The Hidden Truth Behind Mozart’s Compositions

In the summer of 1798, a remarkable and unsettling series of events began to unfold. Multiple composers, including Anton Eberl, alleged that Mozart’s widow, Constanze, had misattributed their compositions to her late husband, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. This chapter delves into these claims, providing substantial evidence that challenges the authenticity of some works long credited to Mozart. Eberl, a distinguished composer in his own right, publicly voiced his scepticism, revealing that several of his compositions were being sold under Mozart’s name. His revelations sparked significant criticism and brought to light a series of deceptions that continue to taint Mozart’s legacy.

Anton Eberl’s Struggle for Recognition

Anton Eberl’s confrontation with Constanze was a courageous move in an era when challenging the legacy of a musical giant like Mozart was nearly unthinkable. In a public statement in 1798, Eberl disclosed that several music stores were selling his compositions as Mozart’s. Despite the fact that even experts had mistaken his works for Mozart’s, Eberl felt compelled to correct the public record, insisting that the musical audience not be misled by these fraudulent attributions. His statement not only questioned Constanze’s integrity but also highlighted the broader issue of misattribution that plagued the posthumous reception of Mozart’s works.

The Leipzig Literary Gazette’s Scathing Critique

Eberl’s revelations did not go unnoticed. The editor of the Leipzig Literary Gazette accused Constanze of engaging in deceptive practices, suggesting that she had little respect for her late husband’s legacy. The article called for further investigation into these ‘thefts’ and condemned Constanze’s involvement in misattributing works to Mozart. This criticism brought to the forefront the ethical dilemmas surrounding the posthumous management of Mozart’s oeuvre and questioned the validity of many works credited to him.

The Confusion of Identities: Eberl’s Compositions

Anton Eberl’s contributions to music were significant, yet his legacy has been overshadowed by the false attributions of his works to Mozart. His Symphony in C major and Keyboard Sonata in C minor were both mistakenly attributed to Mozart, with the latter even being hailed as one of Mozart’s finest compositions. This misattribution not only deprived Eberl of the recognition he deserved but also elevated the status of these works merely because they were thought to be Mozart’s. The association with Mozart’s name had a powerful effect, illustrating how branding could influence the reception of a composition.

The Role of the Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung

The Allgemeine musikalische Zeitung, under the editorship of Friedrich Rochlitz, played a pivotal role in shaping the posthumous image of Mozart. The publication, which aimed to promote the Complete Works of Mozart, often featured stories about his life provided by Constanze. However, Rochlitz’s editorial approach was more focused on the appeal of these anecdotes rather than their authenticity. These unverified stories were later incorporated into Mozart’s biographies, creating a distorted narrative that has persisted for centuries.

The Questionable Clarinet Concerto K. 622

One of the most famous examples of the questionable authenticity of works attributed to Mozart is the Clarinet Concerto K. 622. Despite its presence in Mozart’s personal Thematic Catalogue, significant discrepancies exist between the Catalogue and the original manuscript. The genuine manuscript of the Clarinet Concerto remains missing, and the first publication of K. 622, released after Mozart’s death, is believed to have been reconstructed from an incomplete basset horn concerto. This raises serious questions about the true authorship of the piece and highlights the ongoing issues with the authenticity of Mozart’s posthumous works.