Wolfgang Amadé Mozart
The Deceptive Nature of Mozart’s Catalogue
The Thematic Catalogue traditionally credited to Mozart is fraught with inaccuracies, suggesting that many of his famous works might not be his at all. This prompts a necessary reevaluation of Mozart’s legacy and the authenticity of his compositions.
Mozart The Construction of a Genius: The Untold Story
Mozart: The Construction of a Genius” uncovers how the myth of Mozart was crafted after his death in 1791, initially to support his widow, then exploited by publishers, and later used to elevate Mozart as a cultural icon. Bianchini and Trombetta reveal that the personal catalogue attributed to Mozart is a late 18th-century fabrication, challenging long-held beliefs about his legacy.
“If Mozart had truly authored the Catalogue, he would not have mistakenly attributed the Arietta K. 541 to a bass when it was clearly intended for a tenor-baritone, casting further doubt on the document’s authenticity.”
Mozart: The Construction of a Genius
The Questionable Authenticity of K. 456
The legitimacy of Mozart’s Thematic Catalogue has long been debated, particularly regarding the inclusion of the Concerto K. 456 for Harpsichord and Orchestra, supposedly composed for the blind harpsichordist Teresa Paradis. The Catalogue indicates that the piece was completed on 30 September, just two days before Paradis’s final performance in Paris on 2 October. This timeline raises serious doubts. It seems highly unlikely that Mozart could have composed the Concerto, prepared all the necessary parts, and sent them to Paris in such a short span. The inclusion of this Concerto in the Catalogue without addressing these logistical challenges suggests a likely error or falsification in the dating.
Inconsistencies Surrounding K. 541
Further inconsistencies arise with the Arietta for Bass, K. 541, titled ‘Un bacio di mano’. The Catalogue lists this work as composed in May, yet it was later included in a Viennese revival of Pasquale Anfossi’s opera that same year. The Catalogue incorrectly attributes the performance to the famous bass Albertarelli, while in reality, it was sung by the tenor-baritone Del Sole. Such a mistake would be improbable if Mozart himself had recorded the information, casting further doubt on the Catalogue’s authenticity.
The Mystery of the Jupiter Symphony (K. 551)
The doubts surrounding Mozart’s Catalogue also extend to the famous Jupiter Symphony (K. 551). Some scholars point to similarities between this Symphony and the Arietta K. 541 to support Mozart’s authorship. However, if K. 541 was wrongly attributed to Mozart, the legitimacy of the Jupiter Symphony’s attribution is also questionable. Moreover, the original manuscript of the Symphony lacks Mozart’s signature or date, leading to speculation that the Catalogue was compiled posthumously to attribute this and other works to Mozart without solid evidence.
Discrepancies in Other Works
Questions also surround the authenticity of the Trio for Harpsichord, Violin, and Cello, K. 564, and the Masonic music, K. 477. Both works are listed in Mozart’s Catalogue, but with suspicious details that suggest someone else may have composed or copied them. The strikingly similar handwriting between the Catalogue and the manuscripts suggests potential forgery. Albert Osborn, a scholar on falsifications, argued that anyone who reproduces handwriting exactly is likely a forger, as it is impossible for a person to replicate the same phrase, musical passage, or signature identically multiple times.
Conclusion: A Catalogue of Errors
Often regarded as a definitive record of Mozart’s works, the Thematic Catalogue is fraught with inaccuracies, questionable attributions, and possible forgeries. These issues indicate that much of what has been traditionally accepted about Mozart’s later works, including some of his most celebrated compositions, may not be as it seems.
The discrepancies found in the Catalogue suggest it was likely created after Mozart’s death, potentially by those with an interest in enhancing his legacy. Given all these contradictions, the authenticity of many works attributed to Mozart must be reconsidered.
You May Also Like
Unpacking Mozart’s Early Education
The story of Ligniville illustrates the pitfalls of romanticizing Mozart’s early life and education, reminding us that the narrative of genius is often a construct that obscures the laborious aspects of musical development.
Mozart’s Training
The myth of Mozart’s genius is nothing more than a carefully crafted illusion, propped up by misplaced attributions and romanticised biographies. Behind his so-called brilliance lies the reality of his father’s dominating influence and a lack of formal education.
The False Sonnet of Corilla Olimpica
Leopold Mozart’s relentless pursuit of fame for his son Wolfgang led to questionable tactics, including fabricating a sonnet by the renowned poetess Corilla Olimpica. This desperate attempt to elevate Wolfgang’s reputation casts a shadow over the Mozart legacy.
#3 Leopold Mozart’s Literary Theft
Hidden within the Mozarteum’s archives lies a poem that has long been hailed as a tribute to the young Mozart children. But behind this innocent façade is a story of deception, literary theft, and one father’s ambition to rewrite history.
Letters Under Surveillance
In a world without privacy, Leopold Mozart’s letters were carefully crafted not just to inform but to manipulate perceptions. His correspondence reveals a calculated effort to elevate his family’s status while avoiding any mention of failure or controversy.
Debunking the Romantic Virtuoso Image
The image of Mozart as a Romantic-era virtuoso is a misleading anachronism, fuelled by 19th-century propaganda. Wolfgang was no transcendental pianist, but a product of an era where music was more galant than heroic.