*
... An informative rant ~ on a couple of curious things!


<sub>YES! Herr Michael Lorenz is one of those musicologists who have the courage NOT to blindly follow the traditional canon of only repeating what other biographers have said or just speculate what they want and without anything in hand -

but dig through the actual documents themselves

and if something, based on evidence, invites reasonable doubt as it does not compute with what we've been repeatedly told for 200 years - he is not afraid to say so and to post argumentative and evidence-based criticism. Especially Mozarteum (as self-propagating, self-absorbed establishment who cares only of ''Mozart-as-they-want-to-interpret-and-sell-him'' and not so much of Mozart-as-he-was ~ and frankly, who knows who real Mozart was any more, so many biographers are used to casually twist Mozart's own words for their own personal purpose) rises his fury michaelorenz.blogspot.com/2014… Gotta love the man! ... Frankly, he's probably the best thing that has happened to musicology (and Mozart) in a long, long time.

Ehm, in case you have not yet noticed - and this I do openly, you just have to go through my gallery - so maybe I should tell you right from the start - that I happen to be somewhat critical towards Mozart and, at times, towards his music - and especially about the people who took care of his legacy and name - but despite that ~ I love some of it and find other bits interesting - regarding how much space CDs take: he is right up there on my shelves, beaten only by a couple of others. And the reason for that is because other composers - as of yet - simply do not have their whole canon of works recorded over million times, lol, otherwise they too would be a serious competition to these few!

... Meaning: one can love (some of) Mozart - and be somewhat critical ~~~ at the same time:

new wave musicologists, I think, are of similar opinion. Personally, I'm just tired of infinite amount of exaggerations, lies and liars, starting with the Mozarts themselves ... Yes, this has been known for a while now. But on the up side: we're finally getting to know Mozart and musical history better, and that's a lot already!)

Therefore - please, do not count on me too much: there's over 25.000 composers out there for us to explore - and no way anybody could in our life time take in so much knowledge and music - my composer counter is at the moment nearing or is possibly already over 700 - but that's still just a speck compared to the bulk of names. I'll definitely help you and if you like, we can talk about things - but you really should guide yourself and trust your instinct (you know best as per what interests and draws you in most) and if I can add a little advice, then all the better! And frankly, I pity those studious heads - who, in their lives, only concentrate on a couple of ''great'' composers - and leave out the SHEER MASS of others ... So much knowledge, so many lives to learn from ...</sub>

KAPELLMEISTERSHIP - Mozart, Salieri, Weigl & Albrechtsberger

.... Skip to the synopsis at the bottom where it says  *SYNTAX!*  Here I begin building to it.

Now, about Joseph When I mentioned him previously I haven't read your *Les Oiseaux* yet,
so it was just a random name which I instantly associated with my favourite Joseph (II) - but here's a couple of things about splendid Joseph Weigl:

his godfather was Joseph Haydn, Weigl was, from the first, an immensely talented young person, trained in music and basic composition by his father at Esterháza and later by (Vice)Kapellmeisters Albrechtsberger and Salieri, his first opera *Die unnütze Vorsicht* (in German) was hailed as *a really good one* by Salieri and Gluck (who pulled some strings) but above all - Salieri's successor at royal opera theatre (he also remained a fruitful and successful operatic composer) - --> de.wikisource.org/wiki/ADB:Wei…

*****
BUT THIS IS WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW in order to understand where his story comes from:
*****

~ it is important to realise that the very INSTANT Salieri around 1783 took him under his wing - Weigl was on his merry way of becoming a Kapellmeister (of court theatre thereby Salieri's successor - and a Vicekapellmeister to Joseph Eybler, who in 1824 succeeded Salieri as Hofkapellmeister.) Salieri said to his father: ''Since you were the best friend of my teacher Gassmann, I will repay through your son what I owe to my teacher; I will be his second father.'' You can find the quote on the web: even when Weigl was already a Kapellmeister, Salieri has affectionately singed letters to him as ''Papa Salieri'' (sort of a remembrance: yeah, you're the Kapellmeister now – but remember who's yo' daddy! ) as Weigl in return addressed him as ''Caro Papa'' - they were tight, like FAMILY (such non-related but nevertheless considered as *family* ties ~ meant a lot to Salieri, he was called father and grandfather by his pupils) ~ essentially - like Gassmann hand picked Salieri for his successor - Salieri picked Weigl; it's all about connections, yes - as well as capabilities - and Weigl had plenty of those about - there was really NOTHING he could have done

~ but to through FOUR TOP MEN - Haydn, Gluck, Albrechtsberger and Salieri - as he was now meant to and if all goes well for him, some day inherit Salieri's position: just like there was almost NO WAY OUT for Salieri:

the moment he became pretty much an adopted son, helper and trainee of Gassmanns ~ who has inherited position directly from Freemason Gluck - as well as ExKapellmeister Gluck's ''student'' (Gluck was not altogether overtaken by Salieri's abilities and understanding of melodic and tonal art (too much melody and music! in an opera ), but, luckily, Salieri possessed a peculiar and rare ability: to be able to CENSURE himself, has learned fast and adapted to what was needed and expected of him - and according to Salieri, they were on very cordial and friendly terms and Gluck was, after Danaides, OK with Salieri.)

The string of Habsburg's Kapellmeisters runs deep, as it is only right with a multicultural Imperium Romanum, and goes thus (you wouldn't believe how hard it is to find it all out - not sure I got it completely right, but do Google their music, it's amazing):

Jurij Slatkonja (or Georg Slatkonia, Slovenian born Viennese Archbishop and Musiker, not a Kapellmeister, only a Cantor – but he was THE founder of Wiener Sängerknaben ~ of St. Stephan's Cathedral and Hofkapelle – which was, in accordance with musical trends, a major contribution in formation of Hofkapelle),

Giovanni Valentini www.youtube.com/watch?v=rucCGa… & www.youtube.com/watch?v=UatJgT…

Antonio Bertali, Giovanni Felice Sances, Johann Heinrich Schmelzer, Antonio Draghi,

Johann Michael Zächer (Domkapellmeister of St. Stephens Cathedral & Kapellmeister to Maria Theresa's grandmother)

Marc’Antonio Ziani (Hofkapellmeister & Hofcompositeur under Karl VI)

Johann Joseph Fux (Hofkapellmeister & Hofcompositeur under empress Wilhelmine Amalie) with Antonio Caldara (Vicekapellmeister to Fux)

František Ignác Tůma (Franz Tuma - that's one Bohemian on board! www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulZgtw…)

Gluck (Hofkapellmeister to Maria Theresa and teacher of her children) & Reutter Jr. (Domkapellmeister of St. Stephan's Cathedral)

Papa Florian Gassmann (Hofkapellmeister to Maria Theresa and Joseph II) & Leopold Hoffmann (Domkapellmeister of St. Stephan's Cathedral from 1772 and Salieri's wedding witness )

Joseph Bonno (Viennese born, Hofkapellmeister mostly to Joseph II, much ridiculed as an ageing drooling incompetent in *Amadeus* but in truth a highly productive and vocally oriented operatic composer, scholar and teacher ~ I have no doubts Salieri learned heaps from him as well: www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgATdQ… and [link] - shame this seems to be all there is as of yet recorded of his music) -

Salieri (the LAST Hofkapellmeister of Holy Roman Empire ~ to Joseph II, Leopold II and Franz II (a lovely bunch of seconds!)) & Albrechtsberger (philosopher, theorist, court organist and Kapellmeister of St. Stephan's Cathedral)

Weigl (Kapellmeister to court theatre, Vicekapellmeister to Eybler) -

and Eybler (cousin of both Haydn brothers and Kapellmeister Albrechtsberger's pupil), who was Vicehofkapellmeister to Salieri and later his successor.

POINT: ~ ~ ~ Kapellmeistership was - VIA INVITATION - pretty much a FAMILY run hierarchical business and Salieri had some SERIOUSLYBIGHUGEIMMENSE shoes of his foreFathers to fill!

...

But just as important figure here as these men are - is JOSEPH II -

if you want to understand Salieri and his place under the Sun - you need to understand HIS MONARCH and his tastes in music (which were in truth somewhat antiquated, some of previously mentioned Kapellmeisters were frequently on his musical menu! Probably one of the reasons Salieri has sometimes baroque elements in his works! Then again ~ Baroque ROCKS!)

Joseph took a deep liking to Salieri ~ in fact, to the degree that he himself arranged (= pulled the strings) and eased Salieri's way into operatic world all over Europe: after all, the Hofkapelle's reputation had to be groomed somehow and achieving a good footing for its next Kapellmeister would be in order! It was probably Joseph's fault Salieri's opera inaugurated the opening of La Scala; any other composer could have been in his place - but hey, Ferdinand, who ruled over Milano etc. - was Joseph's BROTHER - just like Marie Antoinette was Joseph's SISTER, whom Salieri dedicated the opera Les Danaides to and was Salieri's royal patron in Paris ... Yes, royals were not completely silly people and Salieri was a neat and capable composer in his own right - royal affection proves this - but a little PR from the court helped to ease his way too (just imagine the amount of envy this must have provoked!) - as even without such favours from his monarch - the ultimate target to please was the AUDIENCE - and with the AUDIENCE ~

(= public opinion of which, as Beaumarchais' example shows, can be controlled through spicy and spiky pamphlets and printed leaflets and magazines - a fierce propaganda machine and tool which also Allgemeine Musikalische Zeitung and other papers and writers later adopted in their intensive hero-building of Mozart and Beethoven, etc. ~ ~ ~ but remember kids ~ Salieri got there first! )

~ fortunately, Salieri had his ups and downs which means not everything depended on his royal patronage or crafty propaganda and Emperor could only have done so much (Salieri was in Vienna pretty much NEVER *No. 1* operatic composer - but was, with his three operas in French (one of which failed because of the contents of libretto, not music - or so contemporaries report) ''quasi-No. 1'' (meaning: for a period of time fairly important) in France (but let's face it: political PR was VERY strong there also, from royals to courtiers to Beaumarchais and revolutionaries - and, of course - the mostly bourgeois or peasantry audience: in its narration and story, *La Nozze di Figaro* is, astonishingly, NOTHING compared to sociopolitical power of *Tarare* (which had to be for Vienna ''minimised'' down to *Axur* ...) Salieri, strangely, only ever got a couple of ostinato criticisms anyway (people knew before and especially after the première night what nobleman Beaumarchais' views on (small-ish) role of music (to which Salieri simply had to comply) in this work was anyhow) - and even those were mostly directed against Beaumarchais (from his opposition.))

ALL THESE PEOPLE, important or not so much, simply made it happen for Salieri - and he accepted it, worked darn hard and did not fight fate: he knew what was expected of him, his capabilities as well as his duties - Salieri was highly disciplined - and he learned how to master the opera and even more importantly - the Hofkapelle, knew all the people and situations they were in, was able to work with everybody no matter the class or nationality or sex, he had nose for hiring the best suited (not necessarily the best) personnel for the job - and had almost 40 years worth of experience in all possible fields of Europeian and Viennese musical and social life - which not many, to such degree, had (nor were they ever in a position to have.)

Plus he was an educated and skilled diplomat - and always respective, even towards people he probably did not like (whom, it would seem, he was polite to – but, if he did not need to, just did not bother with.) A dependable workaholic, who, some say, never touched alcohol (this being an exception to the rule of Kapellmeisters whereupon reaching this status many (like Vivaldi and Haydn) had in their contracts drawn a provision of a couple of bottles of wine to go!)

POINT: Salieri was simply TRAINED for this job. AND SO WAS JOSEPH WEIGL - and he knew it which means he would have had to pick up on some of salierian graces to get a long in a world similar – yet changing ... But Weigl was not adjunkt-Kapellmeister. ... He was a proper Vicekapellmeister.

... To further illustrate the point: it is important to speculate

that neither Mozart nor anybody else were, in the position of an assistant, EVER really in the game of becoming Kapellmeisters

and it is a questionable supposition that after St. Stephan's Kapellmeister Leopold Hoffmann's death, Mozart,

with no particular enthusiasm for writing church music (as opposed to Albrechtsberger, who was all for it), would have in fact gained anything out of it – it was more earthly sense of prestige and glorious 2000 or so florins/gulden/zecchini linked to the comfortable position of Leopold Hoffmann


(of which 1500 florins went to the up-keeping of the 6 Kapelle's choir boys - meaning Leopold Hofmann only kept about 814 florins - only *14* more than Mozart) that, according to Landon, may have attracted and guided Mozart: if I remember correctly – Salieri was paid way less (but did more work for) about 1200 gulden –

which means Mozart was, yes, a highly ambitious KammerkompositeurWannabeKapellmesiter ~ yet in 1791 un-salaried - therefore in official payment records non existing - St. Stephan's assistant.

... As such - at first denied and then affirmed by Decree via members of the city Magistrate: it would be wonderful to know why they changed their position – but which still, according to legal papers and tradition - amounts to

not eligible in the Great Hierarchy of Succession for Position of (Royal Imperial) Kapellmeister. If we won't find any other papers - then that job still went to Salieri. With Adjunkt-Stelle Mozart in effect created an extra job for an assembly regarding which the City Council (Magistrate) already tried their best to minimize in terms of expenses. There were attempts (cca 1784-85) to cut Hofmann off and have him, along with the Kapellmeister title - replaced by a cheaper Cantor.

The man, an Honorary Citizen of Vienna and even has a street named after him - Joseph Preindl, who was after Mozart-Hofmann relationship then Assistant to Kapellmeister Albrechtsberger (1795), succeeded him after A.'s death - so there was serious intent behind charting up this post. Before jumping to conclusion that this was some sort of a ''norm'', it would pay to know how Hofmann got appointed to this position: through being an outsider and sort of  ''third party nominee'' (like Gatti was in Salzburg), a Vicekapellmeister to the True Kapellmeister and his predecessor - or as unpaid assistant ... Turns out that after Mozart's death a draft of the appointment letter (December 12th, 1791) naming Albr. as an Adjunkt-Kapellmeister to Hofmann exists. To put it plainly: it would be marvellous to, prior to this, see how many friends Mozart had in the Magistrate Council - that the Adjunkt-Stelle even got created in the first place. How he even got onto this idea and why it came to be. CAN SOMEBODY PLEASE EXPLORE THIS?! Thank you.

It would be interesting to see who of the two would ''stand to argue'' and ''pull'' more deciding power of which part of the Establishment onto whose side - or who would have been given the title on a silver platter:

salaried and for over 20 years long-standing Vicekapellmeister to St. Stephan's, teacher and theoretician Albrecthtsberger -

or for seven months unpaid assistant and Kammerkompositeur Mozart, who managed to butt himself in.

Who would you choose? ... What would have been the legal and ethical arguments to advocate Mozart's position, this I wonder. 

... If anything, we now have *Albrechtsberger VS Mozart* and one has to wonder what was going on in Albrechtsberger's mind. 

If anything then, Mozart would have been called that: Adjunkt-Kapellmeister. For seven months of his life at least. But I wonder whether Albrechtsberger would have fought and challenged Mozart's *created place* and so ''right'' to the first appointment. Or not. And if not - why not. Just what was this broad social dynamic like between the two men and the Magistrate Council.

But, back to the topic, we have Mozart calling himself a (Royal Imperial) Kapellmeister long before those last seven months.

*

On April 11th, 1781, Mozart wrote in tones of crude reality as per Court Kapellmeister position:

''... - wenn - dann anstatt - wird (Joseph Starzer - due to lack of schooling ~ capitalization, full stops and grammar were from Mozart far removed) - weis mann noch .''

~ Very soon he realised and learned of this - which by consequence also means he has very early on turned his head towards this goal -

but as early as January of 1784 at tender age of 28, and he was not even that long in Vienna ~ Wolfgang Mozart already began calling himself a *fürstl. Salzb. Kapellmeister* when in truth he has held the same position as Michael Haydn (who was around age of 20 truly a Kapellmeister in Großwardein (a job well earned), but in Salzburg held a lower position of Konzertmeister and Organist - and did not represent himself as Kapellmeister either as this was in their common time the title belonging to Salzburg-long-serving Giuseppe/Joseph Lolli, tenorist and former Vicekapellmeister under Kapellmeister Eberlin) - please keep in mind Mozart was via count Arco, May to June 1781, already FIRED by Colloredo and at this point held NO official titles of Salzburgian (Colloredo, it seems, wished to avoid promoting Leo Mozart at all costs: since 1780 the position of Kapellmeister was filled by externally recruited and by Leopold much ridiculed Luigi Gatti www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTU3gD… which was not quite by the book, the only reason for it probably was to further aggravate annoyingly ambitious Leopold Mozart) or any other courtly nature - nor was he ever appointed a functioning Kapellmeister there or anywhere else - yet a couple of months later Mozart already called himself (August 28th, 1784)

a Kapellmeister in Royal Imperial Service - job only Bonno (Hofkapellmeister) and Salieri (Kapellmeister of Italian-Royal-Theatre-Opera thingy, later succeeding Bonno's post too) ~ had. 

Still, the hierarchy of positions was, especially to Leopold Mozart, painfully clear.

... So - what was Mozart << *Royal Imperial Kapellmeister* >> - in the centre of Vienna - of? ... Thin air? A just question my liege, since we, through Mozart's own (semi-literate, unrefined and disorderly) letter

(seriously, despite template of a letter not being sent and, since we're strict with Salieri's German (which Goethe says noting against, just a thought) - like in case of Haydn - excuse of a ''dialect'' - how could he write that to a bleedin' Archfreakin'duke?!!! Education-and-etiquette-wise, and I'm really sorry to say this but - Mozart, with his lack of education, social graces and vocabulary ~ was NO Hofkapellmeister material ...)

of about ''first half of May'' 1790 (less than two months after death of Joseph II) and addressed to the court - to *a* Archduke Franz of Austria, know that he was up to then in fact NOT a Royal Imperial Kapellmeister - because, as he himself openly states, he is after this very (Salieri's) job & title - or at least wishes to partially share it's delights and ''ease Salieri's work a little'' (confirmed: Salieri hinted about general overwork of the troupe and himself in a letter of 1790, in 1819 under similar busy regime Weigl moaned to Goethe as well) by becoming an ADDITIONAL Hofkapellmeister ~ same arrangement later Beethoven suggested (claimed) for himself - and lived to tell the tale, lol! It seems his request was either not granted or the letter was never sent (in which case Salieri would not have known about this) - Mozart so never shared the imperial title with Salieri - but hey, that minor technicality did not stop Mozart from advertising himself as *Kapellmeister in Königliche Kaiserliche Dienste* on his travels with Lichnowsky. Beethoven, as you know, never used this title either as he was then never in a position to use it (only his grandfather was a true Kapellmeister) but has applied for Salieri's job about twice. However, Salieri has long time since already chosen WEIGL as his successor - a recommendation (and tradition) completely honoured by the monarchs, even Leopold II. Not to mention Leopold's favourite, Cimarosa ... Meaning: people were after Salieri's job since forever (it is not Salieri who was jealous or has hated and envied others - but some others, have felt precisely this towards Salieri and worked their way for the grabs (what later historians have done is in psychology called *a projection*, inversion, google it)) - but Salieri was never threatened by the bunch as he was protected by the official decree ONLY HIS MONARCH could change: and Salieri only had the courage to call himself Royal Imperial Kapellmeister ~ after his emperor Joseph II actually decreed, confirmed and signed, sealed, delivered it -

(here comes in the deeply felt gratitude Salieri had towards Joseph II: this was Joseph's greatest gift: as long as Salieri was alive and did his rightful duty as Kapellmeister - there was NO possible reason for ANY monarch to be able to fire or demote him - apart from himself giving notice and seek fortune elsewhere - only death and inability could absolve or pension off a diligent Kapellmeister: in effect, Salieri devoted the rest of his life to the smooth running of the Hofkapelle which he received from Joseph's hands - so than when the echo of demoting Salieri from the court theatre and opera came to Leipzig, it enlisted a furious response in AMZ and we have about 5 different versions of what has happened (at any rate - Weigl inherited this position))

therefore, keeping in mind Mozart went by this title anyway -

- I'd love to hear somebody explain its illusive and ambiguous meaning to me because otherwise

<<< EVERYBODY >>> could be Royal Imperial Kapellmeisters of Viennese Court ...)

Consider this: if Salieri's reputation as a person and as composer has been so vastly besmirched that we are now in fact surprised and shocked as per how good, capable, benevolent, intelligent humanist Salieri was ~ is it not then possible that the PR machine could have gone a bit too far in terms of presenting the Ideal Imago of one Wolf Mozart? As you know, the answer has for a while now firmly been YES - but the question ''to what degree'' still remains to be answered.

So, some say that on the record Mozart was named Kammerkompositor (K. K. Kammermusikus) - but off the record and without any evidence (only via ''word of mouth'' which is a highly dubious source since word of mouth means not officially documented ~ it's like saying Unicorn! and buf! there it is!) ~ that Kammerkompositors apparently held same position as Kapellmeisters. ... Really? The difference is shown at hte very least in their respective income. And have other Kammerkompositors skipped a couple of places and straightforwardly called themselves Royal Imperial Kapellmeisters? Gluck was from October 1774 as cited often - a ''mere'' Hofkompositor (in an honorary position with 2000 Florins + 3000 Livres from French court!), Gaßmann too was a chamber composer - but it took him a while before he made it to the position of a K. K. Kapellmeister - this does make sense, right? Then there is some fictitious claim that the title was ''given to Mozart as sign of honour''. But the only written proof we have suggests that only Mozart himself (and his clique), through advertising in the newspapers, honoured his own person thusly - only later, when he cemented this dubious fame in Nordic foreign lands, have (German) newspapers began reporting it as such. As you can see, Joseph Weigl had to be meticulously trained for this prestigious position (he went through same type of schooling Salieri went through under Gassmann) and had to have officially written papers of such elevation from his monarch. Albrechtsberger as internal court organist (composer, theoretician, contrapunttist, etc.) and Vicekapellmeister of St. Stephan's Cathedral since 1772 (!!!) - was hence for a long time familiar with the Kapelle protocols and has naturally succeeded Hoffmann (strange thing you can read in Mozart-canon is - that on his death bed, Mozart himself (supposedly) graciously recommended Albrechtsberger as his worthy successor after Hoffmann death ... Mozart's successor to what, exactly??! Please think about it: Albrechtsberger has for 20 years already been meant as a successor to Hoffmann - since he was his Vicekapellmeister! Such a statement, that ''only he could follow Mozart's footsteps'' - when Mozart was absolutely *nothing* in game of succession - would only be offending and insulting to Albrechtsberger (who was in 1798 one of only three, for the first time in the history of this society ~ foreign ~ honorary members named by *Royal Swedish Music Academy* - the other two were Joseph Haydn (followed by Michael in 1804) and a couple of months later in 1799 - Antonio Salieri) ~ for as you can see - it was, like so many things in Mozartian canon - in fact THE OTHER WAY AROUND: since he already tried (or wanted to try, as per the draft) this with Salieri's job - why not try it again with Hoffmann's?! It was Mozart whose intention was to usurp (= ''to illegally, wrongfully claim'') the natural order of succession by creating a ''new, unpaid job post'' and, through attaching himself to the Kapelle even when obviously the Kapelle did not need him (hence working for free) - overthrow/trump the position of doyen Georg Albrechtsberger ... You decide, how ethically acceptable Mozart's actions are.) ... And old Salieri wrote in one of his letters that in order to verify his own thus listed titles they only need to contact the French and Italian embassies and Imperial Court. ... So where are Mozart's papers and credentials?
POINT: One can not simply walk into Hofkapelle ...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=H11kCB… LOL!

You may say: oh, nothing special, so what if Mozart told a white lie and called himself a Royal Imperial Kapellmeister. But does anybody ask themselves - what does this, in larger scheme of things, mean and has meant?! Episode is very revealing (also in terms of ''equality of men'', an idea which is usually prescribed to Mozart's private spiritual aspirations - but wishing and doing everything he could think of to achieve hierarchical *No. 1* position in the Empire ~ puts his egalitarian honesty firmly to the test), yet it usually gets brushed aside as people mostly do not even know how to handle it, when all it takes is a little research. Title, as you can see, did not come so lightly as per self-commemoration, self-attribution and self-appointment shortcuts ~ which strongly indicates that Mozart abused the title of Royal Imperial Kapellmeister as he was (as far as we know) NEVER entitled to it in the first place, he was not even in court service until December 7th, 1787 ~

(You can read this on Apropos Mozart webpage: Mozart was pretty much freelance for a couple of years ~ yet even when in service, it seems, the court never ordered him to write anything for the court ~ Mozart simply drew his Kammerkompositeur salary of 800 or so guldens ~ for doing what, exactly? Breathing? Do we have any lists of what he was doing there as a part of the staff? Is his court activity even recorded? In contrast, we know exactly what Salieri was doing and what his duties were (he was true eager beaver!) And the position was created especially for Mozart - the court simply did not need him - but could not let him go either; in essence, he was being paid, like later Beethoven, simply to stay in Vienna, probably as a result of his threat to ''go or move to England''

''The late Hofkompositor (Note: !!! NOT Kapellmeister !!!) Mozart was accepted into Court service expressly to prevent an artist of such outstanding genius from being obliged to seek his subsistence abroad.''

and Joseph, who knew him from their childhood days, apparently thought highly enough of him to at least grant him a place amongst chamber staff (it was not just Salieri whom he did favours to). ... The ONLY slim argument in FAVOUR of Mozart here is the position Leopold Antonin Koželuh as Mozart's successor had: yes, he filled Mozart's place of court Hofkompositeur ~ BUT ~ Koželuh was also (so Angermüller, 2000, Teil II & via count Ugarte) - a Kammerkapellmeister! Pretty much a novelty and not a standard title as Koželuh was the very first ever to receive it. *THIS* is the only position of Royal Imperial Kapellmeister Mozart could have had (after 1788 Ignaz Umlauf became Second Imperial Kapellmeister, right after Salieri) - therefore could have gotten it late in life, somewhere between 1787-1791 and not before. But such a position for Mozart - in court - is not listed in court papers.

Musical posts in Vienna: www.haydn.dk/mh_vienna_post.ph…

Then again - it is listed in Vienna death registers (his own & his children's.) ... Koželuh's new job, along with a divine salary of 1500 gulden, was temporary; he got fired soon and the Anstellung got erased again as it was apparently not necessary. He did sign his name so well after the event. Otherwise, with all these fine nuances in Kapellmeistership (like 1771 naming of Mozart as *Ehrenkapellmeister* of *Accademia Filarmonica Verona* = not linked to any actual Kapelle, just a honorary title given by the educational institution and OF that institution) ~ it's just such a mess and I still await the uncovering of any documents for whichever side of the argument, which would be wonderful.)

~ yet, it seems, some people simply bought it. Could be a part of what Leopold knew and taught his son: what is written down for posterity to learn from - what is recorded - then simply is ... Who will ever know ~ that it isn't?! It's not like we'll ever have the Internet and mass production of studious literature ... I wonder if Salieri and Hoffmann knew of this and how they felt about it, Lichnowsky certainly did know: you will find that, as Salieri had Imperial background – from the other direction – R. Angermüller (author of collected material on Salieri, director of Mozarteum) too recognises Masonic influences on grooming of Mozart, his reputation and music: it is also a political dualism at battle here:

*New World* of bourgeois and small nobility (Freemasons as main backers of Mozart)

VS

*Old World* high born noblemen and imperials (royalists as main backers of Salieri)

... SIMILAR TO LATER

bourgeois Wölfl and Schubert VS high nobility Beethoven (thankfully, S. & B. were long-term students of Salieri and Wölfl had the same training (through Leo, Marianne and Michael Haydn) therefore background as well as supporters as Wolf Mozart – in effect – miracle child and übertalented composer Joseph (who too conveniently died young) was literally ''Little Wolfgang'' Leopold always wanted - Wölfl is a diminutive of Wolf, little wolf cub.) An echo of this is present even today and you can find it on YouTube – when Otto von Habsburg died – they played *Requiem* by Michael Haydn:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A21D7… performed in St. Stephan's Cathedral

click here for better sound quality version: --> www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBV0oI… – which was a bomb for like 160 years and incorporates brief themes from Pergolesi, Hasse and Handel (scores out of which Haydn learned from) – which was, like Handel's Messiah, a direct ''inspiration'' for ''Mozart's'' *Requiem* --> www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_RfFH… – I think you can hear an additional reason as per why, when saying goodbye to the LAST HABSBURG CROWN PRINCE - they went with Michael's complete and original version - ''Mozart's'' 40 or so pages ~ would have been a farce ...

But even better reason is that Michael was, yes, tired, grumpy and depressed ~ but relatively declared subservient composer of the *Old World* and his *Requiem* was written in honour of passing of one such representative, Archbishop Sigismund – naturally, they could not have played rebellious ''Mozart's'' *Requiem* because people who backed up Mozart – were against church and monarchy (and have religious and economicopolitical plans themselves, remember Joseph II, with his severely centralist and controlling agenda, state police and whatnot - banned independent freemasonry ... (I'm not taking sides here, just explaining – this is all well documented and goes a lot deeper than *Amadeus* movie which is pretty much an attempt at final nail in the coffin of Salieri ~ and Old World with him: Salieri was, along with Michael Haydn and unlike Joseph Haydn & some of other ''great'' composers - not a Freemason ...)) Plus by hte time of Salieri-Rumour - the Court was out of popularity, repression, secret police, spies - class wars were eminent.

There was an article by Walther Brauneis: “Mozart’s appointment to the imperial court in Vienna: Facts and Speculations. –-Was Mozart in fact Kapellmeister to Archduke Franz?--”  - but please answer one thing: if by 1790 Mozart already was a Kapellmeister to (whichever the Archduke - there's some controversy as per who of them the here named) Franz (really was, probably the elector of Bonn and brother to Joseph and Leopold) ~ why go after Kapellmeisterstelle of TWO Viennese Kapellmeisters (Salieri and Hoffmann) when you're already drawing two pay-checks from, basically, Viennese court, one of which is supposedly a KKKapellmeister to Franz? There is also reason to suspect that from 1801-1805 (in case should Albrechtsberger or Salieri suddenly expire) same aspiration was imposed by Constanze (and possibly Nissen(= Mozart, see MOZART ... died in 1826 and others in my gallery)) upon any of her two children. Conclusion: they all were ambitious, yes - but as far as official hierarchy goes - did it ever get them above those majestic 800 gulden?

ONLY if Mozart was granted a shared Kapellmeistership together with Hofmann - or if he was perceived as a standing-in Kapellmeister to Hofmann - by the Magistrate. This would finally make him an unofficial ''Kapellmeister''. But even then Mozart had - Kapellmeisters Adjunktenstelle - and he was not a Kapellmeister himself, just ''attached'' to one. Like a limb. Somebody, including Mozart himself, very persistently called him a Kapellmeister, something he never was.

THINK OF IT THIS WAY:

Does placing a concert add - for posterity - automatically make a successful pianist and composer? There was zero response - zero criticism, positive or negative, to such supposed mozartiana events in Vienna. We don't even know if he followed up on these concerts at all. These could easily be bogies.

Does calling yourself a Kapellmeister in an add you placed in a newspaper - an actual Kapellmeister make?

If I describe myself as an open heart surgeon here on the internet ~ does it mean that this is what I really do for a living?

... Would you trust me with your heart?

Do you see the difference? Just because somebody says something has happened - just because something is there which invites certain train of thought - which shapes it further - it does not mean that reality was such as we are led to believe.

So go and watch next Star Trek movie and tell me that all special effects there are real. ... Words create virtual reality and have done so for ages.

*

SYNTAX

So. It all lies within a carefully crafted syntax, which only papers can reveal.

(I hope I got this right - if not, do CORRECT me or add your interpretation!)

... Was Mozart Assistant TO a Kapellmeister?

... Or was Mozart Assistant-Kapellmeister?

Joseph Preindl, since 1772 in Vienna a teacher and organist (and one of the oldest Albrechtsberger's pupils)

was appointed to a Kapellmeisters-Adjuncten-Stelle  

which DOES NOT MEAN he was automatically an ''Assistant Kapellmeister''.

It means Priendl, in his place, was assisting a Kapellmeister (Albrechtsberger). 

Albrechtsbergers draft: dme.mozarteum.at/DME/objs/rara…

Here it is stated: *Kapellmeisters Adjunktenstelle* = of-the-Chapel-Master (Hofmann) Position-of-Attachment.

With applying for this post Albrechtsberger had enough of an *umpf!* left in him to have reassured his position

as Hofmann's eventual and rightful successor by covering up *the gap Mozart created for himself* - by himself.

... In effect, for seven months Mozart was *An Attachment* to Hofmann.

But NOT an ''AdjunktKapellmeister'' or ** wirklichen Kapellmeister** (true/real Kapellmeister) himself.

Especially not a Kapellmeister of Royal Imperial Court, as he advertised.


*
At least this is how I understand it. Feel free to enlighten me if otherwise!

*

It was a steep drop for me. It's ''little'' things and major lies like these which come from Mozart himself and his family that have cured me of my Mozart infatuation (just ask yourself how did 14-going-on-15 years old Mozart become a member of Academy in Bologna: by writing - we usually hear it described as: a ''difficult piece'' - in half an hour when it usually took 4 hours to complete the examination. ... This is what Mozart really wrote: www.youtube.com/watch?v=26C8uQ… and it is exactly one minute long catchy exercise in harmony and rhythm, riddled with mistakes in composition, preferably by someone familiar with old renaissance singing. Someone - like Padre Martini. Martini would have also known what those examinations look like and what professors expect from the adolescent ~ and we already know Mozart had a reasonably good memory ... Mozart got in in the first place only on recommendation of Padre Martini, Leopold's pen pal and really tight friend who *just maybe* also provided both Mozarts with Vatican copies of Allegri's *Miserere* - for Martini was one of three possessors of said copies: yes, the other two were Portuguese and Viennese courts (Leopold was also in touch with court of Vienna, that's TWO sources of Allegri's Original Vatican music score) - which Mozart two weeks after the visit with Martini ~ then wrote down ''from  memory'' - how gullible one has to be not to see TWICE the obvious and important connection in such *building of a miracle reputation* - by Leopold and old Giambattista?! Yes, Mozart wrote it down from memory ~ but from score he very likely saw and studied two weeks beforehand! Sherlock's ''Once you eliminate the impossible ...'' + Ockham's Razor Deductive Method - get cosy with them, you'll come across such reasoning A LOT in Mozart-canon:

you know, I do NOT like lies and I do NOT like to be lied to

I also prefer NOT to deceive myself whenever logic and data no longer support a thesis, no matter how wonderful or time-honoured said thesis may be -

~ that's why I seek out knowledge - present reasonable doubt (which is good enough for any court) - then shape and adjust what I know accordingly. Before you ask: I still have the 30 or so books on Mozart (a CD library), letters, documents, Mozart T-shirt and Mozart beer mug and in the fridge right now a Mozart chocolate liqueur (for the visitors), just last year I have gathered autograph signatures from F. Murray Abe, Tom Hulce, Jeff Jones (yes, even him – he does a splendid job as Jo II), Roy Dotrice (my fave! Great performance as Leo!) and Miloš Forman – it was the very first DVD I ever bought and *Requiem* the very first CD (still have both). If you're willing to open up to it, *Amadeus* movie can be an awesome theatrical experience, Ian McKellen was awarded for a Broadway performance, it's a long running show revived every couple of years when theatres are nearing a bankruptcy, and the movie was amongst my first mozartian indoctrination experiences, it is in fact one of TWO musical films children as part of an OFFICIAL school curriculum ALL OVER THE WORLD see - the other one is *The Sound of Music*, both, curiously, revolve around Austria which is far from being the only country of cool music ...) I don't think watching *Amadeus* would do you much harm - because now you know that what is portrayed there is NOT true Mozart - nor true Salieri nor true anybody else (except maybe Rosenberg - honest, he's like: spot on! And very sexy, cheers, Charles Kay! OMG, he's still alive! www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho6FK_… Wait, so is Roy! www.youtube.com/watch?v=gG-pWR… Dammit, they're great! ) So the movie can't do much harm now. It is an Oscar winning performance of an extremely disrispectful portrayl of Salieri - but it is, like L'Opera Rock and your fan works - just fiction. Fiction is good, it encourages imagination and makes life feel good! Like Dotrice said at *Beauty and the Beast* convention: ''I think people these days desperately want something to believe in.'' These are artistic expressions (with some awesome bits of music!) and it is very important to, yes, believe in what one does, take inspiration from real people – but also to separate these works from experiments in history, as much as we still can (history too, in all its forms, is just a matter of interpretation ~ and re-interpretation, speculation in absence of data is close to a fictional element ~ meaning we can never be 100% sure in what we, through a bunch of syllogisms ~ come to understand. History is alive and constantly changing. But music is alive and always complete and *there*, always *the same* ~ just interpretations are different ...) If you'll ever watch the movie (both versions) - it will only add to – and broaden - your knowledge. This is not a thing to fear. Basically, what I'm trying to say is –

one can appreciate the artistic potential the film carries - whilst being critical towards it ~~~ at the same time (as you can see: this is the same stance I have with Wolf Mozart! And Charlie Chaplin! And ...)



... In newly issued CD called ''Antonio Salieri LIEDER'' there's a snippet of the past:

''The journal Zeitung für die elegante Welt reviewed Salieri's songs together with a work by his pupil Joseph Weigl, highly praising the compositions:

*With works of such acknowledged masters in vocal composition as Salieri and Weigl, words of recommendation are almost superfluous. Suffice it to say that those who love the delicate, deeply felt and simply beautiful more than the shimmering and brilliant in vocal music will not find themselves deceived here.* ''

There is a letter from Salieri to Weigl where he, warmly and amiably, comments on Weigl's new opera:

Salieri cleverly lists Weigl's FULL credentials, Master of the Chapel and Director of Opera Imperiale something .... in French, in Italian he offers tender criticism (for that one of the acts which drags a little - let's, as the audience too did - blame the librettist! ) - yet is deeply affectionate and proud (consoles himself with such a musically talented pupil) – but also colourful in describing the position Joseph Weigl has in his mind and heart – and, of course, the wide wide world in general:

''In tutte le maniere, amico, Lei ha fatto del tutto un'opera clasica [!], ed io me ne consolo di core col mio Peppi. Viva la scuola tedesca ...''

Salieri calls Weigl, respectively, by his *fullest of full* official titles
then names him a *dear friend*
and speaks to him in *third person*, respectively,
then he turns all this grandeur and man's accomplishments on its head & finishes with *my Peppi*
(diminutive of Joseph, Joey of sorts, only smaller and cuter)
and links HIS Peppi directly to the *German musical school* which should be proud to have him
then, at last, signs: *affectionate Papa Salieri.*

The message?

....... _{''Er hat mich gerettet'' assures Weigl, ''ihm verdanke ich Alles, was ich geworden bin.''}

* HE SAVED ME I owe him everything what I have become * says Weigl.

... Never forget who trained you, kid! You're MINE!

*

Antonio Salieri was a rational child of Enlightenment - but also sweet and emotional fellow of finely tuned feelings, he was, through recognition of ''natural'' succession and order, carefully guided to the very Top musical position in the Empire - but more importantly: Antonio Salieri was good TO the people and he was good FOR the people around him - that's just one of great reasons to research/like/love/adulate! - you choose ~ and more importantly, and this comes straight from my heart - learn from him!

... Then again, I'll get more updated! books in a couple of days, so we'll see if something new crops up ...

*