WOLFGANG AMADEUS MOZART - Digital Mozart Edition...

New Mozart Edition X/28/2 Keyboard Concertos and Cadenzas

International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications III

WOLFGANG AMADEUS MOZART

Series X

SUPPLEMENT

WORK GROUP 28: ARRANGEMENTS, ADDITIONS TO AND TRANSCRIPTIONS OF WORKS BY OTHER COMPOSERS

SECTION 2: ARRANGEMENTS OF WORKS BY VARIOUS COMPOSERS

KEYBOARD CONCERTOS AND CADENZAS

PRESENTED BY WALTER GERSTENBERG AND EDUARD REESER

1964


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications IV

Neue Mozart-Ausgabe (New Mozart Edition)*

WOLFGANG AMADEUS MOZART

The Complete Works

BÄRENREITER KASSEL � BASEL � LONDON

En coopération avec le Conseil international de la Musique

Editorial Board: Dietrich Berke � Wolfgang Plath � Wolfgang Rehm

Agents for BRITISH COMMONWEALTH OF NATIONS: Bärenreiter Ltd. London

BUNDESREPUBLIK DEUTSCHLAND: Bärenreiter-Verlag Kassel SWITZERLAND and all other countries not named here: Bärenreiter-Verlag Basel

As a supplement to each volume a Critical Report (Kritischer Bericht) in German is available

The editing of the NMA is supported by City of Augsburg City of Salzburg

Administration Land Salzburg City of Vienna

Konferenz der Akademien der Wissenschaften in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, represented by

Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur Mainz, with funds from

Bundesministerium für Forschung und Technologie, Bonn and Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Unterricht und Kultus

Ministerium für Kultur der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik Bundesministerium für Unterricht und Kunst, Vienna

* Hereafter referred to as the NMA. The predecessor, the "Alte Mozart-Edition" (Old Mozart Edition) is referred to as the AMA.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications V

CONTENTS Editorial Principles ………………………………………………………. VI Foreword………………………………………………………………….. VII Facsimile: Leaf 1r from the autograph of the Concerto in F KV 37………………………………XX

Facsimile: Leaf 14v from the autograph of the Concerto in F KV 37……………………………. XXI

Facsimile: Leaf 1r from the autograph of the Concerto in D KV 40……………………………... XXII

Facsimiles: Leaf 1r and leaf 1v from the autograph of the Concerto in D KV 107 (21b), I……… XXIII

Facsimiles: Leaf 13v and leaf 14r from the autograph of the Concerto in G KV 107 (21b), II..…. XXIV

Facsimiles: Leaf 18r and leaf 18v from the autograph of the Concerto in Eb KV 107 (21b), III…. XXV

Facsimile: Autograph of the cadenzas KV 624 (626a), App. K and C………………………….... XXVI

Facsimiles: Copy by Leopold Mozart of the cadenzas KV 624 (626a), App. K and C…………... XXVII A. Piano Concertos (Pasticci) after single movements by various composers

Concerto in F KV 37……………………………………………………………… 3

Concerto in Bb KV 39…………………………………………………………….. 45

Concerto in D KV 40……………………………………………………………... 84

Concerto in G KV 41…………………………………………………………….. 125 B. Piano Concertos after piano sonatas by Johann Christian Bach

Concerto in D after the Piano Sonata op. V, 2 by Johann Christian Bach KV 107 (21b), I………………………………….. 165

Concerto in G after the Piano Sonata op. V, 3 by Johann Christian Bach KV 107 (21b), II…….............................................. 187

Concerto in Eb after the Piano Sonata op. V, 4 by Johann Christian Bach KV 107 (21b), III………………………………… 203 C. Cadenzas by Mozart for piano concertos by other composers

1. Cadenza for a piano concerto in D of unknown origins KV3: deest…………... 227

2. Cadenza for the second movement (Andante) of a piano concerto by Ignaz von Beecke KV 624 (626a), App. K……………………………….. 227

3. Cadenza (fragment) for the first movement of a piano concerto by Johann Samuel Schroeter (op. III, 4) KV 624 (626a), App. D……………. 228

4. Two cadenzas for the first and second movements of a piano concerto by Johann Samuel Schroeter (op. III, 6) KV 624 (626a), App. F and G……... 229

5. Cadenza for the first movement of a piano concerto by Johann Samuel Schroeter (op. III, 1) KV 624 (626a), App. H…………… 229

6. Two cadenzas for the first and second movements of a piano concerto by Johann Samuel Schroeter (op. III, 3) KV3: deest………………………… 229


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications VI

EDITORIAL PRINCIPLES

The New Mozart Edition (NMA) provides for research purposes a music text based on impeccable scholarship applied to all available sources – principally Mozart’s autographs – while at the same time serving the needs of practising musicians. The NMA appears in 10 Series subdivided into 35 Work Groups:

I: Sacred Vocal Works (1–4) II: Theatrical Works (5–7) III: Songs, Part-Songs, Canons (8–10) IV: Orchestral Works (11–13) V: Concertos (14–15) VI: Church Sonatas (16) VII: Large Solo Instrument Ensembles (17–18) VIII: Chamber Music (19–23) IX: Keyboard Music (24–27) X: Supplement (28–35)

For every volume of music a Critical Commentary (Kritischer Bericht) in German is available, in which the source situation, variant readings or Mozart’s corrections are presented and all other special problems discussed. Within the volumes and Work Groups the completed works appear in their order of composition. Sketches, draughts and fragments are placed in an Appendix at the end of the relevant volume. Sketches etc. which cannot be assigned to a particular work, but only to a genre or group of works, generally appear in chronological order at the end of the final volume of the relevant Work Group. Where an identification regarding genre is not possible, the sketches etc. are published in Series X, Supplement (Work Group 30: Studies, Sketches, Draughts, Fragments, Various). Lost compositions are mentioned in the relevant Critical Commentary in German. Works of doubtful authenticity appear in Series X (Work Group 29). Works which are almost certainly spurious have not been included. Of the various versions of a work or part of a work, that version has generally been chosen as the basis for editing which is regarded as final and definitive. Previous or alternative forms are reproduced in the Appendix. The NMA uses the numbering of the Köchel Catalogue (KV); those numberings which differ in the third and expanded edition (KV3 or KV3a) are given in brackets; occasional differing numberings in the sixth edition (KV6) are indicated. With the exception of work titles, entries in the score margin, dates of composition and the footnotes, all additions and completions in the music volumes are indicated, for which the following scheme

applies: letters (words, dynamic markings, tr signs and numbers in italics; principal notes, accidentals before principal notes, dashes, dots, fermatas, ornaments and smaller rests (half notes, quarters, etc.) in small print; slurs and crescendo marks in broken lines; grace and ornamental notes in square brackets. An exception to the rule for numbers is the case of those grouping triplets, sextuplets, etc. together, which are always in italics, those added editorially in smaller print. Whole measure rests missing in the source have been completed tacitly. The title of each work as well as the specification in italics of the instruments and voices at the beginning of each piece have been normalised, the disposition of the score follows today’s practice. The wording of the original titles and score disposition are provided in the Critical Commentary in German. The original notation for transposing instruments has been retained. C-clefs used in the sources have been replaced by modern clefs. Mozart always notated singly occurring sixteenth, thirty-second notes etc. crossed-through, (i.e. instead of ); the notation therefore does not distinguish between long or short realisations. The NMA generally renders these in the

modern notation etc.; if a grace note of this kind should be interpreted as ″short″ an additional indication ″ ″ is given over the relevant grace note. Missing slurs at grace notes or grace note groups as well as articulation signs on ornamental notes have generally been added without comment. Dynamic markings are rendered in the modern form, e.g. f and p instead of for: and pia: The texts of vocal works have been adjusted following modern orthography. The realisation of the bass continuo, in small print, is as a rule only provided for secco recitatives. For any editorial departures from these guidelines refer to the relevant Foreword and to the Critical Commentary in German. A comprehensive representation of the editorial guidelines for the NMA (3rd version, 1962) has been published in Editionsrichtlinien musikalischer Denkmäler und Gesamtausgaben [Editorial Guidelines for Musical Heritage and Complete Editions]. Commissioned by the Gesellschaft für Forschung and edited by Georg von Dadelsen, Kassel etc., 1963, pp. 99-129. Offprints of this as well as the Bericht über die Mitarbeitertagung und Kassel, 29. – 30. 1981, published privately in 1984, can be obtained from the Editorial Board of the NMA.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications VII

Workgroup 28 (Arrangements, Additions to and Transcriptions of Works by other Composers) is structured as follows:

Section 1: Arrangements of works by George Frederick Handel Volume 1: Acis and Galatea KV 566 Volume 2: The Messiah KV 572 Volume 3: Alexander’s Feast KV 591 Volume 4: Ode for St. Cecilia’s Day KV 592

Section 2: Arrangements of works by various composers Piano concertos and cadenzas (one volume):

A. Piano concertos (Pasticci) after single movements from piano sonatas by various

composers (KV 37 and KV 39-41) B. Piano concertos after piano sonatas by Johann Christian Bach (KV 107/21b)

C. Cadenzas by Mozart for piano concertos by other composers

Section 3: Other arrangements

Section 4: Additions

Section 5: Transcriptions

At this stage, nothing definite can be said about the contents and extent of Sections 3-5, as research into this previously somewhat neglected area is still in progress.

The Editorial Board

FOREWORD

The “Pasticcio Concertos”

For than one hundred years, the opinion amongst Mozart scholars has been that the four Piano Concertos of the year 1767 are to be considered original works by the 11-year-old Wolfgang. Constanze Mozart must also have been convinced of this when J. A. André purchased by the contract of 8 November 1799 Mozart’s musical estate, otherwise she would certainly have warned him. When Franz Gleissner, a corrector in André’s music printing house in Offenbach, inventarised the estate for the first time in 1800,1 he listed these four concertos as Nos. 3 to 6, immediately following the three concertos with undated autographs “which Mozart took from Johann [Christian] Bach’s Sonatas” (KV 107/21b), the latter listed as No. 2.2 J. A. André later compiled a new “Thematisches Verzeichnis W. A. Mozartscher Manuskripte, chronologisch geordnet von 1764–1784” [“ Thematic catalogue of W. A. Mozart manuscripts, in chronological order from 1764–1784”] – it was finished as a manuscript in 1833 but was never printed3 – and gave these four concertos the numbers 5–8; the “3 Sonate del Sgr.

1 This catalogue, which contains a numbered series of incipits along with a separate commentary on each single number, was discovered by Ernst Fritz Schmid and Volkmar Müller-Deck in 1956 in the music archive of the publisher Johann André in Offenbach. Cf. Ernst Fritz Schmid, Neue Quellen zu Werken Mozarts, in: Mozart-Jahrbuch 1956, Salzburg, 1957, pp. 35–45. 2 The list begins with the sacred Singspiel Die Schuldigkeit des ersten Gebots KV 35, described as an “Oratorio”. Cf. the facsimile pages in E. F. Schmid, op. cit. 3 Since 1884 in the British Museum London (signature: Add. Ms. 34. 412). Cf. C. B. Oldman, J. A. André on Mozart's Manuscripts, in: Music & Letters V, April 1924, pp. 169–176; Alfred Einstein in the third edition of the Köchel Verzeichnis, revised by the same](= Köchel-Einstein or KV3), Leipzig, 1937, pp. XXX to XXXV.

Giovanni Bach ridotto in Consorti [sic]” [“ 3 Sonatas by Sgr. Giovanni Bach reduced to consorts”], however, appeared as No. 32, following compositions from the year 1769. Eight years later, one year before his death, André decided to sell his collection of Mozart autographs, and, to this purpose, had a thematic catalogue in systematic order4 drawn up by his amanuensis Heinrich Henkel and published; here the four concertos received the numbers 192–195. These were the numbers which Otto Jahn quoted in 1856 in the first part of his biography,5 although his own systematic overview of the complete works placed these concertos at Nos. 98–101. Finally, in 1862, in the first edition of the Köchel-Verzeichnis6 they received, for the time being, a definitive numbering of 37, 39, 40 and 41.

None of those mentioned here seems ever to have doubted that that the works in question were really original compositions by Mozart. This can be excused by the observation that on the autographs of KV 37, 39, 40 and 41 (as opposed to the concertos after sonatas by Johann Christian Bach) all references in this regard are absent (as, incidentally, is Wolfgang’s name). But even the mere fact that Leopold Mozart did not note the four works in his catalogue of Wolfgang’s early works,7 completed in 4 Thematisches Verzeichnis derjenigen Originalhandschriften von W. A. Mozart [. . .] welche Hofrath André in Offenbach a. M. besitzt, Offenbach, 1841. 5 Otto Jahn, W. A. Mozart, vol. I, Leipzig, 1856, p. 715. 6 Ludwig Ritter von Köchel, Chronologisch-thematisches Verzeichnis sämtlicher Tonwerke Wolfgang Amadé Mozarts, Leipzig, 1862, pp. 49, 52–53. 7 Verzeichniß alles desjenigen was dieser 12jährige Knab seit seinem 7ten Jahre componirt, und in originali kann aufgezeiget werden, now in the Bibliothèque du Conservatoire de Musique, Paris (Collection Malherbe, signature: Ms 263). This document, consisting of three folio pages, was originally conceived as a supplementary gift to accompany the Species facti which Leopold


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications VIII

1768 and going as far as the Missa brevis in G KV 49 (47d), an overview in which it must have been of particular importance to document the musical productivity of the child prodigy as comprehensively as possible, should have been enough to give critical scholars pause for thought. A further point is that the musical content of these concertos was completely underestimated by leaders of informed opinion; the negative judgement uttered by Otto Jahn in the second edition (two volumes) of his biography in 1867 – apparently after a superficial examination of the as yet unprinted works – remained unchallenged for decades:8 “[. . .] these compositions do not rise above the level of the common and arouse no special interest from the point of view of either invention or technique.” Jahn thus seems not to have noticed that, in terms of style, one can speak in these concertos of a remarkably heterogeneous complex of musical materials; nor does he seem to have noticed that, amongst these twelve movements, there are some, such as e.g. the middle movement of KV 39, all three movements of KV 40 or the middle movement of KV 41, of undeniable quality.

It therefore took until 1908 for the whole situation to be finally clarified. T. de Wyzewa and G. de Saint-Foix, to whom Mozart research is so immeasurably indebted, reached the surprising conclusion during preliminary studies for their monumental work on Mozart that the second movement of KV 39 represents an re-working of the second movement of the Piano Sonata op. 17, No. 2 by Johann Schobert. In this article, which they dedicated to this “maître inconnu de Mozart” [“ unknown teacher of Mozart’s”], 9 they conjectured that other movements from these concertos might perhaps likewise be nothing more than than “simples adaptions” [“ simple adaptations”], and that this was the reason why the concertos were missing from Leopold’s catalogue. A short time later, these French scholars were able to report10 that they had indentified five further movements specifically as re-workings of sonata movements by Leontzi Honauer (4) and Johann Gottfried Eckard (1). When the first volume of their standard work W. A. Mozart. Sa vie musicale et son œuvre de l'enfance à la pleine maturité came out in 1912, four of the remaining six movements

presented to Emperor Joseph II on 21 September 1768. Cf. Köchel-Einstein, pp. XXIV–XXV; an edition by E. H. Müller von Asow includes the incipits (Vienna, 1956). 8 Otto Jahn, W. A. Mozart, vol. I, Leipzig 2/1867, p. 62. 9 T. de Wyzewa et G. de Saint-Foix, Un maître inconnu de Mozart, in: Zeitschrift der Internationalen Musikgesellschaft X, 1908–1909, pp. 35–41. 10 T. de Wyzewa et G. de Saint-Foix, Les premiers concerts de Mozart, loc. cit., pp. 139–140.

had been attributed to Hermann Friedrich Raupach. Only the second movement of KV 37 and the Finale of KV 40 defied identification at that point; it was in 1937 that Alfred Einstein, in the third edition of the Köchel Verzeichnis, acted on information by Erwin Bodky and ascertained that the final movement of KV 40 goes back to a piano piece by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach.

Although the Pasticcio Concertos were not put on paper until the early summer of 1767, in Salzburg, they reflect in fact experiences in Paris in the years 1763–1764 and 1766. On 19 November 1763, Leopold Mozart arrived in Paris with his family, and was soon able to form a picture of musical life in the French capital, directing his interest towards instrumental music, especially piano music. He noted his impressions in a letter to Maria Theresia Hagenauer in Salzburg in a letter of 1 February; the following quotation from this letter places us immediately in medias res:11 “– – here there is constant war between the Italian and French music. The entire French music is not worth a t – –; cruel changes have begun, however, and the French are now beginning to vacillate, and in 10 to 15 years, hopefully, the French taste will have been extinguished completely. The Germans occupy a place as masters in publishing their compositions. Amongst them are Mr. Schobert – Mr. Eckard, Mr. Hannauer for the piano, Mr. Hochbrucker and Mr. Meyer for the harp are very popular. Mr. le Grand, a French keyboard player, has abandoned his goût [taste] altogether, and his sonatas are seasoned to our taste. Mr. Schoberth. Mr. Eckard, Mr. Le Grand and Mr. Hochbrucker have all brought their engraved sonatas to us and have paid their respects to my children.”

We can assume that Leopold’s judgement was strongly influenced by the many-sided interests of his patron Melchior Grimm, whose sharp mind found expression in strongly anti-French chronicles. Leopold wrote to Lorenz Hagenauer on 1 April 176412 of Grimm as “this great friend of mine, from I have received everything I have here, a learned man and a great humanitarian”, a man who was at the centre of the circle of German emigrants who had settled in large numbers in Paris around 1760.

The first German musician whom Leopold Mozart met in Paris was Johann Gottfried Eckard (b. in Augsburg in 1735, d. in Paris in 1809), “Virtueux du

11 Mozart. Briefe und Aufzeichnungen. Gesamtausgabe, ed. by the International Mozart Foundation, Salzburg, compiled and elucidated by Wilhelm A. Bauer and Otto Erich Deutsch (= Bauer-Deutsch), vol. I, Kassel etc., 1962, No. 80, p. 126, lines 144–154. 12 Bauer-Deutsch I, No. 83, p. 141, lines 121ff.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications IX

clavessin” [“ Virtuoso of the harpsichord”], as Leopold described him in his travel notes.13 Eckard, who had lived in Paris since 1758, published his Six Sonates pour le clavecin, Oeuvre I [Six Sonatas for the harpsichord, opus I] there, with an advertisement in which he stated that this sonata was also suitable for the clavichord and the pianoforte and that he had marked the dynamics (“aussi souvent les doux, et les fort” [“ equally often the soft and the loud”]) – for the first time in French keyboard works.14

“Mr=Schoberth † Claviceniste chez le Prince Conti.” [“ Mr. Schoberth † harpsichordist to Prince Conti.”] is the second composer to be named in the Paris travel notes.15 Johann Schobert was probably born in Silesia around 1740 dying in Paris on 28 August 1767 after eating poisonous mushrooms, and must likewise have settled in Paris shortly before 1760; soon afterwards, he started to publish sonatas, concertos and symphonies with obbligato piano parts. His Opus XVII (IV Sonates pour le clavecin avec accompagnement de violon [IV Sonatas for the harpsichord with violin accompaniment]), from which the middle movement of KV 39 is taken, seems to have been published only after his death;16 de Wyzewa and de Saint-Foix therefore suppose that in this case Wolfgang had not a printed edition but only a manuscript to work from,17 although I personally find this improbable. It is attested that the Mozarts did not have a good word to say about Schobert, as is clear from Leopold’s letter of 1 February 1764:18 “My girl plays the most difficult pieces that we now have by Schoberth and Eckard etc., including the more difficult of the Eckard pieces, with an unbelievable clarity, in such a way that the scurrilous Schoberth cannot conceal his jealousy and envy and makes himself ridiculous in front of Mr. Eckard, who is a more honest man, and in front many others. [. . .] Mr. Schoberth is not at all the person he should be. He flatters you to your face, and is the most false of people; his religion, however, is according to the fashion. May God 13 Bauer-Deutsch I, No. 74, p. 117, lines 7–8. 14 Cf. the new edition by E. Reeser: Johann Gottfried Eckard – Oeuvres complètes pour le clavecin ou le pianoforte, Amsterdam-Basel-Kassel, 1956; the same author, article Eckard, in: MGG, vol. 3, cols. 1086–1090. 15 Bauer-Deutsch I, No. 74, p. 117, lines 9–10. 16 Likewise missing from the title page of the first edition, printed in Paris, is the usual “chez l'auteur” [“ at the house of the composer”]. Cf. Ausgewählte Werke von Johann Schobert, ed. Hugo Riemann (Denkmäler Deutscher Tonkunst, 1st series, vol. XXXIX, Leipzig, 1909), p. XIX. 17 T. de Wyzewa and G. de Saint-Foix, W.-A. Mozart, vol. I, Paris, 2/1936, p. 190. 18 Bauer-Deutsch I, No. 80, pp. 126–127, lines 168–176.

convert him!” It can hardly be assumed, in the light of such antipathy (in this intensity probably unjustified), that they could have got on sufficiently cordial terms with Schobert for him to have presented the Mozarts with a manuscript book of sonatas before their final departure from Paris on 9 July 1766. Instead, I am convinced that this Opus XVII must already have been available in print at the time.

The Mozarts did not made the personal acquaintance of “Mr. Hannauer” (= Leontzi Honauer) until their second stay in Paris,19 although they already knew him by name before this (see above). Honauer, who was probably born in Strasbourg around 1735 (when and where he died has not yet been established), had been in the service of Prince Louis de Rohan since about 1761, dedicating to him the Six Sonates pour le clavecin, Livre premier [Six Sonatas for the harpsichord, first book] which appeared in that year;20 the Six Sonates pour le clavecin, Livre second [second book] had already appeared by the time the Mozarts reached Paris. The only composer of sonatas not yet mentioned by Leopold in his letter of 1 February 1764 is Hermann Friedrich Raupach (b. in Stralsund in 1728, d. in St. Petersburg in 1778); the Mozarts encountered him for the first time in 1766, perhaps at the same time as they met Honauer.21 That this meeting must have meant more to Wolfgang than the meetings with many other musicians about this time can be deduced from Grimm’s article in the Correspondance littéraire of 15 July 1766: “A Londres, [J. C.] Bach le prenait entre ses genoux, et ils jouaient ainsi de tête alternativement sur le même clavecin deux heures de suite en présence du roi et de la reine. Ici il a subi la même épreuve avec Mr. Raupach, habile musicien qui a été longtemps à Pétersbourg, et qui improvise avec une grande supériorité.” [“ In London, [J. C.] Bach took him between his knees, and they played freely from their fantasy thus on the same harpsichord for two hours without pause in the presence of the King and the Queen. Here he underwent the same test with Mr. Raupach, an able musician who was in St. Petersburg for a long time and who is amongst the really superior improvisers.”] 22 From his Six Sonatas for the harpsichord with violin accompaniment, opus I, which were published by

19 Bauer-Deutsch I, No. 110, p. 227, line 6. 20 Cf. E. Reeser, article Honauer, in: MGG, vol. 6, cols. 681–684. 21 Bauer-Deutsch I, No. 110, p. 227, line 6. 22 Quoted in: Mozart – Die Dokumente seines Lebens, compiled and elucidated by Otto Erich Deutsch (Neue Mozart-Ausgabe X/34), p. 55.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications X

De la Chevardière in Paris in 176523 – they were advertised in the Avantcoureur on 7 October 176524 – Wolfgang used no less than four movements for his Pasticcio concertos.

It is understandable that the efforts to identify the middle movement of KV 37 concentrated primarily on the musicians already mentioned, only widening to include the other musicians mentioned by Leopold in his letter of 1 February 1764. The harp player Christian Hochbrucker (b. in Tagmersheim in 1753, d. in London in 1799), whose Six Sonates pour la Harpe, Oeuvre I were published by Huberty in Paris in 1762, made the Mozarts’ acquaintance right at the beginning of their first stay in Paris;25 it was without doubt these sonatas that Hochbrucker presented to the children a short time later (see above). Although “Mr. Mayr” (= Philippe-Jacques Meyer, b. in Strasbourg in 1737, d. in London in 1819) was not actually mentioned in the travel notes, Leopold and Wolfgang probably saw Meyer’s Essai sur la vraie manière de jouer la Harpe avec une Méthode pour l'accorder, Oeuvre I [Essay on the true manner of playing the harp with a method for tuning it, opus I] at De la Chevardière’s in 1763.26 Another possibility in “Mr. le grand”; this name, as Jean Bonfils and H. A. Durand have been able to establish,27 can only mean Jean-Pierre Legrand (b. in Tarbes in 1734, d. in Marseilles in 1809). He was the composer of a Premier Livre des Sonates de Clavecin [First Book of Sonatas for Harpsichord] published in 1763 (as yet, no example of this print has been located), and he was probably also the author of the sonata movement which appeared under this name in the collection XX Sonate da vari autori, published by Venier in 1760.28 – But one could also consider someone like Christoph Schaffrath possible (b. in Hohenstein on the Elbe in 1709, d. in Berlin in 1763), likewise represented by a sonata movement in the Venier collected volume just mentioned,29 or the composers who, like

23 Thus not “around 1762”, as Edwin J. Simon maintains in his article Raupach in MGG, vol. 9, col. 51. 24 Cari Johannsson, French Music Publishers' Catalogues of the Second Half of the Eighteenth Century, Stockholm, 1955, text volume, p. 72. 25 Bauer-Deutsch I, No. 74, p. 117, lines 17–18. 26 F. Vernillat, article Ph.-J. Meyer, in: MGG, vol. 9, col. 247; Cari Johansson, op. cit., p. 69. 27 J. Bonfils et H. A. Durand, article Legrand, in: Encyclopédie de la Musique, vol. III, Fasquelle, Paris, 1961, pp. 55–56. 28 XX Sonate per cembalo composte da Vari Autori. Opera seconda, pp. 2–3: “Sonata I Dell. Sig.r Le Grand”. 29 Op. cit., p. 24: “Sonata XX Dell. S.r Schaffrath”.

Leopold Mozart himself,30 made contributions to Haffner’s Oeuvres Mêlées. The circumstance that the final movement of KV 40 was a re-working of a piano piece by Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach – La Boehmer,31 to be precise – suggests that one should not restrict the search purely to the circle of lesser masters in Paris. Various searches, at any rate, including one by Vladimir Fédorov in such a rich library as the Paris Conservatoire de Musique, have so far not produced any positive results.

The idea that one particular movement alone was based on an unprinted composition, as de Wyzewa and de Saint-Foix assumed with Johann Schobert primarily in mind, who in their eyes stood far above all other exponents of the keyboard in Paris,32 seems to me somewhat unlikely; another idea, that Leopold had in this case provided an (unprinted) sonata movement, is in terms of style alone hardly plausible, and the possibility that Wolfgang himself composed the piece (either as a sonata movement or, from the beginning, as a concerto movement) can, in my opinion, be ruled out.

The sequence of the Pasticcio Concertos published in the present volume is summarised here in tabular form:

1. KV 37

Allegro, , F major. After RAUPACH, Op. I No. 5, first movement. (Original tempo: Allegro di molto).

Andante , F major. After a sonata movement of unknown provenance.

Rondo , F major. After HONAUER, Op. II No. 3, first movement33. (Original tempo: Allegro).

2. KV 39

Allegro spiritoso, , Bb major. After RAUPACH, Op. I No. 1, first movement. (Original tempo: Allegro moderato).

Andante, , F major. After SCHOBERT, Op. XVII No. 2, first movement34. (Original tempo: Andante poco allegro).

30 Three piano sonatas by Leopold Mozart were included in the 5th, 6th and 9th parts of the Oeuvres mêlées, ed. J. U. Haffner, Nuremberg, 1758 to around 1763. 31 Published in: Musikalisches Allerley. Erste Sammlung, Berlin, 1761, p. 18. Cf. Alfred Wotquenne, Thematisches Verzeichnis der Werke von Carl Philipp Emanuel Bach, Leipzig, 1905, p. 48. 32 T. de Wyzewa et G. de Saint-Foix, W.-A. Mozart, vol. I, p. 190. 33 Not Op. I, No. 3, as in de Wyzewa et de Saint-Foix, op. cit., p. 189, Hermann Abert, W. A. Mozart, vol. I, Leipzig 6/1923, p. 114, and Köchel-Einstein, p. 60. 34 New edition by de Wyzewa and de Saint-Foix (without the part for accompanying violin) along with Mozart’s version, Breitkopf & Härtel, Leipzig, 1908; complete in


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XI

Molto allegro , Bb major. After RAUPACH, Op. I No. 1, third movement. (Original tempo: Allegro assai).

3. KV 40

Allegro maestoso, , D major. After HONAUER, Op. II No. 1, first movement. (Original tempo: Allegro Pomposo).

Andante , A major. After ECKARD, Op. I No. 4, only movement35. (Original tempo: Andantino).

Presto , D major. After C. PH. E. BACH, La Boehmer (Wq 117). (Original tempo: Prestissimo).

4. KV 41

Allegro , G major. After HONAUER, Op. I No. 1, first movement.

Andante , G minor. After RAUPACH, Op. I No. 1, second movement. (Original tempo: Andantino).

Molto allegro , G major. After HONAUER, Op. I No. 1, third movement. (Original tempo: Allegro assai).

Before we turn to the autographs of these concertos, we should mention briefly the existence of a “Pasticcio Concerto” in G major found a few years ago, the only known source so far being a manuscript in the archive of Kremsier castle in the Czech Republic (signature: II F 94). This Concerto per il Cembalo, Violino Primo, Violino 2do, Viola obl. e Bahso Del Signor Amadeo Mozart [Concerto for the Harpsichord, first violin, second violin, viola obbligato and bass by Mr. Amadeus Mozart] in three movements displays, at the beginning of the second movement, the heading Adagio variato. Del Concerto de Masi [Adagio with variation. From the concerto by Masi]. Who is meant by this name must be left open. A Masi is mentioned in Mozart’s letter of 26 January 1770 from Milan; the Sei Concerti per Cembalo e Orch. [Six Concertos for Harpsichord and Orchestra] by P. Felice Masi (State Library Berlin – Prussian Cultural Heritage (Music Department), signature Mus. Ms. 13820) do not, however, contain any pieces which provide models for this concerto. The third movement, by the way, can be traced back, according to information communicated by Prof. Dr. L. F. Tagliavini, Bologna, to Domenico Scarlatti (No. 2 of the Essercisi per Gravicembalo = No. 388 in the Longo edition, vol. VIII, p. 135). The hand in the manuscript is neither Wolfgang’s nor Leopold’s; this fact, however, is not sufficient for this concerto

E. Reeser, De klaviersonate met vioolbegeleiding in het Parijsche muziekleven tentijde van Mozart, Rotterdam, 1939, appendix, pp. 46–48. 35 New edition in: J. G. Eckard – Oeuvres complètes etc., pp. 39–41.

to be declared non-authentic; a more significant fact is that the formn of the concerto is strikingly primitive and nothing less than dilettante-like in its working-out; the orchestral writing, in the judgement of Music Director Ernst Hess of Zurich, who has examined the score thoroughly, contains numerous poor and clumsy passages such as Mozart, not even in his earliest youth, would never have written. In the Kritischer Bericht [Critical Report, available in German only], there is a more detailed discussion of the problematical attribution of this work; at this point, however, I wish to voice the conviction that the concerto is not by Mozart.

* The four concertos, published for the first time in the old Mozart complete edition (AMA) in 1877,36 are transmitted in a single manuscript source;37 all four works bear the title Concerto per il Clavicembalo [Concerto for the Harpsichord] and are dated precisely at the top right by Leopold Mozart – not by Wolfgang, as Einstein writes!38 – as follows: KV 37 nel Aprile 1767, KV 39 in Junio 1767, KV 40 and 41 in Julio 1767. Otto Jahn had already noted that this source can only be considered autograph in a restricted sense, being “largely written in the hand of his father”,39 but went immediately from this to a bold conclusion: “[. . .] whose function, however, was only that of copyist, with Wolfgang occasionally replacing him.” With “mixed autographs” of this kind, it is almost impossible to determine securely how they came into being. Thanks to Wolfgang Plath, we can now distinguish the hands of father and son with a measure of certainty.40 On the basis of such investigations, Plath had to ask himself whether, in the case of the Pasticcio Concertos, one should perhaps assume that Leopold had copied from a no longer extant sketch by Wolfgang.41 For my part, I cannot imagine that this could be the case; in the first and second movements of KV 37, Leopold has on various occasions crossed out Wolfgang’s original notation and replaced it with an improved version (cf. the music text, p. 19, m. 157 and 159;

36 Series XVI, vol. I, Nos. 1–4. 37 State Library Berlin – Prussian Cultural Heritage (Music Department). 38 Köchel-Einstein, p. 60. 39 O. Jahn, op. cit., vol. I, p. 715. 40 Wolfgang Plath, Beiträge zur Mozart-Autographie. I. Die Handschrift Leopold Mozarts, in: Mozart-Jahrbuch 1960–1961, Salzburg, 1962, pp. 82–117. – The conclusions of his investigations as far as they concern the Pasticcio Concertos are discussed in detail in the Kritischer Bericht [Critical Report, available in German only]. 41 Plath, op. cit., p. 98.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XII

pp. 22–23, mm. 19–27; p. 25, mm. 44–45 and 49; p. 26, mm. 54–55), which would have been unnecessary if Wolfgang’s sketch had been at his disposal. I would therefore plead for the second possibility mentioned by Plath, that “these four Pasticcios represent a joint re-working (i.e. not simply a writing-out) by father and son”.42 This possibility becomes a probability due to the fact that Plath inclines to the view, for caligraphic reasons, that the concertos after Johann Christian Bach (KV 107/21b) must be dated to at least later than 1770.43 Thus the four Pasticcio Concertos, not the three Bach arrangements, would represent Wolfgang’s first essays in the concerto form, and it would have been a matter of course for Leopold to want to help his eleven-year-old son in this situation. Finally, one should not rule out the possibility that the works in question were required very urgently for a particular performance, so that Leopold’s greater share of the writing-out (and the arranging?) could be explained as a response to time pressure.

Under these circumstances, it is impossible to ascertain whether it was Leopold or Wolfgang who selected the various sonata movements. In their day, de Wyzewa and de Saint-Foix had already noticed that not less than eight of the total of twelve sonata movements were by the least prominent of the Parisian lesser masters, Honauer and Raupach. The French scholars believed they could explain this by the fact that Wolfgang only met these two composers personally at the end of his stay in Paris, and that their music therefore held a more lively interest for him than e.g. the much more original sonatas by Eckard and Schobert, whose acquaintance he had made more than three years previously.44 This would then be an argument for assuming that Wolfgang himself made the selection. In any case, one must see a significance (as Plath has already done)45 in the fact that Leopold here – in contrast to KV 107 (21b) – refrains from naming a composer.

This is not the place for critical discussion of style and form.46 I do wish to point out, however, that the view of de Wyzewa and de Saint-Foix47 regarding the supposedly primitive arrangement of the Johann Christian Bach concertos compared with the

42 Plath, op. cit., p. 98. 43 Plath, op. cit., p. 96. 44 T. de Wyzewa et G. de Saint-Foix, W.-A. Mozart, vol. I, p. 188, footnote 2. 45 Plath, op. cit., p. 98. 46 Cf. Edwin J. Simon, Sonata into Concerto. A Study of Mozart's first seven concertos, in: Acta Musicologica, XXXI, 1959, pp. 170–185. 47 De Wyzewa et de Saint-Foix, op. cit., vol. I, p. 161, footnote 1.

Pasticcio Concertos does not stand up to examination, discounting the instrumentation, which is of course simpler in the purely string forces in the score KV 107 (21b) compared with KV 37, 39, 40 and 41. We can assume that the Pasticcio Concertos were intended for performance by Wolfgang during his stay in Vienna, where Leopold arrived with his family in September 1767. Whether they really were performed cannot be ascertained securely. It is conceivable that they were first heard in Brno, the refuge chosen by the Mozarts in October 1767 when a pox epidemic broke out in Vienna; the Provost of Sternberg, Aurelius Augustinus, noted in this regard in his diary entry for 30 December 1767 that he had attended a concert

“ in Domo civitatis, Taverna dicta, in qua puer Salisburgensis 11. annorum, et soror sua 15. annorum in ala, aliis Brunansibus diverso instrumentorum genere illum et illam associantibus /: accompagner :/ ad omnium admirationem produxit”

[“ in the public hall, called the Taverna, in which a boy from Salzburg, aged 11, and his sister aged 15, at the keyboard, with other musicians from Brno on instruments of divers kinds combining to accompany one, then the other, to the admiration of all”]. 48

That the reference here is to an orchestral accompaniment can be deduced from a supplication presented by the Turmkapellmeister Abraham Fischer to the magistrates of Brno in 1768, in which he appealed to the favorable appraisal uttered by Leopold Mozart: “The Music Director of Salzburg, Mr. Mozart was completely satisfied with the orchestra here and could not believe that my colleagues could accompany so well at the first rehearsal”.49

Whatever the case here, the probability that Wolfgang performed the concertos later is reinforced by the existence of a subsequently composed cadenza for the first movement of KV 40 – Zum ersten Stück vom Concert aus dem D pastigio [sic] [For the first piece of the Concerto in D pasticcio], as we read in Wolfgang’s handwriting in the autograph. This autograph, registered by Köchel-Einstein under the number 624 (626a), Appendix C,50 can now be dated fairly precisely; it was in fact originally part of a larger leaf, on which a cadenza by Mozart (KV 624/626a, Appendix K) for a piano conerto by Ignaz von Beecke (cf. p. XIII below and pp. 227–228 of the music texts) and a Menuett for 48 Mozart – Die Dokumente seines Lebens, p. 72. 49 Id., p. 72. 50 It is now in the British Museum London (signature: Add. 47873); cf. the description in A. Hyatt King, Mozart in Retrospect, London, 1955, p. 89.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XIII

string quartet were notated; this was later divided by Constanze Mozart in 1835 so that she could give away the separate pieces of the manuscripts as presents.51 Since 1956, the leaf has been available in its entirety once again (as a composite photograph at least).52 Now Ernst Fritz Schmid has shown that the Menuett does not belong to the String Quartet KV 590 – as Einstein had maintained in the third edition of the Köchel Verzeichnis on the basis of an unfounded attribution in the catalogue of a Viennese antiquarian bookshop in 192853 – but is to be seen as an independent piece, belonging stylistically in the proximity of the String Quartets KV 168 and 173, written in Vienna in August or September 1773. Schmid was of the opinion that the notation represented an early version of the Menuett of KV 168,54 giving it therefore the provisional number 168a. Schmid’s hypothesis that Mozart performed both his own concerto KV 40 and the concerto by Beecke during his stay in Vienna in the summer or autumn of the year 1773, and that he wrote out both cadenzas for this occasion55 has much to make it plausible. It should not surprise us that no other cadenzas or “Eingänge” [bridge passages between sections, often improvised] for these concertos have come down to us, as we know that Mozart very rarely included written-out cadenzas or “Eingänge” along with his compositions, in order not to restrict in advance his improvisatory fantasy in performances in which he himself was the soloist. When he composed the cadenzas at a later date, this was probably with a printed version in mind or for a performance without his participation. At any rate, no copies by Leopold Mozart (whose occasional copying sometimes included cadenzas by his son) with a link to the Pasticcio Concertos have been found beyond a copy of exactly the same leaf that Constanze later cut in two, i.e. of the cadenzas for KV 40 and the Beecke concerto (Leopold did not copy the Menuett from the string quartet),56 which could add strength to the supposition that Wolfgang did not write out any cadenzas for the other concertos.

The cadenzas and “Eingänge” missing from the present edition must therefore either be improvised (or written out in advance) by the performer himself. The relevant places are always indicated in the

51 The other fragment is currently in the possession of Rudolf F. Kallir, New York. – Cf. E. F. Schmid, Schicksale einer Mozart-Handschrift, in: Mozart-Jahrbuch 1957, Salzburg, 1958, pp. 43–56. 52 Cf. the facsimile on p. XXVI. 53 Köchel-Einstein, pp. 753 and 824. 54 Schmid, op. cit., p. 55. 55 Schmid, op. cit., p. 52. 56 Cf. the facsimiles on p. XXVII.

autographs and printed editions by fermatas. If the fermata is placed over a second-inversion chord, the soloist must produce a cadenza with motifs referring to the material developed in the movement in question; if it is placed on an imperfect cadence functioning as a dominant for the next section, an Eingang is required: this should first of all be much shorter than a cadenza, and, secondly, should consist only of passage-work, leaps or arabesques, i.e. without a demonstrable connection with thematic elements from the movement.

The Cadenzas for Piano Concertos by other Composers

One of the interesting aspects of Mozart’s personality can be seen in his relationships with comtemporary composers. While displaying on the one hand an almost unlimited admiration for composers such as e.g. Johann Christian Bach and Joseph Haydn, he shows at the same time an almost unlimited contempt for Carl and Anton Stamitz and Muzio Clementi. In general, Mozart was extremely harsh in his judgements on other composers – unless he broke into “rhapsodies” for this person – and in this regard came without doubt very close to the character of his father. It must therefore be seen as a sign of positive appraisal when Mozart showed readiness to perform works of other composers in public and to write cadenzas for these himself. What is left of the latter is confined principally to two composers: Ignaz von Beecke (b. in Wimpfen in 1733, d. in Wallerstein in 1803) and Johann Samuel Schroeter (b. in Warsaw in 1752, d. in London in 1788). Mozart’s first contacts with Beecke go back to Paris in 1766, as we gather from Leopold’s travel notes.57 In the winter of 1774/75, both men took part in a kind of pianistic duel, as Christian Friedrich Schubart’s Deutsche Chronik of 17 April 1775 records.58 Beecke’s piano concerto, for which Mozart’s cadenza KV 624 (626a), Appendix K, was written – the autograph cadenza (today in the possession of Mr. Rudolf F. Kallir, New York) bears the rubric Zum Andante von Beeckè – has as yet remained untraceable. E. F. Schmid has pointed out59 that Mozart wanted to pay a compliment to his colleague Beecke with this cadenza by emphasising a stylistic idiosyncrasy for which Beecke was known at the time, namely the instrumental recitative (an idea perhaps originating with C. Ph. E. Bach). The congruence between Mozart’s cadenza and the fragment of Beecke’s Piano Concerto No. 4 in Bb quoted by Schmid, of which a copied set of parts with entries in the hand of the composer is preserved

57 Bauer-Deutsch I, No. 110, p. 227, line 7. 58 Mozart – Die Dokumente seines Lebens, p. 138. 59 Schmid, op. cit., pp. 48–49.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XIV

in the Princely Music Archive of Oettingen-Wallerstein in Harburg Castle, is striking. As has been argued above, this cadenza must have been written in Vienna in the Summer or Autumn of 1773, which would not rule out Mozart’s later harsh dismissal of Beeckè four years later in a letter to his father from Augsburg, where he sojourned after a visit to Hohen-Altheim, the summer residence of Prince Kraft Ernst von Oettingen-Wallerstein (in whose service Beecke was employed as music supervisor): “[. . .] I have just been playing at sight a sonata by Becché, which was quite difficult, miserable al solito [miserable in the usual way]; what the Sir Music Director and organist twisted together there is indescribable”.60 Nevertheless, Mozart and Beecke remained on friendly terms, and they are said to played together a Mozart piano concerto arranged for four hands in Mainz in October 1790.61

In contrast, Mozart had no personal acquaintance with Johann Samuel Schroeter, who had lived in London since 1772 as a pianist and composer for this instrument, dying there as early as 1788, almost ages with Mozart. His name crops up in the family correspondence for the first time in Mozart’s letter of 3 July 1778 from Paris to his father: “Please write to me if you have the concertos by Schroeter in Salzburg? – the sonatas by Hüllmandel? – I wanted to buy them and send them to you. Both works are very beautiful [. . .]”62. Leopold did indeed possess a concerto by Schroeter: “ex Eb”, as he wrote to his son on 20 July 1778;63 on 10 December 1778 he furthermore informed him that “[. . .] Sgr. Ceccarelli [. . .] was studying the first concerto by Schröter in F [. . .]” with Nannerl (thus in Salzburg).64 Now, of the Six Concertos op. III by Schroeter, the first concerto is in F and the sixth in Eb; these concertos were printed in London in 1774,65 but a French edition by Le Menu & Boyer was to appear by the following year, advertised in the Annonces, affiches et avis divers of 27 February 1775,66 and shortly afterwards a printed edition was published by

60 Bauer-Deutsch II, Kassel etc., 1962, No. 352, p. 69, lines 44–47. 61 A. Hyatt King, Mozart in Retrospect, p. 258, which is based on information presented on this question by E. J. Lipowsky, Bairisches Musiklexikon, Munich, 1811, p. 16. 62 Bauer-Deutsch II, No. 458, p. 390, lines 100–102. 63 Bauer-Deutsch II, No. 467, p. 413, line 37. 64 Bauer-Deutsch II, No. 509, p. 519, lines 61ff. 65 Six Concertos / for the / Harpsichord, or Piano Forte: / With an Accompanyment for / Two Violins, and a Bass / Composed and dedicated to / Her Grace the Dutches of Ancaster. / By / J. S. Schroeter / Opera III / Price 10s6d / London: Printed for and sold by W. Napier, Strand. / 66 Cari Johansson, op. cit., p. 115.

Venier.67 There can be little doubt that Wolfgang had one of these editions in his hands in Paris in 1778, and Leopold may have had the same in Salzburg. We can assume that Mozart only wrote the cadenzas which we know for a number of Schroeter’s concertos from Op. III after his return to Salzburg, i.e. after 15 January 1779. For, on the reverse side of the autograph of the cadenza for the first movement of the Concerto No. 4 (KV 624/626a, Appendix D) and now kept in the Malherbe Collection (Bibliothèque du Conservatoire de Musique, Paris), there is a sketch of the Aria No. 6 from the Singspiel Zaide KV 344 (336b), on which Mozart was working in 1779/80. The identification of this cadenza – printed in the Appendix of this volume as No. 3 (pp. 227–228) – is due to G. de Saint-Foix;68 the same is true of the cadenzas for the first and second movements from Schroeter’s Op. III, No. 6, and for the first movement of Op. III, No. 1 (KV 624/626a, Appendices F, G and H). Unfortunately, the autographs of these three cadenzas, offered for sale in Berlin in 1935 by D. Salomon (Catalogue 100, No. 3352), purchased by W. Poseck in Berlin and later entering the possession of W. Neumann in London, is today untraceable; nor are any copies or photocopies known, so we are forced to print in Part C of this volume only the incipits as they are reproduced in Köchel-Einstein, pp. 823–824. On the other hand, I have been successful in identifying two further cadenzas by Mozart: the first was discovered in 1956 by Ernst Fritz Schmid in the Library of the Conservatorio Giuseppe Verdi in Mailand (Fond. Noseda, No. 6162/12269, f. 12) and published in facsimile in the Mozart-Jahrbuch 1956.69 Once again, Schroeter’s Op. III proved to be a treasure trove: this time it was the third concerto of this series which Mozart considered worth the trouble of providing with cadenzas, in this case for the first and second movements. They are printed in Part C of our volume as No. 6 (pp. 229–230).

A more problematic state of affairs prevails regarding the first cadenza in Part C (p. 227); strangely enough, this has been overlooked in Mozart studies up till now, although the relevant notation is found on the reverse side of the last inscribed leaf of the autograph of KV 40! This cadenza was probably originally written by Mozart in pencil, but later written over and added to by Leopold in ink. One might think that this cadenza – whose autograph, incidentally, contains numerous hardly legible passages – ought to belong to KV 40, 67 Id., p. 167. 68 Köchel-Einstein, p. 823. 69 E. F. Schmid, Neue Quellen zu Werken Mozarts, in: Mozart-Jahrbuch 1956, Salzburg, 1957, after p. 40.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XV

especially as it seems to cadence to D major at the end;70 the metre, however, varying between 3/4 and 4/4 time, does not fit any of the three movements. One is therefore left with almost no alternative but to claim this cadenza as being for a piano concerto by another composer; I would like to retain the dating, however, of 1767, which was also the year in which the Concerto KV 40 was written.

As far as the other cadenzas by Mozart for piano concertos by other composers are concerned, listed in Köchel-Einstein under No. 624 (626a), Appendix, it should be pointed out, continuing from the remarks on this subject made by Wolfgang Rehm in the Foreword to the volume Piano Concertos 8,71 that, as Wolfgang Plath was able to ascertain a short time ago,72 the “2 cadenzas” described by Einstein under Appendix L are identical with a copy made by Leopold Mozart of the Piano Concerto Cadenzas KV 624 (626a), Appendices C and K, which we have already mentioned on p. XIII above.

* The editing of the concertos and cadenzas printed here has in general followed the normal practice in the volumes of Piano Concertos already published in the NMA. The basis is therefore provided by the autographs, which, incidentally, represent the only source in this case (with the exception of the two cadenzas KV 624/626a, Appendices C and K, for which a copy in Leopold Mozart’s hand is also available); account has been taken of modern notational practice, however, especially as far as Mozart’s customary abbreviations are concerned. Pulsating eighth-notes, often notated by Mozart in abbreviated form, have been written out in all cases, while pulsating sixteenth-notes have usually been rendered in the abbreviated form used in the original; whole-measure rests, almost entirely absent from the autographs, have been made up tacitly, while shorter rests omitted carelessly by Wolfgang or Leopold have been made up in distinguishably smaller print. Cautionary accidentals have been omitted wherever they seemed dispensable, and the separate stems for chords of two or more notes, used habitually by Mozart even in homophonic passages, were replaced according to modern practice. Grace-notes were transcribed from Mozart’s notation into

70 In my opinion it would be more logical to interpret the fragment in D minor if Mozart had not expressly notated

for the f in the first chord g# + d + f. It is strange that in this passage Leopold has also diligently written the crass consecutive octaves g#–a! 71 NMA V/15/8, p. XX. 72 W. Plath, Miscellanea Mozartiana I, in: Festschrift Otto Erich Deutsch zum 80. Geburtstag, Kassel etc., 1963, pp. 137–138.

modern notation throughout (cf. The Editorial Method, p. VI); where the interpretation was unclear, an interpretation has been supplied in square brackets and small print above the grace-note in question. Although a precise differentiation between the articulation marks dot and dash (wedge) in the autographs often proved extremely difficult, an attempt has been made in the present edition to present a satisfactory solution. Further discussion of this problem, by the way, is available in the literature submitted in the competition for the prize offered by the Gesellschaft für Musikforschung for studies on the subject.73 The piano part in the autographs of the Pasticcio Concertos is consistently marked with the word Cembalo [harpsichord], which agrees with the original sonata models, where the “Clavecin” [harpsichord in French] is specified everywhere. In Salzburg, Mozart had only a harpsichord available for concert purposes, but he must also have been familiar by that time with the capabilities of the new pianoforte; here we remember that Johann Gottfried Eckard expressly intended his Sonatas Op. I, according to the printed foreword, for the pianoforte as well, and that Johann Christian Bach was considered an influential propagandist for the hammerklavier. Although the style of this keyboard is in no way contrary to the nature of the pianoforte, a performance on the harpsichord is nevertheless to be preferred.

The practice still customary in Mozart’s day of using the solo piano as a continuo instrument in the tutti passages74 is not to be recommended for performances today. We have nevertheless taken over in the present edition the piano part as notated by Mozart, complete with the authentic thorough-bass figures; the abbreviation most frequently used in the original for this practice is colB. (= col Basso), which has in all cases been written out in full, while dynamic marks have been added as they appear in the string bass part.

73 Die Bedeutung der Zeichen Keil, Strich und Punkt bei Mozart. Fünf Lösungen einer Preisfrage, edited by Hans Albrecht on behalf of the Gesellschaft für Musikforschung, Kassel etc., 1957; Ewald Zimmermann, Das Mozart-Preisausschreiben der Gesellschaft für Musikforschung, in: Festschrift Joseph Schmidt-Görg zum 60. Geburtstag, Bonn, 1957, pp. 400–408; Paul Mies, Die Artikulationszeichen Strich und Punkt bei Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, in: Die Musikforschung XI, 1958, pp. 426–452. 74 On this cf. Paul Badura-Skoda, Über das Generalbaßspiel in den Klavierkonzerten Mozarts, in: Mozart-Jahrbuch 1957, Salzburg, 1958, pp. 96–107.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XVI

As has already been described (see p. XI above), Leopold intervened in the first and second movements of KV 37 to make some improvements in Wolfgang’s music text; in the present edition, the improvements have been rendered as part of the main text, with Wolfgang’s original versions notated below the staff. In the second movement, mm. 34–35, Leopold seems to have forgotten to incorporate the improved voice-leading he wrote for the bass part in the parallel passage (mm. 19–20); it is therefore recommended that, at this place, the ossia version provided at the bottom of p. 24 be played.

In the first movement of KV 40, the cadenza KV 624 (626a), Appendix C, probably composed later, in 1773 (see p. XII above), has been included in the main text on p. 101. To this purpose, some changes had to be made in piano part: in m. 145, where the original had a whole-note e'' with trill in the right hand instead of a second-inversion chord, and in m. 146, where an f#' has been added to round off the preceding chord of the dominant seventh. In this cadenza, it was not difficult to make up the barlines missing in the original (in Leopold’s copy as well) as broken lines. In the cadenzas Nos. 1 and 2 included in Part C, in contrast, I have refrained from making up barlines in this manner, as these would lead to metrical irregularities. In the cadenza for the Beecke concerto, I have assimilated the placement of rests in Wolfgang’s autograph to the correcter version in Leopold’s copy; the appoggiaturas printed above the staff on p. 228 are also taken from Leopold. More detailed information on this is provided in the Kritischer Bericht.

* For friendly assistance with the present edition, the editor wishes to thank here the following persons: the librarian of the Bibliothèque du Conservatoire de Musique, Paris, Mr. Vladimir Fédorov; the first Chief Editor of the New Mozart Edition, Dr. Ernst Fritz Schmid †; Music Director Ernst Hess, Zurich;

Mr. Max Reis, Zurich; Mr. Rudolf F. Kallir, New York; my colleagues in the Musicological Institute at the University of Utrecht, Mr. Alfons Annegarn and Ms. Metha-Machteld van Petersen-van Delft; and, above all, the two gentlemen forming the Editorial Board of the NMA, Dr. Wolfgang Plath and Dr. Wolfgang Rehm, whose profound knowledge of Mozart scholarship also extends to the material with which this volume is concerned and has left its traces throughout.

Bilthoven, December 1963 Eduard Reeser

* *

*

The Concertos based on Sonatas by Johann Christian Bach

Each musical epoch has tended to develop a group of instruments which realise and represent its ideal of sonority. Style and instrument exist in a symbiosis, giving and taking, in a close relationship and in constant reciprocal interaction. A particularly good opportunity to observe this relationship is provided by periods of transition or crisis, for these affect both sides, the musical structure and the means of its audible realisation.

In the first two decades of Mozart’s life, it is primarily in the keyboard instruments that this observation is confirmed. In a series of fruitful modifications and in a new type, the pianoforte, the role and application of the keyboard in the musical household underwent changes; it retained its position as a bass instrument, while the more sensitive and sensual tone, the capacity for individual gradations and nuances, led it beyond its previous boundaries and enabled it to participate increasingly in an interplay with the strings, with which it now constantly interacts and mingles. Evidence of this during the period is provided by the twisting paths followed by almost all musical forms whose raison d’être was the piano and which made use of this instrument, namely both the (accompanied) piano sonata and the ensemble forms duo, trio and quartet. Thanks to its cantabile qualities, other ties developed linking it to the operatic aria and song. Soon, an age of arrangements and re-workings was to dawn, in which this fashionable instrument was at centre stage.

It is in this historical context that one must consider the three piano concertos which the Mozarts, father Leopold and son Wolfgang, arranged, in collaboration, from piano sonatas by Johann Christian Bach. It is well-known that Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart esteemed, even adored and loved, this youngest son of Johann Sebastian Bach more than any other musician. The artistry of Johann Christian, with which the child prodigy had become acquainted in 1764 during his stay in London, touched Mozart deeply and remained with him for his whole life. The names of this Milanese, or London, Bach recurs several times in the Mozart family correspondence, and scholarship has painstakingly discerned its traces in the countless echoes and reminiscences in works from all Mozart’s periods. Théodore de Wyzewa and George de Saint-Foix must be credited, in their pioneering portrayal in the Vie musicale of Mozart (five volumes, 1912–1946),


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XVII

with the clarification of precisely this relationship.75 Oskar Fleischer and Max Schwarz,76 but also Hugo Riemann and his school, had prepared the way. Finally, it was in the monographs by Hermann Abert and Alfred Einstein that the now familiar characteristic picture of Johann Christian Bach was woven from their factual representations. Cantabile lines and rounded-off form in the instrumental structures are the secret aspirations of this music which attracted and fascinated the young Mozart. From an intimate knowledge of Johann Christian Bach, Charles Burney composed a colourful picture of his artistic development. Speaking of his studies with his brother Carl Philipp Emanuel, he continued as follows:77

“. . . under whom he became a fine performer on keyed-instruments; but on quitting him and going to Italy, where his chief study was the composition of vocal Music, he assured me, that during many years he made little use of a harpsichord or piano forte but to compose for or accompany a voice. When he arrived in England, his style of playing was so much admired, that he recovered many of the losses his hand had sustained by disuse, and by being constantly cramped and crippled with a pen; but he never was able to reinstate it with force and readiness sufficient for great difficulties; and in general his compositions for the piano forte are such as ladies can execute with little trouble; and the allegros rather resemble bravura songs, than instrumental pieces for the display of great execution. On which account, they lose much of their effect when played without the accompaniments, which are admirable, and so masterly and interesting to an audience, that want of hand, or complication in the harpsichord part, is never discovered.”

Eduard Reeser had mentioned above that the Pasticcio Concertos were seen and designated from the very beginning as being connected with the concertos after Johann Christian Bach.78 This tradition is perpetuated by Köchel in 1862, when he grouped the three concertos, “on the basis of the character of the handwriting” as No. 107 with the hypothetical date 1770, while allowing himself the

75 Cf. the preceding remarks by Eduard Reeser, pp. VIIf. 76 Oskar Fleischer, Mozart, Berlin, 1900; Max Schwarz, Johann Christian Bach, in: Sammelbände der Internationalen Musik-Gesellschaft, year II, 1900–1901, pp. 401–454. 77 Charles Burney, A General History of Music, IV, London, 1789, p. 866. 78 See p. VII of the present volume and the pertinent footnotes. In the catalogue, printed in 1841, André lists the three concertos based on Bach on p. 58 with the number 218.

interpretion of the Giovanni Bach of the original title (see facsimile, p. XXIII/1) as an abbreviation of his father’s name, Johann Sebastian, an assumption which Waldersee sought to correct in the second edition of Köchel’s Verzeichnis (1905).79 Wyzewa and Saint-Foix, who demonstrated that the concertos had their origins in the piano music of Johann Christian Bach, thought that they should be dated earlier than this on stylistic grounds, and suggested 1765/66,80 when father and son Mozart were in London and The Hague. But, as the Johann Christian Bach piano sonatas did not appear in print until 1768,81 as Nos. 2, 3 and 4 of Opus V, one had assumed that Mozart had received them as a manuscript from the composer. This dating was adopted by Alfred Einstein in the third edition of the “Köchel” (1937), where they were given the early work number 21b. In the fifth volume of their great work on Mozart, George de Saint-Foix withdrew his previous statement and stated the conviction82 “que la transcription date d'une période très postérieure à l'enfance de Mozart: le maître n'a évidemment pas conçu cet arrangement comme ayant un but d'enseignement, mais plutôt comme un témoignage de son admiration constante pour cette œuvre d'un de ses maîtres les plus aimés, œuvre qu'il a dû très souvent interpréter lui-même sous cette forme nouvelle.” [“ that the transcription dates from a period very much later than Mozart’s childhood: the master apparently did not conceive this arrangement as teaching material, but rather as testimony of his undying admiration of this work by one of his most cherished teachers, a work which he must have interpreted often himself in this new form.”] The old Mozart edition ignored the concertos altogether. It was only in 1932 that they were published by Schott in a practical form, edited by Heinrich Wollheim.

The only source for the concertos is a manuscript of 24 leaves in oblong format belonging to the former Prussian State Library in Berlin. More recently, Wolfgang Plath has succeeded in throwing some light on the origins of this double autograph.83 He sees the manuscript as a “classic case of a 'mixed' autograph”, since clearly both Leopold and his son had worked on different portions of it: while

79 Cf. the registers of the first two editions Köchel’s Verzeichnis. 80 Op. cit., I, 1912, pp. 160f. 81 Cf. The British Union Catalogue of early Music, I, London, 1957, p. 76; also the thematic index in Charles Sanford Terry, Johann Christian Bach, London, 1929, pp. 338–340. 82 Op. cit., p. 306. 83 In the study by E. Reeser mentioned in footnote 41.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XVIII

Wolfgang had supplied the three string parts, his father is the scribe of most of the other sections; he it was, above all, who wrote out, largely unchanged, Bach’s piano part (and also the thorough-bass figures and other performance directions, cf. the Kritischer Bericht). Surprisingly, this seems to have been added later, i.e. after Wolfgang had determined the basic “concertante” outline of the individual movements. It is in fact only thus that one can explain why Leopold repeatedly had problems as a scribe in fitting the piano part into the available space (see the facsimile, p. XXV/1). A detailed examination of the handwriting of both Mozarts confirms anew Köchel’s original dating. Plath concludes that the autograph must have been written at the end of 1770 at the earliest, “but probably even later” (this necessarily means after the Pasticcio Concertos, cf. Eduard Reeser above, p. XIf.).

The specific question of the occasion and intention of the concertos must for the moment be left unanswered. One could speculate about the Italian journeys at the beginning of the 1770s; the Mozarts spent many months in Milan (from January until into March 1770 and again from October until February 1771, and, during the second journey, between August and December), where Johann Christian had been active until approximately eight years before. Leopold also speaks, in a letter written from Milan on 10 February 1770, of the death of a certain Marquese Litta, who had been Johann Christian Bach’s patroness and supporter. That Mozart at any rate took with him these concertos, whose autograph shows a Salzburg watermark characteristic for these years (medallion with “wild man and cudgel”), as repertoire pieces on this journey and used it on numerous occasions, possibly also for teaching purposes, seems all the more likely when one considers that the two cadenzas for the first concerto (KV 624/626a, Appendices A and B, formerly in the possession of the Prussian State Library and now untraceable, and, according to Köchel-Einstein, autograph) are obviously of a later date. They survive only in a copy by Leopold Mozart (see the facsimile in the Mozart-Jahrbuch 1953, following p. 148) which was also the basis of our edition.84 The Kritischer Bericht details the minimal changes in the autograph notation made necessary by the insertion of both cadenzas into the score of the first concerto. For concertos Nos. 2 and 3, no authentic cadenzas are known; models and examples for their improvisation are available in particular in Section C of the present volume. 84 Cf. Hans Moldenhauer, Ein neuentdecktes Mozart-Autograph, in: Mozart-Jahrbuch 1953, pp. 143–149; on this Mozart-Jahrbuch 1956, p. 44, footnote 24, and Mozart-Jahrbuch 1957, p. 57, footnote 1.

Previous literature has hardly taken note of the Sonata Concertos because of their supposedly primitive substance; authors were unanimous in speaking of unusually simple procedures and poverty of invention.

This can be countered by pointing out that the solo concerto accompanied by only three string parts represented a intimate category of its own in the chamber music of that time; it included a large portion of the piano concertos by Johann Christian Bach, and it seems that Mozart in no way looked down on works of this type in later years.85 It is characteristic that a critic could write in 1779, in another context,86 that “it is also permissible to accompany these concertos with only the two violins, and, if one wishes, to include a violoncello. The viola can generally be omitted; its distinguishing feature is that, on the whole, one would believe it is playing solo.”

The supposedly primitive structure of these arrangements can therefore not be seen as a criterion for the chronological placing nor even for the value of such music; rather, one must see it as the expression of a particular intention. The piano goes beyond the limits of the keyboard and is incorporated organically into the variable sonorities of the ensemble. This development can be seen to be general, and complements Mozart’s discovery that piano sonatas can easily be transformed into concertos. One must indeed, as already mentioned, attribute this concertante re-smelting to the young Mozart. As Johann Christian Bach’s sonatas are readily available in new editions,87 it suffices here to point out the general principles on which these adaptations are based. An astonishing sense of form, such as no child could ever display, prevailed in this process.88 The main compositional complex in the first movement is always the opening tutti. The process traces a path between adaptation from the original sonata, free invention of intermezzos and finales, and transposition of middle movements; it is obviously Mozart’s intention – in the second and third concertos – to provide hints and suggestions of a thematic dualism going beyond anything in the

85 Alfred Einstein, Mozart. Sein Charakter – Sein Werk, Stockholm, 1947, pp. 395–397. 86 Abbé Vogler in: Betrachtungen der Mannheimer Tonschule, II, Mannheim, 1779f., p. 42; cf. Arnold Schering, Geschichte des Instrumentalkonzerts, Leipzig, 1927, p. 152, footnote 4. 87 Cf. Johann Christian Bach. Zehn Klavier-Sonaten, ed. Ludwig Landshoff, Leipzig, C. F. Peters, no date; Landshoff’s valuable introduction deserves special attention. 88 Cf. the study by Edwin J. Simon mentioned above by E. Reeser in footnote 47.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XIX

original sonata. In his transpositions, it is immediately apparent how unschematic the young Mozart’s practice was. As a rule, the movements become longer, although there are two exceptions: the variations movement in the second concerto retains the number of bars displayed in the original, while the Rondo-Allegretto in the third concerto is even 12 measures shorter than Johann Christian Bach’s sonata movement.

Which original source father and son used in their joint work can hardly be determined. A manuscript is suggested on the one hand by the changes to the tempo directions in the first concerto and also by the reversal of the order of Variations 1 and 2 compared to the printed editions of the sonata, and, most strongly, by the fact that Leopold allowed himself some free ornamental changes to the melody in the piano part he was copying (cf. the Kritischer Bericht). Ornament signs in the original are adopted faithfully, with the exception of some writing errors, including the striking synonymity in the notations of mordent and trill. Leopold consistently writes mordents, Wolfgang trills. Here and there, we have placed a natural sign in square brackets above the original signs. The thorough-bass figures in the tutti are given in the source, as a rule, in the string bass part; nevertheless, they are doubtless intended for the pianist and not for some special continuo player.89 The autograph notation of the theme for the variations in the second concerto (see the facsimiles on p. XXIV) has such figures, although the solo part simultaneously renders the piano notation of the original sonata. Could this mean that the piano was originally meant to rest during the presentation of the theme? Is Leopold simply complying with a scribal tradition, or did he want to demonstrate in this way a particular characteristic of this “tutti”? The fact that the original Cembalo specified in the score in no way precludes the use of another kind of keyboard instrument, particularly the piano, is evident from the history of Mozart’s piano concertos. The realisation of the “basso”, in view of the transparent, chamber music-like texture of these concertos, should be entrusted to the violoncello rather than the contrabass. Correspondingly, the two desks of violins should as a rule consist of one player each. The differentiation between short and long grace-notes, notated identically in the autograph, and the interpretation of typical melodic formulas of the day have been facilitated by suggestions provided by the

89 Cf. Hermann Beck, Das Soloinstrument im Tutti des Konzerts der zweiten Hälfte des 18. Jahrhunderts, in: Die Musikforschung XIV, 1961, pp. 427–435.

editor, who has likewise supplied solutions for ambiguous notation in the sources. The autograph was obviously committed to paper hurriedly; numerous erasures, careless errors and inconsistencies are visible. These are listed in detail in the Kritischer Bericht.

* The decisive point for our edition was the distinguishing of the handwritings. The editor’s thanks therefore go above all to Dr. Wolfgang Plath, who, as did his colleague Dr. Wolfgang Rehm, also advised him in numerous other questions. The friendly and obliging help of Dr. Wilhelm Virneisel enabled the editor to consult repeatedly the original manuscript of the concertos, currently kept in Tübingen. Thanks are also due to Dr. Hans Moldenhauer, Spokane (Washington, USA). Tübingen, March 1964 Walter Gerstenberg Translation: William Buchanan


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications VII

Facs. 1: Concerto in F KV 37: leaf 1r (original format c. 23 : 31 cm) from the autograph in the possession of the State Library Berlin – Prussian Cultural Heritage; cf. page 3, measures 1–9. Joint autograph by father and son Mozart, cf. Foreword, pages XIf.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications VIII

Facs. 2: Concerto in F KV 37: leaf 14v from the autograph in the possession of the State Library Berlin – Prussian Cultural Heritage; cf. page 22, measures 19–23. Joint autograph by father and son Mozart; cf. Foreword, pages XIf.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications IX

Facs. 3: Concerto in D KV 40: leaf 1r from the autograph in the possession of the State Library Berlin – Prussian Cultural Heritage; cf. page 84, measures 1–5. Leopold Mozart’s handwriting; cf. Foreword, pp. XIf.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications X

Facs. 4 ,5: Concerto in D KV 107 (21b), I: leaf 1r and leaf 1v (original format c. 23 : 31 cm) from the autograph in the possession of the State Library Berlin – Prussian Cultural Heritage; cf. pages 165–167, measures 1–38. Joint autograph by father and son Mozart; cf. Foreword, pages XVIIf.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XI

Facs. 6, 7: Concerto in G KV 107 (21b), II: leaf 13v and leaf 14r from the autograph in the possession of the State Library Berlin – Prussian Cultural Heritage; cf. pages 196–197, measures 108–112, and pages 197–198, Theme and Variation I. Joint autograph by father and son Mozart; cf. Foreword, pages

XVIIf.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XII

Facs. 8, 9: Concerto in Eb KV 107 (21b), III: leaf 18r and leaf 18v from the autograph in the possession of the State Library Berlin – Prussian Cultural Heritage; cf. pages 208–211, measures 62–92. Joint autograph by father and son Mozart; cf. Foreword, pages XVIIf.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XIII

Facs. 10: Composite photograph of the autograph of Cadenzas KV 624 (626a), Appendices K and C cut up by Constanze Mozart: upper part (= KV 624/626a, Appendix K), owned by Rudolf F. Kallir, New York; lower part (= KV 624/626a, Appendix C), in the possession of the British Museum, London;

cf. page 101, measure 145 and measures [1] – [10], pages 227–228, and Foreword, pages XIIf.


International Mozart Foundation, Online Publications XIV

Facs. 11, 12: Cadenzas KV 624 (626a), Appendices K and C: copy by Leopold Mozart in the possession of Max Reis, Zurich.

Date post:	05-Feb-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	leque
View:	260 times
Download:	0 times

WOLFGANG AMADEUS MOZART - Digital Mozart Edition...

Documents