A Critical Perspective
The Enigma of Mozart's Symphony in C Major, K.73
The Symphony in C Major K.73 has long puzzled Mozart scholars. Touted as a youthful work of prodigious talent, its origins are murky at best. The title “Symphony,” inscribed on the first page of the autograph, is devoid of the composer’s name, casting immediate doubt on its attribution to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Was this truly his work, or is the Symphony yet another victim of overzealous attribution?
Mozart in Italy: The Untold Story
Was Mozart truly a solitary genius, or was he merely the instrument of his father’s ambition? “Mozart in Italy” challenges the conventional narrative, revealing a complex dynamic between father and son that shaped the course of music history. Prepare to question everything you thought you knew.
“History is not a matter of certainty but of critical inquiry. The truth lies not in the name on the manuscript but in the rigor of the questions we dare to ask.”
Mozart in Italy
A Symphony Without a Name
The manuscript, held at the Biblioteka Jagiellońska in Kraków, is devoid of direct evidence linking it to Mozart. Even more intriguingly, the Minuet from the Symphony appears to have been sketched earlier by Wolfgang on page 7r of the 19 Minuets for Orchestra K.103—another work with authenticity in question. Adding to the intrigue is a bass sketch of the first movement’s opening measures in Leopold Mozart’s hand, found among the canon studies K.73x. These connections muddy the waters further, as both K.103 and K.73x are viewed with skepticism by scholars.
The questions multiply: Could this Symphony have been composed by Leopold? Or perhaps by Padre Giovanni Battista Martini, Mozart’s mentor during his studies in Bologna? Could it even be the work of an entirely different composer, misattributed through a combination of historical mishap and wishful thinking?
The Mystery of Dating and Provenance
A date, “1769,” appears on the manuscript in an unknown hand, likely added by Johann Anton André, an early Mozart publisher. This date has been widely accepted, but without critical verification. As one scholar aptly noted, “born as mere hypotheses, these claims have been passed down hand to hand without any form of verification, eventually gaining undeserved authority as proven facts.”
Ludwig von Köchel originally dated the work to late 1769 in his first edition of the Mozart catalogue. However, Alfred Einstein in the third edition reassigned the Symphony to the summer of 1771 and gave it the number K.75a. Subsequent scholarship wavered between these dates, with Wolfgang Plath eventually endorsing the original 1769-1770 timeframe after examining the autograph. Yet, even Plath admitted his conclusions were subject to the limitations of the manuscript’s accessibility.
The location of the Symphony’s composition is equally ambiguous. Salzburg, Bologna, and even Vienna have been proposed, but no definitive evidence supports any of these claims.
A Web of Contradictions
Further complicating the matter is the connection to Leopold Mozart. His sketch of the bass line for the Symphony’s opening movement raises the possibility that he was not only involved but perhaps the primary composer. This hypothesis is bolstered by the fact that the sketch appears in the same manuscript as Wolfgang’s canonic studies, which were long (and erroneously) associated with his lessons under Padre Martini in Bologna.
The stylistic elements of K.73, while competent, lack the innovation typically associated with Wolfgang’s more established symphonic works. Some have argued that the Symphony reflects more of Leopold’s conservative compositional style than the burgeoning originality of his son.
Conclusion: The Symphony That Challenges Certainty
The Symphony in C Major K.73 stands as a testament to the challenges of Mozart scholarship. Its uncertain attribution, murky origins, and conflicting scholarly interpretations reveal the fragility of the Mozart myth. Whether penned by Wolfgang, Leopold, Martini, or another, this Symphony forces us to confront the complexities of eighteenth-century musical authorship and the perils of unquestioned assumptions.
“In the end, the Symphony in C Major K.73 reminds us that history is not a matter of certainty but of critical inquiry. The truth lies not in the name on the manuscript but in the rigor of the questions we dare to ask.”
You May Also Like
#1 A Man of Cunning
In the end, Leopold Mozart’s life was a testament to survival in a world where his talents were often overshadowed by those of his more gifted contemporaries and his own son. While his “Violinschule” remains a notable contribution to music pedagogy, it is clear that Leopold’s legacy is as much about his ability to navigate the challenges of his time as it is about his musical achievements. His story is one of ambition, adaptation, and the lengths to which one man would go to secure his place in history, even if that place was built on borrowed foundations.
@MozartrazoM
Mozart’s Letters: A Legacy of Disappearances, Edits, and Forgeries
Mozart’s letters reveal missing originals, questionable authorship, and forgeries, adding complexity to his legacy.
The Curious Case of Mozart’s “Lullaby”
Though long credited to Mozart, the lullaby “Schlafe mein Prinzchen, schlaf ein” hides a murky history. Initially published by Nissen, Constanze’s second husband, it has endured as one of Mozart’s supposed works—despite a trail of doubts. In 1798, Constanze herself noted sending “another piece of Mozart’s in place of the lullaby,” raising questions about its origins. By the 20th century, researchers revealed it as the work of lesser-known composers, yet it remains deceptively tied to Mozart, its myth surviving through mere footnotes.
Mozart’s Bassoon Concerto: A Question of Authorship
The Bassoon Concerto K.191 raises more questions than it answers. Long thought to have been composed for a Munich bassoonist, new evidence suggests Mozart had no clear performer in mind. The concerto’s disjointed movements and other dubious compositions attributed to Mozart add further complexity to his legacy
The Contradictions Behind Mozart’s Horn Concerto K.412
The authenticity of Mozart’s Horn Concerto K.412 remains hotly debated, as the work bears numerous contradictions in its manuscript history. The first movement may be original, but what about the rest? The inclusion of Franz Xaver Süssmayr and later editorial meddling raises serious questions about what we are really listening to when we hear this ‘Mozart’ concerto.
The Forgotten Viennese Quartets
Attributing Offertorium K.34 to Mozart is not just misleading, it reflects the careless methods used by 19th-century scholars to inflate his legacy. Without an autograph or solid evidence, this work should not be considered part of his output.”