It was during the eighteenth century—the Age of Enlightenment— that writers began to pay some attention to the history of music. The theoretical science of music, of course, continued to be expounded just as it had been in previous centuries. But now, for the first time, its more personal, human side was presented in contemporary accounts by the many periodicals (some of which were devoted entirely to music), almanacs, travel journals, and other such writings that spontaneously appeared everywhere in Europe. Large-scale histories of music were also published. Major accounts were produced by Friedrich Wilhelm Marpurg (five volumes published 1754-78), Giovanni Battista (known as Padre) Martini (3 vols., 1957-81), Sir John Hawkins (5 vols. 1776), Jean-Benjamin Laborde (4 vols., 1780), and Johann Nikolaus Forkel (2 vols. 1783, 1801). Charles Burney, the English music historian, made two trips through Europe in 1770 and 1772 as he collected information for his four-volume history of music published between 1776 and 1789. He interviewed prominent musicians, authors, and scientists along the way and examined the holdings of libraries taking in the whole of cultural life in the cities he visited.
One of the musicians Burney interviewed was Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart (1739-1791), who is best known as the author of the poem “Die Forelle,” which Franz Schubert turned into an art song and the Trout Quintet. Schubart’s career alternated among three principal occupations: that of court musician, newspaper journalist, and circuit preacher and their related fields (for example, harpsichordist and organist and composer, journalist and poet, and so forth). When he tired of one occupation, he would switch to another and find employment in another city. Because of this restless behavior, Schubart was quite familiar with the musical happenings in southern Germany from his three occupational perspectives. He was a Renaissance man, a jack-of-all-trades.
It was in August of 1772 that Burney met Schubart in Ludwigsburg:
I can proceed no further in my account of this place, without making my acknowledgments to M. Schubart, organist of Lutheran church: he was the first who seemed to think the object of my journey was, in some measure, a national concern. I travelled not as a musician usually travels, to get money, but to spend it, in search of musical merit and talents, wherever I could find them, in order to display them to my countrymen. M. Schubart seemed sensible of this, and took all possible pains to please my ears, as well as to satisfy my mind. He is formed on the Bach school;1 but is an enthusiast, an original in genius. Many of his pieces are printed in Holland; they are full of taste and fire. He played on the Clavichord, with great delicacy and expression; his finger is brilliant, and fancy rich; he is in possession of a perfect double shake, which is obtained but by few harpsichord players.2
He was some time organist of Ulm,3 where he had a fine instrument to play on; but here he has a most wretched one. His merit is but little known where he is at present planted: the common people think him mad and the rest overlook him.
We communicated our thoughts to each other in a singular manner: I was not, as yet, able to keep pace with his ideas, or my own impatience to know them, in German; and he could neither speak French nor Italian, but could converse in Latin very fluently, having been originally intended for the church; and it amazed me to find, with what quickness and facility he expressed whatever he would, in Latin; it was literally, a living language in his hands. I gave him the plan of my History of Music to read, in German; and to convince me, that he clearly understood my meaning, he translated it, that is, read it aloud to me in Latin, at first sight. My pronunciation of Latin, if I had been accustomed to speak it, would not have been intelligible to him; but as he understood Italian, though he could not speak it, our conversation was carried on in two different languages, Latin and Italian; so that the questions that were asked in one of these tongues, were answered in the other. In this manner we kept a loquacious intercourse the whole day, during which, he not only played a great deal on the harpsichord, organ, pianoforte, and clavichord; but showed me the theatre, and all the curiosities of Ludwigsburg, as well as wrote down for me, a character of all the musicians of that court and city.
And, in the evening, he had the attention to collect together, at his house, three of four boors, in order to let me hear them play and sing national music, concerning which, I had expressed great curiosity.4
In 1773 Schubart wrote a poem critical of local public officials and he was charged with adultery, a crime for which he was expelled from Württemberg. He went to Heilbronn; his wife and children went back to Geislingen.5 He traveled extensively, seeking opportunities for gainful employment though in many cases had to settle for menial private teaching positions. An inappropriate comment cost him a court appointment in Mannheim. In 1774 he went to Augsburg where he began writing a bi-weekly newspaper in which he would comment on political issues throughout Europe (extending to Russia, north Africa, and America), literature, music, poetry, and various other topics.6 It was his habit to go to an inn, have a mug of beer in one hand, a pipe in his other hand, and to dictate the news to a scribe, without aid of reference materials, thereby demonstrating his “experience and a little bit of wit which Mother Nature had given him.”7 By the end of the year, a court decision forced him to leave Augsburg and take up residence in Ulm, where he continued publication of the newspaper. Things went well for awhile, but in 1777 Schubart’s criticism of political injustices and a comment about the duke’s mistress earned him a ten-year prison term.
His first year was spent in solitary confinement. In February 1778 he was moved to a larger cell, but he was not permitted to write, play music, or to speak to anyone. In the summer of 1778 he was allowed to receive visitors. In 1778-79 he dictated his autobiography to a fellow prisoner through a hole in the wall. By 1781 he could write letters, he was allowed to play the organ at a church service and was allowed to give instruction in keyboard, singing, and figured bass to several families of prison officials. His Aesthetics of Music (Ideen zu einer Ästhetik der Tonkunst) was similarly dictated in 1784-85, though not published until 1806 by his son, Ludwig. Upon his release in 1787, he was appointed court and theatre poet at Stuttgart and resumed publication of his newspaper. He died in 1791, the year of Mozart’s death.
There were several reasons for writing on aesthetics of music: first, he had plenty of time on his hands, and though he had no reference sources, that was not a serious hindrance for he was accustomed to his method of exposition in his journalistic career; second, he had traveled extensively throughout southern Germany and was acquainted with many of the important musicians both professionally and personally; and third, he was offended by a comment that Burney made which implied that Germany had very little to offer to the history of music!8 Schubart could defend his countrymen and argue from a German viewpoint. Though Schubart’s writing style is awkward in many places,9 it does provide us with a contemporary account of musical life and personalities now long forgotten.
Schubart’s Aesthetic is divided into two parts: the history of music comprising pages 1-276 and the principles of music, pages 277-382.
The Double Reed Instruments
Information about instruments comes from part two. Schubart first discusses “musical playing,” where he discusses the string instruments. Wind instruments, including the Jew’s harp, comprise the third large section. Then follows solo singing, musical styles, technical terms, musical genius, and his famous characterization of the keys.
After having discussed the trumpet, horn, trombone, and zink, Schubart is ready to introduce the woodwinds.
The Oboe [pp. 319-20]
This instrument is quite a new invention, about eighty, at the most a hundred, years old. The French used it first with their regiments, although in a very imperfect form, accompanied by horn or trumpet, and thereby aroused the attention of all Europe. Emperor Peter the Great brought the oboe to Russia along with many French and German oboists and introduced them to all regular regiments.
The famous artisan Denner of Nuremberg improved the instrument to which he applied keys, whereby even more notes could be brought forth. Since then it has been used in all types of music, and first-rate geniuses have brought it to such height and delicacy that it has now become a favorite of the music world.
Its range goes from alto D (d1), also from C (c1) up to high C (c3).10 The most recent masters have still added the three-line D, E, and F (d3 through f3). 11 The tone of the pure oboe very much approaches the human voice in the high range, but in the low range it still has much of the honking of a goose. Accordingly, one has tried to take the goose sound from it by means of mutes. But it is best when the master has his breath under control so that he rests in unpleasantness from the low tones. The Germans now have in the oboe, as generally in all wind instruments, the greatest masters. Also, the Italians and French have studied the oboe extraordinary whereby they must have inevitably risen to the mentioned perfection in a short period of time.
For this instrument much feeling is required and especially the most refined wind control. Whoever is not a master of his breath throughout several measures or whoever sustains the slightest injury to his breast should not venture upon the oboe.
Schubart then discusses the clarinet, which he identifies as an alto oboe. Pay close attention to Schubart’s description of the English horn, and then do not believe much ot it!
The English Horn [pp. 321-22]
A quite new invention of the English, so much more important because it is the only instrument that the British invents [sic]. Certainly they came upon this instrument by way of the oboe. It has a great, wide curvature, six holes, and various keys. The form has given it the name horn, but this appears to me very improper, because, according to the idiom of our language, one should only call horn that which is made of horn.
The sound of this instrument lies in the sphere of the alto and tenor and often touches the border of the baritone. For the expression of despondency and profound melancholy, the English horn is exquisitely suited. One can tell immediately that it is a British invention. With such a horn, accompanied by a glass harmonica, suicide is appropriate, says Burney.12
The playing of this instrument is very difficult because the many keys bring about difficulties in the fingering. It is used only lately, and indeed with important results, in opera and sacred music. If the composer can utilize the English horn according to his purpose, and if he never lends it a foreign language,13 then he can bring forth powerful effects with it. The compass of this instrument is now still not very great, but it is hoped that an inventive mind will shortly improve it.
The etymology of the term English horn is uncertain. In J. S. Bach’s cantatas, for example, the early English horn appears as oboe da caccia if it is a solo instrument and taille if it is an accompanying instrument. The oboe da caccia designation must be derived from the corno da caccia (hunting horn) since both instruments had a circular, curving shape. Joppig’s explanation of the flared bell and sound similar to a stopped horn justifies the term “horn.”14 Joppig continues: “Yet in view of its tone colour it is also conceivable that the epithet ‘English’ (in German this can also mean ‘angelic’) referred to the instrument’s celestial sound; in other words, it was the ‘horn of the angels.’”15 Before leaving conjecture, why not allow the French cor anglé (angled horn, which was one of its early shapes) and its homonym, cor anglais (English horn), to be a possible explanation of its etymological origins?
The Bassoon [pp. 327-29]
A new invention of all-powerful effect. This instrument is a relative of the serpent, which, as is well known, has such a strong tone that it substituted for the place of the organ in various French churches. One first noticed bassoons in the military campaigns of the Marshal of Luxembourg, from whence one can conclude that the French are the inventors of this important instrument. Since wind instruments must likewise be accompanied by wind instruments, no better bass instrument can be imagined for oboes, clarinets, trumpets, and horns than the bassoon.
This instrument has played a great role in our days. Not only has it been used for the accompaniment of the most important pieces on the organ, the theater, and chamber, but also so raised it to solo playing that now the bassoon competes with the world’s best instruments. In solo the bassoon has the clearest tenor; it becomes absorbed in the extreme depths and has a somewhat amusing, mocking sound, then it again rises to tenor F [f] and through skill still further to the high tenor F[f1] and also sparkles in the upper register as it has sparkled in the low register. The scale of this instrument is therefore, the following. (It is well noted that all bass instruments are computed from the lowest note upward.) Contra B flat [B flat]. This is its most extreme, natural low point; skill [Kunst] brings forth even lower tones. B natural it has by means of manipulation [Schwebung].16 C, C sharp, D, D sharp, E, A sharp [recte E sharp =], F, F sharp, G, G sharp, A, A sharp, also A flat, B flat, B natural, C, C sharp, D, D sharp, E, A sharp [recte E sharp =], F, F sharp, G, G sharp, highest still the also A [a1].
The instrument was made with much perfection at Nuremberg, yet the Parisian bassoons still have a noticeable superiority. It requires the fullest breath and such a healthy and manly method of blowing that only few men already capable of playing it to the point of mastery, owing to its construction. Although the French invented it, the Germans have produced the greatest masters of this instrument. It has been used for a long time only for the accompaniment, but we Germans were also the first to wrest the solo from it, and indeed with such success that now the bassoon belongs among the best solo instruments of the world. The tone of the instrument is so sociable, so charmingly talkative, so attuned for every untainted soul that the Day of Judgement will be met with many thousand bassoons among us. The bassoon adapts itself to all forms: it accompanies martial music with manly dignity; it is heard in sacred rooms with majesty; it carries the opera [by virtue of its basso continuo function]; it reasons with wisdom in the concerto; it gives sway to the dance,; and it is everything it wants to be.17
Schubart in several places expounded the superiority of German wind players.
Inasmuch as the Italians now have studied all the parts of music so thoroughly, it can be suspected from afar that they must have also had very good instrumentalists. And certainly they also contended here for the palms, although, speaking with prejudice, our fatherland [Germany] has surely already caught them in this. The great study of song led the Italians astray somewhat in neglecting instruments; and because a delightful climate often can produce asthma, quite certainly no exceptional wind instrumentalists are expected from Italy. History knows of one great Italian trumpeter, trombonist, cornetist, hornist or bassoonist, and their flutists hardly extend beyond the mediocre. But have the Italians had great oboists more numerous than the Besozzi? [p. 58]
Schubart also complains about the lack of bass singing voices among the Italians and offers a dietetic explanation:
But the deeply moving bass voice they ignore out of capriciousness or out of shortcoming of such voices and use them only in the comic opera. Perhaps, too, there are few beautiful bass voices in a country where one drinks nothing but wine. [p. 54]
Thus, Schubart implies that a country which has a gentle climate and where people drink only wine cannot produce real men who can succeed in the challenges of the wind instruments.
The Performers of Double Reed Instruments
After a brief history of ancient music in part one of the Aesthetic, Schubart generally devotes a chapter to each city, wherein one paragraph introduces the city and discusses its relative merits followed by a paragraph for each of the noteworthy musicians who have particularly distinguished themselves. Some of those famous musicians are oboists and bassoonists. Schubart also used a similar procedure when he mentioned double reed performers in his journals. Both sources have been combined in this section of the paper.18
Besozzi
Besozi [Besozzi]19 was heard at court here {Augsburg]. By this simple announcement is enough to say to my readers that we have heard of the monarch of oboists. Formerly the oboe was condemned merely to war and church festivals; but through Blas, Fischer20 and Mr. Besozi, it now has come to perfection and tenderness that nothing equals it. Its tone resembles perhaps the sensual enticings of Aurora as Cephalus succumbed in her arms.21
Schubart regarded Besozzi as one of the outstanding oboists in Europe and often compared Besozzi with other musicians in his other writings:
Among the many virtuosos that I heard in Augsburg were some who deserve this title such as the excellent violinist la Motte, the great oboists Besozi, an even so great, but somewhat unusual theorist, the then robust trumpeter Weigel, and the sweet baritone Lidl.22
Among great souls, no virtuosi demonstrate brotherly love for one another than le Brün [an oboist] and Besozi. Recently these athletes battled at Prince Soubise’s: both stood, neither fell. Each felt the other’s greatness. They then embraced and those present shed tears.
It’s my feeling that Besozi’s taste is more capricious than le Brün’s, who with all his godly genius still remarkably has less discretion and, as it seems to me, has less feeling; for Besozi governs through intellect and le Brün through intuition.23
Lebrun
One of the greatest musical geniuses that I have ever come across was le Brün [Lebrun]; at that time a youth in years, but a man in art. He has—even according to the testimony of his great rival Besozzi, with whom I spoke in Augsburg—attained the maximum in perfection on the oboe. His ornaments, inventions, and cadenzas are most inimitable. He overcomes all difficulties of his instrument, plays easy and difficult works, inspires wonder and sweet feeling, expresses foreign works as well as his own, and is, in a word, an original mind.24
When the Graces want to have music in the grove of Acidalius, I would recommend the violin of a Cramer, the oboe of Le Brün or Secci [Secchi], the viola of Stamitz, Nisslen’s and Spandaur’s silver horns, Steinhard’s or Graf’s flute, and Marat’s cello … and the singers Marat {Mara], Gabrieli, or Blümerin …25
Le Brun once played a Cramer violin concerto for me on his oboe. ‘Excellent,’ I said to him, ‘good Le Brun, but don’t you know that you have here a talisman whereby you could enchant mankind if you would imitate the human voice more than a string instrument.’ This extraordinary musical mind grasped my idea so well that he played a Cantabile so beautifully as if it had been sung by Mara or Gabrieli [important singers of the day]. Lolli [Schubart’s favorite violinist] also has the fault that he imitates bird song more than the human voice …26
Le Brün enchants all of Paris with his divine oboe. The French place him above Blas [Plà], Besozi, and Fischer. Whether this classification is correct, I do not want to give judgment.27
[Mannheim] Ludw. Aug. le Brun,28 a true magician on the oboe. This instrument, which comes so close to the human voice, is hardly a hundred years old, and Fischer, Besozzi, and Secchi, and this Le Brun seem to have already exhausted it. Le Brun has forced two additional tones from the oboe which until now did not lie in its gamut—the D and E (d2 and e2). The oboe as a rule had a certain solemn tone which sounded like the goose’s honk. This is now not only refined by the named great masters but transformed to such a tempting sound that we can rightly number this instrument among the most pleasant discoveries of the human spirit. Hardly will one be able to do something more with it than what Lebrun has not already done. His tone has the utmost delicacy. He not only sighs, coos, laments, and weeps but also plays in the brilliant colors of joy. He succeeds with the lively presto as with the innermost sighing largo.29 In his concertos [i.e., virtuoso compositions] he overcomes all difficulties, and in his solos [i.e., the more intimate chamber works, such as the sonata] he is all feeling. He generally composes his pieces himself, although he does play in more than one style.30 His compositions are exceedingly fine and sweet, like drops of nectar. He has produced ballets and chamber pieces which are evidence of the most refined taste. The ethereal beam of genius flickers in everything that he writes, that he performs. He has thus rightly earned the admiration of France and Germany. Although he is not as learned as Besozzi, he has doubtlessly more genius than the latter. [pp. 142-143]
One of the greatest musicians in Europe died in Berlin in the middle of the previous month (December 16, 1790)—Le Brün. He was a descendant of great French painters Le Brün, a genuine musical genius, not ignorant of the arts. He and Besozi have brought the oboe—this sympathetic instrument that tenderly reaches hearts of mankind—to the summit which borders on perfection. Le Brün had far more delicacy and tenderness of taste than the bizarre, often tedious Besozi. Le Brün was also experienced in phrasing as his salve demonstrates in the heart of a lingering passage. Italy, France, England, and our indifferent Germany send our regards to him.31
Plà
[Württemberg] The Blas [Plà] brothers.32 If Castor and Pollux, both inspired by the god who created them, had played the oboe, they could have hardly played better than these two.33 They were both Spaniards transplanted to Germany where they cultivated their style under Jomelli and attained exceptional skill on their instruments. This pair of brothers is quite an exceptional phenomenon in music. As they loved one another inexpressibly, their performance was all the more sympathetic. Whoever has heard them, heard the ultimate music performance. One thought pursued the other; one breath lifted the other. This combining of psyches had never before been heard in Europe; it seemed to be a mutual friendship of two closely united angels. Both composed, both played their phrases masterly, and no one was able to decide who might be the greater. The uniting of sounds, the rise and fall of the portamento, the resemblance in song, and, if one is permitted to say, no one has perhaps expressed, as long as the world exists, love and kindness better than these brothers. The younger one died in Ludwigsburg; there the older one threw away his oboe and then withered away in Spain. The compositions of these great masters are extremely rare because out of obstinacy they had left nothing to print. However, one has some of their sonatas which are composed with indescribable charm and will remain for all oboists an everlasting model. [pp. 153-54]
Secchi
Secchi was the second great oboist that I have heard. He sighed the sounds and inspired more sweet melancholy than Lebrun, whose temperament is more jovial.34
[Concerning an oboe solo by Secchi in a Sales opera:] This man belongs in the sparkling circle of Blas, Fischer, le Brün, and Besozi. Sensitivity seems to flow from his oboe.35
[The aria] “Piungo il mio ben cosi,” with the masterly accompaniment of the Secki’s oboe—how beautiful, how sensitive!36
[Mannheim] Secchi, the most delightful and most amiable oboist of his time. The tones sighed under his lips from his beautiful, youthful soul and broke forth out of his magical instrument. He did not play; he sang. He never brought forth difficulties because his studies were in gracefulness. The control [Mezzotints], the sustaining and abating of tones, the sensual nuance of an intemperance in the principal motive, the little flourishes, and especially his masterly cadenzas carried away all listeners. He was equally strong in accompaniment as a solo, and often the most able singer had enough to do to still sparkle next to him. [p. 126]
Ulrich
On Friday [11 August 1775] the famous chamber virtuoso, Mr. Ulerich [Ulrich]37 of Ansbach, will give a concert in the large room of the Golden Wheel [goldnen Rad; in Ulm]. Since the oboe is an instrument that one seldom hears here in such completeness, it promises to draw a large audience. It will be difficult for him to receive such approval here in Ulm that he has already gained at the greatest German courts. Tickets can be obtained at the Goldnen Rad or from Mr. Schubart in the Goldnen Krone.38
Schubart’s review on the following Thursday was not particularly enthusiastic:
Last Friday Mr. Ulrich, Ansbach chamber virtuoso, was heard in a public concert on the oboe with general approval. Experts testify that he belongs to the golden circle of Blas, le Brün, Fischer, Secchi, and Verazi. Delicacy of sound, quickness in passages, and remarkable tenderness of taste recommend this master to the self-same friends of harmony mentioned above.39
Finally, Schubart includes Ulrich in his Aesthetic:
[Ansbach] Ulerich [Ulrich]. A better orchestral musician than soloist. Since he plays mostly with a mute in order to stop the goose honks of the oboe in the low range and since he caused a turmoil over this in a few concertos and sonatas and thereby exposed himself to the reproach of poverty, it is no wonder that he played no great role as a soloist. On the other hand he accompanied very well with the violin and was accurate in his phrasing. He died even before his musical taste was completely laid out as chamber virtuoso in the Ansbach service. [p. 164]
Bassoonists
Eichner
Ernst Eichner. This favorite of the Graces played the bassoon with unusual sweetness. He completely took up this grumbling, mocking tone and tuned it to the most delicate tenor and to the most lovely contralto. Pleasing gracefulness and melting sweetness was his performance, just as the style of his compositions. But he heaps too many sweets on his compositions and thereby destroys the unity of the phrase. For that reason his style becomes mottled more often, and many of his pieces seem to have more than one motive. Frederick the Great used to call him only dessert, whereas the crown prince Friedrich Wilhelm enjoyed him as a hearty dish. He remained the prince’s favorite until he died—alas, much too early for the musical Muse!40 [p. 92]
Enderle
This is the most curious of Schubart’s entries, and the bassoonist is not the primary concern of this article. It would be interesting to learn more about Johann Joseph Enderle:
Enterlin {Enderle]41 is the Kapellmeister of this orchestra [at Darmstadt], born in Nuremberg, the son of a very famous, deceased bassoonist, who, because he had the misfortune of stabbing one of his comrades to death while under the influence of drink, committed suicide … [p. 195]
Kneferle
Knesserle [Kneferle]. Thursday, the 21st, we had the fortune of hearing Stamitz, the son of harmony, in Augsburg … At the same time Mr. [Heinrich] Kneferle, court organist at EichstÀtt performed on the bassoon. He is a man who has formed his taste through several {8} years of residence in Naples and has become strong in composition, keyboard, and bassoon. It would not be hard for him to reach Schubart, Schwarze, Ritter, 42 and Reuner, the princes of bassoon and—hail to us!—all Germans, if he wanted. But too bad that such magnificent tones only enchant a few ears, for behold—may I be permitted once more an enthusiastic admirer of the arts—the splendid Stamitz and the able Knesserle had to play to an almost empty house. Here a cold publican pulls me by the arm ‘What’s doing? Who would miss his beer, tobacco, and radish [Rettisch] for the sake of music?’ ‘Well, good, dear fellow, go hear your fiddler in ----; but you won’t hear a Stamitz.’43
Schobert
His brother [speaking of the brother of the famous harpsichordist Johann Schobert], Schobert, lives in Paris and is now the best bassoonist there.44 (p. 231)
The Frankfurt concert sparkled. Ms. Franchi, a charming singer, sang; Reiner [Rheiner], this well-known, great bassoonist, played the bassoon; the one-of-a-kind Punto played the horn [Waldhorn]; and Winter, a budding genius out of the Palatine school, played the violin.46
[The Palatine-Bavarian School] Reuner [Rheiner], a great bassoonist, equally strong in the Presto as in the melting Adagio. His tone was pure and full, and his taste very delicate.47 But he occasionally did not avoid groans and growls in the low range whereby one would often believe that he was hearing two different players, one bad and one good. He usually composed his concertos and sonatas himself with understanding and taste and performed them exquisitely. He belonged to the best reformers in Europe of this formerly so disgusting bass instrument.48 His stubborn opinions about music and his massive Bavarian character overshadowed his reputation in some respects.49 [pp. 125-26]
[The Palatine-Bavarian School] Reiner, the best bassoonist out of the Mannheim school. His intonation is clear, his ornaments are tasteful and beautiful, but he does not reach the intensity by far of a Schwarz or Ritter.50 [p. 145]
Schwarz
Schwarz is perhaps the best bassoonist of our time. He has measured completely the wide circle of the difficulties of his instrument. His sound does not shake like the voice of an old, apoplectic alto; it is full and does not hide. In the high range he is exceedingly pure and with amazing ease this artist climbs the ladder upward and even as easily down below. Sartori and Ulrich are in violin and oboe also not of the common mold.51
Schwarz.52 A pupil of the Würrtemberg chapel and unquestionably the best bassoonist of our time. His large physical body causes him to play somewhat asthmatically, but he compensates for it by thousandfold refinements. His tone is full and beautiful. He has magical accuracy in sound. In the tenor range he is extremely pleasant, and in the low range, he is angry. He brings out the voluble passages with penetrating force, and no one plays the Adagio better than he. Hence, he unites in himself qualities that few virtuosos know how to do. The British have gazed at this master, and in Germany his banner has long waved. It is too bad that he understands too little to be able to compose a concerto himself. Yet he chooses very well and knows how to arrange pieces of various compositions to satisfy his spirit. [p.162]
Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart has left us with a valuable insight, though admittedly definitely biased and somewhat naïve when compared with our knowledge, into the double reeds and their players in the latter half of the eighteenth century.
Footnotes
1 It is impossible to determine to which Bach Burney makes reference. J.S. Bach, to us the greatest of the Bach family, would have been known through his son, J.C. Bach, who was active in London from 1762. But J.C. Bach studied in Berlin with his older brother, C.P.E. Bach, who replaced Telemann in Hamburg in 1767 and was probably better known, particularly with his Essay on the True Art of Playing Keyboard Instruments (1753-62). Was it this text-the "Bach school"-upon which Schubart was formed? The J.S. Bach revival began somewhat later; the first full biography was written by Johann Nicolaus Forkel and published in 1802. [return]
In the 16 January 1775 edition of the Deutsche Chronik, Schubart wrote a page and a half article-"some random thoughts about keyboard playing"-about the Bachs. First he began with C.P.E. Bach (25 lines), then proceeded with J.C. Bach (16 lines) and Wilhelm Friedemann Bach (4 lines), whom Schubart named as Erdmann Bach. It's the concluding paragraph which might shed light on the matter: "Moreover, I can never think of the Bachs without gazing in astonishment at their great father. What a method he must have had to teach his sons quickly and correctly the true foundation of melody. Even now as then, they have been witnesses of their father before all the world." (See Deutsche Chronik, 16 January 1775, 38-39.) One might assume that the "Bach school's" founder ultimately, then, is J.S. Bach, but elsewhere in the Deutsche Chronik, Schubart's references to the Bach school are nearly always references to C.P.E. Bach, so the statement is still in question.
2 Burney's writing style is typical of the age, and Schubart's German sentences are similarly constructed. While their sentences do communicate, many times the reader would like to have additional information in order to understand or clarify the meaning of a phrase or even a single word. For example, how can a finger be brilliant? Which one of his fingers is the brilliant one? What is "fancy rich" and how is it related to a finger? A "double shake" is a type of ornamentation, but one does not possess [or own] it, nor does one obtain [as in purchase] it as much as developing it through practice. To a modern reader, the syntax is halting. [return]
3 Schubart was not the organist at Ulm. He had been organist at Geislingen, which neighbors the town of Ulm. In his Ideen zu einer ?sthetik der Tonkunst, Schubart describes Geislingen as an "Ulmish town," and it may be that Burney misunderstood Schubart's reply. See Burney's next paragraph. [return]
4 Charles Burney, An Eighteenth-Century Tour in Central Europe and the Netherlands, ed. Percy A. Scholes (London: Oxford University Press, 1959), 39-40. [return]
5 Apparently, the family was back together by 1775, or at least circumstantial evidence as follows would indicate such. In the 28 August 1775 edition of the Deutsche Chronik, Schubart announced the availability of his engraved portrait. He continues: "Although labelled as the author of the Deutsche Chronik, his wife and his reflection [in the mirror] assure him that he does not have a fish mouth [Karpfenmaul] nor the neck of an ox [Ochsenhals]. [return]
6 The newspaper, titled German Chronicle or some variation on that title, was published on Mondays and Thursdays. Each edition consisted of eight pages and the pagination was continuous for the year. Articles titled "Tonkunst" (Music) usually appeared at the end of the edition of the newspaper, some of which were advertisements of published works. There are also examples of the music topics appearing incidentally within the discussion of a particular city or country. [return]
7 C.F.D. Schubart's des Patrioten, gesammelte Schriften and Schicksale, 8 vols. (Stuttgart: J. Scheible's Buchhandlung, 1839-40), 1:221. Hereafter, GS. [return]
8 English translations of Schubart passages are mine and are found in my "Christian Friedrich Daniel Schubart's Ideen zu einer ?sthetik der Tonkunst: An Annotated Translation" (Ph.D. dissertation, University of Southern California, 1983). Page numbers in the body and footnotes of this paper refer to the 1806 facsimile edition published in modern edition in Fritz and Margrit Kaiser (eds.), Christian Fredrich Daniel Schubart: Ideen zu einer ?sthetik der Tonkunst (Hildescheim: Georg Olms, 1969). [return]
Two examples are given relative to Burney slighting German contributions to music: "Burney, Doctor of Music, has made a name for himself in all of Europe by means of his musical journeys and, particularly, through his history of music. Indeed, his journeys contain an abundance of correct and true observations and reveal, in particular, much musical knowledge. But his opinions are much too British, i.e., too bold and often totally incorrect. Ebeling, the [German] translator of these journeys, and Reichardt have demonstrated this to him most emphatically and, with German courage, have reported his errors and his libels of great men. Burney traveled much too quickly and hurriedly to have been able to make observations with philosophical coldness. He does not do suitable justice to us Germans by any means. He concedes to us only artistic skill and diligence, but refuses us musical genius, a libel, which, through the whole history of music, is refuted to the honor of our nation.
His musical history, on which he collected and wrote for twenty years, indeed contains an indulging display of scholarship, for such can easily be obtained by whomever has enough money. But the work is filled with errors, his opinion is not original but mostly French, and his aesthetic sentiment does not say much." [p. 255]
The word genius [genie] appears frequently in Schubart's Aesthetic and was a common term in 18th-century aesthetics. Notice too that Burney's mention of money in his 1772 meeting with Schubart seems to be altruistic; Schubart, on the other hand, views Burney's money as a form of exploitation.
A second example occurs in Schubart's concluding remarks concerning Johann Adolf Scheibe: "In short, Scheibe was one of the most learned musicians of our century! What is the highly celebrated Doctor of Music Burney compared to a Scheibe?" [p. 160]
See also Schubart's comparison of Reichart with Burney in Deutsche Chronik, 2 February 1775, 75-79. Furthermore, in an article titled "England," Schubart inserts this footnote at the end of the third page: "England has never brought forth a great musician. Handel, Hasse, [J.C.] Bach transplanted their taste to that place. How maddening are Burney's contemptuous sneers [Seitenblicke] against our nation if one knows this fact." Deutsche Chronik, 7 August 1775, 449. Schubart constantly promoted the fartherland in his newspaper and often mentioned Germans prominent in other parts of Europe. Schubart was a patriot.
9 Ludwig, Schubart's son, states that his father never edited the manuscript, and when Ludwig finally decided to see if the manuscript warranted publication, he had a lot of editing to do in order to get the work ready for the printer. [return]
10 Octave designations in this paper are as follows: small c is the second space in bass clef; c1 is middle c; c2 is the third space of treble clef; c3 is two ledger lines above treble clef. [return]
11 Laborde indicates that c1 and C#1 are false; that the range of the oboe was from d1 to f3; and that the normal range was from f1 to c3. See Jean-Benjamin de Laborde, Essai sur la musique ancienne et moderne, 4 vols. (Paris: Ph.-D. Pierres, 1780; reprint, New York: AMS Press, 1978), 1:266. [return]
12 I have not been able to find any such statement in Burney's work. [return]
13 That is, writing music which is not idiomatic for the instrument. [return]
14 Gunther Joppig, The Oboe and the Bassoon (Portland, OR: Amadeus Press, 1988), 101. [return]
16 In other words, the note had to be effected by an embouchure adjustment rather than by the opening of a key. "The B flat and B natural are the lowest notes of the bassoon. They both have the same fingering-all the holes closed. Only the pressure on the reed, which is tighter for the B natural, distinguish them ?" Laborde, Essai sur la musique ancienne et moderne, 1:342. [return]
17 Cf. Lyndesay G. Langwill, The Bassoon and Contrabassoon (London: Ernest Benn, 1965), 38-39. [return]
18 Those paragraphs which are taken from the Aesthetic have the page reference in the text. The city begins the article. Other sources are listed as footnotes. [return]
19 I have chosen to use Schubart's spellings to introduce the musicians. Common spellings are in parentheses. There are several Besozzi family members who were known for their abilities on oboe and whom Schubart could have heard: Alessandro (1702-1793); Antonio (1714-1781; nephew of Alessandro); and Girolamo (1750-1785; son of Gaetano). Schubart did not identify his Besozzi; Burney heard and wrote about Allessandro, Carolo, and Gaetano while on his travels through Europe. See Joppig, The Oboe and the Bassoon, 57-61 and the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, 20 vols. (London: Macmillan, 1980), 2:659-60. Hereafter NG. [return]
20 Schubart does not isolate Fischer for a separate article. There is an interesting footnote, however, provided by Scholes. It's an entry in Ree's Cyclopaedia, (45 vols., published 1802-1820) written by Burney about the oboist Johann Christian Fischer (1733-1800): "He had not a grain of sense but what he blew through his reed; he never spoke more than three words at a time, and those were negatives or affirmatives. But peace to his ashes." Charles Burney, An Eighteenth-Century Musical Tour in Central Europe and the Netherlands, ed. Percy A. Scholes (London: Oxford University Press, 1959), 60, fn. 1. [return]
21 Deutsche Chronik, 30 May 1774, 144. Aurora was the goddess of dawn and Cephalus was the grandson of Aeolis, king of the winds. Cephalus was married to Procris, whom he loved deeply. But as Cephalus was hunting deer early one morning, Aurora carried him off. When she was unable to seduce him, she dismissed him but suggested that Procris was not as faithful toward him. Cephalus' jealous attempts to prove Procris' unworthiness eventually destroyed their marriage. [return]
23 Teutsche Chronik, 2 May 1776, 288. [return]
25 Deutsche Chronik, 14 April 1774, 40. Schubart wrote a poem ("Virtuoso's Fortune") for the Teutsche Chronik, 9 May 1776, 304, in which Lebrun, among others, is cited as an example of perfection. "Wretched is the virtuoso's fortune as a career in our day. [return]
Should it be necessary to take a cord and hang everone up? Everyone toots imagining that he plays as Lebrun plays, fiddles as Lolli, strokes the clavichord as Ekardt, and composes as Bach. thus one hears more lovely tinkling of bells, barking, caterwauling, goose honks, and donkey braying than heavenly music. The ear of most mankind is like a donkey's ear-quite huge! Therefore, consider, my merciful Christ, and don't produce anymore vituosos." Besozzi and Lebrun are Schubart's favorites, and Schubart seems to give Lebrun the edge.
26 Deutsche Chronik, 2 February 1775, 78. [return]
27 Deutsche Chronik, 29 June 1775, 411. [return]
28 Ludwig August Lebrun was born in Mannheim in 1752. He was an "accessit" [apprentice status] in 1764 and became a full member of the orchestra in 1767. When the Mannheim orchestra was dissolved, he was the highest paid oboist. He married Franziska Danzi, daughter of the composer, in 1778 and toured with her in throughout Europe. He died of a liver inflammation in Berlin in 1790. See NG, 10:581-82 for additional biographical information. [return]
29 This statement is similar to the one referenced in fn. 26. [return]
30 In other words, he does perform the works of other composers. [return]
31 Chronik, 11 January 1791, 24. [return]
32 Jos? (=Giuseppe), Juan (=Giovanni Baptista), and Manuel. There are variant spellings of the family name: Blasa, Blas (Schubart's spelling), Blass, Le Plats, Pla, Plaa, Plach, Plah, Plai, Plas, Plat, Plats, Plaz. Much confusion clouds the biographical information about these brothers. In many cases, references to these Spanish oboists (and composers) are by family name only. In 1752, two brothers (unspecified) from Madrid arrived in Paris and, according to Fetis in his Biographi universelle des musiciens et bibliographie g?n?rale de la musique, performed in the Concerts Spirituel. In the same year, Jos? and Juan travelled to Stuttgart and were employed (ca. 1754) by the grand duke, Karl Alexander, of W?rttemberg. Two of the brothers may have been in London around 1760. In 1761, Juan died in Suttgart. Jos? continued in the duke's service until 1763, when he went to Amsterdam until 1776. (This, according to F?tis; other sources state that his whereabouts were unknown or that he returned to Spain.) Some of his works were printed in Amsterdam in 1776. From 1782 to 1789, the elder and younger Pl? were in Germany. Richard Sanchez cites Subira, who states that "In 1783-84) Pla the elder and the younger were part of the chapel orchestra in Mannheim. Also that same 'Almanac of Music' in the volume for 1789 includes the name of Manuel Pl? among the composers who live in German countries." The Musikalischer Almanach f?r Deutschland auf das Jahr 1782 [hereafter MAfD] lists the oboists of the Mannheim court, but no mention is made of the Pl? brothers. The 1782 and 1783 almanacs indicated that the Pl? brothers were formerly at Ludwigsburg but no mention is made of their whereabouts at that time. The MAfD 1789, p. 86, lists "Plats" but no other information is supplied. See Richard Xavier Sanchez, "Spanish Chamber Music of the Eighteenth Century" (Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, 1975), 46-52, 279-81. A recent article corrects Fetis. See Beryl Kenyon de Pascual, "Juan Baptisa Pla and Jos? Pla: Two Neglected Oboe Virtuosi of the 18th Century," Early Music 18 (February 1990): 109-10. [return]
33 Schubart must be referring to the inseparability of Castor and Pollux, who were brothers. In one version of the legend, Castor was killed and Pollux prayed that he too might die. Zeus took pity and allowed Pollux to be with Castor and that they would spend half their time beneath the earth and the other half in heaven. [return]
35 Deutsche Chronik, 12 May 1774, 103. [return]
36 Deutsche Chronik, 27 April 1775, 266. Gioseffo Secchi served as court and chamber musician in Munich from 1765 to 1776. This is a report of Antonio Tozzi's Orfeo ed Euridice performed in Munich, 9 January 1775. Schilling states that Secchi left Munich in 1784 and travelled through France, Holland, and Italy and was employed in Turin around 1800. (Gustav Schilling, Encyclop?die der gesammten musikalischen Wissenschaften, oder Universal-Lexikon der Tonkunst, 7 vols. [Stuttgart: F.H. K?hler, 1835-38, 1842; reprint, Hildescheim: Georg Olms, 1974], 6:311. Hereafter, Schilling.) [return]
37 Jean-Rodolphe (Johann?) Ulrich was an oboist, violinist, and composer. He was in the W?rttemberg duke's service. He then moved to Ansbach and finally to Switzerland about 1780, where he apparently remained until his death in Zurich, 8 February 1795. 38Deutsche Chronik, 10 August 1775, 512. [return]
39 Deutsche Chronik, 17 August 1775, 528. This is Johann Christian Fischer's only mention in Schubart's Aesthetic. Fischer was a German oboist and composer active in London from about 1768. He studied with Alessandro Besozzi in Turin in the 1750s. Verazi is unknown to me. He is not listed in any of the MAfDs or the Gerber or Schilling lexikons. [return]
40 Eichner entered the service of Friedrich Wilhelm in 1772 and died in 1777. He was in Mannheim until 1770, then to Zweibr?cken during 1770, and in London until 1772. See Will Jensen, The Bassoon: Its History, Construction, Makers, Players and Music (The Netherlands: Knuf, 1978-), p. 1722 and NG, 6:80-81. [return]
41 Wilhelm Gotfried Enderle, born in Bayreuth, 21 May 1722, is the chapel master. He was taught in Nuremberg until his fourteenth year. He then earned a position in the W?rzburg orchestra in 1748 and went to Darmstadt in 1753, becoming Kapellmeister in 1762. There is no mention of his father in Gerber. The bassoon-playing father was Johann Joseph Enderle, who died in Nuremberg in 1748. [return]
42 Schubart never wrote an article with Ritter as the primary focus. Georg Wenzel Ritter (1748-1808) was in Mannheim (1768), Munich (1778), and Potsdam (1788). Schubart could also be referring to Georg's older brother, Heinrich Ritter, who was in Mannheim from 1741 until 1771. It is probably not Karl Christian Ritter, a German bassoonist in Dresden c. 1760. See Jensen, The Bassoon, p. 1779. [return]
43 Deutsche Chronik, 27 June 1774, 207-8. Heinrich Kneferle was organist at Eichst?dt. He studied music for eight years in Naples. In addition to keyboard and bassoon skills, he was also a composer best known for his "operettas" and concertos (for keyboard, bassoon, and flute). Schilling, 4:163. [return]
44 The spelling could be Schubart, Schubarth, Schubert, Schoebert, or Schober, but no record can be found. [return]
45 See David Rhodes, "Felix Rheiner: A Neglected 18th-Century Bassoonist," The Journal of the International Double Reed Society 21 (July 1993): 41-48 for a full biography of Felix Rheiner. [return]
46 Deutsche Chronik, 19 December 1774, 607-8. [return]
47 Cf. Charles Burney, An Eighteenth-Century Musical Tour in Central Europe and the Netherlands, ed. Percy A. Scholes (London: Oxford University Press, 1959), 60. [Munich] "There was M. Sechi, a very good hatuboy, who, if I had not lately heard Fischer, would have charmed me; M. Rheiner, the bassoon, who, when in England, was so ill, that he was unable to play more than once in public, and whom I had not yet heard, was here to-night, and had quite recovered his health. His tone is sweet, and execution neat, and he must be allowed by every competent and impartial judge, to be a very able and pleasing performer." [return]
48 Jensen has a similar passage which is attributed to Hans Reuner. See Jensen, The Bassoon, p. 1778. [return]
49 In discussing temperament and the important of correctly matching an instrument with the virtuoso's temperament, Schubart cities the following example: "Rheiner was one of the greatest bassoonists in Europe, yet more stormy than delicate." GS, 1:188. This same statement, without attribution, is found in Gerber. [return]
50 This entry is problematical. This and the previous quotation are from a chapter in the Aesthetic, comprising pp. 121-46, entitled "The Palatine-Bavarian School." Schubart begins first with the Bavarian school, which means Munich, and discusses the following musicians: Joseph Michael Johann von Cr?ner, Rheiner, and Secchi. The remainder of the chapter is about the Palatine school, a geographical area which has two parts and of which Mannheim is one of the cities. Musicians mentioned in this second section are Holzbauer, Vogler, Raaff, Cannabich, Toeschi, Cramer, Stamitz (father and son), Filtz, Lebrun, Franziska Danzi (Lebrun's wife, the daughter of the famous cellist, and a singer herself), Wendling, Fr?nzle, Reiner, and Winter. As can be seen, Schubart has correctly placed Felix Rheiner in Munich. The problem is with the second Rheiner that there is no such person in the records of the Mannheim orchestra and there is not any mistake about the reading of "the best bassoonist out of the Mannheim school." [return]
So how could Schubart have made such an error? An easy response is that he simply made a mistake. But are there other possible explanations? Three are proposed. First, Schubart's Aesthetic was published in 1806, but it was written in 1784-85 and it must be remembered that he was incarcerated early in 1778. The point is that the error was not made by an old man early in the 1800s who was trying to remember what had happened in the 1770s and '80s. Neither was it written by someone who had access to the most current information, for Schubart had been in isolation for at least six years before he began his history of German music. He had to rely somewhat on his recent memory. He did the best he could with the information he had at hand. Second, Schubart didn't actually write his Aesthetic. Rather, he dictated his book through a hole in the wall to the son of the commandant. Ludwig, Schubart's son, said that his father was never able to revise the book before his death in 1791. Perhaps what Schubart dictated was not accurately recorded, or perhaps some time elapsed between sessions and Schubart had forgotten that he had already given characteristics for Felix Rheiner, or perhaps when Ludwig prepared the manuscript for publication, he altered or rearranged text. Errors of this kind cannot be blamed on the author. Third, when Maximilian Joseph III died on 30 December 1777, Carl Theodor of Mannheim became the Elector of Bavaria and moved his court to Munich. The Mannheim "school" then (minus musicians who were pensioned off because of age or unwillingness to relocate to Munich), was transplanted to Munich. Could Schubart, in 1784-85, have been thinking of this connection (Felix Rheiner, Munich, Mannheim school all the same location) when he made the statement? There are four possibilities and perhaps there are even other explanations.
Regardless of outcome, now that a problem has been discovered, we should consider its ramifications in the history of music. In the late eighteenth century, there are a number of almanacs and lexikons which contain biographical information about musicians. If one were to write a biographical dictionary early in the 19th century, how would one go about collecting information? Wouldn't the logical answer be to compile a listing from sources already in circulation? Let's use Felix Rheiner as our example. Schilling's "Encyclopedia of Collected Musical Knowledge" began publication in 1835. Schilling cross-references "Reuner" and "Reiner" to Felix Rheiner. (See fn. 1 of David Rhodes' article cited in fn. 45 above.) The "Rheiner" article concludes with statements by Schubart. Fetis also began publication of his "Biography and Bibliography" in 1835. His "Rheiner" article expands Schilling. Next comes the problem. One would expect that Robert Eitner's Quellen-Lexikon, which began publication in 1900, would be even more complete, but Eitner relied too heavily on Schubart rather than on the scholarship of more recent research. Eitner's source for the entry "Felix Reiner" is Schubart, p. 145; his article on "Reuner" (first name unknown) is that Reuner was a Bavarian bassoonist in Maximilian Joseph III's court and the source is Schubart, p. 125. There follows several lines of what seems to be direct quotations from Schubart, but upon closer examination it turns out to a pharaphrase of Schubart. Thus we learn that most recent is not necessarily the best information. One must carefully scrutinize the trustworthiness of the information presented and not rely solely on date of publication as evidence of authenticity.
51 Deutsche Chronik, 18 September 1775, 597. [return]
52 Andreas Gottlob Schwarz (1743-1804) was a pupil of M?ller in Karlsruhe. He went to Stuttgart, Anspach (1773), London (1774), Frankfurt (1775-77), and again in London (1782). See Jensen, The Bassoon, p. 1790. Schubart lists Schwarz with the city of Anspach. [return]