MOZART AND ARISTOCRATIC WOMEN PERFORMERS IN SALZBURG:
A Study of the Piano Concertos K. 242 and K. 246
Among recent approaches to Classic music, one of the most revealing is the investigation of expression via topoi. Pioneered by Leonard Ratner, and developed by leading musicologists specializing in 18th-century music,1 this system identifies characteristic figures and styles that conveyed specific meanings to 18th-century audiences via processes of association. These implications resulted from intimate contacts with everyday musical activities in worship, entertainment, dance ceremonies, the military, hunt, and outdoor events. Familiarity with such characteristic topoi and styles enables listeners and performers today to reconstruct the original venues of communication between composers and their audiences.2 Serving as case studies, this paper explores the expressive content of two concertos intended for aristocratic women performers in Salzburg: the Concerto for three keyboards in F, K. 242 (1776), written for the Countess Antonia Lodron and her two daughters, Aloysia and Josepha, and the keyboard concerto in C, K. 246 (1776) intended for the Countess Antonia Lützow. Indeed, it seems that much as Mozart provided his singers with arias that were tailored to their voices,3 in these cases, he granted the Countesses music that was redolent of their social milieu. In support of this hypothesis, this article opens with a description of several social-musical activities that engaged the Lodron and Lützow families in Salzburg during the 1770s. It then proceeds to discuss references to these concertos found in the Mozart family correspondence. While much of this information is gleaned from well-known Mozart sources, its recall establishes the cultural and sociological context for these specific works, and provides an insight into the manner of performance that Mozart valued for this music. The paper concludes with a semiotic analysis of selected passages, suggesting that the choice of the topical content bears homage to the women dedicatees.
The Lodrons and the Lützows
Daily life in Salzburg included a busy schedule of
music-making, including ceremonial and private occasions, concerts, processions,
carnivals, and recitals. These activities reflected a long tradition, based
on close interactions between members of the Church, descendents of the
Salzburg aristocracy, and the court musicians. During the 1770s, the Countesses
Lodron and Lützow, together with the Mozarts, emerge as prominent
protagonists in the establishment of this social-cultural environment.
The Lodron family, whose ancestor was the powerful Archbishop Paris Lodron (1619-53), served the Salzburg court throughout the 17th and 18th centuries. 4 In addition to his political responsibilities, Archbishop Lodron laid the basis for Salzburg’s musical life by founding the Benedictine University in 1622 and the new cathedral in 1628. This vast complex served as Salzburg’s musical center, housing a permanent choir, particularly renowned string players, as well as wind players, organists, trumpeters, and timpanists. These performers participated in municipal festive occasions, where they provided a variety of outdoor music entertainment. Enriching the public concerts, members of the court, most often women, also nurtured private domestic concerts. Most specifically, Countess Antonia Lodron (1738-80), née Arco,5 a personal friend of the Archbishop Colloredo, emerged as the first lady of the court during the years that Mozart was active in Salzburg.6
During the 1770s, Mozart composed nine large-scale works for orchestra with the title cassation or serenade.7 All were performed in Salzburg by local musicians during the summer months, usually in the open air, and were designed to accompany and celebrate a particular social event, including name days, birthdays, weddings of aristocrats, and university graduations. These works consist of a sequence of symphonic, concerto, and dance movements as well as independent opening and closing marches. While many composers contributed to this genre during the 1760s, Mozart established the instrumentation and movement-sequence of the Salzburg serenade during the 1770s.8 Most relevant to this study, he limited the number of concerto movements included in his serenades to three, often setting the third as a minuet-rondo.9
The Lodrons and the Mozarts became neighbors in 1773 when the Mozarts moved into the famous Dancing-Master’s House.10 The two families shared many happy musical events, some testifying to the Countess’s prominent social status. Two such occasions occurred in 1776 and 1777, on 13 June, St. Anthony’s Day. Since the Countesses Lodron and Lützow were both called Antonia, Mozart composed his famous serenades K. 247 and K. 287 in their honor.11 These works, together with the piano concertos K. 242 and 246 composed contemporaneously, reflect the warm personal relations between Mozart, the Lodrons, and Countess Lützow.12
Another such occasion indirectly relates to the composition of K. 246. In April 1775, the Archduke Maximilian’s visit to Salzburg inspired a spectacular musical happening.13 In his honor, the court organized three concerts, the last featuring Countess Lützow and Mozart at the keyboard.14 As a result of the Czernin-Mozart contact, the Countess’s father, Count Prokop Adalbert Czernin, engaged Mozart to compose music for his son and daughter, hoping that when friends and relatives would visit Salzburg they would perform for them.15 Indeed, Schuler and Halliwell believe that the concerto K. 246, dedicated to the Countess Lützow, may have been premiered at such a family gathering held in May 1776.16
Finally, the Lodron daughters Aloysia and Josepha, students of Leopold Mozart, participated in an amateur orchestra founded and directed by Count Czernin in 1778. 17 The orchestra met every Sunday afternoon in the hall of the Lodron palace, accompanied by Mozart’s sister, Nannerl, who served as the only permanent female member of the group. While Leopold often complained about the low level of performance, the concerts stimulated the students’ progress and enabled Leopold to preserve close contacts with the Lodrons. Thus, Leopold reports to Wolfgang in June 1778: “We still have our amateur concerts in Lodron’s hall every Sunday. The two Lodron girls have each played three times already…. They all did themselves and myself great credit.”18
K. 242 and K. 246 in the Mozart Correspondence
When Mozart left Salzburg in 1777 in the hope of
finding a new position in Munich, Augsburg, Mannheim, or Paris he took
with him the concertos K. 242 and K. 246, presumably for use with his new
students. Mozart’s letters, however, reveal that future successful performances
required a very high level of musicality, often achieved only after intense
Mozart’s well-known letter from Augsburg on 23 October 1777, in which he praises the fortepiano built by the famous keyboard maker Johann Andreas Stein (1728-92), relays a report of a successful performance of K. 242. During this concert, Mozart, together with the organist of the Augsburg Cathedral, Johann Michael Demmler (1748-85), and Johann Andreas Stein, performed the concerto K. 242 to ecstatic applause. Recalling the performance, Mozart boasted that: “Stein used to be quite crazy about Beecke, but now he sees and hears that I am the better player, that I do not make grimaces, and yet play with such expression that, as he himself confesses, no one up to the present has been able to get such good results out of his pianofortes.”19 This concert apparently owed its exceptional success to Mozart’s vividly expressive performance.
Achieving this high level of musicianship involved much effort and instruction. Indeed, in a letter from Mannheim, 12 March 1778, Mozart describes a concert in which three young musicians, including Cannabich’s daughter, required intense coaching before they could venture a public performance of K. 242.20 Similarly, in a letter to his son from 11 June 1778, Leopold reports how Mlle. Villersi, a governess at the Court,21 studied K. 246 with the intention of performing it at the Lodron concert. During the final rehearsal, however, she realized that “she played it abominably. So she came out to our house in tears and begged us to coach her, postponing her performance for a fortnight and ending by learning it so proficiently that she really did herself great credit.”22
Mozart’s letters further explain some of the subtle aspects, not explicit in the score, which would result in an expressive interpretation. Most prominently, he stressed the importance of choosing a correct tempo. Referring to K. 246, in another letter dated Mannheim, 17 January 1778, Mozart observes how the choice of an inappropriate tempo ruined the effect of the concerto. Describing the famous Abbé Vogler’s performance, which he played at sight, Mozart recalled: “He took the first movement prestissimo, the Andante allegro and the Rondo, believe it or not, prestissiomo.”23 Suggesting what Vogler should have done, Mozart ponders: “And wherein consists the art of playing prima vista? In this: in playing the piece in the time in which it ought to be played, and in playing all the notes, appoggiaturas and so forth exactly as they are written and with appropriate expression and taste, so that you might suppose that the performer had composed it himself….”24
By contrast, in a rare positive comment on Salzburg, Mozart praised the dancing abilities of Salzburg women, which he related to their good sense of rhythm. Writing to his father on 6 October 1777 from Munich, he reminisced: “Yesterday, Sunday, October 5th, we had a religious wedding in this house and there was dancing. I only danced four minuets and by eleven o’clock I was back in my room, for among fifty ladies there was only one who could keep in time; and that was Mlle. Käser, a sister of the secretary of that Count Perusa who was once in Salzburg.”25
Interconnecting dance, rhythm, and expression reflect well-conceived Classic aesthetics, voiced earlier by Leopold Mozart and repeated by the theorists Johann P. Kirnberger and Daniel G. Türk.26 Moreover, Kirnberger suggested that:
Every beginner who wants to be well grounded in composition is well advised to make himself familiar with the organization of all forms of the dance, because in them all kinds of character and of rhythm appear and are most precisely executed. If he has no fluency in these characteristic pieces, it is not at all possible for him to give to a piece a particular character.27While Kirnberger refers specifically to dances, we may assume that he advocated a familiarity with a wide range of extra-musical topoi, including marches and fanfares, as well as brilliant and singing styles.
Concertos K. 242 and K. 246: The Expressive Content
Turning to the music itself, we may ask ourselves
whether the topical content of these concertos reflect on the social environment
in Salzburg. Moreover, are there subtle ways in which the expressive
language particularly honors the Countesses Lodron and Lützow?
The scoring of K. 242 for three keyboards acknowledges from the start the Countess’s maternal exemplarity, recognized as a criterion for the perfect woman in late 18th-century ideology. Within this mode of thought, woman and men occupy “separate spheres” as the male domain encompasses the public world of labor and commerce, while the female domain centers on the private world of household management and education of children. Seeing the Countess and her daughters in performance would immediately evoke the portrait of the Countess as queen of her home, and educator of her children.28 Moreover, in comparison with the other ensemble concertos, K. 242 contains the least tutti-solo interaction, 29 further honoring the exclusive social status of the soloists.
Turning to the first movements, we find an expressive language that recalls topics prominent in Salzburg serenades. These include marches, contredanses, and fanfares, as well as brilliant and singing styles. These topics, organized in a direct and sequential manner,30 alternate at a very quick rate, often on the phrase and subphrase levels. Thus, for example, Solo I in K. 242 opens with an alternation of the march and the singing style, the transition continues with alternations of the brilliant style and the march, while the brilliant style and the singing style alternate in the secondary theme (Example 1a). In K. 246, march, singing-sensibility, and brilliant styles also alternate rapidly throughout Solo I (Example 1b). Conveying the wealth of detail inherent in this kaleidoscopic expressive texture challenges the musicality of the soloists. Moreover, a rushed performance would inevitably camouflage the rich associations inherent in the music, underscoring the importance of choosing a proper tempo.
a. Concerto for Three Pianos, K. 242/I. Topical Content of Solo I
|* 2Sa||b||c||d e||1S||* Ka||1 KB||* b||* c|
b. Piano Concerto K. 246/I. Topical Content of Solo I
|Pa||b b1||Tax||ay *y||b||*2Sa|
|a1||b||Tb1||1Sa *b||*3Ka||b c|
|61||64||70||73 77||81||84 87|
The mood changes drastically in the second movements, possibly moving from the public to the private domain. In the Adagio second movement of K. 242, the soloists enter alone, presenting poignant themes in the singing style (Example 2). 31 Typical of expressive music in late 18th-century opera buffa, this style was often associated with a female heroine. As Mary Hunter explains,
In the context of Viennese opera buffa … a moment of self-absorbed, song-like beauty, used to introduce a character, is overwhelmingly a female moment.32While the second movements of Mozart’s concertos feature many beautiful themes in the singing style, considering the total context of these concertos, Hunter’s remarks may be meaningful. Indeed, this movement projects a unified, smaller-scaled, introspective character, focusing more on feeling than activity. Further confirming their central position, and departing from convention, the soloists also conclude the movement.
Example 2. Concerto for Three Pianos, K. 242/II.
Topical Content of Solo I
|Pa||b 1T||*2Ta b||Sa1 b||Ka1||*b|
|13||15 17||18 20||22 25||27||29|
Another particularly feminine feature in the second
movement of K. 242 is a possible reference to the glass harmonica. This
instrument, famous for its celestial tone, was frequently
associated with aristocratic women.33
Ann Ford, the first woman to perform on the instrument publicly, in a preface
to her manual on performance, prophesized that the instrument will soon
accompany “every Lady who can play or sing,” and Benjamin Franklin’s improved
glass harmonica, 1762, was quickly hailed as a supremely feminine instrument.
Indeed, at the height of its popularity during the second half of the 18th
century, the harmonica in the parlor epitomized the
domestic feminine space, just as the band on the parade ground summarized
the public and collective character of masculine music-making.34
A striking work featuring the harmonica was Johann Adolf Hasse’s solo cantata, L’armonica, written in 1769 for Marianne Davies, an early harmonica virtuosi, and her sister, the soprano Cecilia Davies.35 Commissioned for the wedding of Ferdinand, Duke of Parma, and Maria Amalia, Archduchess of Austria, Metastasio praised the exquisite effect of the harmonica as it accompanied a female singer. Emphasizing the individual gifts of the Davies sisters, he particularly noted the qualities of their ensemble:
The first of them [Marianne] plays with admirable mastery on an instrument of most recent invention called the armonica … which particularly in the pathetic [genre] ( which is the dominant style of this instrument) has an incomparable sweetness. The second [Cecilia], gifted with a pleasant, most well-suited voice, sings splendidly both through practice and by nature; and when she sings along to the sound of the armonica, she knows how marvelously to blend her own voice with it, so that sometimes it is not possible to distinguish the difference between them. (My emphasis)36Mozart and Leopold heard many performances of the harmonica during their visit to Vienna in 1773,37 and the Lodrons’ and Lützows’ close affiliations with Vienna surely brought them into contact with this most fashionable instrument.
Concerto for Three Pianos, K. 242/II. The memorable Adagio theme from the development (mm. 33-40) may suggest the glass harmonica.
The second movement in K. 246 also highlights the
soloist. While many of the themes presented in Ritornello I return in Solo
I, the soloist’s presentation is far more personal. Following a flourish
around the tonic that concludes Ritornello I (mm. 20-22), the soloist enters
unaccompanied, invoking a personal expression (Example 4). Strengthening
this affect, P*b, *1T, and *2K, as well as Sb are predominantly unaccompanied.
Solo II, the development section, intensifies the expression as a new theme,
in a singing-sensibility style, saturated with expressive sigh motives,
repeated notes, and dotted rhythms, deepens the focus on the soloist. While
Solo III, the recapitulation, closely follows Solo I, new secondary dominants
and chromaticism in the transition, once again performed by the soloist, further
intensify the expressive pathos (mm. 97-100).39
Propelling motion, the themes 1P, *T, 1S, and 1K, cast in a duple meter, open with upbeats and feature complex rhythmic arrangements, including syncopated surface and phrase rhythms (Example 5). Most notable, syncopations emphasize the third and/or seventh beat of the phrase, creating a point of arrival at the beginning of the fourth bar. These rhythmic features are consistently mentioned with regard to the 18th-century bourrée, perhaps suggesting an allusion to this courtly dance despite the slow tempo.40
Example 4. Piano Concerto, K. 246/II. Topical
Content of Solo I
|Pa *b||*Ta b||1Sa1||b1||IK||*2Ka||b|
|23 28||33 39||43||47||51||54||58|
Example 5. Piano Concerto K. 246/II, mm. 33-42. The duple meter, upbeat, and syncopated rhythm of the transition propel motion and enhance the expression.
Turning to the Rondo finales, K. 242 and K. 246 open
with refrains cast as elegant minuets, the arch dance of the court.
While minuets were extremely popular as finales during this period, the
extra-musical connotations that permeate these concertos lend the minuet
special significance. Both movements also share similar structural layouts,
ABA1CDB1A3 in K. 242 and ABA1C
A2 B1A3 in K. 246. The D episode in K.
242 highlights an extraordinary theme in the singing style. Stable in the
subdominant key of Bb major, this theme connects cyclically with the personal
style and Bb tonality of the second movement (Example 6). In K. 246, the
subdominant key of F opens B1. Here, however, the countermodulation
occurs within the transition of the recapitulation, and not as a separate
The arrangement of topics in the opening sections of K. 246/III may allude to the court and the military, lifestyles with which Countess Lützow was very familiar. Thus, while the minuet topic prevails in the refrain, transition, and first secondary theme, fanfare and brilliant styles color the second section of the B episode.41 Furthermore, the configuration of affects presented in this brief episode may suggest a Salzburg serenade. The second secondary theme (mm. 47-58), cast in the traditional singing style, features an incipient fanfare that emerges to dominate the end of the episode (mm. 58-66). Perhaps we may imagine a band of wind players slowly moving to their destination as the sounds of their trumpets come closer and clearer. Such allusions were not foreign to Salzburg audiences, as marches, often memorized and rehearsed, regularly opened and closed serenades (Example 7).
Example 6. Concerto for Three Pianos, K. 242/III.
Structural outline and topical content.
|sturm und drang||dialogue||chromatic,||canon|
Example 7. Piano Concerto in C, K. 246/III.
The Topical Content of the Refrain and the B episode.
|Key: C major||G|
This study attempts to illustrate how an awareness of social context and a familiarity with musical topoi enable a listener to reconstruct a frame of reference that facilitates a better understanding of expression in Classic music. In this instance, an analysis of the expressive content of the concertos K. 242 and K. 246 reveals subtle ways in which these concertos pay homage to their dedicatees. Indeed, by providing the Countesses Lodron and Lützow with music that was accessible and yet challenging, Mozart acknowledged both their noble social status and their talents as aspiring performers.
P – primary theme
T – transitional theme
S – secondary theme
K – cadential theme
ab – phrases
x, y – subphrases
* – themes and phrases introduced by the soloist
A – refrain
B – first episode
C – second episode
D – third episode
Superscripts – varied material
1 For a sampling of this research, see Leonard G. Ratner, Classic Music (New York: Schirmer Books, 1980); Wye J. Allanbrook, Rhythmic Gesture in Mozart (Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1983); Kofi Agawu, Playing with Signs (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991); Elaine R. Sisman, The Jupitor Symphony (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); Robert Hatten, Meaning in Beethoven (Indiana: Indiana Press, 1994); and Raymond Monelle, The Sense of Music (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000).
2 This system gains
in practical significance in light of Jeanne Bamberger’s findings, in which
she discloses that students respond initially and intuitively to structurally
meaningful entities on motivic, figural, and phrase levels. In this case,
such “units of perception” may serve as bridges connecting modern listeners
with the cultural context for which the music was intended. See Jeanne
Developing Musical Intuitions. A Project-Based Introduction
to Making and Understanding Music (Oxford: Oxford University Press,
3 For similar adjustments made for Mozart’s singers, see John Rice, “Mozart and his Singers: The Case of Maria Marchetti Fantozzi, the First Vitellia,” The Opera Quarterly, 11 (1995): 31-52.
4 The historical background in this section draws on Ruth Halliwell, The Mozart Family: Four Lives in a Social Context (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), Chapters 13-20; Heinz Schuler, “Mozart und das hochgrafliche Haus Lodron,” Mitteilungen der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum, 31 (1983): 1-17; Heinz Schuler, “Zur Dedikationstragerin von Mozarts Lützow-Konzert KV 246,” Mitteilungen der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum, 33 (1985): 1-10; and O.E. Deutsch, ed, Mozart. A Documentary Biography, trans. E. Blom, P. Branscombe and J. Noble (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1966), doc. 152-58.
5 A charismatic, proud aristocrat in her own right, Antonia married Ernst Maria Joseph Nepomuk Lodron (1716-79), a descendent of the Archbishop Paris Lodron, referred to in Mozart’s correspondence as “Count Potbelly.” See Leopold’s letter to his son, 1 November 1777, in The Letters of Mozart and his Family, third edition, edited by Emily Anderson and revised by Stanley Sadie and Fiona Smart (London: Papermac, 1989), p. 353.
6 See O.E. Deutsch, ed, Mozart. A Documentary Biography, doc. 156-58.
7 See Andrew Kearns,
“The Orchestral Serenade in Eighteenth-Century Salzburg,” Journal of
Musicological Research, 16 (1997): 163-89.
8 Mozart perfected his open-air summer music throughout the 1770s, beginning with the Cassation in G, K. 63, and culminating with his towering Posthorn Serenade, K. 320 of 1779. Minuets, rondo finales, and popular sounding melodies constituted main ingredients of these serenades. See Daniel Heartz, Haydn, Mozart and the Viennese School, 1740-1780 (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1995), pp. 576-84.
9 Cliff Eisen suggests that the orchestral serenade was an important background genre to both the symphony and the concerto in Salzburg. See Cliff Eisen, “Salzburg under Church Rule,” The Classical Era, ed. Neal Zaslaw (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1989), pp. 174-75, and Andrew Kearns, p. 180
10 This large apartment contained eight rooms and a dance hall, indicating the prime position of dancing in the Mozart’s lifestyle. For a review of the rich history of Mozart’s house, see Rudolph Angermüller, “Können sie denn noch ein paar Zimmer anbauen lassen?,” Mitteilungen der Internationalen Stiftung Mozarteum, 44 (1996): 1-83, especially 38-39, 41-42.
11 Mozart’s friend,
Joachim Ferdinand von Schiedenhofen (1747-1823) recorded in his diary that
the event was carefully rehearsed and impressively performed, bringing
great pride and pleasure to all. See Halliwell, pp. 219-21. Soon afterwards,
Mozart composed and directed the well-known Haffner Serenade, K. 250, in
honor of the marriage of Elisabeth Haffner, who was the daughter of the
wealthy merchant and former mayor of Salzburg, Sigmund Haffner. See O.E.
Deutsch, ed, Mozart. A Documentary Biography, doc. 160.
12 In later years, in times of strife between the Mozarts and Archbishop Colloredo, the Lodrons supported the Mozarts. In fact, Countess Lodron actively assisted in securing Mozart’s return to Salzburg in 1778. See Halliwell, The Mozart Family, pp. 296-317.
13 Archduke Maximilian was Maria Theresa’s youngest son.
14 See O.E. Deutsch, ed, Mozart.
A Documentary Biography, doc. 152-53.
15 The children of Colloredo’s deceased sister, Count Johann Rudolph Czernin and his sister, Countess Antonie Lützow, arrived in Salzburg from Vienna in 1775. The Count, aged 17, intended to study at the university under Colloredo’s supervision and the Countess accompanied her husband, the newly appointed commander of the garrison of Fort Hohensalzburg. Both children were aspiring musicians, the Countess as a keyboard player and the Count as a violinist. See Heinz Schuler, “Zur Dedikationstragerin von Mozarts Lützow-Konzert KV 246,” 1-10.
16 See Halliwell, The Mozart Family, pp. 218-19 and n. 18.
17 While this orchestra
was established after the composition of K. 242 and K. 246, the circumstances
surrounding its emergence shed light on the musical environment in Salzburg.
18 See the letter from Leopold Mozart to his wife and son, 11 June 1778, in The Letters of Mozart and his Family, p. 545.
19 The Letters of Mozart and his Family, pp. 339-40.
20 In this same letter, Mozart evaluates Rosa Cannabich’s progress as a student, saying, “She can now perform before anyone, and for a girl of fourteen and an amateur she plays quite well; and it is thanks to me, as all Mannheim knows. She now has taste and can play trills; her time is good and her fingering is much better; formerly she had nothing of this.” In this same letter, Mozart complained that the Cannabichs had not paid him anything in return for his services. See The Letters of Mozart and his Family, p. 517.
21 Mlle. Villersi was the daughter of the Archbishop’s former tutor, Casimir Villersi, and governess to Count Kuhnbirg’s children. See The Letters of Mozart and his Family, p. 545.
23 Mozart further complained that Vogler, “generally played the bass differently from the way it was written, inventing now and then quite another harmony and even melody. Nothing else is possible at that pace, for the eyes cannot see the music nor the hands perform it.” Ibid., pp. 448-49.
24 Ibid., pp. 448-49.
25 Ibid, pp. 298-99.
26 Leopold himself advised: “Before one begins to play … one must seek out the character, the tempo, and the kind of motion required by the piece ….” See Leopold Mozart, Versuch einer gründlichen Violinschule (Augsburg, 1756); trans. E. Knocker as A Treatise on the Fundamental Principles of Violin Playing (London: Oxford University Press, 1951), pp. 255-56. See also D.J. Türk, Klavierschule, 1789; trans. Raymond H. Haggh as School of Clavier Playing (Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press, 1982), p. 503, n. 3. Kirnberger further explained: “… A composer in order to achieve proper expression in his music should not only know in his imagination the species of passions and feelings which he intends to represent, but also their particular nuances, before he designates a tempo for a composition.” See his entry “Bewegung” in J.G. Sulzer’s Allgemeine Theorie der schönen Künste, I (Leipzig, 1774), p. 386, also cited in Türk, p. 518, n. 50.
27 Kirnberger, Kunst, 1:202, n. 28, as quoted in Allanbrook, p. 29. For a full discussion of the interconnections between meter, dance, and expression, see Wye Jamison Allanbrook, Rhythmic Gesture in Mozart (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), pp. 13-30.
28 See Mary Hunter, “Rousseau, the Countess, and the Female Domain,” in Mozart Studies 2, ed. Cliff Eisen (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997), p. 5.
29 Two of the solo parts are active, while the third is markedly easier. Later, c. 1780, Mozart arranged the concerto for two players. On 3 September 1780, Nannerl mentioned in her diary that she and her brother played the solo parts. See Daniel Heartz, p. 630. For a discussion of the tutti-solo interactions in the Salzburg concertos, see my doctoral dissertation, “Mozart’s Early Concertos, 1773-1779: Structure and Expression” (Bar-Ilan University, 1994).
30 This arrangement
is unlike the more complex language of the other Salzburg concertos, in
which two or more topics may appear simultaneously. See for example
the Piano Concerto K. 271, movement I, the secondary theme, where singing-learned-brilliant
topics occur together (mm.104-11).
31 While no other piano concerto from this period includes an Adagio second movement, the violin concertos K. 207, 216, 219, the flute concertos K. 313, 314, and the bassoon concerto K. 191 feature Adagio second movements.
32 See Hunter, pp.
5-21, especially p. 21.
33 For a discussion of the history of the instrument and its association with women see A. Hyatt King, “Musical Glasses and Glass Harmonica,” Proceedings of the Royal Musical Association, 62 (1945/6): 97-122; Alec Hyatt King, “Musical Glasses,” NGD, 2nd edition, 12: 823-25; Sascha Reckert, “Glasharmonika,” MGG, Sachteil 3: 1400-14; and Heather Hadlock, “Sonorous Bodies: Women and the Glass Harmonika,” Journal of the American Musicological Society, 53 (2000): 507-42.
34 Heather Hadlock, p. 511.
35 Marianne Davies
(1744-92), a famous London virtuoso performer, introduced the instrument
to Europe. In 1768, she and her sister Cecilia, escorted by their father
and equipped with letters of introduction to aristocratic European families,
embarked on an extended trip to Europe and Italy, reminding us of the Mozart
family journeys. Like Leopold, the father hoped that his daughters’ musical
skills would merit them a permanent position in one of the European courts.
In fact, they settled in Vienna where they instructed the daughters of
the Empress Maria Theresa in playing the glass harmonica and singing, and
between 1768 and 1773 became favorite performers at the major courts of
Paris, Milan, Florence, Turin, and Vienna. For discussions of the Davies
sisters and the glass harmonica, see Betty Matthews, “The Davies
Sisters, J.C. Bach and the Glass Harmonica,”
Music and Letters 56
36 Pietro Metastasio’s letter, dated 16 January 1772, is quoted in Heather Hadlock, p. 513.
37 The Mozarts knew
the Davies sisters well, and were also in contact with another famous performer,
Dr. Franz Anton Mesmer (1734-1815), who used the hypnotic sounds of the
instrument as part of a unique medical cure. Reporting from Vienna
in 1773, Leopold wrote to his wife, “Do you know that Herr von Mesmer plays
Miss Davies’s harmonica unusually well? He is the only person in Vienna
who has learnt it and he possesses a much finer instrument than Miss Davies
does. Wolfgang too has played upon it. How I should like to have one!”
See The Letters of Mozart and his Family, 12 August 1773,
38 At a later date, in 1791, Mozart composed a quintet for glass harmonica, flute, viola, oboe, and cello (K. 617) and an Adagio for glass harmonica solo (K. 671a). The latter was intended for Marianne Kirchgessner, a blind girl of twenty-one, and distant cousin of the composer, who was an expert harmonica player. K. 617a also features both hands in the treble clef.
39 This harmonic
enrichment apparently compensates for the lack of modulation to the dominant.
40 The bourrée, like the minuet, belongs to the heritage of the French court dance. According to Sulzer, it was used in ballets for “serious as well as playful and humble affects,” and Mattheson notes its “contentment and pleasing manner.” While bourrées are mostly associated with fast tempos, some feature a moderate tempo. See Allanbrook, p. 49, and Meredith Ellis Little, “Bourrée,” NGD, 2nd edition, 4: 119-20.
41 The concertos K. 219 and K. 271 feature interpolated episodes in the rondo finale in which a contrasting topic is juxtaposed with the main style of the movement. Thus, in K. 219 the Turkish style opposes the minuet, and in K. 271 the minuet verses the march.