He had probably played piano for the choral and vocal solo rehearsals but would have had little or no function at the concert itself. See Frimmel, Handbuch, I, pp. 302–303; Wolfgang Rehm, “Kreutzer,” MGG, Vol. 7, cols. 1774–1780.

WEDNESDAY, MAY 5—AFTERNOON

111

hastened to explain: “They [presumably the singers] probably laugh at themselves when they can’t [do] something.75 // Don’t believe, though, that they are laughing at you personally or at your work. You know anyhow that Unger is a foolish thing, full of joking and teasing, even at those places where it isn’t appropriate.”76 A little later, he reassured Beethoven, “Sontag knows even more than Unger; also she was more attentive.”77 Concerning the chorus itself, Schindler commented, “The altos have become weak, but the boys are coming tomorrow [Thursday, May 6], and they’ll make the difference, as they always do.”78 Beethoven must have expressed some doubt about the orchestra, to which Schindler countered, “In this respect we are far ahead of the French, in that they rehearse a large-scale work for 4 to 6 weeks and their violin players still are said to play inaccurately. // Their execution is said to be incomparable, but they must study a long time.”79 Beethoven must have expressed some frustration that he himself could not be more helpful in the musical preparations, and Schindler reassured him: “You are not yet coming too late!!! and your ears don’t hinder you so much that you cannot make a powerful impression upon the whole. // The one doesn’t surprise me, but the other one does, in that the author, through his influence, must often take so many pains in pounding the true spirit into the performers.”80 Indeed, Beethoven must have been frustrated at Wednesday morning’s rehearsal and expressed it for others to see and feel. As Franz Lachner observed, “Because of his already advanced hearing afflictions at the time, Beethoven’s actions during the rehearsals were merely a distraction.”81 75

From this point, the conversation essentially turns to a discussion of that morning’s rehearsal, far out of earshot of the participants themselves. 76 Heft 65, Blätter 27r–27v, and 31r. At one point, Unger had evidently said something about vomiting that cracked the others up in laughter. Given his deafness, Beethoven, of course, was unaware of what the joke was. 77 Heft 65, Blatt 29r. 78 Heft 65, Blatt 28r. 79 Heft 65, Blatt 28v. Later, after Beethoven’s death, and possibly even after he himself visited Paris early in 1841, Schindler added this further comment: “But everything too quickly, as everyone assures us. All the Adagios must be at least Andantino. Even the Parisian who was recently here said so.” 80 Heft 65, Blatt 29r. 81 These remarks demonstrate a difference from the benign Beethoven who attended the choral rehearsal on the morning of Tuesday, May 4 (q.v.). Franz Lachner, “Erinnerungen an Schubert und Beethoven,” in Vor den Coulissen: Original-Blätter von Celebritäten des Theaters und der Musik, ed. Josef Lewinsky (Berlin: Hofmann & Comp., 1882), Vol. 2, pp. 1–10, specifically pp. 7–10; excerpted for passages concerning Beethoven in Klaus Martin Kopitz and Rainer Cadenbach, eds., Beethoven aus der Sicht seiner Zeitgenossen (Munich: G. Henle, 2009), Vol. 2, pp. 537–540. Lachner

112

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

Before leaving the restaurant, probably late in the afternoon, Beethoven made a note to himself as to how much he had spent on dinner and where: “3 fl. 59 kr.; Birne.”82 Either they went from the Birne to a nearby coffee house, or they remained there, sipping the last drops of the wine they had had with dinner. They discussed Beethoven’s need to deliver printed invitations to the Court (or what remained after the emperor departed for Prague) and the nobility on Thursday, May 6 (rather than let it wait until Friday), but also his need to be present for the rehearsal. The rehearsal would run from 9 a.m. until 1 p.m., but the optimum time for visiting the nobility was between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. As Schindler advised: “Don’t give them any convenient reason to excuse themselves just because you failed to visit them. We are living in an aristocratic state.”83 But Schindler still had errands to run: “Now I am still going to see Duport. // Schuppanzigh also wants me to engage the second Harmonie.”84 Schindler and Beethoven probably walked one block north on Landstrasser Hauptstrasse and parted ways. Beethoven walked west on Bockgasse (today’s Beatrixgasse) to his apartment, while Schindler probably walked into the City through the Stubentor, past the Stephansdom, and out the Burgtor to the Josephstadt.

(b. Rain am Lech, Bavaria, April 2, 1803; d. Munich, January 20, 1890), an organist, conductor, and composer, came to Vienna in ca. 1823 and became organist at the Lutheran (evangelische) church in the Dorotheergasse. He soon entered Schubert’s circle of friends and was also, less closely, a friend of Anton Schindler. He seemingly did not attend the rehearsal as a participant but rather as an observer. Lachner mentioned Sontag, Unger, Haitzinger, and Seipelt as the vocal soloists. Wednesday, May 5, was the first rehearsal when bass Joseph Seipelt sang. By the rehearsal of Thursday, May 6 (where Seipelt also sang), Beethoven now merely sat in the audience and observed. Therefore, the rehearsal that Lachner attended was probably May 5. I am grateful to Michael Ladenburger (Beethoven-Haus Bonn) for bringing Lachner’s report to my attention; see his “A Four-Leaf Clover: A Newly Discovered Cello, the Premiere of the Ninth Symphony, Beethoven’s Circle of Friends in Bonn, and a Corrected Edition of the Song ‘Ruf vom Berge,’ WoO 146,” in The New Beethoven: Evolution, Analysis, Interpretation, ed. Jeremy Yudkin (Rochester, N.Y.: University of Rochester Press, 2020), pp. 50–77; specifically pp. 56–57 and 71. 82 Heft 65, Blatt 29v. Beethoven often visited the restaurant Zur goldenen Birne (The Golden Pear) in the Viennese suburb of Landstrasse, at Hauptstrasse No. 52. See Frimmel, Handbuch, I, p. 160; Groner, Wien wie es war, 1922, p. 42. 83 Heft 65, Blätter 30r–30v. 84 Heft 65, Blatt 31r. This is still in the late afternoon of Wednesday, May 5, because the second Harmonie (presumably eight individual musicians rather than Prince Liechtenstein’s standing Harmonie) evidently did not come to a rehearsal until Thursday, May 6. See Blatt 34r below.

WEDNESDAY, MAY 5—EVENING

113

Beethoven, now home, made a note in the conversation book to remind himself, “Haircut.”85

Wednesday, May 5—Evening That evening, nephew Karl reminded Beethoven that the housekeeper (presumably Barbara Holzmann, 1755–1831) would be gone on Friday, May 7, to which Karl reacted indignantly.86 Beethoven probably complained to Karl about the way the chorus acted during rehearsal, and he replied in the affirmative: “If things like this are going on at the rehearsals in the theater, then it’s no wonder that opera performances aren’t always the best either. // They [the singers] regard these rehearsals only as a good time, where people come together in order to entertain themselves. // I don’t believe anything about intrigues; but their custom of behaving this way at rehearsals also appears to have become apparent here. // I find it negligent that the girls [Unger and Sontag] have not studied their parts. // S[chindler] says that Umlauf has usually been coaching their parts with them. Perhaps he was hindered [from doing so].”87 Beethoven probably repeated that he found the overall cooperation and coordination among the various performing groups to be lacking, and Karl replied enthusiastically, “Live! [//] For this reason, it is already good that there is an Akademie from which you will really see how inspired the people are.” Beethoven also lamented the progress in preparations for the Missa solemnis, roughly ten manuscript copies of which had already been distributed throughout Europe. As Karl commented: “Nothing has been written from France or Russia that indicated in the least that it [the Missa solemnis] was too difficult for them.”88 Either that evening or early the next morning, Thursday, May 6, Beethoven entered in his conversation book a note that might be changed in the bass’s recitative in the Finale,89 as well as a couple of notes in a ritard for divisi first violoncello. He also noted, “Bass, red pencil.”90 85 Heft 65, Blatt 31v, and, later, Blatt 38v. This haircut took place on the morning of Friday, May 7, and can be seen in Beethoven’s portrait by Johann Stephan Decker, made on May 27. 86 Heft 65, Blätter 31v–32r. This is probably why there was little or no food in Beethoven’s apartment when he (accompanied by Schindler and Joseph Hüttenbrenner) returned home from the Akademie on Friday night, May 7; and why he ultimately gave up plans to host the celebratory dinner at home on Sunday, May 9 (see Heft 66, Blätter 12v and 14r; and Heft 67, Blätter 1v–10v), and have it in the Prater instead. 87 Heft 65, Blätter 32r–32v. 88 Heft 65, Blatt 33r. Beethoven’s Missa solemnis had been performed in St. Petersburg on April 7, 1824, and possibly in parts in Paris; see also Heft 64, Blatt 17v. 89 Bass recitative in the Finale; see Schindler-MacArdle, p. 284. 90 Heft 65, Blatt 33v.

114

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

Thursday, May 6—Morning Otherwise, the morning of Thursday, May 6, began prosaically enough, with nephew Karl’s evidently accepting a load of firewood,91 Beethoven’s jotting a minor alteration into his conversation book,92 and Karl’s prompting Beethoven on how to write a receipt to Geymüller’s banking house.93 As planned, Schindler probably arrived at Beethoven’s apartment with a rented fiacre at ca. 8:30 a.m. and reported his activities of the evening before: “The 2nd Harmonie is also coming already today. I myself reserved all of them yesterday. You will have to pay 4 or 5 of them, at most.”94 Once again, there was a discussion (this time with Schindler and nephew Karl) about whether Beethoven’s honors and diplomas should be listed on the Zettel, and now came the final decision that they would appear on the publicly displayed Zettel95 but not on the invitation sheets (already in hand) that the composer would deliver to the nobility and others whom he would invite personally.96 Probably by 9 a.m., Beethoven and Schindler departed for the general rehearsal at the Grosser Redoutensaal, picking up Henriette Sontag and Caroline Unger along the way. Schindler had advised Beethoven to use the carriage between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. to deliver the invitations to the nobility, but once he arrived at the rehearsal—evidently in concert order—Beethoven simply stayed. He seems not to have interfered with Umlauf ’s rehearsal, but even Schindler recognized

91

Seemingly Beethoven took delivery on some firewood, possibly in the evening of Wednesday, May 5, but more likely on the morning of Thursday, May 6. On Saturday, May 1 (Heft 64, Blatt 7r), the maid had said that she wanted to stack it herself. 92 Heft 65, Blatt 34r. 93 Karl was prompting Beethoven in what to write as a receipt for 50 ducats (presumably the fee for a manuscript copy of the Missa solemnis) at Geymüller’s banking house ( Heft 65, Blatt 34v and Heft 66, Blatt 3r). A large amount might already have been available on Wednesday, May 5 (see Blatt 27r above). 94 Heft 65, Blatt 34r. See also Blatt 31r above. The standard Viennese Harmonie (wind ensemble) in the 1780s consisted of 2 oboes, 2 clarinets, 2 horns, and 2 bassoons, for a total of 8 players. It is not clear whether Beethoven’s full wind section (including trumpets and trombones) was to be augmented, but the above notation suggests that at least 6 hornists (the 4 prescribed in the score, plus 2 more in the added Harmonie) played on May 7. It can be presumed that low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky, for whom Beethoven wrote the solo in the third movement of the Symphony, high hornist Friedrich Starke, and clarinetist Joseph Friedlowsky were among them, and probably not Prince Liechtenstein’s regularly employed Harmonie. 95 See the poster that appeared on May 6, 1824 (with Seipelt already as bass soloist), illustrated in Köhler, ed., Beethovens Konversationshefte, Vol. 6, facing p. 96. 96 Heft 65, Blätter 34r–34v. See Heft 65, Blatt 18r above, for an earlier discussion concerning the wording on the poster of May 7, 1824.

THURSDAY, MAY 6—AFTERNOON

115

that “It would be very desirable for you to go through the entire score with him before the performance.”97 There were still logistics in the theater itself needing attention, and Schindler told Beethoven, “I am leaving now to seek out Duport and Stubenrauch98 about setting up the scaffolding properly. I’ll be back here in an hour. // Are you staying much longer? It is past 11 o’clock.” Beethoven probably said that he also wanted to talk to Sontag and Unger. Schindler commented, “Aren’t both of them secure yet? [//] This afternoon, both are going to study with Umlauf.”99 In addition, Schindler thought that the text of Schiller’s An die Freude was not clear enough and needed to be printed for distribution to the audience. Karl confirmed that the words were not understandable in the chorus, and so they decided to order 500 copies.100

Thursday, May 6—Afternoon Schindler departed to run errands, while Beethoven finished watching the rehearsal. Schindler returned and observed, “It is tiring Umlauf too much.”101 Later, he added, “He [Umlauf ] is really doing what he can for it. I truly believe that he still isn’t thoroughly acquainted with the score.”102 When the rehearsal was over, probably around 1 p.m., Beethoven, Schindler, and Karl probably rode back to the apartment and discussed how and where the tickets to the concert would be sold: at the Kärntnertor Theater’s box office, of course, but also at Beethoven’s apartment and possibly at lawyer Bach’s office. Karl reminded Beethoven that he needed to take a carriage to deliver invitations to the nobility that afternoon, and Schindler confirmed it: “You can drive around in the afternoon to Metternich,103 Saurau,104 Liechtenstein,105 Schwarzenberg,106 97

Heft 65, Blatt 35r. Heft 65, Blatt 35r. Philipp von Stubenrauch (1784–1848) was costume and scenery director at the Court Theater. See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 127; Wurzbach, Vol. 40, p. 153. 99 Heft 65, Blätter 35r–35v. 100 Heft 65, Blatt 35v. 101 Heft 65, Blatt 36r. It is possible that Schindler was beginning to imagine that he might substitute for Umlauf. 102 Heft 65, Blatt 37v. 103 Prince Clemens Lothar Wenzel von Metternich (1773–1859), chancellor of Austria. 104 Count Franz Joseph von Saurau (1760–1832), minister of the Interior; see Heft 63, Batt 32v. 105 Prince Johann Joseph von Liechtenstein (1760–1836), privy councillor and chamberlain. See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 304. Schindler wrote: Lichtenstein. 106 Prince Joseph Johann Nepomuk von Schwarzenberg (1769–1833), privy councillor and chamberlain. See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 62. 98

116

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

Kohary,107 the government president,108 Trauttmannsdorf,109 and various other Great Ones. You simply drive up to the door, and hand the porter your visiting card with the flyer.”110 As for the remainder of the invitations, Schindler advised, “Early tomorrow [Friday], [go to] the archdukes.” Beethoven evidently seemed reluctant to undertake such a task by carriage, and so Schindler conceded, “Then I’ll go with you.”111 Now nephew Karl related, “Schindler says that Bernard, Bach, and others should be given seats.”112 And Schindler himself continued, “Bernard, Bach, Unger, Sontag, Rzehaczek (for his violins), and Staudenheim. // Karl thinks 1 [ticket for] Kirchhofer.113 // Your brother is getting 3 seats in the 4th gallery. The 3rd [gallery] has none. [//] We will send each of them 2 tickets; you can’t do more than that.”114 Karl predicted the attendance: “It will be full.” As to the haircut that Beethoven had projected on Wednesday afternoon, Karl passed along the message: “Schindler says that you should have your hair cut only a very little bit.”115

107 Prince

Franz Joseph von Koháry (b. 1766 or 1760; d. June 27, 1826), Royal Hungarian Court chancellor. He was married to Countess Maria Anna, née WaldsteinWartenberg (1771–1854). See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 240. Wurzbach, Vol. 12, pp. 281–282, gives his birth both as September 7, 1766 (according to the Court Calendar), and as September 4, 1760, according to J. Nagy. The date in 1766 seems closer to correct. 108 The Regierungs Präsident, the president of the Lower Austrian Regional Government, was August Reichmann, Baron von Hochkirchen (ca. 1754–1828). See Hof- und StaatsSchematismus, 1824, I, p. 384; Schmidt, Nekrolog, Vol. 6, pp. 979–980. 109 Prince Ferdinand zu Trauttmannsdorf-Weinsberg (1749–1827), high chamberlain. See Heft 64, Blatt 5r. 110 Heft 65, Blatt 37r. This horizontally formatted flyer was different from the various theater posters discussed here and still had Preisinger’s name as the bass soloist. For an illustration, see Robert Bory, Ludwig van Beethoven: Bild-Biographie (Zürich: AtlantisVerlag, 1960), p. 191 (upper left). 111 Heft 65, Blatt 37r. 112 Wiener Zeitung editor Joseph Carl Bernard and lawyer Johann Baptist Bach, both professional and personal friends of Beethoven’s. 113 Franz Rzehaczek had evidently lent instruments from his large and valuable collection of historical stringed instruments for the occasion (see Heft 64, Blatt 3r, and Böckh, 1821, p. 360); Staudenheim was Beethoven’s physician and Kirchhoffer his sometime financial adviser. 114 Heft 65, Blätter 38r–38v. 115 The results may be seen in the chalk portrait of Beethoven by Johann Stephan Decker, made on May 27 and therefore shortly after this haircut; illustrated in Köhler, ed., Beethovens Konversationshefte, Vol. 6, facing p. 80, and reproduced as the frontispiece in this volume (p. ii).

THURSDAY, MAY 6—AFTERNOON

117

It was now ca. 4 p.m.,116 and Beethoven still needed to clean up and change clothes before setting out with the invitations. Schindler allowed, “If you are ready only at 5 o’clock—time enough.”117 Even the enthusiastic and energetic Schindler was beginning to exhibit some fatigue and complained about several individuals or circumstances close to the planning and execution of the Akademie: “I was very angry about Mylord [Schuppanzigh], because he doesn’t want to do anything at all; not one time, tomorrow morning, to check the scaffolding, which I must do again.” “Karl is offering himself as conductor, if you would honor him in this way.” And concerning the publicity for the concert, “Everybody knew it already on Monday,”118 but both Pilat of the Beobachter119 and Bernard of the Wiener Zeitung did not want to announce it until later in the week.120 And even possibly a little impatience with Beethoven: “While you are getting dressed, I’ll go to see Duport and to the printer about the alterations in the poster. [//] Therefore, it will say ‘Honorary Member of the Royal Academies of Arts and Sciences in Stockholm and Amsterdam, and Honorary Citizen of Vienna.’”121 “Karl should go to the printer’s about the poem now.” “I’ll be back here at 5 o’clock. It’s already after 4 o’clock.”122 With this, Schindler departed, leaving Beethoven to get dressed to make house calls. And then, while he was waiting for Schindler to return, Beethoven toyed about possible minor revisions and jotted them in his conversation book: “Contra Bassoon” (Contra Fagott), without any indication why; then a brief variant on the bass soloist’s melisma on “freudenvollere”; then a changed note

116 See

Heft 65, Blatt 40r, for the time. 65, Blatt 39r. Schindler was evidently already planning to accompany Beethoven on his rounds delivering invitations to the nobility. See Heft 66, Blätter 2r–2v. 118 Heft 65, Blätter 39r–39v. 119 Joseph Anton Pilat, editor of the Beobachter. 120 The Beobachter announced Beethoven’s Akademie only on Friday, May 7 (so the issue must have appeared on the morning of the concert), while the Wiener Zeitung had published the notice on Thursday, May 6, 1824 (with Preisinger still listed as bass soloist). See Beobachter, No. 128, p. 600; Wiener Zeitung, No. 104 (May 6, 1824), p. 444. 121 Heft 65, Blätter 39v–40r. The Kärntnertor Theater’s Zettel of Friday, May 7, 1824 (the left half of a sheet that also contained the program for the Theater an der Wien on the right), included the addition noted by Schindler here. See H.C. Robbins Landon, ed., Beethoven: A Documentary Study (New York: Macmillan, 1970), p. 369 (plate no. 237). Beethoven’s titles were not yet included on the vertically formatted poster of May 6, depicted in Köhler, ed., Beethovens Konversationshefte, Vol. 6, facing p. 96; and Bory, p. 191; essentially quoted in Schindler-MacArdle, p. 279. Both of these versions, however, note Seipelt as the bass soloist. 122 Heft 65, Blatt 40r. 117 Heft

118

REHEARSALS AND CONFUSION

in the Credo for Unger; and another in the Dona nobis pacem for the tenor section of the chorus; and later an annotation “Faster, the 17th bar afterward.”123

Thursday, May 6—Evening When Schindler returned to Beethoven’s apartment, probably a little after 5 p.m., he brought news that “there is a little spinet in the theater that can be placed wherever you want it.” Beethoven would not have needed it for the performance itself but possibly wanted somewhere visible where either choral director Ignaz Dirzka or Conradin Kreutzer, who had done considerable vocal coaching with the soloists, could sit during the performance.124 Schindler had also arranged for tickets to be sold at home and at the box office and reported that many wealthy patrons had (as was evidently the custom) paid more than the face value of the ticket itself. Then he sent the maid to get them a carriage. They probably set out by ca. 5:30,125 writing the list of visits while jiggling in the moving carriage:126 “1st to Prince Kohary, 2nd to Schwarzenberg, to Stadion,127 Prince Palffy,128 Hatzfeld,129 Metternich, Trauttmannsdorf, to Saurau, to Czernin.130 // In one

123 Heft 65, Blätter 40v–41r. Shin Augustinus Kojima believed that the first jottings suggested that Beethoven intended the contrabassoon to play along with the violoncello/ contrabass recitatives, but the notes themselves match the vocal bass solo in pitch, not the instrumental passages. 124 In Balthasar Wigand’s famous depiction of the performance of Haydn’s Die Schöpfung (The Creation) at the Aula of the university on March 27, 1808, a piano (possibly even a spinet) is visible onstage, but essentially for accompaniment during the many recitatives throughout. The pianist for that performance was none other than Conradin Kreutzer, then still a student! 125 Heft 66, Blätter 1r–1v; and Heft 65, Blatt 40r. On May 5, Schindler had projected that the visits would take two hours (with a carriage); see Heft 65, Blatt 30v. 126 Heft 66, Blätter 2r–2v. In the right margin, Schindler later annotated in pencil: “This [list] was written in the carriage, while I, with Beethoven, delivered the invitations to the upper nobility.” See also Heft 65, Blätter 35–37 (especially 37r). 127 Count Johann Philipp zu Stadion-Thannhausen und Warthausen (1763–1824), state, conference, and finance minister. See Hof- und Staat-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 248. 128 Prince Joseph Franz Palffy (1764–1827). See Wurzbach, Vol. 21, p. 211. 129 Prince Franz Ludwig von Hatzfeldt zu Trachenberg (1756–1827), Royal Prussian ambassador in Vienna. When Beethoven solicited subscriptions to manuscript copies of the Missa solemnis in 1823, he was the intermediary with the Prussian king Friedrich Wilhelm III. See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 224. 130 For Czernin, see Heft 64, Blatt 19v.

THURSDAY, MAY 6—EVENING

119

hour in the morning, everything will be done.131 // To Esterhazy right away; to the Government president [Reichmann].”132 As they neared the completion of the evening’s rounds, Schindler wrote, “One can go to them [the archdukes] already at 8 o’clock in the morning. [//] He [Schwarzenberg] lives in his garden house by the Karlskirche; thus tomorrow morning, as you drive by.”133 And finally, at about 7:30 p.m.: “Now you are finished.” Schindler suggested that they drive to see Henriette Sontag, but Beethoven had had enough activity for one day and decided to go home.134 Back in his apartment, Beethoven probably lamented the previous two hours of necessary social calls with Schindler to nephew Karl, who reminded him, “Be assured that without him [Schindler] the Akademie would still not have taken place, even next week. // No one would have taken over these errands.”135 Probably exhausted at the end of this day before the premiere performance of his Symphony No. 9, Beethoven wrote one last word, with red pencil (Rötel), into his conversation book: “Contrabassoon.”136

131 As

noted in Heft 65, Blatt 37r, the round of calls on Friday morning, May 7, was to include the archdukes. 132 With the exception of Stadion, Palffy, Hatzfeld, Czernin, and the obvious Esterházy, all of these recipients of Beethoven’s calls were listed and identified in Heft 65, Blatt 37r. 133 Heft 66, Blätter 2r–3r. If Beethoven were driving along the outer Glacis from his apartment in Ungargasse to the vicinity of the Karlskirche, he would have passed by Prince Schwarzenberg’s sumptuous summer palace with its large garden extending next to the Belvedere. 134 Projected earlier; see Heft 65, Blatt 40r. It is highly unlikely that they went. 135 Heft 66, Blatt 3v. 136 Heft 66, Blatt 3r.

Chapter 6

Premiere and Celebratory Dinner Friday, May 7, 1824—During the Day As usual, Beethoven must have been up early on the morning of Friday, May 7.1 Nephew Karl left Beethoven’s apartment by 8 a.m., so as to be in the Kärntnertor Theater’s box office by 8:30 to serve as observer for ticket sales.2 Schindler arrived, probably already in a fiacre, with a list of eleven people who were to receive a total of 22 locked (gesperrte) seats:3 soprano Sontag, contralto Unger, conductor Umlauf, Zeitung editor Bernard, physician Staudenheim, and Josephstadt Theater manager Hensler in the parterre; with Beobachter editor Pilat, financial adviser Kirchhoffer, Theater-Zeitung editor Bäuerle, brother Johann, and the printer who provided copies of “An die Freude” in the fourth gallery.4 Schindler departed to make the complimentary ticket deliveries, and, probably a little later, Beethoven left his apartment to visit the barber and run other errands. When Karl came home for midday dinner, Beethoven had not yet returned from having his hair cut. Karl was probably anxious to tell him about the successful morning at the box office and so left him a note: “Dearest Uncle! Since I must be in the box office at 3 o’clock, I’ve eaten quickly, because it would take too long to wait for you. We’ll see each other this evening. In general, it has gone well. The boxes are sold; a few even overpaid,

1 On ca. February 12, 1820, Beethoven’s friend Franz Oliva had told a prospective housekeeper that the composer customarily got up at 5 a.m. (Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 7, Blatt 66r). This must have been his habit at least as early as April 4, 1803, the day of the dress rehearsal for his concert of April 5, because his student Ferdinand Ries found him writing out trombone parts at that hour. See Franz Gerhard Wegeler and Ferdinand Ries, Biographische Notizen über Ludwig van Beethoven (Koblenz: Bädeker, 1838), p. 76; English edition as Beethoven Remembered, trans. Frederick Noonan (Arlington, Va.: Great Ocean Publishers, 1987), pp. 65–66. 2 Heft 66, Blatt 4r. The walking time from Beethoven’s apartment at the corner of Ungargasse and Beatrixgasse to the theater was roughly 30–35 minutes. 3 These were reserved seats that were locked closed until an attendant opened them for the occupant, usually for a small tip. 4 Heft 66, Blätter 4r–4v.

FRIDAY, MAY 7, 1824—DURING THE DAY

121

with 25 and 50 fl. In the 4th floor, all the seats are gone. I still hope to dispose of the remaining [seats] in the parterre and 1st gallery. Your son, Carl.”5 The next Tuesday, May 11, while looking back on the previous Friday, Karl confirmed: “The tickets for the 4th floor were gone at 11 o’clock.”6 He had already reported that “the people in front of the box office almost had a fight, in order to get near. The push [to buy tickets] was that great.”7 In midafternoon, Schindler returned to Beethoven’s apartment to get a fair copy of the vocal score that he had promised to “the girl,”8 only to find that there was none. Beethoven evidently scolded him about it, and he retorted that the public already knew about the disorganization (Liederlichkeit) surrounding the upcoming performance. Possibly to placate Beethoven, Schindler now reported that young Archduke Franz9 had heard that the rehearsals were not going well and that there were many intrigues involved. Schindler had told the archduke that Beethoven had wanted this Akademie to take place before the emperor’s departure, but that was in vain. Franz replied that he would report about everything to the emperor.10 Schindler further reported that Sontag and Unger had had a piano rehearsal with conductor Michael Umlauf earlier that day, and that he (Umlauf ) had shouted at them. Sontag promised that she would not miss a note that evening but that Unger still felt insecure. Schindler hoped that they might come to see him—or at least the First Kapellmeister, Conradin Kreutzer—for another rehearsal that afternoon, but Kreutzer had already been rude to Unger,11 and so it probably did not take place. At this point Beethoven probably asked whether any further amateurs had joined the string section, and Schindler replied in the negative, adding, “Please forgive me for noting that this Symphony is really an exception from all the previous ones, and—you yourself must admit—it is the grandest and most difficult one.”12

5

Heft 66, Blatt 5v. Heft 67, Blätter 13v–14r. 7 Heft 66, Blatt 21r. 8 Presumably either soprano Henriette Sontag or contralto Caroline Unger. 9 Franz Carl, archduke of Austria (1802–1878), second son of Emperor Franz I; he would marry Sophie Friederike Dorothea of Bavaria on November 4, 1824. Their son would be the future Emperor Franz Joseph (1830–1916). See Gräffer-Czikann, II, p. 282; Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1825, I, p. v. 10 Heft 66, Blätter 6r–6v. There is something of the child-to-parent tattletale in this account, but it might have given Beethoven some comfort to know that the emperor-father might hear that the composer-son had been wronged. And Schindler enjoyed engaging in such chatter anyway. 11 Heft 66, Blätter 7r–8r. 12 Heft 66, Blatt 8r. 6

122

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

Beethoven might have expressed some concerns about Schuppanzigh’s weight as lessening his effectiveness as concertmaster, because Schindler replied, “If I had told you this earlier, you would have considered me to be an enemy of his. But I first became acquainted with him through the Septet [Op. 20]. I have already told you something about it—[but] I could not tell you the truth then. He has become so many years older and heavier.”13 Duport, the resident manager of the Kärntnertor Theater, had already begun discussing with Schindler the repeat concert and proposed placing it in the Grosser Redoutensaal. As Schindler commented to Beethoven, “It’s only a matter of whether he can provide the Orchestra and the Chorus with it. He is giving the Orchestra as well as the Chorus, but he cannot order them to sing gratis anywhere else but in the theater. That is the stumbling block.”14 Beethoven evidently wanted to discuss this matter and the potential date of the repeat concert further, but it must have been approaching 4 p.m., and Schindler still had some tickets to deliver: “In God’s name, let me go!15 I still have to have the tickets to deliver to [lawyer] Bach and [physician] Staudenheim and [financial adviser] Kirchhoffer. I’ll be back here in an hour.”16

Friday, May 7—The Evening of the Akademie At this point, the conversation books become “silent” (with one exception, noted below) until Beethoven arrived home after the Akademie. This means that, for the most part, Schindler and members of the audience—given the noise and excitement in any case—could speak their parts of conversations loudly,17 and Beethoven could answer orally. This will provide a new picture of Beethoven in 13

Heft 66, Blatt 8v. Heft 66, Blatt 9r. 15 This exclamation was later crossed out. 16 Heft 66, Blatt 9v. Bach was Beethoven’s lawyer, now living in the Wollzeile No. 863 (see Clive, p. 11); Staudenheim was Beethoven’s physician (Clive, pp. 349–350); Kirchhoffer was his financial adviser (see Clive, pp. 185 and 265). For Bach, see also Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 708. 17 On April 8, 1823, a year before, Beethoven had told a random acquaintance, Sandra (possibly a diminutive of Alexander), that “by abstaining from using [hearing devices], I have fairly preserved my left ear in this way.” See Heft 28, Blatt 42r. Similarly, on September 11, 1825, sixteen months after the premiere of the Ninth Symphony, Sir George Smart, visiting from England, attended an informal performance of the String Quartet, Op. 132, and observed, “He [Beethoven] was in the highest of spirits. We all wrote to him by turns, but he can hear a little if you halloo quite close to his left ear.” See Cox, Smart, p. 115. For this concert in audiological context, see Albrecht, “The Hearing Beethoven: Demythifying the Composer’s Deafness,” Beethoven Journal 34, No. 2 (Winter, 2019), pp. 44–56; published simultaneously as “Der hörende Beethoven,” trans. Ernst Kobau, Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 85 (March, 2020), pp. 3–23. 14

FRIDAY, MAY 7—THE EVENING OF THE AKADEMIE

123

public during this period and help to clarify the meaning of many of the reports surrounding the Akademie. Schindler probably returned from his errands at ca. 5 p.m. and helped Beethoven to get dressed. The concert was to begin at 7 p.m., and so Beethoven and Schindler departed the composer’s apartment by carriage by 6 p.m. They would have arrived at the Kärntnertor Theater at 6:15 and headed backstage for Beethoven to greet the performers and wish them well. Beethoven had his conversation book with him; he evidently asked the conductor, Michael Umlauf, where nephew Karl was sitting, and Umlauf wrote, “In the parterre.”18 From the reports by Karl and others, we know the names of several members of the audience.19 Violinist Joseph Mayseder (1789–1863), who was playing as a member the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra that night, took six seats, presumably for family and friends.20 Count Moritz Lichnowsky, once so active in Beethoven’s preparations for the concert, was present. The Giannatasio family21 was also there. The banker Wilhelm August Gosmar22 was probably there, as was the cloth merchant Johann Nepomuk Wolfmayer,23 who had bought two locked (gesperrte) seats and paid double. Karl saw Baron Nikolaus Zmeskall von Domanovecz,24 one of Beethoven’s oldest friends and 18

Heft 66, Blatt 10r. Later, on Blatt 18r, Karl confirmed where he sat. Because Karl stayed in the City overnight, his report to Beethoven took place around midday on Saturday, May 8. See Heft 66, Blätter 21r–22r. At that time, Beethoven must have mentioned an acquaintance, and Karl noted that he did not come, but we do not who the absentee was. It may have been Blöchlinger or one of Karl’s other teachers. 20 Mayseder, the son of a prominent artist (i.e., painter), had studied with Schuppanzigh as a youngster, was handsome, and became a popular teacher among Vienna’s wealthy classes, as well as a member of the Hofkapelle, and by 1822 already owned his own house in the City, Naglergasse No. 307. See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 78; and Behsel, p. 10. 21 Fashionable educator Cajetan Giannatasio del Rio (1764–1828) and his family. Karl had studied at Giannatasio’s boarding school from 1816 to 1818, and the educator’s daughter Franziska, known as Fanny (1790–1873), had developed a secret crush on Beethoven. See Clive, pp. 128–130. 22 Wilhelm August Gosmar (1773–1846), wholesaler and owner of a sugar refinery, whose office and warehouse were located in the Untere Breunerstrasse No. 1129. He came from a north German Jewish family, but (with his family) had converted to Protestantism in St. Thomas Church in Leipzig before coming to Vienna in 1812. In 1828, Gosmar’s daughter Louise (1803–1858) married the Catholic Leopold Sonnleithner, who had been active among the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s singers at Beethoven’s Akademie. See Deutsch, Schubert Reader, pp. 605 and 959; Anton Redl, Adressen-Buch der HandlungsGremien…. (Vienna: Redl, 1824), pp. 21 and 184. 23 Johann Nepomuk Wolfmayer (1768–1841), Viennese cloth dealer and music lover, admirer and friend of Beethoven, whom he often supported financially. See Frimmel, Handbuch, II, p. 465; and Clive, p. 401. 24 Nikolaus Zmeskall von Domanovecz (1759–1833), a friend of Beethoven’s since the 1790s, Court secretary of the Royal Hungarian Court Chancellery and director of 19

124

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

suffering with arthritis, carried into the theater and to his seat in a sedan chair.25 Because the emperor, the empress, and their entourage had left for Prague two days before, the Imperial loge was empty or largely so.26 Beethoven’s brother Johann had received three complimentary tickets to sit in the fourth gallery with his wife, Therese, and her illegitimate daughter, Amalie Waldmann. Johann reputedly gave a speech27 to those around him and ostentatiously told total strangers who sat next to him, “He is my brother.” Schindler told Beethoven that one of the neighboring audience members was the journalist Moritz Gottlieb Saphir (1795–1858),28 who evidently laughed it off and said that he did not see anything harmful in it.29 * With the audience duly in place, the evening’s program consisted of: Overture to The Consecration of the House [ca. 12 minutes] Kyrie [ca. 10 minutes] Credo [ca. 20 minutes]

records, and a Protestant. He was a good violoncellist and a member of the board of directors of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Zmeskall suffered from gout or arthritis. See Frimmel, Handbuch, II, p. 474; Frimmel, Studien, II, pp. 85–87; Hof- und StaatsSchematismus, 1824, I, p. 241, and II, p. 341; Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 113 and 190; and Clive, pp. 404–405. 25 Heft 66, Blatt 11v; confirmed in Heft 67, Blatt 26v. 26 Wiener Zeitung, No. 104 (May 6, 1824), p. 441. They had departed Vienna for Linz and ultimately Prague early on the morning of Wednesday, May 5. This official business must have been planned for weeks or months and cannot be interpreted as any personal affront against Beethoven. 27 Heft 66, Blatt 11v. 28 Moritz Gottlieb Saphir (1795–1858), author and collaborator in Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung, lived in Vienna from 1822 to 1825 and again from 1834. Jewish by birth, he converted to Protestantism in Munich in 1832. Moritz Gottlieb’s nephew, the poet Samuel Saphir (b. ca. 1802, d. January 30, 1825), was a compiler of Poesien, a collection of poems that appeared in 1825. His death is mentioned in Heft 84, Blatt 22v. See Goedeke, Vol. 11, second half-volume, p. 363; Friedrich August Schmidt, Nekrolog, III, p. 1617; Wurzbach, Vol. 28, pp. 213–231; Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon, Vol. 9, pp. 419–420. 29 Heft 66, Blatt 14v. The topic of conversation here seems to be the printing of the petition sent to Beethoven in late February, 1824, and possibly Count Moritz Lichnowsky’s offense that his name had been published among the signers. Therefore, the Saphir mentioned here is almost surely Moritz Gottlieb, who was active with Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung.

FRIDAY, MAY 7—THE EVENING OF THE AKADEMIE

125

Agnus Dei [ca. 15 minutes]30

[Intermission]

Symphony No. 9 in D Minor [ca. 65 minutes]. The orchestra was situated on the stage with the conductor in the center. The vocal soloists would probably have been placed in front of him, for best eye contact, with Beethoven (and a separate music stand for his score) close to Caroline Unger. The chorus would have been placed in the pit, probably facing half-forward, so as to be able to watch the conductor from an angle.31 * Beethoven probably walked onto the stage with conductor Michael Umlauf before the Overture. Contrary to the myths in word and film, Beethoven did not look like a disheveled genius. Instead, he had a fresh haircut (still visible in Decker’s portrait of May 27), was freshly shaven and sponge-bathed, and— whether the coat was black or green—was respectably dressed. While Umlauf would have stood in front of the orchestra to conduct (much as we know it today), Beethoven seemingly stood, with his back to the audience and with another music stand in front of him, somewhere within the ensemble. He may have even designated the beginning tempos for each movement to Umlauf, but this would have been more to demonstrate his advertised personal participation in the concert than from any real necessity. From the various reports, the Overture and three Mass movements were performed well enough, and the audience listened enthusiastically. The vocal soloists would have walked onstage after the Overture, and nephew Karl later commented, “Sontag and Unger, who, at other times, are received with the greatest applause when they appear, were hardly applauded at all when they entered, which is only natural. Because at an Akademie which you give, the public probably feels that it ought not to applaud the singers.”32 What the public was especially anxious to hear, of course, was the Ninth Symphony. The first movement received no particular comments among Beethoven’s circle, but overall, Schindler later told Beethoven,: “The Harmonie [winds] performed very valiantly—not the slightest mistake could be heard.”33 30

Much of the audience would have understood that these Hymns (whose texts they would have recognized in any case) came from Beethoven’s new Missa solemnis, but they had to be disguised to satisfy the censor and the religious authorities. 31 For the placement of the chorus, see the passage at the end of the discussion of the May 2 rehearsal (Heft 64, Blätter 25r–25v). 32 Heft 66, Blatt 20v. 33 Heft 66, Blatt 10v.

126

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

Unger and the Applause during the Scherzo One of the most often repeated legends concerning the first performance of the Ninth Symphony tells that, at its end, Caroline Unger took the totally deaf Beethoven (who was turning the pages of his score) by the sleeve and pointed him toward the audience, so he could see the applause and acknowledge it. Reports of this incident (especially concerning when it took place) are contradictory. Schindler reported that “at the end of the performance,” Unger had turned the deaf Beethoven around to see the cheers of the audience.34 In 1869, in a gallery of the Crystal Palace Concert Room in London, Unger (1803–1877) herself told Sir George Grove, in part, that “at the end of this great work, [Beethoven] continued standing with his back to the audience, and beating the time, until [she] turned him, or induced him to turn around and face the people who were clapping their hands.”35 In 1860, however, Beethoven’s American biographer Alexander Wheelock Thayer met the virtuoso pianist Sigismund Thalberg (1812–1871), who, as a 12-year-old boy, had attended the performance. Thayer made a note of it (in English): “November 28, 1860. I saw Thalberg in Paris. He told me [that] he was present at Beethoven’s concert … [in] 1824. Beethoven was dressed in black dress-coat, white neckerchief, and waistcoat, black satin small-clothes, black silk stockings, shoes with buckles. After the Scherzo of the 9th Symphony, he saw how B. stood turning over the leaves of his score, utterly deaf to the immense applause, and Unger pulled him by the sleeve, and then pointed to the audience when he turned and bowed. Umlauf told the choir and orchestra to pay no attention whatever to Beethoven’s beating of the time, but all to watch him. Conradin Kreutzer was at the Pianoforte.”36 Thayer himself later questioned Thalberg’s memory, because a conversation book entry of Schindler’s37 indicates that Beethoven wore a green coat to conduct. Unfortunately, that entry (with its oversolicitous tone) appears to be falsified, although Schindler’s falsifications often contain more than a grain of truth. From a musical point of view, it does not make sense for this incident to have taken place at the end of the Symphony. The final choral Maestoso (“Freude, schöner Götterfunken! Götterfunken!”) and orchestral Prestissimo in the Coda cannot be confused, and the composer would have been able to perceive (through his extant, but weak hearing and vibrations) when the music stopped and when 34

See Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, p. 71; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 280. See George Grove, Beethoven and His Nine Symphonies (London: Novello, Ewer, 1898; repr. New York: Dover, 1962), pp. 334–335. 36 See Thayer-Forbes, p. 909; Thayer-Deiters-Riemann, V, p. 92. If Kreutzer was, in fact, onstage at the performance, his presence was entirely ceremonial, to indicate that he had played piano for the rehearsals. 37 Heft 65, Blatt 41r. 35

UNGER AND THE APPLAUSE DURING THE SCHERZO

127

the general visual environment changed with it. At the conclusion of such a grueling concert, there was probably as much uproar on the stage as there was in the audience. Beethoven would never have continued to turn pages, and Unger would never have had to turn him around under these circumstances. Unexpected applause at the end of the Scherzo seems more possible.38 The Scherzo itself contains multiple passages that are soft with potentially confusing repeats for the half-hearing Beethoven. Even the Coda contains eight bars of softness or silence before the final two bars of bumptious forte. This might have been when the incident involving Unger took place. The solution, however, is probably even more logical and based on contemporary accounts. With its extensive octave interjections played by timpanist Anton Hudler, the Scherzo received perhaps the most specific commentary within Beethoven’s circle. As Schindler reported, “At one point, the second movement of the Symphony was completely interrupted by applause. And should have been repeated.” As we shall see below, the Viennese Theater Ordinance of 1800 would have prevented any encore. Two days after the performance, pianist Carl Czerny, who was in the audience, wrote to Friedrich Wieck in Leipzig, “The Scherzo moved the whole house to stormy, involuntary interruptions of applause.”39 Two years later, Karl Holz, who probably played in the violin section, still recalled that in the Ritmo di tre battute, where the timpani interject with their octave Fs, it was “Too bad that this passage was lost at the concert; people were applauding so much that a person couldn’t hear anything.”40 At this point—where the bar groupings changed from four bars to three bars and with explosive timpani interjections—here is where the audience broke out in unexpected applause, and here (while the music was being played) is where Beethoven would have been reading through his score, trying to match sounds to written notes among the “white noise” of the applause. This, then, would have 38 Even so, concert audiences in Beethoven’s day often applauded at the ends of movements, so that applause at the end of the novel Scherzo might not have been unexpected at all. 39 Czerny, Letter of May 9, 1824; reproduced in full in Anna von Meichsner, Friedrich Wieck und seine beiden Töchter (Leipzig: Matthes, 1875), pp. 27–30; excerpted for passages concerning Beethoven in Kopitz and Cadenbach, eds., Beethoven aus der Sicht seiner Zeitgenossen, Vol. 1, pp. 198–199. Wieck (1785–1843), accompanied by piano builder Matthäus Andreas Stein, had visited Beethoven in Baden on July 8, 1823; see Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books Heft 35, Blätter 31v–35v. I am grateful to Michael Ladenburger (Beethoven-Haus Bonn) for bringing Czerny’s report to my attention; see his “A Four-Leaf Clover: … the Premiere of the Ninth Symphony,” in The New Beethoven, ed. Jeremy Yudkin, pp. 56–57 and 71. 40 See Heft 114, Blatt 16r. Holz was now (in the second week of July, 1825) the composer’s “new” unpaid secretary. See the Gesamtausgabe, p. 85, bar 4 and following.

128

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

been the logical time, under logical circumstances, for Unger to have pointed out what was going on in the audience behind the composer.

The Symphony Resumes Shortly after the concert, nephew Karl also commented about this second movement: “How splendid the Scherzo is. It surely wouldn’t have worked without Umlauf. When coming out onto the stage, Umlauf made [the sign of ] the cross over the orchestra, so worried was he that it would not come together.”41 It is not clear here whether Umlauf was worried about the Symphony as a whole or the Scherzo in particular. If it were the Scherzo, what nephew Karl took for the sign of the cross might have been Umlauf ’s reminder to the orchestra of the tempo in a grouping of four bars (already ritmo di quattro battute) at the beginning of the movement. Even today, some conductors sometimes use “silent” beats (unseen by the audience) to prime the orchestra concerning tempo at the tricky opening of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 5.42 For the past decade, Beethoven had spent much of his “leisure” time studying the works of Bach and Handel, certainly reflected already in the Hammerklavier Piano Sonata, Op. 106, but now in such passages as the “Et vitam venturi saeculi” fugue in the Credo of the Missa solemnis, the Scherzo of the Ninth Symphony, but especially the almost chaotic fugue after the tenor’s March with chorus in the Symphony’s Finale. To this end, Schindler told Beethoven, “People are saying that you used quadruple instead of double counterpoint in these works.”43 Once the Ninth Symphony came to its conclusion with the full orchestra from piccolo to contrabassoon, Turkish percussion, and everything in between, the audience must have gone wild with enthusiasm. Schindler later reported, “Never in my life have I heard such stormy and yet sincere applause. “The reception was more than imperial—for the people broke out [in applause] four times. At the end, they shouted, ‘Vivat!’ “As the parterre began their fifth round of applause, the police commissioner shouted, ‘Quiet.’” This last comment has often been quoted out of context, and so a word of explanation seems in order. The “police commissioner” (Polizey Comissär ) mentioned here would not have been the feared police chief, Count Sedlnitzky, but instead an ordinary police officer assigned to the theater to keep order. 41

Heft 67, Blätter 11v–12r. It is also possible that such silent beating took place before the first movement. In the original parts preserved in the Archive of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde (Vienna), there are vertical lines for four bars of silent preparatory beats before the first movement begins (although these seem, upon first inspection, to date from later in the century). I am grateful to Dr. Otto Biba for access to these materials in June, 2014. 43 Heft 66, Blatt 11r. 42

THE SYMPHONY RESUMES

129

The Viennese Theater Ordinance of 1800 had forbidden encores, extensive applause, repeated curtain calls, whistling, pounding the floor with canes, stamping the floor with feet, and so on. On March 22, 1824, the day of the third performance of Auber’s opera Der Schnee, and on April 1, 1824, on the occasion of the local premiere of Michele Carafa’s opera Gabriella di Vergi, the administration of the Kärntnertor Theater printed reminders of these ordinances on the Zettel (playbills). They periodically repeated the admonitions on other Zettel for ballets and, especially, Italian operas. The most recent appearance had been on a Zettel for Rossini’s Corradino on April 20, 1824.44 Therefore, in limiting the applause, the Polizey Comissär was merely enforcing a long-standing ordinance. In any case, Schindler summed up the reception with a comparison that was guaranteed to gratify the composer: “The Court [was applauded] successively only three times, but Beethoven five times.”45 With stage changes and, presumably, a somewhat extended intermission to refresh the vocal soloists and chorus, the Akademie would have lasted until ca. 9:30 or 9:45 p.m. After the performance, Beethoven probably received congratulations from the participants and members of the audience, all out loud and without the aid of his conversation book. Nephew Karl talked to Beethoven and Schindler briefly but remained in the City to be nearer his classes on Saturday morning. Therefore, Schindler, joined by Joseph Hüttenbrenner (1796–1882), who had sung tenor as a member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s chorus,46 accompanied Beethoven home by carriage.47 44 See Kärntnertor Theater, Zettel, March–May, 1824 (Bibliothek, Österreichisches Theatermuseum; courtesy of librarian Othmar Barnert). The most recently documented application of the ordinance took place at the Spitzeder couple’s farewell performance at the Kärntnertor Theater on Monday, May 3; see the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 27 (July 1, 1824), col. 437, where they did not encore the popular aria “O närrische Leute” (“Che seccolo e questo”) in Paisiello’s Die Müllerin (La molinara). See also Heft 64, Blätter 15r–15v. Even today, one can see police and fire department officials with similar functions sitting among the audience at Vienna’s Konzerthaus and Musik-Verein. 45 Heft 66, Blätter 10r–10v. Schindler made the aforementioned reports later that night, after he had accompanied Beethoven back home. Grove, Beethoven … Symphonies, p. 334, however, noted that “three successive bursts of applause were the rule for the Imperial Family.” The number was an evocation of the Trinity. 46 Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 127; Peter Clive, Schubert and His World: A Biographical Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), pp. 86–87. A younger brother of Anselm Hüttenbrenner, Joseph, a junior official at the Court chancellery, lived in the City, Wipplingerstrasse No. 389, in fall, 1822. 47 In his Biographie (1860, Vol. 2, pp. 70–71; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 280), Schindler gives a dramatic account of the long night after the concert, with Beethoven’s justifiable exhaustion, unfortunately (but not criminally) conflated with his disappointment concerning the box-office receipts. As is clear from the conversation book entries in Heft

130

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

As Carl Czerny described the performance to Friedrich Wieck in Leipzig: “The large orchestra covered itself with glory and sweat, and Umlauf conducted alongside Beethoven with a fire and dedication that makes him worthy of respect both as a man and an artist.”48 The sculptor Anton Dietrich (ca. 1796–1872) was also present and provided a layman’s observation: “Beethoven himself conducted; it was divine to see how he animated everything with expression and feeling; in the orchestra the best artists of Vienna participated with the utmost engagement and intensity.”49 Therefore, the performance, often described in the popular literature as ill prepared or inadequate, was in fact not judged in that manner by many professional musicians and educated music lovers. Once Beethoven, Schindler, and Hüttenbrenner arrived back at the apartment at 10:15 or 10:30 p.m.,50 Schindler and Beethoven relived the exciting evening in conversation: the applause at various times, the superb playing by the Harmonie, Karl’s report about Zmeskall’s arrival, brother Johann’s antics, and so forth.51 At one point, Schindler even expressed a sigh of relief: “My triumph is fulfilled, because I can now speak from my heart. As late as yesterday I secretly feared that the Mass would be forbidden, because one heard 66, Blätter 17r and 18r, Beethoven would not learn about the gross and net receipts until shortly after the Abendkassa (evening box office) opened at 5 p.m. on Saturday, May 8. 48 Czerny, Letter of May 9, 1824; see Anna von Meichsner, Friedrich Wieck und seine beiden Töchter, pp. 27–30; quoted in Kopitz and Cadenbach, eds., Beethoven aus der Sicht seiner Zeitgenossen, Vol. 1, pp. 198–199. Wieck (1785–1843) had visited Beethoven in Baden on July 8, 1823. I am grateful to Michael Ladenburger (Beethoven-Haus Bonn) for bringing Czerny’s report to my attention; see his “A Four-Leaf Clover … the Premiere of the Ninth Symphony,” in The New Beethoven, ed. Jeremy Yudkin, pp. 56–57 and 71. See another detail reported by Czerny under “Unger and the Applause during the Scherzo” above. 49 Anton Dietrich to Leopold Kupelwieser, in Rome; Postscript to a letter from Wilhelm August Rieder, Vienna, to Kupelwieser, June 24, 1824 (autograph in the Archiv Kupelwieser-Widrich, Salzburg); quoted in Kopitz and Cadenbach, eds., Beethoven aus der Sicht seiner Zeitgenossen, Vol. 1, pp. 252–253. I am grateful to Michael Ladenburger (Beethoven-Haus Bonn) for bringing Dietrich’s letter to my attention; see his “A Four-Leaf Clover … the Premiere of the Ninth Symphony,” in The New Beethoven, ed. Jeremy Yudkin, pp. 56–57 and 71. In 1821, Dietrich had made a bust of Beethoven “from life.” The artist Kupelwieser (1796–1862) is best known as a member of Franz Schubert’s circle of friends; in 1825, the artist Rieder (1796–1880) made a well-known portrait of Schubert. 50 As noted in Chapter 5 (under “Thursday, May 5—Evening”), Beethoven’s housekeeper (presumably Barbara Holzmann) had Friday, May 7, off, so in any case there would have been no hot food waiting for them. If the restaurant on the ground level were still open, they might have brought some food up with them (if any were still left that late), or they might have made do with light supper fare, such as bread, cheese, and hard-boiled eggs. See Heft 65, Blätter 31v–32r. 51 These entries in Heft 66, Blätter 10r–12r, have, for the most part, been quoted above in connection with their pertinent events during the concert.

SATURDAY, MAY 8—THE DAY AFTER THE AKADEMIE

131

that the archbishop52 protested against it! I was right, though, in not saying anything about it to the police commissioner at the beginning. [//] By God, it would have been done! // It has never been done yet, though, in the Court Theater! // Now Pax tecum [Peace be with you].”53 Probably in reference to Henriette Sontag and Caroline Unger, Schindler commented, “Better to cope with 10 male singers than one female singer.”54 Schindler and Hüttenbrenner (whom Beethoven had not met previously55 and who did not enter into the written conversation) probably remained long into the evening and even to the very early hours of the morning until Beethoven’s excitement abated into exhaustion. As they prepared to leave, Schindler noted, “It’s raining quite hard.”56

Saturday, May 8—The Day after the Akademie On the morning of Saturday, May 8, Schindler stopped by Beethoven’s apartment: “So, have you recovered from yesterday’s exertions?” Nephew Karl had Collegium (a discussion group) at the university until 5 p.m., so Schindler made an 52

Since 1822, the prince-archbishop of Vienna had been Count Leopold Maximilian von Firmian (1766–1831). See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, II, p. 3; Wurzbach, Vol. 4, p. 234. 53 Heft 66, Blätter 10v–11r. 54 Heft 66, Blatt 11v. This may be a reference to the fact, as Schindler recounted here, that Count Palffy had attempted to forbid the bass Seipelt from singing on the Akademie, but Seipelt had told him that he had specifically been invited by Beethoven and had prevailed (Blätter 11v–12r). 55 Only on the afternoon of Saturday, May 8, did Schindler tell Beethoven who he was: “His name is Hüttenbrenner, employed in the office of Count Saurau, and knows Lichnowsky as an acquaintance from Graz. He is very musical and sang in the chorus at the Akademie.” See Heft 66, Blatt 16r. Joseph Hüttenbrenner (1796–1873), a brother of Anselm Hüttenbrenner and a friend of Franz Schubert, was a practicing member (in singing) of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. He worked as a registrar’s apprentice at the Imperial United Court Chancellery, which was under Count Saurau’s supervision. See Schindler-MacArdle, p. 280; Deutsch, Schubert Reader, p. 86, 260–261, 266–267, and 671–673; Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 236 (phonetically called Hittenbrenner); Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 127. 56 The weather reports in the Wiener Zeitung for May 6–10 do not indicate any rainstorms in Vienna at the normal recording times of 8 a.m., 3 p.m., and 10 p.m. During the afternoon and evening of Friday, May 7, and the morning of Saturday, May 8, however, the skies were trüb (overcast) compared to corresponding times on the surrounding days, so the conditions were favorable then for a sudden and hard, but usually brief, rain shower that is characteristic of the geographical region. See Wiener Zeitung, No. 106 (May 8, 1824), p. 452; No. 107 (May 10, 1824), p. 455; No. 108 (May 11, 1824), p. 460; and No. 109 (May 12, 1824), p. 403.

132

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

appointment to meet him there then, in order to go to the Cassa (box office) and get Beethoven’s share of the income. Since Beethoven was still without a housekeeper/cook, he probably went to a nearby coffee house for coffee by late morning to read the day’s newspapers and to make his list of errands, including: “Pay the cleaning people in the theater.”57 Shortly after noon on Saturday, Karl had a break in his classes, came home to Beethoven’s apartment, and, as Schindler had the night before, relived the triumphs of the Akademie. It was now that he reported on the low-keyed applause that the women soloists had received and the sundry people who had bought tickets and whom he saw among the crowd at the concert.58 Beethoven had promised to host his circle to a well-deserved dinner on Sunday, May 9, and when Schindler returned to Beethoven’s apartment (evidently in time to go to dinner with Karl) on Saturday afternoon, they began making plans, perhaps to get food from the restaurant in Beethoven’s building but hold it in the composer’s apartment. Even so, Schindler could not resist making a caustic comment about concertmaster Ignaz Schuppanzigh: “From the restaurant; only if you make an earlier agreement with the proprietor [about] how much per person.59 // If you invite Umlauf [for] tomorrow [Sunday, May 9], then the Fat One [Schuppanzigh] will also come with him. // Was he such a gourmand in earlier years, or did he become one only in Russia?”60 Schindler also reminded Beethoven to write letters of thanks to High Chamberlain Trauttmansdorff, as well as one each to the orchestra, the chorus, and the dilettantes. He suggested that Beethoven postpone writing to the performers until he knew for sure whether the second Akademie would take place on Friday, May 14, a Norma-Tag, so he could invite them to participate again.61 Turning to their projected mission to pick up the receipts at 5 p.m., Schindler said, “We are speaking about the correctness of the cashier’s calculations—that he cannot cheat.”62

57

Heft 66, Blätter 20r–20v. Heft 66, Blätter 20v–22r. 59 It seems that Beethoven initially intended to host a celebratory dinner in his apartment on Sunday, May 9, with food brought in from the restaurant across the courtyard, the way that he was accustomed to doing when he and Karl had needed a quick and convenient take-out meal in the past. Indeed, the housekeeper’s last day was Friday, May 7 (see Heft 65, Blatt 31v). Even so, Barbara Holzmann (ca. 1755–1831) would continue working for Beethoven, off and on, for another year. 60 Heft 66, Blatt 12v. Several Blätter in this Heft were entered or bound out of order, therefore the numbering sequence apparent here and immediately above. 61 Heft 66, Blätter 12v–13r. A Norma-Tag was a minor religious holiday when no dramas or operas were allowed to be performed but uplifting concerts (Akademies) were. Schindler projected that they would know by the next day, Sunday, May 9. 62 Heft 66, Blatt 14r. 58

SATURDAY, MAY 8—THE DAY AFTER THE AKADEMIE

133

Karl evidently did not return to the university for Collegium on Saturday afternoon but instead remained at home with Beethoven and Schindler until 5 p.m., when Schindler wrote, “We’re going to the box office now; it is exactly 5 o’clock. // Tomorrow [Sunday, May 9], I’ll load up Mylord [Schuppanzigh] and Umlauf, and we’ll pick up Your Majesty here in all submissiveness.”63 Contrary to their initial plans, Beethoven evidently accompanied Schindler and Karl to the Kärntnertor Theater’s box office on Saturday afternoon, May 8. There are no conversation book entries from that transaction. While at the theater, however, Beethoven also encountered conductor Umlauf and asked if the bass singer Seipelt were in the building, so he could thank him for stepping in for the Akademie on such short notice. As luck would have it, Umlauf told Beethoven, Seipelt “has just arrived,”64 and so the composer’s errand at the theater must have ended pleasantly. Beethoven, Karl, and Schindler evidently repaired to a restaurant for one of the composer’s favorite dishes, Hecht (pike). They enjoyed pleasant conversation, and Karl finally wrote, “I must go now. Please give me my [boarding house] dinner money.”65 Schindler remained, and only now did the conversation, initially positive, turn negative: “All the people were shattered, even crushed by the greatness of your works. // In Paris and London, this Akademie would certainly have brought you 12 to 15 thousand gulden; here you can earn that many hundreds. After yesterday, though, you have to see all too clearly that you are wasting your reputation if

63

Heft 66, Blatt 17r. The latter remarks concern plans for the dinner in the Prater; see Heft 67. 64 Heft 66, Blatt 18r. The German editors were not sure that the author of this entry was Umlauf. This entry implies that the writer and Beethoven expected to see bass Joseph Seipelt at the Kärntnertor Theater that evening. Seipelt did not sing regularly at either the Kärntnertor or the Theater an der Wien. His most recent appearance at the Kärntnertor before Beethoven’s Akademie was on the Spitzeder couple’s farewell performance of Paisiello’s Die Müllerin (La molinara) on Monday, May 3, and his next would be on Friedrich Wranitzky’s benefit concert at 12:30 p.m. on Sunday, May 9, where he would sing in an unnamed male vocal quartet by Schubert with tenors Haitzinger and Rauscher and bass Ruprecht. Perhaps Seipelt was at the theater on Saturday evening for a rehearsal for their Schubert quartet. Beethoven’s Fidelio Overture would open Wranitzky’s concert and would need little or no rehearsal (see Heft 65, Blatt 1r). For an additional entry probably by Umlauf, see Heft 66, Blatt 10r. 65 Heft 66, Blätter 18r–19r. As noted above, Karl was evidently spending some of his nights in the City and might also have been eating his midday meals at the Kosthaus of Baroness Born and her sister Frau Paumgarten (or Baumgarten) in the Rother Igel, Tuchlauben No. 558.

134

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

you remain within these walls any longer. In short, I have no words to express myself, as I feel the injustices against you.”66

Sunday, May 9—The Day of the Dinner As planned the day before,67 in the early afternoon of Sunday, May 9, Schindler probably hired a carriage, picked up Umlauf and Schuppanzigh at their residences in the City, and then headed south to the Ungargasse in suburban Landstrasse to pick up Beethoven and Karl. If so, the five of them then drove to the restaurant Zum wilden Mann in the Prater,68 presumably arriving at ca. 2 p.m. It is also possible that Beethoven and Karl simply walked from the Landstrasse to the Prater and met the others at Zum wilden Mann.69 Schindler said that if the repeat concert could not be scheduled for Friday, May 14, then Beethoven should hold it on Sunday, May 16, at the Grosser Redoutensaal, where all the orchestra members could participate. He said that if Beethoven priced the tickets low, then those who had already heard the Symphony might come a second time. Schuppanzigh began by complimenting Beethoven’s new haircut, and that may have occasioned some pleasant banter. Then he cautioned that the concert needed to be given that week, because people were already starting to move to the country for the summer. Schuppanzigh, however, advocated that Beethoven hold it at the Landstand on Friday evening, May 14, and unrealistically projected that an audience of 800 could fit into the hall. This and a further suggestion that they try to get the university’s Aula [hall] probably irritated Beethoven, who had suffered through this kind of unproductive speculation six weeks before. 66

Heft 66, Blatt 19v. These are presumably the last entries, chronologically, in Heft 66. Heft 66, Blatt 17r. 68 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, p. 88 (Schindler-MacArdle, p. 290), confirms the location but indicates that Beethoven arrived “with stormy countenance.” Schindler also places this dinner “a few days after the second performance,” seemingly conflating it with a dinner (possibly at the Birne in Landstrasser Hauptstrasse) attended by Schindler, Karl, and Schuppanzigh directly after the second Akademie on Sunday, May 23 (see Heft 69, Blatt 5r). The narrative here is based largely on the contemporary entries in the conversation books and may serve to correct some previously accepted misconceptions of the occasion. For a comparison, Schindler’s 1860 account may be found in Appendix G. 69 Five men (including hefty Schuppanzigh) in a fiacre meant for four might have been excessive. In his account, Schindler reported that Beethoven arrived with nephew Karl (Biographie [1860], Vol. 2, p. 88; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 290; and Appendix G in this volume), and indeed the day was conducive for such a walk: sunny and 58 degrees Fahrenheit at 8 a.m.; overcast and 66 degrees at 3 p.m.; and 60 degrees and clear at 10 p.m. See the Wiener Zeitung, No. 108 (May 11, 1824), p. 460. Moreover, the opening conversational entries in Heft 67, Blätter 1v–2r, have the tone of arrival rather than common travel. 67

SUNDAY, MAY 9—THE DAY OF THE DINNER

135

Umlauf ordered red wine for everyone, and—even though they were already eating at Zum wilden Mann, Beethoven’s choice for hosting the group70— Schuppanzigh praised the meals at Benko’s restaurant nearby, owned by a relative of Umlauf ’s wife. Schuppanzigh seemingly became more irritating with his advice71 and told Beethoven that he should not pay Gläser (the copyist who had worked above and beyond the call of duty on the Ninth Symphony) so much money. Then the subject turned to Schuppanzigh’s Quartet concerts, and the violinist complained that he had had to pay Joseph Melzer (former principal contrabassist of the Kärntnertor Theater) so much for his appearance with them on March 14.72 70 A few minutes later (Heft 67, Blatt 4v), Umlauf recalled that he and Beethoven had eaten here in Zum wilden Mann, along with Wolfmeyer and Tuscher, after the production of Fidelio (which Umlauf had conducted) in 1814. The third version of Beethoven’s opera, Fidelio, was first performed in the Kärntnertor Theater on May 23, 1814, and was repeated many times in the same year. See Thayer-Deiters-Riemann, III, pp. 424–426; and Thayer-Forbes, pp. 580–584. Johann Nepomuk Wolfmayer was a cloth dealer and music lover; he commissioned Beethoven for a Requiem but ultimately became the dedicatee of his String Quartet, Op. 135. Mathias Tuscher was a Magistrat’s councillor and amateur violinist and had been guardian of nephew Karl in March–July, 1819. 71 Schuppanzigh tended to become angry and abusive when he had had too much to drink. For a similar situation, see the brief Heft 95, filled during dinner after the first private performance of Beethoven’s String Quartet, Op. 132, on September 9, 1825. It is published in facsimile as Beethoven im Gespräch: Ein Konversationsheft vom 9. September 1825, ed. Grita Herre, trans. Theodore Albrecht (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2002). 72 Joseph Melzer/Mölzer (1763–1832), contrabassist at the Kärntnertor Theater, as well as contrabassist and contrabassoonist at the Hofkapelle, had collaborated in a performance of Beethoven’s Septet in C, Op. 20, on March 14, 1824 (within Schuppanzigh’s Quartet series). The performers included Schuppanzigh (violin), Weiss (viola), Linke (violoncello), Melzer (contrabass), with Anton Friedlowsky (clarinet), August Mittag (bassoon), and Michael Herbst (horn). Melzer had played Beethoven’s Septet with Schuppanzigh as early as a concert at Zum römischem Kaiser on the Freyung on April 11, 1814. The members of the ensemble then had been almost exactly the same, except that Anton Romberg (1771–1842) still lived in Vienna and played bassoon. Earlier on that concert in 1814, Beethoven, Schuppanzigh, and Linke had performed the “Archduke” Piano Trio, Op. 97, all to great applause. Although Barbaja had dismissed Melzer from the Kärntnertor Theater at the end of November, 1823, Beethoven may have brought him back to play principal contrabass for the premiere of the Ninth Symphony after the death of Anton Grams on May 18, 1823. See AmZ 16, No. 21 (May 25, 1814), col. 355; Der Sammler, No. 62 (April 17, 1814), p. 248; Wiener AmZ 8, No. 12 (March 27, 1824), p. 45; Köchel, Hof-Musikkapelle, pp. 94–95; Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 65 and 80; Hoftheater, Generalintendanz, Karton 70 (1827), new 96/Op; 3 Beilagen, July 21, 1826–March 19, 1827 (Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna).

136

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

Probably feeling the tension rise as the unsolicited advice increased, nephew Karl finished his meal and departed, claiming that he still needed to study.73 Now the conversation turned to the leased Käntnertor Theater administration under Barbaja and Duport, and that Court music administrator Dietrichstein had been too weak to prevent the lease.74 Umlauf noted that he had been in a lawsuit with the administration and won it, but for seven months had no services. He said that he would rather own a civilian business than be the “First Kapellmeister of the World.” Many of the members of the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra who had been dismissed by Barbaja’s administration—including oboist Joseph Czerwenka, hornist Friedrich Hradetzky, and contrabassist Melzer—still had their supplemental jobs at the Hofkapelle, but Umlauf called it “an old people’s home, and that none [of its members] can live from his salary.”75 Schuppanzigh, who did not like the idea of dilettantes playing in public and taking jobs away from professional musicians, said that Archduke Rudolph,76 with Streicher,77 was the real benefactor of the amateur-friendly Musik-Verein78— and “he is now very sorry that it is more detrimental than useful to the Art.” Schuppanzigh added that his concert in the Augarten hall on the morning of

73

Heft 67, Blätter 1v–3r. Karl had seemingly missed studying with his Collegium on Saturday afternoon, so the “2te Stunde” (second hour or second class) that he mentioned in the full entry here might have been another discussion session. 74 The discussion concerns the lease of the Kärntnertor Theater by Domenico Barbaja, which took place on December 1, 1821. Count Moritz Dietrichstein had taken over the office of Court theater director in February, 1821. See Bauer, 150 Jahre Theater an der Wien, p. 99; Deutsch, Schubert-Dokumente, p. 113; Franz Hadamowsky, Wien: Theatergeschichte (Vienna: Jugend und Volk, 1988), pp. 342–352. 75 In May, 1824, of the 33 regular members of the orchestra of the Hofkapelle, the oldest was contrabassist Georg Sedler (August 13, 1750–July 27, 1829) at 73; the youngest was trumpeter Joseph Weidinger, the Younger (b. ca. 1799) at age ca. 25; but the average age was ca. 55 years old. In comparison, the average age of the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra members in fall, 1822, had been ca. 36 years old. See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 63–66 and 78–81; and Albrecht, archival research notes (Vienna, 1996–2019). 76 Heft 67, Blatt 4r. Rudolph, of course, was also Beethoven’s most constant benefactor. 77 Johann Andreas Streicher (1761–1833), well-known piano maker; a friend of Schiller’s in his youth. Since 1802, with his wife, Nannette, he led the Viennese piano firm of “Nannette Streicher née Stein.” Their son Johann Baptist (1796–1871) had been a partner in the firm since 1823. See Frimmel, Handbuch, II, pp. 262–264; Folker Göthel, “Streicher, Johann Andreas,” MGG, Vol. 12, cols. 1515–1517. 78 The Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in dem Österreichischen Kaiserstaate, often simply referred to as the “Musikverein.”

SUNDAY, MAY 9—THE DAY OF THE DINNER

137

May 1, which had included Beethoven’s Symphony No. 5, had cost him 205 fl., even with all the dilettantes.79 Schuppanzigh turned back to the logistics for the upcoming repeat concert and told Beethoven that if he wanted it to take place, he had better keep brother Johann from getting mixed up in it. Part of the blame for some of the early confusion caused by Johann now seems to have been turned, momentarily, to Schindler, who defended himself: “If other people made trouble and got everything tied up in knots, then, by God, I could not do any differently than I did.”80 Schindler then turned the conversation to Johann Baptist Gänsbacher,81 the leading candidate for the cathedral Kapellmeister’s position, and the kinds of salary and incidental income that it would bring. Then Schuppanzigh made a comment out loud, and Schindler repeated it in writing for Beethoven: “Mylord [Schuppanzigh] says that the epidemic82 always rages among the people.”83 If Metternich’s secret police, always on the prowl, had overheard Schuppanzigh’s remark, then Beethoven and his circle, by extension, might have found themselves in trouble with the authorities, especially at a time when the composer was performing movements of a Mass on the secular concert stage. Beethoven may have cautioned the violinist to lower his voice. Beethoven may have commented on how difficult it was to get the desired effect with the running 16th-notes in the bassoons under the fanfares in the Consecration of the House Overture. Then Schuppanzigh may have come close to 79 Heft 67, Blätter 4r–4v. As so often in these cases, Schuppanzigh’s strings were probably largely dilettantes under professional leadership with professionals in most of the wind sections. There are very few indications of how much professional musicians were paid for individually contracted jobs, but in February, 1814, Beethoven had paid his professionals 2 fl. for a rehearsal and 3 fl. for a performance. Thus a professional who played one rehearsal in addition to the performance received 5 fl. See the receipt in Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181. 80 Heft 67, Blätter 4v–5v. Schindler was discreet in his self-defense here and did not launch a counterattack against Johann by name. 81 Johann Baptist Gänsbacher (1778–1844), composer, pupil of Johann Georg Albrechtsberger and Abbé Vogler, was especially supported by Archbishop Count Leopold Maximilian Firmian upon his application for the cathedral Kapellmeister’s position at St. Stephan’s in Vienna, which had been vacant since Joseph Preindl’s death on October 26, 1823. The appointment decree, however, dated only from September 26, 1824. Gänsbacher assumed the office on November 10, 1824. See Wiener AmZ, No. 96 (December 1, 1824), pp. 381–382, and following issues; Conrad Fischnaler, Johann Gänsbacher (Innsbruck, 1878), pp. 36–37; Walter Senn, “Gänsbacher,” MGG, Vol. 4, cols. 1230–1236; Wurzbach, Vol. 5, p. 48; Franz Loidl and Martin Krexner, Wiens Bischöfe und Erzbischöfe (Vienna: Verlag Dr. A. Schendl, 1983), p. 70; and Heft 50, Blätter 2r–2v. 82 In context, this may be a negative comment about organized religion. 83 Heft 67, Blatt 6r.

138

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

dangerous territory when he carried the thought one step further: “Pardon me, Great Master of Tones! If, in the Overture, the violoncello played along with the 16th-notes in the bassoons, I believe that its effect would not fail.84 Once more, pardon me.”85 Beethoven may have treated Schuppanzigh’s suggestion as diplomatically as possible, and the violinist now steered the conversation into less personal matters concerning the Hofkapelle and its principal hornist, Willibald Lother (1762– 1844), although not by name: “In the last Court Concert, Handel’s Chorus from [Judas] Maccabaeus was done; they had to alter the horn part because the hornist did not produce the high C.”86 To which Umlauf added, “The trumpeters, like the oboists.”87 After this, Schindler wrote several entries concerning various topics on behalf of the others present: “Umlauf asks whether there were small trombones, since he never heard of soprano trombones. [//] Schuppanzigh heard them in Berlin [in 1816].88 // Umlauf says that the French trombonists played quite splendidly.”

84

The passage in the Consecration of the House Overture is the running notes in the bassoons under the fanfares that follow the opening March. Beethoven did not give in to the expressed suggestion and, in fact, probably became irritated with Schuppanzigh for making it. See Beethoven, Gesamtausgabe, Ser. 3, No. 24, p. 6, bar 4 and following. 85 Heft 67, Blatt 6v. Years later, after Beethoven’s death, Schindler seconded Schuppanzigh’s suggestion with a pitiful falsified entry. 86 Heft 67, Blatt 7r. Doubtless the chorus was “See, the conquering hero comes,” with its high horn part. It had been performed at a concert in the Ceremonial Hall at Court on Tuesday, March 30, 1824. In May, 1824, the two hornists in the Hofkapelle were Willibald Lother/Lotter (November 8, 1762–May 12, 1844) and Friedrich Hradetzky (ca. 1766/1769–1846). As Vienna’s most prominent low horn player, Hradetzky would never have been expected to play such a high horn part. Lother, however, had presumably been a fine high horn player, but at age 61 might no longer have been secure in the treacherous upper register. See Hof Musikkapelle, Karton 13 (1824), fols. 57–58, 60, and 63 (HausHof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna). 87 Umlauf may be describing high clarino trumpeters—their upper harmonics allowed them to produce a diatonic major scale in the key of the instrument—and how similar it is to the tone of the oboe. 88 After Prince Rasumovsky disbanded his resident string quartet, Schuppanzigh spent from early 1816 to mid-April, 1823, away from Vienna, initially touring Germany but ultimately settling in St. Petersburg, with occasional excursions southwest to Warsaw and south to Lemberg (Lvov/Lviv). Schuppanzigh was in Berlin in late April and May, 1816, giving an orchestral concert (including Wellington’s Victory) on May 1; Weber then conducted Wellington’s Victory on a benefit concert on May 8, presumably with Schuppanzigh among the violins. Steiner had published Wellington’s Victory in score and parts in February, 1816 (see Kinsky-Halm, pp. 253–254), and Schuppanzigh may have taken a fresh set with him to Berlin.

SUNDAY, MAY 9—THE DAY OF THE DINNER

139

“Schuppanzigh requests that you might say just a few words to Umlauf, [so] that, when all is said and done, he prepares himself for the second concert.” One hopes that Schuppanzigh meant that in good humor, rather than the caustic criticism of which he was capable. Someone suggested an ensemble that might have been appropriate to the Landständischer Saal but hardly to Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony as the focal point of these two concerts: “One needs only a simple orchestra,89 few choral singers, and almost no expenses, and everything would probably be all right.” And then Schindler added the most prophetic comment of all: “How much better it is, that one cannot hear your music mistreated in restaurants.”90 Now Schuppanzigh himself wrote in his typical third-person style: “Dear Beethoven! I ask him [= you], that he [= you] just write a little letter of thanks to the orchestra of the Kärntnertor [Theater]; they will all enjoy it very much.”91 Of course, Beethoven had intended to do so—and also to the chorus and to the dilettantes—but had decided to hold off until he knew for sure when the repeat concert would take place. The dinner itself had long since run its course, and the four of them probably sat too long at the table, sipping the last of their wine. Schindler said that the violinist Joseph Böhm had told him that all that was needed to get the MusikVerein’s dilettantes was a note to its vice president, Kiesewetter,92 saying where the concert would take place, but Schuppanzigh said that he would not do it until Beethoven knew for sure. Umlauf mentioned one of the Fröhlich sisters, singing stars of the MusikVerein.93 Now there were recriminations concerning the solo singers whom Beethoven had chosen, and Schindler said that it was Forti’s fault that Preisinger Schuppanzigh also gave two Quartet concerts on May 17 (including Beethoven’s Quartet in F minor, Op. 95) and May 28 (including Beethoven’s Quintet in C, Op. 29). See the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 18, No. 25 (June 19, 1816), cols. 423–424. 89 Schindler means an orchestra with a relatively small string section and only a single complement of winds. 90 Heft 67, Blätter 7v–8r. In the twenty-first century, of course, we can hear Beethoven’s compositions fragmented and adapted in pop music, television commercials, cell phones, and all sorts of similar circumstances. 91 Heft 67, Blatt 8v. 92 Raphael Georg Kiesewetter, (Edler) von Wiesenbrunn (1773–1850), Court councillor and office director of the Court War Council, known music scholar and collector of musical autographs, was vice president of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde from 1821 to 1843. See Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten, 1823 (reflecting 1821), p. 351; Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 290, and II, p. 340; Perger, p. 279; Wurzbach, Vol. 11, p. 252; Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 111. 93 As good singers, the four sisters Maria Anna (1793–1880), Barbara (1797–1879), Katharina (1800–1879), and Josephine (1803–1878) Fröhlich were performing members of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Which of them is discussed here (probably in

140

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

refused to sing. Beethoven finally seems to have lost his composure over all of the afternoon’s bickering and hurled a retort at Schindler, who countered, “Remember the business with Clement,94 that you did not want to deviate from your purpose. Was I also the reason for that?” Ultimately, Schindler shot back, “In short, was I not the only reason that these great works came to performance? Everyone who means you well is telling me this. [//] Adieu, Adieu! Thus, God preserve you.”95 At this point, Schindler and Umlauf departed the restaurant Zum wilden Mann in the Prater and walked back toward the City.96 Schuppanzigh, who had contributed his share to the contentions of the afternoon, remained for a few moments and now waxed sympathetic toward Schindler: “The can do nothing about it; he really is innocent.”97 With a certain sad resignation, he added, “Just let me know in time, what has been decided concerning the concert.”98 Probably around 5 p.m., Schuppanzigh departed the restaurant, walking to the City,99 and Beethoven—probably feeling manipulated and abandoned to the consequences—walked alone the more direct path back to suburban Landstrasse.100

conjunction with the Ninth Symphony) cannot be determined. See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 119 and 121; and Clive, Schubert, pp. 50–54. 94 Beethoven had initially attempted to negotiate with Count Ferdinand von Palffy to hold his 1824 Akademie at the Theater an der Wien, substituting Ignaz Schuppanzigh for the theater’s regular concertmaster Franz Clement, but Palffy would not allow the substitution. See Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 276–277. 95 Heft 67, Blätter 8v-10r. 96 Schindler later reported that he and Umlauf repaired to the restaurant Zum goldenen Lamm in the Leopoldstadt to resume their interrupted meal (see Biographie, Vol. 2, p. 88; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 291). The restaurant (Leopoldstadt No. 581 in 1824) was located in the Praterstrasse, only one building east of the Ferdinands Brücke (Bridge) over the Danube Canal (see Behsel, p. 32). 97 Heft 67, Blatt 10r. 98 Heft 67, Blatt 10v. 99 Schindler reported that Schuppanzigh followed them and that all three went to Zum goldenen Lamm (see Biographie, Vol. 2, p. 88; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 291). 100 As noted above, for Schindler’s conflated account of this dinner in the 1860 Biographie, with most of its contentions concerning the financial outcome (not supported by the conversation books here), see Appendix G. In fact, already on May 4, three days before the first Akademie, Schindler had written in Beethoven’s conversation book, “You will not make much profit the first time, but will lose [money] … but it is the only way possible to acquaint the public at large with the greatness of the work.” See Heft 65, Blätter 4v–5r.

HOME ON THE EVENING OF SUNDAY, MAY 9

141

Home on the Evening of Sunday, May 9 Probably the last thing that Beethoven wanted when he arrived home on the evening of Sunday, May 9, was company. But who should appear at his doorstep but brother Johann, bringing with him the violinist Joseph Böhm!101 Böhm had played in the Akademie on Friday night, and neither of them had evidently had an opportunity to talk to the composer since then.102 Johann may also have had an ulterior motive, because he had earlier bragged to nephew Karl and several others that “he [Johann] would allow the Akademie to pass, then he would get rid of Schindler.”103 Böhm’s entries in Beethoven’s conversation book that evening, with their arrogant tone and poor spelling, speak for themselves: “Has anything been determined already about the [repeat] concert? It should already be made known tomorrow. The people are already glad.” “Schindler cannot be relied upon. He talks a lot and does little. I must openly admit that I have not been able to comprehend why you can have placed so much confidence in him. He talks a lot, but does little.” Beethoven might have asked if Böhm had any replacements for Schindler in mind, because his next entries were: “Piringer. [//] I, Böhm.”104 101 Joseph (Michael) Böhm (1795–1876), violin professor at the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s Conservatory from 1819; member of the Hofkapelle since 1821. His writing style and spelling are less than sophisticated. See also Elisabeth Th. Hilscher, “Böhm,” MGG-2, Personenteil, Vol. 3, cols. 249–250. 102 On Heft 67, Blatt 10v, after Beethoven’s death, Schindler entered a “falsified” comment indicating that after the dinner in the Prater, Beethoven had complained about his colleagues “until late into the night.” Perhaps Böhm was the person to whom Beethoven complained. Böhm’s account on Heft 67, Blatt 38r, suggests that both he and brother Johann visited Beethoven on a Sunday, presumably May 9. 103 Karl had reported this to Beethoven, in Schindler’s presence, on the afternoon of Saturday, May 8; see Heft 66, Blätter 14r–14v. Karl indicated that Schindler had already heard the same thing from another witness. 104 Böhm’s semiliterate entries are worth repeating in their original German (Heft 66, Blatt 11r): “Ist den schon etwaß bestimt wegen Concertt. Es solde mo[r]ge[n] schon bekantgemacht werden. Die Menschen freuen sich schon alle.” “Auf den Schintler ist sich nicht zu verlaßen; er spricht fiel und macht wenig. // Ich mus aufrichtig gestehen daß ich nicht begreifen habe können daß Sie ihm so fiel Zudraun haben schenken können.” “Piringer [//] ich[?] Böhm.” Böhm seems to be suggesting that he and Piringer were individuals who could replace Schindler. Schuppanzigh, whom Beethoven had trusted for a quarter century, contemptuously regarded Piringer as a dilettante. The young professional violinist Böhm, essentially the same age as Schindler, could have been regarded as a competitor to Schuppanzigh in Beethoven’s circle. Moreover, Beethoven surely realized that he needed

142

PREMIERE AND CELEBRATORY DINNER

Böhm had recently returned from a tour as far west as Paris and so gave a report of his activities and observations concerning potential income: “I was very satisfied in Paris.105 [//] The Parisians are quite delighted with you. [//] A concert [earns] at least 2,000 fl. [//] Spontini, Kreutzer.”106 Böhm may have been a rising star as a violinist, but he was only semiliterate when it came to writing. Schindler, with his training in law, was at least a fine writer, and Beethoven—probably already feeling manipulated—and now pushed further by his own semiliterate and meddling brother Johann, would never have replaced Schindler with the likes of Böhm. He probably ushered them out of his apartment as soon as he conveniently could. Nephew Karl may have been present during the visit, and now (as already detailed above) told Beethoven how splendid the Scherzo was, and how it would never have worked without Umlauf and his sign of the cross.107 After this, they may have eaten a light supper at the restaurant down below or possibly ordered something “to go” and brought it back upstairs. At any rate, it cost 1 fl. 57 kr., to which Karl added a 14 kr. tip, for a total of 2 fl. 11 kr.108 And then, to bed!

Monday Morning, May 10—A New Day The next morning, probably after a good night’s sleep, Beethoven must have been up early, improvising and drafting a work that would become the gently rolling Bagatelle, Op. 126, No. 5.109 Then110 he turned his attentions to drafting a letter of thanks that, once the date of the repeat concert had been determined, could be adapted for the orchestra of the Kärntnertor Theater, the chorus, and the dilettantes: an assistant far more literate than Böhm was. The German editors questioned their own reading of “ich Böhm,” which may also have been “jos” in Kurrentschrift, simply an abbreviation for Joseph. 105 On February 1, 1824, Joseph Michael Böhm had returned from a concert tour to Munich and Paris. See Wiener Zeitung, No. 27 (February 4, 1824), p. 123. 106 Heft 67, Blätter 11r–11v. As in his earlier semiliterate entries, Böhm writes phonetically here, “Spondini, Kreizer,” doubtless meaning Gaspare Spontini (1774–1851, active in Paris from 1803 to 1820) and Rodolphe Kreutzer (1766–1831, active in Paris from his student years until 1826). 107 Heft 67, Blätter 11v–12r. The implications of this are discussed above as part of the performance of the Scherzo of the Symphony. 108 Heft 67, Blatt 12r. 109 Heft 67, Blatt 12r (bottom part of the page). Sketch for the Bagatelle in G major, Op. 126, No. 5. The bass line is fleetingly written, with the first two bars particularly unclear. 110 After several tense moments on Sunday, Beethoven would probably not have been in a mood to draft a letter such as this without a night’s sleep behind him. Therefore, Monday, May 10, seems the most likely date.

MONDAY MORNING, MAY 10—A NEW DAY

143

“I am obliged to thank most sincerely all those who showed me so much love and cooperation at my Akademie. Since I have been invited to give it one more time, I am convinced that I shall not commit an error—since, as a result of the invitation, I am giving a second this coming Friday in the Landständischer Saal—if I requested all of the participants once more to take part and ennoble my work by their assistance.”111 But Beethoven’s troubles were not yet over, and, ultimately, his second Akademie would not take place on Friday, May 14.

111 Heft 67, Blätter 12v–12a-r; additionally published in Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 363; Brandenburg, No. 1831.

Chapter 7

One More Time Monday, May 10, through Monday, May 17, 1824 The next week in Beethoven’s life was especially chaotic. After drafting his letter of thanks to the participants of the first Akademie on the morning of Monday, May 10, he started a list of tasks that needed to be done and people he needed to see: “Letter to Duport. The rehearsals must be in agreement with Duport. [//] Umlauf. [//] Schuppanzigh.”1 Once again, he needed to consider where to hold the repeat Akademie—in the small Landständischer Saal, the Kärntnertor Theater with its dry acoustic, or the more reverberant Grosser Redoutensaal, also depending upon the financial and logistical terms for each. Whether already on Sunday, May 9, or now, on Monday, May 10, Beethoven wrote Duport a letter of request to use the Kärntnertor Theater on Friday, May 14, a Norma-Tag, but in any case dated the request “May 9.” With Schindler temporarily out of the picture, Beethoven went to see Duport at the theater and gave him the request. Duport probably added his endorsement (dated “May 10”) to the document and sent it up the administrative chain: “No. 643/1824: Van Beethoven, musician, requests permission to give an Akademie on the evening of the 14th of this month, since it is a Norma Tag.”2 Ultimately, the high chamberlain, Prince Trauttmannsdorf, denied Beethoven’s request.3 On Tuesday, May 11, nephew Karl argued strongly against the Landstand and reminded Beethoven that the orchestra’s stagehand and his helper were to be paid 21 fl.4 That evening, the violinist Joseph Böhm and the amateur instrumental coordinator Ferdinand Piringer met with Beethoven and Karl at Neuling’s beer garden in the Ungargasse, about three blocks south of the composer’s apartment. Piringer

1

Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 67, Blatt 12a–v. Hoftheater, Generalintendanz, Karton 69 (Oper, 1823–1825), No. 643/1824 (new collation: 11/Op.); Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna (with thanks to Dr. Joachim Tepperberg). See Albrecht, No. 364; Brandenburg, No. 1830. 3 Claiming to have told Beethoven earlier that Trauttmannsdorf might not allow the repeat of the Akademie on Friday, May 14, Schindler did not remind him of the fact until ca. Sunday, May 16. See Heft 67, Blätter 38r–38v. 4 Heft 67, Blatt 15r. 2

MONDAY, MAY 10, THROUGH MONDAY, MAY 17, 1824

145

noted that Böhm had made an appointment to see the theater manager Duport and that he wanted to augment the orchestra, as before.5 On Thursday morning, May 13, Piringer appeared at Beethoven’s apartment with a progress report that he had arranged for concert notices to be placed in Bäuerle’s Theater-Zeitung, Kanne’s Musikalische Zeitung, and Schickh’s Mode-Zeitung (actually Zeitschrift). Beethoven had evidently paid the orchestra’s stagehand earlier, and Piringer said that he had paid too much, that only one person should have received 21 fl., while the other one should only have gotten 8 fl. The vocal parts to Beethoven’s Trio Tremate, empi, tremate, written two decades before under Salieri’s influence and dusted off here as an attractive piece in the Italian style, would be sent to the soloists on Saturday evening. Piringer confirmed Beethoven’s concerns: “Unforeseen expenses always add up to a great deal. Copying, carriages, servants, instruments, etc.” This also confirms that they were hoping that Franz Rzehaczek would lend some of his fine string instruments again for the repeat concert. Still, there were other pressing problems: with the beginning of springlike weather, “Everyone is going to the country.”6 A review of the May 7 Akademie appeared in Bäuerle’s Allgemeine TheaterZeitung on Thursday, May 13, and the next day nephew Karl reported to Beethoven that the composer’s brother Johann had said that the author was Joseph Blahetka, father of the young piano virtuosa Leopoldine Blahetka.7 Beethoven knew the Blahetkas but easily became impatient with the father’s crude boasting of his daughter’s accomplishments. Looking forward, Karl noted that while Beethoven would have the income from all the seats in the Redoutensaal, the Kärntnertor Theater (where Beethoven would not receive income from family-leased boxes) would still be preferable. On Friday afternoon, May 14, a Norma-Tag, nephew Karl reminded Beethoven that he needed to write to the violoncellist Joseph Linke, and then (probably as a holiday outing) they drove to see Madame Simonelli’s traveling menagerie, set up at the far end of the Jägerzeil (today’s Praterstrasse). There they especially marveled at animals that nephew Karl jotted into Beethoven’s conversation book: “White fox. // An unknown animal that was just discovered [a sloth bear]. // Lioness.”8 5

Heft 67, Blätter 15v–17r. On the evening of Sunday, May 9 (see above), Böhm had indicated that he or Piringer wanted to replace Schindler as Beethoven’s unpaid secretary; thus their presumptuous actions here. 6 Heft 67, Blätter 19r–21r. 7 Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 17, No. 58 (May 13, 1824), pp. 230–231, signed “Th___k.” 8 Heft 67, Blätter 28v, 30v, 31r, 35v–36r. The menagerie of Hermann van Aken and Henri Martin, which had arrived in early March, 1824, was located “at the end of the Jägerzeil (today’s Praterstrasse), first Hütte [pavilion] on the right,” and Beethoven and Karl took a fiacre to see it; see Intelligenzblatt, No. 143 (June 24, 1824), p. 1015. See Blatter 30v–31r and 35v–36r. Joseph Simonelli’s menagerie was located nearby. The

146

ONE MORE TIME

The pleasant excursion and change of venue must have had a stimulating effect on Beethoven, who soon (possibly even during the fiacre ride back to the City) began another list of things to do, including: “Czerny. [//] Umlauf: As sorry as I am to be troublesome to you. [//] The printed poem [An] die Freude,” and nephew Karl jotted back as a wordplay, “An der Cassa.” The brief note concerning “Czerny” suggests that Beethoven suddenly had the inspiration to add his former student (and now a popular piano teacher) to the program, playing the composer’s Piano Concerto in E-flat, Op. 73. But more of this later. He then clarified what he wanted to tell the conductor, Michael Umlauf: “At the fermata, hold it out more, before one begins.”9 This was surely the fermata on “vor Gott,” before the entry of the March in the Finale of the Symphony, suggesting that Beethoven intended it to be a truly significant gesture. When they arrived back at Beethoven’s apartment, the composer may have received either a note or a visitor from the Lithographic Institute, asking if they could send an artist to make a pencil or chalk portrait that they could reproduce lithographically.10 This occasioned nephew Karl to comment, “Of all the attempts that have been made to capture your likeness, the copper engraving [by Blasius Höfel and Louis Letronne, ca. 1814] is the most successful. // I don’t think that the large portrait [by Joseph Willibrord Mähler with a Greek lyre, ca. 1804] ever looked like you.”11 Around midday on Saturday, May 15, Piringer came to discuss several logistical concerns. First, how many dilettantes, especially among the strings, that Beethoven might need to get the required totals for the repeat concert: “16 violins. [//] 14 [firsts and seconds]. [//] 10 violas are enough. [//] Have you already notified Schuppanzigh? // And [he] does nothing in addition to directing [as concertmaster]?” He asked Beethoven whether he had sent a copying order to Frau Schlemmer yet and reminded him to write a note to Rzehaczek concerning another loan of his instruments. He discussed the number of dilettante choral singers needed but added, “Are the theater singers holding rehearsals? [//] A quarter of them don’t understand anything.” Finally, Piringer drafted: “Concert Notice. The awaited repeat of Beethoven’s Akademie will take place on the evening of Friday, May 21, at the theater next sloth bear (Lipperbär) was not entirely “unknown” among zoos in Europe, but it was still exceedingly rare. 9 Heft 67, Blätter 31r–31v. 10 In any case, a representative from the institute visited Beethoven on the morning of Friday, May 21, to set up the appointment for the artist (Heft 68, Blatt 15v). The artist Stephan Decker (1784–1844) came to make Beethoven’s portrait on the afternoon of Thursday, May 27 (Heft 70, Blätter 9v–10r). 11 Heft 67, Blatt 32r.

MONDAY, MAY 10, THROUGH MONDAY, MAY 17, 1824

147

to the Kärntnertor. The usual theater posters [and] Wiener Zeitung will contain further details.”12 Beethoven invited Piringer to midday dinner, but he declined. Later on Saturday afternoon, the violinist Böhm arrived and expressed an opinion that might have applied to the professional Schuppanzigh or the amateur Piringer: “He plays your pieces well, practices too little.”13 Böhm expressed himself as willing to help Beethoven with delivering invitations to the various nobility, as Schindler had done. Beethoven grumbled about Schindler’s handling of the arrangements for the May 7 concert, and Böhm replied, “Do you know for certain, then, that he is the cause? // He was at my place yesterday. // Perhaps you were too hard on him, though.”14 On Sunday morning, May 16, one of Frau Schlemmer’s copying assistants brought Beethoven the news that “all of the remaining choral parts will be brought by Friday’s rehearsal.” Beethoven made notes to himself “concerning more violins” and “concerning the Zeitung.”15 Later that day, Joseph Böhm visited Beethoven again, this time bringing with him Anton Schindler, whom Beethoven had not seen for a full week. Evidently one of the conditions was that Schindler would not have to have anything to do with Johann, because Böhm asked, “Is your brother coming here? // Understands nothing about music.” Schindler had been to see Duport, who did not say a word about contractual possibilities for the repeat. Böhm informed Beethoven that the Concerts spirituels wanted to have the Missa solemnis for their series. Concerning the repeat, the reassuring Böhm told Beethoven that he could have gotten it a week before at no cost, and Schindler reminded Beethoven that Prince Trauttmannsdorf had hinted that the repeat would not be allowed on a Norma-Tag, and that he (Schindler) had done a great deal to smooth over the logistical difficulties for the first Akademie, including negotiations for music stands when the Redoutensaal attendant did not want to release them.16 When Böhm and Schindler left on Sunday afternoon, Schindler must have 12

Heft 67, Blätter 33v–34v. Heft 67, Blatt 35r. Böhm was eager to undermine Beethoven’s confidence in Schuppanzigh. After Schuppanzigh’s Quartet gave an underrehearsed premiere of Beethoven’s String Quartet, Op. 127, on March 6, 1825 (essentially because they had not had the performing parts long enough), Böhm was quick to apply to Beethoven to be allowed to try for a better performance, probably given on the Feast of the Annunciation, Friday, March 25. See Heft 85, passim. 14 Heft 67, Blatt 36r. This was the same Böhm who was conspiring with brother Johann and Piringer to take over Schindler’s “position” as Beethoven’s unpaid secretary. The contradictions will continue below. 15 Heft 67, Blätter 36v–37r. 16 Heft 67, Blätter 37r–39v. The Concerts spirituels, under Ferdinand Piringer, would perform the Gloria from the Missa solemnis on March 1, 1827, and the Kyrie on April 5. In between, they performed Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 on March 15. These performances 13

148

ONE MORE TIME

hesitantly promised to go back to see Duport the next day and ask directly what the financial and logistical arrangements would be. Possibly in midmorning of Monday, May 17, Schindler came with the news: “The administration is giving you the Redoutensaal on Sunday [May 23]—is taking care of the lighting, scaffolding, and all expenses, and guarantees you 500 fl. C.M. Anything more [in income] belongs to the administration.… Or Duport provides everything necessary and takes a third of the net income for the administration.… Also he would prefer having it in the Redoutensaal, on account of the subscribers in the theater.17 [//] You are to determine the price, however. “For example: The income is 3,000 fl., thus Duport takes from it the expenses for lighting and stage setup, and then he takes a third from the remaining sum. “Duport believes that if it is held for the second time in the theater, the income would not amount to 600 fl. C.M., because the nobility is too miserly.”18 Concerning the location for the concert, Schindler reported, “[Editor/ composer] Kanne is for the Redoutensaal and [choral conductor] Dirzka is not; thus opinions are divided.”19 This is easily understandable, because the Wiener AmZ’s editor, Kanne, was also a composer who appreciated a “live” acoustic, while Dirzka, an operatic buffo bass, would have felt more comfortable with a drier theater acoustic. Schindler and Beethoven then seemingly walked into the City, probably to Steiner’s Music Shop in the Paternostergassel. Co-owner Tobias Haslinger offered his opinion of the location and more: “At least from my impartial point of view, I am not for the Redoutensaal. Stand firm for the theater on Friday [May 21]—otherwise there is nothing left to do now except to give it in the fall.”20

Tuesday, May 18, and Wednesday, May 19 The next day, Tuesday, May 18, while he was in the City again, Beethoven stopped at the office of the Wiener Zeitschrift,21 where editor Johann Schickh gave his opinion of the situation, also touching upon the orchestra and other performing forces: “I am in no way in agreement that you should repeat this Akademie now, and this all the more resolutely, because, from December 1 of this year, the two Redoutensäle will again be at the disposal of the Court, and therefore of your took place at the Landständischer Saal. See Heft 133, Blätter 22r–22v, for Piringer’s plans in late January, 1827. 17 If a box in the theater were subscribed for the season, it could not be released to Beethoven for his concert. 18 Heft 67, Blätter 40r–42r. 19 Heft 67, Blatt 40r. 20 Heft 67, Blatt 42r. 21 He had already put this on his errand list on Friday, May 14 (Heft 67, Blatt 22v).

TUESDAY, MAY 18, AND WEDNESDAY, MAY 19

149

admirers, Count Dietrichstein and Court Councillor Mosel.22 Thus, with their support, you will give your sublime musical poems (which cannot elicit a worthy response, except with the best execution) with a completely different orchestra and singers, and—which is to be considered—certainly to make a profit from it. Therefore—I advise you as your benevolent Friend!—let it rest for this year.”23 In the early afternoon of Wednesday, May 19, Beethoven was evidently expecting a visit from Kapellmeister Umlauf when nephew Karl wrote, “The orchestra servant is here.24 He just wants to assemble everything that belongs to every part in order to be able to place them on the stands for every player tomorrow [Thursday, May 20]. That way it won’t cause as much disturbance as it did at the previous rehearsal in the Redoutensaal.” The orchestra servant also brought word that Umlauf had a rehearsal at the Kärntnertor Theater and would come later.25 Shortly after 1 p.m.26 on Wednesday, May 19,27 Schindler arrived with Caroline Unger, who still enjoyed visiting the composer. Like everyone else, she too had an opinion about the venue for the repeat concert and reasons why: “In any case, it is better in the Redoutensaal, because (1) you are sure to get 1,200 fl.;28 (2) the music will sound better; (3) you will have no worries; (4) it is my opinion!”29 Unger also told Beethoven, “I am studying Iphigenia, and would also like to study Fidelio, and you would make me infinitely happy if you would lend me the piano score. [//] You’ll do it?!!!! Really?!!” and Schindler commented sarcastically, “She would like to be even more, or entirely a man.” Changing the subject, Schindler asked, “Have you read yesterday’s [May 18th’s] Sammler? // A second review, which is likewise very fine; very true, like the first.

22 Since 1821, Ignaz Franz Edler von Mosel (1772–1844), Court councillor, had been vice-director of the Court Theaters. In addition, he was active as a composer and writer and was a supporting member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. See Clive, p. 240; Frimmel, Handbuch, I, pp. 429–430; Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. 126. 23 Heft 67, Blätter 45r–46r. Schickh’s scolding must have affected Beethoven deeply; Karl told Haslinger about this the next day, May 19 (see Heft 68, Blatt 8r). 24 In fall, 1822, the orchestra manager of the Kärntnertor Theater was Franz Ortner. See also Heft 67, Blätter 15r, 19r, and 25v. 25 Heft 68, Blatt 1v. 26 If routine rehearsals of the Kärntnertor Theater’s forces generally lasted until 1 p.m., Unger would have taken a carriage and arrived in the Ungargasse by 1:30 p.m. or so. 27 The conversation continues, and Schindler referred to “yesterday’s Sammler” on Blatt 4r below, confirming that the visit took place on Wednesday, May 19, 1824. 28 Unger probably means an amount in Wiener Währung, roughly equivalent to the 500 fl. C.M. that Duport had offered Beethoven. 29 Heft 68, Blätter 1v and 3r.

150

ONE MORE TIME

I hope [that] you have read the first review in the Sammler.30 // The second is far more comprehensive, goes more into detail, and really the best, along with the first in the Sammler.” Beethoven commented aloud, Unger laughed at it, and then Schindler had to explain her laughter: “She [Unger] is laughing about your saying that they completely misunderstood the last movement, because it is very lovely.”31 Beethoven must have made another comment about a previously unknown detail of the performance on May 7, leading to Unger’s explanation for it: “The 3 other [singers] wanted to remain seated, and so I could not stand up, but next time, I’ll stand up.”32 Therefore, the solo singers must have remained seated in the Finale of the Ninth Symphony when they were not actually performing, and Beethoven was probably advocating that once they had risen to sing—the bass first and then the other three singers in the second strophe—they remain standing until the end of the movement, creating less visual distraction in that way. With his rehearsal finished at ca. 2 p.m., conductor Michael Umlauf now arrived at Beethoven’s apartment. He, too, was polled for his recommendation concerning the venue for the repeat Akademie: “In the Redoutensaal, with the guaranteed income, is the best.”33 Schindler now pressed the composer for a firm decision, so that everyone could move forward with their preparations. Beethoven must have decided upon the Redoutensaal on the evening of Friday, May 21, and sent nephew Karl to the Kärntnertor Theater to tell manager Duport. Unger (who had to rest before singing that night) departed, leaving Schindler at Beethoven’s apartment with Umlauf. Beethoven’s brother Johann must have arrived at about this time and interjected himself into the mix. They discussed current contractual policies at the Court Opera and then turned to the salaries of the Hofkapelle, because such matters always concerned Beethoven, especially so since many of the Kärntnertor Theater’s experienced orchestra members had been dismissed or forcibly retired by the Barbaja administration since 1822. Schindler wrote, in part, on behalf of Umlauf, “Dietrichstein is said to get only ca. 2,000 fl. W.W. [sic] annually at his disposal for the Hofkapelle. // Always very poorly paid. [Emperor] Joseph already did it that way. // Under Joseph, everyone received 300 fl. C.M. Not until under Maria

30 These two unsigned reviews appeared in the Sammler, No. 58 (May 13, 1824), pp. 231–232; and No. 60 (May 18, 1824), pp. 239–240. 31 Heft 68, Blätter 4r–4v. The last item is typical of how one must often interpret what happens in between entries in Beethoven’s conversation books. 32 Heft 68, Blatt 4v. 33 Heft 68, Blatt 5r.

TUESDAY, MAY 18, AND WEDNESDAY, MAY 19

151

Theresia,34 the wife of the emperor [Franz], was the salary raised to 500—600— and 800 fl. C.M.”35 Schindler, Johann, and Umlauf departed Beethoven’s apartment, and—even though the composer had already sent Karl to see Duport and tell him that he had decided for the Redoutensaal on Friday, May 21—the first two decided independently that they would do the same. Probably early that evening, Wednesday, May 19, Karl returned to Beethoven with a tale of chaos and potential embarrassment. Karl had gone first to Steiner’s and Haslinger’s music shop in the Paternostergassel because Piringer, who frequented the place, wanted to know Beethoven’s decision about the date as soon as possible, so he could get word out to the dilettantes. Karl was about to leave Steiner’s when brother Johann arrived to say that he had just been to see Duport, and that Schindler had gotten there before either of them. Duport had evidently told Schindler that yes, Beethoven could have the Redoutensaal, but no, he could not have it until Sunday, May 23, and gave Schindler a letter to that effect. But Schindler probably had to play that evening in the Josephstadt Theater and did not have enough time to deliver word to Beethoven. Then, of course, brother Johann had arrived at Duport’s the first time, and when Duport told him what he had told Schindler, an argument ensued, and Duport wrote a duplicate letter and gave it to Johann. Johann, in turn, went to Steiner’s music shop, where he encountered Karl, and the two of them went to the Kärntnertor Theater to see Duport. This time the manager was not available, and so Johann sent Karl to see Schindler in the Josephstadt, confirm Duport’s decision with him, and then go to see Piringer to tell him that the Akademie would take place on Sunday, May 23. Schindler gave Duport’s letter to Karl, and the nephew took it directly to Beethoven, along with the story of all the confusion. Therefore, on the evening of Wednesday, May 19, Karl also told Beethoven that because the Akademie would be in the Redoutensaal, Duport insisted that one Hymn (i.e., one movement of the Missa solemnis) be omitted and replaced by an aria or something similar. To this end he even suggested that Beethoven allow Giuseppe Fenzi (ca. 1788–1827), an Italian virtuoso violoncellist who had just arrived in Vienna, to play on the Akademie. Giuseppe’s late younger brother 34 Maria Theresia, also called Marie Therese (1772–1807), daughter of Ferdinand I. In 1790, she became the second wife of the future Emperor Franz I. Unlike her husband, she was known as an interested and generous patron of music. See Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, I, p. iii; and John Rice, Empress Marie Therese and Music at the Viennese Court, 1792–1807 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003). 35 Heft 68, Blatt 6r. Schindler (or perhaps Umlauf ) generalizes too much, because wind players and string section leaders were usually paid higher salaries than string section players, but on the whole, salaries rose significantly during the period under discussion. See Köchel, Hof-Musikkapelle, pp. 90–95, as well as sundry documents concerning the Hof Musikkapelle in Vienna’s Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv and Hofkammer Archiv.

152

ONE MORE TIME

Vittorio had been principal violoncellist at the Teatro San Carlo in Naples and therefore connected with Domenico Barbaja, the Kärntnertor Theater’s lessee. Beethoven and Karl may have made fun of this proposal, and ultimately Karl wrote, “In the end, he [Duport] wanted to recommend to you someone who plays the Czakan.”36 In any case, given the indecision of the past week, Duport’s moving the repeat concert to the Grosser Redoutensaal on Sunday, May 23, provided Beethoven with a more resonant acoustic and just a little more organizational time.

Thursday, May 20: Final Organization Begins The next morning, Thursday, May 20, Beethoven compiled a list, partially in red pencil, including: “Print the poem [‘An die Freude’]. “Red pencil. “Write to [editor] Bäuerle. “[Choral director] Dirzka for dinner. “+ Haslinger: Engrave vocal parts”37 Probably by midmorning, Schindler arrived at Beethoven’s apartment. The first thing on his mind was, “Just allow me most kindly to pose this question for a reason: Have you reached an agreement with Schuppanzigh?” Schindler’s reason for asking quickly became clear: “Herr Rzehaczek came to see me today, and appeared very willing to lend [his instruments], and to find out from me what contract you might have made with Schuppanzigh, upon which I very naturally replied that it was impossible to insist upon something from Herr Schuppanzigh, that he probably could be satisfied with the honor to have been there. Then Herr Rzehaczek said that he had heard—whether from Schuppanzigh or someone else—that Schuppanzigh wants a third of the net income. This was only to warn you—this question of Rzehaczek’s is not without good reason.”38 Then Schindler clarified how much Beethoven was to receive from Duport for the upcoming Akademie: 1,250 fl. W.W.—the equivalent of the usually cited 500 fl. C.M. 36

Heft 68, Blätter 7r–8r. In his final sentence, Karl was being sarcastic. The Czakan was a flute shaped like a walking stick and popular among less serious amateurs in the 1820s. Occasionally professional musicians like oboists Joseph Khayll (Kärntnertor Theater) or Ernest Krähmer (Burgtheater) would play a piece on the instrument in public, but more as a popular novelty than a serious work. 37 Heft 68, Blätter 8v–9r. 38 Heft 68, Blätter 9v–10r.

THURSDAY, MAY 20: THE INVITATION TO CARL CZERNY

153

Schindler departed (evidently to see conductor Umlauf ), and later that morning, Schuppanzigh arrived: “When will the concert be? In the evening? // In the Redoutensaal? // That is even better and more profitable than in the theater. // The effect is entirely different in the Redoutensaal than in the theater.” Therefore, Schuppanzigh, like many of Beethoven’s associates, seemed heartened at the prospect of giving a concert in the acoustically more reverberant Redoutensaal rather than in the drier theater. Schuppanzigh asked if Beethoven knew whether Umlauf had had a piano rehearsal with the women singers or not, and continued, “I am glad that it won’t be until Sunday, because I am not yet entirely well and still have to take medication. [//] My stomach is in great disorder. [//] My shortness of breath hinders me from making large motions.39 // Braunhofer is my doctor.40 // Today I can get around on foot with great ease. //41 Let’s wait until Saturday [May 22], after the rehearsal; tomorrow I may not eat anything yet.”42 After Schuppanzigh departed from Beethoven’s apartment, probably around noon on Thursday, May 20, Schindler arrived back and commented, “Duport wants to have everything in the Redoutensaal, because all the effect is lost in the theater.” Schindler began organizing errands with nephew Karl, who noted, “Between now and Sunday, the only day that the [choral] rehearsal can be held is tomorrow.” He would go and tell Dirzka that only the “Kyrie” and the choral Finale from the Symphony needed to be rehearsed on Friday. By omitting the other two movements from the Missa solemnis, this would cut the amount of music that Dirzka would have to rehearse in half and therefore allow him to rehearse the remaining ca. 34 minutes of material more thoroughly.

Thursday, May 20: The Invitation to Carl Czerny Nephew Karl now echoed an idea that Beethoven had had earlier: “Czerny ought to play the Concerto.”43 This would surely counter Duport’s suggestion that 39 Possibly the kinds of motions that Schuppanzigh would need to make as concertmaster, “leading” the orchestra. 40 Dr. Anton Braunhofer (1780–1845), Viennese physician, professor of general natural history and technology. A practitioner of homeopathic medicine, he also treated Beethoven from 1820 to 1826. See Frimmel, Handbuch, I, p. 60; Hof- und Staats-Schematismus, 1824, II, pp. 97 and 117; and Clive, pp. 45–46. 41 At this point, Beethoven may have suggested that they have dinner. 42 Heft 68, Blätter 10v–11v. 43 Beethoven had almost surely played the Piano Concerto No. 5 in E-flat, Op. 73, with members of the Theater an der Wien’s orchestra in either Archduke Rudolph’s apartments or (more likely) Prince Lobkowitz’s palace in 1809 or 1810. On January 13, 1811, Archduke Rudolph played the Concerto for a private concert at the Lobkowitz

154

ONE MORE TIME

Beethoven have violoncellist Giuseppe Fenzi play on his concert. Schindler volunteered to take Beethoven’s request to his old student: “Just write a few lines to Czerny; I can tell him the rest orally. Which Concerto should he play, then? He has already played the one in E-flat [No. 5, Op. 73] often; therefore, it would not cost him much trouble. // He’ll do it, if only you’ll make up your mind about it.” He added, “Czerny can probably play only the first movement, because the entire [Concerto] might last too long. We just calculated that, with 1 Hymn and 1 movement of the Concerto, the Akademie will last until 2:30 p.m.44 // Since, in addition, Czerny has a great following among the nobility, then this will also be effective upon these dull-spirited individuals.”45 As Schindler had suggested, Beethoven then wrote a brief letter to Czerny, asking him to play the final two movements of his Concerto in E-flat on his upcoming concert: “Do me the favor of playing the Adagio and Rondo of my Concerto in E-flat in the Grosser Redoutensaal the day after tomorrow.46 If you do, you will lend luster to the whole concert. Since the choruses have not been sufficiently rehearsed, it is not possible to perform more than one of the Hymns. I hope that you will not refuse my request.”47 The imposing first movement would have taken ca. 20 minutes; the attractive pairing of the second and third movements together would have taken ca. 18 minutes; the entire Concerto ca. 38 minutes. Karl then gave Beethoven their immediate plans: “Right after dinner, I am going to Haslinger’s, while Schindler is going to see Czerny and Duport, because the orchestra servant expects me there [at Haslinger’s] at 4 o’clock. Then Schindler Palace, with a repeat one week later. Even, so, Carl Czerny (1791–1857) had given the first Viennese public performance of that Concerto, probably with members of the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra, at a benefit concert on February 12, 1812. A half-dozen years later, he had played it on a benefit concert of low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky. For Rudolph’s performances, see Rita Steblin, Beethoven in the Diaries of Johann Nepomuk Chotek (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2013), passim. 44 In approximate numbers, the Kyrie takes 10 minutes; the first movement of the Piano Concerto No. 5 is 20 minutes; the Ninth Symphony is 65 minutes, for a total of 95 minutes with breaks. Add the trio Tremate, empi, tremate (9 minutes), and requisite breaks between works and an intermission, and Schindler is absolutely correct. Ultimately, Rossini’s brief but popular “Di tanti palpiti” would add only 3 minutes to the music performed on May 23. 45 Heft 68, Blätter 12r–12v. Some of the entries have been reordered here for greater efficiency. 46 There is potential confusion here. The Akademie was probably not “übermorgen” (the day after tomorrow), but the rehearsal with orchestra would be. 47 See Anderson, No. 909 (misdating the undated letter as 1818), and Brandenburg, No. 1838 (editorially dated as May 21, 1824).

THURSDAY, MAY 20: THE INVITATION TO CARL CZERNY

155

is coming back here to give you Czerny’s reply. Then the rehearsal will have to be determined after that.”48 Schindler continued his report on the morning’s errands: “I was at Umlauf ’s, but did not find him at home. His wife49 sends you her greetings, with the assurance that he will certainly come to see you tomorrow [Friday, May 21] at 1 o’clock.”50 After midday dinner on Thursday, May 20, Karl decided that he would go with Schindler to see Czerny, and then he had to go from there to his discussion class (Collegium) and, after that, to Steiner and Haslinger’s shop.51 Returning to Beethoven’s apartment later in the afternoon of Thursday,52 May 20, Schindler reported, “Czerny made a thousand excuses that since he is absolutely unprepared to play in public, he will therefore have to excuse himself.”53 Later on Thursday (or possibly even Friday), Czerny drafted a letter of regret to Beethoven, worth reading in extenso for its many aspects of music-making, either stated outright or simply implied: “Your wish, which honored me beyond my capability to express it, forced me, with all the frankness with which one must speak man to man, to explain to you my opinions as well as my circumstances. I have sacrificed the last 15 years of my life giving lessons in order to provide decent security for myself and my parents. Composition and playing remained secondary matters, since I lacked all encouragement and help, and especially the latter (playing) with the demands now placed upon virtuosos, could not possibly be cultivated to the degree which is now so kindly expected from my abilities. “And now shall I—although I have not performed before the vast, knowledgeable Viennese public for 14 years—appear again, suddenly, without any preparation, having hardly 2 days’ practice time, to produce one of your greatest, most thoroughly thought-out compositions, and even more so in the most dangerous place that exists for pianists! The Grosser Redoutensaal is the most ungrateful location for this instrument, and all piano players who have played there up to now have regretted it. “Otherwise my consideration is not for myself, rather for the well-founded fear that it is impossible for me to perform your elevated work in an accomplished 48

Heft 68, Blatt 13r. Since February 9, 1807, Michael Umlauf (1781–1842) had been married to Anna Maria von Benko (born 1778), daughter of the deceased Court Treasury Registrar’s Adjunct Joseph von Benko. See Pfarre St. Michael, Trauungsprotokoll, K, p. 46. 50 For Umlauf ’s visit, see Heft 68, Blatt 16r. 51 Heft 68, Blatt 13v. 52 The wording of “Saturday,” later in this entry, suggests that it was written on Thursday, May 20, and not Friday, May 21, 1824. 53 Heft 68, Blatt 14r. 49

156

ONE MORE TIME

manner in this short, overly hurried period of hardly two full days, as well as my unbounded respect pledged to you—the reason for which I most necessarily forgo this honor.”54

Thursday, May 20: Late in the Day Schindler now continued his report to Beethoven: after he had left Czerny, he had gone to see Duport, who asked if the composer had any additional works ready to fill in the gaps on the upcoming Akademie. Schindler mentioned Beethoven’s Trio Tremate, empi, tremate, and Duport asked to see it. He said that if it was not difficult, he could have it copied by the time of the orchestral rehearsal on Saturday [May 22] and have it sung by Italian members of the Opera Company, if Beethoven would be willing.55 Schindler probably felt outflanked by the Italians, and Beethoven did too, because they both knew that as far back as the February Petition, the German music lovers in Vienna viewed Beethoven’s concert as a symbolic blow against the Italian faction and their hero Rossini. Because Duport was sponsoring this repeat Akademie, with Beethoven to be “paid” a fixed 500 fl. C.M., the composer decided to offer the Trio56 and sent it to Duport via Schindler early in the evening of Thursday, May 20, along with the signed contract and instructions on how the Zettel promoting the concert needed to be worded.57 Schindler said that he would bring Beethoven the second copy, signed by Duport, at midday on the next day.58 Beethoven had essentially lost administrative control over his own concert. Looking outside, Schindler determined that it was raining too hard59 for him to walk an hour home to the Josephstadt and that he would simply stay the night

54 Undated original in the Archiv of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, Vienna, Czerny 65, Nr. 1; published as Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 366; Brandenburg, No. 1839 (editorially dated as May 21). 55 Heft 68, Blätter 14r–14v. 56 The Trio Tremate, empi, tremati, Op. 116, had already been performed on Beethoven’s concert of February 27, 1814, so it could not be termed “never before heard.” The poster for the concert of May 23, 1824, announced it as “a new Trio.” In a letter to Tobias Haslinger, Beethoven named Louis Antoine Duport as responsible. See Brandenburg, No. 1840; Anderson, No. 1294; Kinsky-Halm, p. 334; Thayer-Deiters-Riemann, V, p. 97; Thayer-Forbes, p. 912. 57 Heft 68, Blatt 15r. 58 See Schindler’s follow-up concerning Duport and the contract, presumably the next day (Heft 68, Blatt 16v). 59 On Thursday, May 20, it rained the whole day in Vienna, with temperatures between 51 and 53 degrees Fahrenheit. On Friday, May 21, it was consistently cloudy, but with temperatures several degrees warmer. Therefore, Thursday, May 20, is the most

157

FRIDAY, MAY 21

at the Birne60 in Landstrasser Hauptstrasse, around the corner from Beethoven’s apartment.61 As he left, he told Beethoven, “Tomorrow morning I’ll come to see you briefly; then, if you wish, you can give me the orchestral parts to the Trio, which I shall give to Frau Schlemmer [for copying].”62

Friday, May 21 Probably on the morning of Friday, May 21, after Schindler’s brief visit, a representative of the Lithographic Institute63 came to ask Beethoven, “As a supplement to the [Wiener Allgemeine] Musikalische Zeitung, as well as for the general public, the Institute wishes to possess your portrait, and to have it drawn from life by a skillful artist;64 approximately 2 sittings at ¾ of an hour [each]. [//] I ask you only [to designate] the day and the hour.” They evidently agreed upon Thursday, May 27, at a time when the sunlight from the west would be strongest in Beethoven’s apartment: “Between 4 and 6 o’clock.”65 As Umlauf ’s wife had projected the day before, the conductor came to visit Beethoven, presumably at about 1 p.m. on Friday, May 21.66 He noted, “I am inventorying and organizing the [Tonkünstler] Societät’s music, and it must be finished today.”67 likely date for these entries. See the Wiener Zeitung, No. 118 (May 22, 1824), p. 500; and No. 119 (May 24, 1824), p. 503. 60 Zur goldenen Birne (The Golden Pear), restaurant and inn, Landstrasse (Hauptstrasse) No. 52, only a block and a half southeast of Beethoven’s residence. Schindler’s apartment in suburban Josephstadt (Josephsgasse, one building east of Lange Gasse) was almost an hour’s walk from Beethoven’s, not a pleasant prospect on a cold and rainy night. 61 Nephew Karl informed Beethoven: “He is going to sleep at the Birne, because the weather is so bad”; see Heft 69, Blatt 2r. 62 Heft 69, Blatt 2r. If the rehearsal of Tremate, empi, tremate was to take place on the morning of Saturday, May 22, then Schindler would probably have had to get the original parts from Beethoven on Friday morning, May 21, consistent with the weather dating above for these entries as Thursday, May 20. 63 This is the same person who visited Beethoven on April 13, 1824, asking permission to make an engraving of the king of France’s medal. See Heft 61, Blatt 35r. 64 In an advertisement in the Wiener Zeitung, No. 127 (June 3, 1824), p. 536, the Lithographisches Institut announced the newly appearing portrait of Beethoven, “lithographed from life by Decker.” The artist was (Johann) Stephan Decker (1784–1844); for fuller details, see Heft 70, Blatt 9v. Kanne’s Wiener AmZ published the same portrait in its Beilage (Supplement) to Volume 8, No. 38 (June 5, 1824). 65 Heft 68, Blatt 15v; and Heft 70, Blätter 9v–10r. 66 The day before, Schindler had reported that Umlauf would come to see Beethoven at 1 o’clock (Heft 68, Blatt 13r). In any case, his visit was relatively brief. 67 In addition to his activity as Kapellmeister of the Kärntnertor Theater, Michael Umlauf occupied the office of conductor in the Tonkünstler-Societät from 1819 to 1834

158

ONE MORE TIME

Turning to Beethoven’s most recent negotiations with Duport, Umlauf asked for information about additional music that he might have to conduct: “A Trio of yours. [//] I would like to see it. [//] The Akademie is on Sunday [May 23]. [//] 500 fl. C.M. [//] There’s nothing more to do.”68 Also on Friday, May 21, Ignaz Dirzka probably held a three-hour rehearsal with the chorus—presumably the dilettantes from the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in addition to those professionals from the Kärntnertor Theater. With less choral music projected for Sunday’s Akademie, he could be more thorough in preparing it. Shortly after Umlauf ’s visit on Friday, May 21, Schindler arrived at Beethoven’s apartment, probably in time for midday dinner. He was full of news: “Duport is having the Trio [Tremate, empi, tremate] rehearsed by [soprano Geronima] Dardanelli, [tenor Domenico] Donzelli, and [bass Pio] Botticelli. They liked it so much that they’ll sing it.”69 Seat prices were to be 1 fl. C.M. for the parterre; 2 fl. C.M. for the balcony. Moreover, Schindler reported, Duport was planning to come to see Beethoven to persuade him to allow the tenor David70 to sing a solo—“a rather small Arietta, as he says.” Duport projected that if Beethoven allowed it, then the hall would be “jam-packed” with those who wanted to hear David but who would also have to hear Beethoven’s works as well and thereby render the concert profitable. Nephew Karl indicated that Duport was making a third financial proposition to Beethoven, whereby, after Duport paid all of the concert’s expenses, Beethoven would receive two-thirds of the net income. But Karl warned, “Thus he can easily set the expenses higher than they are.” Later, he added, “One must deal cautiously with Duport, because he bristles up like an eel. // Speculator in the highest degree.”71 Now Schindler reminded them all of Duport’s possible motivation for the new financial proposal: “As Umlauf recently predicted here, it now actually happens that Duport must pay the chorus as well as the orchestra, because they are not and of cashier of the organization from 1819 to 1827. See Pohl, Tonkünstler-Societät, pp. 96 and 100; Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, p. 213. 68 Heft 68, Blatt 16r. 69 All three were prominent members of the Italian Opera Company at the Kärntnertor Theater. 70 Either the famous tenor Giacomo Davide, also called David (1750–1830), member of the Italian Opera of Vienna’s Court Theater, 1822–1824, or his son Giovanni (1789– 1851), tenor of the Italian Opera, 1822–1827. This singer’s first name is not specified in the reviews of the second Akademie, in which David sang the cavatina “Di tanti palpiti” (3 minutes in length) from Gioacchino Rossini’s Tancredi. Therefore, the singer of this brief “cameo performance” was more likely Giacomo David, who, in spite of his advanced age, was successful in Vienna until 1824. See Deutsch, Schubert-Dokumente, p. 240; Deutsch, Schubert Reader, p. 347; Portrait-Katalog, p. 418; Schilling, Vol. 2, p. 368. 71 Heft 68, Blätter 16v–18v.

FRIDAY, MAY 21

159

obligated to render services in the Redoutensaal. He has also already considered that perhaps everyone wants 8 fl. for a rehearsal and performance. // Duport has [an orchestral and choral] payroll72 of 700 fl.”73 Barbaja’s lease, and with it Duport’s management, was set to expire in December, 1824, and Schindler commented on one of the prospects for replacement: “Palffy has made the proposition to the emperor to take over both Court Theaters— whereas he is not in the position to administer his own theater [an der Wien]; for two months already, he has paid no salaries.”74 As he had for the Akademie on May 7, Beethoven probably hired several orchestral musicians, like his old friend principal clarinettist Joseph Friedlowsky from the Theater an der Wien. Some of them might have given their services gratis for the first concert, but—especially considering the situation with their theater salaries—Beethoven would be sure that they received payment for May 23. At 7 p.m. on Friday, May 21,75 Beethoven and nephew Karl seemingly attended the rehearsal of Tremate, empi, tremate at Dardanelli’s apartment. Because Umlauf had a rehearsal at the theater, Duport played the piano for it.76 Either at the rehearsal or immediately after it, Beethoven encountered the poet and journalist Ignaz Castelli, who addressed him as “Freund” and took the opportunity to tease him about the fact that David would be singing “this street-ballad” Di tanti palpiti. He also told Beethoven, of course in writing so as not to be overheard, that the public would laugh and say, “See, he must get help from Rossini.” Furious, but possibly not showing it, Beethoven turned to leave. “So where are you going now?” the oblivious Castelli asked. Probably when they got home to Beethoven’s apartment, Karl commented, “I had to leave, if a new complication with Duport were not to arise.”77 72 In the German original, Schindler erroneously says that Duport has a payroll of 700 persons, but he really meant a payroll of 700 fl. The paid adult chorus (excluding its boys) numbered about 43. The orchestra personnel numbered 47. Together they totaled 90, whose pay at the aforementioned 8 fl. each would equal 720 fl.—very close to the number specified by Schindler. Therefore, what Schindler actually meant was: “Duport has an orchestral and choral payroll of 700 fl.” For numbers of choristers and instrumentalists in fall, 1822, see Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 75–81. 73 Heft 68, Blatt 19r. On the payroll for his concert of February 27, 1814, Beethoven had paid the professionals 3 fl. for the performance and 2 fl. for the rehearsal. There had, of course, been considerable inflation in the ensuing decade. See Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 181. 74 Heft 68, Blätter 19r–19v. 75 Heft 68, Blatt 18v. Dardanelli’s address does not appear in Ziegler, Böckh, or Gugitz, “Conscriptionsbögen.” 76 Schindler confirms this on Heft 68, Blatt 26r. Therefore, the dancer Duport must have had more than minimal musical training. 77 Despite his Italian surname, Castelli was thoroughly Viennese, was a member of the Ludlamshöhle group who wrote and signed the February Petition, and lobbied

160

ONE MORE TIME

For the second night in a row, Beethoven probably went to bed frustrated and made to feel foolish by the Italians.

Saturday, May 22: At Home in the Morning The early morning of Saturday, May 22, began domestically enough, with nephew Karl supervising the delivery of firewood, making notes concerning that activity and charges in the current conversation book.78 While he was doing that, seemingly before 8 a.m.,79 Beethoven received a visitor and grabbed a new conversation book that had only been used momentarily during the rain shower on Thursday night. The visitor was Christian Rummel (1787–1849),80 Kapellmeister to Duke Wilhelm of Nassau in Biebrich, who was visiting Vienna. On April 19, B. Schotts Söhne in Mainz (directly across the Rhein from Wiesbaden and Biebrich) wrote that they were sending this letter with Rummel. The Nassau entourage had arrived in Vienna on April 28, staying at the Ungarische Krone in the Himmelpfortgasse, and Rummel may have visited briefly to deliver the letter during the last hectic days before the premiere of the Ninth Symphony on May 7. Late on Thursday, May 20, Schindler mentioned having just encountered him, presumably in the City, and that he would be coming out to see Beethoven soon.81 Rummel’s previous visit, if he had met Beethoven at all, must have been very fleeting, because, even though expected, he essentially had to introduce himself to the composer on May 22:

constantly for German (and against Italian) culture in Vienna. His identity as the writer of these entries is established in Heft 97, Blatt 57r. For the entries themselves, see Heft 68, Blätter 21v–22r. 78 Heft 68, Blatt 22v. 79 In Heft 78, Blatt 30r, Karl implies that he was already sitting in class by 8 a.m. 80 Rummel had been military band director in the Second Nassau Infantry Regiment since 1806 and, after 1815, had led the private Kapelle of Duke Wilhelm of Nassau in Biebrich on the Rhein, directly south of Wiesbaden. In the duke’s entourage, he undertook a journey to Vienna in April, 1824. According to Schott’s letter of April 19, the young Kapellmeister’s primary purpose was “his urge for improvement in the study of composition.” See Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 357; Brandenburg, No. 1813. In his reply to Schott, dated May 20, 1824, Beethoven mentioned that Rummel would visit him “the day after tomorrow” (see Anderson, No. 1290; Brandenburg, No. 1835). See also Reinhold Sietz, “Rummel, Christian,” MGG, Vol. 11, col. 1092; ThayerDeiters-Riemann, V, p. 207; Thayer-Forbes, p. 916; and Heft 68, Blatt 20r. 81 Heft 68, Blatt 20r. Schindler calls him “the gentleman from Mainz,” probably because he had come bearing the letter from B. Schott’s Söhne in Mainz.

MAY 22: THE GENERAL REHEARSAL AT THE GROSSER REDOUTENSAAL

161

“I am employed by the Duke of Nassau;82 [we have] a 12-part Harmonie, in which there are very fine artists; I have arranged your Symphonies for Harmonie.” Beethoven probably welcomed Rummel, who must have shouted clearly enough to make himself understood during most of his visit. He only wrote again as he prepared to depart, later in the morning: “If Herr von Beethoven would allow me to come again.”83 Leaving for his Saturday classes, probably by 7:45 a.m., nephew Karl handed the current conversation book back to Beethoven, noting, “I’m taking 1 fl. [//] I’m eating in the City.”84

Saturday, May 22: The General Rehearsal at the Grosser Redoutensaal Schindler must have attended the whole dress rehearsal at the Grosser Redoutensaal, probably beginning at 9:30 or 10 a.m. on Saturday, May 22. Earlier, Beethoven had paid for a carriage85 to pick up the vocal soloists for the Ninth Symphony and take them to the hall. Now the coachman probably returned to the Ungargasse to get the composer, who, as planned, arrived just a few minutes before 12:30 p.m., in time to hear the final few notes of the rehearsal and probably to thank all of the participants.86 Writing in Beethoven’s conversation book, Schindler told him of the most recent developments:87 “Frau Schlemmer or one of her copyists offered the copying of the choruses to Gläser, because Frau Schlemmer does not have enough hands to do the job. This very much wounded Gläser.”88 82

Duke Wilhelm of Nassau (1792–1839) was noted in the Wiener Zeitung, No. 99 (April 30, 1824), p. 423, among those who “Arrived in Vienna” on April 28, 1824, staying at the Ungarische Krone, Himmelpfortgasse No. 961; his “Departure” for Prague took place on June 11, as reported in the Wiener Zeitung, No. 134 (June 12, 1824), p. 569. See also Behsel, p. 29. Wilhelm must have been related to Henriette of Nassau-Weilburg (1797–1829), wife of Archduke Karl, noted on Heft 69, Blatt 5v, as having attended the Akademie on May 23. 83 Heft 69, Blatt 1v. The operative word in German for “if ” here is “wenn” and not “ob” (whether). 84 Heft 68, Blätter 22v–23r. 85 Heft 68, Blatt 22v. Nephew Karl actually paid the coachman, whose fee (probably for a customary half-day) was 2 fl. 25 kr. 86 This is not documented but would be consistent with Beethoven’s behavior noted on other occasions. 87 Schindler’s later marginal notation in the conversation book indicates that the following entries were made during the rehearsal in the Grosser Redoutensaal. 88 Peter Gläser, the copyist of the Josephstadt Theater, who copied the parts for The Consecration of the House in 1822, and with whom Beethoven worked in the initial preparations for the May 7 Akademie.

162

ONE MORE TIME

“In the end, Duport shamed himself. David, however, was nowhere to be found.” “Everything—the singers, their enthusiasm, their love, and their voices—all work together effectively. The Trio [Tremate, empi, tremate] went in such a way, as if it had been rehearsed 10 times.” Someone else, walking past Schindler and the composer, stopped to confirm that the Trio went “very well” and went on his way. Beethoven probably asked Schindler what time it was, and Schindler answered, “12:30 precisely.” Then, possibly because his eyes were bothering him,89 he asked where Schuppanzigh was, and Schindler answered, “Schuppanzigh is there.”90 Probably as the stands and chairs were being cleared, Schindler reported, “The hall manager says that either Umlauf or you should already be here at 9 o’clock in the morning, because all of the workers will be here by then; and later, by 11 o’clock, the hall will be full of people.” Schuppanzigh now joined them, and Schindler wrote on his behalf, “Schuppanzigh says that it [Tremate, empi, tremate] is sufficiently loud with 3 voices.” Concerning David, however, Schuppanzigh said, “One heard nothing from the tenor.” Both Schindler and, later, nephew Karl commented that “Di tanti palpiti” did not fit with the rest of the program: “By God, it does not belong on this Akademie.”91 Evidently Umlauf had attended Dirzka’s choral rehearsal on Friday and reported, through Schindler, that it had gone well.92 Beethoven might have been worried about security for the orchestral and choral parts, so brother Johann, who was also present, found the answer: “The music can be locked up here. // He [the stagehand or “orchestra servant”] says that he can then put everything in order better. // He has his own room for it here.”93

Saturday, May 22: Midday Dinner By now, ca. 1:30 p.m., Beethoven’s rental carriage had departed to take the four vocal soloists home, and so he, Schindler, Schuppanzigh, brother Johann, and possibly one or two others went to a nearby restaurant for dinner. Schindler sat

89 According to the reminiscences of Ignaz von Seyfried, Beethoven had suffered from weak eyesight since his youth, when he had survived an attack of smallpox. More recently, Beethoven had suffered from some sort of eye inflammation through much of 1823, and as recently as Wednesday, May 19, nephew Karl advised him that he needed new glasses, because he had just mistaken a 10-fl. bill for a 20 (Heft 68, Blatt 1r). 90 Heft 68, Blätter 23r–23v. 91 Heft 68, Blätter 24r–25r. The last is a quote from Schindler. 92 Heft 68, Blatt 24v. 93 Heft 68, Blatt 25v.

SATURDAY, MAY 22: MIDDAY DINNER

163

next to Beethoven, probably to the composer’s left, relating the various topics of conversation going on around the table:94 “We are speaking of Palffy’s proposition concerning the theater.” “Böhm did not want to accompany the Italians. Schuppanzigh says that he places himself behind Unger, etc. [//] People noticed immediately, however, that Professor Böhm is not accompanying!!!”95 “He is speaking96 about the Adagio of the Symphony, where, at the change of meter,97 Umlauf asked him [Schuppanzigh] what kind of effect it made on him, and Schuppanzigh said: ‘If he wanted the seconds to play it better, then he [Umlauf ] must conduct it that way!’” “Schuppanzigh says that [amateur violinist] Piringer and all those under him are scraping away. [//] At Steiner’s, Schuppanzigh publicly complained about the dilettantes, that they understand nothing and steal bread from the [professional] artists. // Piringer even allows himself to be paid 5–8 fl. for conducting, says Schuppanzigh.” “He98 is telling her that in England he ate beefsteaks better than these were.” “He says that because Böhm did not accompany, a gap resulted from it!!” “He is speaking about distributing tickets, from A, B, C, D, to Z—but 30 long and not so wide.99 // I will get them from Duport by 6 [p.m.] today, and have already reserved the orchestral servants for that time, and they will distribute them.”100 Dinner was coming to an end, and Schuppanzigh probably took the conversation book for a moment to suggest dinner after the Akademie itself: “Tomorrow,101 let’s drive over into the Prater, slowly, of course, but the apothecary’s [Johann’s] horses do not go fast.”102 Schindler took the opportunity to complain that there were not enough free tickets to distribute: “Grillparzer, not even one. // [There] are already 35.

94

As with the conversational excerpts earlier in the Redoutensaal, the following entries represent a majority, but not all of the topics. 95 Unger had recently been noted as possibly insecure in her music; if Böhm placed himself near her, it may have been to cue or reinforce her, if necessary. (The verb tenses in the original German are similarly mixed.) 96 Blätter 26v, 27v, and 28r (all written by Schindler) begin with an explanatory “We are speaking about…” or “He is speaking about….” 97 The change to Andante moderato (3/4) at bar 25, where the second violins and violas have the melody. 98 It is not clear who among Beethoven’s dinner companions might have been to England. Possibly this was simply Schuppanzigh exhibiting his aggressive side. 99 This seems to describe the dimensions of the tickets. 100 Heft 68, Blätter 26r–28r. 101 Presumably after the concert on Sunday, May 23. 102 Heft 68, Blätter 28v–29r.

164

ONE MORE TIME

Therefore, ask for more; you will certainly get them.”103 Schuppanzigh probably added that the cloth merchant Johann Nepomuk Wolfmayer (1768–1841)104 should get one. According to Schuppanzigh, he always cried when he heard something by Beethoven. Schuppanzigh said that he ate dinner with him every Friday at the restaurant Zum braunen Hirschen105 and that it would give him unending pleasure if Beethoven would join them sometime.106

Saturday, May 22: Later in the Day Brother Johann drove Beethoven back to the Ungargasse apartment after dinner, probably around 3:30, and evidently suggested that they attend the theater or opera that evening. Karl, who was there, said that he had been sitting since 8 a.m.107 and didn’t want to go. Beethoven, too, surely begged off. They had a caller, and Karl announced, “The person is here who transported the music on Sunday [May 16].”108 It was probably Frau Schlemmer’s assistant with the copying bill for the orchestral parts to Tremate, empi, tremate and the additional choral parts that had been needed. Karl commented, “Therefore, that is 12 fl. C.M. or 30 fl. W.W.—therefore almost 3 ducats.”109 There must have been another caller, this time with an order for paid tickets that might have been accompanied by a very welcome gratuity in the face of Beethoven’s accumulating expenses. Nephew Karl announced, “From Baron Eskeles. He requests 6 tickets. // The Fräulein [daughter Marie]110 sends thanks for the kind things that you wrote in her autograph book. Also you 103 Heft 68, Blatt 29v. In Heft 67, Blätter 43r–43v, Beethoven projected that the number of free tickets that he would receive was 24. Schindler later reported that publisher Tobias Haslinger was hurt because he did not receive a complimentary ticket to this concert. 104 See Frimmel, Handbuch, II, pp. 465–467; and Clive, p. 401. 105 The restaurant Zum braunen Hirschen (At the Sign of the Brown Deer) in the Rotenturmstrasse No. 728. See Pezzl, p. 241. 106 Heft 68, Blatt 29v. 107 Karl’s classes and related work occupied virtually all of his time on Saturday morning; see his schedule for Saturday, May 1, in Heft 64, Blätter 5v–6r. 108 Heft 68, Blatt 26r (written vertically). The previous Sunday had been May 16; see Frau Schlemmer’s copyist in Heft 67, Blatt 36v. 109 Heft 68, Blatt 29r (written vertically). 110 Baroness Marie von Eskeles (1801–1862), daughter of banker Bernhard von Eskeles. Their family possessed a summer house in Hietzing. Marie was a piano student of Catharina Cibbini-Koželuch (1785–1858). The reference here is to Beethoven’s autograph book composition “Der edle Mensch sei hülfreich und gut,” WoO 151. Marie will finally meet Beethoven and thank him personally on Sunday, September 11, 1825; see Heft 96, laid-in Blatt 12a (chronologically between Blätter 8r and 8v). See also Reichardt, I, p. 231; Schmidl, Wiens Umgebungen, Vol. 3, p. 95.

SATURDAY, MAY 22: LATER IN THE DAY

165

ought to eat with them at their place in Hietzing sometime.”111 Beethoven had done business with the banking firm of Arnstein and Eskeles, off and on, for a dozen years. The families were related and were prominent in the Reform Jewish community. In late January, 1825, anticipating the opening of the Seitenstettengasse Tempel in April, 1826, a delegation from the Israelitische Kultusgemeinde, probably headed by Bernhard Eskeles, invited Beethoven to compose a cantata for the dedication of the temple.112 Busy writing String Quartets and probably feeling his health declining, Beethoven refused, but he still may have included a stylized version of the Kol Nidrei chant in the brief, contemplative sixth movement of his String Quartet in C-sharp minor, Op. 131, written late in 1825 and early in 1826.113 But first, he needed that repeat performance of Symphony No. 9!

111 Heft 68, Blatt 30v. This and similar associations are discussed in Theodore Albrecht, “Vienna’s Jewish Community, 1819–1826: Glimpses from Beethoven’s Conversation Books at the Dawn of a New Era,” in Jews and Urban Life, Studies in Jewish Civilization 33, ed. Leonard J. Greenspoon (2021/2023), forthcoming. 112 Possibly after hearing the choral Finale of the Ninth Symphony, Eskeles envisioned something similar (but based on How Lovely Is Thy Dwelling Place) composed by Beethoven for the temple’s dedication. 113 See Theodore Albrecht, “Beethoven’s Quotation of Kol Nidrei in His String Quartet, Op. 131: A Circumstantial Case for Sherlock Holmes,” in Jews and Music, Studies in Jewish Civilization 19, ed. Leonard J. Greenspoon (2006/2008), pp. 149–166.

Chapter 8

Second Premiere and Financial Reality Sunday, May 23, 1824: The Second Akademie Up to now, we have known very little that is authentic about Sunday, May 23, the day of Beethoven’s “repeat” concert featuring the Ninth Symphony. The performance at the Grosser Redoutensaal was to begin at 12:30 p.m., and there are conversation book entries—possibly falsified—in Schindler’s hand indicating that the amanuensis was still urging Beethoven to leave his apartment at 12:15: “Umlauf and Schuppanzigh ask you to hurry, otherwise they will be forced to begin [the Akademie] without you.”1 A carriage drive from Beethoven’s apartment in suburban Landstrasse to the Josephsplatz in the City would have taken only 10 or 15 minutes, so the composer presumably arrived on time, in any case. The program reflected the modifications and accommodations to the Italianopera-loving public that theater manager Duport had demanded if he was to share in the profits or losses from this concert: 1) Beethoven, Grand Overture [Consecration of the House]. 2) Beethoven, New Trio [Tremate, empi, tremate], with soloists Mad. Dardanelli, Herren Donzelli and Botticelli. 3) Beethoven, Grand Hymn [Kyrie from the Missa solemnis], with soloists Henriette Sontag, Caroline Unger, Anton Haitzinger, Joseph Seipelt, and Chorus. 4) [Rossini], Aria “Di tanti palpiti” [from Tancredi], sung by Herr David. 5) Beethoven, Grand Symphony, with a … Finale … on Schiller’s Ode, An die Freude.2 Commentators through the present day have repeated or paraphrased Schindler’s statement that “the hall was not even half full, for the bright sun had lured the music lovers out of doors.”3 In fact, the morning had started out 1

Beethoven’s Conversation Books/Konversationshefte, Heft 69, Blatt 6r. Zettel, May 23, 1824; reproduced in Brandenburg, Vol. 5, p. 326; printed version in Thayer-Forbes, p. 912. Schindler reported that Sontag also sang an “aria di bravura” by Saverio Mercadante, but it does not appear on the Zettel and is reflected nowhere else. See Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, p. 74; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 281. 3 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, p. 74; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 281–282; ThayerForbes, p. 912. 2

SUNDAY, MAY 23, 1824: THE SECOND AKADEMIE

167

“cloudy,” and the rest of the day was “overcast,” though it might have included periods of sunshine. The winds were light in the morning but heavy by 3 p.m., and the temperature ranged between 58 and 64 degrees Fahrenheit.4 Two days later, on Tuesday, May 25, nephew Karl gave Beethoven a point-bypoint explanation for the poor attendance that seems more logical than Schindler’s rationalizations of nearly four decades later. According to Karl, “I was in the hall, in part also to hear opinions. “It was not full, primarily because many people are already out in the country. “The high price of the galleries may also have frightened many off; therefore these were quite empty. “One part [of the potential audience] did not come, because it is known that you would not receive the [box-office] income. Another part remained away because the Rossini aria roused them to indignation, as it also did to me. // Everyone was irritated about the aria.”5 With less music and, overall, less difficult music on this modified repeat concert, and with the opportunity for more rehearsal time, the second performance of the Ninth Symphony, on May 23, seemingly went more smoothly than its predecessor on May 7. It also probably benefited from the more resonant acoustic of the Grosser Redoutensaal, although when Friederich August Kanne came to examine Beethoven’s scores the following Friday, May 28, he commented, “For many passages, however, the theater is better than the Redoutensaal, for example, the Scherzo. [//] Echoes too much.”6 Much later, the violinist Karl Holz told Beethoven, “At your last Akademie, the wind instruments projected more in the [Kärntnertor] theater, and in the Redoutensaal the stringed instruments did.”7 After the concert was over, and Beethoven had presumably thanked and bestowed compliments on all, he, Schindler, Schuppanzigh, and nephew Karl probably took the rented carriage back to suburban Landstrasse and presumably to the Birne,8 around the corner from the composer’s apartment. Perhaps they got 4

Wiener Zeitung, No. 120 (May 25, 1824), p. 507. Karl’s extensive explanation appears in Heft 69, Blätter 8r–8v. As an exception to the widespread negative opinion about the Rossini aria, Karl noted that “[Abbé Maximilian] Stadler had a little crowd around him, who waxed enthusiastic about it.” 6 Heft 70, Blätter 18r–18v. 7 Heft 91, Blatt 24r. The conversation took place while Holz was visiting Beethoven in Baden on July 24, 1825. Presumably, Holz had played in both performances of May 7 and May 23. 8 Remarks about two men debating nearby and a reference to someone’s “coming out” to join them (Heft 69, Blätter 5r–5v) suggest that they are in a restaurant outside the City walls. Beethoven’s preference would probably have been the Birne on Landstrasser Hauptstrasse, also mentioned on Heft 69, Blatt 2r above, as presumably having guest rooms. In Heft 68, Blatt 28v (seemingly Saturday, May 22), Schuppanzigh had mentioned possibly going to the Prater with Johann’s carriage, but that prospect seems not to have materialized. 5

168

SECOND PREMIERE AND FINANCIAL REALITY

one of the restaurant’s private rooms, where the others could speak loudly enough for Beethoven to hear, because there are very few entries in the conversation book. Schindler did note (perhaps not wanting to risk being overheard) that the Magistrat’s councillor (Magistratsrat) wanted to take one-fifth of Beethoven’s income from the concert, which Duport was supposed to have paid, and Schindler, describing him as an “arch-lout” (Erzflegel), had persuaded him to take less. Schuppanzigh had had trouble with this same official at his May 1 concert at the Augarten.9 On a more positive note, Schindler recounted that “[Archduke] Karl’s wife10 was at the Akademie. // [High Chamberlain] Trautmannsdorf stayed until the last note.”11

Tuesday, May 25: Facing Financial Reality Because of all of the expenses of producing large-scale musical compositions for the first time, Beethoven’s net income from the Akademie on May 7, 1824, was predictably disappointing. The gross box-office income had been 2,200 fl. W.W. Against this, the rent for the halls (rehearsals and performance), plus payment for the orchestra and the singers (soloists and chorus), as administered by Duport of the Kärntnertor Theater, came to 1,000 fl. Copying expenses, paid independently by Beethoven, came to 700 fl. Additional expenses totaled 200 fl. That meant that Beethoven’s own earnings from this concert amounted to only 300 fl. W.W. or 120 fl. C.M.12 By comparison, Beethoven’s agreement with theater manager Louis Antoine Duport concerning the repeat concert on May 23 provided for his being paid a flat 500 fl. C.M. in any case. The composer became aware that Duport had, in fact, lost money on the concert and initially hesitated in taking his 500 fl. On Tuesday, May 25, however, he did accept the money, but a conversation book entry by nephew Karl clarifies the conditions that prevailed: “It was very good that you accepted the 500 fl. C.M. The expenses and 1/3 of the income would not have left so much remaining. [//] Duport earns nothing. All of the choristers and the orchestral people were paid; because, since they knew that they should serve only Duport, none went without payment.”13

9

Heft 69, Blätter 5r–5v. Since 1815, Archduke Karl had been married to Henriette of Nassau-Weilburg (1797–1829). She, in turn, must have been related to Duke Wilhelm of Nassau (1792– 1839), noted above. 11 Heft 69, Blatt 5v. 12 These figures were published in the Leipzig Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 26, No. 27 (July 1, 1824), col. 442. 13 Heft 69, Blätter 4r–4v. 10

THURSDAY, MAY 27: PORTRAIT OF A COMPASSIONATE COMPOSER

169

By 4:30 that afternoon, Beethoven and his brother Johann (but without Schindler) went to the Kärntnertor Theater to see Duport and to receive his 500 fl. C.M.,14 almost as if he, too, were merely an employee of the Court.

Epilogue: Thursday, May 27: Portrait of a Compassionate Composer At some time between 4 and 6 p.m. on Thursday, May 27, 1824, the artist Stephan Decker (1784–1844) climbed the stairs to Beethoven’s apartment in order to make a chalk drawing of the composer for publication by Vienna’s Lithographic Institute. Using three candles and the light through the western windows, he portrayed an eagle-like aging Beethoven,15 with a new suit and a recent haircut, looking off into the distance with immeasurable experience, accomplishment, strength, and wisdom. But underneath was also the humane and compassionate Beethoven who, only two days before, had refrained from being paid for the second premiere of his Ninth Symphony until the members of his chorus and his colleagues in the orchestra had received their payments. In Decker’s portrait is the Beethoven to be remembered by performing musicians and their audiences the world over.16 The End

14

Heft 69, Blatt 9r. Heft 70, Blatter 9v–10r. Decker projected that Beethoven would receive copies of his portrait by the next Tuesday, June 1, 1824. 16 Decker’s portrait, which would be copied and adapted many times, is the frontispiece for the present volume. 15

Appendix A

Anton Schindler’s Acquaintance with Beethoven (March, 1814–May, 1824) In January, 1823, Anton Schindler (1795–1864), a former university student and law clerk who had recently turned professional violinist as concertmaster at the theater in suburban Josephstadt, began serving as Beethoven’s part-time and unpaid secretary for the purpose of soliciting subscriptions to the Missa solemnis, and soon for other functions as well.1 Schindler’s musical background and his earlier acquaintance with Beethoven have often been misunderstood or misrepresented,2 and so a review of them, in light of recent research concerning Vienna’s orchestras and concert life in Beethoven’s time, seems warranted here. For the first years, a relatively simple chronology may serve objectivity the best.

Various “Associations” through November, 1822 1795 (June 13): Schindler was born in Meedl (today Medlov), Moravia, ca. 16 miles northwest of Olmütz. His Counter-Reformation schoolteacher father initially taught him violin. He became a Sängerknabe at the St. Mauritz Church (1492) in Olmütz, where he also continued his study of the violin and keyboard, and entered the Gymnasium there.3 1813 (fall): Schindler went to Vienna to study law at the university.

1 The most complete biography of Schindler, although needing more than a century of additional material and corrections, is still Eduard Hüffer, Anton Felix Schindler, diss., University of Leipzig; published Münster: Aschendorff Buchdruckerei, 1909, 78 pages. Hüffer’s ancestors in Münster apparently knew Schindler, and his publisher is the same company that published Schindler’s books. From this we can determine that the focus of Hüffer’s book is less on Vienna and more on German cities, and even on Meedl in Bohemia. For a thorough, pre-Stadlen, biographical sketch of Schindler in English, see Donald W. MacArdle, “Anton Felix Schindler, Friend of Beethoven,” Music Review 24, No. 1 (1963), pp. 51–74. 2 For a brief survey of such occasions, see “The Schindler Problem” in the preface to this volume. 3 Hüffer, Schindler, pp. 2–3, citing original church documents.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

171

1813–1814 (winter): Schindler joined an amateur orchestra that rehearsed in the home of Anton Pettenkofer.4 Future jurist Leopold Sonnleithner (1797–1873) also played there and confirmed Schindler’s participation.5 1813 (December 8 and 12), attendance: On December 8 and 12, 1813, Beethoven and mechanic Johann Nepomuk Maelzel organized two gigantic war benefit concerts in the Aula of the university. The almost fully professional orchestra consisted of ca. 113 musicians from most of Vienna’s theaters and private ensembles. The programs included the premieres of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 7 and Wellington’s Victory, the latter especially popular with the patriotic audiences.6 Schindler must have attended at least one of these concerts in the Aula in order to make his comparison with the Grosser Redoutensaal below. 1814 (January 2), attendance: On January 2, 1814, Beethoven gave a third performance for his own benefit in the more spacious Grosser Redoutensaal. The program included Symphony No. 7, excerpts from The Ruins of Athens, and the popular Wellington’s Victory. Schindler attended this third concert and commented how Wellington’s Victory gained from having opposing corridors in which to place the bands representing the advancing armies. 1814 (Sunday, February 13), performance: The university law students played a concert in the Aula at 12:30 p.m., featuring an unidentified Beethoven Symphony,

4

Anton Schindler, Biographie von Ludwig van Beethoven, 3rd ed. 2 vols. (Münster: Aschendorff, 1860), I, pp. 187 and 229–230; Anton Schindler, Beethoven as I Knew Him, ed. Donald W. MacArdle, trans. Constance S. Jolly (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1966), pp. 202–203; summarized in Theodor Frimmel, BeethovenHandbuch (Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1926), II, p. 106. Anton Pettenkofer (1788–1834), a wholesaler’s shipping agent, lived at Bauernmarkt No. 620 [renumbered as 581 in 1821]. In early 1818, he began hosting Otto Hatwig’s private orchestral society; principal violist in the orchestra of ca. 32 musicians was Franz Schubert. 5 Wilhelm Böcking, [“Ignaz Sonnleithner’s Salon,”] Recensionen und Mittheilungen über Theater, Musik und bildende Kunst (Vienna) 8, No. 24 (June 15, 1862), pp. 369–370. Leopold Sonnleithner had begun the series “Musikalische Skizzen aus Alt-Wien” in Recensionen 7, No. 47 (November 24, 1861) to provide a history of the amateur musical salons in Vienna from ca. 1815 to ca. 1824 and employed Böcking to write an objective, “third-person” history of his own family’s salon. 6 Theodore Albrecht, “Two Contrabassoons and More: The Personnel in Beethoven’s Orchestras for Symphony No. 7, Symphony No. 8, Wellingtons Sieg, and Der glorreiche Augenblick (1813–1814),” in Beethoven und der Wiener Kongress, ed. Bernhard R. Appel and Julia Ronge (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2016), pp. 165–217.

172

APPENDIX A

probably No. 1 or No. 2. The performers presumably included Schindler, Leopold Sonnleithner, and their colleagues from Pettenkofer’s rehearsals.7 1814 (February 27), attendance: On February 27, 1814, Beethoven gave a fourth varied repeat of the concerts for his own benefit in the Grosser Redoutensaal with Symphony No. 7; the Trio Tremate, empi, tremate; the yet-unheard Symphony No. 8; and the wildly popular Wellington’s Victory. By now, only half of the ca. 113 professionals played as a gratis courtesy; Beethoven had to pay 60 of them himself. Again, Schindler was present and reported on the joyous outbursts during Symphony No. 7 (with the second movement repeated) and Wellington’s Victory (with the “battle” section repeated).8 1814 (end of March), first meeting with Beethoven: “At a gathering [at Pettenkofer’s], one of my stand partners asked me to deliver to Beethoven a note from [virtuoso violinist Ignaz] Schuppanzigh [1776–1830] (who was his teacher) the following morning, because he himself was prevented from doing so. The note concerned a proposed rehearsal, and Beethoven, who was to take part, only had to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no.’ I undertook the task with joy. And so my desire to stand in the presence of the man whose works, for years, had inspired my greatest admiration for their author was now to be fulfilled. I was then 18 years old. “The next morning, I climbed the four flights of stairs of the Pasqualati House and was immediately admitted by the tailor-servant who led me to the Master’s desk. When Beethoven had read the note, he turned to me and said, ‘Yes.’ After a few hurried questions, the audience came to an end.”9 1814 (April 11), second meeting with Beethoven: Soon after meeting Beethoven, Schindler made the acquaintance of Schuppanzigh, who gave him a ticket for his concert at the Hotel Zum römischen Kaiser at 12:30 p.m. on April 11, when

7 Stefan Weinzierl, Beethovens Konzerträume: Raumakustik und symphonische Aufführungspraxis (Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Erwin Bochinsky, 2001), p. 229, citing Theophil Antonicek, Musik im Festsaal der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Vienna: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1972), p. 87, and Alexander Wheelock Thayer, Thayer’s Life of Beethoven, ed. Elliot Forbes (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1964/1967), p. 576. 8 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, pp. 194–195; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 169–170; Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 16, No. 8 (February 23, 1814), cols. 132–133, and No. 12 (March 23, 1814), cols. 201–202. 9 This anecdote is worth quoting in full. Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, pp. 187 and 229–230; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 202–203; Thayer-Forbes, pp. 577–578. Schuppanzigh was a close friend of Beethoven’s and had served as concertmaster for his recent series of four gigantic benefit concerts.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

173

Beethoven took part in the first performance of his Trio in B-flat, Op. 97. The other work on the program was Beethoven’s popular Septet, Op. 20.10 Schindler presented himself to the composer with more confidence and greeted him respectfully. “He responded in a friendly manner and indicated that he remembered me from having brought the note.”11 1814 (May 23), attendance: Premiere of the third version of Fidelio; at the Kärntnertor Theater with Michael Umlauf conducting. It would be performed 22 times in 1814, 10 times in 1815, 10 times in 1816, 10 times again in 1817, then 5 times in 1818, and 3 times in 1819. By any reasonable standard, this was a long and respectable run.12 Schindler would surely have heard it at least once a year until the run ended in 1819. Ignaz Moscheles made the piano score, possibly the source of violinist Schindler’s aversion to piano arrangements. 1814 (July 31), performance: The law students of the university gave a concert. A Beethoven work appeared on the program, but its identity is unclear. Schindler, Sonnleithner, and their Pettenkofer colleagues would probably have been among the participants.13 1814 (November 29 and December 2), invited to perform: Beethoven gave gigantic concerts in the Grosser Redoutensaal to welcome the Congress of Vienna. The program consisted of his new cantata, Der glorreiche Augenblick (including an extensive solo for concertmaster Ignaz Schuppanzigh); Symphony No. 7; and the popular Wellington’s Victory. Schindler reported in his Biographie, “Schuppanzigh invited me to take part in the large-scale concerts of November 29 and December 2 [1814]. Therefore I had several opportunities to see the creator of the [Seventh] Symphony in A Major at very close range.”14 Schindler noted that he played in the second violin section, and there is no reason to disbelieve him.15 10

Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 16, No. 21 (May 25, 1814), col. 355. Biographie (1860), I, pp. 187 and 229–230; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 202–203; Thayer-Forbes, pp. 577–578. The concert was a benefit for an unnamed military cause. 12 See the Zettel, Kärntnertor Theater, Bibliothek, Österreichisches Theatermuseum (courtesy librarian Othmar Barnert). 13 Weinzierl, p. 229, citing Antonicek, Musik im Festsaal, p. 89. 14 Concerts for the Congress of Vienna with Der glorreiche Augenblick and possibly the sixth and seventh performances of Symphony No. 7 premiered on December 8 and 12, 1813. There would have been a total of two rehearsals for these two Congress concerts. 15 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, p. 198; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 171–172. Schuppanzigh had signed the orchestral payroll of February 27, 1814, as witness, and probably welcomed talented amateurs, especially in the string sections, to lower costs here. 11 Schindler,

174

APPENDIX A

1814 (December 25), performance: The traditional Christmas Day concert held in the Grosser Redoutensaal to benefit the Bürgerspital (Old People’s Home) in suburban St. Marx. The program was the same as November 29 and December 2: Der glorreiche Augenblick, Symphony No. 7, and Wellington’s Victory. Schindler presumably played on it as well.16 1814–1815 (winter): In fall, 1813, Leopold Sonnleithner began holding string quartet rehearsals in his lawyer father’s home in the Gundelhof each Sunday. As a fellow law student with Leopold, Schindler was a member in the winter of 1814–1815.17 1815 (February): Schindler supposedly accepted a teaching position in Brünn, Moravia, and, summoned by the police, was questioned about his association with political unrest at the University of Vienna. Unfortunately, his papers were not in order, and he was imprisoned for “several weeks.” “But a whole year had been lost in my academic pursuits.”18 1815 (fall), meets Beethoven repeatedly: Schindler returned to Vienna, presumably in time to begin the Michaelmas semester (ca. November 1) at the university. Shortly thereafter, Beethoven (through a mutual acquaintance) invited him to the Blumenstock beer house in the Ballgässchen, where the composer frequently went at 4 p.m. to read the daily newspapers and have his coffee. He wanted to learn firsthand what had taken place in Brünn. Beethoven sympathized and reportedly invited Schindler to join him for coffee again. Soon, Schindler began occasionally to accompany Beethoven on his walks after his coffee, but these occasions were probably not as frequent as Schindler later remembered them.19 1816 (early): Schuppanzigh left Vienna on tour through northern Germany to Russia, remaining until April, 1823. Therefore, Beethoven was without his chosen concertmaster, and Schindler was without one of his most important networks into the professional orchestral world. In any case, Schindler seems never to have been a student of Schuppanzigh’s.20

16

Thayer-Forbes, p. 600; Weinzierl, p. 230. Böcking, “Ignaz Sonnleithner’s Salon,” pp. 369–370. 18 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, pp. 229–231; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 202–204. Frimmel, Handbuch, II, p. 106, says that Schindler had fled to Brünn but was discovered there on January 21, 1815, and arrested. Much of this story remains confused. 19 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, p. 231; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 204. For Beethoven’s daily routine, see Theodore Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Vol. 1, pp. xxvi–xxvii. 20 On May 8, 1824, the day after Beethoven’s Akademie, Schindler asked the composer, “Was he [Schuppanzigh] such a gourmand in earlier years, or did he become 17

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

175

1817 (Sunday, June 1), performance: The Widows’ and Orphans’ Society of the university’s law faculty presented a benefit concert in the institution’s Aula (grand hall). On the typical potpourri program was the popular second movement (designated “Andante”) from Beethoven’s Symphony No. 7, “well performed.” Schindler and other members of Sonnleithner’s salon were presumably among the amateurs in the orchestra, supplemented by professionals.21 1817: Johann Baptist Bach (1779–1847) opened his law practice and soon gained an excellent reputation. He employed one paid law clerk and several unpaid assistants (Schindler among the latter). On January 22, 1820, Bach married Katharina Feicht; Schindler later told Beethoven, “For years I was witness to his bachelor life,” suggesting that he was indeed one of Bach’s law clerks from 1817. Bach became Beethoven’s legal adviser by fall, 1819, and Schindler probably continued a nodding acquaintance with the composer in this way.22 It may also be presumed that Bach attended virtually all of the Widows’ and Orphans’ Society concerts mentioned here. 1817 (Sunday, December 21), performance: The Widows’ and Orphans’ Society of the university’s law faculty presented a benefit concert in the institution’s Aula (grand hall) before a large audience. The potpourri program opened with Beethoven’s Overture to Egmont, whose “performance left nothing to be desired.” Again, Schindler was probably among the amateurs who constituted most of the orchestra, supplemented by professionals. The concertmaster was attorney Dr. Joseph (Edler) von Ohmayer, and the conductor was the Kärntnertor Theater’s Michael Umlauf.23 1818 (Sunday, April 5), performance: The Widows’ and Orphans’ Society of the university’s law faculty presented a benefit concert in the institution’s Aula one only in Russia?” (Heft 66, Blatt 12v), suggesting strongly that Schindler did not know Schuppanzigh well enough to have studied with him that early. 21 Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 1, No. 24 (June 12, 1817), col. 199; Weinzierl, p. 231; citing Antonicek, Musik im Festsaal, p. 90; and Zettel (Archiv, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde). The Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung mit besonderer Rücksicht auf den Österreichischen Kaiserstaat (abbreviated as Wiener AmZ) had recently been established by the publisher S.A. Steiner and would continue until 1824. Its reporter did not say so, but this particular Beethoven movement was probably encored, as was becoming local custom. 22 See Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Heft 11, Blatt 39r; and Heft 20, Blatt 6v. As late as April, 1823, Schindler relished his former employer’s legal victories of February, 1820; see Heft 29, Blatt 4v, and Clive, p. 11. 23 Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 20, No. 4 (January 28, 1818), col. 71; Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 1, No. 52 (December 27, 1817), cols. 447–448; Weinzierl, p. 231, citing Antonicek, Musik im Festsaal, p. 91.

176

APPENDIX A

(grand hall). The program opened with Beethoven’s Overture to Coriolan. As before, Schindler was certainly among the students and faculty who played as amateurs in the orchestra.24 1818 (Sunday, April 12), attendance: Friedrich Hradetzky (1766/1769–1846), senior low hornist of the Court Opera and Hofkapelle, gave a concert for his own benefit in the Kleiner Redoutensaal (Small Imperial Ballroom). The program included Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 5. “The prominent pianist Herr Carl Czerny [1791–1857] played this profound Concerto so well, so masterfully that one cannot praise him too highly and must cherish him all the more…. The orchestra left much to be desired.” The orchestral musicians were probably from the Hofkapelle and Kärntnertor Theater; the conductor was probably viceKapellmeister Joseph Eybler. Schindler attended; Beethoven seems not to have.25 1819 (Sunday, January 17), performance, probable meeting: At 12:30 p.m. on Sunday, January 17, 1819, the Widows’ and Orphans’ Society of the university’s law faculty presented a benefit concert in the institution’s Aula (grand hall). The program opened with Beethoven’s Prometheus Overture and continued with four modest-scaled works. As usual, the orchestra’s strings were largely talented amateurs, Schindler surely among them, under professional leadership, and the orchestra’s winds and contrabasses were largely professionals. The final, and longest, work on the program was Beethoven’s Symphony No. 7, conducted by the composer. The Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung noted that when Beethoven appeared, “all hands applauded, bravos filled the hall, and the eyes of music lovers were filled with tears.” The performance itself was a success, “full of energy and effect,” “and, as always, crowned by joyous applause,” even “in between the movements of the composition.” The Wiener AmZ commented, “Whoever has not heard Beethoven’s Symphony under his direction cannot comprehend fully this most important instrumental work of our time.”26

24 Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 20, No. 21 (May 27, 1818), col. 388; Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 2, No. 15 (April 11, 1818), cols. 130–131; Weinzierl, p. 232. 25 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, p. 181; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 161. See also Weinzierl, p. 232; Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 20, No. 21 (May 27, 1818), cols. 388–389; Wiener AmZ 2, No. 16 (April 18, 1818), col. 139. 26 Wiener AmZ 3, No. 6 (Monday, January 20, 1819), cols. 44–45; Thayer-DeitersRiemann, IV, pp. 157–158; Thayer-Forbes, p. 733; Weinzierl, pp. 233 and 244. Beethoven had conducted the premiere of the Symphony No. 7 in the same hall on December 8, 1813. Bäuerle’s Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung 14, No. 9 (January 21, 1819), p. 35; also quoted in Thayer-Deiters-Riemann, IV, p. 157. Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 21, No. 8 (February 24, 1819), cols. 126–127.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

177

Even so, Schindler (who, as a law student or clerk, played in the violin section) later recounted, “It was only too obvious that the master was no longer capable of conducting his own works.”27 Because many of the amateurs and professionals had probably played the Symphony several times since 1813–1814, they probably played it well in spite of Beethoven. 1819 (March–June): On March 24, 1819, it was announced that Archduke Rudolph, Beethoven’s longtime pupil and patron, would become the cardinal of Olmütz, Moravia (ca.120 miles north of Vienna, and ca. 16 miles southeast of Schindler’s birthplace).28 Rudolph’s installation would take place on March 9, 1820.29 As Schindler later recounted, “Without a suggestion from anyone, Beethoven decided to write a Mass for this solemn occasion.”30 1819 (late August), meeting(s) in Mödling: A summary version of Schindler’s lengthy account: “Beethoven spent the summer of 1819 in the Hafner Haus in Mödling. I frequently visited him there and saw the Mass take shape.”31 “Toward the end of August, I arrived at 4 o’clock in the afternoon, accompanied by the musician Johann Horzalka.”32 “From behind the closed door, we could hear the composer working on the fugue of the Credo [probably the Gloria if 1819]—singing, howling, stamping his feet.”33

27 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, p. 2; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 231. Schindler attributed Beethoven’s problems on this occasion to the Aula’s resonant acoustic. 28 Thayer-Forbes, pp. 719–720; Roger Fiske, Beethoven’s Missa Solemnis (London: Paul Elek, 1979), pp. 16–17. 29 Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 228 and 343. The cathedral in Olmütz is dedicated to St. Wenceslas and is roughly a half mile east northeast of Schindler’s old St. Mauritz Church. 30 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, p. 269; Schindler-MacArdle, Beethoven as I Knew Him, p. 228. In the paragraph immediately following, Schindler had a slip of the mind or pen and wrote, “In the late autumn of 1818, I saw him start to work on this score.” Schindler would not be the only writer on Beethoven to confuse 1818, 1819, and the years surrounding them. 31 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, p. 269; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 228; Thayer-Forbes, p. 735; text here slightly combined, condensed, and edited from these three sources. 32 Johann Evangelist Horzalka (b. Triesch near Iglau, Moravia, December 6, 1798; d. Vienna-Penzing, September 9, 1860), pianist and composer. See Ziegler, Addressenbuch, p. 23; Behsel, p. 18; Wurzbach, Vol. 9 (1863), pp. 335–336; Otto Erich Deutsch, Schubert: A Documentary Biography, trans. Eric Blom (London: J.M. Dent, 1946; repr. New York: Da Capo Press, 1977), pp. 262–263, 348–349, 398–399, 480–483, and 743. 33 Seven sketches for the Credo of the Missa solemnis appear in Beethoven’s conversation books from March 24, sporadically through September 8, 1820 (see Albrecht,

178

APPENDIX A

Beethoven came to the door, disoriented and embarrassed, but welcomed his visitors. Schindler and his companion learned that he had not had eaten that day and so took him to a restaurant for a late midday dinner.34 Schindler did not say why he went to visit Beethoven in remote Mödling, but it may have been in his role as clerk for Bach, who would soon become Beethoven’s lawyer. Minor inconsistencies aside, the story rings true. 1819 (fall), occasional casual encounters: Johann Baptist Bach, Schindler’s employer, became Beethoven’s lawyer. 1820 (Sunday, April 16), performance: The Widows’ and Orphans’ Society of the university’s law faculty presented a benefit concert in the Aula at 12:30 p.m. The program opened with Beethoven’s Namensfeier Overture, noted as “a new overture, already heard several times; a powerful composition, fairly well performed.” Again, Schindler was surely among the amateurs who made up the majority of the orchestra.35 1820 (probably by summer): Schindler began to prepare for a career as a professional violinist. As he later told Beethoven, “I played for 8–9 hours each day for two years.”36 This figure may be hyperbole, but it appears that Schindler practiced violin intensely for two years before he won the position of concertmaster at the Theater in der Josephstadt by summer, 1822. 1820 (November–December, 1822), four performances: Between November, 1820, and December, 1822, the young lawyer and talented amateur musician Leopold Sonnleithner (frequently mentioned above) conducted four of the regular concerts given by the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in the Grosser Redoutensaal, with a work by Beethoven on each one: 1820 (November 19): Symphony No. 8; 1821 (November 18 [actually 13]): Symphony No. 7; Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Heft 10, Blatt 18r, through Heft 16, Blatt 58r). These lend credence to Schindler’s anecdote, but for 1820 rather than 1819—a forgivable mistake. 34 Schindler, Biographie (1860), I, pp. 269–271; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 228–229; Thayer-Forbes, p. 735; text slightly combined, condensed, and edited from these three sources. 35 Wiener AmZ 4, No. 33 (April 24, 1820), cols. 257–258; Weinzierl, p. 235, citing Antonicek, Musik im Festsaal, p. 94. On Saturday, April 8, Dr. Joseph von Ohmayer, presumably the concertmaster, visited Beethoven and borrowed the orchestral parts for the Overture. The rehearsal took place on Thursday, April 13, at 11 a.m. See Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Vol. 2, pp. 120–121 (Heft 11, Blatter 54r–54v). 36 Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Heft 25, Blatt 39v.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

179

1822 (March 3): Overture to Egmont; 1822 (December 15): Symphony No. 1; Calm Sea and Prosperous Voyage, Op. 112. As a law clerk, a fellow student of Sonnleithner’s, and a Beethoven enthusiast, Schindler probably played in the violin section of this amateur orchestra for at least three of these concerts and possibly even the fourth. It is doubtful that Beethoven attended any of them.37 1822 (summer): Karl Friedrich Hensler (1759–1825) managed the western suburban Theater in the Josephstadt and the summer theater in Baden, 15 miles south of Vienna. The Josephstadt Theater was under complete renovation and would reopen on October 3. For the gala reopening, he commissioned Beethoven to revise his 1811 music for The Ruins of Athens (under the title Die Weihe des Hauses [Consecration of the House]) with an added chorus with dances (Wo sich die Pulse) and a new celebratory Overture. Beethoven spent from late May to late August in Oberdöbling, a village 2 miles north of Vienna. 1822 (probably July), occasional meetings: Hensler hired Schindler as concertmaster (with additional administrative duties) for the Josephstadt Theater, whose renovation was nearing completion. Schindler probably served as liaison between Hensler in Baden and the Josephstadt and Beethoven in Döbling. 1822 (July–August), meeting(s): While in Döbling, Beethoven composed Wo sich die Pulse (needed first for choreography and rehearsal) and revised the Ruins music. Schindler witnessed and reported Beethoven’s slow work and the ballet master’s increasing impatience.38 Hensler, however, seemingly delayed in negotiating with Viennese publisher S.A. Steiner, who owned the rights to the Ruins,

37 Between November, 1820, and March, 1822, however, Schindler, given his reported garrulous and chattering nature, would surely have conversed with Beethoven about these performances when the composer came to Bach’s office. Unfortunately, none of these concerts took place in a period covered by a surviving conversation book. See Clive, pp. 342–343; Weinzierl, pp. 235–237 and 244–245; Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 23, No. 1 (January 3, 1821), col. 10; and AmZ 24, No. 1 (January 2, 1822), col. 15. Some of the earliest entries in the surviving conversation books concern a Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde concert of March 1, 1818, conducted by Beethoven’s du-friend Vincenz Hauschka, which the composer did not attend. See Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Heft 1, Blätter 3r–5v. 38 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, pp. 6–7; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 234.

180

APPENDIX A

and Beethoven waited until this was accomplished before turning the above items over to Hensler.39 1822 (September), meeting(s): On September 1, Beethoven moved to Baden with his nephew Karl (1806–1858). Schindler recounted, “In September it was time to write a new Overture. One day, while walking with his nephew Karl and me in the lovely Helenenthal near Baden, Beethoven told us to go ahead and wait for him at a certain spot. He soon caught up with us and remarked that he had jotted down two themes for the overture. He explained that he planned to develop one of them freely and the other in the formal style of Handel. In a happy mood, he sang them both and asked which one we liked better. The nephew liked both themes, while I said that I would like to see the fugue subject developed in a strict Handelian style. At any rate, Beethoven had long had the idea of writing an overture in the style of Handel, rather than just to please me.”40 1822 (late September), possible messenger: Beethoven finished his working copy of the Overture to The Consecration of the House. Wenzel Schlemmer, Wenzel Rampl, and Matthias Wunderl (Copyist E) came to Baden to copy the Overture, which took two days. On the cover of the copied score, which he proofread and corrected, Beethoven inscribed, “Written [copied?] toward the end of September, 1822.”41 Beethoven would have sent that score, possibly via Schindler, to the Theater in der Josephstadt for individual orchestral parts to be extracted by Peter Gläser, its resident head copyist, and his staff. 1822 (October 3, with repeats on October 4 and 5), performances: As Schindler recounted, “The newly constituted orchestra of the Josephstadt Theater received the music on the afternoon of the day of the opening, with countless copying mistakes in every part. All that a rehearsal in front of an auditorium that was already filling up could accomplish was to correct the most noticeable of these errors.

39 Emily Anderson, ed., The Letters of Beethoven, 3 vols. (London: Macmillan, 1961), Nos. 1087 and 1094; Sieghard Brandenburg, ed., Ludwig van Beethoven: Briefwechsel; Gesamtausgabe, 7 vols. (Munich: G. Henle, 1996–1997), Nos. 1486 and 1490. 40 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, pp. 7–8; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 234–235 (edited for wordiness, etc.). In addition to Handel, Beethoven must have had Mozart’s Overture to The Magic Flute in mind and, indeed, may have been developing many of these ideas in his head and even on paper before divulging them to Schindler and Karl. But it makes a believable enough anecdote. 41 Manuscript in the Beethoven-Haus, Bonn; cover illustrated in Brandenburg, Briefwechsel, Vol. 4, p. 532. This overture will be performed on Beethoven’s Akademie of May 7, 1824, and its repeat on May 23. Its score and parts figure prominently in the preparations for that concert, so are worthy of being noted here.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

181

“Beethoven took his place at the piano in a position in which he was facing most of the orchestra and where his left ear, which was still of some service to him, was turned toward the stage. The Kapellmeister Franz Gläser placed himself on Beethoven’s right where he could oversee the whole performance, while I led the orchestra from my place at the head of the first violins.”42 1822 (probably ca. October 17–20, possibly while Beethoven was in the City running errands); a visit from Schindler, bringing soprano Katharina Sigl and family: On July 22, 1822, the soprano Katharina Sigl (1802–1877) arrived in Vienna from Munich, accompanied by her father, Ignaz, and younger brother Eduard,43 for guest performances at the Kärntnertor Theater to include the Queen of the Night in Mozart’s Die Zauberflöte and Donna Elvira in Don Giovanni. On September 9, when Katharina’s engagement was over, the Sigls went to Pest and returned on October 16. They remained in Vienna for several more days and then departed back to Munich on October 21, 1822.44 At some time during their stay in Vienna, but most likely during the period from October 17 to 20, Schindler took them to meet Beethoven, presumably when the composer came back into the City from Baden for a day or two to run errands.45 Probably shortly after the Sigls’ arrival home, Katharina wrote to Schindler, “Would you be so kind as to ask Herr von Beethoven whether he would write an aria for me, perhaps with a violoncello obbligato for my brother? … I always envy your ability to be around that God.”

42 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, pp. 8–10; Schindler-MacArdle, p. 235. Schindler was nominally the concertmaster, but young Léon [originally Napoléon] de St. Lubin (b. Turin, July 5, 1805; d. Berlin, February 13, 1850) was the theater’s “solo player.” 43 Arrivals and departures in Wiener Zeitung, No. 169 (July 25, 1822), p. 675; and No. 210 (September 12, 1822), p. 839; arrival noted in the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung 24, No. 36 (September 4, 1822), col. 591. Originally from Passau, Ignaz Sigl, Royal Bavarian Court musician, had come to Munich in 1816; the son was violoncellist Eduard. See Hans-Joachim Nösselt, Ein ältest Orchester, 1530–1980: 450 Jahre Bayerisches Hof- und Staatsorchester (Munich: Verlag F. Bruckmann, 1980), p. 229; Ludwig Eisenberg, Grosses Biographisches Lexikon der Deutschen Bühne im XIX. Jahrhundert (Leipzig: P. List, 1903), pp. 968 and 1065; Hüffer, Anton Schindler (Münster: Aschendorff, 1909), pp. 8–9; Brandenburg, Briefwechsel, Nos. 1506 and 1514; Loewenberg, Annals of Opera, 3rd ed. (1978), col. 590; Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Heft 19, Blatt 11r (January 21, 1823), and Heft 24, Blatt 36r (February 20, 1823), notes 123 and 124. 44 Wiener Zeitung, No. 210 (September 12, 1822), p. 839 (to Pest); No. 241 (October 18, 1822), p. 963 (return to Vienna); No. 245 (October 23, 1822), p. 979 (return home to Munich). 45 This might have taken place at the composer’s old apartment at Landstrasser Hauptstrasse No. 244, because there is no hint of Schindler’s having taken the Sigls to Baden.

182

APPENDIX A

Schindler must have responded, and Beethoven, evidently separately, sent either an Albumblatt or possibly one of his recent Lieder. In any case, on December 4, 1822, Katharina replied to Schindler, “I am greatly indebted to you. You were the kind angel who introduced me to the divine, heavenly Beethoven. The hour that we spent there is one of the happiest, most memorable in my whole life. I am also extremely proud and honored to receive an aria from him. I have only you to thank for it. Dear friend, how much I regret that I did not have the pleasure of seeing you more times while in Vienna. Give my deepest regards to Herr von Beethoven. I don’t dare write to him.”46 These letters demonstrate that by mid–October, 1822, Schindler was already perceived as having an ongoing association with Beethoven and even acting as a medium for bringing strangers into contact with the composer. 1822 (November 3), performance: The Theater in der Josephstadt held an evening serenade for the birthday of its manager, Hensler. Beethoven composed the Gratulations-Menuett, WoO 3, using thematic material derived from his cantata Der glorreiche Augenblick (1814). Beethoven probably conducted the simple piece, with Schindler as concertmaster. Coincidentally, Beethoven’s opera, Fidelio, was revived at the Kärntnertor Theater that night as a vehicle for the young soprano Wilhelmine Schröder (1804–1860). Evidently the serenade took place early enough for Beethoven to have attended both events, but instead, he and his nephew Karl attended the second performance of the revival on the next night, Monday, November 4. 1822 (November 4), assigned dinner companion: At 3 p.m. on November 4, there was a birthday dinner for Hensler at Zum goldenen Strauss, the restaurant immediately east of the Josephstadt Theater. Beethoven attended alone, and Hensler assigned Schindler to sit next to him and keep him company during the meal. Schindler’s first authentic entry in the conversation books (Heft 18, Blatt 9r) asked, “Were you at Fidelio?” (meaning the performance the previous evening, after Hensler’s birthday serenade). Schindler and Beethoven continued to converse during dinner. Schindler pointed out various people in the crowd; he then asked, “Do you have another idea about the stove? // If only it had more light.”47 It is not clear whether he meant Beethoven’s previous apartment on the Glacis, north of the Auersperg Palace, or his new one in the Obere Pfarrgasse, but it does suggest that Schindler had already seen the interior of one of Beethoven’s residences, probably during the visit by the Sigl family in mid-October (see above). 46 In 1909, these letters were in the possession of Fräulein Egloff in Mannheim; today in the Beethoven-Haus Bonn, BH 213 (Schindler Nachlass/Estate). Texts from Brandenburg, Nos. 1506 and 1514; and Hüffer, Schindler, pp. 8–9. 47 Heft 18, Blätter 9r–11v, then through 18r.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

183

* 1822 (fall): According to Daniel Brenner, Schindler did not develop any “close personal contact” with Beethoven until fall, 1822.48 In fact, by that time Schindler had met Beethoven on more than a dozen reasonably verified occasions, plus an indeterminate number of casual encounters. He had participated in ca. 25–30 performances of ca. 12 of the composer’s works: Symphonies No. 7 (10 times, including once under Beethoven’s direction) and No. 8 (twice), Wellington’s Victory (7 times), Der glorreiche Augenblick (3 times), Calm Sea and Prosperous Voyage, Namensfeier Overture, the Overtures to Coriolan and Egmont, as well as the premieres of the Consecration of the House Overture and incidental music, and the Gratulations-Menuett. In addition, he probably played in informal rehearsals in Pettenkofer’s and Sonnleithners’s salons, as well as the law school’s amateur orchestra, probably to include the early Symphonies and Concerti, as well as such popular overtures as Prometheus. He had also heard several of the above works, as well as Fidelio; the “Archduke” Trio (with Beethoven as pianist); the Septet, Op. 20; and the Piano Concerto No. 5 (with soloist Carl Czerny), as a member of the audience—an enviable foundation upon which to begin an even closer association and friendship with Beethoven. *

Getting Better Acquainted, January–May, 1823 1822 (November–December): By December, 1822, Beethoven’s oversized Missa solemnis was finished, essentially still unsponsored, and certainly unperformed. In spite of earlier discussions with publishers in various political, marketing, and economic regions,49 and in an uncertain post-Napoleonic market for church music, Beethoven developed the idea of selling subscriptions for manuscript copies of the score to Europe’s highest nobility (or their libraries) for a fee of 50 gold ducats per copy. His friends probably reminded him of his popularity 48 Brenner,

Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss (2013), p. 12. Many earlier writers on Beethoven have implied or outright stated that these exploratory discussions were unethical, not realizing that there was virtually no international copyright protection for music. Vienna, Bonn, Paris, London, and Leipzig represented different economic regions, and a prominent composer like Beethoven had to negotiate for simultaneous publication in multiple regions if he hoped to escape the appearance of multiple editions. In the early years of the century, Gottfried Christoph Härtel (Leipzig) repeatedly lectured Beethoven about this in order to rationalize the low prices that he was offering the Viennese composer and yet, a few years later, offered to “go halves” with publisher Muzio Clementi (London) for works by Beethoven to be published in their two cities. See, for instance, Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, under Härtel and Clementi, as well as under Hans Georg Nägeli (Zürich), who had similar ideas. 49

184

APPENDIX A

with the nobility during the Congress of Vienna and that, with their embassies and legations in the Austrian capital, soliciting such subscriptions might be as simple—deceptively simple—as writing a letter to a crowned head, to be delivered locally. First he would test the waters with an old friend. 1823 (January 7): On January 7, 1823, Beethoven wrote to Georg August Griesinger, former tutor and now secretary to the ambassador from Saxony, Count Schönfeld, cautiously soliciting a subscription to the Missa solemnis and asking his advice about such an undertaking as a whole.50 His brother Johann, not particularly literate himself but possessing a certain proficiency in business affairs, may have advised him to be more promotional in his description of the work and more specific in his marketing terms. 1823 (Sunday, January 19): By Sunday, January 19, Beethoven had discussed the matter with Schindler, who was not only concertmaster of the Josephstadt Theater but also a former law clerk, university educated, talented in the art of persuasive writing, and eager to help his idol. Schindler was already prepared to write subscription solicitations on Beethoven’s behalf that would be much more effective than the letter that Beethoven had written Griesinger and projected doing so the next day.51 Not only that, on Tuesday, January 21, Schindler accompanied the awkward and hearing-impaired Beethoven to a meeting with Baron Friedrich Carl von Tettenborn, the envoy from the state of Baden in western Germany, to make a personal solicitation for the Missa solemnis.52 Despite their having met nine years before, Schindler still knew Beethoven better professionally than personally and, over the next weeks, asked several questions in the conversation books that provide evidence that they were quickly getting acquainted.53 On Thursday, January 30, 1823, at Beethoven’s apartment in Obere Pfarrgasse, shortly before midday dinner at 2 p.m., Schindler asked him, “Would you be so kind as to tell me your birthday?” and mentioned “the great honor of eating with you.”

50 Anderson, No. 1122; Brandenburg, No. 1523. Griesinger was well known and active in Viennese musical circles: he had written monthly Viennese reports to Leipzig’s Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, acted as liaison between publisher Breitkopf und Härtel and Haydn, Beethoven, and others, and had written a biography of Haydn (1810). Brother Johann delivered Beethoven’s autograph letter to Griesinger. 51 Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Heft 19, Blatt 2r. 52 Heft 19, Blatt 6r. 53 Beethoven’s relationship with Schindler (as with his previous unpaid secretary, Franz Oliva, through December, 1820), would never reach the intimate du form of address but always remained the polite Sie.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

185

Later in the same conversation, he asked, “What are the prospects for your sinecure?” Schindler may have meant Beethoven’s pension (since 1809) from Princes Lobkowitz and Kinsky and Archduke Rudolph (who was the object of the Missa solemnis), but he may also have meant Anton Teyber’s position at Court, which had recently become vacant. And still later that day, “How long has it been since you have seen your native city? // I know the Rhein and its regions from paintings, but admittedly too little.”54 A week later, on the afternoon of Thursday, February 6, 1823, at a coffee house on the Spittelberg, Schindler asked Beethoven, “What do you think of Wähner?55 [//] What do they have, two together?”56 Beethoven had been friends with the liberal, controversial, Protestant journal editor, Friedrich Wähner, since at least 1819. As for Schindler’s second question, several journals shared the same offices at Dorotheergasse No. 1108. Just a few moments later in the same conversation, Schindler wrote, “Doesn’t your brother come to see you at all?57 I am certainly a thorn in his eye, because I help to uncover his weaknesses;58 he must and should know that.” Beethoven must have discouraged this line of discussion, because Schindler continued in

54 Heft 22, Blätter 3r, 5v, 9r. The Heft and Blatt numbers, here and below, are common to both Köhler et al., Beethovens Konversationshefte (German edition) and Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books (English edition). 55 Friedrich Wähner (1786–1839), aesthetician and eccentric critic, originally a Protestant minister. In 1818, he came to Vienna, where he was on the staff of numerous newspapers and specialty magazines, including the Aglaja, Schickh’s Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Literatur, Theater und Mode, and the Sammler, most of which had a common editorial address, previously on the north side of the Kohlmarkt but now at Dorotheergasse No. 1108 (south side of the street, 4 buildings west of the Graben). Beethoven thought highly of Wähner and his liberal-minded colleague Johann Schickh. See Gräffer, Vol. 1, pp. 544–546; Wurzbach, Vol. 52, pp. 62–63; Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten, pp. 60–69. 56 Heft 23, Blätter 26v–27r. 57 Beethoven’s surviving brother, Nikolaus Johann (1776–1848), had already begun learning the apothecary’s profession in Bonn and moved to Vienna in 1795. In 1808, he acquired an apothecary’s shop in Linz, through which he made a great deal of money selling drugs to the invading French troops. Since August 2, 1819, he had owned “Wasserhof,” a medium-sized country estate in Gneixendorf, outside of Krems, roughly forty miles northwest of Vienna. His city apartment in Vienna was in a house (Kothgasse 61) in suburban Windmühle, owned by his wife’s brother, the master baker Leopold Obermayer. See Klein, p. 122. Johann’s most recent documented visit was after an evening concert of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde on Thursday, January 30, eight days before this conversation (see Heft 22, Blätter 7r–10r). 58 Even this early in their relationship, Schindler is already a divisive element in Beethoven’s relations with others.

186

APPENDIX A

another direction: “Do you know that they have removed Schreyvogel59 from the censorship? A certain Rupprecht60 has gotten it [the position].”61 Entries such as this continue to demonstrate how new Schindler was to Beethoven and his circle at this date. Beethoven must have frequently lamented the loss of the levelheaded, practical, and culturally aware Franz Oliva in December, 1820. Still another week passed, and Beethoven and Schindler met on Thursday, February 13, 1823; probably at a coffee or wine house in the City. As they sat conversing, Lobkowitz tutor Karl Peters and Wiener Zeitung editor Joseph Carl Bernard evidently stopped by their table, then: “Who is Peters?62 // 63 In this way one is fitting for the other. [//] Everyone looks for his own deficiencies in his neighbor. // I don’t allow myself to be led around by prejudice, but, on the whole,

59 Joseph Schreyvogel (1768–1832), writer and critic (pseudonyms Thomas and Carl August West), was Court Theater secretary and dramaturge of the Court Theaters in Vienna from 1802 to 1804 and again from 1814. In 1817, he accepted a position with the censor’s office and also began to report on theater life for Schickh’s Wiener Zeitschrift. According to a Court decree of January 20, Johann Baptist Rupprecht was named the censor for newspapers. See Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, Vol. 54, pp. 186–188; Wurzbach, Vol. 31, pp. 292–294; Clive, p. 325. 60 Johann Baptist Rupprecht (1776–1846), Viennese flower merchant, author, translator, and I.R. book censor. Well respected as a botanist, he was a member of Vienna’s Agricultural Society. In 1814–1815, Beethoven had set his poem Merkenstein not once, but twice (Op. 100 and WoO 144). See Frimmel, Handbuch, II, pp. 91–92; ThayerDeiters-Riemann, IV, p. 439; Thayer-Forbes, p. 603; Wurzbach, Vol. 27, pp. 272–274; Clive, pp. 297–298. 61 Heft 23, Blätter 27v–28r. 62 Bohemian-born Karl Peters (1782–1849), tutor in Prince Lobkowitz’s household and co-guardian of Beethoven’s nephew Karl since spring, 1820. Schindler’s questions and naive comments (see also Blatt 1v above) suggest strongly that his own acquaintance with Beethoven was very recent. Clive, pp. 260–262. 63 At this point, Beethoven probably told Schindler about his accepting the commission to compose an oratorio to Bernard’s unwritten and still-unfinished libretto Der Sieg des Kreuzes, about Bernard’s suggesting (on ca. November 24, 1819) that the outwardly respectable Peters be appointed Karl’s co-guardian, and about Beethoven’s subsequent disappointment with Bernard and his circle because of their distasteful locker-room banter, as well as Bernard’s prejudices against Jews and intellectual/literary women, and how (after March, 1820) he essentially distanced himself from them. See dozens of references in Hefte 3–10.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

187

I don’t rely upon or trust any Bohemian.64 // In my experience, his physiognomy demonstrates a great deal of pedantry.”65 Roughly five weeks later, Schindler was learning about acquaintances on the periphery of Beethoven’s circle. At midday on Saturday, March 22, they discussed Beethoven’s former student Ferdinand Ries, then living in London. Then Beethoven, speaking out loud, must have mentioned Franz Christian Kirchhoffer, prompting Schindler to ask, “Who, then, is this Kirchhofer?”66 Beethoven must have told him about the bookkeeper who gave him occasional financial advice and handled his mailings of music to Ries, who was also promoting the composer’s works in the British capital.67

Irritating Inklings Soon after he began working closely with Beethoven in mid-January, 1823, Schindler’s active imagination became manifest—indeed, it did so on Sunday afternoon, January 26, 1823, at Beethoven’s apartment with nephew Karl present. They were discussing the expenses incurred by various theaters, when Schindler came up with a far-fetched solution for a fundraising event: “Would that you gave a Ball, where I could be the leading dancer. // “Dr. Bach does a great business with country estates. // “Karl should be the leading dancer in my shoes; then I would follow.”68 Beethoven may have felt uncomfortable with Schindler’s first comment about a ball with himself as dancer and attempted to change the conversation to Schindler’s former employer, the lawyer Dr. Johann Baptist Bach. Schindler, however, brought the conversation back to a ball with his (and now nephew Karl’s) dancing in it. Beethoven must have been even more uncomfortable with 64 Bernard and Peters had both been born in Bohemia; Schindler in neighboring Moravia. Schindler’s instinctual dislike for Bohemians may also be reflected in his report to Beethoven on April 24, 1824, after contracting with the Kärntnertor Theater for the Akademie of May 7: “Schuppanzigh is ‘very hellishly’ glad that he has to do nothing more with the Bohemians of the [Theater an der] Wien’s orchestra” (Heft 63, Blatt 2r). 65 Heft 24, Blatt 5r. 66 Franz Christian Kirchhoffer (1785–1842), cashier and bookkeeper at the wholesale silk dealers Hofmann und Goldstein in Vienna, the intermediary in sending letters and money between Beethoven and Ferdinand Ries in London. See Frimmel, Handbuch, I, p. 263; Anderson, No. 1159; Clive, pp. 185 and 265. 67 Heft 27, Blatt 14v. 68 Heft 20, Blatt 19v. A few entries later, Beethoven’s brother Johann joins them and—through Schindler as his messenger—asks the composer to “Write a canon on the theme Lumpenkerl [rascal] of Samothracia” (Heft 20, Blatt 19a–v). As their acquaintance developed, “Samothracian” was one of Beethoven’s nicknames for Schindler. The allusion is unclear; perhaps it was an alliterative euphemism for “Sodomite” (essentially the same word in German or English).

188

APPENDIX A

the implied homosexual activity so close to home and now turned the topic to Artaria’s publication plans, typical of the deflection that he used when he did not like a conversation’s direction. Schindler seems to have garrulously boasted of his new association in various musical venues, probably including Steiner’s and Artaria’s shops, known as social centers in musical Vienna. Word about his gossip and excessive chattering soon got back to Beethoven, who cautioned him against it when he visited the composer’s apartment on Ash Wednesday, February 12, 1823. Schindler’s reply was predictably defensive, but also conciliatory: “I don’t go into any art [music] dealership without having something to do; and even then, I know how to behave like an intelligent man; you will always be satisfied of that in the future.”69

Conflicts: Service versus Vexation Beethoven disliked the idea of prodigy children, but on April 8, 1823, Schindler arranged for the young Franz Liszt (1811–1886) to come to the composer’s apartment and invite him to Liszt’s upcoming concert on April 13.70 Beethoven received him graciously, heard him play, and kissed him on the forehead as a benediction.71 By this time, Beethoven seldom attended concerts, and Liszt’s was no exception, though Schindler and nephew Karl (now 16 years old) did. A week later, on April 20, 1823, while alone with Beethoven and discussing young Liszt’s concert, Karl observed Schindler’s fickle side: “It is always one extreme or the other: either he [Schindler] praises excessively, or, if the wind blows another direction, he complains excessively.”72 Earlier that same day, after afternoon dinner, brother Johann evidently invited Beethoven and Karl to join him and his wife for a drive in the Prater, but his carriage would only hold four passengers. Thus Johann effectively excluded

69

Heft 24, Blätter 1v, and 3v–4r. Another clue (see also Blatt 5r below) that Beethoven’s close acquaintance with Schindler was recent. 70 Schindler was at Beethoven’s apartment that afternoon for a scheduled letter-writing session, so the arrival of Liszt and his father, Adam, must have been prearranged without Beethoven’s knowledge. 71 Heft 28, Blätter 40r–40v; fuller, more up-to-date annotation in the English edition. A kiss on the forehead was a common enough gesture at the time, but legend and lore transformed it into a prophetic Weihekuss (kiss of consecration), which it was not, and bestowed onstage after Liszt’s concert, which Beethoven did not attend. 72 Heft 30, Blätter 18r–18v. Concerning Schindler, see also Heft 40, Blatt 23r (late August–early September, 1823).

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

189

Schindler from the pleasurable ride.73 These subtle rebuffs were not lost on the secretary, even this early. A week later, on Saturday, April 26, 1823, Beethoven hosted Schindler, brother Johann, and nephew Karl for midday dinner in his Obere Pfarrgasse apartment at 2:30 p.m. They had a long conversation, and then Schindler presumably departed to run errands.74 Karl commented, “He [Schindler] will probably be angry that you didn’t invite him for coffee too.”75 Johann had evidently also given Schindler errands to run and appeared at Beethoven’s apartment (in the building just north of his own) at ca. 1:30 p.m. on Sunday, April 27: “I am expecting Schindler.” And then confirmed the observation from the afternoon before: “Because you invited me for coffee yesterday and not him.”76 Considering how long Schindler craved the musician’s life and worked so hard to achieve it, he was gradually developing a dislike for his position as concertmaster at the Josephstadt Theater. At midday dinner on Sunday, April 20, 1823, with Beethoven, Johann, and Karl present, Schindler (as related by Karl) confessed, “He [Schindler] says that he is only waiting until a position is offered him, then he will leave the theater [in der Josephstadt]. Being able to do something means nothing, as long as he has the letter of reference. // Copyist, office staff, and similar employment are more. // But it is secure. // Everyone needs him as a servant.”77 Indeed, Schindler, up to this point, was not part of Beethoven’s close circle of friends or extended family, nor were they ever on familiar du terms linguistically. Through much of their relationship, Schindler was essentially as he described himself here—a servant!

May–June, 1823 On Saturday, May 17, 1823, Beethoven moved out to Hetzendorf, a mile south of Schönbrunn, where he would spend the first three months of the summer. Before he went, he paid a visit to his lawyer, Johann Baptist Bach, at his office, Wollzeile No. 863. Bach asked, “Are you still going out to your estates [apartment in Hetzendorf ] today? Will our Master compose diligently? The whole world would be overjoyed with a new opera.” 73 Heft 30, Blätter 17r–17v. Dinner would have been at 2 p.m., so the ride to and around in the scenic park in the Leopoldstadt, across the canal, east of downtown, might have taken from 3:30 until ca. 6 p.m. Schindler would have been left alone, to walk the mile north to his apartment in Josephigasse in suburban Josephstadt. 74 Schindler’s remarks also appear on Blätter 5v–5r. Therefore, he returned during Schuppanzigh’s visit. 75 In Heft 31, Blatt 1r (presumably the next day, Sunday, April 27), Johann notes that Beethoven had invited him (Johann) but not someone else, presumably Schindler. 76 Heft 30, Blatt 56v; Heft 31, Blatt 1r. 77 Heft 30, Blätter 18v–19r; and Heft 25, Blatt 24v.

190

APPENDIX A

Then Bach turned the conversation to their mutual acquaintance: “A good person [Schindler]. Always chattering.78 And, with every year, becomes more of a man.”79 A month later, sometime between Monday, June 16, and Friday, June 20, Beethoven visited the shop and residence of Wenzel Schlemmer (1758–1823), his favorite copyist, on the south side of Kohlmarkt, across from the intersection with Wallner Strasse. Schindler had evidently pressured him for an accelerated delivery for copies of the Missa solemnis. As Schlemmer reported to Beethoven: “Herr von Schindler told me that you want the score [of the Missa solemnis] to be sent off twice this month; it will be finished when I have it. 80 Then, on Sunday, June 22, 1823, Schindler was again the subject of conversation when the accountant Kirchhoffer joined Beethoven and nephew Karl for dinner. Kirchhoffer wrote, “He [Karl] must now serve as your secretary and put your business affairs in order. He [Schindler] has shown me all of his sides. He has annoyed me a great deal.” Beethoven must have explained some practical function that Schindler served, to which Kirchhoffer replied, “What business is that of his?” Karl then related Kirchhoffer’s account of a recent incident that presumably took place at the accountant’s office: “He [Schindler] remained at the Comptoir [office] for half an hour and chattered away, so that everyone saw the kind of disturbance he made.”81 * Therefore, by May and June, 1823, Beethoven and Schindler knew each other well enough for others in the composer’s circle to comment about the garrulous, presumptuous, possibly homosexual admirer, who was otherwise 78

Schindler had worked as a clerk in Bach’s law office before becoming concertmaster at the Theater in der Josephstadt during the summer of 1822. He was also known as a chatterer and gossip (Beethoven called him “Papageno”), fitting with the description of Schindler. The incomplete final reference may have concerned Schindler’s masculinity, possibly still developing. 79 Heft 32, Blätter 16v–17r. This confirms that Schindler’s former employer considered him to be, if not homosexual, at least adolescent and immature. 80 Heft 34, Blätter 12v–13r. The angle brackets (< >) indicate a passage that has been crossed out on the handwritten page. 81 Heft 34, Blatt 21r. Combined with copyist Wenzel Schlemmer’s remarks concerning Schindler in Heft 34, Blätter 12v–13r, Karl’s and Kirchhoffer’s remarks here suggest that Beethoven’s associates did not like having to work through Schindler, and why Beethoven himself occasionally referred to him as a Papagei (parrot) or as “Papageno,” after Prince Tamino’s bumbling, good-natured, chattering companion in Mozart’s opera The Magic Flute.

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

191

proving to be very useful in helping to manage the subscriptions to the Missa solemnis and their fulfillment, as well as other functions such as apartment hunting and, ultimately, finding a dependable copyist to replace Wenzel Schlemmer, who died on August 6, 1823. * Shortly thereafter, Beethoven and Schindler had a falling-out, probably when Schindler suggested the Josephstadt Theater’s Peter Gläser as a new copyist without allowing a respectable time after Schlemmer’s death. Indeed, they remained estranged until mid-November 1823. After that, Schindler took up his duties again, almost as if there had been no break in their relations. Although Schindler continued to run Beethoven’s errands and monitor subscriptions to the Missa solemnis into the new year 1824, he initially had no specific role in Beethoven’s preparations for the upcoming Akademie to premiere the Ninth Symphony and excerpts from the Mass. Once Beethoven became frustrated with the copyist Paul Maschek, Schindler again suggested Peter Gläser and brought him to visit the composer on March 23, 1824.82 Beethoven engaged him, and Schindler, as concertmaster of the Josephstadt Theater, finally had an identifiable function in carrying scores and parts from Beethoven to Gläser and back.

Schindler Appreciated Beethoven often became impatient with Schindler during the preparations for the Akademie of Friday, May 7, 1824, and occasionally needed a reminder of his secretary’s efforts to achieve it. On the afternoon of Tuesday, May 4, Beethoven, Schindler, and concertmaster Schuppanzigh enjoyed a postrehearsal dinner in the Prater. With his wry humor, Schuppanzigh commented, “If there were not a Schindler, the concert could not be given at all. Schindler deranges [derangirt] everything.” Quick on the uptake, Schindler replied, “or ar-ranges [arrangiert] everything.”83 Similarly, on the late afternoon of Thursday, May 6, Beethoven and Schindler rented a carriage and spent two hours making the rounds of the homes of the nobility and delivering invitations to the concert. Back in his apartment and tired, Beethoven probably lamented the necessary social calls to nephew Karl, who reminded him,

82

Heft 60, Blatt 17r. Heft 65, Blatt 12r. Schuppanzigh had evidently not understood the joke that Schindler had made earlier, and now it was Schindler’s turn not to understand or not to appreciate Schuppanzigh’s linguistic joke. In any case, it points to underlying tensions within Beethoven’s circle of friends and colleagues. 83

192

APPENDIX A

“Be assured that without him [Schindler], the Akademie would still not have taken place, even next week. No one would have undertaken these errands.”84

Schindler Dismissed The premiere of the Ninth Symphony on Friday, May 7, was an artistic triumph for Beethoven, even if the financial picture—owing to the overhead costs of mounting a first performance—was disappointing. Indeed, there would be fingerpointing, some of it unfortunately premeditated. In the midafternoon of Saturday, May 8, Beethoven, nephew Karl, and Schindler were discussing the finances, partially out loud, partially written. Karl jotted, “Your brother was responsible.” And then he continued, “As Schindler knows from an eyewitness, your brother, in front of many people, said that he [Johann] would allow the Akademie to pass, then he would drive Schindler off.”85 With his customary sarcastic humor, Schindler chimed in, “Drive [me] from the house? That’s the way people usually get rid of bugs.”86 On Sunday afternoon, May 9, Beethoven, Schindler, nephew Karl, Schuppanzigh, and Umlauf met for a celebratory dinner in the Prater. Their conversation concerned scheduling the upcoming repeat concert, ultimately projected for May 23. Possibly influenced by the absent Johann, Beethoven brought up the meager profits, and Schindler attempted to explain the expenses versus the income. As was often the case, Schuppanzigh had by now drunk too much and escalated the negative tone of the conversation, so that everyone left angry about one thing or another.87 Probably needing to cool down, Beethoven walked home from the Leopoldstadt to the Landstrasse, only to receive a visit from brother Johann with Joseph Böhm (his candidate as a replacement for Schindler) in tow. Böhm was a good violinist but semiliterate, even less literate than Johann himself.88 Plans moved ahead, and the repeat performance of the Ninth Symphony took place on Sunday, May 23. Afterward, Beethoven, Karl, Schindler, and Johann repaired to the Birne (Pear) restaurant, around the corner from Beethoven’s apartment. Initially, the conversation was pleasant enough, though it ended in contention.89 As Karl commented later, “You made some remarks about a

84

Heft 66, Blatt 3v. ausbazen, ausbeitzen, Viennese expression for “fortjagen”—to chase off, drive off, expel, kick out. See Julius Jakob, Wörterbuch des Wiener Dialektes (Leipzig/ Vienna, 1929), p. 28. 86 Heft 66, Blätter 14r–14v. 87 Heft 67, Blätter 1v–10v. 88 Heft 67, Blätter 11r–11v. 89 Heft 69, Blätter 5r–5v. 85 Original

ANTON SCHINDLER’S ACQUAINTANCE WITH BEETHOVEN 

193

conspiracy. Schindler doesn’t mean badly. He was quite upset that you misunderstood him.”90 In any case, Schindler’s May 23, 1824, entries in the conversation book are the last authentic entries that he would make until December 8, 1826, five days after the mortally ill Beethoven had returned from Gneixendorf.91 One way or another, brother Johann had succeeded in driving Schindler off.

90

Heft 69, Blatt 7v. On ca. July 15 and 24, 1825, the literate violinist/official Karl Holz (1799–1858), whom Beethoven had known since at least the fall of 1823, ingratiated himself more closely with the composer and filled Schindler’s old position as unpaid secretary. This relationship lasted until Beethoven and nephew Karl departed for Gneixendorf on September 28, 1826, and then for the first few days of December, 1826. Schuppanzigh and Holz were more overtly antisemitic than Schindler. 91

Appendix B

The Ludlamshöhle Petition, Late February, 1824 1 To Herr Ludwig van Beethoven. Out of the wide circle of reverent admirers that surrounds your genius in this, your second native city [Vienna], a small number of disciples and lovers of art approach you today to express long-felt wishes, and humbly to proffer a long-suppressed request. But, since the number of spokesmen is only a small portion of the many who joyfully acknowledge your worth and your significance for both the present time and the future, then the wishes and the requests are by no means restricted to the number of those who speak for others of like mind and who, in the name of all to whom art and the realization of their ideals are more than the means and objects of leisure, assert that their wish is also the wish of an innumerable multitude, their request is echoed aloud or in silence by everyone whose breast is animated by a sense of the divine in music. Above all, the wishes of those of our countrymen who venerate art are those that we desire to express here; for although Beethoven’s name and his creations belong to all of today’s humanity and every country that opens a sensitive heart to art, it is Austria that is first entitled to claim him as her own. Among her inhabitants, appreciation for the great and immortal works that Mozart and Haydn created for all time within the bosom of their homeland has not died. With joyous pride, these inhabitants are conscious that the holy triumvirate, in which these names and yours glow as the symbol of the highest within the spiritual realm of tones, sprang from the soil of the fatherland. It must be all the more painful for them [Austrians] to feel that a foreign power [Italian music] has invaded this royal citadel of its noblest ideas [Vienna], that above the graves of the departed [Mozart and Haydn] and around the dwelling places of the only member of that band who remains to us [Beethoven], phantoms who can boast no kinship with the princely spirits of those houses are leading the dance; that shallowness [Rossinian opera] is abusing the name and identity of art, and, in an unworthy dalliance with sacred things, is beclouding and dissipating appreciation for the pure and eternally beautiful.

1 As noted in chapter 2, the petition was delivered to Beethoven on either Wednesday, February 25, or Thursday, February 26, 1824.

THE LUDLAMSHÖHLE PETITION, LATE FEBRUARY, 1824

195

For this reason they [Austrian lovers of art] feel a greater and more animated sense than ever before that the great need of the present moment is a new impulse directed by a powerful hand, a new advent of the ruler [Beethoven] into this domain. It is this need that leads them to you today, and the following are the requests that they lay before you on behalf of all to whom these wishes are dear, and in the name of native art. Do not withhold any longer from the popular enjoyment, do not keep any longer from the oppressed sense of that which is great and perfect, the performance of the latest masterworks from your hand. We know that a grand sacred composition [the Missa solemnis] has joined the first one [Mass in C, Op. 86] in which you immortalized the emotions of a soul, penetrated and transfigured by the power of faith and superterrestrial light. We know that a new flower [Symphony No. 9] glows in the garland of your glorious, still unequaled symphonies. For years, ever since the thunders of the Victory at Vittoria [Wellington’s Victory or the Battle at Vittoria, Op. 91] ceased to reverberate, we have waited and hoped to see you distribute new gifts from the fullness of your riches to the circle of your friends. Do not disappoint the general expectations any longer! Heighten the effect of your newest creations by giving us the joy of first becoming acquainted with them through you yourself! Do not allow these, your latest offspring, to appear someday, perhaps as strangers to the place of their birth, perhaps introduced by persons who are also strangers to you and your spirit. Appear soon among your friends, your admirers, your venerators! This is our first and foremost prayer. But other claims on your genius have been made public. The desires expressed and offers made to you more than a year ago by the Management of our Court Opera [for an opera on Grillparzer’s Melusine] and by the Society of the Austrian Friends of Music [for an oratorio on Bernard’s Der Sieg des Kreuzes] were too long the silent wish of all admirers of art and your name. They stimulated the hopes and expectations too much not to get the speediest publicity far and near, and not to have awakened the widest interest. Poetry has done her share in supporting such lovely hopes and wishes. Worthy material from the hand of a valued poet waits to be charmed into life by your imagination. Do not let that intimate call to so noble an aim be made in vain! Do not delay any longer leading us back to those departed days when the song of Polyhymnia moved powerfully and delighted the initiates of art and the hearts of the multitude! Need we tell you with what deep regret your retirement from public life has filled us? Need we assure you that, at a time when all glances were turned toward you with hope, all perceived with sorrow that the one man whom all of us are compelled to acknowledge as foremost among living men in his domain looked on in silence as foreign art [Italian music] took possession of German soil and the honored home of the German muse, while German works gave pleasure only by echoing the favorite tunes of foreigners, and where the most excellent

196

APPENDIX B

[musicians] have lived and labored, a second childhood of taste [i.e., a period of immature taste] threatens to follow the Golden Age of Art? You alone are able to ensure a decisive victory to the efforts of the best amomg us. The Art Society of our country [Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde] and the German Opera expect from you new blossoms, rejuventated life, and a new sovereignty of the true and beautiful over the [Italian] domination to which the prevalent spirit of fashion wishes to subject even the eternal laws of art. Give us hope that the wishes of all who have been drawn to the sound of your harmonies will soon be fulfilled! This is our most urgent second prayer. May the year that we have begun not come to an end without gladdening us with the the fruits of our petition, and may the coming spring [1824], if it witnesses the unfolding of our longed-for gifts, become a twofold blossom time for us and the entire world of art! Vienna; February, 1824 [Signers of the petition:]2 Prince E. Lichnowky3 Artaria and Co.4 V. Hauschka5 M.J. Leidesdorf6 J.E. von Wayna7 2 The identities of the signers have been determined from several standard sources, including Köhler et al., Beethovens Konversationshefte; Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven; Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books; Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten der Haupt- und Residenz-Stadt Wien (1823); Brandenburg, Beethoven: Briefwechsel; Gesamtausgabe; Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv; and Clive, Beethoven and His World. 3 Prince Eduard Maria Lichnowsky (1789–1845), son of Prince Karl Lichnowsky (1761–1814) and nephew of Count Moritz (1771–1837), who signed further down the list. He was a historian, wrote a history of the Habsburg family, but was also a dramatist. Unlike many of the high nobility, he published several of his works. 4 Artaria, the prominent music publisher in the Kohlmarkt. 5 Vincenz Hauschka (1766–1840), Bohemian violoncellist, broadly trained in music and liberal arts in Prague. He came to Vienna in ca. 1792 and entered the Imperial Payroll Office, rising to a responsible position. He was a member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde and at times conducted its concerts. He was one of the few people in Vienna who was on a familiar du basis with Beethoven. 6 Max (originally Marcus) Joseph Leidesdorf (1787–1840), composer, partner in the music publishing firm of Sauer and Leidesdorf (Kärntnerstrasse No. 941) from 1822 until he left Vienna in 1827. 7 Joseph (Edler) von Wayna (1777–1848), wholesale merchant, banker, and, since 1821, one of the directors of the Austrian National Bank. The owner of a copper sulfate factory in Hernals since 1802, he was among those who invited Beethoven to honorary

THE LUDLAMSHÖHLE PETITION, LATE FEBRUARY, 1824

197

Andreas Streicher8 Anton Halm9 Abbé Stadler10 von Felsburg, Court Secretary11 Count Ferdinand von Stockhammer12 Count Ferdinand von Palffy13 Baron Eduard von Schweiger14 Count Czernin15 Count Moritz von Fries16 I.F. Castelli17 Deinhardstein18 Ch. Kuffner19 membership in the Vienna Commercial Society in 1819 (see Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 262). 8 (Johann) Andreas Streicher (1761–1833), piano manufacturer and longtime friend of Beethoven’s. 9 Anton Halm (1789–1872), composer, pianist, and piano teacher in Vienna since 1815. In 1826, he made a piano four-hands arrangement of the Grosse Fuge, Op. 133. 10 Abbé Maximilian Stadler (1748–1833), composer and organist. Two years older than Salieri, he was highly respected among Viennese musicians. 11 Johann Baptist Stainer/Steiner von Felsburg (1756–1832), Court secretary; ennobled in 1813; father of Joseph Jacob Stainer von Felsburg (1786–after 1852), who signed below. 12 Count Ferdinand von Stockhammer (1790–1845), high official in the Imperial Treasury; member of the board of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. 13 Count Ferdinand von Palffy-Erdöd (1774–1840), owner and manager of the Theater an der Wien, 1813–1825. He and Beethoven had not gotten along since ca. 1814. Shortly after this petition was written, however, Count Palffy offered Beethoven an attractive “package deal” for the use of the theater and its personnel at his concert. Because Beethoven wanted to use Schuppanzigh as concertmaster (replacing the Theater an der Wien’s Franz Clement), he and Palffy could not reach an agreement. 14 Baron Eduard Schweiger von Lerchenfeld (1782–1860), Imperial treasurer and lieutenant colonel since 1811. 15 Count Johann Rudolph von Czernin (1757–1845), first chamberlain, president of the Academy of Fine Arts, and supporting member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. 16 Count Moritz von Fries (1777–1826), prominent banker of Protestant Swiss origins, director of the Austrian National Bank, and avid art collector. 17 Ignaz Franz Castelli (1781–1862), poet, theatrical director, and sometime journalist. Board member of the respectable Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde and a leader of the Ludlamshöhle artistic group that authored this petition. 18 Johann Ludwig Deinhardstein (1794–1859), dramatic poet; professor of aesthetics at the Theresianum since 1822. 19 Christoph (Johann Anton) Kuffner (1780–1846), official at the War Ministry, musically talented poet, author (with input from the composer) of the text of Beethoven’s

198

APPENDIX B

Fr. Nehammer, Provincial Secretary20 Stainer von Felsburg, Bank Liquidator21 Count Moritz von Dietrichstein22 Ig. Edler von Mosel, I.R. Court Councillor23 Carl Czerny24 Count Moritz von Lichnowsky25 Zmeskall26 Court Councillor Kiesewetter27 Dr. Leopold Sonnleithner28 Choral Fantasia, Op. 80. He also wrote the drama Tarpeja, for which Beethoven supplied a Triumphal March in C, WoO 2, in March, 1813. 20 Franz Nehammer (1778–1849), one of four secretaries in the Lower Austrian government; amateur violinist in the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. 21 Joseph Jacob Stainer von Felsburg (1786–after 1852), son of Johann Baptist Stainer (who signed above); liquidator/sequestrator in the Austrian National Bank. 22 Count Moritz von Dietrichstein-Proskau-Leslie (1775–1864), Hofmusikgraf/Court music administrator (1819–1826) and Court Theater director (1821–1826). 23 Ignaz (Franz) von Mosel (1772–1844), amateur violist, composer, arranger, conductor, vice-director of the Court Theaters since 1821; influential in the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. 24 Carl Czerny (1791–1857), pianist, composer, pedagogue, former student of Beethoven’s. On May 20, 1824, Beethoven approached Czerny to appear on the repeat concert of May 23, but he declined. 25 Count Moritz von Lichnowsky (1771–1837), brother of Prince Karl Lichnowsky and a longtime friend of Beethoven’s. He visited the composer frequently during the initial phases of planning for the Akademie of May 7, 1824. Once this petition was published with his noble name listed among its signers, however, he distanced himself from the composer. 26 Nikolaus Zmeskall von Domanowecz (1759–1833), Protestant, secretary in the Hungarian chancellery in Vienna, amateur violoncellist, and Beethoven’s longtime friend. Now almost totally housebound by gout, he lived in the vast Bürgerspital apartment complex between Kärntnerstrasse and the Lobkowitz Palace. He was brought in a sedan chair to the Akademie of May 7, 1824. 27 Raphael Georg Kiesewetter von Weisenbrunn (1773–1850), high official in the War Ministry, well trained in music, vice president of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde (1821–1843). An accomplished amateur music historian, he edited Kandler’s German edition of Baini’s biography of Palestrina (1834). 28 Leopold von Sonnleithner (1797–1873), the nephew of Beethoven’s Fidelio librettist Joseph Sonnleithner, musical amateur in the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde and a member of the board of the society’s concert series. He wrote an account of the rehearsals for and first performance of the Ninth Symphony: “Ad Vocem: Kontrabass-Rezitativ der 9.

THE LUDLAMSHÖHLE PETITION, LATE FEBRUARY, 1824

199

S.A. Steiner and Co.29 Anton Diabelli30 Lederer31 J.N. Bihler32 Sources: Autograph in the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Mus. ms. autogr. Beethoven 35, 21; listed in Bartlitz, p. 123. Printed versions in Schindler (1840), pp. 144–148; Schindler-Moscheles, pp. 97–99; Schindler (1860), II, pp. 60–63; Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 273–275; Thayer-Deiters-Riemann, V, pp. 67–69; Thayer-Krehbiel, III, pp. 153–155 (omits list of names); Thayer-Forbes, pp. 897–899 (restores list of names); Landon, Beethoven: A Documentary Study, pp. 359–360; Albrecht, Letters to Beethoven, No. 344; Brandenburg, No. 1784. Facsimile in Bory, p. 190; and John Knowles, “Die letzten Jahre,” in Beethoven: Mensch seiner Zeit, ed. Siegfried Kross (Bonn: Ludwig Rohrscheid, 1980), p. 122.

Symphonie von Beethoven,” Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, N.S. 2 (1864), pp. 245–246; trans. and ed. Walter Paul et al. as “The Contrabass Recitatives of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony at Its 1824 Premiere,” Journal of the Conductors’ Guild 8, No. 1 (Winter, 1987), pp. 38–39; and also by Max Rudolf in Beethoven Newsletter (San Jose, Cal.) 4, No. 3 (Winter, 1989), pp. 56–57. 29 Sigmund Anton Steiner (1773–1838), music publisher, whose shop in the Paternostergassel at the north end of the Graben was only a five-minute walk from the meeting place of the Ludlamshöhle, near the south end of the Graben. He was a longtime friend of Beethoven’s and a member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. 30 Anton Diabelli (1781–1858), pianist, composer, music publisher, and friend of Beethoven’s. 31 Probably Johann Lederer, an official, amateur violinist in the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde; or possibly Baron Karl Joseph Alois von Lederer (1772–1860), a banker (see Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon [Vienna, 1972], p. 84). 32 Dr. Johann N[epomuk] Bihler/Biehler, doctor of pharmaceutics, tutor to various wealthy households.

Appendix C

Vienna’s Principal Theaters and Halls in Beethoven’s Time Burgtheater: The Burgtheater’s building originated as the Court’s sixteenthcentury Ballhaus (indoor tennis courts) but went vacant after the tennis craze subsided. From 1741, it was converted into a Court Theater, later with an eastward extension into Michaelerplatz to enlarge the backstage areas. In the first years of the 1800s, a Resonanzkuppel (acoustical shell) was placed on the stage for the large-scaled Tonkünstler-Societät benefit concerts, but it was cumbersome and fell into disuse. Beethoven’s Piano Concerto in B-flat, Op. 19, was premiered on a TonkünstlerSocietät concert here in March, 1795, and his Piano Concerto in C, Op. 15, and Symphony No. 1 in C, on his own first benefit concert on April 2, 1800. In his ballet Creatures of Prometheus (March, 1801), he wrote for specific players within the Burgtheater’s orchestra, including harpist Josepha Müllner. Once his contract with the Theater an der Wien expired, Beethoven composed his Coriolan Overture for the Burgtheater’s orchestra in 1807 and the Egmont Overture and incidental music (with several specific passages for specific orchestral musicians) in early 1810. By 1810, the theater’s condition had declined to a point where the more physically demanding opera and ballet companies were moved to the Kärntnertor Theater, with the Burgtheater used almost exclusively for dramas. Its capacity was roughly 1,300, including boxes, regular seating, and standing places. It took nearly an hour to empty after a performance and was considered a firetrap. Even so, it was used until 1888. Sources: Weinzierl, pp. 61–70; Czeike, Vol. 1, pp. 522–523; Morrow, pp. 71–78; ÖML, Vol. 1, pp. 239–241. Kärntnertor Theater: A theater next to the Tor (Gate) leading to Kärnten (provincial Carinthia, on the way to Italy) was built in 1709 but burned completely in 1761. In its place (roughly the site of today’s Hotel Sacher), the Court built a new Kärntnertor Theater, larger than the Burgtheater (five tiers of boxes, seats, and standing places, compared to the Burg’s four), in 1763, with a new entry and facade added three years later. Its practical capacity was roughly 1,800 persons. Because the new building had been designed as a theater, it could accommodate the more elaborate scenery and space required by opera and ballet and from 1810 was used for those activities. It also proved a desirable venue for many benefit

VIENNA’S PRINCIPAL THEATERS AND HALLS IN BEETHOVEN’S TIME

201

concerts. Except for such improvements as ventilation through the ceiling to cool audiences in the warm months, the theater remained largely unchanged. Although composed for the Theater an der Wien’s orchestra in 1809, Beethoven’s Piano Concerto No. 5 received its first public performance in Vienna by Carl Czerny at a benefit performance at the Kärntnertor Theater in 1812. Similarly, the revised Fidelio received its premiere here in May, 1814, and was performed at the theater until 1819. Also premiere of the Horn Sonata with Punto in 1800. The Court of Emperor Franz found staging opera and ballet to be too expensive and, in 1821, leased the theater to the Italian impresario Domenico Barbaja, whose showcase composer was Gioacchino Rossini. Hoping to balance the repertory for patriotic patrons, Barbaja revived Fidelio for the young soprano Wilhelmine Schröder in November, 1822. Therefore, the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra and chorus of late 1822 were the ensembles that Beethoven had in mind when he composed the Ninth Symphony. Under these circumstances, the first performance of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony took place on May 7, 1824. Sources: Weinzierl, pp. 70–74; Klein, pp. 130–131 and 135–136; Czeike, Vol. 3, pp. 468–469; Morrow, pp. 78–83; ÖML, Vol. 2, pp. 966–967. Theater an der Wien: From the late 1780s, actor/playwright/impresario Emanuel Schikaneder had operated the 1,000-seat Theater auf der Wieden in the Freyhaus apartment complex in suburban Wieden, with successful fantasy operas such as Mozart’s Magic Flute (1791). Between 1797 and 1801, he and his backers built a new state-of-the-art theater, accommodating an uncomfortably packed audience of up to 2,400, a thousand feet north, across the Wien River and in suburban Laimgrube. When it opened on June 13, 1801, with augmented forces, the privately owned Theater an der Wien was far superior to either of the Court Theaters inside the walls. Either for the Theater itself or for its orchestra, Beethoven would compose his Symphonies Nos. 3 (Eroica), 4, 5, and 6 (Pastorale); Piano Concertos Nos. 3, 4, and 5; his Violin Concerto (including the piano version); Fidelio/Leonore (1804–1806); and Christus am Ölberge, among others, to include Symphonies Nos. 7 and 8, after his contract had expired. Beethoven initially admired its virtuoso concertmaster Franz Clement but by 1824 had become impatient with his showman’s flair. Even so, the theater itself remained an attractive potential venue for Beethoven’s Akademie to premiere the Ninth Symphony. Sources: Weinzierl, pp. 74–77; Morrow, pp. 85 and 88–90; Krzeszowiak, pp. 31–42. Theater in der Josephstadt: This theater, located within the northeast corner of Josefstädter Strasse (then Kaiserstrasse) and Piaristengasse in suburban Josephstadt, started out as a makeshift theater inside a restaurant in 1788. Over the years it was enlarged and improved until its lessee Karl Friedrich Hensler had it completely

202

APPENDIX C

renovated, but still within a courtyard of preexisting buildings, using plans by architect Joseph Kornhäusel in 1821–1822. For its grand reopening on October 3, 1822, Hensler obtained the use of Beethoven’s music for August von Kotzebue’s The Ruins of Athens (Pest, 1811–1812); adapted Kotzebue’s play under a new title, Die Weihe des Hauses (Consecration of the House); and commissioned Beethoven for a new Overture and a chorus with dance. Anton Schindler (see Appendix A), making his transition from lawyer to professional musician, was appointed administrative concertmaster (but not solo violinist) of the newly rebuilt theater. He may have been the go-between with Beethoven, who was summering in Baden, or Hensler (who also was active there) may have negotiated with the composer himself. The Overture was copied by Wenzel Schlemmer, Wenzel Rampl, and Mathias Wunderl (Court and private copyists), but the remainder of the copy work was probably by the Josephstadt’s head copyist, Peter Gläser, and his staff—the same copyists who would ultimately perform the majority of the copying work on the Ninth Symphony in spring, 1824. Sources: Weinzierl, pp. 79–80; Klein, p. 121; Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Hefte 60–65. Grosser Redoutensaal: The Redoutensäle (Imperial Ballrooms, large and small) were built in the 1740s and remodeled several times. The Grosser (Large) Redoutensaal had seats on its main floor and a balcony with further seating on three sides of the oblong, high-ceilinged room. It was often used for large-scale concerts but required scaffolding to raise the performers above the audience. Wildly exaggerated accounts place up to 3,000 or even 5,000 in the audience, but more recent and rational estimates suggest ca. 600 seated and perhaps an equal number standing, for a total of ca. 1,200 in the audience. The acoustic was considered more resonant than in the Kärntnertor Theater, but Carl Czerny considered it unsuitable for the performance of a pano concerto. Several concerts with Beethoven’s music took place here during the Congress of Vienna era (1814–1815), and, of course, Beethoven’s repeat Akademie of May 23, 1824, was held here. Sources: Weinzierl, pp. 99–102; Klein, pp. 136–137; Biba, “Concert Life,” p. 84; Morrow, pp. 102–107. Landständischer Saal: The assembly hall of the Lower Austrian Provincial Government (Landstand) was built in ca. 1710 and was used for smaller-scaled concerts from 1813 to ca. 1840. It had excellent acoustics and was available rent free, but it could only hold ca. 500 people and could not be heated. No work of Beethoven’s was ever premiered there, but during the preparations for the Ninth Symphony, the chorus rehearsed upstairs and the orchestra downstairs. Sources: Weinzierl, pp. 70–74; Biba, “Concert Life,” p. 86; Czeike, Vol. 3, pp. 468–469; ÖML, Vol. 2, pp. 966–967; Albrecht, Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Hefte 64–65.

Appendix D

Orchestral Personnel, Kärntnertor Theater, 1822/1824 N.B.: The basic list below represents the personnel in fall, 1822, with annotations and supplements to reflect, if sometimes speculatively, the orchestra for the first performances of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 on May 7 and 23, 1824. Personnel are often listed alphabetically within their sections. Theater’s name abbreviated here as K-Theater.

Conductors Gyrowetz, Adalbert (b. Budweis, February 20, 1763; d. Vienna, March 19, 1850). Res (1822): City, Minoritenplatz No. 41. Kinsky [Kinky], Joseph (b. Olmütz, ca. 1790; d. Olmütz, February 2, 1853). Res (1822): Windmühle, Kothgasse No. 66. Weigl, Joseph (b. Eisenstadt, March 28, 1766; d. Vienna, February 3, 1846). Res (1822): City, Sailerstätte No. 805. Umlauf, Michael (b. Vienna, August 9, 1781; d. Baden nr. Vienna, June 20, 1842), violinist, son of composer Ignaz Umlauf (1746–1796). Beginning as a section member at the K-Theater, he became a staff conductor. He conducted (or coconducted) Beethoven’s benefit concerts of 1813–1814; then Fidelio, 1814–1823; and Beethoven’s concerts of May 7 and 23, 1824. He was often at odds with the Italian lessees of the theater from 1821. Res (1822): City, his own house (from his wife’s family), Untere Breunerstrasse No. 1130.

Additional Conductor (starting spring, 1823) Kreutzer, Conradin (b. Messkirch, Baden, Germany, November 22, 1780; d. Riga, December 14, 1849), peripatetic pianist, composer, conductor. Formerly a law student, came to Vienna to study music in 1804. Played continuo pianoforte in Haydn’s Creation (university Aula, March 27, 1808). From 1810, toured Germany and Switzerland, occupying several posts. In December, 1822, returned to Vienna (opera Libussa; text by Joseph Carl Bernard), remaining as a visible conductor until 1827, leaving for Paris, then returning again (1829–1835). He coached the

204

APPENDIX D

vocal soloists before Beethoven’s Akademies of May, 1824. Best known for his Das Nachtlager vor Granada (Josephstadt Theater, 1834).

Concertmasters (possibly a total of 24 violins, including concertmasters) Katter, Joseph, also member of the Hofkapelle (b. Eisenstadt, Hungary, ca. 1771; d. Vienna, February 25, 1841); possibly through Esterházy influence, joined K-Theater on October 27, 1795; promoted to Burgtheater, May 1, 1797; one of four theater concertmasters by 1807; probably moved back to K-Theater (now Opera company) by December, 1810; also conducted for ballets in 1823. Remained single. Also Domkantor in St. Stephan’s Cathedral. He died of allgemeine Lähmung (general debility). Res (1822): City, Kärntnerstrasse No. 1043. Hildebrand/Hildenbrand, Johann (b. 1790), began as second concertmaster in ca. fall, 1823, and lasted perhaps a year in the position, possibly until the end of Barbaja’s lease in March, 1825. He was single at the time. Res (ca. 1822/1823): City, Kärntnerstrasse No. 1005, Apartment 2.

Concertmaster for Beethoven’s Concerts Schuppanzigh, Ignaz (b. Vienna, July 20, 1776; d. Vienna, March 2, 1830), brilliant but idiosyncratic violinist, led String Quartets for Prince Lichnowsky and Count/Prince Rasumovsky; led the summer concerts in the Augarten; became Beethoven’s preferred orchestral concertmaster after ca. 1805. After the dissolution of the Rasumovsky Quartet at the end of 1815, he toured Germany and east to Russia, then south to Lemberg (Lvov) until returning to Vienna on ca. April 15, 1823. He then established his own Quartet (with Karl Holz, Joseph Weiss, and Joseph Linke) and resumed summer orchestral concerts in the Augarten. Applied for Expektant in the Hofkapelle, March 2, 1824; regular member in 1827. In his late years, his extreme corpulence took a toll on his performance stamina. Died of a stroke; estate included an Amati violin. Wife: Barbara Killitschky; stepdaughter, Therese (b. ca. 1819). Res (1830): City, Schultergasse No. 395.

Violins Breymann/Breumann, Anton (b. Obersulz nr. Vienna, November 25, 1762; d. Vienna, September 24, 1841), violinist in Prince Liechtenstein’s Kapelle, 1797; joined K-Theater orchestra on September 23, 1810; moved to Burgtheater in 1826; married Barbara Girsink (b. Neubistritz, Bohemia, ca. 1773/1774; d. Vienna, May 10, 1826). She died of Lungensucht (tuberculosis); he died of Alterschwäche (weakness of old age). Res (1822): St. Ulrich, Roveranigasse No. 72.

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

205

Hellmesberger, Georg, also professor at the Conservatory (b. Vienna, April 24, 1800; d. Vienna, August 16, 1873); became a major figure in Viennese musical life into the period of Johannes Brahms and Anton Bruckner; biographical entries in most major musical encyclopedias. Res (1822): City, Schulerstrasse No. 403 [sic]. Leithner/Leitner, Carl (dates unknown, possibly retired or died ca. 1820–1822), violinist. Joined K-Theater orchestra in October, 1810; played in the second violin section in Beethoven’s concerts of 1813–1814. Member of second violin section of K-Theater in June, 1814; had moved to first section by 1817 but back to seconds by 1819 and 1820. No longer present for Beethoven’s concerts in May, 1824. Mayseder, Joseph, also member (soloist) of the Hofkapelle (b. Vienna, October 26, 1789; d. Vienna, November 21, 1863), violinist. Studied with Ignaz Schuppanzigh, occasionally playing second in his String Quartet; joined the K-Theater’s orchestra on September 23, 1810, and was “solo player” by 1822. He was Court chamber musician and a major figure in Vienna’s musical life by 1822 and became a fashionable violin teacher. Biographical entries in most major musical encyclopedias. Res (1822): City, Naglergasse No. 307 (his own house, inherited from his father). Mayer/Meier, Mathias (b. Vienna, June 14, 1800); possibly the son of Mathias Mayer and wife, Theresia (d. September 9, 1807); stepson of musician Joseph Eisenfest (1775–ca. 1830), effective February 14, 1817. Balletmaster (unconfirmed), K-Theater, 1831. Second violinist to at least 1845. Res (1822): Laimgrube, Pfarrgasse No. 54. Menzel, Joseph (b. 1804/1805); son of clothing accessories dealer Joseph Menzel (b. ca. 1760/1762). In 1820, he obtained promissory decree to become member of K-Theater; he was too short for military conscription. Listing in Ziegler erroneously implies that he was son of K-Theater violinist Zeno Franz Menzel (October 12, 1757–November 19, 1823), who may have retired by fall, 1822. Res (1822): City, am Hof, at the Hahnenbeiss No. 322. Otter, Ludwig (b. ca. 1780s; d. after 1867), violinist. Son of Hofkapelle violinist Joseph Otter. Became a member of the orchestra of the Court Theaters as second violinist in May, 1807; was a member of the first violin section of the K-Theater by June, 1814, through 1820; not listed in Ziegler in fall, 1822, but still in the Court’s records for 1826. On October 25, 1822, he joined the Hofkapelle and was still active there in 1867. Also played in Otto Hatwig’s and Leopold Sonnleithner’s house orchestras in the 1810s. Res (1821–1822): Franziskanerplatz No. 920, Apartment 18.

206

APPENDIX D

Rabel, Jacob (b. Vienna, ca. 1758/1759; d. Vienna, January 1, 1826), joined Court Theater orchestras after 1808; also dancing instructor. Married Magdalene by ca. 1794; sons Jakob (b. ca. 1796), musician, and Adam (interior painter). Died of a Schlagfluss (stroke). Res: variously Leopoldstadt Nos. 216, 282, and 330 (where he died). Staufer, Franz (b. Vienna, March 25, 1803), son of musical instrument maker Georg Staufer (b. 1778); passport granted to Lemberg, Poland, October 22, 1819; leave granted for 1 year in Graz (March 30, 1821), renewed to May 22, 1823; leave granted for 1 year in Berdiczow/Kwarsawa, Russia. Res (1822): [Laimgrube] an der Wien, Obere Gestättengasse No. 132 (father’s residence). May have been absent at the time of Beethoven’s concerts in May, 1824. Steiner, Franz (b. ca. 1789); played in Theater an der Wien’s orchestra; substitute, presumably K-Theater, from December 31, 1820. Married, but wife died young; daughter Theresia (b. 1812); son Franz (b. 1816). Res (ca. 1819): Laimgrube No. 37, Apartment 2. Strebinger, Mathias, also a singer (b. Baden bei Wien, ca. 1807; d. Vienna, February 12, 1874), joined the K-Theater orchestra by fall, 1822; employed here and, from 1843, in the Hofkapelle until his death. Married by ca. 1829; children. He died of Lymphdrüsen-entzündung (inflammation of lymph glands). Res (1822): City, Currentgasse No. 403. Tischler, Franz (b. Herzogenburg [west of Perchtoldsdorf ], ca. 1793/1798; d. Vienna, April 28/29, 1861), also became member of the Hofkapelle. Remained single. He died of Herzleiden (heart disease). Res (1822): Wieden, Schleifmühlgasse No. 549. Tutowitsch, Benedict (b. Boskowitz, Moravia, ca. 1777/1778), employed by East Gallician Princess Lubomirsky in Vienna, 1804; joined K-Theater orchestra on December 1, 1806; transferred to Burgtheater in 1827. Res (1822): City, Currentgasse No. 405. Wranitzky, Anton (b. Vienna, ca. 1795/1796; d. Vienna, July 8, 1829), son of Lobkowitz violinist/Kapellmeister (and deceased K-Theater concertmaster) Anton Wranitzky (1761–1820); member of Theater an der Wien’s orchestra by 1815. Employed by the Burgtheater on February 1, 1819 (replacing Wenzel Krupka); remained through at least early 1822, when he was considered “excellent.” Transferred to the K-Theater by fall, 1822. Died of Brustwassersucht (dropsy of the chest) and Leberverhärtung (hardening/cirrhosis of the liver). Res (1822): City, Annagasse No. 1001.

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

207

Supplemental Violins Böhm, Joseph (b. Pest, March 4, 1795; d. Vienna, March 28, 1876), studied with his father and with the traveling Pierre Rode. He came to Vienna, studied with Schuppanzigh, and became professor at the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s Consevatorium from 1819 and member of the Hofkapelle since 1821. At Beethoven’s concerts of May, 1824, he sat next to Schuppanzigh, first stand, inside seat. Holz, Karl (b. Vienna, March 3, 1799; d. Vienna, November 9, 1858), official in the Lower Austrian Provincial Accounting Office, gifted amateur violinist, played second violin in Schuppanzigh’s Quartet from June, 1823. Active member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Probably in mid-July, 1825, he became Beethoven’s unpaid secretary (much as Schindler had been), which lasted until Beethoven’s departure for Gneixendorf with nephew in late September, 1826. By then, Holz was engaged to Elisabeth Maria von Bogner, and he did not resume his former duties when Beethoven returned on December 3, 1826. Continued playing second violin in the Quartets of Schuppanzigh and Joseph Böhm. Res (1822): City, Mölkerbastei No. 84. Piringer, Ferdinand (b. Unterretzbach, Lower Austria, October 18, 1780; d. Vienna, November 11, 1829), official in the Court Treasury, accomplished dilettante violinist and violist. He actively helped Beethoven in organizing his concerts of May, 1824, but to appease concertmaster Schuppanzigh (who did not like sitting near dilettantes), he may have played viola (q.v.) rather than violin for the performances. Res (1822): City, Schlossergasse No. 598. Jansa, Leopold (b. Wildenschwert, Bohemia, March 23, 1795; d. Vienna, January 24, 1875), came to Vienna in 1817 to study law but became an accomplished violinist by 1820. Went to the Brunsvik Kapelle in Hungary in 1823 but returned to Vienna in 1824 and the Hofkapelle by August, 1824. Hired (over Schuppanzigh) by the K-Theater on ca. February 19, 1824 (Heft 56, Blätter 24r, 28r, and 31v). Leopold Sonnleithner recalled that he was in the violin section for Beethoven’s concerts of May, 1824. Rzehaczek, Franz (1758/1764–1840), senior secretary in the Court Chancellery, amateur violinist, member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, and lent many of his historically valuable stringed instruments for Beethoven’s concerts in May, 1824, so may have performed himself. Res (1822): Schulerstrasse 846. Fradl, Karl (dates unknown), violinist, member of the Representative Body, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. In April, 1824, he signed the posted request for volunteers for Beethoven’s concerts (Appendix F). Res (1822): Mariahilf, Kleine Kirchengasse No. 24.

208

APPENDIX D

Fischer, Johann Nepomuk (b. Vienna, 1774), Lower Austrian Civil Building Construction Administration, amateur violinist and sometime concertmaster. In April, 1824, he signed the posted request for volunteers for Beethoven’s concerts (Appendix F). Res (1822): Herrengasse No. 252. Gauster, Martin (dates unknown), amateur violinist and sometime concertmaster, Röhrich salon. In April, 1824, he signed the posted request for volunteers for Beethoven’s concerts (Appendix F). Res (1822): Wieden, Salvatorgasse No. 234. Becker, Joseph (dates unknown), amateur violinist, member of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde; had performed a solo on their concert of November 3, 1822, and would again on February 4, 1825. Res (1822): Stadt, Haarmarkt No. 646.

Violas (possibly a total of 10) Barton, Johann (b. Zumberg/Schumberg, Bohemia, 1777; d. Vienna, February 26, 1848); joined K-Theater orchestra, March 1, 1802; pensioned in 1826; played in Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts. He never married but in 1820 lived with Rosalia von Moliver (b. 1784). Died of Lungenlähmung (pulmonary edema). Res (1820 and 1822): Josephstadt, Kaisergasse [Josephstädter Strasse] No. 131, Wohnpartei 5; (1848): Breitenfeld No. 8. Müller, presumably Joseph (b. Thury/Lichtenthal, suburban Vienna, ca. 1800). Deutschmeister Regiment reserve status until July 27, 1825; married Josepha Herr (b. Vienna, ca. 1802/1803; d. Vienna, July 8, 1826, 11 days after giving birth to son Anton). Res (1826): Alservorstadt No. 257. Schreiber, Anton, also violinist and bookkeeper (b. Jaromirsch, Bohemia, ca. 1766/1767; d. presumably Vienna, after 1830); employed in National Theater, Prague, ca. 1795/1796, probably also by Prince Lobkowitz there. Moved to Lobkowitz’s ensemble in Vienna by January, 1797; played in Schuppanzigh’s String Quartet resident there through 1807; probably lent at times to Theater an der Wien, ca. 1803–1808; joined K-Theater orchestra on September 23, 1810; forcibly retired in September, 1830. Played premieres of Beethoven’s String Quartets, Opp. 18 and 59; probably all 9 Symphonies. Married Katharina Mittis, June 10, 1810; no surviving children. Res (1822): City, Augustinergasse No. 1157. Stichey/Stichay, Joseph, joined K-Theater on November 1, 1803; played in Beethoven’s concerts of 1813–1814. Res (1822): Laimgrube, Kothgasse No. 2 (had lived there at least since early 1807).

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

209

Supplemental Violas Weiss, Franz (b. Glatz, Silesia, January 18, 1778; d. Vienna, January 25, 1830), violist and composer. Came to Vienna in 1794, became a member of Prince Lichnowsky’s Quartet (with Schuppanzigh) and later Count/Prince Rasumovsky’s Quartet. After dismissing the other members of his Quartet at the end of 1815, Rasumovsky retained Weiss as chamber virtuoso to administer his music. When Schuppanzigh returned to Vienna in mid-April, 1823, he reorganized the Quartet privately, with Karl Holz (second violin), Weiss (viola), and Linke (violoncello). Weiss also played in a quartet led by Joseph Böhm from 1821. Tall and thin, he nevertheless died five weeks before the corpulent Schuppanzigh, who was less than two years older. Res (1822): Landstrasse, Rauchfangkehrergasse No. 78. Piringer, Ferdinand (b. Unterretzbach, Lower Austria, October 18, 1780; d. Vienna, November 11, 1829), official in the Court Treasury, accomplished dilettante violinist and violist. Active as a chamber music player and, from 1824, conductor of the Concerts spirituels, made up largely of dilettantes. On June 26, 1823, he played second viola in Beethoven’s String Quintet, Op. 29, at a Schuppanzigh Quartet concert. Schuppanzigh did not like to sit near Piringer in orchestral situations, so he may have played viola rather than violin in Beethoven’s concerts of May, 1824. Res (1822): City, Schlossergasse No. 598. Kaufmann, Joseph (b. Gaubitsch, Lower Austria, February 24 1788; d. Vienna, March 25, 1860), official in the Supreme Court, violinist and violist. Initially a member of the Sonnleithner family salon, then the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s concerts from 1823. He later became one of the Gesellschaft’s most prominent violists in chamber music (especially Leopold Jansa’s Quartet), November, 1832, through at least March, 1834. In April, 1824, he signed the posted request for volunteers for Beethoven’s concerts (Appendix F). Res (1822): Schottenbastei No. 1167. Sonnleithner, Leopold von (b. Vienna, November 15, 1797; d. Vienna, March 4, 1873), came from a prominent family of lawyers, also amateur musicians. He sang and played the viola, was instrumental in recruiting amateur singers from the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde for Beethoven’s concerts of May, 1824, but may then have played viola in the orchestra. He left reminiscences concerning the contrabass recitatives at the premiere of the Ninth Symphony.

Violoncelli (possibly a total of 8) Dont, Joseph Valentin (b. Nieder-Georgenthal, Bohemia, October 15, 1776; d. Vienna, December 14, 1833), entered K-Theater orchestra, September 1, 1804; married Theresia (b. Vienna, ca. 1776; d. December 27, 1847); musician sons

210

APPENDIX D

Ludwig (b. ca. 1802/1803); Franz (b. ca. 1805/1807); violinist Jacob (b. Vienna/ Neubau, March 2, 1815), member of the Hofkapelle, 1841–after 1867. Joseph died of Schlag- und Stickfluss (stroke and suffocative catarrh); Theresia of lung disease. Res (1812–1822): Neubau, beginning of the Wendelstadt No. 130; (ca. 1830–1832): Josephstadt No. 131, Apartment 13; (1833 and 1847): Neubau No. 79. Merk, Joseph, also Court and chamber musician and professor at the Conservatory (b. Schottenfeld, suburban Vienna, January 18, 1795; d. Oberdöbling/Vienna, June 16, 1852); in youth, lived on the northwest corner of Florianigasse and Kochgasse in suburban Josephstadt. Joined K-Theater on October 1, 1812 (some sources indicate 1810). Married Helene (b. ca. 1799). Res (1822): City, Neuer Markt No. 1066. Weidel/Weudl, Franz (b. Raudnitz [a Lobkowitz seat], Bohemia, ca. 1795). Wife, Rosalia (b. Vienna, 1801), seems to have died by mid-1820s. Res (1822): Wieden, Favoritenlinienstrasse No. 164. Wranitzky, Friedrich (b. Vienna, May 13, 1798; d. Dresden, ca. February, 1840), violoncellist. Son of Lobkowitz violinist/Kapellmeister (and deceased K-Theater concertmaster) Anton Wranitzky (1761–1820). In September, 1815, he became a cellist in the Burgtheater and probably transferred to the K-Theater over the summer of 1822. Married Maria (b. 1798) but lived separately by 1830. In the later 1820s, he left Vienna and played at the Königstadt Theater, Berlin, but returned to Vienna temporarily by 1830, returning to Germany in 1834. Res (1821): City, Spitalsplatz No. 1101 [Lobkowitz Palace]; (1822): City, Kumpfgasse No. 825.

Supplemental Violoncelli Linke, Joseph (b. Drachenberg/Trachenberg, Prussian Silesia, June 8, 1783; d. Vienna, March 26, 1837), violoncellist. Son of Joseph Linke, an official. He played in Count (later Prince) Rasumovsky’s Quartet, 1807–1816, joined the Theater an der Wien’s orchestra as principal violoncellist in June, 1818, and was there in 1822. Later moved to Court Opera at the K-Theater until his death. His tone could sound like a contrabass, and Schubert wrote the second (pizzicato) cello part in the String Quintet in C, D. 956, for him in 1828. Married Barbara Pirkner/ Pürker (b. Vienna, ca. 1788; d. May 9, 1847) at St. Rochus Church on April 22, 1811; violinist Ignaz Schuppanzigh was witness. Son Karl (b. November 5, 1814; d. after 1861), violoncellist in K-Th orchestra by 1847. Joseph died of cirrhosis of the liver and dropsy. His estate amounted to 71 fl., including a violoncello valued at 10 fl. Res (1811 and 1814): Landstrasse, Rauchfangkehrergasse No. 79 [two buildings west of Rasumovsky Palace, renumbered as 82 in 1821 and 94 in 1830]; (1822): Windmühle, Weisse Taube, Kothgasse No. 34; (1837): Laimgrube, Glacis No. 23; (1847, Barbara): Windmühle, Laimgruben-Hauptstrasse No. 10.

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

211

Hauschka, Vincenz (b. Mies, Bohemia, January 21, 1766; d. Vienna-Hietzing, September 13, 1840), Court official, accomplished violoncellist; a du-friend of Beethoven’s. After professional musical training in Prague, he toured through Germany to Vienna. In 1792, he obtained a position in the Imperial Accounting Office but maintained his proficiency on the cello. Officer in the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde; sometime conductor of its concerts. His estate included 1 violoncello, 1 viola, and 2 violins (enough for a private string quartet). Remained single. Res (1825): Schottengasse No. 103; (1840): City, Petersplatz, Aug Gottes No. 574; (summer, 1840): Hietzing No. 88. Gross, Friedrich (dates unknown), amateur violoncellist; participated in the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s concerts from 1824. On April 1, 1824, he performed on a chamber concert and later that month signed the posted request for volunteers for Beethoven’s concerts (Appendix F). Res (1822): Steindlgasse No. 430. Geissler, Johann Baptist (dates unknown), amateur violoncellist and music librarian. In April, 1824, he signed the posted request for volunteers for Beethoven’s concerts (Appendix F). Res (1822); Mölkerbastei No. 96.

Contrabasses (possibly a total of 6) Grams, Anton (b. Markersdorf, Bohemia, October 29, 1752; d. Vienna, May 18, 1823); choirboy in Breslau, ca. 1762; master’s degree (philosophy), University of Breslau, 1774; contrabass study with Joseph Natter in Prague; Italian Opera, Prague; principal contrabassist, National Theater, Prague, 1783–1801, with brief periods in Salzburg (1784) and as director of the Vaterländisches Theater, Prague (1795–1797); copyist of first full score of Mozart’s Don Giovanni (1787). Moved to Vienna as principal contrabassist, Theater an der Wien, ca. late 1801; Esterházy Orchestra, 1810; joined K-Theater orchestra, ca. spring, 1813; played principal in Beethoven’s concerts, 1813–1814. Reputed as a strong principal but also a discrete concertino player, Grams played the premieres of most of Beethoven’s orchestral works, 1803–1815. Married Theresia Draxl/Drechsler (b. ca. 1759; d. July 17, 1805) August 20, 1780; sons Matthäus (b. ca. 1788), August (d. September 13, 1810), Leopold (b. ca. 1801). Grams died of Schleimschlag (stroke); his funeral took place at the church of suburban Neulerchenfeld (where son Matthäus was chaplain); the K-Theater personnel performed an extraordinary memorial service (Mozart’s Requiem) here on July 5, 1823. Res (1822): City, Kärntnerstrasse No. 1039 (directly behind K-Theater). N.B.: Grams died a year before Beethoven’s concerts of May, 1824; the composer felt his loss greatly. Melzer/Mölzer, Joseph, also contrabassoonist; Court and chamber musician (b. St. Gotthard, Hungary, November 9, 1763; d. Vienna, June 28, 1832). Replaced

212

APPENDIX D

deceased Franz Kammermayer at the K-Theater on April 1, 1800, and remained there until Barbaja’s economies terminated him ca. November 1, 1823. Along with hornist Hradetzky, petitioned for employment in the Burgtheater as late as 1827 with no success. Joined the Hofkapelle on June 21, 1813, remaining until his death. Married Eva Huber (b. Zell, Bavaria, ca. 1757/1760; d. Vienna, January 12, 1853). He died of Leberverhärtung (cirrhosis of the liver); Eva died of Alterschwäche (weakness of old age) at 96. Res (1822): St. Ulrich, Capuzinerstrasse No. 70. N.B.: Although Barbaja had terminated Melzer, Beethoven probably hired him back for his May, 1824, concerts. Leithner/Leitner, Franz [Karl] (b. Vienna, ca. 1783/1785; d. Vienna, March 20, 1825), contrabassist. Joined Theater an der Wien’s orchestra after 1809 (definitely by 1812), still there in 1817; played in Beethoven’s concerts of 1813–1814; joined K-Theater orchestra in 1818 (replacing Bartha/Parta, d. January 27, 1818). Married Theresia (b. 1786) by ca. 1813; only surviving son, Carl (b. ca. 1814). He died of Nervenfieber (typhus). Estate amounted to 42 fl., but no instruments. Res (1822): Rossau, Langegasse No. 130 (owned by Liechtenstein, directly opposite the palace’s front gate; the Leithners seemingly moved there between 1819 and 1822). Family lived in Apartment 5 while contrabassist was alive; lived in Apartment 6 after his death. Perschl, Joseph (b. Vienna, ca. 1784; d. Vienna, June 2, 1856), son of Leopoldstadt Theater contrabassist Michael Perschl (ca. 1755–1805); joined K-Theater as choral singer in 1804; transferred to the orchestra on September 1, 1821; and then as contrabassist in the Hofkapelle (replacing Sedler) from August 1, 1829, until his death. He remained single; two stepchildren (niece and nephew). He died of Lungenlähmung (pulmonary edema). Res (1822): Leopoldstadt, Kleine Fuhrmannsgasse No. 470.

Supplemental Contrabasses Pollak/Polak, Anton (b. Janowitz, Bohemia, ca. 1774; d. Vienna, March 6, 1848), contrabassist and contrabassoonist at the Burgtheater. Played contrabass in the Liebhaber Concerts of 1807–1808. Entered Court service in March, 1808. He and Raab (below) played contrabassoon in Beethoven’s concerts of 1813–1814; Burgtheater (contrabass) by June, 1814, through his death. Wife, Elisabeth, née Jakob, survived him; she remained illiterate. Children (4) included Johann (b. ca. 1814), orchestra member at the Leopoldstadt Theater in 1848; and Franz (b. ca. 1817), musician in 1841 and 1848. Anton died of Übersetzung der Gicht auf die Lunge (transfer of gout to the lungs). Res (1822): Leopoldstadt, Donaustrasse No. 93; and (1848): Leopoldstadt, Kleine Pfarrgasse No. 187. N.B.: Beethoven would surely have hired Pollak and Raab for his May, 1824, concerts.

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

213

Raab, Ignaz (b. Hohlen, Kreis Leitmeritz, Bohemia, 1766/1769; d. Vienna, July 4, 1838), contrabassist and contrabassoonist at the Burgtheater. Entered Court service in April, 1810. He and Pollak (above) played contrabassoon in Beethoven’s concerts of 1813–1814; Burgtheater (contrabass) by June, 1814, through his death. First wife: Barbara (b. 1774; d. March 29, 1823). Second wife: Theresia (b. 1804); daughter, Leopoldine (b. 1825). Ignaz died of Brustwassersucht (dropsy of the chest). Res (1822–1825): Spittelberg, Fuhrmannsgasse No. 82; and (1838): Neubau, Neubau Hauptstrasse No. 265. N.B.: Beethoven would surely have hired Raab and Pollak for his May, 1824, concerts. Röhrich, Anton (b. ca. 1785; d. Vienna, September 13, 1832), wealthy merchant, played all strings and horn but specialized on the contrabass. Had his own musical salon; played violoncello in the Theater an der Wien’s orchestra in fall, 1822, and for Gesellschaft concerts from 1826. In April, 1824, he signed the posted request for volunteers for Beethoven’s concerts (Appendix F). Res (1822): Neuwiedener Hauptstrasse No. 309 (his own house).

Flutes (total of 4) Öhler, Georg (also violin in 1822), joined the K-Theater orchestra on April 20, 1805; still there 1838 and 1845. Also called “Ehler” but signed himself “Oeller” in 1826. Res (1822): Lichtenthal, Kirchengasse No. 48. Scholl, Carl (b. Quolkiev/Czulkow, Russian Poland, January 8, 1778; d. Vienna, February 12, 1854), spent his youth in “Germany.” He was a member of the Leopoldstadt Theater orchestra by September, 1795, and joined K-Theater orchestra on May 1, 1797. Schindler noted that Beethoven sought his opinion concerning the technical capabilities of the flute, probably most consistently after the retirement of the Theater an der Wien’s Anton Dreyssig. Wife, Barbara (b. ca. 1788/1794); daughters Anna (b. ca. 1810/1811), Theresia (b. ca. 1811/1812), Carolina (b. ca. 1812/1814). Carl was joined in Vienna by Simon Scholl (ca. 1787/1788–1832, seemingly his brother), violinist in the Leopoldstadt Theater orchestra in 1814. He was named coguardian for Simon’s two daughters in 1832. Carl died of Lungenlähmung (pulmonary edema). Res (early 1820s): City No. 963, Apt. 7. Zierer, Franz (b. Gmunden, 1796; d. Vienna, 1882), was principal flutist of the K-Theater in 1838 and 1845; professor at the Conservatory. Res (1822): City, Komödiengassel No. 1040.

Supplemental Flute Khayll, Aloys (b. Hermanův Mestec, Bohemia, June 3, 1791; d. ViennaOberdöbling, December 18, 1866). Son of a schoolteacher; brothers Joseph

214

APPENDIX D

(oboe) and Anton (trumpet) also active in Vienna. Aloys also played piccolo. Studied with Ludwig Gehring (Burgtheater); orchestra member at Theater an der Wien probably from June, 1808. Moved to Burgtheater by ca. 1809; remained there, ultimately with great honors, celebrating anniversary in 1858. Played in Beethoven’s concerts of 1808 and 1813–1814. Piccolo parts in Symphonies No. 5, 6, and 9, plus Egmont, Wellingtons Sieg, and Der glorreiche Augenblick were written for him. Professor, Conservatory of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Wife: Katharina (married 1817, Paulanerkirche); at least 2 sons, 4 daughters. Res (1817): Wieden No. 428 [renumbered as 533 in 1821 and 784 in 1830]; (before 1830): Wieden No. 525 [renumbered as 174 in 1821 and 328 in 1830]; (1834): Josephstadt, Kaiserstrasse, Fleischhauerhaus; (1836): Alsergrund/Josephstadt, Kochgasse No. 62; retired to Oberdöbling.

Oboes (total of 4) Khayll, Joseph, also Court and chamber musician (b. Hermanův Mestec nr. Chrudim, Bohemia, August 20, 1781; d. Vienna, January 23, 1829); son of Karlskirche organist; received training at Wiener Neustadt; substituted at K-Theater, 1804–1806. Regimental Kapellmeister, 1806–1812 (with brief period as soldier); joined K-Theater on May 1, 1812, presumably as principal oboist. Trio with brothers Aloys (flute) and Anton (trumpet), 1817–1823; duo with Aloys (for which Moscheles composed Concertino, 1818). Married Theresia Mayer (b. ca. 1788), May 14, 1811; 7 children, among them Burgtheater (unpaid) violinist Joseph (August 24, 1813–July 28, 1839). Because of tuberculosis, moved to violin or viola section late in 1828. Death of Lungengeschwür (pulmonary abscess, but really tuberculosis). Res (1822): Wieden, Favoritenlinienstrasse No. 164. Mollnik (no further information at time of writing); second oboist in fall, 1822. Uhlmann, Jacob (b. Vienna/Altlerchenfeld, December 19, 1803; d. Vienna, November 18, 1850). Son of oboist and wind-instrument maker (Johann) Tobias Uhlmann (b. Kronach, Bavaria, June 8, 1776; d. May 12, 1838), who, in turn, was the son of a master turner. He received his first instruction on the clarinet from his father (second oboist at the Theater an der Wien) but then, in May, 1821, entered the newly founded instrumental wing of the Conservatorium as an oboe student of Joseph Sellner and, reportedly, was soon substituting for his father. At K-Theater, sometime after fall, 1822, at the recommendation of Kapellmeister Joseph Weigl, he presumably sat second to Khayll but was called “solo player” and also played English horn. He had already begun as a wind-instrument maker in 1824. In January, 1825, he received a call to the Royal Kapelle in Stuttgart but then presumably played the 1826–1827 and 1827–1828 seasons in Frankfurt am Main’s City Theater. He received an invitation to North America but did not accept it, instead returning to Vienna to enter into his father’s instrument-making

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

215

business. He seemingly replaced Khayll as principal at the K-Theater in late 1828. Member of the Hofkapelle (replacing Sellner, d. May 18, 1843) until his own death; similarly appointed at the Conservatory. Entered Tonkünstler-Societät on March 26, 1839 (member no. 298). Married Anna (still living in 1871) by June, 1836. Son Jacob (b. March 21, 1837; d. November 10, 1871) followed in father’s footsteps. Jacob the elder died of Typhus (original designation and spelling). Res (1822 and 1831): Laimgrube/Spittelberg No. 189, Apartment 17; (1850): Spittelberg No. 17.

Supplemental Oboe Krähmer, Ernest Johann (b. Dresden, March 30, 1795; d. Vienna, January 16, 1837), principal oboist, simultaneously (from September, 1822) I.R. Court and chamber musician. His mother, née Trübenser/Trübensee, was related to the Viennese Burgtheater’s principal oboist, Georg Triebensee (1746–1813). Attended the Saxon Royal Military Academy in Annaburg (15 miles north of Torgau), ca. 1805–1810; then played as a Dresden city musician under Gottfried Krebs (d. 1816, also a teacher of bassoonist Mittag) until he entered Saxon Royal Service in ca. 1813. After a brief period in the army, he moved to Vienna and entered the Burgtheater orchestra on February 1, 1815, replacing Esslair/Ellsler, and played there until his death. In September, 1822, entered the Hofkapelle as an Expektant, ultimately (late 1828) replacing the incapacitated Joseph Khayll, who died on January 23, 1829. Thus Krähmer was probably the second Lutheran [evangelisch], after Mittag in 1824, to hold a position in the Hofkapelle. He consistently gave his name as Ernest and not Ernst. On September 19 (but registered on September 21), 1822, he married the clarinettist Caroline Schleicher (b. Stockach, Baden, December 17, 1794; d. ViennaFünfhaus, April 19, 1873) and made concert tours with her through Austria and south Russia (November, 1822–March, 1823), Hungary (winter, 1823), Bohemia and Dresden (summer, 1825), Salzburg, southern Germany, Switzerland, and the Rheinlands (August, 1834–January, 1835). From ca. 1823 to ca. 1832, they had five surviving children. Caroline originally suggested cellist Santi Hueber as coguardian but ended up with Johann Ziegler, municipal wind-instrument maker (City, Kärntnerstrasse, corner of Weihburggasse, No. 941). Ernest died of Lungenlähmung (pulmonary edema). Res (1822): City, Bischofgasse No. 638 (same building as bassoonist Mittag); (1837): City, Fähnrichshof in the Singerstrasse No. 884. Caroline’s death date courtesy Dr. Michael Lorenz (December 26, 2020). Krähmer is mentioned positively several times in Beethoven’s conversation books and would have been the logical person to hire. If Mollnik was gone by May, 1824, the next logical hire to make 4 oboes would have been Joseph Sellner (Theater an der Wien), although Beethoven seems not to have met him until September 2, 1825 (see Heft 93, Blätter 13r–13v).

216

APPENDIX D

Gebauer, Gotthart (1796–1839) and Emanuel Erler (b. 1790), Liechtenstein oboists; remote possibilities; see note under Wenzel Sedlak (clarinetist) below.

Clarinets (total of 4) Bauer, Franz (b. Kregnitz nr. Prachin, Bohemia, 1800; d. Vienna, ca. 1865/1866), second clarinettist. Seeming younger son of Anton Bauer (1759–1822), house owner in Altlerchenfeld; roomed at Wieden No. 542 in the 1820s; thereafter inherited father’s house and retired. Presumably joined the K-Theater orchestra as second clarinet in ca. 1821, when Dobyhal (below) became first; remained in the orchestra in February, 1825. Dobyhal, Joseph (b. Krasowitz, Bohemia, June 13, 1779; d. Vienna, September 16, 1864), principal clarinettist. Learned piano, organ, violin, and most wind instruments in his youth. In ca. 1784, he was sent to Enns (Upper Austria) to learn music and German. From there he went to Vienna, studied further, and joined the Leopoldstadt Theater’s orchestra as clarinettist for six years. Studied composition under Joseph Heidenreich and Franz Tayber, then, for two years, became Kapellmeister to the Russian ambassador, Prince Alexander Borisovich Kurakin (1759–1829), until Kurakin’s departure for Paris in 1808. Joined the Burgtheater orchestra in October, 1810 (simultaneously with Prince Lobkowitz’s Kapelle), and became second clarinet (to Joseph Purebl’s first) in K-Theater orchestra on October 1, 1812 (replacing Pichler, pensioned in September). He presumably became first upon Purebl’s retirement in ca. 1821, eventually transferring back to second by the 1830s. From 1811, also Kapellmeister of the Second Artillery Regiment under Archduke Maximilian von Este, and built the band to one of the finest in the Imperial army, called upon to play in the Court Opera whenever a band was needed onstage. As a result, he arranged over 100 works for band, reflecting the practices of the greatest vocalists of his time, even praised by Rossini during his stay in Vienna. In 1845, he was still second clarinettist at the K-Theater and conductor of the Second Artillery Regiment’s Band. Entered Tonkünstler-Societät, November 16, 1807, as member no. 223. Married twice: Anna (1784–1843) and Franziska (d. April 30, 1868); son Franz Xaver, violinist (b. October 14, 1817; d. after 1871). Res (1822): Landstrasse, Artillery Caserne [Barracks] No. 484 [renumbered from 434 in 1821]; (Anna, before 1843): Landstrasse No. 484, Apartment 4; (1859): Landstrasse, Hauptstrasse No. 288 [renumbered from 246 in 1830].

Supplemental Clarinets Friedlowsky, Joseph (b. St. Margarethen near Prague, July 11, 1777; d. Vienna, January 14, 1859). Came from Prague to Theater an der Wien in 1802; remained until retirement. Beethoven wrote prominently for him in Symphonies No. 4, 6,

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

217

8, and the Violin Concerto. See his 1846 apostrophe to Beethoven, quoted in the preface to this volume. Schubert wrote for Friedlowsky in Der Hirt auf dem Felsen. Professor, Conservatory of Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, from 1822. Hofkapelle, 1832–1859. Wife: Maria (1782–after 1830); 9 children, incl. violinist Franz (b. 1802), clarinettist Anton (1804–1875). Res (1822): Laimgrube, Canalgasse No. 92. Sedlak, Wenzel1 (b. Jezbořitz, Bohemia, August 4, 1776; d. Vienna, November 20, 1851), initially clarinettist, then leader of the Harmonie of Prince Liechtenstein, 1808–1835. In 1814, he arranged much of Beethoven’s Fidelio for Harmonie, with the composer’s blessing. He is mentioned occasionally in the conversation books, so would have been a logical person to hire for the doubled clarinet section. Freyberger, Joseph (1799–1830), Liechtenstein second clarinettist; remote possibility; see note under Wenzel Sedlak (clarinettist) immediately above.

Bassoons (total of 4) Nowak/Nowack, Joseph (b. Prague, 1796); probably came to Vienna in mid-1822; seems to have returned to Prague by mid-1824. He was replaced by Theobald Hürth in January, 1824. Res (1824): Wieden No. 164 (listed as fremd [foreign, or only a temporary resident]). Bettlach/Pattlög, Karl (b. Prague, 1801); single. Immediately after completing studies at the Akademie in Prague, he went to Vienna to become principal at the K-Theater. He and Beethoven were among 40 contributors of Waltzes in Karl Friedrich Müller’s Musikalisches Angebinde zum neuen Jahre (December, 1824).

1 At dinner, after the rehearsal of May 2, Schindler suggested that the entire Liechtenstein Harmonie would play. In fall, 1822, they had consisted of Wenzel Sedlak (1776–1851), principal clarinet and leader; Joseph Freyberger (1799–1830), second clarinet; Gotthart Gebauer (1796–1839) and Emanuel Erler (b. 1790), oboes; Franz Bubenik (b. 1795) and Johann Holub (b. 1790/1793), horns; and Anton Soyka (1800–after 1856) and Wenzel Gruss (b. 1798), bassoons. See Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, passim. On Wednesday, May 5, Schindler engaged a second Harmonie. The next day, he told Beethoven, “The 2nd Harmonie is also coming already today [Thursday, May 6]. I myself reserved all of them yesterday. You will [have to] pay 4–5 of them, at most” (see Heft 65, Blätter 31r and 34r). It is not clear whether Beethoven’s full wind section (including trumpets and trombones) was to be augmented, but the above notation suggests that at least 6 hornists (the 4 prescribed in the score, plus 2 more in the added Harmonie) played on May 7. Since it can be presumed that Beethoven would have given preference to his old and trusted colleagues, clarinettist Joseph Friedlowsky, high hornist Friedrich Starke, and low hornist Friedrich Hradetzky, it is less likely that he would have hired the Liechtenstein Harmonie as a group.

218

APPENDIX D

About 1827, he returned to Prague to become principal bassoonist at the opera and teacher at the Akademie. Res (ca. mid-1820s): City No. 1014. Hürth, Theobald (b. Landau, Pfalz, December 5, 1795; d. Vienna, March 9, 1858), first bassoonist at the Court Theater in Mainz, ca. 1816–1818. Toured to Berlin, Weimar, and Zürich, where Conradin Kreutzer probably heard him and invited him to Vienna. He arrived on November 23, 1823, was probably installed as principal bassoonist of the Kärntnertor on January 1, 1824, replacing Nowak, and met Beethoven for the first time at the rehearsal of May 2, 1824. He replaced August Mittag as professor at the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s Conservatorium in 1839 and succeeded Franz Höllmayer in the Hofkapelle in 1840. N.B.: He replaced Nowak and was principal bassoonist for Beethoven’s concerts in May, 1824.

Supplemental Bassoons Mittag, August (b. Kreischa near Dresden, December 25, 1795; d. Vienna, November 21, 1867), bassoonist. He received his first instruction in Gottfried Krebs’s (d. 1816) music school (where oboist Krähmer was also associated) and advanced study with the Royal Saxon chamber musicians Kummer and Schmidt. Mittag was Kapellmeister of a Royal Saxon Regiment before coming to Vienna, where he soon became known as an “erudite piano teacher, an activity that provided him entry into the foremost houses of the Imperial capital.” Possibly through these political connections and possibly through the influence of Krähmer, he entered the Burgtheater by January, 1820, to replace longtime principal bassoonist Paul Clement, who was retired to the viola section. Mittag also entered the Hofkapelle on August 28, 1824 (seemingly replacing Wenzel Matuschek). Similarly, Mittag was probably the first Lutheran [evangelisch] to hold a position in the Hofkapelle (followed by Krähmer in 1828/1829). He also became professor of bassoon at the Conservatorium of the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in 1821. He conducted a rather extensive series of conversations with Beethoven about bassoon development on ca. March 30–April 2, 1826 (Heft 107, Blätter 22r, 27r, 34v–35v, 40r–44r, and 58r–59v). Mittag entered the Tonkünstler-Societät on May 10, 1830, as member No. 269. Wife: Julie (d. after 1871). In 1837, Mittag demanded 400 fl. C.M. from the estate of oboist Ernest Krähmer. Res (1822): City, Bischofgasse No. 638 (same building as oboist Krähmer); (1837): City, Wollzeile No. 776; (sometime): City, Schönlaterngasse 679; and (1867): City, Maximilianstrasse No. 7. Mittag was visible musically and a friend of Krähmer’s, therefore a good possibility for Beethoven to hire in May, 1824. Soyka, Wenzel (b. Bohemia, June 29, 1792; d. July 2, 1851), bassoonist at the Theater an der Wien by fall, 1822, upon the resignation of Valentin Czejka (no relation) in 1821. He was son of Franz Soyka, a farmer, and his wife, Magdalena.

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

219

By 1838, Soyka and his brother (!) jointly filled the second bassoon position at the K-Theater. Wenzel probably substituted at the Hofkapelle but was not an official member. He entered the Tonünstler-Societät, April 1, 1823, as member No. 260. On November 6, 1820, he married the cook Maria Anna/Marianne Karka (b. K/Rauchowan, Moravia, 1793; d. Vienna, April 21, 1860). Witnesses included hornist Michael Sack (Theater an der Wien) and Josef Resnitschek (Kapellmeister of the Gyulai Regiment in the Alserkaserne). Res (from September, 1820): St. Ulrich, Am Platzl No. 64; (1822): Wieden, Pressgasse No. 308; (1860, Marianne): Wieden, Wohllebengasse No. 896. Anton Soyka (1800–after 1856) and Wenzel Gruss (b. 1798), Liechtenstein bassoonists; remote possibilities; see note under Wenzel Sedlak (clarinettist) above.

Contrabassoon Melzer, Joseph (see contrabasses above). Other possibilities were Burgthteater contrabassists Pollak and Raab (listed with supplemental contrabasses), both of whom doubled on contrabassoon.

Horns (total of 5) Bellonci, Camillo, also extra in Hofkapelle (b. Italy, ca. 1781; d. Italy? date?), trained in Italy and France; played in La Scala, Milan, in his youth; came to Vienna, ca. 1808; played part-time for Prince Lobkowitz; appointed principal horn in K-Theater, ca. 1811; remained single. Played in Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts (paid by Lobkowitz); principal at 1814 revival of Fidelio. Left Vienna, ca. August 1, 1823, for tour to Paris and Italy; never returned. Res: City, Franziskanerplatz No. 912, Apartment 7. N.B.: Therefore, no longer present in May, 1824; Elias Lewy was presumably his replacement. Hradetzky, Friedrich, also Court and chamber musician (b. Swietlau, Bohemia, ca. 1766/1769; d. Vienna, April 13, 1846), came to Vienna by ca. 1790; joined K-Theater orchestra ca. May 1, 1796; probably discussed low horn techniques with traveling virtuoso Giovanni Punto (Johann Wenzel Stich), when Punto gave a concert at the K-Theater (not the Burgtheater) on April 18, 1800. Hradetzky played Beethoven’s Horn Sonata, Op. 17, in public in spring, 1809, and Beethoven wrote the horn solo in the Fidelio Overture for him in 1814. Hradetzky remained as the K-Theater’s accomplished low hornist until Barbaja’s economies terminated him in January, 1824. He invented an experimental valved horn by February, 1822 (Joseph Eybler composed a Rondo for it). Beethoven presumably wrote the “fourth” horn solo for him in the third movement of the Ninth Symphony. Along with contrabassist Melzer, he petitioned for employment in the Burgtheater as

220

APPENDIX D

late as 1827 to replace his lost position at the K-Theater. Continued to serve in Hofkapelle until his death. Married Rosalia Stichl/Stiffer (b. Vienna, ca. 1771; d. Vienna, November 21, 1836) on January 9, 1791; several children died in infancy; sole surviving daughter, Anna (b. ca. 1796). He died of Lungenlähmung (pulmonary edema). Res (1822): City, Judengasse No. 501. N.B.: Beethoven surely hired him back for May 7 and 23, 1824. Janatka/Janaka, Johann (b. Trznboratitz, Bohemia, 1797/1800), first instruction under his uncle Joseph Zelenka (village schoolteacher and organist); student, Prague Conservatory, 1813–1819; came to Vienna and K-Theater, 1822; succeeded Michael Herbst as principal at Theater an der Wien until 1832; thereafter professor of horn, Prague Conservatory. Res (1822): Strozzi-Grund No. 19, Apartment 2. Khayl/Kail, Joseph (b. Bozi Dar/Gottesgab, Bohemia, 1795; d. Prague, 1871), distantly related to the Khayll family (flutist Aloys [Burgtheater], oboist Joseph [see above], trumpeter Anton [see below], young violinist Joseph) also active in Vienna. Came to Vienna and K-Theater, 1822; returned to Prague, December 1, 1824. N.B.: He was replaced by Robert Leser. Lewy, Elias (b. Saint-Avold, March 3, 1796; d. Vienna, June 3, 1846), probably the first practicing Jewish member of the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra. He was the elder son of Elie Lewy, a violoncellist in the orchestra of the duke of Deux Ponts (Zweibrücken) and was sent in ca. 1810 to the Conservatoire in Paris to study horn with Heinrich Domnich (1767–1844) and occasionally with Frédéric Duvernoy (1765–1838). He also became proficient on violin and violoncello. He joined the band of the Old Guard until the Battle of Waterloo (June 18, 1815), then became a regimental band director. In 1817, he joined the orchestra in Basel. Conradin Kreutzer heard him there in 1823, invited him to come to Vienna. He probably began as first hornist at the Kärntnertor Theater on January 1, 1824. His younger brother Joseph Rudolph (b. Nancy, 1802; d. Oberlössnitz near Dresden, 1881) arrived from Stuttgart in April, 1826, and played for six years in the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra before leaving for Germany. Elias (changing his given names to Eduard Constantin) and his family converted to Catholicism on June 24, 1835. He soon received an Aufnahms-dekret to the all-Christian Hofkapelle, replaced Hradetzky in 1846, and died less than two months later. N.B.: Lewy was probably the official replacement for Camillo Bellonci in the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra and principal hornist for Beethoven’s concerts in May, 1824.

Supplemental Horn Leser, Robert (b. Basel, 1809), student of Elias Lewy and presumably followed him to Vienna from Switzerland. Played on Lewy’s own concert of May 9, 1824,

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

221

so he may have joined his teacher to double loud passages on Beethoven’s concerts of May 7 and 23. Participated in a performance of a Horn Quartet by Dionys Weber in Vienna on November 21, 1824, noted (with Lewy, Janatka, and Khayl) as members of the Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra. He composed a Cotillon for a collection of 50 piano pieces published by retired actor Karl Friedrich Müller in December, 1825. On April 22, 1827, Leser, along with Janatka and the Lewy brothers, Elias and Joseph Rudolph, premiered Schubert’s Nachtgesang im Walde at a concert given by Joseph Rudolph (who had arrived in Vienna from Stuttgart in April, 1826). Leser was no longer at the Kärntnertor Theater by 1838. Res: City, Tuchlauben No. 553. N.B.: Leser replaced Joseph Khayl but may have already played extra horn in Beethoven’s concerts in May, 1824. Franz Bubenik (b. 1795) and Johann Holub (b. 1790/1793), Liechtenstein hornists; remote possibilities; see note under Wenzel Sedlak (clarinettist) above.

Trumpets (customary 2, but possible total of 3) Beissel/Beisl, Heinrich, also Court and field trumpeter (b. Brno, Moravia, August 11, 1799; d. Vienna, November 16, 1849), moved with parents to Vienna ca. 1801–1804; served in the Second Artillery Regiment band until August 20, 1822, but had seemingly also joined K-Theater by 1818; wife/widow Katharina. He died of Lungentuberculose (tuberculosis of the lungs). Res (1818): Landstrasse No. 3. Block/Plock/Pflög, Franz (b. ca. 1780; d. before 1830), joined Burgtheater’s orchestra on September 1, 1801. By January, 1804, was seemingly at the K-Theater, through at least mid-1806, probably into 1807–1808. Played in Beethoven’s concerts of 1813–1814. By June, 1814, definitely at the K-Theater, remaining until after 1825. Played in trombone quartet with Philipp Tuschke, 1825–1826. Wife: Rosalia (b. Vienna/Mariahilf, 1786; d. after ca. 1836); sons Franz (b. 1817), Johann (b. 1820); daughters Rosalia (b. 1813), Josepha (b. 1815), Adelheid (b. 1822). Res (1807/1808 to at least 1822): Josephstadt, Lange Gasse No. 58 [renumbered as 61 in 1821]. Khayll, Anton, also Court and field trumpeter (b. Hermanův Mestec nr. Chrudim, Bohemia, April 8, 1787; d. Vienna, April 28, 1834); son of Karlskirche organist; received musical training at Wiener Neustadt; developed a keyed trumpet and, with brothers Aloys (Burgtheater flutist) and Joseph (oboist, above), had a trio popular on benefit concerts, 1817–1823. Joined K-Theater in November, 1810. Married Anna Gazda by ca. 1817; then Theresia Heydt (ca. 1800–August 10, 1834); four children by Anna, including musician Anton (b. April 6, 1819; delicate health by 1841). Anton the trumpeter died of Lungen- and Rippenfell-entzündung (pneumonia and pleurisy). Res (1822): Wieden, Pressgasse No. 304.

222

APPENDIX D

Trombones (customary 3) Duschke/Tuschke, Philipp (b. Olmütz, Moravia, ca. 1792; d. Vienna, April 11, 1832); as “Tuschky”; played in trombone quartet on concerts, 1825–1826; one of the trombonists to play at Beethoven’s funeral in 1827. Remained single. Res (1830): Erdberg, Erdberger Hauptstrasse No. 13, Apartment 13 [sic]. Hebel; probably Hörbeder, Franz (b. Vienna/Spittelberg, March 29, 1799; d. Vienna, August 27, 1851). Gradually replaced father, Franz Hörbeder Sr. (1759/1761–1841), at the Theater an der Wien and Court Opera. Seegner/Segner, Leopold (b. Schwechat, November 3, 1762; d. Vienna, October 10, 1834), violinist and trombonist. Employed in the Leopoldstadt Theater as a section violinist by August, 1795, and a similar position in the Court Theaters in early 1807, church jobs during this period as well. He was a trombonist in the K-Theater by 1814 and continued there for the remainder of his career. Leopold and son Anton played in Beethoven’s concerts of 1813–1814. Married Theresia by ca. 1787; children: court trombonist Anton (b. ca. 1790; d. before 1834), singer Johanna (b. ca. 1791; d. September 28, 1808), Court trombonist Franz Gregor (b. August 6, 1797; d. ca. 1876/1877); cathedral trombonist Joseph (b. June 14, 1808; d. December 20, 1859); trombonist Moritz (b. ca. 1813). Four children died in infancy, 1796–1799. Leopold died of Gedärmbrand (gangrene of the intestines). Estate included a 5-octave piano and an old trombone. Res (1796–1799): Leopoldstadt, Fischer house, Schmelzgasse No. 405 [renumbered as 454 in 1821]; (1822): Wieden, Favoritenlinienstrasse No. 158 or Gemeindegasse No. 175. N.B.: A trombone dynasty, like the Christian family of trombonists in the previous century!

Timpani Hudler, Anton (b. Zwettal, March 7, 1784; d. Vienna, September 8, 1857), replaced Anton Brunner as timpanist in K-Theater on July 1, 1806; played for 1814 revision of Beethoven’s Fidelio and premiere of his Symphony No. 9 (with octave Fs). Experimented with mechanical tunings for timpani. Hudler married daughter of Burgtheater timpanist Anton Eder in 1808; son Georg (b. ca. 1809); first wife died. Second marriage to Franziska (b. ca. 1799; d. after 1871), presumably in 1826; daughters Franziska (b. ca. 1831) and Bertha (b. ca. 1835). He died of Erschöpfung der Kräfte (exhaustion of strength). Res (1822): Laimgrube, Windmühlgasse No. 150.

ORCHESTRAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

223

Auxiliary Percussion (Bass Drum, Cymbals, Triangle) Performers unidentified, possibly included Anton Brunner, who contracted personnel for Beethoven’s concert of February 27, 1814 (if he was still alive), or possibly two or three percussionists from one of the several regimental bands in Vienna (long a common practice) on a per-service basis.

Orchestra Manager Ortner, Franz. Res (1822): St. Ulrich, Capuzinergasse No. 67. Source: Anton Ziegler, Addressen-Buch von Tonkünstlern (Vienna: Anton Strauss, 1823), pp. 73, 78–81. Preface is dated January 1, 1823; personnel lists reflect fall, 1822. Personnel in all sections in alphabetical order, except contrabasses, which could have been a mistake. Supplemental biographical details supplied from, among others, the Totenbeschauprotokoll (death records), Verlassenschafts-Abhandlung/Sperrs-Relation (estate records), Conscriptions-Bögen (conscription/census records), etc. (Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv); Akten of the Hof-Theater and Hofmusikkapelle (Haus-, Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna); Court accounting books (Hofkammer Archiv, Vienna); as well as the birth, baptism, marriage, and death records of over a dozen churches in Vienna. University of Vienna musicologist Dr. Michael Lorenz has generously provided various details (Schuppanzigh’s birth date and Duschke’s death date, for instance) as he has encountered them in his own research in various libraries and archives in the city.

Appendix E

Choral Personnel, Kärntnertor Theater, 1822/1824 Conductor Dirzka, Ignaz Karl (b. Königsbrunn am Wagram, 1779; d. Vienna, January 5, 1827), bass singer, first appearance at the K-Theater in Cherubini’s Graf Armand (Wasserträger), on May 14, 1808; later Osmin in Mozart’s Entführung. The Barbaja administration appointed him choral director by fall, 1822, and he earned praise for the choruses in Weber’s Euryanthe (October, 1823). After the May 7, 1824, premiere of the Ninth Symphony, Beethoven noted in a conversation book, “[Invite] Dirzka to dinner” (“Dirzka zum Essen”). Res: City, Bürgerspital No. 1100, Courtyard 2, Stairway 2, 1st floor [2nd floor, American].

Choral Rehearsal Pianist/Conductor Stegmayer, Ferdinand. Res: Wieden, Schleifmühle No. 551.

Choral Personnel Manager Prinz, Leopold (b. Gross-Haugsdorf, ca. 1779/1782; d. after 1831); member since at least 1814. Res: City, Krugerstrasse, Goldener Löwe No. 1006.

Men (28, listed alphabetically) Baptist, Franz (b. Pressburg, 1799; d. Linz, March 5, 1856); tenor and music copyist; member since ca. September, 1823. Res: Wieden, Schleifmühlgasse No. 548. Breitschädl, Johann (b. Philippstal, Moravia, 1779; d. Vienna, February 5, 1843). Res: Wieden, Alleegasse No. 66. Diabelli, Leopold (b. 1789); member since at least 1814. Res: City, Ruprechtssteig No. 462. Egger, Georg (b. Feldsberg, 1792; d. after 1849). Res: Josephstadt, Lange Gasse No. 68. Elsler [Elssler], Johann (b. Gumpendorf, 1802); son of Haydn’s copyist. Res: City, Wasserkunstbastei No. 1191. Essinger, A. [Johann] (b. Ernstbrunn, 1796), Res: City, Tiefer Graben No. 172.

CHORAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

225

Fritz, Adalbert. Res: Leopoldstadt, k.k. Augarten Building No. 162. Grill, Johann (b. 1801); went to Hannover in 1826. Res: Rossau, Ladengestätte No. 33. Grosswald, Anton (1790/1792/1796–after ca. 1840); member since at least 1814. Res: Alservorstadt, Florianigasse No. 69. Grosswald, Ignaz (1784/1785–March 19, 1839); member since at least 1814; also in Dom choir. Res: Alservorstadt, Florianigasse No. 69. Grübel, Joseph (b. Bertholzofen, Bavaria, 1776). Res: Wieden, Altwiedner Hauptstrasse No. 250. Gschlenk, Anton; wife died September 19, 1818. Res: Himmelpfortgrund, Brunngasse No. 39. Hofbauer, Anton [Karl] (b. 1787). Res: Spittlberg, Johannesgasse No. 65. Högelsberger, Andreas [Anton] (b. Hadres, 1792). Res: Landstrasse, Hauptstrasse No. 42. Kaspar [Caspar], Johann (1778 – after 1822); member since at least 1814. Res: Spittlberg, Kandelgasse No. 122. Kiesling [Kissling], Leopold [Joseph] (ca. 1797–August 8, 1832); member since at least 1814. Res: Landstrasse, Hauptstrasse No. 51. Kuczera [Kutschera], Ignaz. Res: Wieden, Grosse Neugasse No. 338. Leidel, Joseph [Anton] (b. Bohemia, 1782). Res: Josephstadt, Florianigasse No. 118. Lenhard, Franz. Res: City, Salvatorgasse No. 339. Marschal, Joseph. Res: Josephstadt, Lange Gasse No. 65. Neumann, Philipp. Res: Mariahilf, Hauptstrasse No. 39. Partuschek [Bartuscheg], [Matthias] (b. Schelletau, Moravia, 1788; d. Vienna, March 8, 1837). Res: Laimgrube, Kothgasse, Zwei Meerfräulein No. 66. Schmidt, Anton (b. Schweinbach, ca. 1785; d. Vienna, May 29, 1823); member since at least 1814. Res: Landstrasse, Ungargasse No. 387. Schuster, Mathias (b. Niederleis, 1802). Res: City, Annagasse, Goldenes Kreuz. Stonaczek, Wenzel. Res: Jägerzeil No. 12. Strehle [Strelly], [Joseph] (b. Tirol, 1767; d. 1824?). Res: Hungelbrunn, Wiedner Hauptstrasse No. 11. Urzwimer [Urzwinner], Rudolph (b. 1798). Res: City, Rauhensteingasse No. 937. Wittmann, Leopold [Joseph?] (b. 1780). Res: Mariahilf, Kleine Kirchengasse No. 19 [Michelbeuern No. 19].

Women (17, listed alphabetically) Ball, Dem. Maria [Anna] (b. 1792). Res: City, Johannesgasse No. 930 [Johannesgasse No. 972]. Caminada, Mad. Josephine. Res: Wieden, Paniglgasse No. 47. Dobihal, Dem. ____; daughter of Kärntnertor clarinettist/military band director

226

APPENDIX E

Joseph Dobyhal (1779–1864). Res: Landstrasse, Hauptstrasse, Artillery Kaserne [Barracks] No. 485. Fuchs, Dem. [Rosa?] (b. 1793). Res: Laimgrube No. 84. Kässmayer, Mad. [Elisabeth] (d. after 1840); second wife of retired Kärntnertor trombonist Georg Kässmayer (1772/1773–1840); their children born in ca. 1818, 1824, 1826, and 1831. Res: Josephstadt, Neu-Schottengasse No. 135. Pamer, Mad. _____; possibly wife of dance orchestra director Michael Pamer (1782–1827) and mother of Beethoven’s former maid Maria Pamer (b. 1807). Res: Wieden, Wienstrasse No. 546. Partsch [Bartsch], Dem. _____; member since at least 1814. Res: Laimgrube, Kothgasse No. 7. Paternos, Mad. Caroline, née Kuntzmann. Res: Strozzi Grund No. 13. Pensel, Mad. _____; wife of Johann (b. Vienna, 1794). Res: Josephstadt, Kaisergasse No. 132. Schmidt, Dem. _____; member since at least 1814. Res: Mariahilf, Kleine Kirchengasse No. 33. Schuster, Dem. Antonia. Res: Wieden, Wienstrasse No. 546. Stecher, Dem. _____. Res: Laimgrube, Kothgasse No. 69. Strein, Dem. _____. Res: Mariahilf, Stiftgasse No. 89. Vogl [Vogel], Dem. [Anna] (b. 1798). Res: Spittelberg, Herrngasse No. 95. Weber, Mad. [Anna?]; (b. ca. 1800; d. Vienna, January 27, 1835); Bavarian Court singer. Res: City, Schottenbastei No. 1168. Wessely, Mad. _____. Res: Wieden, Hauptstrasse No. 430. Zapf, Mad. _____. Res: Wieden, Hauptstrasse No. 250.

Boys (12, unlisted)1 SOURCES: Ziegler, Addressen-Buch, pp. 75–78. Men are listed with first names and residences; women are listed as “Mad.” (Madame, if married) and “Dem.” (Demoiselle, if unmarried); first names occur in only 4 of the original 17 entries 1 Ziegler’s Addressen-Buch of 1823 (reflecting fall, 1822) does not list the presence of boys to complement the women’s voices, and yet conversation book entries just before the final rehearsals for the May 7 performance indicate them. Their number comes from a similar personnel list for the Kärntnertor Theater in June, 1814, about a decade earlier and at the time of the premiere performances of the final version of Fidelio. In that instance, there were 12 boys, presumably equally divided among sopranos and altos. See Hoftheater, Generalintendanz, Karton 6: 131/1814, Beilage 6, fol. 145r–146r (Haus-, Hofund Staatsarchiv, Vienna); and Theodore Albrecht, “Two Contrabassoons and More: The Personnel in Beethoven’s Orchestras for Symphony No. 7, Symphony No. 8, Wellingtons Sieg, and Der glorreiche Augenblick (1813–1814),” in Beethoven und der Wiener Kongress, ed. Bernhard R. Appel and Julia Ronge (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2016), pp. 165–217 (specifically pp. 214–215).

CHORAL PERSONNEL, KÄRNTNERTOR THEATER, 1822/1824

227

for the women, although residences are listed for all of them. These entries have been checked against Gustav Gugitz, “Auszüge aus den ConscriptionsBögen,” typescript, ca. 1952; and Gugitz, “Auszüge über Persönlichkeiten des Wiener Kulturlebens, 1783–1850,” typescript, 1952 (both Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv). The information supplied to Ziegler was, in some cases, inconsistent with details (as fundamental as given names) in the Gugitz indexes to the conscription/ census records and the Verlassenschafts-Abhandlungen (Sperrs-Relationen) noted above. The turnover in choral personnel was high: of the 27 men in late 1822, only 7 had been members since 1814; of the 17 women in late 1822, only 2 had been members since 1814. Assuming that there may have been other cases like the Grosswald brothers above, we have compared addresses for several of the personnel and included several variants in names and dates. For late-addition tenor Franz Baptist, see Albrecht, ed., Beethoven’s Conversation Books, Heft 28, Blätter 37r–38v. See also Grant William Cook III, “Beethoven’s Choral Director, Ignaz Karl Dirzka (1779–1827),” Choral Journal 46, No. 6 (December, 2005), pp. 46–51.

Appendix F

Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s Volunteer Sign-Up Sheet, 1824 On about Thursday, April 8, 1824, during a two- or three-day period when the undecided Beethoven contemplated giving his concert at the Theater an der Wien on April 22, he wrote the following informal note to the Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde: “The undersigned herewith most respectfully invites all amateur musicians to support him with their talents at his Akademie, which is to take place on April 22 in the Theater an der Wien. Those who kindly wish to take part are graciously requested to sign this invitation in their own handwriting. Ludwig van Beethoven”1 Sixteen individuals signed Beethoven’s request:2 [1] Georg Hellmesberger (1800–1873), already violinist, Kärntnertor Theater; Gesellschaft concerts since 1818; professor at the Gesellschaft’s Conservatorium, 1821–1848 (Z, 119; Mf ) [2] Joseph Böhm (1795–1876), violin; Gesellschaft concerts since 1819; professor at the Gesellschaft’s Conservatorium; member of Hofkapelle (Z, 118; Mf ) [3] Karl Holz (1799–1858), violinist in Schuppanzigh’s Quartet, wrote “wird erscheinen” (will appear) after his signature. Res: Mölkerbastei No. 84 (Bö; Z, 136) [4] Maximilian Philipp (Br) [5] Anton Röhrich (ca. 1785–September 13, 1832), all strings and horn but specialized on the contrabass; had his own salon; Gesellschaft concerts, violoncellist, Theater an der Wien by 1822; wealthy merchant; member of Scharfschützen-Corps. Res: Wieden, Neuwiedener Hauptstrasse No. 309, his own house (Bö; Z, 147 and 191; S-V, 162–164; Mf; WZ)

1 Anderson, Vol. 3, Appendix H, No. 14; Brandenburg, No. 1808 (dated ca. April 8, 1824). 2 With the exception of Hellmesberger (concertmaster) and possibly Fradl, none of these names duplicate the personnel of the Gesellschaft des Privat-Musik-Vereins identified in Ziegler, Addressen-Buch (reflecting fall, 1822), pp. 194–195.

GESELLSCHAFT DER MUSIKFREUNDE’S VOLUNTEER SIGN-UP SHEET

229

[6] Karl Fradl, violin, Gesellschaft Board. Res: Mariahilf, Kleine Kirchengasse No. 24 (Bö; Z, 114 and 118) [7] Joseph Kaufmann (February 24, 1788–March 25, 1860),3 second violin and viola, Sonnleithner salon; Gesellschaft concerts from 1828/1830; official in Supreme Court. Res: Schottenbastei No. 1167 (Bö; Z, 118, 136, and 193; S-V, 173; Mf; WZ) [8] Friedrich Kunst, supporting member, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde. Res: Stock-im-Eisenplatz No. 876 (Z, 171) [9] Leopold Kletzinsky (Br) [10] Franz Hacker (Br) [11] N. Hacker [12] Johann Nepomuk Fischer (b. Vienna, 1774), violin/concertmaster. Res: City, Herrengasse No. 252 (Bö; Z, 118 and 135; Heft 93, Blatt 6r) [13] Friedrich Gross, violoncello; chamber music; Gesellschaft concerts from 1824. Res: City, Steindlgasse No. 430 (Bö; Z, 17 and 144; S-V, 173 and 176; Mf ) [14] Johann Riegler, violin and piano. Res: City, Renngasse, No. 157 (Z, 40) [15] Martin Gauster, violin/concertmaster; Röhrich’s salon. Res: Wieden, Salvatorgasse No. 234 (Bö; Z, 135; S-V, 164) [16] Johann Baptist Geissler, violoncello; music librarian. Res: City, Mölkerbastei No. 96 (Bö; Z, 144)

Sources for Identification: Bö = Böckh, Merkwürdigkeiten Br = Brandenburg, Briefwechsel Heft = Conversation Book and Blatt Mf = Concert files, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde S-V = Sonnleithner-Vago, Recensionen WZ = Wiener Zeitung Z = Ziegler, Addressen-Buch In late April, 1824, Beethoven wrote to Tobias Haslinger requesting more printed parts for the Gesellschaft der Musikreunde’s chorus who were joining. He then reported, “Piringer has been instructed to select the 8 best violinists, the 2 best violists, the 2 best contrabassists, the 2 best violoncellists, even if a few of them wear wigs, because just that number are to augment the orchestra.”4

3

Birth/baptismal date, Pfarre Gaubitsch, Lower Austria, Taufbuch 1784–1822, fol. 17; courtesy Carol Padgham Albrecht, January 31, 2023. 4 Brandenburg, No. 1827 (full text); Anderson, No. 1277 (partial text).

230

APPENDIX F

Unfortunately, Beethoven’s request of Piringer is not consistent with the above list of signers. Hellmesberger and Böhm were already professionally active in the Court orchestras, and Röhrich had been a violoncellist at the Theater an der Wien since fall, 1822. Therefore, the status, proficiency, and number of musicians in this list who might have been “the best” is open to question. We have speculatively added the following as “Supplements” to the personnel list of fall, 1822, in Appendix D: Violin: Hellmesberger, Böhm, Holz, Fradl, Fischer, Gauster Viola: Kaufmann Violoncello: Gross, Geissler Contrabass: Röhrich

Appendix G

Schindler’s Account of Beethoven’s Post-Akademie Dinner in the Prater In the 1860 edition of his Biographie, Anton Schindler published an account of Beethoven’s celebratory dinner for his innermost circle—the factotum Schindler, concertmaster Ignaz Schuppanzigh, conductor Michael Umlauf, and, of course, the composer’s nephew Karl—at the restaurant Zum wilden Mann in the Prater. According to Schindler’s account, the dinner took place “a few days” after Beethoven’s second Akademie of Sunday, May 23, 1824. In fact, Schindler’s narrative reflects a conflation of two events: primarily the dinner held at the Prater on the afternoon of Sunday, May 9, two days after the premiere of the Ninth Symphony (evening of Friday, May 7) and a second, smaller-scaled dinner, probably at the Birne, two blocks from his apartment, on the afternoon of Sunday, May 23, shortly following his noon-hour second concert. Basically, Schindler—probably for dramatic and literary effect—transferred the events of the dinner on May 9 to a few days after the second concert of May 23, 1824, but left the venue as the Prater. The historically accurate events of May 9, based on Conversation Books, Heft 67, Blätter 1v–10v, may be found in chapter 6 of this volume. The less-well-documented events of May 23, based on Heft 69, Blätter 5r–5v, may be found in chapter 8, with documentation and commentary in those locations, to allow comparison with Schindler’s account that follows here.

Schindler’s Conflated 1860 Account of the Dinner Beethoven felt obliged to thank Umlauf, Schuppanzigh, and me for the troubles we had taken [in preparing the Akademie]. Therefore, he made reservations for a dinner at [the restaurant] Zum wilden Mann in the Prater a few days after the second concert. Accompanied by his nephew, he appeared among us with storm clouds hanging over his head. Everything he said was cold, biting, and critical. We expected an explosion. We had hardly sat down to the feast, when, without further ado, he launched into a discussion of the financial outcome of the first concert in the [Kärntnertor] theater,1 accusing the manager, Duport, 1 Several of Beethoven’s well-wishers had predicted that he would (or should) make great profits from these concerts, but already on May 4, three days before the first

232

APPENDIX G

and me of cheating him. Umlauf and Schuppanzigh attempted to prove to him the impossibility of any fraud, that every coin had passed through the hands of the two theater cashiers, that the reports [of box-office receipts] agreed exactly, and, beyond this, that, at the insistence of the brother-apothecary [Johann] and contrary to all custom, his nephew [Karl] had stayed with the cashiers as inspector. Beethoven, however, maintained his position, adding that he had been informed of the fraud by a reliable source. Now it was time for these complaints to end. As quickly as possible, I departed with Umlauf, and, after enduring a few salvos on his ample person, Schuppanzigh soon followed. We regrouped at the tavern [Gasthaus] Zum goldenen Lamm in the Leopoldstadt to resume our interrupted meal in peace. The furious master was left to vent his anger on the waiters and the ceiling beams, and to eat the opulent meal alone with his nephew.2

Akademie, Schindler had written in Beethoven’s conversation book, “You will not make much profit the first time, but will lose [money]. This is too little—but it is the only way possible to acquaint the public at large with the greatness of the work—without defraying extraordinary costs. // At the second performance, this expenditure of energy is no longer necessary. The public will already know beforehand what it will hear.” See Heft 65, Blätter 4v–5r. 2 Schindler, Biographie (1860), II, p. 88; and Schindler-MacArdle, pp. 290–291; adapted (as described in the preface of this book) in Thayer-Deiters-Riemann, V, p. 94; and Thayer-Forbes, p. 911. Translation here is the author’s in consultation with SchindlerMacArdle and Thayer-Forbes. Inclusion of Schindler’s account for comparison with the account derived from the conversation books themselves (under May 9, 1824, in chapter 6 above) suggested by Dr. William R. Meredith (June 8, 2023).

BIBLIOGRAPHY Albrecht, Theodore. “Anton Grams: Beethoven’s Double Bassist.” Bass World 26 (October, 2002), pp. 19–23. Albrecht, Theodore. “Anton Schindler as Destroyer and Forger of Beethoven’s Conversation Books: A Case for Decriminalization.” In Music’s Intellectual History, edited by Zdravko Blažeković and Barbara Dobbs Mackenzie, pp. 169–181. New York: RILM, 2009. Albrecht, Theodore. “Beethoven and Shakespeare’s Tempest: New Light on an Old Allusion.” Beethoven Forum 1 (1992), pp. 81–92. Albrecht, Theodore, trans. and ed. Beethoven’s Conversation Books. 12 vols. projected. Woodbridge, Suffolk: Boydell and Brewer, 2018–. Volumes I–V published: 2018–2024. Albrecht, Theodore. “Beethoven’s Portrait of the Theater an der Wien’s Orchestra in His Choral Fantasy, Op. 80.” In Beiträge zu Biographie und Schaffensprozess bei Beethoven, edited by Jürgen May, pp. 1–26 (Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2011). Albrecht, Theodore. “Beethoven’s Quotation of Kol Nidrei in His String Quartet, Op. 131: A Circumstantial Case for Sherlock Holmes.” In Jewish Music and Musicians through the Ages, edited by Leonard J. Greenspoon, pp. 149–165. Studies in Jewish Civilization 19. Omaha, Neb.: Creighton University Press, 2008. Albrecht, Theodore. “Beethoven’s Sonata in F for Piano and Horn, Op. 17: New Light on Its First Performances, 1800–1801 and Beyond,” translated by Ernst Kobau. Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 93 (March, 2022), pp. 10–17. Albrecht, Theodore. “Benedict Fuchs, Franz Eisen, and Michael Herbst: The Hornists in Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony at Its First Performances in Vienna, 1805–1809,” Horn Call 34 (October, 2003), pp. 39–49. Albrecht, Theodore. “Benjamin Gebauer, the Life and Death of Beethoven’s Copyist C.” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 3 (2003), pp. 7–22. Albrecht, Theodore. “Elias (Eduard Constantin) Lewy and the First Performance of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony,” Horn Call 29 (May, 1999), pp. 27–33, 85–94, and cover. Albrecht, Theodore. “Ernest Krähmer and His Wife Caroline (geb. Schleicher), Musical Pioneers in Vienna’s Biedermeier Period.” Translated by Ernst Kobau. Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 56 (March, 2013), pp. 3–10.Albrecht, Theodore. “The Hearing Beethoven: Demythifying the Composer’s Deafness.” Beethoven Journal 34, No. 2 (Winter 2019): 44–56. Published simultaneously as “Der hörende Beethoven,” translated by Ernst Kobau. Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 85 (March, 2020), pp. 3–23. Albrecht, Theodore. “Hyperbole and High Drama: The Chronology and First Performance of Beethoven’s Oratorio Christus am Ölberge, Op. 85.” Bonner BeethovenStudien 13 (2022), pp. 10–63.

234BIBLIOGRAPHY Albrecht, Theodore, trans. and ed. Letters to Beethoven and Other Correspondence. 3 vols. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1996. Albrecht, Theodore. “‘Manchmal die Oboisten, Clarinettisten, Hornisten, etc. einladen’: Beethoven’s Hospitality at Home in Early 1823,” translated by Ernst Kobau. Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 45 (March, 2010), pp. 3–7. Albrecht, Theodore. “‘Mit Verstärkung des Orchesters’: The Orchestral Personnel at the First Public Performance of Beethoven’s Eroica Symphony.” In The New Beethoven: Evolution, Analysis, Interpretation—Essays in Honor of Lewis Lockwood, edited by Jeremy Yudkin,pp. 161–202. Rochester, N.Y.: University of Rochester Press, 2020. Albrecht, Theodore. “The Musicians in Balthasar Wigand’s Depiction of the Performance of Haydn’s Die Schöpfung, Vienna, March 27, 1808.” Music in Art: International Journal for Music Iconography 29 (Spring–Fall, 2004), pp. 123–133. Albrecht, Theodore. “Otto Heinrich Graf von Loeben (1786–1825) and the Poetic Source of Beethoven’s Abendlied unterm gestirnten Himmel, WoO 150.” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 10 (2012), pp. 7–32. Albrecht, Theodore. “Picturing the Players in the Pit: The Orchestra of Vienna’s Kärntnertor Theater, 1821–1822.” Music in Art 34, Nos. 1–2 (2009), pp. 203–213. Albrecht, Theodore. “The Premiere Performances of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 (May, 1824), Seen from the Orchestra’s Perspective.” Translated by Ernst Kobau as “Die Uraufführungen von Beethovens Sinfonie Nr. 9 (Mai 1824) aus der Perspektive des Orchesters.” Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 61 (March, 2014), 6–16; 62 (June, 2014), 8–24; 63 (October, 2014), 4–13; 64 (December, 2014), 13–22; 65 (March, 2015), 3–12; 67 (October, 2015), 13–22; No. 68 (December, 2015), 9–19; No. 69 (March, 2016), pp. 3–19. Albrecht, Theodore. “The Professional First Performances of Beethoven’s Orchestral Works in Vienna, 1795–1824.” Translated by Ernst Kobau as “Alte Mythen und neue Funde.” Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 50 (June, 2011), pp. 6–18. Albrecht, Theodore. “Thayer contra Marx: A Warning from 1860.” Beethoven Journal 14 (Summer, 1999), pp. 2–8; (Winter, 1999), pp. 56–64. Albrecht, Theodore. “Those Fabulous Disappearing Khaylls: A Family of Orchestral Musicians in Beethoven’s Vienna.” Translated by Ernst Kobau. Journal der Gesellschaft der Wiener Oboe 47 (October, 2010), 4–10; 48 (December, 2010), pp. 7–17. Albrecht, Theodore. “Time, Distance, Weather, Daily Routine, and Wordplay as Factors in Interpreting Beethoven’s Conversation Books.” Beethoven Journal 28, No. 2 (Winter, 2013), pp. 64–75. Albrecht, Theodore. “Two Contrabassoons and More: The Personnel in Beethoven’s Orchestras For Symphony No. 7, Symphony No. 8, Wellingtons Sieg, and Der glorreiche Augenblick” (1813–1814).” In Beethoven und der Wiener Kongress. Edited by Bernhard R. Appel and Julia Ronge, pp. 165–217. Bonn: Verlag BeethovenHaus, 2016. Albrecht, Theodore. “Vienna’s Jewish Community, 1819–1826: Glimpses from Beethoven’s Conversation Books at the Dawn of a New Era.” In Jews and Urban Life, Studies in Jewish Civilization 33, forthcoming. [AmZ.] Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1798–1848. Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung mit besonderer Rücksicht auf den Österreichischen Kaiserstaat. Edited by Ignaz von Seyfried and Friedrich August Kanne. Vienna:

BIBLIOGRAPHY

235

S.A. Steiner, 1817–1824. (Commonly called the Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung or Wiener AmZ.) Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung [title varies]. Edited by Adolf Bäuerle. Vienna, 1806–1860. Amtsblatt. Separately titled supplement to the daily Wiener Zeitung. Vienna, 1818–1827. Anderson, Emily, trans. and ed. The Letters of Beethoven. 3 vols. London: Macmillan/ New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1961. Bartlitz, Eveline. Die Beethoven-Sammlung in der Musikabteilung der Deutschen Staatsbibliothek: Verzeichnis. Berlin: Deutsche Staatsbibliothek, 1970. Bauer, Anton. Das Theater in der Josefstadt zu Wien. Vienna: Manutiuspresse, 1957. Bauer, Anton. 150 Jahre Theater an der Wien. Zürich: Amalthea Verlag, 1952. Beck, Dagmar, and Grita Herre. “Einige Zweifel an der Überlieferung der Konversationshefte.” In Bericht über den Internationalen Beethoven-Kongreß, 20. bis 23. März 1977 in Berlin, edited by Harry Goldschmidt, Karl-Heinz Köhler, and Konrad Niemann, pp. 257–294. Leipzig: VEB Deutscher Verlag für Musik, 1978;. Beck, Dagmar, and Grita Herre. “Anton Schindlers fingierte Eintragen in den Konversationsheften.” In Zu Beethoven, edited by Harry Goldschmidt, pp. 11–89. Berlin: Verlag Neue Musik, 1979). Beer, Gretel. Austrian Cooking and Baking. London: Andre Deutsch, 1954. Reprinted, New York: Dover, 1975. Beethoven-Album: Ein Gedenkbuch dankbarer Liebe und Verehrung. Edited by Gustav Schilling. Stuttgart: Hallberger, 1846. [Beethoven, Gesamtausgabe.] Ludwig van Beethovens Werke. Vollständige … Ausgabe. Ser. 1–25. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1864–1890. Reprinted, Ann Arbor: J.W. Edwards, 1949. Beethoven im Gespräch: Ein Konversationsheft vom 9. September 1825. Facsimile. Edited by Grita Herre. Translated by Theodore Albrecht. Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2002. (Heft 95.) Beethoven, Ludwig van. Beethoven: Drei Skizzenbücher zur Missa solemnis, II (Ein Skizzenbuch zum Credo), SV 82. Transcription. Edited by Joseph Schmidt-Görg. Bonn: Beethovenhaus, 1970. Beethoven, Ludwig van. Sinfonie Nr. 9 d-Moll Op. 125. Facsimile. Leipzig: Fr. Kistner and C.F.W. Siegel, 1924. Reprinted with additions, Leipzig: Edition Peters, 1975. Beethoven, Ludwig van. Sinfonie Nr. 9 d-Moll op. 125. Facsimile. Edited by Lewis Lockwood, Jonathan Del Mar, and Martina Rebmann. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2010. Contains additional material, including trombone and contrabassoon parts, from the Beethoven-Haus, Bonn, and the Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris. Beethoven, Ludwig van. Symphonie Nr. 9 d-Moll Opus 125. Edited by Beate Angelika Kraus. In Beethoven Werke, Abteilung I, Band 5. Munich: G. Henle Verlag, 2020. Beethoven, Ludwig van. Symphonie Nr. 9 in d-moll op. 125: With Critical Commentary. Edited by Jonathan Del Mar. Imprints No. TP 909 and BA 9009. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1996/1999. Beethoven’s Conversation Books. See under Albrecht. Beethovens Konversationshefte. See under Köhler. Behsel, Anton. Verzeichniss aller in der kaiserl. königl. Haupt- und Residenzstadt Wien mit ihren Vorstädten befindlichen Häuser. Vienna: Carl Gerold, 1829. (Annotated copy in the Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv.) [Beobachter.] Der Oesterreichische Beobachter. Vienna, 1818–1827.

236BIBLIOGRAPHY Biba, Otto. “Beethoven und die ‘Liebhaber Concerte’ in Wien im Winter 1807/08.” Beiträge ’76–78. Beethoven Kolloquium 1977: Dokumentation und Aufführungspraxis, edited by Rudolf Klein, pp. 82–93. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1978;. Biba, Otto. “Concert Life in Beethoven’s Vienna.” In Beethoven, Performers, and Critics: International Beethoven Congress, Detroit, 1977, edited by Robert Winter and Bruce Carr, pp. 77–93. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1980. Böckh, Franz Heinrich. Merkwürdigkeiten der Haupt- und Residenzstadt Wien und ihren nächsten Umgebungen. Vienna: Bernhard Philipp Bauer, 1822/1823 [reflecting 1821]; and Supplement, 1823 [reflecting 1822–1823]. Böcking, Wilhelm. [“Ignaz Sonnleithner’s Salon.”] Recensionen und Mittheilungen über Theater, Musik und bildende Kunst (Vienna) 8, No. 24 (June 15, 1862), pp. 369–370. Bory, Robert. Ludwig van Beethoven. Zürich: Atlantis, 1960. (Available in several languages.) Brandenburg, Sieghard. “Die Skizzen zur Neunten Symphonie.” in Zu Beethoven 2: Aufsätze und Dokumente. Ed. Harry Goldschmidt. Berlin: Verlag Neue Musik, 1984, pp. 88–129. Brandenburg, Sieghard, ed. Ludwig van Beethoven: Briefwechsel; Gesamtausgabe. 7 vols. Munich: G. Henle, 1996–1997. Brenner, Daniel. Anton Schindler und sein Einfluss auf die Beethoven-Biographik. Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2013. Breuning, Gerhard von. Aus dem Schwarzspanierhause. Vienna, 1874. Edited by Maynard Solomon, translated by Henry Mims and Maynard Solomon as Memories of Beethoven: From the House of the Black-Robed Spaniards. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992. Brown, Clive. “Historical Performamce, Metronome Marks and Tempo in Beethoven’s Symphonies.” Early Music 29, No. 2 (May, 1991), pp. 247–250, 252–254, 256–258. Brummitt, Eric. “The Writings of Antonio Tosoroni: Promoting the Early Valved Horn as an Orchestral Instrument in 19th-Century Italy.” Paper presented at Early Brass Festival, New Orleans, July 24–27, 2008. Busch, Hans. Verdi’s Aida: The History of an Opera in Letters and Documents. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1978. Busch, Hans. Verdi’s Falstaff in Letters and Contemporary Reviews. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1997. Caeyers, Jan. Beethoven: A Life. Translated by Brent Annable. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2020. Castelli, Ignaz Franz. Memoiren meines Lebens. 2 vols. Edited by Josef Bindtner. Munich: Georg Müller, 1913. Clive, Peter. Beethoven and His World: A Biographical Dictionary. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. Cited in notes as “Clive,” without further details. Clive, Peter. Schubert and His World: A Biographical Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. Conversationsblatt: Zeitschrift für wissenschaftliche Unterhaltung. Edited by Franz Gräffer and Ignaz Franz Castelli. Vienna: Wallishausser & Gerold, 1819–1821. Cook, Grant William, III. “Beethoven’s Choral Director, Ignaz Karl Dirzka (1779– 1827).” Choral Journal 46, No. 6 (December, 2005), pp. 46–51.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

237

Cook, Nicholas. Beethoven: Symphony No. 9. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Cooper, Barry. Beethoven. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. Cooper, Barry. Beethoven’s Folksong Settings: Chronology, Sources, Style. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994. Cooper, Barry. “Schindler and the Pastoral Symphony.” Beethoven Newsletter 8, No. 1 (Spring, 1993), p. 7. Cooper, Martin. Beethoven: The Last Decade, 1817–1827. Rev. ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. Cox, H. Bertram, and C.L.E. Cox, eds. Leaves from the Journals of Sir George Smart. London: Longmans, Green, 1907. Reprint, New York: Da Capo Press, 1971. Czeike, Felix, ed. Historisches Lexikon Wien. 6 vols. Vienna: Kremayr & Scheriau, 1992–2004. Davies, Peter J. Beethoven in Person: His Deafness, Illnesses, and Death. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 2001. Del Mar, Jonathan. Beethoven Symphonie Nr. 9 in d-moll, op. 125: Critical Commentary. Imprint no. 9009. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1996/1999. Del Mar, Jonathan. “The Text of the Ninth Symphony.” In Cook, Beethoven: Symphony No. 9, pp. 110–117. Deutsch, Otto Erich, ed. Franz Schubert’s Letters, and Other Writings. Translated by Venetia Savile. London: Faber & Gwyer, 1928. Reprint, New York: Vienna House, 1974. Deutsch, Otto Erich. Schubert: Memoirs by His Friends. Translated by Rosamond Ley and John Nowell. London & New York: Macmillan, 1958. Originally published as Schubert: Die Erinnerungen seiner Freunde. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1957. Deutsch, Otto Erich. The Schubert Reader/Schubert: A Documentary Biography. Translated by Eric Blom. London: Dent, 1946; New York: W.W. Norton, 1947. Originally published as Schubert: Die Dokumente seines Lebens. Munich: Georg Müller, 1914. See also under Waidelich. Deutsch, Otto Erich. Schubert: Sein Leben in Bildern. Munich & Leipzig: Georg Müller, 1913. Never translated or reprinted. Dorfmüller, Kurt, ed. Beiträge zur Beethoven-Bibliographie: Studien und Materialien zum Werkverzeichnis von Kinsky-Halm. Munich: G. Henle, 1978. Dorfmüller, Kurt, Norbert Gertsch, and Julia Ronge, eds. Ludwig van Beethoven: Thematisch-bibliographisches Werkverzeichnis. 2 vols. Munich: G. Henle Verlag, 2014. Eisenberg, Ludwig. Grosses Biographisches Lexikon der Deutschen Bühne im XIX. Jahrhundert. Leipzig: P. List, 1903. Fétis, François-Joseph, ed. Biographie universelle des musiciens. 8 vols. Brussels: Meline, Cans, 1838–1844. Revised edition, Paris: Firmin-Didot, 1884. Fischmann, Nathan L. “Die Uraufführung der Missa solemnis.” Beiträge zur Musikwissenschaft 12 (1970), pp. 274–280. Fiske, Roger. Beethoven’s Missa Solemnis. London: Paul Elek, 1979. Fortuna: Taschenbuch des kais. kön. privil. Josephstädter Theaters für das Jahr 1824. Edited by Franz Xaver Told. Vienna: Leopold Grund, [1824]. Frimmel, Theodor [von]. Beethoven-Handbuch. 2 vols. Leipzig: Breitkopf und Härtel, 1926.

238BIBLIOGRAPHY Frimmel, Theodor [von]. Beethoven-Studien. 2 vols. Munich, 1905; Leipzig: Georg Müller, 1906. Garland, Henry, and Mary Garland. The Oxford Companion to German Literature. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986. Goedeke, Karl. Grundriss zur Geschichte der deutschen Dichtung. 2nd ed. 18 vols. Dresden: L. Ehlermann, 1884–1998. Gräffer, Franz, and Johann Jacob Heinrich Czikann, eds. Oesterreichische National Encyklopädie. 6 vols. Vienna: Michael Schmidl’s Witwe & Ignaz Klang, 1835–1837. Groner, Richard. Das Grosse Groner Wien Lexikon. Edited by Felix Czeike. Vienna: Verlag Fritz Molden, 1974. Includes biographical entries. For further editions, see under Czeike. Groner, Richard. Wien, wie es war. Vienna: Waldheim-Eberle, 1922. Revised edition, edited by Felix Czeike. Vienna: Verlag Fritz Molden, 1965. Grove, George. Beethoven and His Nine Symphonies. London: Novello, Ewer, 1898. Reprint, New York: Dover, 1962. Grove, George. “Schindler, Anton.” In A Dictionary of Music and Musicians, Vol. 3, edited by Sir George Grove, p. 251. London & New York: Macmillan, 1894. Guetjahr, Mathias. Vollständiges Verzeichniss aller in der k.k. Haupt- und Residenzstadt Wien und ihren Vorstädten befindlichen Strassen, Gassen, Plätze und Häuser…. Vienna: Carl Gerold, 1821. Gugitz, Gustav. See Archival Documents below. Gurk, Joseph, and Eduard Gurk. Wien’s Umgebungen, nach der Natur gezeichnet. Vienna: Mollo, 1827. Reprint, edited by Robert Wagner, Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1988. Gutiérrez-Denhoff, Martella. “Die gute Kocherey”: Aus Beethovens Speiseplänen. Bonn: Beethoven-Haus, 1988. Hadamowsky, Franz. Die Wiener Hoftheater … 1776–1810. Vienna: Georg Prachner, 1966. Hadamowsky, Franz. Die Wiener Hofoper (Staatsoper), 1811–1974. Vienna: Georg Prachner, 1975. Hadamowsky, Franz. Wien: Theatergeschichte. Vienna: Jugend und Volk, 1988. Hanslick, Eduard. Geschichte des Concertwesens in Wien. Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller, 1869. Haydn, (Franz) Joseph. Sämtliche Symphonien. Edited by H.C. Robbins Landon. Vienna: Universal Edition/Philharmonia, 1967. Hof- und Staats-Schematismus des österreichischen Kaiserthums (title varies). Vienna, 1800–1848. Hopfner, Rudolf. Wiener Musikinstrumentenmacher, 1766–1900: Adressenverzeichnis und Bibliographie. Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum/Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1999. Howell, Standley. “Beethoven’s Maelzel Canon: Another Schindler Forgery?” Musical Times 120, No. 1642 (December, 1979), pp. 978–990. Translated as “Der Mälzelkanon—eine weitere Fälschung Schindlers?” in Zu Beethoven 2, edited by Harry Goldschmidt, pp. 163–171. Berlin: Verlag Neue Musik, 1984. Hüffer, Eduard. Anton Felix Schindler. Münster: Aschendorff, 1909. Hummel, Walter, et al. W.A. Mozarts Söhne. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1956.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

239

Humphries, John. The Early Horn: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Intelligenzblatt. Separately titled supplement to the daily Wiener Zeitung (q.v.). Vienna, 1818–1827. Jakob, Julius. Wörterbuch des Wiener Dialektes. Leipzig &Vienna: Gerlach & Wiedling Verlag, 1929. Johnson, Douglas, Alan Tyson, and Robert Winter. The Beethoven Sketchbooks: History, Reconstruction, Inventory. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985 Jones, David Wyn. The Life of Beethoven. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998. Kagan, Susan. Archduke Rudolph, Beethoven’s Patron, Pupil, and Friend: His Life and Music. Stuyvesant, N.Y.: Pendragon Press, 1988. Kayser, Christian Gottlob. Vollständiges Bücher-Lexicon enthaltend alle von 1750 bis zu Ende des Jahres 1832 in Deutschland und in den angrenzenden Ländern gedruckten Bücher. 6 parts. Leipzig: L. Schumann, 1834–1836. Kaznelson, Siegmund. Beethovens Ferne und Unsterbliche Geliebte. Zürich: StandardBuch Verlag, 1954. Kelly, Thomas Forrest. First Nights: Five Musical Premieres. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2001. Kerman, Joseph. “Schindler’s Beethoven.” Musical Times 108, No. 1487 (January, 1967), pp. 40–41. Kerst, Friedrich. Beethoven: The Man and the Artist, as Revealed in His Own Words. Translated and edited by Henry Edward Krehbiel. New York: B.W. Huebsch, 1905. Reprint, New York: Dover, 1964. Kerst, Friedrich, ed. Die Erinnerungen an Beethoven. 2 vols. Stuttgart: Julius Hoffmann, 1913. Kinderman, William. Beethoven. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Kinderman, William. “Beethoven’s Dishonest Biographer: Anton Schindler.” In Artaria 195: Beethoven’s Sketchbook for the Missa solemnis and the Piano Sonata in E Major, Op. 109. 3 vols. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003; Vol. 1: Commentary, pp. 58–60. Kinsky, Georg. Das Werk Beethovens: Thematisch-bibliographisches Verzeichnis. Completed by Hans Halm. Munich: G. Henle, 1955. Kisch, Wilhelm. Die alten Strassen und Plätze von Wien. 3 vols. Vienna: Frank, 1888–1895. Klein, Rudolf. Beethovenstätten in Österreich. Vienna: Verlag Elisabeth Lafite, 1970. Knowles, John. “Die letzten Jahre.” In Beethoven: Mensch seiner Zeit, edited by Siegfried Kross, p. 122. Bonn: Ludwig Rohrscheid, 1980. Koch, Bertha. Beethovenstätten in Wien und Umgebung, mit 124 Abbildungen. Berlin: Schuster & Loeffler, 1912. Köchel, Ludwig von. Die kaiserliche Hof-Musikkapelle in Wien von 1543 bis 1867. Vienna: Beck’sche Universitäts-Buchhandlung, 1869. Köhler, Karl-Heinz. “The Conversation Books: Aspects of a New Picture of Beethoven.” In Beethoven, Performers, and Critics: International Beethoven Congress, Detroit, 1977, edited by Robert Winter and Bruce Carr, pp. 147–161. Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 1980.

240BIBLIOGRAPHY Köhler, Karl-Heinz. “… tausendmal leben!”: Konversationen mit Herrn van Beethoven. Leipzig: VEB Deutscher Verlag für Musik, 1978. Köhler, Karl-Heinz, Grita Herre, and Dagmar Beck, eds. Ludwig van Beethovens Konversationshefte. 11 vols. Leipzig: VEB: Deutscher Verlag für Musik, 1972–2001. (Vol. 1, 1972; Vol. 2, 1976; Vol. 3, 1983; Vol. 4, 1968; Vol. 5, 1970; Vol. 6, 1974; Vol. 7, 1978; Vol. 8, 1981; Vol. 9, 1988; Vol. 10, 1993; Vol. 11, 2001).Kojima, Shin Augustinus. “Die Uraufführung der Neunten Symphonie Beethovens—einige neue Tatsachen.” In Bericht über den Internationalen Musikwissenschaftlichen Kongress, Bayreuth, 1981, edited by Christoph-Hellmut Mahling and Sigrid Wiesmann, pp. 390–398. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1984. Kopitz, Klaus Martin. “Wer schrieb den Text zu Beethovens Chorfantasie? Ein unbekannter Bericht über die Uraufführung.” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 3 (2003), pp. 43–46. Kopitz, Klaus Martin, and Rainer Cadenbach, eds. Beethoven aus der Sicht seiner Zeitgenossen.2 vols. Munich: G. Henle, 2009. Kroll, Mark. Ignaz Moscheles and the Changing World of Musical Europe. Woodbridge, Suffolk, U.K.: Boydell & Brewer, 2014. Krzeszowiak, Tadeusz. Theater an der Wien: Seine Technik und Geschichte 1801–2001. Vienna: Böhlau Verlag, 2002. Kysselak. See Archival Documents below. Ladenburger, Michael. “A Four-Leaf Clover: A Newly Discovered Cello, the Premiere of the Ninth Symphony, Beethoven’s Circle of Friends in Bonn, and a Corrected Edition of the Song ‘Ruf vom Berge,’ WoO 146.” In The New Beethoven: Evolution, Analysis, Interpretation, edited by Jeremy Yudkin, pp. 50–77. Rochester, N.Y.: University of Rochester Press, 2020. Landon, Howard Chandler Robbins. Beethoven: A Documentary Study. New York: Macmillan, 1969. As much a pictorial as documentary biography of the composer. Landon, Howard Chandler Robbins. Haydn: Chronicle and Works, Vol. 5: The Late Years, 1801–1809. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1977. Levy, David Benjamin. Beethoven, The Ninth Symphony. Revised edition. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2003. Leitzmann, Albert, ed. Ludwig van Beethoven: Berichte der Zeitgenossen, Briefe und persönliche Aufzeichnungen. 2 vols. Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1921.Lockwood, Lewis. Beethoven’s Lives: The Biographical Tradition. Woodbridge, Suffolk, U.K.: Boydell & Brewer, 2020. Lockwood, Lewis. Beethoven’s Symphonies: An Artistic Vision. New York: Norton, 2015. Lockwood, Lewis. Beethoven: The Music and the Life. New York: Norton, 2003. Loidl, Franz, and Martin Krexner. Wiens Bischöfe und Erzbischöfe. Vienna: Verlag Dr. A. Schendl, 1983. Lühning, Helga. “Das Schindler- und das Beethovenbild.” Bonner Beethoven-Studien 2 (2001), pp. 183–199. MacArdle, Donald W. “Anton Felix Schindler, Friend of Beethoven.” Music Review 24, No. 1 (1963), pp. 51–74. Mason, William. Memories of a Musical Life. New York: Century, 1902. Messner, Robert. Die Innere Stadt Wien im Vormärz: Historisch-topographische Darstellung. 3 vols. Vienna: Verein für Geschichte der Stadt Wien, 1996–1998. Messner, Robert. Die Josefstadt im Vormärz. Vienna: Verein für Geschichte der

BIBLIOGRAPHY

241

Stadt Wien, 1972. Similar one-volume suburban studies for Leopoldstadt (1962), Landstrasse (1978), Wieden (1975), and Alsergrund (1970). [MGG.] Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart. 17 vols. Edited by Friedrich Blume. Kassel: Bärenreiter, 1949–1986. Individual articles are cited under authors’ names in footnotes in the present volume. Morrow, Mary Sue. Concert Life in Haydn’s Vienna. New York: Pendragon Press, 1989. Newman, William S. Beethoven on Beethoven: Playing His Piano Music His Way. New York: W.W. Norton, 1988. Newman, William S. “Yet Another Major Beethoven Forgery by Schindler?” Journal of Musicology 3, No. 4 (Autumn, 1984), pp. 397–422. Nichols, Irby Coghill, Jr. The European Pentarchy and the Congress of Verona, 1822. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1971. Nösselt, Hans-Joachim. Ein ältest Orchester, 1530–1980: 450 Jahre Bayerisches Hof- und Staatsorchester. Munich: Verlag F. Bruckmann, 1980. Nottebohm, Gustav. Zweite Beethoveniana: Nachgelassene Aufsätze. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1887. Österreichisches Biographisches Lexikon 1815–1950. 17 vols. to date. Edited by Leo Santifaller et al. Vienna & Graz: Böhlau, 1957–2015. Oesterreichisches Musiklexikon. Edited by Rudolf Flotzinger. 5 vols. Vienna: Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2002–2006. Individual articles are cited under authors’ names in footnotes in the present volume. Pemmer, Hans, and Nini Lackner. Der Wiener Prater einst und jetzt. Vienna: Jugend und Volk, 1935. Perger, Richard, and Eusebius Mandyczewski. Geschichte der k.k. Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde in Wien. 2 vols. Vienna: Alfred Holzhausen, 1912. Pohl, Carl Ferdinand. Denkschrift aus Anlass des hundertjährigen Bestehens der Tonkünstler-Societät. Vienna: Carl Gerold’s Sohn, 1871. Pohl, Carl Ferdinand. Die Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde des österreichischen Kaiserstaates und ihr Conservatorium. Vienna: Wilhelm Braumüller, 1871. [Portrait-Katalog.] Katalog der Portrait-Sammlung der k. u. k. General-Intendanz der k. k. Hoftheater: Zugleich ein biographisches Hilfsbuch auf dem Gebiet von Theater und Musik. Vienna: Adolph W. Künast (Wallishausser’sche Hofbuchhandlung), 1892. Not all of the personnel listed are represented by actual surviving portraits. Prochnik, George. Heinrich Heine: Writing the Revolution. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 2020. Raffelsperger, Franz. Allgemeines geographisches statistisches Lexikon aller Österreichischen Staaten. 2nd ed. 6 vols. Vienna: Typo-geographische Kunstanstalt/Ignaz Klang, 1845–1853. Redl, Anton. Adressen-Buch der Handlungs-Gremien…. Vienna: Redl, 1824. [Reichardt.] Johann Friedrich Reichardts Vertraute Briefe, geschrieben auf einer Reise nach Wien. Edited by Gustav Gugitz. Munich: Georg Müller, 1915. Rice, John A. Empress Marie Therese and Music at the Viennese Court, 1792–1807. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. Ross, Alex. “The Great Gay-Jewish Poetry Brawl of 1829.” New Yorker (February 5, 2021). https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-great-gayjewish-poetry-brawl-of-1829#:~:text=In%20the%20shouty%20Valhalla%20 of,German%20literary%20world%20in%201829.

242BIBLIOGRAPHY Rotter, Hans. Die Josephstadt. Vienna: Rotter, 1918. Sachs, Harvey. The Ninth: Beethoven and the World in 1824. New York: Random House, 2010. Der Sammler, ein Unterhaltungsblatt. Vienna: Schaumburg/Anton Strauss,1809–1846. Sammons, Jeffrey L. Heinrich Heine: A Modern Biography. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1979. Schilling, Gustav, ed. Encyclopädie der gesammten musikalischen Wissenschaften, oder Universal-Lexicon der Tonkunst. 6 vols. and supplement. Stuttgart: Franz Heinrich Köhler, 1835–1842. Schimmer, Carl August. Neuestes Gemälde von Wien. Vienna: Sollinger, 1837. Schindler, Anton. Beethoven in Paris. Münster, Aschendorff, 1842. Schindler, Anton. Biographie von Ludwig van Beethoven. Münster: Aschendorff, 1840; 3rd ed., 2 vols. Münster: Aschendorff, 1860. Schindler, Anton. Ludwig van Beethoven. 5th ed. Edited by Fritz Volbach. Münster: Aschendorff, 1927. [Schindler-MacArdle.] Schindler, Anton. Beethoven as I Knew Him. Translated by Constance S. Jolly, edited by Donald W. MacArdle. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1966. Reduced reprint, New York: W.W. Norton, 1972. Annotated translation of Biographie, 3rd ed. (1860). [Schindler-Moscheles.] Schindler, Anton. The Life of Beethoven, Including His Correspondence with His Friends. 2 vols. Edited by Ignace Moscheles. London: Henry Colburn, 1841. Altered reprint, Boston: Oliver Ditson, [1840s]. Only Moscheles’s name appeared on the title page. Schmidl, Adolf. Wiens Umgebungen…. 3 vols. Vienna: Carl Gerold, 1835–1839. Schmidl, Adolf. Wien wie es ist. Vienna: Carl Gerold, 1833. Schmidt, Friedrich August. Neuer Nekrolog der Deutschen. Vols. 1–19. Ilmenau & Weimar: Voigt, 1824–1843. Schmidt-Görg, Joseph, and Hans Schmidt. Beethoven. Bonn & Hamburg: Deutsche Grammophon Gesellschaft, 1969; New York: Praeger, 1970. Schünemann, Georg, ed. Ludwig van Beethovens Konversationshefte. 3 vols. Berlin: Max Hesses Verlag, 1941–1943. Seyfried, Ignaz von. “Clement, Franz.” In Schilling, Encyclopädie, Vol. 2, pp. 260–261. Seyfried, Ignaz von. “Journal.” See Archival Documents below. Smidak, Emil F. Isaak-Ignaz Moscheles. Aldershot, U.K.: Scolar Press, 1989. Smolle, Kurt. Wohnstätten Ludwig van Beethovens von 1792 bis zu seinem Tod. Bonn: Beethoven-Haus/Munich: G. Henle, 1970. Solomon, Maynard. Beethoven. New York: Schirmer Books, 1977; 2nd rev. ed., New York: Schirmer Books, 1998. Solomon, Maynard. “Beethoven’s Tagebuch.” In Beethoven Essays, edited by Maynard Solomon, pp. 233–295 and 351–353. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1988. One of several publications of essentially the same material. Sonneck, Oscar George Theodore, ed. Beethoven: Impressions by His Contemporaries. New York: Schirmer, 1926. Reprint, New York: Dover, 1967. Sonneck, Oscar George Theodore, and Frederick H. Martens. “Heinrich Heine’s Musical Feuilletons.” Musical Quarterly 8, No. 1 (January, 1922), pp. 119–159; 8, No. 2 (April, 1922), pp. 273–295; 8, No. 3 (July, 1922), pp. 435–468. Sonnleithner, Leopold von. “Ad vocem: Contrabass-Recitative der 9. Symphonie

BIBLIOGRAPHY

243

von Beethoven.” Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, Neue Folge, No. 14 (April 6, 1864), cols. 245–246. Revised as “The Contrabass Recitatives in Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony at Its 1824 Premiere.” Translated by Walter Paul. Journal of the Conductors’ Guild 8, No. 1 (Winter, 1987), 38–39. Sonnleithner, Leopold von. “Musikalische Skizzen aus Alt-Wien.” Recensionen und Mittheilungen über Theater und Musik 7, No. 47 (November 24, 1861)–9, No. 20 (May 17, 1863). [Sonnleithner-Vago.] Vago, Alexandra. “Musical Life of Amateur Musicians in Vienna, ca. 1814–1825: A Translated Edition of Leopold von Sonnleithner’s “Musikalische Skizzen aus Alt-Wien (1861–1863).” M.A. thesis, Kent State University, 2001. Spohr, Louis. Lebenserinnerungen. Unabridged ed. Edited by Folker Göthel. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1968. Sporschil, Johann Chrysostomus. “Musikalischer Wegweiser.” Allgemeine TheaterZeitung 16, No. 137 (November 15, 1823), p. 548. Probably documents loss of conversation books, ca. November 1, 1822. Stadlen, Peter. “Schindler and the Conversation Books.” Soundings, No. 7 (1978), pp. 2–18. Translated as “Schindler und die Konversationshefte.” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 34 (January, 1979), pp. 2–18. Paginations coincidentally identical. Stadlen, Peter. “Schindler’s Beethoven Forgeries.” Musical Times 118 (July, 1977), pp. 549–552. Translated as “Zu Schindlers Fälschungen in Beethovens Konversationsheften.” Österreichische Musikzeitschrift 32 (May–June, 1977), pp. 246–252. Steblin, Rita. Beethoven in the Diaries of Johann Nepomuk Chotek. Bonn: Verlag Beethoven-Haus, 2013. Steblin, Rita. “Beethoven’s Name in Viennese Conscription Records.” Beethoven Journal 24, No. 1 (Summer, 2009), pp. 4–13. Swafford, Jan. Beethoven: Anguish and Triumph. Boston & New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2014. Thayer, Alexander Wheelock. Ludwig van Beethoven’s Leben. 3 vols. Translated by Hermann Deiters. Berlin: Ferdinand Schneider/W. Weber, 1866, 1872, 1879. Coverage only to 1816. Thayer, Alexander Wheelock. Salieri, Rival of Mozart. Edited by Theodore Albrecht. Kansas City, Mo.: Philharmonia of Greater Kansas City, 1989. [Thayer-Deiters-Riemann.] Thayer, Alexander Wheelock. Ludwig van Beethovens Leben. 5 vols. Edited by Hermann Deiters and Hugo Riemann. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel, 1901–1911. [Thayer-Forbes.] Thayer, Alexander Wheelock. Thayer’s Life of Beethoven. 2 vols. Edited by Elliot Forbes. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1964–1967. Updated version of Thayer-Krehbiel, still with portions of Thayer’s original text omitted. [Thayer-Krehbiel.] Thayer, Alexander Wheelock. The Life of Ludwig van Beethoven. 3 vols. Translated and edited by Henry Edward Krehbiel. New York: Beethoven Association/G. Schirmer, 1921. Reduced reprint, London: Centaur, 1960. Omits portions of Thayer’s original text. Tyson, Alan. “Notes on Five of Beethoven’s Copyists.” Journal of the American Musicological Society 23, No. 3 (Fall, 1970), 439–471. Ullrich, Hermann. “Franz Oliva: Ein vergessener Freund Beethovens.” Jahrbuch des Vereins für Geschichte der Stadt Wien 36 (1980), pp. 7–29.

244BIBLIOGRAPHY Volkmann, Hans. “Beethoven und Sporschil.” In Neues über Beethoven. Berlin: Hermann Seemann Nachfolger, 1904, pp. 62–64. Waidelich, Till Gerrit, et al., eds. Franz Schubert: Dokumente, 1817–1830. 2 vols. Tutzing: Hans Schneider, 1993–2003. Wallace, Robin, trans. and ed. The Critical Reception of Beethoven’s Compositions by His German Contemporaries, Op. 125. Boston: Boston University—Center for Beethoven Research, 2017. Weber, Max Maria von. Carl Maria von Weber. Berlin: Grote, 1912. Wegeler, Franz Gerhard. Nachtrag zu den Biographische Notizen über Ludwig van Beethoven. Koblenz: Baedeker, 1845. Wegeler, Franz Gerhard, and Ferdinand Ries. Biographische Notizen über Ludwig van Beethoven. Koblenz: Baedeker, 1838. Translated by Frederick Noonan as Beethoven Remembered: The Biographical Notes of Franz Wegeler and Ferdinand Ries. Arlington, Va.: Great Ocean Publishers, 1987. Translation of Kalischer edition, 1906. Weidmann, Franz Carl. Die Umgebungen Wiens. Vienna: Mayer, 1839. Weingartner, Felix. “Eine Begegnung mit einer Zeitgenossin Beethovens.” Allgemeine Musikzeitung 27 (1900), pp. 7–8. Weinzierl, Stefan. Beethovens Konzerträume: Raumakustik und symphonische Aufführungspraxis an der Schwelle zum modernen Konzertwesen. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Erwin Bochinsky, 2002. Weston, Pamela. Clarinet Virtuosi of the Past. London: Novello, 1971. Wiener Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, 1813. Edited by Ignaz Franz v. Schönholz. Reprint, edited by Othmar Wessely. Vienna: Hermann Böhlaus Nachfolger, 1986. [Wiener AmZ.] See Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung mit besonderer Rücksicht, 1817–1824 above. Often cited with mention of editor Kanne to avoid confusion. Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Literatur, Theater, und Mode. Edited by Johann Schickh. Vienna, 1816–1835. Often cited with mention of editor Schickh to avoid confusion. Wiener Zeitung. With supplements Intelligenzblatt and Amtsblatt. Vienna, 1818–1827. Willetts, Pamela J. Beethoven and England: An Account of Sources in the British Museum. London: British Museum, 1970. Wlassack, Eduard, ed. Chronik des k. k. Hof-Burgtheaters … Februar 1876. Vienna: L. Rosner, 1876. Wurzbach, Constant von. Biographisches Lexikon des Kaiserthums Oesterreich. 60 vols. Vienna: K.k. Hof- und Staatsdruckerei, 1856–1891. Volumes cited with Arabic numbers to avoid confusion. Ziegler, Anton. Addressen-Buch von Tonkünstlern, Dilettanten, Hof- Kammer- Theaterund Kirchen-Musikern … in Wien. Vienna: Anton Strauss, 1823. Contents generally reflect fall, 1822.

Archival Documents Gugitz, Gustav. “Abhandlungen Schotten [1783–1850].” Typescript. Vienna: Stadtund Landesarchiv, ca. 1952. Gugitz, Gustav. “Auszüge aus den Conscriptions-Bögen.” Typescript. Vienna: Stadtund Landesarchiv, ca. 1952.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

245

Gugitz, Gustav. “Auszüge über Persönlichkeiten des Wiener Kulturlebens, 1783–1850.” Typescript. Vienna: Stadt- und Landesarchiv, ca. 1952. Hofmusikkapelle. Akten. Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna. Hoftheater. Generalintendanz. Akten. Haus- Hof- und Staatsarchiv, Vienna. Kysselak, Franz. “Todesnachrichten aus Zeitungen 1814–1870.” Manuscript. Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv, Handschriften 3.4.A.112.1–8. Listed in the Beethovens Konversationshefte as “Memorabilien, Österreichs Verstorbene.” Portheim Katalog. Biographical index on manuscript cards. Wiener Stadt- und Landesbibliothek. Program Files. Archiv, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, Vienna. Seyfried, Ignaz von. “Journal … Theater an der Wien, 1795–1829.” Manuscript. Handschriften-Sammlung, 84958 Jb. Wiener Stadt- und Landesbibliothek. Theater-Zettel (Burgtheater; Kärntnertor Theater; Theater an der Wien). Bibliothek, Österreichisches Theatermuseum, Vienna. Vienna. Church Records (baptisms, marriages, deaths), 1783–1850. Cited in footnotes by their parishes. Vienna. Magistrat. Conscriptions-Bögen, 1805–1856. Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv. Vienna. Magistrat. Totenbeschauprotokoll. Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv. Vienna. Magistrat. Verlassenschafts-Abhandlungen (Sperrs-Relation). Wiener Stadtund Landesarchiv.

INTRODUCTION TO THE INDICES To enable the reader to locate names and other subjects, this volume has three often overlapping indices: Index to Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony—its sketches, scores, copying, rehearsals, performances on May 7 and May 23, 1824, and their immediate aftermaths. Index of Beethoven’s Other Compositions—especially the Consecration of the House Overture and movements of the Missa solemnis that joined it on the Akademies of May 7 and May 23. General Index—which lists a multitude of other subjects, especially the orchestra members, choral singers, and vocal soloists who performed the Ninth Symphony for the first time. To help the reader further, the Table of Contents (pp. vii–ix) lists roughly seventy sub-headings within the preface and ensuing chapters and appendices—an average of roughly one subheading per four pages. These are also reflected in the running headers at the tops of the pages. Technical jargon has been kept to a minimum. Younger brother Johann van Beethoven is often simply called Johann (or brother Johann), and nephew Karl van Beethoven is Karl (or commonly nephew Karl). A few abbreviations (whose meanings are usually clear in context anyway) help to conserve space: GdMf—Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde (Society of the Friends of Music) J-Theater—Theater in der Josephstadt K-Theater—Kärntnertor Theater TadW—Theater an der Wien As the reader will find, Beethoven’s life was filled with hundreds of often chaotic details during the composition of the Ninth Symphony, and they seemed to grow exponentially as he organized, rehearsed, and performed the concerts to present it to the world. These indices cannot hope to list all of the aforementioned details in any coherent order, either by subject or by chronology, although they make a vain attempt to do so. The solution to the frustrating fragmentation in the indices is to read the book straight-through, including all the footnotes, from beginning to end and enjoy the engrossing story that it tells.

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY Within its alphabetical entries, this index contains a number of major sub-groups for Akademies (the concerts of May 7 and May 23, their preparations, performances, and activities afterwards); Rehearsals (largely in chronological order); Symphony No. 9, by movement (with sketches and other aspects under the appropriate movement); and Michael Umlauf (who rehearsed and conducted the concerts). There are also substantial sections under various subjects and activities: rehearsals; choral parts, choral rehearsals, and choruses. Chorus director Ignaz Dirzka also has a substantial entry, as does theater manager Louis Antoine Duport. There are substantial sections under copying, copying estimates, and copying parts. Major copyists Peter Gläser and Paul Maschek have listings here, as does Josepha Schlemmer (who copied choral parts and Tremate, empi, tremate). The score to the Ninth Symphony, as well as its working copy and fair copy, are listed here, but the Missa solemnis and Consecration of the House Overture are listed in the Index of Beethoven’s Other Compositions. Concertmaster Ignaz Schuppanzigh and secretary/factotum Anton Schindler have modest entries here, but are indexed extensively in the General Index. Much the same is true for orchestral instruments, orchestral players, and some of the vocal soloists. For virtually every name and topic in this index, please see also the General Index for additional and complementary entries. Akademie / Concert (May 7, 1824)— Preparations “An die Freude” (text): 500 copies for audience ​115 Anticipation, public and professional ​ 45, 50 Audience: “It will be full” ​116 Beethoven: “No concert” ​49 Conflict with Tonkünstler-Societät ​31 Preparations, practical (early April) ​ 51–52 Projected in December, 1823 ​12, 14 Projected high income ​15 Repeated (May 23) ​49 Proposed dates ​31 Rehearsals

“One for correctness, one for expression” (Beethoven) ​38, 73 Repeat on a Norma-Tag (Ferial Day) ​ 109 Schindler joins planners (March, 1824) ​ 30–31 Schubert mentions as upcoming ​50 Situation (March 30), Beethoven’s assessment ​40 Venues considered ​33, 59–67 Confusion (gr./kl. Redoutensaal) ​ 49 Grosser Redoutensaal ​33 K-Theater preferred ​32 K-Theater selected ​64–67

248

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Akademie / Concert (May 7, 1824) (continued) Venues considered (continued) Johann did not reserve hall ​45 Joseph Sonnleithner suggests B-Theater ​50  ​Beethoven applies ​56 Landstand a “nutshell” ​60 Scaffolding ​117 Theater an der Wien: Clement or Schuppanzigh ​63–64 Volunteer professionals, possible ​29–30 Zettel / posters (various) ​116–117 Wording ​114 Akademie / Concert (May 7, 1824)— Performance ​122–131 Attendees ​122–123 Beethoven heard (partially) and spoke ​ 122–123 Beethoven’s appearance ​125–126 Computerized recreation, Jake Green ​ xxxiv–xxxv Czerny’s report to Wieck ​127, 130 Emperor in Prague ​124 Harmonie performed well ​125 Johann: boastful “speech” ​124 Karl “in parterre” ​123 Musical progress ​125–128 Program: content ​124–125 Scherzo Applause for timpani ​126, 128 Umlauf ’s “sign of the Cross” ​128 Seating of performers ​125 Solo singers: seated when not singing ​ 150 Theater Ordinance re applause enforced ​ 128–129 Akademie / Concert (May 7, 1824)— After the Performance Dinner (Sunday, May 9) ​134–140, 231–232 Argument at end ​139–140 Letters of thanks ​132, 139, 142–143 Pick up financial earnings (Saturday, May 8) ​132–133 Return home (with Schindler and Jos. Hüttenbrenner) ​129–131 No supper waiting ​130  ​Housekeeper’s day off ​113 Post-concert recap ​130–131 Raining after concert ​131

Schindler’s dramatic account ​ 129–130, 231–232 Reviews of May 7 (Bäuerle and Sammler) ​145, 149–150 Akademie / Concert, Repeat (May 23, 1824)––Preparations ​122 “An die Freude” (text): printed again ​ 152 Conflicting advice ​151 Czerny invited and declines ​153–156 Financial prospects ​148 Affected by Rossini fever ​159 Duport’s payroll (May 23) ​158–159 Future repeats (1824–1825) ​148–149 Location ​144–145, 148, 150 Redoutensaal: Umlauf prefers ​150 Redoutensaal: Beethoven chose ​150 Music stored overnight (May 22–23) ​ 162 People moving to country ​145 Programming Beethoven adds “Tremate” ​145, 154–158 Criticized for Italian music ​162 Duport adds Rossini, “Di tanti palpiti” ​154 Duport suggests cellist Fenzi or czakan ​151–152 Only Kyrie: allowed efficient choral rehearsal ​152 Rehearsal, general, Redoutensaal (May 22) ​161–162 Request denied ​144 Scheduling ​134–135 Time: 12:30 p.m. ​162 Set-up, early (May 23) ​162 Solo singers still not prepared ​145–146 Tickets: not enough complimentary ​ 163–164 Weather (May 20–23) ​156–157 Wording of publicity ​146–147 Akademie / Concert, Repeat (May 23, 1824)—Performance Activities ​166–167 Attendance, poor ​ Reasons speculated ​167 Program listed Reflected Rossini fever ​166 Symphony No. 9 Acoustic, more resonant ​167

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Akademie / Concert, Repeat (May 23, 1824) (continued) Symphony No. 9 (continued) Orchestral balance ​167 Performance went more smoothly ​ 167 Weather ​167–168 Akademie / Concert, Repeat (May 23, 1824)—After the Performance Beethoven’s earnings ​168–169 Disappointing ​169 Dinner, Birne (?) ​167–168 Ethics, Beethoven’s, concerning payment ​ 168–169 Financial considerations ​168–169, 192, 231–232 Bassi, Nicola (deep bass), stand in ​107 Brief biographical sketch ​107 Beethoven, Karl van (nephew) Treatment of “über Sternen” ​53 Berlin Prospects for premiere if needed ​xv– xvi, 10–12 Bettlach, Karl, bassoon ​61 Biba, Otto ​95 Botticelli, Pio (bass) ​158, 166 Burgtheater, possibility ​50 Beethoven applies for hall ​50 Karl prefers Redoutensaal ​50 Choral parts Four at Juilliard ​96 Pronunciation of vowels ​64 Repeat Akademie ​152 Schlemmer’s copying bill ​164 Taken from GdMf, given to Dirzka ​76 To be lithographed? ​28–30, 47 Or not ​29 Some lithographed(?) ​76 Choral rehearsals ​68 Began with Missa solemnis ​79 Begin April 24 ​62 Dirzka wanted, with Beethoven and Umlauf ​84 Sectionals ​62 Choruses Combined 80–90 members ​63 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde (young girls) ​41

249

Choruses (continued) Theater an der Wien singing school ​ 41–42 Parts to Dirzka ​67 Pronunciation of vowels in parts ​64 Clarinet parts ​7, 47 Working score ​7 See also Friedlowsky in General Index and below Clarinets: pièces de réchange ​47, 55 Composed with K-Theater orchestra (1822) in mind ​5 Not for London Philharmonic ​5 Compositional process ​53 Concentrated work after Diabelli Variations ​ 5–6 Concert preparations begin ​26 Beethoven to improvise ​27 No reading-rehearsal ​27 Concertmaster, shared and alternating ​42 Contrabasses Manner of copying pages ​28 Range ​85 “Contrabassoon” (May 6), red pencil ​117, 119 Contrabassoon part ​95–96, 99 Copying Fair copy of the score ​28 Gläser brings fair copy of Finale ​47 Gläser wants third movement ​45 Gläser works on Finale ​54–55 Gläser’s copyists made ligatures ​51 Maschek’s progress ​38 Maschek’s realistic copying speed ​41 Movements 1–3 finished ​47 Score copy for Ries and London ​76 Size of paper ​39 “Supplements” ​54 Copying estimates Fair copy of score ​28 Finale to be ready by Easter Monday (April 19) ​55 Finished or nearly so (April 13) ​58 Haslinger estimates time ​34 Not entirely finished ​62 Number of parts needed ​28 Performers’ parts ​26 Copying parts ​30–31 Bass trombone part missing ​50 Bass vocal solo unmeasured (?) ​55 Horn solo in third movement missing ​ 83

250

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Copying parts (continued) Pacing: vocal soloists received parts first ​20 Textual underlay for instrumental parts (?) ​55 Viola parts ​72

Duport, Louis Antoine (continued) “Speculates in the highest degree” ​158 Threats similar to those by Salieri (1808) ​ 59 To schedule Akademie ​32 See also Kärntnertor Theater

Dardanelli, Geronima, soprano (May 23) ​ 158, 166 Davide/David, Giacomo/Giovanni, tenor Nowhere to be found ​162 Rossini, “Di tanti palpiti” (May 23) ​ 158–159, 166 Added by Duport ​154 Del Mar, Jonathan ​41 Score C (Maschek/Gläser) ​41–42 Impatient description ​41 Dinner, Prater (May 4) ​101–102 Paying the bill ​104 Dinner, Prater (May 9) ​134–140, 231–232 Dinner (May 22) ​162–163 Dinner, Birne (May 23) ​167–168 Conflated with May 9 ​167 Diplomacy (Beethoven) ​159 Dirzka, Ignaz (choral director) ​73, 76, 84, 94 Beethoven letter ​94 Biographical sketch ​68 More efficient rehearsal time (for May 23) ​152 Preferred drier acoustic ​148 Rehearsal details (May 5) ​107–108, 118 Rehearsal, 3–hour (May 21) ​158 Went well 162 Donzelli, Domenico, tenor (May 23) ​158, 166 Duport, Louis Antoine (K-Theater/ Redoutensaal resident manager) ​ 48–49, 231–232 Adjusts program for repeat Akademie ​ 151–154 Beethoven’s letter (April 30) ​81 “Bristles like an eel” (Karl) ​158 Called “Little Napoleon” ​70 Letter 48–49 Musical training, more than minimal ​ 158 Negotiations ​52–53 “Presumptuous, ridiculous” ​82 Schindler consults lawyer Bach ​98 Schindler imitates Duport’s speech ​81 “Scoundrel” (Bernard) ​81

Financial matters ​55, 76, 148, 158–159 Expectations ​15, 40, 75 Too little income ​49 Schindler projects loss ​98–99 Franz Carl (Archduke) Biographical sketch ​121 Will report intrigues to Emperor Franz ​ 121 Friedlowsky, Joseph (clarinetist) ​6–7, 49 Future repeats (1824–1825) ​148–149 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde Library-Archive ​95 Piringer selects best dilettantes ​85 To supplement orchestra and chorus ​ 65 Volunteer list ​101, 228–230 Gläser, Peter (head copyist) ​41–58 Attends Blöchlinger’s mother-in-law’s funeral ​110 “Beethoven should not pay him” (Schuppanzigh) ​135 Biographical sketch ​110 Copyist, potential (Schindler) ​20, 41–42 Discusses proofreading ​47 Feet bad, no distance walking ​55, 72 Met with Beethoven ​55, 72, 77 Missa solemnis parts ​62 Schlemmer (Josepha) gave him choral parts (May) ​161 Der glorreiche Augenblick, foreshadows ​1–2 Grebner, Frau (GdMf chorus) ​99–100 Haircut ​120 Haitzinger, Anton (tenor) Brief biographical sketch ​79 Harmonie (wind octet), defined ​114 Hauschka to assist ​106–107 Hradetzky, Friedrich (horn) ​49, 62 Hudler, Anton (timpani) Dinner for playing part ​46 Timpani part (movement 2) ​78 Timpani part (movement 3) ​11

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Information, “received” ​xi–xii Invitations ​83–84, 115–116, 118–120, 122 Complimentary seats ​116 Schindler helped deliver invitations ​191 Janatka, Johann (horn) ​61 Josephstadt Theater Gläser’s copying staff ​43–44 Possible source for extra winds ​33 Kail, Joseph (horn) ​61 Kärntnertor Theater (site of May 7 Akademie) Administration discussed (dinner, May 9) ​136 Audience Ordinances (1800), enforced ​ 128–129 Best location (?) ​26 Boxes specified ​65 Choice for venue ​32 Gave soloists permission to sing ​60 Hildebrand, second concertmaster ​70 Hornists not good ​61 Limits to 2 general rehearsals ​62 Never intended to allow 3 rehearsals ​ 63 Orchestra Ages ​136 Barbaja’s personnel cuts ​136 Dismissals ​32, 150–151 Numbers ​28 Size specified ​65 Strength and balances ​28–29 Paid stagehands ​145 “Pay cleaning people” (Beethoven) ​132 Schindler’s negotiations for date ​47 Schuppanzigh as concertmaster, allowed ​ 70 Schuppanzigh to contract extra winds ​ 70 Selected as venue ​64–67 Stage set-up specified ​65 Stagehand and librarian meet with Karl ​ 154–155 Symphony No. 9 composed for it ​39 See also Duport (manager) and Orchestra Kreutzer, Conradin (conductor/composer) Coached vocal soloists ​118 Pianist in Wigand’s Creation (1808) ​118 Presence at Akademie ceremonial ​126

251

Landstand/Landständischer Saal Rehearsals held there ​72 Length/duration ​18–19 “Longer than Eroica?” (Karl) ​18 Lichnowsky, Moritz (Count) ​Minimizes amount of work needed ​40 ​See also in General Index Lithographic Institute ​47 Location Alternate cities ​48 Berlin ​48 London, possibility lessening ​xv–xvi London Philharmonic Society Beethoven solicited for commission ​ 5–6 Never formalized ​5–6 Symphony composed for Kärntnertor Theater’s orchestra ​39, 46–47 Louis XVIII, proposed possible dedicatee ​ 52 Maid, Gläser’s To carry copied materials ​55, 76 Maschek, Paul (copyist) ​31–35 Beethoven meets ​31 Copying priorities ​31–32 Copyists at his apartment ​32–33 Exaggerates speed of copy work ​31 Literate and articulate ​34 Melzer, Joseph (contrabass) ​49 Metronome Leonhard Mälzel ​18–19 Markings for cooperating conductors ​ 40 Marks ​xxii–xxiii, xxxii Minutes of March 2, 1824 Schindler fabrication ​31 Misconceptions about Ninth Symphony ​ xi–xii Mollnik (oboist) ​61 Nowak, Joseph (bassoon) ​61 Orchestra Ages of players ​136 Beethoven did not want small suburban theaters ​33 Balance (acoustical): K-Theater vs. Redoutensaal ​167 Dilettantes stole Scholl’s walking stick ​ 103

252

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Orchestra (continued) Dismissals and salaries compared ​ 150–151 Extra winds ​70 Fees for extra professionals needed ​49 K-Theater’s winds, would play gratis ​ 83 More amateur strings? (May 7) ​121 Musicians ​xvii Orchestra personnel ​63–64 Placed on stage ​110 Schuppanzigh: contract extra winds ​70 Gave task to Schindler ​112, 114 Size for report ​146 Size (relative) and effectiveness ​39–40 String players (Sonnleithner) ​107 Supplemental professionals and dilettantes ​82 See also Kärntnertor Theater (Orchestra) Pencil, red (for cresc.) ​99 See also in General Index Petition (Ludlamshöhle), Ninth mentioned ​ 22–23 Piccolo Khayll, Aloys (Symphony No. 5) ​14 Preisinger, Joseph (bass) ​47 “angenehmere” (performance advice) ​ 99 Biographical sketch ​56, 89 Rehearse with Unger ​56 Premiere performance (not in foreign country) ​32 Rehearsal, general Closed to public ​73 Compared to French ​111 Double rehearsal 66 “One for correctness, one for expression” (Beethoven) ​38, 73 Planning, detailed ​72–74 Scheduling Last-minute ​89 Projected: 3 large rehearsals ​89 Scheduling pattern ​70–71 String section leaders ​69 Time needed for ​72–73 Transport for soloists ​85 Rehearsal (May 2, 1824) ​87–90 Beethoven meets Hürth and Lewy ​88 Finale: mixed success/problems ​89

Rehearsal (May 2, 1824)(continued) Harmonie: going “to the devil” ​88 Mass: “Pray” ​89 Scherzo: repeat problems in parts ​88 Rehearsal (May 3, 1824) ​90, 92 Choral ​97 Karl attends ​97 Rehearsal (May 4, 1824) Chorus (GdMf ) ​99–101 Chorus present ​97 Chorus: tempo ​97 Instrumental amateurs (GdMf ) ​101 Orchestra not notified ​97 Gottdank forgot ​97–98 Schuppanzigh and Beethoven attended ​ 97 Rehearsal (May 5, 1824) ​107–112 Beethoven: “a distraction” ​111 Beethoven takes offense at singers ​ 110–111 Cello/contrabass recitatives difficult ​ 107 Grams invoked ​107 Kreutzer attended ​110 Rehearsal order and pacing ​107 Vocal soloists ​107 Rehearsal (May 6, 1824), morning ​ Boys added to chorus ​111 General rehearsal at Grosser Redoutensaal ​114 Second Harmonie attended ​112 “Umlauf doing best he can; still doesn’t know score” ​115 Rehearsal (May 6, 1824), afternoon Umlauf rehearses Sontag and Unger ​ 115 Rehearsal (May 7) Sontag and Unger ​121 Ries, Ferdinand  76 Rossini, “Di tanti palpiti” (May 23) ​167 Rzehaczek, Franz (official, violinist) ​116 Beethoven’s letter to him ​80 Biographical sketch ​79–80 Brother-in-law of Schuppanzigh ​ 79–80 Collection described by Böckh ​80 Stradivari, Amati, Stainer ​80 Instruments for repeat Akademie ​ 145–146 Lent rare string instruments ​79–80

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Schindler, Anton (secretary, violinist) Conflations ​xxxi, 231–232 Extra winds from J-Theater ​33 Joins planners (March, 1824) ​30–31 Not well known among Viennese professionals ​34 See also General Index Schlemmer, Josepha (copyist) ​28 Choral parts ​26 Copied Tremate for repeat Akademie ​ 157, 164 Scholl, flute trill (“et incarnatus”) ​68–69 Schröder, Sophie (actress) ​4 Schröder, Wilhelmina (daughter, singer) ​4 Schubert mentions Symphony enthusiastically ​50 Schuppanzigh, Ignaz (concertmaster) Rehearses string section leaders ​69, 72 To contract second Harmonie ​ 70 Asks Schindler to engage them ​112 See also General Index Schwarzböck, Ludwig Singing School, TadW ​41–42 Score Copy for London and Ries ​52 Fair copy (MascheK-Gläser) ​30–31, 41 Del Mar description ​41 Disciplined marginal annotations ​96 Gläser brings fair copy of Finale ​47 Gläser prioritizes finishing fair copy ​ 43 Now at Juilliard ​31, 95–96 Score “C” ​41 Size of paper ​39 Used by Umlauf ​96 Piano score Czerny (Carl) offers to make for Finale rehearsals ​49 Working copy (Beethoven’s hand) ​6–7, 31 Different papers in Finale ​98 Facsimile editions ​6, 31 In Berlin ​95–96 Movement 1 ​6–7 Schindler asks for working copy ​45 Third movement ​45 To take to Gläser ​45 Werkverzeichnis (2014) ​6 Seats, gesperrte (locked), defined ​120 Sedlnitzky (Count), Police President ​76 Seipelt, Joseph (bass) ​56 Stepped in as soloist at last minute ​101

253

Sketches ​3–4 Artaria 205/5 ​3–4 Autograph II/1 ​3–4 Engelmann ​3–4 Landsberg 8–2 ​3–4 Scheide ​3–4 Wittgenstein ​3–4 Slurs (ligatures) added to copying work ​51 Symphony No. 9, comments (selected) “Grandest and most difficult” (Schindler) ​121 Schubert mentions enthusiastically ​50 Symphony No. 9, Movement 1 “Check Violin I” (Beethoven, May 4) ​99 Sketch leaf (Juilliard) ​96 Sketchbook Engelmann 5b ​6–7 Sketchbook Landsberg 8/1 and 2 ​6–7 Sketches ​6–7 Working score ​6 Symphony No. 9, Movement 2 (Scherzo) ​ 7–8 D.S. in all parts ​99 Finished (September–October, 1823) ​9 Repeat problem in rehearsal ​88–89 Schuppanzigh’s return (mid-April, 1823) ​ 8 Send to Gläser ​62 Sketchbook Artaria 205/5 ​8 Sketches ​7–8 Tabs pasted to parts ​91, 94–97, 99 Timpani ​7 Karl proofreads ​46 For Hudler ​8 Trombone sketches/score ​8 Symphony No. 9, Movement 3 Beethoven: saw fanfares in Haydn Symphony 60/5 ​10, 19 Change of meter, bar 25 (conducting of ) ​163 Horn solo (38 bars) for Hradetzky ​ 10–11, 13, 83 Hradetzky’s valved horn ​11 Low horn in E-flat part missing ​62 Karl liked Andante ​10 Rolland Sketchbook (June, 1823) ​9 Sketching ​8–10 Begun mid-April ​9 Rolland Sketchbook (June, 1823) ​9

254

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Symphony No. 9, Movement 3 (continued) Timpani double stops ​11 Weidinger (?) ​17–18 Symphony No. 9, Movement 4 (Finale) “An die Freude” (December) ​13–14 Not in final form ​13 “angenehmere” (advice to Preisinger) ​ 99 Copying phase ​46 Completion projected Easter Monday (April 19) ​55 Gläser asks about details ​55 Gläser brings fair copy ​47 Fanfares, possibly chromatic ​17–18 Fermata on “Gott” (hold longer) ​146 “freudenvollere” (variant) ​117 Paper types (working copy) ​98 Performance parts ​72 Recitatives Beethoven’s attempts at words ​14 Instrumental: conceived for Grams ​ 46–47 “Seid umschlungen” ​14, 16, 27, 38 Trombones ​47 Sketches: Autograph 8, bundles 1 and 2 ​ 13–14 Autograph 205, bundle 4 ​14 Sketch (February, 1824) ​14 Sketching begins ​13 Structure: March through “Freude” ​38 Tempo suggestions (Schindler) ​19 Treatment, emphasis, of “über Sternen” (Karl) ​53 Trombones ​38, 47 “Turkish” music ​14 Sketches 16 “Violoncello” ​13 “Whole symphony finished,” February, 1824 (Schindler) ​18 Tempos Beethoven set at performance ​40 Metronome marks for various conditions ​ 40 Theater an der Wien ​57–58 Potential venue ​39–40, 47 Schindler and Lichnowsky negotiate ​57 Schindler’s continuing advocacy ​52 Schedule, crowded ​54 Singing school ​41–42, 57

Theater Audience Ordinances (1800), enforced ​128–129 Theater capabilities, 76, 200–202 Tickets ​32 Bach’s office ​115 Box office ​115 Complimentary ​116 Karl as security ​120–121 Prices not raised ​76 Timpani part ​ Karl proofreads ​46 Trombone parts ​95–96 At Juilliard ​96 Missa solemnis ​62 Overture ​99 Umlauf, Michael ​2, 4, 88 Biographical sketch ​155, 157–158 Choral rehearsal with Dirzka, Beethoven ​ 84 Conducted Fidelio (1814) ​135 Dinner with Beethoven afterwards ​ 135 Conducted Fidelio (revival, 1822) ​182 Conductor for Akademie ​52, 65 Beethoven to co-conduct ​69–70 Confirmed as conductor ​52 Dinner (May 9 and 23) ​231–232 “Does not know the score yet” ​88, 115 “Knew his way around scores” (Schindler, May 3) ​99 “Doing what he can” ​115 Encounter (?) of Saturday (May 8) ​133 Fermata on “Gott” longer ​146 “Hofkapelle is old people’s home” ​136 Lawsuit with Theater administration ​136 Pencil, red (for marking) ​101 Positions and offices, various ​157–158 Rehearsal details (May 5) ​107–108 Rehearsals with Sontag and Unger Preliminary ​78, 113 May 6, afternoon ​115 May 7, morning ​121 Score, fair copy (used at performances) ​ 96 Score, goes through with Beethoven ​115 Scores, received (May 1) ​88 “Sign of the Cross,” Scherzo (silent conducting beats) ​128 Third movement (bar 25): conducting questions ​163 Schuppanzigh’s sarcastic reply ​163

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S NINTH SYMPHONY

Umlauf, Michael (continued) Trombones, small, in Berlin? ​138 Visits Beethoven ​157–158 Wife Passes message to visit ​157 Related to restauranteur Benko ​ 103, 155 Would not be “First Kapellmeister of the World” ​136 Viola parts ​72 Vocal soloists’ parts Bass line underlay for easier rehearsal ​30 Change, possible, to bass recitative ​113 Corrected ​72 Four parts at Juilliard ​96 Haitzinger received (May 2) ​79

255

Vocal soloists’ parts (continued) Sontag and Unger don’t know parts (May 2) ​89, 91 Taken to soloists ​69 To be extracted first ​40 Already copied ​45 Weather May 7 (after Akademie) ​131 May 23 (time of Akademie) ​166–167 Weigl, Joseph, potential conductor? ​47 Wind parts: textual underlay when accompanying voice ​55 Winds, extra Many played gratis ​70–71 Named ​71 Schuppanzigh contracted ​70

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S OTHER COMPOSITIONS This Index of Beethoven’s Other Composition—that is, compositions other than the Ninth Symphony—is arranged under two primary topics: Instrumental and Vocal. Within these topics, the bold-print subheadings should make locations of specific genres and works fairly clear. Sub-headings under such works as the Missa solemnis and Consecration of the House tend to be diverse and even chaotic, and so the reader will want to survey all of the subordinate entries for potentially useful information. For the most part, the language used to identify works will follow common practice in English-speaking countries: The Creatures of Prometheus in English, but the Abendlied unterm gestirnten Himmel in German. Proposed, incomplete, or unset works are generally placed within the genres most appropriate to the work, if it had been completed. Sketches for completed works are indexed with the works themselves, so that the interested reader can follow, for instance, the composition of certain passages of the Missa solemnis. Sketches for the Ninth Symphony, of course, will be found in the Index to the Ninth Symphony. INSTRUMENTAL Symphonies Symphony No. 1 (Op. 21) ​xiii, 2, 172, 179, 200 Symphony No. 2 (Op. 36) ​xiii, 2, 59, 172 Cond. Schindler, J-Theater ​14, 16 Feldtrompeter, J-Theater ​105 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​16 Symphony No. 3, Eroica (Op. 55) ​xiii– xiv, 201 Well-funded ​15 Well-rehearsed premiere ​xiii–xiv Symphony No. 4 (Op. 60) ​xiv, xvi, 201 Symphony No. 5 (Op. 67) ​xiv, xvi, 201 Schuppanzigh concert (May 1, 1824) ​ 78, 104, 136–137 Movements separated ​78, 104 Symphony No. 6 (Op. 68) ​xiv, xvi, 201 Cond. Lannoy (Spring, 1824) ​40 Corrected by metronome marks (Schindler) ​40 Performance (April 1, 1824) ​50

Symphony No. 7 (Op. 92) ​xiv–xv, 1, 171–174, 178 Beethoven conducts (1819) ​176–177 Movement 1: chromatic bass line ​1 Movement 2: excerpted/encored ​ 173–175 Reading rehearsal (Rudolph) ​15 ​Duplication of parts ​16 Symphony No. 8 (Op. 93) ​xiv–xvi, 1, 171–174, 178 Reading rehearsal (Rudolph) ​15 Timpani (Manker) ​1 Symphony No. 9 (Op. 125) See the Ninth Symphony index Concertos and Concerted Works Piano Concerto No. 1 (Op. 15) ​200 Piano Concerto No. 2 (Op. 19) ​200 Altmütter ​2 Piano Concerto No. 3 (Op. 37) ​201

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S OTHER COMPOSITIONS

Piano Concerto No. 4 (Op. 58) ​201 Piano Concerto No. 5 (Op. 73) ​146, 201 Czerny on Akademie (?) ​19, 176 Discussion with Czerny (May 20, 1824) ​ 153–154 Declines invitation ​155–156 Genesis of work (1809) ​154–155 First performances ​154–155 Hradetzky Akademie ​78, 176 Rudolph reads ​153–154 Violin Concerto (Op. 61) ​201 Triple Concerto (Op. 56) ​2, 58 Kraft ​2 Wranitzky ​2, 58 Choral Fantasy (Op. 80) ​xiv Text by Kuffner and Beethoven ​86, 197–198 Other Orchestral / Instrumental Works Equale, trombones (WoO 30) ​20 Gratlulations-Menuett (WoO 3) ​182 Namensfeier Overture ​(Op. 115) ​178 Wellington’s Victory (Op. 91) ​xv, 1, 171–174, 195 Berlin (Schuppanzigh, 1816) ​138 Duplication of parts ​16 String Quartets String Quartet (Op. 95) ​139 Berlin (Schuppanzigh) ​139 String Quartet (Op. 127) ​147 Sketches ​14 String Quartet (Op. 131) ​ Quotation of Kol Nidrei ​165 String Quintet in C (Op. 29) ​139

257

String Quintet in C (Op. 29) (continued) Berlin (Schuppanzigh) ​139 Other Chamber Music Piano Trio, Archduke (Op. 97) ​135, 173 Schuppanzigh’s performances ​172–173 Schindler heard ​173 Septet (Op. 20) ​18, 35, 173 Schuppanzigh’s performances ​122 Schindler heard ​122, 173 Piano Works—General Piano Sonatas Piano Sonata, Pathetique (Op. 13) Zwei Principe ​xxix, 2 Piano Sonata, Tempest (Op. 31, No. 2) ​ xxv, xxxii Piano Sonata, Appassionata (Op. 57) ​xxxii Piano Sonata, Hammerklavier (Op. 106) ​ 19 Sonatas with Other Instruments Sonata, Horn (Op. 17) ​2, 10 Hradetzky/Czerny (1809) ​78 Played at Archduke Rudolph’s ​78 Premiered at K-Theater with Punto (1800) ​201, 219 Sonata, Violoncello (Op. 69) For Nikolaus Kraft ​2 Other Piano Music Bagatelles (Op. 126) No. 5 (sketch) ​142 Variations, Diabelli (Op. 120) ​5–6 Sketches ​4

VOCAL (AND DRAMATIC, NON-VOCAL) Dramatic Works Consecration of the House, Overture (Op. 124), incidental music ​ Beethoven “at the piano” for the premiere ​181 Chorus-ballet, “Wo sich die Pulse” ​ 179–181 Hastily copied parts ​9 Henning obtains for Berlin ​11–12 Karl attends rehearsal (J-Theater) ​19 Revised from Ruins music ​179–181, 202 Saint-Lubin, Leon de (violin soloist) ​ 181

Consecration of the House, Overture (Op. 124) (continued) Schindler concertmaster ​4–5 Sketches ​4–5 Overture ​ Akademie (May 7 and 23, 1824) ​124 Akademie, repeat (May 23, 1824) ​166 Bassoons, running, in fanfares ​137–138 Schuppanzigh’s comment ​138 Beethoven could conduct (?) ​69 Beethoven had not received parts (April 9, 1824) ​53 Copied by Schlemmer, Rampl, Wunderl (late September, 1822) ​180

258

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S OTHER COMPOSITIONS

Overture (continued) Copying work to be done ​77 Feldtrompeter, used for spoken play ​105 Hensler sent orchestral parts to Pressburg ​42 Mentioned by Schubert ​50 Parts from Hensler ​58, 65 Parts temporarily misplaced ​54–55, 68 Score to Schindler ​72 Send to Gläser ​62 Stylistic influences Handel overture ​180 Mozart, Magic Flute Overture ​180 Zwei Principe (?) ​180 Tempo ​69–70 Trombone parts ​99 Trombones: “check” (Beethoven) ​99 Coriolan Overture (Op. 62) ​176, 200 Performance (April 1, 1824) ​50 Creatures of Prometheus, ballet (Op. 43) ​ 200 Overture ​25, 176 Egmont Overture (Op. 84) ​175, 179, 200 Fidelio (1814) ​xvi, 50, 105, 173, 201 Conducted by Umlauf (1814) ​2, 135, 173 Dinner with Beethoven afterwards ​ 135 Leonore Overture No. 2 (1805) ​105 Fidelio Overture (1814) Horn solo (Hradetzky) ​10, 13 J-Theater (May 4, 1824) ​105, 110 Mechanical instrument ​5 Schindler heard rehearsal (April 17, 1824) ​61 Librettist Joseph Sonnleithner ​50, 198 Performance history (1814–1819) ​4–5 Piano score (Moscheles) ​173 Revival (November, 1822) ​182 Conducted by Umlauf ​182 Score, full (Beethoven had none) ​35 Ruins of Athens, Overture and incidental music (Op. 113) ​171, 179–180 Tarpeja (Triumphal March, WoO 2) ​ 197–198 Tremate, empi, tremate, dramatic trio (Op. 116) ​172 Akademie, repeat (May 23) ​145, 154, 156, 166 Italian opera soloists ​156, 158 Rehearsals went well ​159, 162

Tremate, empi, tremate, dramatic trio (Op. 116) (continued) Copied by Josepha Schlemmer ​157, 161, 164 Influenced by Salieri ​145 Opera subject/project, discussed, never carried out Melusine (Grillparzer) ​14–15, 17, 195 Political tool ​14–17 Potential high income ​14–17 Choral Works Christus am Ölberge (Op. 85) ​120, 201 Lichnowsky (Moritz?) refreshments (1803) ​67–68 Trio and choruses (April 1, 1824) ​50 Trombones, integral ​46, 77 Trombone parts (1803) 77 Der glorreiche Augenblick, cantata (Op. 136) ​ 1–2, 174 Chorus with Turkish instruments ​2 Foreshadows the Ninth Symphony ​ 2 Violin solo (Schuppanzigh) ​173 Played by Mayseder (?) ​173 Mass in C (Op. 86) ​195 As Hymns (1808) ​61 Concerts spirituels (1824) ​86–87 Credo (performed April 1, 1824) ​50 Frequently performed by Esterhazy forces German translation, Scholz, for Protestants Meeresstille und glückliche Fahrt (Op. 112) ​ 1–2, 173–174, 179 Missa solemnis in D (Op. 123) ​xiii, xvi, xxxi, 1, 5–6, 12, 17, 190–191, 195 Akademie (May 7, 1824), three movements ​124–125 Akademie (May 23, 1824), one movement (Kyrie) ​151, 166 Archduke Rudolph: did not commission ​ xv, 177 Bassi ​99 Binding, sewn ​46 Censor allows only three movements (as Hymns) ​52–53, 61, 124–125 Questions about work ​55 Changes, last-minute ​118 Choral parts present (March 23) ​42

INDEX OF BEETHOVEN’S OTHER COMPOSITIONS

Missa solemnis in D (Op. 123) (continued) Composition of fugue (Schindler overhears) ​177–178 Concerts spirituels wants it ​147 Contrabassoon ​99 Copying ​ Orchestral parts not finished ​62 Progress on ​40 Copying (continued) Security measures ​16 Trombones (Gläser) ​62 Copyists Maschek: parts for Kyrie, Credo, Agnus ​34, 44 Credo Flute trill (“et incarnates est”) ​ 68–69, 93, 103 Not commissioned by Rudolph ​xv, 177 Organ part (possible) ​26 Performance at St. Petersburg (April 7, 1824) ​113 Petition (Ludlamshöhle), mentioned in ​ 22–23 Piano score (for rehearsals), Czerny offers to make ​49 Proofreading ​45–47, 52 Rehearsals Choral (April 29–30) ​79 Unger with Preisinger ​56 Sanctus Benedictus, long violin solo for Schuppanzigh ​1

259

Schindler, Anton Engaged for subscriptions ​5–6 Overhears composition of a fugue ​ 177–178 Schubert mentions ​50 Sketches ​3–4 In conversation books ​177–178 Subscription scheme ​183–186 Fee received (May 6, 1824) ​109 Schindler solicits for ​5–6 Subscriptions Sales report ​113 Tempos: Beethoven sets ​40 Tonkünstler-Societät wants exclusive use ​48 Trombone parts ​62 Added to whole ​46 Unrealized/Incomplete Works Albumblatt or aria for Katharina Sigl ​182 Aria for Henriette Sontag ​26 Beftreiung, Die (in jest) ​27 Requiem (Wolfmayer commission) ​135 Sieg des Kreuzes, Der (Bernard) ​186, 195 Beethoven rejected (early 1824) ​186 Songs Der edle Mensch, for Marie Eskeles (WoO 151) ​164–165 Merkenstein (Op. 100 and WoO 144), Rupprecht ​186

GENERAL INDEX This General Index includes people, topics, activities, and concepts in general more generalized than those specifically pertaining to the Ninth Symphony itself. It often overlaps or complements the Index to Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony, but does not generally duplicate entries that appear in the Index of Beethoven’s Other Compositions. For most subjects outside of specific Beethoven compositions, the reader will want to consult both the Index to Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony and the General Index. While the General Index attempts to be thorough, it cannot be a concordance. It contains no entries under “Beethoven, Ludwig van,” with subheadings such as “Hearing.” Instead, such entries will simply be listed under “Hearing.” Entries include numerous subheadings to specify their often elusive subjects, either by noun, adjective, or verbal phrase. Entries concerning Beethoven’s unpaid secretary Anton Schindler appear frequently. Similar entries for Schindler, brother Johann, nephew Karl, the violinist Schuppanzigh, and conductor Umlauf appear in both this General Index and the Index to Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony. Entries for the performers—both orchestral and choral—at the premieres of Beethoven’s Ninth Symphony appear in this index, but may be complemented by entries in the Ninth Symphony index. Consistency is a chimera. . . . Acoustics Redoutensaal more resonant ​152 Redoutensaal not good for solo piano ​ 155 Various preferences ​148, 150 Albrecht, Carol Padgham ​xxxviii–xxxix, 229 Alcoholic beverages. See Wine Allgayer-Kaufmann, Regine ​xxxviii Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung. See Bäuerle Altmütter, Matthias (violist) ​2 American Beethoven Society ​xxxviii Ami de Beethoven (Heine’s fiction to discredit Schindler) ​xix–xx Debunked ​xx An die Freude (poem, Schiller) ​13 Antisemitic Beethoven was not ​xviii Schindler was not ​xviii, xxi–xxii Apartment hunting ​71

Appel, Bernhard ​xxxvii Archdukes (Akademie Invitations) ​ 115–116, 119 Artaria (music publishing firm) ​196 Identity sketch ​196 Petition signer (for the company) ​196 Auber, D.F.E., Der Schnee ​35 Augarten concerts ​137–138 Orchestra personnel and pay ​137–138 Austria, bankrupt (1811) ​15 Bach, Johann Baptist ​98 Implies Schindler’s homosexuality ​190 Schindler’s former employer ​175, 178 Two comp tickets ​116 Wife Katharina ​175 Ball, Dem. Maria [Anna] (chorus) ​225 Ballet: Wo sich die Pulse (Consecration) ​ 179–181

GENERAL INDEX

Bankers, Jewish ​ See Eskeles Baptist, Franz (chorus, tenor, copyist) ​224 Barbaja, Domenico ​ Court Theater lease (1821) ​3–5 Orchestral dismissals ​25–26, 136 Bärmann, Carl, Bassoon Concerto ​25 Barnert, Othmar ​xxxvii, 37, 84 Barth (tenor) ​56 Barton, Johann (viola, K-Theater) ​208 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​208 Biographical sketch ​208 Bassoons, in Consecration Overture ​138 Bauer, Franz (second clarinettist, K-Theater) ​ 216 Biographical sketch ​216 Bauer, Monika ​xxxviii Bäuerle, Adolf (publisher, Allgemeine Theater-Zeitung) ​22–24 Biographical sketch ​23 Published Petition ​67 Bauernfeld, Eduard ​25 Beck, Dagmar Schindler’s falsified entries ​xxiii ​ Becker, Joseph (amateur violinist, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde) ​208 Bednarik, Josef (oboist) ​xxxviii Beethoven, Carl van (brother); (died 1815) ​ 3 Beethoven, Johann van (brother) Attended with family ​124 Biographical sketch ​185 Calls for score for Ries ​76 Complimentary seats, three ​116 Did not receive hall for Akademie ​45 Dislike for Schindler ​185–186, 192–193 Gneixendorf (estate) ​45, 49, 85, 99 ​ Invited Beethoven to theater (May 22) ​ 164 Beethoven refused ​164 Interfered with Duport ​99 “Music, understands nothing about” (Böhm) ​147 Poor writer ​64–65 Recriminations (March 31) ​49 Replace Schindler with Böhm ​ 105–106, 141–142, 192–193 Will “drive Schindler off” ​49–50, 192 Succeeds ​193 Should not be involved with repeat Akademie ​137 Interferes ​151

261 Beethoven, Johann van (brother) (continued) Took Karl to see Boieldieu’s Johann von Paris ​53 Trip to Linz and Gneixendorf (after March 10) ​45, 99 Returned (by March 31) ​49 Wine from Gneixendorf ​85 Beethoven, Karl van (nephew) ​3 “An die Cassa” (wordplay) ​146 Andante in third movement, liked ​xli, 10 Ate in the City (May 22) ​161 Attends Boieldieu, Johann von Paris, with Johann ​53 Box office, monitored ​120–121, 146 Calls Lichnowsky “an old lady” ​59 Consecration Overture: attended rehearsal (J-Theater) ​19 Dinner (May 9) ​136, 192, 231–232 Firewood, took delivery ​114, 160 Kind and generous to Gläser ​72 Meets stagehand and librarian (repeat Akademie) ​154–155 Menagerie, visit with Beethoven ​ 145–146 Missa solemnis subscription fee, collects at Geymüller’s ​109 Projected Piano Concerto 5 with Czerny for Akademie ​19 Requests boarding house money ​109, 161 Signed himself as “Carl” and “son” ​121 Suggests subscription sales of Symphony No. 9 ​57 Symphony No. 9; notes “beautiful Andante” ​xli, 10 University classes ​120–121, 164 Beethoven-Haus, Bonn ​xxxvii Caeyers ​xxviii Lühning ​xxvii See also Brenner, Kraus, Ladenburger, Ronge Beissel/Beisl, Heinrich (trumpeter, K-Theater) ​221 Biographical sketch ​221 Belloli, Agostino, Concerto for horn ​25 Bellonci, Camillo (departed high hornist, K-Theater) ​219 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​219 Biographical sketch ​219 Replaced by Lewy ​219

262 Benko, Mathias, restauranteur (Prater) Hosts quartet concerts ​103, 106 Related to Umlauf ’s wife ​103 Beobachter (newspaper, Pilat) ​17 ​ Berlin, possible premiere, ​10–12, 48, 103–104 Fried chicken unknown ​103–104 See also Bethmann, Henning, Schuppanzigh Bernard, Joseph Carl ​62, 84–86, 106–107, 117 Beethoven distances himself ​186 Biographical sketch ​102, 186 Complimentary tickets ​116 Librettist, Der Sieg des Kreuzes (un-set) ​ 186, 195 Prejudiced (women, Jews, Protestants) ​ 186 Text for Mass by Stockhausen ​62 Wiener Zeitung editor ​186 Bethmann, Heinrich (Berlin), resigned ​48 Bettlach/Pattlög, Karl (bassoonist, K-Theater) ​61, 217–218 Biographical sketch (primary) ​217–218 Biba, Otto ​xxxvii, 95, 128 Bihler/Biehler, Johann Nepomuk (doctor of pharmaceutics, tutor) ​199 Biographical sketch ​199 Petition signer ​199 Bingham, Nick ​xxxix Birne, Zur goldenen (Landstrasse) ​193, 141–142, 231–232 Bjelik, Martin ​xxxviii Bjelik, Rosemarie ​xxxviii Blahetka, Leopoldine (pianist), concert at Landstand ​60 Blasen, Charles M. (Logic course) ​xxiii Block/Plock/Pflög, Franz (trumpeter, K-Theater) ​221 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​221 Biographical sketch ​221 Boarding house ​109, 161 Baumgarten and Born ​109, 161 Bohemians Schindler doesn’t trust ​187 Schuppanzigh glad to be away, TadW ​ 65 Böhm, Joseph ​(violinist, quartet leader, proposed secretary) ​29, 108, 139, 147, 207, 228, 230 Biographical sketch ​207 Did not want to play Italian works ​163

GENERAL INDEX

Böhm, Joseph (continued) Johann’s candidate for secretary ​ 105–106, 141–142 Complicity in diving Schindler off ​ 49–50 Meet at Neuling’s beer garden ​44–145 Meeting (March 7) ​27–28 Semi-literate ​49–50 Tour to Paris ​142 Boieldieu, Johann von Paris ​53 Bookcases (Karl advocates purchase) ​44 Books, conversation (blank). See Conversation Books Born, Baroness. See Boarding house Boydell & Brewer ​xxxvii, xxxix Boys, unnamed (chorus) ​226 Brandenburg, Sieghard ​xxxvii Brauneis, Vera ​xxxviii Brauneis, Walther ​xxxviii Braunhofer, Anton (physician) ​152 Breitensee (western village/suburb) Beethoven considered for summer residence ​54 Schindler humorously opposed ​54 Breitkopf & Härtel ​xxxvii Breitschädl, Johann (chorus) ​224 Brenner, Daniel ​ Affiliated with Beethoven-Haus, Bonn ​ xxi, 162 Collection of Schindler letters ​xxvii, 162 Minimizes Schindler’s acquaintance ​ 183 Schindler’s influence on Beethoven biography ​xxi Breuning, Stephan von (executor) ​xvii Breymann/Breumann, Anton (violinist, K-Theater) ​204 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​204 Brilliant (Ira F.) Beethoven Center ​xxxviii Brunner, Anton (timpanist, K-Theater, to 1806) ​222 Personnel manager, Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​222 Brunsvik, Franz (Count) ​108 Brusilow, Anshel (violinist, conductor) ​ dedication page (v), xxxix Bubenik, Franz (Liechtenstein hornist) ​ 221 Burgtheater History and description ​200 Spoken plays (1810) ​5

GENERAL INDEX

Buurman, Erica ​xxxviii Caeyers, Jan ​xxviii Caminada, Mad. Josephine (chorus) ​225 Castelli, Ignaz Franz (poet, journalist) ​ 22–23, 197 Biographical sketch ​86, 197 Encounter, re May 23 Akademie ​ 159–160 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde member ​ 197 Ludlamshöhle leader ​197 Petition signer ​197 Castrated (humorous punishment for Piringer) ​103 Chicken, fried Schuppanzigh eats ​103–104 Unknown in Berlin ​103–104 Children of Israel (Moscheles and Heine), generalized ​xxi–xxii Church services: Beethoven seldom/never attended ​54 Churchill, Neville ​xxix Cibbini-Kozeluch, Catharina (piano teacher) ​164 Compositional process ​xvi Beethoven’s description ​26 Concerts 1813 (December, through February, 1814) ​1–2 Composite orchestra ​1–2 Orchestra size ​1–2 1814 (February 27), rehearsals and payroll ​70–71 1823 (November 15), K-Theater ​13 1823 (November 16), GdMf ​12 1823 (December 12), J-Theater ​16 Symphony No. 2 ​16 1823 (December 14), GdMf ​6 Symphony No. 2 ​16 1824 (January 25), Schuppanzigh ​18 Septet, Op. 20 ​18 1824 (March 14), GdMf ​35 All-Mozart ​35 Karl attended ​35 1824 (March 14), Schuppanzigh ​35 Program ​35 1824 (March 16), Court ​35–37 Postponed until March 30 ​37 Program ​36 Rehearsal, March 28 ​48 Sontag and Unger ​35–37

263 Concerts (continued) 1824 (March 25), holiday benefit ​45 Grosser Redoutensaal ​45 Program ​45 1824 (March 28), St. Lubin ​48 1824 (April 1/Spring), Concerts spirituels ​ 40, 50 All-Beethoven program ​48, 50 Symphony No. 6, cond. Lannoy ​40 1824 (April 8), Concerts spirituels ​52 1824 (April 12), Tonkünstler-Societät ​ 56 Haydn, Seasons ​56 1824 (April 25), Noble Women’s benefit ​ 60 1824 (May 1), Augarten, Schuppanzigh ​ 82, 104 Symphony No. 5 ​78, 104 1824 (May 7) ​passim. Concerts spirituels All-Beethoven program (1824) ​48 Rehearsal (Piringer) ​48 Missa solemnis, want ​147 Kyrie and Gloria (1827) ​147–148 Ninth Symphony (1827) ​147–148 Conducting technique: silent beats ​128 Conductors. See Gläser, Franz; Hauschka; Schindler; Seyfried, Ignaz von; Umlauf; Weigl, Joseph Congress of Vienna ​173 Contrabassists. See Dragonetti, Grams, Melzer ​ Conversation Books ​59–60 Chronology ​38 Falsified entries Partially valid ​47 “Tempest in a teapot” ​xxix See also Schindler Heft 1: used until ca. June 24, 1818 ​ xxviii Loss in transport (Fall, 1822) ​ xxviii–xxix Total of ca. 200–225 ​xxviii Cook, Grant W.  xxxiv, xxxviii, 68 Cook, Nicholas ​xi Cooper, Barry ​xxvi Copying work. See also in Ninth Symphony index. Security measures ​16 See also Missa solemnis in Other Compositions index Copyist E (Wunderl) ​180

264 Copyists ​xiii–xvi See also Gebauer, Gläser, Rampl, Schlemmer, Wunderl Woman. See Schlemmer, Josepha Counterpoint: Beethoven’s renewed study ​ 3 Court Theaters Lease to Barbaja (1821) ​5 Manager Duport (1822) ​5 Personnel dismissals (1822–1823) ​5 Reorganization (1810) ​5 Czakan (flute) ​36, 103 Krähmer ​36 Scholl ​103 Suggested for repeat Akademie ​152 Czejka, Valentin (bassoonist), to Italy ​2 Czernin, Rudolph von (Count, chamberlain) ​197 Academy of Fine Arts ​197 Biographical sketch ​197 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​197 Invitation ​118 Petition signer ​197 Czerny, Carl (pianist, pedagogue) ​198, 201 Biographical sketch ​198 Day-to-day teaching ​153–156 Supports his parents ​155–156 Invited to play Piano Concerto No. 5 ​ 153–155 Declines ​155–156 Letter to Beethoven (May 20/21, 1824) ​ 155–156 Offers to make piano scores of Ninth and Missa ​49 Petition signer ​198 Czerwenka, Joseph (oboist) ​2 Daily schedule. See Routine, daily Deabis, Franz (violoncellist) Baptized Jew ​24–25 Deafness (Beethoven) Not complete ​20 See also Hearing Decker, Stephan ​xxxv, 157 Portrait (May 27, 1824) ​frontispiece (ii), 157, 169 Advertised in Wr. Zeitung and Wr. AmZ ​157 To make portrait ​146 Deinhardstein, Johann Ludwig (poet; professor) ​22–23, 197 Biographical sketch ​86, 197

GENERAL INDEX

Deinhardstein, Johann Ludwig (continued) Petition signer ​197 Theresianum ​197 Del Mar, Jonathan ​xii, 6, 31, 95–96 Del Rio, Giannatasio. See Giannatasio del Rio Dematteis, Phil ​xxxix Diabelli, Anton (pianist, composer, music publisher) ​199 Biographical sketch ​199 Petition signer ​199 Diabelli, Leopold (chorus) ​224 Diarrhea (Unger) ​37 Dietrichstein-Proskau-Leslie, Moritz (Count, Court music administrator) ​ 50, 148–149, 198 Biographical sketch ​198 Petition signer ​198 Dinner (March 14) with singers ​34–37 Menu ​34–35 Report on “illness” ​48 Dinner (May 9), post-Akademie, Prater ​ 132, 134–140 Arranging for food ​132 Schindler’s conflated account ​231–232 Dinner (May 23), Birne ​141–142, 193 Conflated with May 9 ​231–232 Dinners with musicians Dirzka ​46 Friedlowsky ​46 Hudler (timpanist, deserves dinner) ​46 Umlauf (1814) ​135 Dirzka, Ignaz Karl (choral director; bass singer) ​224 As Bartolo ​17 Biographical sketch ​224 See also Cook, Grant W. and in Ninth Symphony index Doberer, Maria ​xxxviii Dobihal, Dem. (chorus) ​225–226 Biographical sketch ​225–226 Dobyhal, Joseph (principal clarinettist, K-Theater) ​216, 225–226 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​216 Biographical sketch ​216 Dont, Joseph Valentin (violoncellist, K-Theater) ​209–210 ​Biographical sketch ​209–210 Dragonetti, Domenico (London contrabassist) ​xi Ninth Symphony parts conceived with Grams in mind ​46–47, 108, 211

GENERAL INDEX

Dreyssig, Anton (principal flutist, TadW) ​ 2 Du-friends. See Hauschka; Kanne; but not Schindler Duggan, John ​xxxix Duport, Louis Antoine (dancer, administrator, K-Theater) ​17 Importance minimized ​56–57 Projected Akademie and Melusine ​14 Willful and capricious ​57 “Because he was a dancer” ​57 See also in Ninth Symphony index Duschke/Tuschke, Philipp (trombonist, K-Theater) ​222 Biographical sketch ​222 Played at Beethoven’s funeral ​222 Dwight, John Sullivan (publisher, journalist) ​xxxiv Egger, Georg (chorus) ​224 Elsler [Elssler], Johann (chorus) ​224 England Potential tour no longer realistic ​3–4 See also London ​ Erler, Emanuel (Liechtenstein oboist) ​216 Eskeles, Bernhard (banker) Jewish temple commission ​165 Pianist daughter Marie ​164–165 Tickets for repeat Akademie ​164–165 Essinger, A. [Johann] (chorus) ​224 Esterházy (Invitation) ​119 Eybler, Joseph Leopold ​36 Rondo, valved horn (Hradetzky) ​10 Eyesight (Beethoven’s) ​162 Seyfried’s account ​162 See also Health Fellner and Würth (bankers, concerts) ​xiv Fenzi, Giuseppe (violoncellist) Suggested for repeat Akademie ​151–152 Ferial Day. See Norma-Tag Ferritto, John ​xxxviii Fichtner, Stephan (oboist) ​2 Financial and banking matters ​15 Symphonies 1–8 ​15–16 Firewood Delivery May 6 ​114 May 22 ​160 Fischer, Johann Nepomuk (amateur violinist, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde) ​208, 229–230

265 Forti, Anton (singer) ​17 Fradl, Karl (amateur violinist, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde) 207, 229–230 Franz I (Emperor) Departed for Prague (May 5) ​69 Liberal religious practice, unfriendly to ​52 Masses and church music, conservative ​ 9 Franz, Stephan (violinist, Hofkapelle) ​48 Freyberger, Joseph (Liechtenstein second clarinettist) ​217 Friedlowsky, Anton (second clarinettist, TadW) ​ 217 Biographical sketch ​92, 217 Premiered Schubert’s Der Hirt auf dem Felsen ​xvii, 217 Schuppanzigh concert ​135 Friedlowsky, Joseph (principal clarinettist, TadW) ​xvi, 71, 99, 216–217 Apostrophe to Beethoven ​xvi–xvii Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​217 Beethoven’s parts for him ​xvi, 216–217 Biographical sketch ​92, 216–217 Dinner with Beethoven ​7 Letters to 6–7 Professor, GdMf ’s Conservatory ​217 Schubert’s Der Hirt auf dem Felsen for him ​xvii, 217 Fries, Moritz von (Count, Protestant banker) ​197 Biographical sketch ​197 Petition signer ​197 Fritz, Adalbert (chorus) ​225 Fröhlich sisters (singers) ​139–140 Fuchs, Dem. [Rosa?] (chorus) ​226 Fuchs, Ingrid ​xxxvii, 95 Gallizinberg ​ xxxviii ​ Gänsbacher, Johann Baptist ​137 “Garbage, reeking, rotting” (Sachs) ​xii Gauster, Martin (amateur violinist, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde) ​ 208, 229–230 Gebauer, Benjamin (oboist, Copyist C) Beethoven disliked his work ​30 Copied Eroica Symphony ​30 Former oboist ​30 Gebauer, Gotthart (Liechtenstein oboist) ​ 216 Geissler, Johann Baptist (amateur violoncellist) ​211, 229–230

266 Geissler, Johann Baptist (continued)​ Biographical sketch ​211 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​211, 229–230 George, William (hornist, musicologist) ​ xxxviii German muse ​195 Gesellschaft der Freunde der Wiener Oboe ​ xxxviii Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​xxxvii Men’s chorus sufficiently trained ​42 Orchestra and chorus: size and strength ​ 42 Orchestra largely amateurs ​16 Prepared to help with Akademie ​17 Volunteer sign-up sheet (April 8, 1824) ​ 228–230 Women’s chorus (young girls) weak ​42 Gesellschaft des Privat-Musik Vereins ​228 Geymüller (banker) ​109 Giannatasio del Rio, Cajetan Attended Akademie with family ​123 Biographical sketch ​123 Gierlichs, Grazyna ​xxxviii Gläser, Franz (composer/conductor) ​181 Biographical sketch ​104 Conducted Consecration ​19 Conducted Feldtrompeter ​19 Gläser, Peter (copyist, Josephstadt) Active theater copyist ​44 Assessed situation ​43 Biographical sketch ​43 Engaged as copyist ​43 Schindler engages ​43 Potential copyist, Ninth Symphony ​20 Principal copyist, Ninth Symphony ​ 41–58 Schindler recommends as copyist  191 Staff of J-Theater ​44 See also in Ninth Symphony index Glöggl (visitor) ​20 Gneixendorf (near Krems). See Beethoven, Johann van Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von. See Egmont in the Index of Compositions ​ Goldstein, Latte ​xxxix Görgen, Helene. See Grebner, Helene (singer) Gosmar, Wilhelm August (banker) Attended Akademie ​123 Baptized Jew ​123 Biographical sketch ​123 Related to Leopold Sonnleithner ​123

GENERAL INDEX

Gottdank, Joseph (assistant manager, K-Theater) ​17, 97 Gottlieb, Jane (Juilliard librarian) ​96 Grams, Anton (late principal contrabassist, K-Theater) ​211 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​211 Biographical sketch ​108, 211 Copied first full score of Mozart’s Don Giovanni ​211 Death (May 18, 1823) ​9, 25–26 Invoked at May 5, 1824, rehearsal ​108 Master’s degree in philosophy (Breslau) ​ 211 Principal contrabassist, Theater an der Wien (1802–1810) ​211 Premieres of most of Beethoven’s orchestral works (1803–1815) ​211 Recitatives in Ninth Symphony conceived for him ​46–47, 211 Section leader, renowned ​46–47 Study with Joseph Natter (Prague) ​211 See also in Ninth Symphony index ​ Grebner/Krebner, Helene (née Görgen) Biographical sketch ​99–100 Girl chorister, GdMf ​99–100 Interviewed by Weingartner ​99–101 Green, Jake ​xxxiv–xxxv Computerized recreation of Akademie ​ xxxiv–xxxv Griesinger, Georg August ​184 Biographical sketch ​184 Grill, Johann (chorus) ​225 Grillparzer, Franz Did not get free ticket ​163 See also Melusine (unset by Beethoven) ​ in the Other Compositions index Gröger, Constanze ​xxxvii–xxxviii Gröger, Thomas (violinist) ​xxxviii Gross, Friedrich (amateur violoncellist) ​ 211, 229–230 Biographical sketch ​211 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​211, 229–230 Grosser Redoutensaal. See Redoutensaal, Grosser Grosswald, Anton (chorus) ​225 Grosswald, Ignaz (chorus) ​225 Grübel, Joseph (chorus) ​225 Gruber, Reinhard H. ​xxxvii Grünbaum (Madame), Rossini aria ​25 Gruss, Wenzel (Liechtenstein bassoonist) ​ 219

GENERAL INDEX

Gschlenk, Anton (chorus) ​225 Gugelhupf (Viennese pastry/cake) ​34 Gyrowetz, Adalbert (conductor/composer, K-Theater) ​203 Hacker, Franz (potential Gesellschaft volunteer) ​229 Hacker, N. (potential Gesellschaft volunteer) ​229 Hafer, Edward ​xxxviii Haidvogel, J. (Gasthaus, Graben) ​22 Haircut (Beethoven’s) ​ Reminder (May 5) ​112 Shown in Decker portrait ​frontispiece (ii), 116 Haitzinger, Anton (tenor). See in Ninth Symphony index Halm, Anton (composer) ​197 Arranged Grosse Fuge ​197 Biographical sketch ​197 Petition signer ​197 Handel, George Frideric Alexander’s Feast, Praise of Bacchus ​36 Consecration Overture, Handel style ​ 180 Israel in Egypt, double chorus ​36 “See the Conquering Hero Comes,” horn parts ​138 Harps (Mass by Stockhausen) ​62 Haslinger, Tobias (publisher) Advises postponement ​49, 51 Estimates time to copy parts ​34 Meeting (March 7) ​27–28 Hatwig, Otto (retired bassoonist/ contrabassist), his orchestra ​171 Hatzfeld, Franz Ludwig (Prince, Prussia) Intermediary for Missa subscription ​ 118 Invitation 118 Hauschka, Vincenz (violoncellist, official) ​ 196, 211 Biographical sketch ​196, 211 Conducting ​179 Du-friend ​196, 211 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​196, 211 Petition signer ​196 Professional musical training (Prague) ​ 211 Haydn, Joseph ​194 Creation/Schöpfung ​xiv, 48 Wigand’s depiction ​xiv Seasons ​48

267 Haydn, Joseph (continued) Siegesgesang, arr. Eybler ​36 Symphony No. 60 (movement 5) ​10, 19 Beethoven probably saw (1803) ​10 Fanfares model for Ninth/3 ​10 Health (Beethoven, deteriorating) ​xv–xvi See also Eyesight, Hearing ​ Hearing/deafness At Akademie (May 7) ​122–123 Conversation with Sandra (1823) ​122 For conducting ​69 With Smart (1825) ​122 See also Deafness, Mälzel Hebel; probably Hörbeder, Franz (trombonist, K-Theater) ​222 Biographical sketch ​222 Heine, Heinrich Ami de Beethoven (calling card), derisive fiction ​xix–xx, xxx Heine retracted reluctantly ​xxi “Mere joke” (Thayer) ​xxxi Baptized Jew ​xix Biographical sketch ​xix–xx Disliked Beethoven’s music ​xxx Disliked homosexuals ​xxx Homophobic ​xix Disliked Schindler ​xix–xx, xxx Related to Moscheles’s wife ​xix–xx Report from Paris ​xix–xx Hell, Helmut ​xxxvii Hellmesberger, Georg (violinist, K-Theater) ​ 205, 228, 230 Biographical sketch ​205 Hen ​34 Henning, Carl Wilhelm (violinist, Berlin) ​ 11–12 Obtained Consecration music ​10–12 Hensler, Carl Friedrich (manager, Josephstadt Theater) Sent Consecration Overture to Pressburg ​ 42 Herbst, Michael (middle-ranged hornist) ​ xvii, 26, 135 Herre, Grita ​xxxvii Schindler’s falsified entries ​xxiii Hesperus (journal, Stuttgart) ​30 Heterosexuals, selected. See Beethoven (Johann); Beethoven (Karl); Schlemmer (Wenzel) ​ Hietzing ​ Kobau residence ​xxxviii

268 Hildebrand/Hildenbrand, Johann (assistant concertmaster, K-Theater) ​70, 204 Biographical sketch ​70 Hofmusikgraf. See Dietrichstein Hofkapelle/Hofmusikkapelle ​ “Old people’s home” (Umlauf ) ​136 Orchestra ages ​136 Hofbauer, Anton [Karl] (chorus) ​225 Högelsberger, Andreas [Anton] (chorus) ​ 225 Holub, Johann (Liechtenstein hornist) ​221 Holz, Karl (amateur violinist, Schuppanzigh’s quartet) ​207, 228, 230 Beethoven’s orchestral colleagues, lists ​ xvii Biographical sketch ​207 Pun on name ​29 Holzmann, Barbara (1755–1831, housekeeper) ​8, 34–35 Biographical sketch ​8 Cooking Day off (May 7) ​113 Karl reacts angrily ​113 Homosexuality 187–188 See also Heine; Schindler Hörbeder, Franz (trombonist, K-Theater) ​ 222 Biographical sketch ​222 See also Hebel, Franz ​ Horn/hornists ​24–26 Mass by Stockhausen ​62 Techniques ​10 Valved (Hradetzky, 1822) ​10, 64, 219 Valved (Lewy, 1825) ​xi Hörr, Johann (Penzing landlord) Tailor to Rudolph ​7 Horzalka, Johann Evangelist ​177–178 Höslinger, Clemens ​ xxxvii ​ Howell, Standley ​ xxiv ​ Hradetzky, Friedrich (low hornist, K-Theater) ​xvii, 62, 71, 78, 99, 138, 154, 176, 219–220 Beethoven, Horn Sonata and Fidelio Overture (solos) ​10, 61 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​ 219–220 Biographical sketch ​219–220 Coached with traveling virtuoso Giovanni Punto (Johann Wenzel Stich) ​219 Concert (1818) ​176

GENERAL INDEX

Hradetzky, Friedrich (continued) Dismissed in Barbaja’s cuts ​13, 26 Eybler, Rondo ​10 Horn solo in Fidelio Overture for him (1814) ​10, 61, 219 Horn solo, movement 3, Ninth Symphony, for him 10–11, 17, 219–220 Invented experimental valved horn (1822) ​10, 219 See also in Ninth Symphony index Hudler, Anton (timpanist, K-Theater) ​222 Biographical sketch ​222 Mechanical tunings for timpani ​222 Played for 1814 revision of Fidelio ​222 Replaced timpanist Anton Brunner, K-Theater ​222 Symphony No. 8 (octaves in Finale) ​8 Played at Christmas (1817) ​8, 222 Symphony No. 9 (octaves in Scherzo) ​ 8 See also in Ninth Symphony index Hummel, Johann Nepomuk, profits in Russia ​78 Humor ​5, 29, 45, 54, 59–60, 70, 87, 102–104, 110–111, 152, 191 Karl as conductor ​117 Pun on Holz (wood) ​29 Sarcasm ​102, 152, 163 Schindler taunted for conducting ​45 See also Puns; Wordplay ​ Hürth, Theobald (principal bassoonist, K-Theater) ​218 Beethoven meets ​88 Biographical sketch ​24, 93, 218 Encounter with Schubert ​25 “Foreign” ​61 Friends with hornist Lewy ​218 Kreutzer, Concertant for Hürth and Lewy ​25 Played in Beethoven’s 1824 concerts ​ 218 Replaced Nowak ​217–218 Hüttenbrenner, Joseph Accompanied Beethoven and Schindler home from Akademie ​129–131 Biographical sketch ​131 Friend of Schubert’s ​129 GdMf chorus (tenor) at Akademie ​129 Hyperbole (Beethoven) ​51 Information, “received” ​xi–xii

GENERAL INDEX

Jäger (tenor) ​47 Janatka/Janaka, Johann (hornist, K-Theater) ​ 220 Succeeded Michael Herbst, principal, Theater an der Wien ​220 Biographical sketch ​220 Jansa, Leopold (recent violinist, K-Theater) ​ 108, 207 Biographical sketch ​108–109, 207 Hired over Schuppanzigh for K-Theater ​ 108–109 Jews ​24–25 Gosmar ​123 See also Deabis, Eskeles, Heine, Lewy, Moscheles, Saphir Jones, David Wyn ​xxvi Josephstadt Theater. See Theater in der Josephstadt ​ Juilliard Manuscript Collection ​95–96 Schott materials ​95–96 Kagan, Susan ​ xxxviii ​ Kail, Joseph (hornist, K-Theater) ​61, 220 Distantly related to the Khayll family (flutist, oboist, trumpeter) ​220 Returned to Prague, December 1, 1824 ​ 220 Biographical sketch ​220 Kanne, Friedrich August (composer, journalist) Biographical sketch ​74–75 Preferred “live” acoustic ​148 Published Petition ​67 Karl, Archduke ​ Diminutive uniform size ​76 Invitation (Akademie) ​116 Napoleonic War general ​67 Petition, wanted to sign ​67 Kärntnertor Theater History and description ​200–201 Opera and ballet (1810) ​5 Orchestra ​13 Weakened (1822–1823) ​5 Selected as venue for Akademie ​64–67 See also Court Theaters; Duport Kaspar [Caspar], Johann (chorus) ​225 Kässmayer, Mad. [Elisabeth] (chorus) ​226 Biographical sketch ​226 Katter, Joseph (concertmaster, K-Theater) ​ 204 Biographical sketch ​204

269 Kaufmann, Joseph (official, prominent amateur violist) ​209, 229–230 Biographical sketch ​209 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​209, 229–230 Sonnleithner family salon ​209 Kelly, Thomas Forrest ​xii, xxxv Kerman, Joseph ​xxiii–xxiv “Lackey,” “stupid, dull, vindictive” (on Schindler) ​xxiv “Shabby little shocker” (on Puccini’s Tosca) ​xxiv Khayll, Aloys (flutist/piccolo player, Burgtheater) ​71, 99, 213–214 Beethoven’s 1808 and 1813–1814 concerts ​ 213–214 Beethoven’s piccolo parts for him ​ 213–214 Biographical sketch ​213–214 Brothers Joseph (oboist) and Anton (trumpeter), popular trio ​ 213–214 Professor, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde’s Conservatory ​ 213–214 See also in Ninth Symphony index Khayll, Anton (trumpeter, K-Theater) ​221 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​221 Biographical sketch ​221 Trio with brothers Aloys (flutist) and Joseph (oboist) ​221 Khayll, Joseph (hornist, K-Theater). See Kail, Joseph Khayll, Joseph (oboist, K-Theater) ​214 Biographical sketch ​214 Moscheles, Concertino, flute and oboe) ​ 214 Training at Wiener Neustadt ​214 Trio with brothers Aloys (flutist) and Anton (trumpeter) ​214 Kiesewetter von Weisenbrunn, Raphael Georg (official, amateur music historian) ​198 Biographical sketch ​139–140, 198 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, vice president ​198 Petition signer ​198 Kiesling [Kissling], Leopold [Joseph] (chorus) ​225 Kinderman, William ​xxvi King, Antje ​xxxix

270 Kinsky [Kinky], Joseph (conductor, K-Theater) ​203 Kirchhoffer, Franz Christian (bookkeeper) ​ 17 Biographical sketch ​187 Complimentary seats ​116 Kletzinsky, Leopold (potential Gesellschaft volunteer) ​229 Knapp, Edmund ​xxxvii Knowles, John ​199 Kobau, Ernst (oboist) ​xxxviii, 2, 27 Kohary (Invitation) ​116 Köhler, Karl-Heinz (project director, Konversationshefte) Warned against “criminal sensation” in forged entries ​xxiii Kojima, Shin Augustinus ​xii, xiii Kol Nidrei (in Quartet, Op. 131) ​165 Kopitz, Klaus Martin ​86 Kornhäusel, Joseph (architect, J-Theater) ​ 201 Kost (Board). See Boarding house Kosz, Ilse ​xxxvii, 95 Kotzebue, August, Ruins of Athens. See in Other Compositions index ​ Kraft, Anton (violoncellist) ​xvii, 2 Beethoven’s Triple Concerto ​xvii Kraft, Nikolaus (violoncellist) ​xvii Beethoven’s Sonata, Op. 69) ​xvii Krähmer, Caroline, née Schleicher (freelance clarinettist/violinist) ​27, 215 Biographical sketch ​215 Husband Ernest ​215 Krähmer, Ernest Johann (principal oboist, Burgtheater) ​29, 71, 215 Beethoven knew reputation ​215 Biographical sketches ​215 Concert (March 7) ​29 Friends with bassoonist Mittag ​215, 218 Lutheran ​215, 218 Variations on Czakan ​36 Wife Caroline (clarinettist) ​27, 215 Krams (contrabassist). See Grams Kraus, Beate Angelika ​xi, xxxvii, 95–96 Kremser, Werner ​xxxviii Kreutzer, Conradin (conductor/composer, K-Theater) ​203–204 Attended May 5 rehearsal ​110 Biographical sketch ​24, 203–204 Concertant for Hürth and Lewy ​25 No function at Akademie ​110

GENERAL INDEX

Kreutzer, Conradin (continued) Rehearsal pianist for chorus and soloists ​ 110 Taucher (opera) ​36–37 Variations, 2 horns, Lewy and Leser) ​105 Krommer, Franz (composer) ​45 Kubik, Gerhard ​xxxviii Kučera, P. Milan ​xxxviii ​ Kuczera [Kutschera], Ignaz (chorus) ​225 Kuffner, Christoph Johann Anton (official, poet) ​22–23, 197–198 Biographical sketch ​197–198 Choral Fantasy (text) ​86, 197–198 Drama Tarpeja ​197–198 Petition signer ​197–198 Kunst, Friedrich (potential Gesellschaft volunteer) ​229 Kupelwieser, Leopold Biographical sketch ​130 Friend of Schubert ​130 Lachner, Franz (organist/composer) ​25 Attended rehearsal ​111 Biographical sketch ​111–112 Friend of Schindler ​112 Friend of Schubert ​112 Ladenburger ​112 Ladenburger, Michael ​xxxvii, 7, 112, 127 Laichmann, Michaela ​ xxxvii ​ Landstand/Landständischer Saal ​202 Capacity ​60, 202 Court would not attend there ​60 No Beethoven work premiered there ​ 202 Termed a “nutshell” ​60 Lechner, Ursula ​xxxvii Lederer, Johann (official, amateur violinist, GdMf ) ​199; or Lederer, Karl Joseph Alois (banker) ​199 Biographical sketch ​199 Petition signer ​199 Leidel, Joseph [Anton] (chorus) ​225 Leidesdorf, Max/Marcus (composer, publisher) ​196 Biographical sketch ​196 Petition signer ​196 Sauer and Leidesdorf ​196 Leipzig, Thomaskirche ​123 Leithner/Leitner, Franz [Carl] (violinist, contrabassist, K-Theater) ​205, 212 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​205, 212 Biographical sketch ​212

GENERAL INDEX

Lenhard, Franz (chorus) ​225 Lenneberg, Hans ​xxiv Leser, Robert (horn student of Elias Lewy) ​ 220–221 Biographical sketch ​220–221 Kreutzer, Variations (2 horns) ​105 Schubert, Nachtgesang im Walde ​221 Letters ​ 1824 (March 28), Duport to Beethoven ​ 48–49 1824 (ca. April 1), to Lichnowsky, Schuppanzigh, Schindler ​51 “No concert;” never sent ​51 1824 (ca. April 8), amateur volunteers, Gesellschaft ​228–230 1824 (late April), Haslinger ​229 1824 (late April), Haslinger to Beethoven ​229 1824 (April 30), to Duport ​81 Discussed fee ​81 1824 (ca. May 2) to Dirzka ​94 1824 (May 10), K-Theater orchestra, chorus, dilettantes ​142–144 His thanks and projected repeat ​ 142–144 1824 (May 20), to Bäuerle (?) ​152 Letters (unsent) 1802, Heiligenstadt Testament ​51 1812, Immortal Beloved ​51 1824, Lichnowsky, Schuppanzigh, Schindler ​51 Levy, David ​xi–xii, xxxv Lewy, Elias (high hornist, K-Theater) ​220 Baptized (1835) as Eduard Constantin ​ 24, 220 Beethoven meets ​88 Biographical sketch ​24–26, 64, 93, 220 Encounter with Schubert ​25 First Jewish member, K-Theater orchestra ​220 “Foreigner” ​61 French training ​220 Friends with bassoonist Hürth ​218 Kreutzer, Concertant for Hürth and Lewy ​25 Kreutzer, Variations (2 horns) ​105 Replaced Bellonci as principal (January, 1824) ​220 Lewy, Joseph Rudolph (hornist, Elias’s younger brother) ​64 Lewy, mythical fourth hornist, xi

271 Library, Beethoven’s ​ Bookcases available ​44 Filled with orchestral parts ​35 Lichnowsky, Eduard Maria (Prince, historian, dramatist) ​196 Biographical sketch ​196 Petition signer ​196 Lichnowsky, Moritz (Count, brother of Carl) ​198 “An old lady” (Karl) ​59 Attended Akademie (May 7) ​123 Biographical sketch ​198 Daughter (illegitimate), Jeannette Stummer ​ Friendship, uncomfortable ​ Hosted Beethoven, Schindler ​59–60 Meeting (March 7) ​27–28 Negotiations with Schindler for TadW ​ 57 Refreshments at Christus rehearsal (1803) ​ 67–68 Signs Ludlamshöhle Petition ​24, 198 Angry over Petition’s publication ​ 24, 67 Left Beethoven’s circle ​87 Omit name from published Petition ​ 75 Wife, second (Josepha/Johanna Stummer, singer) Liebhaber Concerts ​xiv Liechtenstein Harmonie ​71 Liechtenstein, Prince (Invitation) ​115 Linke, Joseph (principal violoncellist, TadW) ​108–109, 135, 210 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​210 “Best cellist in Europe for quartets” ​13 Biographical sketch ​210 Rasumovsky’s Quartet ​210 Schubert’s pizzicato part in Quintet in C ​13, 210 Written for him ​145 Schuppanzigh’s Quartet ​210 Tone could sound like contrabass ​210 Liszt, Franz (pianist, composer) ​ Schindler engineered meeting ​188 Visited Beethoven (April 8, 1823) ​188 Weihekuss in Beethoven’s apartment ​ 188 Lithographic Institute (Michaelerplatz) ​ 146 Decker portrait ​157 Advertised in newspapers ​157

272 Lobkowitz Palace ​xiii–xiv Lockwood, Lewis ​xxxviii, 6, 31, 95–96 Logic: principles missing in attacks on Schindler ​xxiii London Projected visit less likely ​xv–xvi London Philharmonic ​3 Modern indignation over “commission” ​ 5–6 Lorenz, Michael (musicologist, Vienna) ​ xxxviii, 25, 27, 215, 223 Lother, Willibald (hornist) ​138 Ludlamshöhle ​xii, xvi Lühning, Helga ​xxvii Lund, Susan ​xxxviii Lutherans. See Starke; Wähner; Zmeskall MacArdle, Donald W. Schindler “anti-Semitic”  xxi Macháček, Joseph ​ xxxviii ​ Maid, Gläser’s, delivers copy work ​67 Mälzel, Leonhard ​ Address ​19 Ear trumpets ​18–19 Metronome ​18 Manker, Ignaz (timpanist) ​1–2 Death (1817) ​8 Symphony No. 8, fourth movement ​1, 8 Marschal, Joseph (chorus) ​225 Marx, Adolph Bernhard: Thayer disapproved ​xxxiii–xxxiv Maschek, Paul (copyist) Beethoven’s impatience ​38, 40 Dismissal as copyist ​43–44 Realistic copying speed ​41 See also in Ninth Symphony index Masić, Dika ​xxxviii Masić, Leila ​xxxviii Mason, William Described Schindler (1850–1852) ​xxxiii Masses Beethoven seldom attends ​9 Emperor Franz’s conservative taste ​9 Mayer Bookshop (Deutsches Haus) Book cases for sale ​44 Mayer/Meier, Mathias (violinist, K-Theater) ​ 205 Mayseder, Joseph (violinist, K-Theater) ​ 108, 205 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​205 Biographical sketch ​85, 205

GENERAL INDEX

Mayseder, Joseph (continued) Family attended Akademie ​123 Variations for violin ​36 Meat ​ Beef (?) ​34 Mechanical devices (hearing). See Ear trumpets Medal, Louis XVIII ​52 Méhul, Overture to Adrien ​36 Melkus, Eduard (violinist, conductor) ​ xxxviii Melusine. See also Grillparzer and in Other Compositions index Melzer/Mölzer, Joseph (contrabassist / contrabassoonist, K-Theater) ​71, 135, 211–212, 219 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​ 211–212 Biographical sketch ​135, 211–212 Dismissed ​25–26 Septet (Op. 20; March 14, 1824) ​135 Menagerie, Madame Simonelli’s Beethoven and Karl visit ​145–146 Menagerie, Van Aken’s Beethoven and Karl visit ​145 Menzel, Joseph (violinist, K-Theater) ​205 Mercadante, Saverio, aria ​36 Meredith, William R. ​xix–xxi, xxx, xxxviii, 232 See also Heine Merk, Joseph (violoncellist, K-Theater, professor at GdMf ’s Conservatory) ​ 210 Biographical sketch ​210 Metronome marks ​xxii–xxiii Metronome (Zmeskall’s) ​40 Metternich, Clemens Wenzel Lothar (chancellor) Invitation ​115 Middeke, Michael ​xxxvii, xxxix Military imagery ​87 Misar, Karl ​ xxxvii ​ Mittag, August (principal bassoonist, Burgtheater) ​71, 135, 218 Biographical sketch ​218 Conversations with Beethoven (1826) ​ 218 Friends with oboist Krähmer ​215, 218 Lutheran ​215, 218 Mollnik (oboist, K-Theater) ​61, 214 Biographical sketch ​214 Monetary values ​37, 40

273

GENERAL INDEX

Moscheles, Ignaz ​ Acquaintance (mixed) with Beethoven ​ xviii Called Schindler “Don Quixote” ​xx Concertino, flute and oboe, 1818 (Aloys and Joseph Khayll) ​214 Facile variations ​26 Kidney stones ​xviii Piano score to Fidelio ​173 Publishes Schindler’s biography under his own name ​xviii Modern scholars blind to plagiarism ​ xxi Moscheles surprised at Schindler’s reaction ​ xxii ​ Remained Jewish ​xviii–xxii Mosel, Ignaz Franz von (violist, composer, librarian, Court Theater official) ​ 148–149, 198 Biographical sketch ​149, 198 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​198 Petition signer ​198 Mostić, Ana ​xxxviii Mozart, Wolfgang Amadeus ​194 Davidde penitente ​35 Don Giovanni (German) ​16–17 Magic Flute Overture ​180 Model for Consecration of the House Overture ​180 Flute part composed for Dreyssig ​2 Marriage of Figaro (German) ​16–17 “Non piu andrai” (repeated) ​17 Symphony No. 38 (“Prague”) ​35 Müller, presumably Joseph (violist, K-Theater) ​208 Biographical sketch ​208 Müllner-Gollenhofer, Josephine (harpist) ​200 Musicians, orchestral Appreciated Beethoven ​xvi Numbers ​xiii–xv Professional ​xiii–xv See also Orchestral musicians Musik-Verein. See Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde “Napoleon, Little” (Duport) ​70 Nehammer, Franz (government secretary) ​ 198 Biographical sketch ​198 Petition signer ​198 Violinist, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​ 198

Nettl, Paul ​xxxiv Neuling’s beer garden ​144–145 Neumann, Philipp (chorus) ​225 Newman, William S. ​xxiv–xxv Nichols, Irby Coghill (historian) ​xxxii Ranke principles ​xxxii Norma-Tag (Ferial Day) ​109 Defined ​132 Nowak/Nowack, Joseph (bassoonist, K-Theater) ​61, 217 Biographical sketch ​217 Replaced by Hürth ​217–218 Oboe, Gesellschaft der Freunde der Wiener ​ xxxviii Oboists Bednarik, Josef ​xxxviii Kobau, Ernst ​xxxviii See also Gebauer, Benjamin Öhler, Georg (flutist, K-Theater) ​213 Biographical sketch ​213 Ohmayer, Joseph von (lawyer, concertmaster) ​175, 178 Oliva, Franz (accountant) ​xxxviii Previous “secretary” (to December, 1820) ​ 186 Orchestral musicians From Prague Conservatory ​61 Invited for dinner ​2–3 Josephstadt Theater ​14–15 Personnel changes (1814–1820) ​2–3 Organ part ​26 Ortner, Franz (orchestra manager, K-Theater) ​223 Otter, Ludwig (violinist, K-Theater) ​205 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​205 Palffy-Erdöd, Ferdinand (Count, theater owner) ​39–40, 42, 197 Beethoven not comfortable with him ​ 59 Biographical sketch ​39, 197 Invitation ​118 K-Theater, bids on ​159, 163 Petition signer ​197 Theater an der Wien ​197 Pamer, Mad. (chorus) ​226 Biographical sketch ​226 Pap, Christina ​ xxxviii ​ Partsch [Bartsch], Dem. (chorus) ​226 Partuschek [Bartuscheg], [Matthias] (chorus) ​225

274 Paternos, Mad. Caroline, née Kuntzmann (chorus) ​226 Patronage/support Early symphonies ​xiii–xvi Changed circumstances ​xv–xvi Paul, Bernhard (hornist) ​xxxviii Paul, Walter ​109, 199 Paumgarten, wife of Captain. See Boarding house Peet, Crispin ​xxxix Pelikan, Zum goldenen ​ xxxviii ​ Pencil, red (Rother Bleystift) ​44, 53, 113, 152 Commonly in use ​44 “Contrabassoon” ​117, 119 Rötel, term considered mysterious ​44 Umlauf also used ​44 Pensel, Mad. (chorus) ​226 Percussion, auxiliary (K-Theater), unidentified ​223 Perschl, Joseph (contrabassist, K-Theater) ​ 212 Biographical sketch ​212 Perschl, Michael (contrabassist, Leopoldstadt Theater) ​212 Peters, Karl (tutor/guardian) ​186 Biographical sketch ​186 Petition, Ludlamshöhle ​74–75, 77 Archduke Karl wanted to sign ​67 Complaint against publication ​77–78 Delivery to Beethoven ​23 Did not affect Beethoven’s progress ​24 Full text, annotated ​194–199 Origins and purpose ​85–86 Product of Ludlamshöhle group ​22–23 Published ​23–24, 67 By Bäuerle ​67 By Kanne ​67 Lichnowsky angry ​67 Schickh to publish (third time) ​75 Without Lichnowsky’s name ​75 Schindler reads ​30 Self-important language ​22 Several authors ​22–23, 74 Signers ​22 Stainer as author ​74 Pettenkofer, Anton, orchestra organizer ​171 Pfarrhund, Frau Stella ​xxxviii Philipp, Maximilian (potential Gesellschaft volunteer) ​228 Piccolo ​29 Khayll, Aloys ​14, 29

GENERAL INDEX

Pilat, Joseph Anton, Beobachter ​117 Pils, Susanna ​xxxvii Pirate reprinting ​ Härtel ​183 Nägeli ​183 Piringer, Ferdinand (official, amateur violinist/violist, Concerts spirituels) ​ 48, 52, 207, 209 Biographical sketch ​207, 209 Dilettantes ​39–40 Would contact ​58 Meet at Neuling’s beer garden ​144 About newspapers ​145 Occasionally paid ​163 Schuppanzigh’s sarcasm ​163 Offered help on Akademie ​20–21 Schuppanzigh’s ambivalence ​209 Selected “best amateur strings” for May 7 Akademie ​229 To be castrated ​103 Pollak/Polak, Anton (contrabassist / contrabassoonist, Burgtheater) ​71, 212, 219 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​212 Biographical sketch ​212 Portamento, Salieri decried (1811) ​19 Portrait, Decker. See Decker, Stephan Portrait, Höfel/Letronne: Karl’s favorite ​ 146 Portrait, Mähler, with lyre (1805): “Never” (Karl) ​146 Prague Conservatory, graduates in Vienna ​ 61 Preisinger, Joseph (bass). See in the Ninth Symphony index Prinz, Leopold (choral personnel manager) ​ 224 Pronunciation, Rhenish ​49–50 Protestants. See Krähmer, Mittag, Wähner, Zmeskall Publishers. See Artaria; Diabelli, Haslinger; Schott, Steiner Puns. See Humor; Wordplay Punto, Giovanni (low hornist). See Stich, Johann Wenzel Raab, Ignaz (contrabassist / contrabassoonist, Burgtheater) ​71, 213, 219 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​213 Biographical sketch ​213 Rabel, Jacob (violinist, K-Theater) ​206

GENERAL INDEX

Rampl, Wenzel (“Copyist B”) ​28, 180 Biographical sketch ​28 Ranke, Leopold (von) xxxii Principles of documentary, objective history ​xxxii Thayer used his principles ​xxxii Rebmann, Martina ​xxxvii, 6 Redoutensaal, Grosser xv Acoustics not good for solo piano (Czerny) ​155 History and description ​202 “Reeking, rotting garbage” (Sachs) ​xii Rehearsal, double ​xiii Rehearsal methods (vocal parts) ​30 Rehearsals, reading ​xii–xv Rehearsal/scheduling practices Earlier concerts ​82 Two in 1814 ​173 See also Ninth Symphony index Reichmann-Hochkirchen (Invitation) ​116 Reprinting, pirate. See Pirate reprinting ​ Residences Hetzendorf (Summer, 1823) ​189 Landstrasse, Ungargasse No. 323 ​11–12 Directions/address ​11–12, 19 Restaurant: Bierteufel ​ xii Restaurant: Schöne Sklavin ​106–107 Pasqualati House ​172 Restaurants: Schöne Sklavin ​106–107 Ribar, Maria ​xxxviii Riegler, Johann (violinist, potential Gesellschaft volunteer) ​229 Ries, Ferdinand (pianist, composer) ​3, 187 Christus observations (1803) ​120 Copy of Ninth Symphony ​76 Liaison with London Philharmonic ​ 5–6 Röhrich, Anton (wealthy merchant, amateur contrabassist) ​213, 228, 230 Biographical sketch ​213, 228, 230 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​213, 228, 230 Romberg, Anton (bassoonist) ​135 Ronge, Julia ​ xxxvii ​ Rossini, Gioacchino Bianca, aria ​36 Mohameto, Act I (finale) ​36 Semiramide, duet and duettino ​36 Zelmira, quintet ​36 See also Ninth Symphony index Rossini fever ​xvii, 4, 23, 194 Affects May 23 repeat Akademie ​159

275 Rossini fever (continued) April–May, 1824 ​129 Aria ​25 At Court ​36 Rötel. See Pencil, red Routine, daily (Beethoven) ​132, 174 Early riser ​120 Rudolf, Max (conductor) ​199 Rudolph (Archduke), apartment ​xiv–xv See also Ninth Symphony index ​ Rummel, Christian (Kapellmeister, Nassau) ​ 92–93 Biographical sketch ​160–161 Visited (May 22) ​160–161 Rupprecht, Johann Baptist (poet, botanist, censor) Biographical sketch ​186 Poet of Merkenstein ​186 Russo, Eugenie (pianist) ​xxxviii Rzehaczek, Franz (official, amateur violinist, rare instrument collector) ​207 Biographical sketch ​207 Complimentary seats ​116 Lent rare stringed instruments ​79–80 Used for Akademie ​79–80, 152 Schuppanzigh’s brother-in-law ​152, 207 Sachs, Harvey ​xi–xii Saint-Lubin, Leon [Napoleon] de (violinist) Concert ​48 J-Theater ​181 Salad (Sontag) ​34, 38 Salieri, Antonio ​ Decried portamento in strings (1811) ​19 Influence ​145 Political machinations against Mozart ​ 57 Threat (1808) against Beethoven ​57, 59 Saphir, Moritz Gottlob Attended Akademie ​124 Biographical sketch ​124 Saurau (Invitation) ​115 Scheuch, P. Albin ​xxxvii Schickh, Johann (Wiener Zeitschrift) Advises postponing repeat concerts ​149 Will publish Petition without Lichnowsky ​75 Schiller, Friedrich ​ An die Freude ​13 Karl gets printed text ​117

276 Schiller, Friedrich (continued) Complimentary ticket for printer ​ 120 Reprinted for repeat Akademie ​152 Schilling, Gustav ​xvi–xvii Schindler, Anton (violinist, former law clerk) Accompanied Beethoven home after Akademie ​129–131 Dramatic account ​129–130 Acquaintance (Early) with Beethoven ​ 170–193 1813: Attends gigantic concerts ​171 1814 (March): First meeting ​172 1814 (November): Plays on Congress concerts ​173–174 1815: Occasional meetings ​174 1817: Clerk for lawyer Bach ​175 1819: Played Symphony No. 7 (Beethoven conducting) ​ 176–177 1822: Consecration of the House ​ 179–183 1823 (January): Secretary for Missa solemnis subscriptions ​ 183–185 1823 (Summer): Increased usefulness ​ 190 Acquaintance with Beethoven minimized ​ xxvii–xxviii Acquaintance substantiated ​ 170–193 Admired conductor Umlauf (May 3) ​ 99 Advocated TadW ​52 Akademie: involved from March 24, 1824 ​30 Definable role ​44, 191 “Anti-Semitic” reaction to Moscheles’s plagiarism ​xx–xxi “Antisemitism probably reflects Schindler’s attitude” (MacArdle) ​xxi Schindler not anti-Semitic ​xxii Antisemitism, largely unsaid motivation for campaign to discredit Schindler ​xxiii Apartment hunting with/for Beethoven ​ 71 Arrange for supplemental pros/ dilettantes ​82 Arrogance ​xvii

GENERAL INDEX

Schindler, Anton (continued) Asserts that Beethoven could conduct ​ 69–70 Attended GdMf rehearsal ​42 Beethoven in Paris ​xx–xxi Beethoven’s associates disliked working with him ​190 Beethoven’s dinner companion (assigned as) ​182 Beethoven’s friend, perceived as (October, 1822) ​181 Beethoven’s orchestral colleagues ​ xvii–xviii Biographie ​1840) ​xviii English edition (Moscheles alone) ​ xviii–xix Reacts to plagiarism ​xx–xxi Biographie (1860) “Children of Israel” generalized ​xxi Called “anti-Semitic” (MacArdle) ​ xxi–xxii Biography Approved by Thayer ​xxxiii–xxxiv Romantic/heroic style (not scholarly) ​ xxxi Bohemians, does not trust ​187 Butt of Schuppanzigh’s sarcasm ​102 Caricature by Adolphe Mende (Frankfurt, 1852) Career after 1824 ​xviii–xxii Charges against him defended ​ xxviii–xxxii Comments on aristocracy ​112 Compares earnings to Paris/London ​ 133–134 Compares “Hammerklavier” to Haydn ​ 19 Conducts benefit concert ​45 Taunted for his conducting ​45 Conflated accounts in Biographie Composition of Missa solemnis ​xxxi Ninth Symphony ​xxx Considers himself a “servant” ​189 Consulted lawyer Bach re Duport ​98 Conversation books Destruction (accused) ​xxii Destruction refuted ​xxvii Falsified entries discovered ​xxiii ​ Corrected Lannoy’s tempos using metronome ​40 Correspondence, ed. Brenner ​xxvii

GENERAL INDEX

Schindler, Anton (continued) “Cravat, terrible white” (Heine on Schindler) ​xx–xxi Description by William Mason (1850– 1852) ​xxxiii Dinner disastrous (March 14) ​34–37 Cover-up ​36–38 Dinner (May 9) ​134–140 Conflated account ​192, 231–232 Divisive element ​185–186 “Don Quixote, image of ” (Moscheles on Schindler) ​xx Du-friend, never with Beethoven ​184, 189 Effeminate ​xvii Engages Peter Gläser as copyist ​43 Engages second Harmonie ​ (May 5) ​ 112, 114 Excluded from Beethoven family outings ​ 188–189 “Expression, funereal” (Heine on Schindler) ​xx Facilitated Liszt’s visit to Beethoven ​188 Falling out with Beethoven (Aug.–Nov., 1823) ​9–10, 191 Did not witness movements 2 and 3 composed ​12 Summary of Summer–Fall, 1823 ​ 12–13 Falsified entries: some accurate and usable ​ xxvi, xxix ​ “Criminal sensation,” Köhler warns against ​xxiii “Wholesale forgeries” (Newman on Schindler) ​xxv Fickle ​188–189 Financial expectations ​152 Function found and defined ​191 “Gauche, grotesque, forbidding manner” (Newman on Schindler) ​xxv Gossipy ​xvii Heine’s Ami de Beethoven fabrication ​ xix–xx Homosexual, perceived as ​xx ​ By lawyer Bach and Heine ​xix–xx, xxx, 190 Hinted ​187–188 Imitates Duport’s speaking ​81 Immature ​xvii Indignant ​88 Intrigues by Böhm and Piringer ​ 144–145, 147

277 Schindler, Anton (continued) Items from estate ​xvii–xviii Johann (Beethoven’s brother) Plans to oust Schindler ​49–50 Final break (late May, 1824) ​ 192–193 Josephstadt Theater (concertmaster) Conducted concerts (Nov.–Dec., 1823) ​14 Symphony No. 2 ​14–15 Orchestra size ​14–15 Kept manuscript materials together ​ xxviii “Lackey” (Kerman and Newman on Schindler) ​xxiii–xxiv Legal writing (April 24) ​65–66 Letter to Duport ​65–66 Masculinity. See Homosexuality ​ Mentions contrabassist Anton Grams ​ 46–47 Metronome controversy ​xxii Mocked by Heine ​xix–xxi Modern scholars: balanced evaluations of Schindler ​xxv–xxviii Modern scholars: campaign against Schindler ​ xxii–xxviii ​ Negotiations with TadW ​39–40 Lichnowsky accompanies him ​57 “Papageno” ​190 “Perfectly honest writer” (Thayer) ​ xxxiv Political troubles (1815) ​174 “Poor devil” (Schuppanzigh) ​140 Portraits Caricature by Mende (Frankfurt, 1852) ​xxxiii Photograph (ca. 1860) ​xxv Potential correspondent, Hesperus (Stuttgart) ​30 Preparations for violinist’s career ​178 Preservation and editing ​xxviii ​ Projects losing money at Akademie ​ 98–99 Reads Ludlamshöhle Petition ​30 Recommends copying Finale first ​ 40–42 Rents fiacre for rehearsals ​108–109 Samothracian (Sodomite?) ​187 Scholars’ suspicions ​xxii Schuppanzigh and Karl appreciate his efforts ​191–192 Schuppanzigh’s physical limitations ​122

278

GENERAL INDEX

Schindler, Anton (continued) Schubert, Franz (continued) Sent Moscheles sheet from Symphony 9 Insults bassoonist Hürth and hornist MS as souvenir ​xviii Lewy ​25 Service to Beethoven ​xvii–xviii Kupelwieser, about upcoming Akademie ​ Solicits subscriptions to Missa solemnis ​ 50130 5–6 Lachner, Schindler friends ​112 Sonnleithner knew him (since 1813) ​ Nachtgesang im Walde (Lewy brothers, 20–21 Leser, Janatka, hornists) ​221 Spends the night at the Birne ​157 Nasty when drunk ​25 “Stupid, dull, and vindictive” (Kerman Probably attended Akademie ​129 on Schindler) ​xxiv Quartet, A Minor (D. 804) ​35 “Tickets, not enough free ones” ​ Nephew Karl’s comment ​35 163–164 Schuppanzigh, Ignaz (violinist, Unreliable ​36–38 concertmaster, quartet leader) ​xvii, “Vindictive” (reaction against 204, 231–232 plagiarism) ​xxiv Attended GdMf rehearsal ​42 Wants administrative position ​189 Augarten concerts ​78 See also Ninth Symphony index ​ 1824 (May 1) ​78, 104–106, 136–137 Schlemmer, Josepha (wife, widow, copyist) ​ Personnel, paid ​137 12, 146 Symphony No. 5 (May 1) ​78, Copied Tremate for repeat Akademie ​ 104–106 157, 164 Became drunk ​135 Copies after Wenzel’s death ​12 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​204 See also Ninth Symphony index Biographical sketch ​204 Schlemmer, Wenzel (copyist) ​180 Clement controversy ​57, 64–65 Death ​9–10, 12 Compliments Schindler at dinner ​140 Grammar and phonetic spelling ​34 Concert, quartet (March 14) ​35 Schlögl, P. Matthias ​xxxvii Had to pay contrabassist Melzer ​135 Schmidt, Anton (chorus) ​225 Program ​35 Schmidt, Dem. (chorus) ​226 Concertmaster, unopposed ​70 Schmiedl, Franz-Josef ​xxxviii Consecration Overture, comment on ​ Scholl, Carl (flutist, K-Theater) ​xvii, 213 137–138 Beethoven asked about flute capabilities ​ Contracted extra winds ​70 213 “Did most for Beethoven” (Karl) ​27 Biographical sketch ​103, 213 Diet affecting his agility ​103 Flute trill (“et incarnates”) ​68–69, 93 Dinner (May 9), contentions ​134–140 Walking stick stolen by dilettantes ​103 Disliked dilettantes ​70–71, 136 Piringer’s fault ​103 Eats fried chicken ​103–104 Schreiber, Anton (violist, K-Theater) ​208 Ill in mid-May ​152 Beethoven’s quartets and all symphonies ​ Introduces student Karl Holz ​29 208 Meeting (March 7) ​27–28 Biographical sketch ​208 Missa solemnis: Benedictus solo for Lobkowitz’s house ensemble ​208 him ​1 Schuppanzigh’s early quartet ​208 Offered help proofreading ​30 Schreyvogel, Joseph (printer, censor) Offered help to organize Akademie ​ Biographical sketch ​186 20–21 Schubert, Franz “One must support Art” ​103 Auf dem Strome (Joseph Rudolph Lewy, Passed over in past at TadW ​65 hornst) ​220 Physical limitations ​103, 122 Hüttenbrenner (Joseph), friend, Plays on benefit concert ​45 accompanied Beethoven home ​ Portamento, uses ​19 129 Practice decried by Salieri (1811) ​19

GENERAL INDEX

Schuppanzigh, Ignaz (continued) Profit, reportedly wants a cut ​152 Quartet concerts at Benko’s (Prater) ​ 103, 106 Quartet, premieres Beethoven’s Op. 127 (1825) ​147 “Sang with his violin” ​18 Sarcasm concerning Piringer and amateurs ​163 Sarcasm concerning Schindler ​102 Sarcastic reply to Umlauf ​163 Solo in Der glorreiche Augenblick ​173 Taunts Schindler for his conducting ​45 Teaching activities ​32 Tour, Germany and Russia (1816–1823) ​ 138–139, 174 Included Beethoven’s chamber music ​ 139 Included Wellington’s Victory ​138 Return from Russia (April 15, 1823) ​ 8 Used “hellacious” frequently ​52–53 “Hellaciously glad not to work with Bohemians” ​65, 187 Schuster, Mathias (chorus) ​225 Schuster, Dem. Antonia (chorus) ​226 Schwarzböck, Ludwig ​(chorus director, TadW) ​57 Schwarzenberg (Princely family), Invitation ​ 115 Schweiger von Lerchenfeld, Eduard (Baron, official) ​197 Biographical sketch ​197 Petition signer ​197 Sedlak, Wenzel (principal clarinettist, leader, Liechtenstein Harmonie) ​217 Arranged Beethoven’s Fidelio for Harmonie ​217 Biographical sketch ​217 Sedler, Georg (contrabassist) ​136 Seipelt, Joseph (bass) ​56 Stepped in as soloist at last minute ​101 Sellner, Joseph (principal oboist, TadW) ​ 71, 214–215 Seyfried, Ignaz von (conductor, TadW) Simple Mass for Emperor Franz ​9 “Shocker, shabby little” (Kerman on Tosca) ​ xxiv Sigl, soprano Katharina and family Visit Beethoven (October, 1822) ​ 181–182 Sittl, Weinhaus ​xxxviii

279 Slave girl, beautiful. See Residence, Ungargasse Sogg, Richard ​xxxviii Solomon, Maynard (psychological biographer) ​xxiv–xxvi Sonnleithner, Joseph ​50 Librettist of Fidelio ​50 Suggests Burgtheater ​50 Sonnleithner, Leopold von (lawyer, amateur violinist, concert organizer) ​171, 174, 178, 198, 209 Accounts of these performances ​198, 209 Biographical sketch ​198, 209 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​66, 198, 209 Helped organize Beethoven’s 1824 concerts ​20–21, 209 Petition signer ​198 Related to Gosmar ​123 Sontag, Henriette (soprano) ​17, 56 Complimentary seats ​116 Dinner (March 14) ​34–37 Vomited afterwards ​37 Part for Missa solemnis copied by March 25 ​43 Orchestra member neglected to deliver it to her ​45 Schindler suggests her for Ninth Symphony ​17 Wanted to visit Beethoven ​17 Sood, Sushma ​xxxviii Soyka, Anton (Liechtenstein bassoonist) ​ 219 Soyka, Wenzel (bassoonist, TadW) ​218–219 Biographical sketch ​218–219 Spitzeder, Joseph (actor) Biographical sketch ​78–79 Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin—Preussischer Kulturbesitz ​95 Stadion, Johann Philipp (Finance Ministry), Invitation ​118 Stadlen, Hedwig/Hedi (wife of Peter) Anti-Nazi writer, political activist ​ xxii–xxiii, xxvi Continued Peter’s campaign against Schindler ​xxvi Stadlen, Peter (pianist, musicologist, critic) ​ xxii Attacked Schindler, Forbes, Anderson ​ xxii Influenced others to attack Schindler ​ xxiii–xxvii

280 Stadlen, Peter (continued) Attacks against conversation books and metronomes ​xxii–xxiii Jewish ​xxii Sadie’s assessment ​xxii–xxiii Stadler, Anton (oboist, TadW) ​2 Stadler, Maximilian (Abbé, composer) ​197 Befreiung Jerusalems ​27 Biographical sketch ​197 Petition signer ​197 Stainer/Steiner von Felsburg, Johann Baptist (Court Secretary) ​197 Biographical sketch ​197 Father of Joseph Jacob Stainer ​197 Petition signer ​197 Stainer von Felsburg, Joseph Jacob (bank liquidator) ​198 Biographical sketch ​74, 198 Petition author (possible) ​23 Petition signer ​198 Son of Johann Baptist Stainer ​198 Starke, Friedrich (hornist, K-Theater) ​71, 78 Staudenheim, Jacob (Dr.), complimentary seats ​116 Staufer, Franz (violinist, K-Theater) ​206 Steblin, Rita ​8 Stecher, Dem. (chorus) ​226 Stegmayer, Ferdinand (choral rehearsal pianist/conductor) ​224 Stein, Matthäus Andreas (piano maker/repairer) Had Zmeskall’s metronome ​40 Steiner, Franz (violinist, K-Theater) ​206 Steiner, Sigmund Anton (music publisher/ dealer) ​199 Biographical sketch ​199 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​199 Petition signer ​199 Stern: restaurant (Stephansplatz, Brandstatt) ​ 27 Stich, Johann Wenzel (Giovanni Punto), low hornist ​xvii Stichey/Stichay, Joseph (violist, K-Theater) ​ 208 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​208 Biographical sketch ​208 Stockhammer, Ferdinand von (Count, official) ​197 Biographical sketch ​197 Family friends of Schindler’s ​197 Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde ​197 Petition signer ​197 Stockhausen, Franz

GENERAL INDEX

Mass, 6 harps, 4 horns ​62, 66 Performed with text by Bernard ​62 Stonaczek, Wenzel (chorus) ​225 Strebinger, Mathias (violinist, K-Theater) ​ 206 Strehle [Strelly], [Joseph] (chorus) ​225 Streicher, (Johann) Andreas (piano maker) ​ 197 Biographical sketch ​197 Petition signer ​197 Streicher-Stein family ​136 Strein, Dem. (chorus) ​226 Stroh, Patricia ​xxxviii Supper, light (evening) ​ May 7, after Akademie, none (Holzmann’s day off) ​130 May 9, after Prater dinner ​142 Swafford, Jan ​xxvii–xxviii Tailor-servant ​172 Tensions within Beethoven’s circle ​191–192 ​See also Beethoven, Johann; Beethoven, Karl; Böhm; Lichnowsky; Schindler; Schuppanzigh Tepperberg, Joachim ​xxxvii, 5 Texas ​xxiii, xxxii Blasen ​xxiii Brusilow ​dedication page (v), xxxix Nichols ​xxxii Yaeger ​dedication page (v), xxxix Thayer, Alexander Wheelock (biographer, lawyer, consul) Disapproved of A.B. Marx ​xxxiii–xxxiv Positive about Schindler ​xxxiv “Perfectly honest writer” ​xxxiv Ranke’s principles ​xxxiii–xxxiv Report to Grove about Schindler ​xxxiv Theater an der Wien ​ History and description ​201 Orchestra, Bohemian members ​65 Schuppanzigh “hellaciously glad not to work with them” ​65, 187 Theater in der Josephstadt Boieldieu, Johann von Paris ​53 Johann and Karl attend ​53 Copyist Gläser. See Gläser, Peter History and description ​200–201 Kornhäusel (architect, J-Theater) ​201 Orchestra ​104–105 Ages (young) ​104–105 Revolt ​26–27 Size ​14–15

GENERAL INDEX

Theater in der Josephstadt (continued) Overture to Fidelio ​105 Schindler tires of being concertmaster ​ 189 Timpani Symphony No. 9 ​11 Violin Concerto ​11 See also Hudler, Manker above ​ Tischler, Franz (violinist, K-Theater) ​206 Tonkünstler Societät Avoid schedule conflicts ​31 Wanted Missa solemnis exclusively ​48 Like Haydn’s Schöpfung ​48 Trattnerhof ​22–23 Trauttmannsdorf, Ferdinand (Prince) ​50, 144, 147 Invitation ​116 Trombones and parts French play well ​138 In Berlin ​138 Missa solemnis ​46 Parts ​120 Not conceived last ​46 See also Christus am Ölberge in Other Compositions index ​ Tuscher, Mathias (former guardian) Biographical sketch ​87 Tutowitsch, Benedict (violinist, K-Theater) ​ 206 Two Principles (falsified) ​xxix, 180 Uhlmann, Jacob (oboist, K-Theater) ​ 214–215 Biographical sketch ​214–215 Instrument maker ​214–215 Student of Joseph Sellner ​214–215 Umlauf, Michael (conductor, K-Theater, for Beethoven’s 1824 concerts) ​1–2, 203 Biographical sketch ​203 Used red pencil ​44 See also Ninth Symphony index Ungargasse. See Residence, Ungargasse ​ Unger, Caroline (mezzo-soprano) ​17 Complimentary seats ​116 Dinner (March 14) ​34–37 Diarrhea afterwards ​37 Enthusiastic about her part ​56 Was having difficulties ​56 Would rehearse Symphony and Mass with Preisinger ​56

281 University Aula (hall) ​xiv–xv Law student orchestra ​171–179 Urhan, Mehmet ​xxxvii Urzwimer [Urzwinner], Rudolph (chorus) ​ 225 Vienna, Congress of. See Congress of Vienna Violinists. See Böhm; Clement; Holz; Piringer; Schindler; Schuppanzigh Violists. See Weiss ​ Violoncellists. See Brunsvik, Franz; Krafts; Linke; Merk; Zmeskall ​ Vogel, Wilhelm (business manager, TadW) ​ 52, 54–56 Vogl [Vogel], Dem. [Anna] (chorus) ​226 Vogl, (Johann) Michael (bass) ​17–18 Successful in Schubert Lieder ​17 Unsuccessful Pizarro in Fidelio ​17 Vogri, Franziska Grebner GdMf singer’s daughter (Brussels) ​100 Vomiting (Sontag) ​37 Wagner, Richard “Das Judenthum in der Musik” ​xxii Against Meyerbeer, Mendelssohn, J.R. Lewy, Schlesinger ​xxii Wähner, Friedrich (journal editor, Protestant) Biographical sketch ​186 Walking stick (Scholl’s), stolen by dilettantes ​103 Piringer (dilettante coordinator) to be castrated ​103 See also Czakan, Krähmer ​ Wallace, Robin ​xii, xxxv ​ Wayna, Joseph (Edler) von (merchant, banker) ​196–197 Biographical sketch ​196–197 Petition signer ​196–197 Weather ​131 May 7–8, 1824 ​131 May 9 ​134 May 20–23 ​156–157 Weber, Carl Maria ​ Euryanthe ​23, 86 Weber, Mad. [Anna?] (chorus) ​226 Weidel/Weudl, Franz (violoncellist, K-Theater) ​210 Weidinger, Anton (trumpeter) Haydn, Trumpet Concerto ​17

282 Weidinger, Anton (continued) Keyed horn ​17 Keyed trumpet ​17 Weidinger, Joseph, the Younger (trumpeter) ​ 136 Weigl, Andreas (archivist) ​xxxvii Weigl, Joseph the younger (conductor, K-Theater) ​203 Biographical sketch ​203 Potential conductor for Akademie ​17 Weihekuss (Liszt) ​188 Weihsmann, Helmut (architecture historian) ​ xxxviii ​ Weingartner, Felix (conductor) ​99–101 Interviewed 1824 chorister Helene Grebner ​99–101 Weinhaus Sittl ​xxxviii Weinzierl, Stephan (acoustical historian) ​ 200–202 Weiss, Franz (violist, composer, Schuppanzigh quartet) ​xvii, 135, 209 Beethoven’s 1813–1814 concerts ​209 Biographical sketch ​209 Rasumovsky’s Quartet ​209 Schuppanzigh’s Quartet ​209 Wessely, Mad. (chorus) ​226 Wieck, Friedrich (piano pedagogue, father of Clara Schumann) Biographical sketch ​127, 130 Czerny’s account of Beethoven’s Akademie ​127, 130 Visits Beethoven (July 28, 1823) ​127 Wiener Beethoven-Gesellschaft ​xxxviii Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst …. See under Schickh Wilfinger, Msgr. Franz ​xxxviii Wine From Johann’s estate ​85 Schindler drinks little ​104 Schubert, nasty drunk ​25 Schuppanzigh gets drunk ​103 Wittmann, Leopold [Joseph?] (chorus) ​ 225

GENERAL INDEX

Wolfmayer, Johann Nepomuk (cloth dealer, benefactor) Attended Akademie ​123 Schuppanzigh ate Friday dinners with him ​164 Should get free ticket (May 23) ​164 Wanted to commission Requiem ​135 Woman copyist. See Schlemmer, Josepha Wordplay ​85, 87, 146 See also Humor Work pattern (Beethoven’s) ​4 Wranitzky, Anna Catharina (soprano) ​58 Wranitzky, Anton, senior (Lobkowitz Kapellmeister, K-Theater concertmaster) ​2, 58, 210 Wranitzky, Anton, son (violinist, K-Theater) ​ 206 Wranitzky, Friedrich (violoncellist, K-Theater) ​210 Biographical sketch ​210 Wunderl, Mathias (Copyist E) ​180 Yaeger, George (hornist, conductor) ​ dedication page (v), xxxix Zapf, Mad. (chorus) ​226 Zierer, Franz (flutist, K-Theater) ​213 Biographical sketch ​213 Zmeskall von Domanowecz, Nikolaus (violoncellist, Chancellery official) ​ 198 Attended Akademie ​123 Carried in sedan chair ​123–124 Biographical sketch ​123–124, 198 Petition signer ​198 Stein had his metronome ​40 Zum goldenen Lamm, restaurant (Leopoldstadt) ​232 Zum wilden Mann, restaurant (Prater) ​ 192, 231–232 Zwei Prinzipe ​ (falsified) ​ Consecration of the House Overture (?) ​ 180 Piano Sonata, Op. 13 ​xxix, 180