New Mozart Theory-chapter 3

Mozart, an enthusiastic Freemason

As explained in the previous chapter, the cause of Mozart's vast amount of debts, I believe, was for the sake of establishing a new Masonic lodge named "Cavern".
I myself believe so, but many readers will doubt if Mozart actually took such activities in his late Vienna era.
Yes, it is natural that people think so since the lodge was after all not founded and no document related to the establishment of the lodge "Cavern" was left to date.

Yet I firmly believe that Mozart took such activities secretly for many years after mid 1780's.
Of course, I do not want to put the matter right with my description in the previous chapter. There existed other things that I believe so. They are also many other Mozart's letters than those I have already quoted.
Yes, by analyzing such Mozart's letters, we can understand that Mozart had surely taken activities for establishing a new Masonic lodge. Now let me explain it.

Contents

1. Mozart's Masonic Experiences

(1) His Personal Contacts with Freemasons before joining the lodge "Beneficence".
(2) His Masonic Activities after becoming the Member of the lodge "Beneficence".

2. Tracing His Footmarks for Establishing a New Lodge

(1) The First Stirring of His Passion for a New Lodge Establishment.
(2) Supposed Frequent Meetings for Establishing the New Lodge.

3. Resignation of Establishing the New Lodge

4. What urged him to such a devoted Freemason.

(1) The Status of Musicians Those Days
(2)　His experiences at Mannheim-Paris Travel

5. Mozart and His Catholic Piety

1. Mozart's Masonic Experiences

In the first place, I would like to touch briefly on Mozart's relationship with Freemasons before 1784, when he became the member of the lodge "Beneficence" in Vienna.
I would like to show you at first that Mozart had a fairly long history of frequent connections with Freemasons before he joined the lodge. These abundant connections would suggest that Mozart had joined "Beneficence"not merely by the fashion or popularity of Freemasonry that time but had joined it with his firm belief on Freemasonry based on his long experiences.
Next, I would like to show you all Mozart's Masonic footmarks after he joined the lodge that I could gather. Here, I would like to suggest that Mozart was a stalwart Freemason considering from his so many devoted activities for Freemasonry.
Now let us move to the subject.

(1) His Personal Contacts with Freemasons before joining the lodge "Beneficence"

It probably was the first time for Mozart to have a connection with Freemason when he was commissioned "Bastien und Bastienne" (K.50=46b) in 1767 from Dr. Anton Mesmer, a famous freemason that time.
After that Mozart's family and Mesmer's family kept good relationship for a long time.
In 1778, Leopold received a letter from Anton's uncle Joseph Conrad Mesmer in which Joseph wrote why Leopold would not send Mozart to Vienna for Mesmer's care.
And in March 1781, Mozart visited Mesmer's villa first as soon as he arrived in Vienna.
These facts prove that both families kept good relationship for a long time.
In 1772, he was commissioned to compose " O heiliges Band" (K.148=125h) from Johannes Lodge in Regensburg.
In spite of the existence of these facts, I suppose that Mozart had not a strong awareness toward Freemasonry by 1772.
　
However, things were different when he was commissioned to compose " Two chorus and five intermezzi for King Thamos in Egypt" (K.173d) from Baron Tobias von Gebler in 1773.
According to Katharine Thomson,

"The theme of this 'King Thamos' is the conflict of power between good and evil, between light and darkness. And the story indicated the victory of goodness embodied by an enlightening monarch. Masonic context were shown in the scene settled in Egypt and the service for adoration of the sun goddess."

Mozart would have elaborately read this play script since this script was so long as Mozart had to compose about 45 minutes for it. (The first edition was lost. But we can guess so from his second edition( K.345=336a) in 1779 which was full of solemn and magnificent melodies.)
Mozart would have fully recognized Freemasonry idea that time, though we cannot say decisively that he sympathized with the idea that time.

Like this, Mozart already had his experience with Freemasonry thought in his Salzburg era, but the most important experience as to his awareness toward Freemasonry was his Mannheim-Paris travel in 1777 and 1778.
When he started on this journey, he was already 21 years old. He has already reached to the age of understanding some thought, or being influenced by some thought.
Just around that age, he traveled to the enlightened cities, Mannheim and Paris. It was not the travel to such conservative cities as Vienna and Italian cities.

Through this travel, he became acquainted with many Masons both in Mannheim and Paris.
In addition, he could find by his own eyes that musicians in such enlightened city as Mannheim received far more kind treatment and high income than the conservative city Salzburg. He, at the same time, could know that open market for musicians had already existed in such advanced city as Paris.
These facts attracted Mozart very much, to say nothing of.

During this travel, the unforgettable thing for Mozart would have been the fact that the courts, both in Munich and Mannheim, were cold enough not to hire Mozart as their court musician.
We also know that, before this travel, both courts in Lombardia and Vienna turned their cold shoulders to Mozart and did not show any sign to hire him.
Therefore, at the time when he was refused to be a court musician at Mannheim court, he must have felt keenly that the Establishment were after all by no means on his side..

On the other hand, it was Masons in Mannheim and Paris who welcomed Mozart warmly.
In Mannheim, he got acquainted with Christian Cannabich (the court conductor), Johann Baptist Wendling (the court flutist) and Friedrich Ramm (the court oboist), and Otto Heinrich von Gemmingen (a dramatist, later he became the leader of the lodge "Beneficence" which Mozart joined in 1784), Wolfgang Heribert von Dalberg (the director of Mannheim National Theater) and so on. In addition, he could get to know Christoph Martin Wieland who happened to visit Mannheim that time. They were all Freemasons or Illuminati.

They supported Mozart both physically and spiritually during his stay in Mannheim.
Cannabich invited Mozart to his house almost everyday. Wendling offered Mozart to take his meals at his house at noon and in the evening everyday.
Moreover, Wendling kindly suggested Mozart and his mother to transfer to Serrarius's house where the rent was free in exchange for piano lesson to his daughter. He also brought Mozart a commissioned work for several flute music by 200 florins from Dejean, a Dutch doctor who happened to visit Mannheim that time.

In addition, Wendling encouraged Mozart teaching that Mozart could set himself up in his business independently in Paris by composing symphonies and by piano lessons, even if he were not hired by the court in Paris. And he let Mozart know the market price of composing a symphony and piano lesson in Paris. Mozart, who was depressed being rejected by Munich and Mannheim court, probably became full of spirit to hear that.
Finally Wendling and Ramm kindly offered Mozart to take him to Paris with them.
Thus he was welcomed warmly by Masons in Mannheim while on the other hand he was coldly treated by the Establishment.

Things were quite the same in Paris.
Mozart was treated very coldly by the aristocracy in Paris who belonged to the Establishment.
For example, Duchess de Chabot let Mozart play piano in her cold room without burning fire in stove, but she was doing dessin all the time dealing with her male friends while Mozart was playing.
At that time Mozart felt that he was completely disregarded by this lady.
At another opportunity, he composed "The concerto for flute and harp" (K.299=297c) for duke de Guines and he at the same time has been teaching her daughter how to compose. However, this duke would not pay the promised fees for composition and lesson. This French noble man made fool of young German composer and tried to cheat Mozart.

In Paris, he had not visited the court at last during his six months stay there. Probably his feeling, that any court will not be on his side after all, made him lose to visit the court.
Yes, he had already lost his passion to be a court musician. This can be explained by the fact he refused to accept the job of the Versailles court organist, which a horn player Rudolph brought for Mozart. His father Leopold strongly suggested his son to accept the job. However, he did not accept it in the end saying excuses this and that to his father. Probably he had become disgusted with the Establishment around that time.

On the other hand, there were persons in Paris who were kind to Mozart. They were also Freemasons or enlightened persons.
Baron Grimm was the guarantor of Mozart in Paris, accepting Leopold's eager requests.
He was not a Mason, but had deep thought on the Enlightenment thought having close connection with Diderot and Voltaire. He was once in charge of the secretary of Duc d'Orleans who established the grand lodge in Paris.
Mozart rent a room of Grimm's lover d'Epinay. It is also very famous that this lady opened her salon where many enlightened persons in Paris gathered.

In Paris, Mozart had frequent connections with Joseph Legros who was the director of the Concert Spirituell. Thanks to Legros, the " Symphony No.31 (Paris) " (K297=300a) was successfully performed at the concert.
He met Gossec as well in Paris. Gossec highly appreciated Mozart's chorus music and strongly recommended it to Legros. Mozart wrote in his letter to Leopold that he became very intimate with Gossec. Needless to say, Legros and Gossec were both Freemasons.

As described above, Mozart had many unpleasant experiences in Paris and he often fell in gloomy mood. At such time, Wilhelm Graf Sickingen, the Pfarz ambassador to Paris, was Mozart's relief there. According to his letter to Leopold, he often visited Sickingen and spent 9 hours there every time when he visited.
Mozart had no acquaintance with Sickingen before, but it was Cannabich and Gemmingen in Mannheim who wrote the introduction letter to Sickingen. He was also a Freemason.

Thus, Mozart was welcomed and supported by Masons in Mannheim and Paris though the courts and aristocracy treated him coldly.
We can not decidedly say if he were put the Enlightenment thought into his head by those persons, or he positively learned it by himself during his travel to Mannheim and Paris. However, we can surely say that the fact he was given a warm helping hand by Masons was printed clearly to his memory.

About two years after this Mannheim-Paris travel, he deserted Salzburg permanently and moved to Vienna. At his earlier Vienna era, he lived his life being surrounded and supported by Masons and Illuminati.
Soon after he started his life in Vienna, he was commissioned to compose an opera " Die Entführung aus dem Serail " (K.384).
His partner (scriptwriter) was Gottlieb Stephanie who was a Mason in Vienna. The tenor Johann Valentin Adamberger, who was given the roll of Belmonte at the first performance of this opera in Vienna, was also a Freemason, the member of "Crowned Hope".
Mozart had good friendships with those two for many years in his Vienna life.
Mozart's first piano pupil in Vienna was Countess Rumbeke. She was a cousin of deputy premier Cobenzl who was once a member of Illuminati. Mozart was loved much by this deputy premier.

It is well known that Maria Wilhelmine Reichsgräfin Thun-Hochenstein opened her salon in Vienna, where many illuminated persons gathered.
She was very fond of music and invited Mozart often to her residence to hear his piano playing. Sometime she offered her piano for Mozart's concert.
It is said that Mozart got acquainted with van Swieten (Illuminati) and Joseph von Sonnenfels ( member of the lodge "True Harmony" and was an Illuminato before) here in Maria Wilhelmine's salon.

Van Swieten held matinee concerts on every Sunday, and Mozart attended the concert every time. Swieten was the Vienna ambassador in many countries in Europe, and he had collected baroque music scores on a massive scale during his ambassador era.
Mozart borrowed these baroque music scores from Swieten and studied them hard in his house.

Mozart who became a free musician in Vienna often held concerts by subscription as one of his means to make his living.These concerts were successful every time.
He proudly wrote all names of 174 subscribers in his letter to Leopold on March 20, 1784 (Unlike nowadays, 174 subscribers were great that day).
According to some research, about 40 persons among 174 were Freemasons in Vienna. Moreover, we can know by this name list that important Masons in every Vienna lodge had become the member of the subscriber.

Like this, Mozart was surrounded and supported by Masons at his early stage in Vienna.
The existence of the court and church had gone off into the distance from Mozart's view.
When we discuss about Mozart as a Freemason, it is very important for us to have this viewpoint that Mozart had such long experienced contacts with Freemasons before joining the lodge "Beneficence".

(2) His Masonic Activities after becoming the Member of the lodge "Beneficence"

As Mozart has had such long experience of keeping company with Masons and Illuminati, there was no wonder for him to have joined the lodge "Beneficence" willingly by his own decision.
He applied to be a member of the lodge "Beneficence" and was accepted on December 14,1784.
The lodge was established in 1783 as a spin-off from "Crowned Hope", and the Master was Otto von Gemmingen with whom Mozart had already gotten acquainted in Mannheim.

This lodge was the youngest among eight lodges in Vienna, but was taking great stride. The number of the member was 32 in 1784, however it hiked up to nearly 70 in 1785.
A distinctive feature of this lodge was that it did not have many noble men.
The jobs of the members in 1785 were administrative official (29 men), university professor (8 men), churchman (7 men), artist (6 men), military officer (4 men), merchant and banker (4 men), handicraftsman (3 men), doctor (2 men), and others (6 men).

Another feature of this lodge was that their guiding principle was based on promoting charity.
They valued the Enlightenment thought and had the chapel in common with the lodge "True Harmony".
At the end of 1785, this lodge was obliged to be put together by the imperial ordinance and had to start afresh as the lodge "New Crowned Hope" together with other two lodges .


Now let us take a look at how Mozart acted in and for this association.
I summarized his Masonic activities below.

Above are all Mozart's Masonic footmarks that I gathered from books published in Japan.
As shown in this table, Mozart had been doing a variety of Masonic activities.

As to the meetings, Mozart attended not only the meetings of the lodge "Beneficence" but also those of the lodge "True Harmony"frequently in 1785.
The lodge "True Harmony" where Ignaz von Born and Joseph von Sonnenfels belonged was the leading lodge rich in Enlightenment thought that time in Vienna, and Mozart had good relationships with them. Mozart therefore willingly visited the lodge "True Harmony" again and again.

The actual number of his attendance to the meeting during these seven years would have been far more larger than the table. That guess comes from the fact that Viennese lodges had hidden and scrapped their documents from the time when they suffered from the persecution by the secret police which supposedly started after the imperial ordinance in December 1785.

His eagerness to Freemasonry can be seen not only his attendance to both lodges but also in other aspects below.
One is that he persuaded a number of persons to join the association since he was so deeply devoted to this party. One of those was his father Leopold, who happened to visit Vienna to make sure of his son's success by his own eyes. By his son's strong suggestion, Leopold joined the lodge "Beneficence" in April 1785 where his son Mozart had already belonged .
Leopold was promoted to "the degree of Master Mason" within a month. This was based on the rule of Freemasonry that prompt promotions should be considered in response to traveler's circumstances.

Not only his father but also Mozart eagerly recommended Joseph Haydn to join Freemasonry.
Haydn accepted Mozart's advice and joined the lodge "True Harmony" in January 1785.
However, after the joining, he somehow did neither attended the meeting nor composed for this association.
Hofdemel, who was the secretary of Vienna supreme trial court, was also the person to whom Mozart invited to join the association. It is well known that Hofdemel was the man who loaned 100 florins to Mozart at his trip to Sachsen in 1789, and his wife Maria Magdalena was Mozart's piano pupil.

Now secondly, Mozart greatly contributed to the association by his music activities.
As shown in above table, not only he composed many songs and cantatas for the association which were full of Freemason spirits, but also he contributed by showing his piano performances.
His music full of Freemason spirits were not restricted to those offered to the association.
In 1791, he composed the famous Freemason opera "Die Zauberflöte" and performed it in the presence of common people in Vienna. Yes, he wanted to demonstrate Freemason spirits widely to Viennese.

Apart from Masonic cantatas and opera, Masonic symbolism can be seen even in his ordinary composing, according to Katharine Thomson.
She pointed out that the number of such music comes up to 90, for example , the symphonies No.39 to 41(K.543, 550, 551), the piano concerto No.20(K.466) and the string quartet(K.458).

He showed his piano performance in response to the request from Masonic lodges. Sometimes he played piano for the financial support for Freemason brothers.

The third is that his Masonic activities had not restricted only in Vienna.
As described before, he had many acquaintances with brother Masons outside of Vienna.
He had been to Prague three times in his Vienna era. Every time when he went to Prague. he was sure to visit the lodge "Truth and Concord". He met many important Masonic persons there, the state of which will be described soon later.
At the opportunity traveling to Sachsen, he met such Masons as Johann Gottlieb Nauman in Dresden who was the member of the lodge "Golden Apple" and Karl Engel in Leipzig as well.
In other aspect, he willingly accepted to compose a cantata for the Regensburg lodge in 1791.

Like this, Mozart had been doing a variety of Masonic activities and it continued up to his death.
However, everyone can easily notice from above table that Mozart's Masonic activities seems to be concentrated both in 1785 and the second half of 1791.
His Masonic activities during 1786 to the first half of 1791 seems as if they had become thin or cooled down. During the term, his attendance to the meeting seems to be less and less. He did not compose a music at all for this association during these five and a half years.

Why was that ? This has been an enigma on Mozart's attitude toward Freemasonry, I think.
As to this phenomenon, many persons thought that Mozart probably became cooled down toward Freemasonry. But, in my view, it was not. If so, why could he revive his devoted activities again in the second half of 1791?

In my view, Mozart was so busy for his attempt to establish his new lodge during these terms, therefore he could not contribute to the lodge "New Crowned Hope".
I mean that he was very busy for planning for the establishment of a new lodge, gathering members for it, collecting money and holding frequent meetings and finally the winding up for his project during the term, and then he could neither pay enough attention nor contribute to his lodge "New Crowned Hope".
This would have been the possible reason why he did neither compose nor play for the lodge "New Crowned Hope" for five and a half years.
However, he always had his enthusiasm to Freemasonry in his mind and had never lost it. And then , after his completion of the winding up for his unrealized project, he showed his energetic Freemasonry activities again from July 1791.

Now, I must move to next description to verify my opinion that Mozart was attempting to establish a new lodge during 1786 to 1791.

2. Tracing His Footmarks for Establishing a New Lodge

(1) The First Stirring of His Passion for a New Lodge Establishment.

After becoming the member of the lodge "Beneficence", Mozart had been very energetic in his Masonic activities for a year.
However, unexpected thing happened to Vienna Freemasonry at the end of 1785. It was an imperial ordinance which shocked Mozart as well as Viennese Masons.

1785

An imperial ordinance was officially announced on December 11,1785. It was an ordinance regarding administration of Freemasonry in Vienna.
This ordinance prescribed that the number of lodges in Vienna should be three or less, and the new lodges should submit their member lists and the minutes of the proceedings periodically to the police.
It was obvious that the purpose of this imperial ordinance aimed to control Freemasonry in Vienna under the Establishment.
By this ordinance, the "Crowned Hope" combined with the lodges "Beneficence" and "Three Flames", and they formed a new lodge "New Crowned Hope". Tobias Philipp von Gebler became the Master of this new lodge.
On the other hand, the lodge "True Harmony" combined with the lodges "Palm Tree" and "Three Eagles", and they newly organized a new lodge "Truth". Ignaz von Born became the Master of this lodge.
Other two lodges, the lodges "Perseverance" and "St. Joseph", dissolved that time.

This ordinance had great impact not only on Freemasonry in Vienna but also on Mozart himself.
Many Masonic brothers left their lodges that time. Such high-powered Freemasons as Sonnenfels and Gemmingen left their lodges that time too.
It is said that the number of Masons in Vienna decreased from 950 in 1785 to 350 in 1786.
Here, we should pay careful attention to this fact. That is, about two thirds of Viennese Freemasons left their lodges and stopped to be Masons that tine.
Nevertheless, Mozart did not quit his lodge. He remained to be a Freemason up to his death.
This tells us that his faith to Freemasonry was not flippant but was firm.
This viewpoint is important when we discuss Mozart as a Freemason.

The ordinance brought confusion into Freemasonry in another aspect.
The character of the new lodge was obliged to change largely by this ordinance, since the new lodge became the mixture of previous three lodges.
It is allegedly said that the character of the lodge "Beneficence" was rich in the Enlightenment thought, and therefore was full of rationalism.
While on the other hand, the lodge "Crowned Hope" had deep concerns with alchemy and mysticism which were descended from the Rose-Cross, and they were in the opposite side to rationalism. On top of it, there were many noble men in the lodge "Crowned Hope" whom Mozart disliked .
Things were like that, the newly born lodge "New Crowned Hope" was as if bitter enemies in the same boat.
Mozart must have been unsatisfied with such new lodge.

I guess that this was the possible incentive for Mozart to have had an attempt to establish his own lodge. Yes, he sincerely loved Freemasonry itself, but he could not put up with the character of his new lodge which was compelled to merge by government force.
Though Mozart had become disgusted with the new lodge, more time was necessary for him to start his project.

1786

The memorial party for celebrating the start of the lodge "New Crowned Hope" was held on January 14, 1786. Opening ode (K.483) and Closing ode (K.484) were performed at the party, but Mozart was absent from it. He sent a letter in advance in which he described that he could not attend the party due to serious toothache and stomach cramps.
As to this Mozart's action, I doubt if the writing in his letter were an excuse for him not to attend the party. This may be my shrewd guess, but I suppose that Mozart showed his rejection to the new lodge whose members and character were reformed forcibly by the ordinance.

In line with the imperial ordinance, a campaign trying to weaken the influence of Freemasonry arose in Vienna around that time.
Many anonymous pamphlets to slander Viennese Freemasonry as well as Illuminati were scattered here and there in Vienna.
It turned out later that the anonymous writer was Alois Hoffmann who once was a secretary of the lodge "Beneficence". He had become a betrayer after that.
He denounced Illuminati as a party to plot against Christianity and to attempt to remodel Freemasonry to an awful political association. He denounced as well Freemasonry as an association enchanted by world-compatriotism and the Enlightenment thought.
Thanks to the penetration of this campaign, Freemasonry in Vienna became to be hated among Viennese gradually.

This campaign probably shocked Mozart. But more impact struck him too.
That was Born, who was the Master of the lodge "Truth" and was very intimate with Mozart, left his lodge this year due to internal strife.
Mozart must have worried that Vienna Freemasonry would become more and more shrunken by intensive governmental control for one thing, and losing powerful leader like Born for the other.

Under such circumstances, there supposedly came a sign of establishing a new lodge in his mind those days. He must have thought that he should gather like-minded people and establish a new lodge to avoid the decline of Freemasonry power.
Within the regulation of the ordinance, one more lodge other than the lodges "New Crowned Hope" and "Truth" was allowed to exist. The founder of a new lodge was not restricted to noble man nor scholar as "St. Joseph" was founded by an opera singer Schmid. Then there was no problem for Mozart to establish a new lodge in Vienna.

Though I wrote like this, there are, to be sure, no clear evidences to verify that Mozart had such idea those days. However, things show a little different from next year and we are likely to have clues in his letters.


(2) Supposed Frequent Meetings for Establishing a New Lodge.

1787

Thanks to the frantic popularity of "Le nozze di Figaro" in Prague, Mozart was invited to Prague in 1787 as its composer.
He arrived there on January 11, 1787 and stayed for a month. During his stay in Prague, he met many Masons and often visited the lodge "Truth and Concord".
On January 15,1787, he sent a letter to Gottfried von Jacquin who was a Mozart's intimate friend in Vienna. By this letter we can know that Mozart had met such high rank Masons in Prague as Count Canal who was the founder of the lodge "Truth and Concord" and Father Unger, the deputy director of the association. In that letter, he at first stated how he was welcomed and how he was busy in Prague. And then, in the midst of his letter, the following curious sentence suddenly appears.

" Now, I will pay my respects to you, my most beloved friend, most beloved Hinkitihonky ! - That is your name probably you have already known. We thought of new names during this travel and gave the names to our friends. Let me show you them. I , Punkutititi. My wife,Shapurapumfa. Hofer, Rozuca=Pumpa. Stadler, Narchibinichibi ................"

Here I did not quote all his paragraph, but he created eleven strange names in total and gave them to his friends one by one.

The question is why he thought of such strange names. With regard to this, Alfred Einstein described like this.

" It probably is no use to smell out the deep meaning of the names given to his brothers/sisters. It would have been very interesting for Mozart to create those strange names, but we can explain the reason why he created such strange names only when we recognize of Mozart's parody."

It is true that he partly had such character in his mind.
His "Ein Musikalischer Spass"(K.522) and letters to Bäsle (Maria Anna Thekla Mozart ) would be the samples or expressions of that character.
However, he had not necessarily disclosed such funny character to everyone thoughtlessly.
He really was, as shown in many letters, the man who valued his honor and appearance above everything. Jacquin was not the man to whom Mozart made a joke carelessly, but the most beloved and reliable friend to Mozart in Vienna.

Now, my question is whether Mozart let Jacquin know such meaningless names just from his parody, or not. Mozart was almost 31 years old that time. And then, it is difficult for us to understand that such a sensible grown-up made play on words in the letter to his serious friend.

If not, what do we think ?
This may be a mere guess, but I think that Mozart had already had an idea of establishing a new lodge in his mind at that moment. That is, he was thinking in his mind of applying pseudonyms to the supposed members of his own lodge, which was to be established in near future.

It is well known that Illuminati had its own pseudonyms as well as their own calendar, which only the members could distinguish. I know that Vienna Freemasonry had their own calendar, but I am not sure if they had such pseudonyms as well.
However, it is said that Mozart's name was written as A*** (probably Adam ) in the manuscript of the memorial service for Mozart held by "New Crowned Hope", and then I guess that pseudonyms were also common to Freemasonry in Vienna.

In line with this pseudonyms, next matter I want to talk with regard to Mozart's awareness about establishing a new lodge is the following short sentence written by Meißner.
This was introduced in the book "Musik und Freimaurerei, Mozart und die königliche Kunst"( Mozart and Freemasonry ) by Paul Nettl.
According to this book, Gottlieb August Meißner, who was the member of the lodge "Truth and Concord" in Prague, stated that Mozart often called at the lodge during the last several days of his stay in Prague. He left a record about Mozart's visit those days.

Later on, his grandson Alfred Meißner wrote a short story whose title was " A picture of Rococo". (This was published far later in 1871, more than 80 years after Mozart's Prague visit).
Based on his grandfather's record, Alfred wrote the following sentence.

"When he visited us last, the brothers was drawn up in two lines. The person was welcomed by the performance of his cantata 'Die Maurerfreude' (K.471) which was composed in honor of Born in 1785. This thoughtfulness impressed Mozart very much. He expressed his appreciation first and then said that he would soon pay his more splendid respects to Freemasonry. He meant 'Die Zauberflöte' which had already matured in his mind."

Although Alfred wrote like this, I personally have a strong question about the last sentence.
My question is that Alfred regarded "Die Zauberflöte" as " Mozart's more splendid respects to Freemasonry".
But I believe "his more splendid respects to Freemasonry" was not "Die Zauberflöte" but was a quite other thing - establishing a new Masonic lodge, in my view supposedly.

Here, the point is the time of the year when Mozart visited Prague, although Alfred wrote it as if it were the event in 1791. If this was the event in 1791, Mozart's more splendid respects to Freemasonry would have been "Die Zauberflöte" as Alfred described.
However, if this was the event in 1787 ( I strongly believe so), it must not have been "Die Zauberflöte"since Mozart of course did not have the plan to compose "Die Zauberflöte" in 1787.
Therefore to decide 'which occasion' is an important point to define what ' Mozart's more splendid respects to Freemasonry' was.

During his Vienna era, Mozart visited Prague three times- January 1787, October 1787 and September 1791.
There are two ways of interpretation of above "last"( I wrote it in Italic).
One is the last time of his Prague visit, which was in 1791. The other is the last time when he often visited the lodge during his stay in Prague in January 1787.
Though Alfred wrote this sentence as if it were at the event in 1791. However, I myself do not think so. I firmly believe it was the time when Mozart visited Prague in 1787.

Now let me describe the reasons why I think so.
As long as I read Nettl's book ( by translation in Japanese), this must have been the event in January 1787.
In that book, being based on Mozart's letter to Jacquin dated on January 15, 1787, Nettl touched on such Mozart's behaviors as meetings with Count Canal and Father Unger in January 1787. And then, without a break, Nettl quoted above Alfred's sentence.
Therefore those two ( Mozart's meeting with Canal and Unger, and Mozart's visit to the lodge) can be considered as coincidental events in January 1787.
If those two were the events at different time ( in 1787 and in 1791), probably Nettl would not have described those two at a breath, I suppose.

There is other reasons for me to think it was Mozart's visit in January 1787.
As to his last trip to Prague (1791), the travelling term was as short as two weeks. He passed very busy days during the term.
On August 28, 1791, he arrived at Prague. At that moment, the composition of "La clemenza di Tito"(K.621) was not yet completed. He was busy for composing it for several days after his arrival.
It is said that he could finish it five days before the performance.
The first performance of this opera was held on September 6,1791 and the second performance was given on September 7 or 8. It was likely that Mozart could not have enough time to visit the Prague lodge before the performance of his opera.
According to the material, after the performance of "La clemenza di Tito", he visited the lodge "Truth and Concord" on September 10. Then he appeared on the ball held at the National Theater on September 12. After that he left Prague hurriedly and came back to Vienna in mid September.

From this busy schedule, it was very difficult for Mozart to find out the chances for frequent visits to the lodge. I guess that probably Mozart could have visited the lodge only once, on September 10, in 1791.
Therefore, as long as Gottlieb stated "Mozart often called at the lodge during the last several days of his stay in Prague", I can not understand it as the event in 1791.
On the contrary, he stayed there for a month in January 1787, and then he could have visited the lodge very often.
This is my other ground to think it was the event in 1787.

My next ground to think so is that "Die Zauberflöte" had almost completed around mid September 1791. It was not the stage of "which had already matured in his mind", but reached to the stage of completion.
Then if his more splendid respects were "Die Zauberflöte", Mozart would have said the name of the opera in the presence of the member of "Truth and Concord"lodge.
But he did not. He only said more splendid respects vaguely. That was because his visiting was in 1787, when the idea of composing "Die Zauberflöte" was not yet in his mind, of course.

Therefore, I guess that the sentence "When he visited us last,...................... his more splendid respects to Freemasonry." originated in the record by Gottlieb August Meißner, while the sentence "He meant 'Die Zauberflöte' which had already matured in his mind."was written supposedly by Alfred as his own thought.
In another words, Gottlieb probably did not left his record in which Mozart's more splendid respects meant "Die Zauberflöte", but his grandson Alfred thought of it afterwards at his discretion when he wrote his book, I suppose.

From above, I am afraid that Alfred probably made two mistakes in writing his book. One is he took Mozart's visit for the event in 1791. The other is, consequently he combined Mozart's more splendid respects to "Die Zauberflöte".
However, according to my thought, it was the event in 1787 and it was not "Die Zauberflöte"

Then, what did Mozart mean for his more splendid respects to Freemasonry in the meeting of 1787, unless it was "Die Zauberflöte" ?
I myself believe that he meant his new lodge in his mind that moment. But he could not clearly mention it in the presence of the brothers in Prague, since it was merely the stage of his idea that time.


In October 1787, he made the second trip to Prague to perform "Don Giovanni "(K.527) which was commissioned by a promoter Pasquale Bondini during his first visit there. Mozart started Vienna on October 1, 1787.
During his stay in Prague, Mozart sent his letters to Jacquin this time too. However, unlike the previous visit, we can not find any clue of his contact with Masons in his letters. But we find an incomprehensive sentence again in his letter to Jacquin dated on November 4,1787.
It reads as follows.

"People here pester me eagerly to stay here for more several months and to write another opera. The offer is very attractive to me, to be sure, however I can not accept it."

He did not write any reason why he could not accept that attractive offer. But this is a very curious story when thinking about Mozart's situation in 1787.
As mentioned earlier, Viennese had turned the cold shoulder on Mozart by this time. As a result, he could neither appear on the theater stage nor be invited to any of Vienna nobility as a pianist. He could accept a commissioned work only from Prague (Don Giovanni) this year, but nothing from Vienna. Then Mozart's income consequently must have dropped that year.

Remember that it was this April when he had to transfer to a cheap apartment house in Landstrasse (whose rent was only 50 florins a year) from the gorgeous Figarohaus(rent was 460 florins a year).
At this moment, he was not yet appointed to the court musician (it realized December 7 this year).
And then he had not yet owned salaried job that time.

Things were like that, his letter seems more and more incomprehensive.
If he accepted their proposal, he could have surely earned more 1,000 florins, assuming its term were the same as that of "Don Giovanni"( composition fee plus income from one performance ). Moreover, in case he stayed there much longer, he could have earned a considerable amount of money by holding several times of piano concert there.

But, strangely enough, he did not. He left Prague on November 12 or 13, and went back to Vienna soon. Why was that ?
In his letter to Jacquin, he did not open the reason why he did not accept the proposal. Then we should try to find out the reason.
Was it the reason on his music job in Vienna ?
No, it surely was not. As described above, there was no reason for him to go back soon to Vienna on his business reason because he had no schedule for appearing on stage. Then what was it ?

I guess that it probably was an appointment for some meeting in Vienna what drove him to go back soon to Vienna.
The appointment had already made in Vienna before his departure to Prague, and was not a person to person promise, but probably was a meeting by many persons, I guess.
Moreover, he was not one of the attendants, but was the chairperson of the meeting. Then he had to come back to Vienna at any cost,.
Yes, he was to open the first meeting of a new lodge establishment somewhere in Vienna, I guess.

I consider like above because his incomprehensive loan from Puchberg started soon after, in next half in 1788, which seemed to be for his project to establish a new Masonic lodge.
Yes, Mozart rallied like-minded people and started its kick-off meetings at the end of 1787, and the project started at around the first half of 1788.- This is my thought.

As to the reason why he quickly retuned to Vienna from Prague, there was a plausible opinion connecting this to Gluck's death. But there was no possibility, I think.
The opinion says someone informed imminent Gluck's death to Mozart and he returned to Vienna.
However, Mozart was writing this letter to Jacquin more than 10days before Gluck's death (It took place November 15 by a sudden stroke while driving). Who and for what purpose did someone inform the news on Gluck to Mozart as early as about two weeks before his death ?
It is true that Mozart was appointed as a court musician on December 7, 1787. But he was not the successor of Gluck ( the court composer, annually paid 2,000 florins). The difference of the title names and salaries prove this.
Gluck's death and the appointment of Mozart to a court musician took place at neighboring time. However, these two have nothing to do with each other.

Here we should remember the fact that he received another 1,000 florins from Nannerl at the end of 1787. It was his share for Leopold's inheritance after the negotiation between Nannerl and Mozart.
Mozart asked the money to be sent to Puchberg in a bill of exchange, not to his bank account. Why did he asked Nannerl to do so ? We should detect the meaning.
It is evident that Mozart did not want let Constanze know the existence of such money. Therefore he asked Nannerl to send it not to a bank but to Puchberg. Yes, my guess is that the money was secretly reserved by Mozart for his project ( the establishing of a new lodge ) since he needed to have free money without Constanze's interference

1788

As described in the previous chapter, his estimated income this year was more than 2,000 florins.
He could now expect the salary from the court. Moreover the income from " Don Giovanni " in Prague would have benefited his life at least for the first half of this year. Constanze had not yet suffered from her disease this year. There was no fear for him to live his life comfortably.
Yet he asked loans to Puchberg again and again, and probably asked to Lichnowsky after that.
These were, of course, not for the sake of expenses for his ordinary living, but supposedly for the Masonic meeting expenses.

However, we can not find any document regarding his supposed meetings. And then I can not describe the details - its frequency, the names of the member, and the place of the meetings as well as the subjects discussed at the meeting. But I am sure the meetings must have been held very frequently.
These frequent meetings would have called for a sizable amount of money.
Supposed uses of money that Mozart borrowed from Puchberg and Lichnowsky might have been the rent of the meeting room, lightening and heating expenses, eating and drinking at the meetings, and various costs for printed matter, travel expenses, purchase of furniture and ceremonial tools, etc..

After the establishment of lodge, they can collect such money from their members as an entrance fee and monthly membership fee ( There is an investigation that, the entrance fee was 50 florins, monthly membership fee was 1 florin, and the payment of 20 and 35 florins was necessary at the promotion to the second degree and the third degree respectively in some Masonic lodge in Vienna those days.). Then the necessary expenses for maintaining Masonic lodge could be covered by such member's fee.
However, before the establishment, someone must bear the expenses. Mozart, as the chairperson, of course had to bear the expenses. Then he had to be busily engaged in gathering money.

He prepared above mentioned 1,000 florins for the present. However, after the meetings with his brothers, he might have realized that much sizable amount of money would be necessary in near future for promoting the project. Then he asked Puchberg in June, 1788 to loan 1,000 to 2,000 florins with a long term repayment ( one to two years) .


Though we digress from the main subject, I would like to touch here on the following with respect to Mozart's debts, which I have forgotten to write in Chapter-1, Mozart's Debts.

The first is why Puchberg did not lend as Mozart required, the second is whether Mozart had paid his effort to make money by himself or not, and the third is his curious loan to Stadler.

It is true that brother Puchberg supported Mozart well financially.
However, he did not necessarily respond to all Mozart's requirements any time. He usually loaned less money than Mozart asked. Why was that ?
Was it because he was stingy ? - Probably it was not.
He was in charge of the accountant of the lodge "Truth" and then he knew well how much money was necessary for the meeting expenses. He always considered that money asking by Mozart was
overestimated. Then, judging the circumstance carefully, he loaned money which he thought the amount would be enough for Mozart .

As to the second item, Mozart must have paid his own effort for making money, not only relying upon loans. I guess that his composition of the famous three symphonies would have been that expression.
We know that Mozart's last three symphonies (K. 543, K. 550, K. 551) were composed in 1788.
It is also famous that these were composed during incredibly short terms. The finishing dates for the composition were June 26 for K. 543, July 25 for K. 550 and August 10 for K. 551.
But we do not know for what purpose these symphonies were composed.
There was no sign that he was commissioned an urgent order by someone for the coming music season. And so he did not need to hurry in composing. Yet, he composed them in a very hurry.
Then what was the reason for him to hasten the composition ?

I myself pay close attention to those dates.
What I want to say is that the timing of composition is just after Puchberg's refusal toward Mozart's big request (1,000 to 2,000 florins) in 1788.
Yes, Mozart was in difficulty for making money after Puchberg's refusal. And then he must have tried to make money by himself.
His idea was to compose three symphonies in a hurry and let some music publisher in Vienna buy those music scores at a considerable amount of money, I guess.
At that time this was his only one way to make large amount of money since he has been neither commissioned to compose an opera nor was invited to the theater to play piano for a long time in Vienna.
I suppose that these three symphonies must have been written under such background. In another word, these were composed for making money for his Masonic activities, I believe.
In spite of his strong wish, however, music publisher in Vienna who could buy a down-and-out musician's music scores did not appear. Then he finally had to ask help to Lichnowsky.

Now let me touch on this subject a little more.
The reason why I think these composition have relevance to his Masonic activities is that each symphony contains Masonic suggestions in itself as Einstein and Thomson have pointed out.
At that time Mozart was fully absorbed in his Masonic activities and was always captured by Freemasonry thought. That was why he composed "three"symphonies at a time ( we know "three" is one of Masonic symbolism) and expressed Masonic suggestions deeply in each symphony.

Nowadays it becomes our common recognition that these three symphonies must have been played somewhere in Vienna while Mozart was alive. That was because G minor symphony (K. 550) was revised after the first edition and clarinet part was newly added at that revision. The premise that Mozart did not make revision his own music without hearing the performance of the music by himself is the basis for the recognition. I myself fully agree with this opinion.

However, curiously enough, we can find no evidence anywhere that these symphonies were performed in Vienna. When and where were these symphonies played ?
As to this, my guess is that these symphonies must have been performed in the presence of Freemason brothers somewhere in Vienna (probably at the hall of New Crowned Hope ) at around year end of 1788 or the beginning of 1789.
After hearing his own music at that concert, Mozart realized that adding clarinet, which was the symbolic instrument for Freemasonry as well as bassethorn, to G minor symphony would be more appropriate. And then he remade it.
There was a possibility that such record has been registered in some Freemasonry document. However, I suppose that the document was destroyed by Freemasonry themselves together with other document to keep their secret forever.

Lastly, I would like to describe my opinion on the curious Mozart's loan to Anton Stadler.
According to the inheritance records, 500 florins of Mozart's loan to Stadler had existed.
It seems very curious that Mozart had vast amount of debts on one side, but had loan on the other.
Probably the fund of this 500 florins came from Mozart's borrowing from Lichnowsky in 1788.
The character of this loan was not private loan from Mozart to Stadler, but must have been the money Mozart handed to Stadler in advance for his activity-expenses in helping Mozart's project since Stadler helped Mozart establish a new lodge as Constanze stated..

When we take a look at this item in Mozart's inheritance records, we find the curious words "without liability" there. Why this loan was without liability ?
I believe this words surely mean that this is not a loan based on private basis.
Mozart did not have mind to ask to repay to Stadler from the beginning. Because the money itself was not for Stadler's private use, but for his Masonic activity-expenses handed from Mozart in helping his project.
I myself believe this is the real meaning of "without liability ". If not, I would like to ask what the real meaning of "without liability" was.

In addition, if we regard this loan on private basis, the story became quite confusing.
That is, there remained the fact that Mozart sent his immortal music work "Clarinet Concerto "(K. 622) to Stadler just two months before his death. What was the meaning of this present ?
It surely was Mozart's expression of his thanks to Stadler's assistance for Mozart project.
Now, if we assume this loan was private basis, do we say that Mozart presented such splendid work to such ungrateful Stadler who would not repay his debt to Mozart ? - Probably not.
Mozart must have presented this to express his thanks to Stadler for his many assistance.
The same meaning can be applied as well to his masterwork "Clarinet Quintet"(K. 581) composed in 1789.

1789

During January to March in 1789, Mozart was busy for composing dance music for Vienna court and arrangement of Handel's "Messiah" commissioned by Swieten.
However, in early April this year, he suddenly traveled to Sachsen together with brother Lichnowsky about which I described in the previous chapter.
It has been said for a long time that the purpose of this trip was for the solution of his poverty.
However, considering many curiosities and/or enigmas described below, I can not support this opinion at all.

The first strangeness was their itinerary.
Mozart and Lichnowsky left Vienna on April 8. They visited Dresden first and then headed for Potsdam. However, they did not directly head for Potsdam.
As to this, Solomon says," Potsdam was located 160 km ahead of Dresden. They did not head for Potsdam directly, but they went by a roundabout way through Leipzig ( this was 100 km roundabout), from where more 120 km was left to Potsdam."
He arrived at Leipzig on April 20 and stayed there for three days. But he did not hold a concert that time ( The open concert he held in Leipzig was on May 12 at his second visit there ). We can not know Mozart's movements in Leipzig as well as why they went to Leipzig that time. What was the reason for their roundabout ?

There were also other curiosities as to his itinerary.
Mozart spent two months for this trip. However, he only had two times open concert, in Dresden and Leipzig. He stayed at Potsdam for 10 days and Berlin for 9 days. But he had no concert there.
In addition, his movements there were quite obscure.
If this travel were for the sake of making money due to his poverty, why didn't he open his concert more frequently ?
I believe only twice open concerts reveals in a sense that the real purpose of this trip was not for the resolution of his poverty.

As I explained earlier, it was sure that Mozart had to repay some of his debt to Lichnowsky around that time. Then, one of his purpose for this travel would have been making money for repayment.
Probable another reason might have existed in his Masonic activities.
Though I wrote like this, it is true that only dim evidences were left to prove Mozart' Masonic activities there.

As to his Masonic activities during this travel, Braunbehrens described that " Mozart wrote his letter to Puchberg in Leipzig. It is considered that Mozart let Puchberg know in the letter that he had visited a lodge in Leipzig. But the letter was lost."
The lost letter was his letter to Puchberg dated on April 28. We can know this fact in his letter to Constanze (May 16,1789).
Braunbehrens describes as well that presumably he also visited lodges on his other travels, especially during his stay in Berlin in April and May 1789.

On the other hand, his letter to Constanze on April 13 let us know that he had met Johann Gottlieb Nauman, who was the Kapellmeister of Dresden Court and was a Freemason ( the member of "Golden Apple").
One more probable evidence which proved Mozart's contact with another Mason is that he met Karl Emanuel Engel, a Sachsen court organist, in Leipzig on May 16 and left his signature " For the token of innocent friendship and brother's love. Kapellmeister Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart " in Engel's commemorative notebook.
Though we can find only a few instances to prove Mozart's contacts with Masons there, that might have been one of his purpose to visit Sachsen.

As to other strangeness about this travel, an incomprehensive thing happened during their trip.
They could not have the audience by Prussian King at Potsdam on April 26,as described before. Then they went back to Leipzig again and arrived there on May 8. But it was a month later, on May 26 in Berlin, when Mozart actually could have the audience by the King.
This fact clearly proves that detailed plans for this trip were not made in advance. That suggested that the purpose of this trip was the solution of his poverty.

One more curious thing is that Lichnowsky suddenly left Leipzig on the way of their trip and went back to Vienna leaving Mozart alone there. What happened to Lichnowsky ?
There probably existed the following background in my opinion..

After their departure, a shocking incident for Freemasons had taken place in Vienna.
The lodge "Truth" to which Lichnowsky belonged suddenly submitted their dissolution to the government during April ( As a result, the lodge "New Crowned Hope " became only one Masonic lodge in Vienna after that).
Probably Lichnowsky who was on their trip to Sachsen that time could not catch the news up to their arrival in Leipzig on May 8. Then, as soon as Lichnowsky caught the news in Leipzig, he decided to go back soon to Vienna to know the actual situation.
Mozart had to remain there since he already had the promise to meet Prussian King on May 26 in Berlin.This probably was the background for Lichnowsky's return, I suppose.

At this moment, Lichnowsky borrowed 100 florins from Mozart and went back to Vienna.
However, this sounds very curious to us since Lichnowsky was a rich marquis, and Mozart was a down-and-out musician.
Why had such a rich person have to borrow money from a (so called ) poor musician ?
I suppose this was not borrowing but a part of repayment from Mozart to Lichnowsky.
Lichnowsky knew well that Mozart got 450 florins in a beautiful box from Carl August (Mozart did not tell this fact to Constanze) and earned some money at the open-concert in Dresden.
And then he asked Mozart to repay some of them. Being asked so by Lichnowsky, Mozart had to nod in assent and repaid 100 florins then. The rest of Mozart's earning would have been reserved for his travel.

Thus the purpose of this travel were, in my opinion, not for the solution of his poverty but for making money for the repayment to Lichnowsky and visiting some Masonic lodges in Sachsen.
In addition to these, I suppose that there was a quite different purpose than these, which is to be described in Mozart's Marital Relationship.


Mozart spent two months and came back to Vienna on June 4,1789.
The dissolution of the lodge "Truth " must have had a big impact on those who were going to join Mozart's new lodge.
No Masonic lodge other than " New Crowned Hope" has already existed in Vienna. The raison d'être for Freemasonry seemed to become smaller and smaller in Vienna. Secret police were always sniffing out Masonic lodge. Viennese had become to hate Freemasonry.
Under such hard circumstances, it was natural that an upheaval, whether or not they continue to promote Mozart's project, appeared among those members - some insisted continuation, and other insisted withdrawal.
Mozart himself had not given up his project though he was put in such bitter circumstances.

However, it was likely that time was not on his side. Probably at the end of 1789 or at the beginning of 1790, Mozart had to give up his project.
We can guess it so from Mozart's music activities and his letters to Puchberg after 1790.

3. Resignation of Establishing the New Lodge

The reason why Mozart had to give up his project must have existed in the point that there were only a few persons left who were in favor of continuation of the project. Major part of his members probably became negative being influenced by the dissolution of the lodge "Truth". And then Mozart could not dare to proceed it any further.

After that Mozart faced to winding up the affairs of the now unrealized new lodge.
He had to pay such various outstanding accounts as room rent, fees for printing and furniture and so on. He sometimes had to ask merchants to accept delayed payments.
Probably restoring the rent room to its original state would have been contained in that winding up. In addition, disposal of written documents related to this project secretly was a headache matter for Mozart.
All these were troublesome affairs and Mozart needed long terms to manage them.

Thus he probably was busy for this winding up from 1790 to early 1791.
The grounds why make me think so are his less music activities in 1790 and the context of his letters to Puchberg after 1790.

1790

In the first place, we should be careful about the number of his music composed in 1790 .
Watching the footmarks of his composition year by year, we easily notice that the number of his music composed in 1790 was extraordinarily small, only 20 in total including fragments, which was the least after 1786.
Among his compositions, the completed music by Mozart were only 9 that year, if we regard the composition of "Cosi fan tutte" (K. 588) was substantially finished in 1789.
They were two string quartets ( K. 589, K. 590) , a quintet (K. 593), two arrangements for Handel's music (K. 591, K. 592) and four small pieces (K. 588b, K. 592a, K. 594, K. 590d).
In addition to these, eleven fragments have been left this year.

Examining the number of his compositions including fragments after 1786, we roughly can say he composed more than 40 music including fragments a year except for 1789 and 1790.
We know that he made a long term trip in 1789 and 1790 respectively. This was of course one of the reason for that in each year.

However, taking the factors - so many fragments and no large work like opera - into consideration, there must have been some time-consuming affair that Mozart had to involve in around that time.
I guess that was the winding up of his project. The troublesome winding up works and his depressed mental condition that time probably made him inactive for composition.

If not, can we think of any other reason ? Crazy about gambling, or womanizing all the year ? - Probably not.
I believe he really was in charge of winding up of his project from another grounds to think so.
They were his letters to Puchberg after 1790.
Now, let me explain it.

Before my explanation, I would like to list up all his letters to Puchberg relating to his loan after 1790 in a very compact form summarized below.

Here, I only abstracted the core expressions of Mozart's letters to Puchberg. However, we can easily notice the following by reading these.

The first is that Mozart's requirement of money to Puchberg became very modest.
Most of the case, he did not ask clear amount of money in his letters after 1790. In case he wrote it clearly, the amount was 100 florins at maximum.
We should remember here that he had asked Puchberg 400 and 500 florins (he sometime asked 1,000 to 2,000 florins) every time before 1790.

Where did this difference come from?
This probably reveals that his project came to an end by then, and he did not need larger amount of money any more.
However he was busy for his winding up those days, he sometimes had to depend small amount of money on Puchberg.

The second is that the tone of his way for asking money in his letters have changed largely.
As described in the previous chapter, we often found curious or incomprehensible expressions in his letter to Puchberg before 1790.
However, watching his all letters after 1790 carefully, we soon notice that those curious or incomprehensible expressions had disappeared except for the following three letters.
Among the three, the first and the second letters reveal that his project was stopped by then, I suppose.

Here, I would like to describe my opinion as to these letters in which incomprehensible expressions were written.


Letter to Puchberg (at the beginning of April 1790)

Before sending this letter, Mozart dared to petition the new emperor Leopold �U for a post of deputy Kapellmeister of the court on March 13, though the post was not recruited (This was rejected two months later, in May)

"You know my present situation as similar as I. However, if it were made public, it would have a bad effect on my petition to the court - To avoid it, it is very important that it must be kept strictly in secret. That is because the court tends to judge everything only by the outside appearance, not by the assessment of the situation, to our regret."

Mozart did not make it clear in this letter what he did not want to be made public.However, it is sure that Mozart was afraid of his present situation to become public ( or known by the emperor).
What was that ?
As to this, there is an opinion that it would have been his asking to grand duke Franz's recommendation to the post around that time, of which draft were left to date.
However, it was not such kind of matter, I suppose.
The matter he would like to hide from the emperor was surely his enthusiastic Masonic activities, I think. Yes, he would not like to let the emperor know the fact he was in charge of establishing a new lodge.

The new emperor has been living in Firenze for a long time. He had just taken office as the emperor after Joseph's death (February 20,1790). And then, Mozart did not know if Leopold was in favor of Freemasonry or not.
He must have thought that his devoted Masonic activities would have bad effect on his petition if Leopold were against Freemasonry.

Now, this petition has been regarded for a long time as one of grounds to prove poor Mozart theory. That is, they said Mozart made this petition to increase his income since he could not escape from his poverty.
However, it would be baseless if we consider the income situation of Mozart those days.
At this point, what prospect in relation to his income in 1790 could Mozart have ?

Probably he had already gotten 900 florins for the composing fee for "Cosi fan tutte"in hand.
He of course could expect 800 florins for his annual salary as a court musician that year too.
In addition, he could count on 450 florins by two commissioned works by Swieten ( arrangement of Handel's works) . Moreover he could be in expectation of fees from piano lessons, say 324 florins for two pupils (based on Solomon's estimation ).

The sum of these comes up to 2,474 florins !
Yes, he could have a view of 2,500 florins for his income in 1790. Besides, he could expect another income from publishing fee for his music score.
With such expected high income, can we say that his petition was due to his poverty ?
Of course, "No."
Facing to the winding up of his project, he thought of the petition for the repayment of his accumulated debts, I suppose.


Letter to Puchberg (at the beginning of May 1790)

Next we can find his incomprehensible sentence in the following letter to Puchberg too.
Here, we can find another possible sign that Mozart was obliged to do winding up around that time.

"My largest distress at present is that I owed a fashion-dealer in Stock im Eisen some debt. At first, the proprietor of the shop knew well my situation and could accept my delayed payment. However, at present, he obstinately asks me to pay. The amount of debt comes up to 100 florins."

There were several ways of translation or interpretation for "the shop in Stock im Eisen".
They were a haberdashery, a jeweller, a fashion-dealer, for example.
As to the shop in Stock im Eisen, Eric Blom the translator of the "Mozart Documentary Biography" (Deutsch) interpreted like this - 'Cf. Mozart's letter to Puchberg, early May 1790, where there is mention of a debt of 100 guldens in favour of a fashion-dealer in the Stock-im-Eisen-Platz.')
Among the three, I adopted here a fashion-dealer under the presumption that they had dealt with the sales of textures those days since this interpretation concurs with my thought best.

The question is the content of 100 florins that Mozart owed.
Considering the fact that he had no chance to appear on the stage and scarce relationship with rich merchant/aristocracy those days, there was no need for him to dress well with haberdashery or jewelry. Then why he had such debt to the shop ?
Money itself ? Yes, there was that possibility of course.
But I guess that Mozart purchased 100 florins of textures by later payment at that shop some day.

However, such large quantity and amount of textures were probably not for his own use since we can not find such gorgeous clothes in his inheritance records.
I therefore guess that they would have been textures for the ceremonial suits for the members of the supposed new lodge.

There is a description in his inheritance records that he owed two tailors 296 florins in total. This amount is too large for sewing cost for an individual if we regard this as the sewing cost.
Then I guess this might have been the sewing cost for above mentioned ceremonial suits for his Masonic brothers.

As to this, my next question is why the proprietor suddenly changed to ask to pay at that time although he had shown a good understanding to Mozart's situation by then.
In my opinion, perhaps the proprietor of the shop in Stock im Eisen shrewdly caught the news that Mozart had given up his project. And then he began obstinately to ask Mozart to pay.
Thus I consider that this letter also suggested that Mozart's project had come to an end.


Letter to Constanze ( October 8, 1790)

The last letter containing of incomprehensible sentence is the following.
In September 1790, he went to Frankfurt to make money by holding piano concert there. Though this travel has been said for the sake of getting out of his poverty, but it probably was not. The repayment of his debts to Lichnowsky was the probable reason.
During his stay in Frankfurt, he sent the following letter to Constanze in Vienna.

"It is impossible to earn such big amount of money here that enables me to pay 800 or 1,000 florins just at my return to Vienna. However, assuming the negotiation with Hoffmeister were settled, and the time when I have only to appear comes, I shall get 2,000 florins to 1,600 florins( after 20% interest is to be reduced). And then, still 600 florin will be left in my hand, even if I paid 1,000 florins at that time."

This curious and incomprehensible letter to Constanze annoys us again. To whom had he to pay such a big amount of money ? - My answer is that it was to Lichnowsky. Who else ?
He was trying to find a new lender ( Hoffmeister ) to prepare for the repayment to Lichnowsky. And then he described his idea in his letter to Constanze.

Excluding these three letters, incomprehensible sentences can not be found in Mozart's letters after 1790.

1791

Mozart asked loans twice to Puchberg in the first half of this year. The amount was very small, 30 florins in April and 25 florins in June respectively.
These were of course not due to his poverty. The time gap between his income and expenditure apparently let him borrow small amount of money.
In addition, we can not find incomprehensible sentences anywhere in his letters in 1791. The use of money was clear. That of June was remittance to Constanze in Baden, though that of April was unexplained.
Probably the winding up had been completely finished by this time.

He after all could not establish his lodge, but his enthusiasm to Freemasonry did not decline at all.
Then, in turn, he vigorously developed his enthusiastic activities toward Freemasonry again from the second half of 1791, details of which can be seen in the chronological table described before.

Among his activities toward Freemasonry in late 1791, we should pay enough attention to the performance of "Die Zauberflöte".
At that time, Vienna Freemasonry was in the midst of suppression. It was a risky deed for Mozart to perform the Masonic opera in public.
Nevertheless, he bravely dared to perform it in the theater at Wieden and got a storm of applause from common Viennese.
This proves how his enthusiasm toward Freemason was enormous.

4. What urged him to such a devoted Freemason

So far I have written Mozart's enthusiastic Masonic attitude and activities incorporating my own view into it.
When reading this article, probably readers will accept, (I hope so), that Mozart's attitude toward Freemasonry was very enthusiastic.
If so, what urged him to be such an enthusiastic Freemason ?

In the past history, it was sure that there had been many arguments about his Masonic music, especially about Die Zauberflöte. However, when it comes to the details of his attitude and activities toward Freemasonry, there seem to be a few, I feel.
Moreover, it seems to me that most writers regarded Mozart as a frivolous Mason.
For instance, Alfred Einstein described the motive of Mozart's joining Freemasonry like this.

"It was probably his deep feeling of loneliness as an artist and desire for sincere friendship what drove him to plunge into the association. Though Mozart was once given a kick by count Arco and was treated as a servant by Colloredo, he, as a man who had genius, could have the same rights and be placed on the same level as noble men in this association."

I admit what Einstein said was truly correct. However, I feel somehow light in tone in his statement.
I mean if Mozart's motive to join the association were such a casual extent, he would have quitted , as many Masons did so, the association at the time Viennese lodges had to be regrouped. And of course he had neither tried to establish a new lodge nor revived his contribution to Freemasonry again from the second half of 1791, if his motive were such a casual extent.

I myself consider that it was not his mere longing for equality in the association that he joined Freemasonry. But he had far more larger expectation on it.
His expectation in his mind would have been the reform of the Establishment by deep penetration of the Enlightenment thought through Freemasonry into the society that time.
Now let us check the background.

In those days, music and musicians in the Holly Roman Empire were merely the belongings to the court and church.
The social status of musicians there was as same as that of servants. Court musicians could not expect free composition, being asked only to compose such music as opera seria, table music ( divertimento) and church music for the monarch and church.
Mozart could not put up with such status at all.

His thought in mind was that the social status of musicians should be much higher since their business was, unlike that of servants, the noble art through which deep impression were given to everybody in the world.
At the same time, Mozart might have thought that musicians should get freedom in composition, not being bothered by the stale and routine orders from the lord and church.

Like this, what he keenly hoped was to obtain the independence of music and musicians in the society, .
He must have thought secretly in his mind that the Establishment was the nuisance against his wish. And then, he joined Freemasonry hoping the reform of the Establishment.
Now let us take a more close look at it.

(1) The Status of Musicians Those Days

We should recognize once more here that the status of musicians those days was, unlike today, as similar as that of servants. This condition continued through the eighteenth century since we can see such a help-wanted ad as the following in Die Wien Zeitung, June 1798.

"Help wanted. A musician and concurrently a servant.
A musician is wanted. He can be good at piano playing as well as singing and has the ability for teaching both. This musician shall do the work of servant as well. The person who want to accept this job shall visit the second floor of small Colloredo House at Weiburg street 982."( H.C. Robbins Landon)

This was the usual case when a musician was employed by a noble man. The social standing of the court musicians was nearly the same.
Remember, for example, Mozart wrote the following letter to his father Leopold with evident sarcasm. In the letter, he described about the order of seating at lunch. It was at the opportunity in Deucheshaus when he was forcibly called to Vienna by archbishop Colloredo.

"Persons who had their meals there were two archbishop's servants, a supervisor of servants, Mr. Cetti, a confectionery craftsman, two cooks, Ceccarelli, Brunetti and I. But two archbishop's servants sat above me. And yet, I had the honor of taking my seat in front of the two cooks." (March 17,1781)

At that time he was titled as the court organist and concurrently a court composer of Salzburg. His salary, 450 florins annually, was as high as that of deputy Kapellmeister Leopold Mozart.
Yet he had to dine with servants and cooks, and the seating order was below than that of archbishop's servant.
Like this, musicians those days were regarded as if they were servants themselves.

Mozart could no put up with such discriminatory treatment at all.
He often wrote to his father such statements as "I have never known that I was a servant." or "It is not the status of person what decides the nobleness of person."
He always had the question in his mind why the aristocracy without having any ability could maintain their high social status only by heredity, while on the other hand musicians who devoted themselves to noble art were regarded as servants.
Yes, he originally was the man who had a strong hatred for a class society.
Probably there existed in Mozart mind that improvement of musician's social status could not be expected unless these feudal lord systems were destroyed.

In his early Vienna era, he had frequent contacts with Born and Sonnenfels who were once the members of Illuminati in Bavaria.
Illuminati had adopted the following as their slogan.
That was " This association is a great society. Respects, once paid to the wealth and status in the old world, are only paid in this society to the abilities and achievements."(Katharine Thomson)
It is needless to say that Mozart was deeply impressed by their liberal thought.
Mozart therefore determined to devote himself to Freemasonry, hoping that the reform of the Establishment could be attainable if the Enlightenment thought through Freemasonry became widespread in his country.

In those days, although music had gradually began to penetrate into wealthy citizens, music as it were belonged to the courts and churches, lords and aristocracy.
Musicians had to obey to compose such formal operas as opera seria and festival opera for the court events, Masses, Litaniaes and Vesperaes for churches, and divertimento for the pleasures of the lords and their honored guests.
As we already know, opera seria was old-fashioned one whose themes were only restricted to those of ancient myths. As to the composition of Masses, archbishop Colloredo, for example, ordered in his self-serving manner that the length of Masses should be within 45 minutes.
Thus, musicians those days were compelled to compose routine music and could not have a free hand in composition.

Mozart would have keenly hoped to escape from such restricted circumstances.
However, in the Holly Roman Empire, open market for musicians were not yet developed. Music had to be performed in the court, court theater, church and the residences of aristocracy most of the case. Under these unfavorable circumstances, Mozart was obliged to be a court musician in Salzburg since there was no other choice than selecting a court musician there.
However, his real desire in his mind was to compose human operas based on free ideas and free circumstances, and to provide common people with his instrumental music so that they can enjoy to hear and perform together with their family and/or friends.
To realize his own desire, the Establishment was a big obstacle to be overthrown.

One more thing Mozart had deplored was that almost all lords went overboard for Italian musicians.
Loads and aristocracy competed with others in hiring famous Italian musicians. As a result, the post of Kapellmeister in the court was always occupied by Italian.
Gassmann, Bonno, Salieri, and Cimarosa who became the Kapellmeister of Vienna court were all Italian.Things were quite the same in Salzburg. Kapellmeister Lolli, Fischietti, Gatti and Rust were all Italian musicians as well.
They were of course treated well being given high salaries, while on the other hand German musicians were treated coldly.
These favoritism apparently came from lords' self-serving manners regardless of real music ability.
Mozart must have felt strong discrimination to these favoritism.

In addition, operas performed in the theaters in Vienna and Salzburg largely depend on Italian operabuffas or French comic operas.
It is true that, by Emperor Joseph's policy, there was a time when German operas (singspiel) were going to be taken up in Vienna. However, its term was very short and disappeared soon. Things were like that, Mozart had to write his operas in Italian most of the case.
However his real desire as a German composer was to compose German operas. We can see his blazing passion for German operas in his letter to Anton Klein dated on March 21,1785.
Patriotic Mozart could not put up with such Italianized tendency at all in the world of music.

Probably he blamed such lack of understanding and unfair treatment on the Establishment. Then he must have wanted the quick end of the Establishment secretly in his mind.
However, it was obvious that the end of the Establishment could not be attained by the force of an independent person. Then he might have thought that the wide penetration of the Enlightenment thought by means of Freemasonry was only the practical way of the ending the Establishment..
Such thought in his mind surely became the clue for him to join the association later, I believe.

(2) His Experiences at Mannheim-Paris Travel

In his Salzburg era, Mozart had fully suffered from bitter circumstances by Colloredo's self-serving manner.
However, the experiences at his Mannheim-Paris travel opened his eyes and added fuel to Mozart's flame of adoration for the Enlightened thought and Freemasonry .

In Mannheim, he came to know the court conductor Cannabich and the excellent Mannheim orchestra. He could know that Cannabich had absolute authority over the orchestra of Mannheim. As a result, the orchestra was far trained well than that of Salzburg. While on the other hand, everyone put in a word to the management of orchestra in Salzburg. Mozart, of course, could not put up with such interference.

In addition, musicians in Mannheim had gotten far better treatment than Salzburg.
According to his mother Maria Anna's letter to Leopold, Kapellmeister Holzbauer was annually given 3,000 florins, Cannabich was given 1,800 florins and the concert master was paid 1,400 florins annually by their court.
While in Salzburg, Leopold was paid only 350 florins annually as a deputy Kapellmeister at that time (in 1778), and Mozart was paid 150 florins as a concert master .
The difference came from the reason that music and musicians were far more respected in such Enlightened city as Mannheim than a conservative city like Salzburg.
Moreover, there was a permanent German national theater in Mannheim, where German operas were always performed.
Mozart must have been enchanted by all these conditions in this Enlightened city.

Things were the same as Paris.
Here in Paris, he could know by his own eyes that the open markets for musicians have already been established. Musicians there could live their life without being hired by the court.
Musicians there could earn by their performance at the Concert Spirituell, for example, and they also could get money by selling their music scores in the market.
London was also an Enlightened city and one of the most advanced city in Europe those days.
During his stay in Paris, he met Christian Bach there who was living in London and happened to visit Paris. He must have heard from Christian Bach how the music circumstances in London was. It is no doubt that those of London were as similar as Paris.

After the end of this travel, Mozart must have sighed what a backward country his country was.
Since then, it probably lodged in his mind that music environments in Vienna and Salzburg would be improved like Mannheim, Paris and London, if the Enlightenment thought spread over his home country.
It is likely that he resolved secretly in his mind around that time that he would join the association in due time.
Undoubtedly, those striking contrasts, miserable musician's status in Salzburg and what he saw in the Enlightened cities, became the clue for him to join Freemasonry.

Now, the popular opinion so far is that Mozart was a naive man, having no interest in the society and politics. Main reason for that probably comes from the fact that we can not find any Mozart's papers and his eloquent talks relating to politics anywhere.
However, we should consider that the Masonic documents including Mozart's activities in that association were intentionally destroyed by Freemasonry themselves in the first. And more, the letters in reference to Freemasonry were supposedly thrown away by Mozart himself , Leopold and Constanze.
In addition, Mozart's papers on establishing a new lodge which Constanze sent to Breitkopf has been lost later.
By such reasons, we now can not find his paper on politics at all.

However, according to my analysis, he surely had his strong consciousness about the society and politics since he had been doing such enthusiastic Masonic activities as described here.
As a result, I believe the issue on Mozart as a Mason should be the subject more to be discussed widely. He was never a stupid man who had no interests in the society and politics, only addicting to
drinking and womanizing as Constanze told.

5. Mozart and his Catholic Piety

Before entering into my description, I would like to clarify here that I have nothing to do with Catholic nor Freemasonry. I do not have any intention to take side with Freemasonry nor to criticize Catholic since my family's religion is Buddhism as most of Japanese families are so, which has nothing to do with any other Western religions.
Then my concern here exists only in the point whether the opinion with regard to Mozart's Catholic piety was logically acceptable, or not.


Nobody can deny that he was a very pious Roman Catholic during his Salzburg era.
We can find the evidences in his many religious church music, in his letters, in Nannel's diary and so on. And then, there will be no need to say much on this matter.

However, when it comes to his Catholic piety during his Vienna era, I feel somewhat strange about the opinion that Mozart had not given up his faith to Catholic to the end of his life.
As long as I know, those opinions can be summarized as follows.

-His real Catholic piety would have been in bloom without any contradiction in the Deism.

-Both Mozart and his father were pious Catholics to the end of their lives. Mozart had not lost his convinced Catholic piety by the influence of Freemasonry thought.

-The fact that he composed the religious "Ave verum corpus"(K.618) a half year before his death revealed that he had not lost his Catholic piety at his later years.

-By the research of Alan Tyson, several church music, which were once thought to be his composition in Salzburg era, are now regarded as his composition in late Vienna era.
By this, there raised such opinion that the fact, that these church music has been left in his Vienna era, makes us believe Mozart had been interested in Church music even in his late Vienna era.

I believe we do not need more samples other than above.
It is sure that those persons after all obstinately insist that Mozart's Catholic piety was lifelong, though they had to reluctantly admit that Mozart was a Freemason.
This sounds very curious to me.

Mozart had composed various types of excellent church music in his Salzburg era, to be sure.
However, after the nineteenth century, it was the Roman Catholic Church who solely respected Gregorian hymn and Palestrina style, and did not at all rate Mozart's church music highly.
Then, it makes me bewildered that those persons who seem to belong Catholic say such things as above now.

It is widely known that the Roman Catholic Church had denounced Freemasonry as "Devil's Church" and they had excommunicated Freemasons again and again since the first excommunication ordinance by Pope Clemens.
In relation to this, it is said that the Church Law indicated the following.

1. The excommunication means the deprivation Catholic believers of their rights to receive all sacraments like Holly Communion.
2. Every lord whose state religion are the Roman Catholic can execute those who are applicable for the excommunication by this Law.

In addition, in the old Church Law, there was such a provision (Article 2335) that those who did their action against the Church or state organization under the name of Freemason and/or such other association could be excommunicated by their action.

Now, the point is whether or not Mozart, who was once a pious Catholic believer and acknowledged well his state religion was the Roman Catholic, did not know this excommunication at all.
Undoubtedly there is no need to say that Mozart recognized well the existence of the Church Law and the meanings of excommunication.

Then Mozart must have thought that he was to be excommunicated by the Roman Catholic Church if he joined Freemasonry. Nevertheless he dared to join the association by his own will.
Probably he has recognized himself as an excommunicated person by the Roman Catholic from the time he joined the lodge up to his death.

As to the religion in Freemasonry, they had denied the revealed religion. But they believed in Deism. Mozart had joined such association. And, to the end of his life, he neither stopped to be a Freemason nor betrayed the association like Alois Hoffman.
Upon his death, Mozart himself would not ask to call a priest though his consciousness was clear two hours before death. Yes, he chose the death as a Freemason, not as a Catholic.

Considering thus, I myself can not accept the opinion that Mozart still had Catholic belief in his late Vienna era and/or his real Catholic piety would have been in bloom without any contradiction in the Deism.


Next subject to be discussed is his church music composed in late Vienna era.
Not a few persons regard these as the evidence that Mozart had his piety for Catholic or interest in church music even in late Vienna era. However, that way of thinking seems quite suspicious to me.

Here, the church music in question are "Ave verum corpus" and the five Kyries and a Gloria (K.323=Anh.15, K.Anh.20=323a, K.Anh.14=422a, K.Anh.16=196a, K.Anh.13=258a, K.341=368a)
Among them, " Ave verum corpus" and Kyrie (K341=368a) are the finished music, but the rest are fragments. And all music were not commissioned works.

Now, my first question is that if Mozart was fascinated in composing church music even in his later years, he would have completed almost all of them by his strong piety.
However, only two music were completed and five were left as fragments.
In contrast, all Freemasonry Music were completed with the exception for a cantata (K.429).
This fact reveals in a sense that Mozart was devoted to Freemasonry in Vienna era, but his passion for Catholic was dim or lost.

My next question is whether composers could have their passion for not commissioned church music, or not.
In general, composers can know in advance at what opportunity and at what church their works are to be performed, in case it were commissioned church music.
However, they can not have such plan in advance for not commissioned church music.
As described before, above church music were not ones Mozart was commissioned to compose.
Nevertheless, above persons who insisted Mozart as a long life Catholic believer say that Mozart passionately tried to compose them ? But I can not believe so at all.

I consider like above. However, the following refutations will be waiting for me and I must respond to them.

1.Why could he compose such religious "Ave verum corpus" in his last year ?
2.Why did he have a hand in church music in his late years ?

As to"Ave verum corpus", it is well known that he composed it not for church, but for Anton Stoll who was the leader of choir in Baden.
Before Constanze's third visit to Baden ( June 1791), Mozart asked Stoll to seek some appropriate room in Baden for Constanze. Stoll introduced Grundgeyer's house to her and he took care of her one way or another during her stay in Baden. Then the music must have been Mozart's expression of thanks to Stoll.
It was quite natural that the music was full of religious motif since Mozart composed it appropriate for the church choir leader of Baden.

As to the several church music other than"Ave verum corpus", things would have been as follows.
His son Karl Thomas was educated for a long time at Häger's educational facilities. This facilities were, however, very expensive but not good enough as shown in Mozart's last letter to Constanze. Then Mozart was going to let Karl transfer to another educational facilities, a Piarist school.
Since Mozart went through a lot of hardships after becoming a Freemason, he wanted his son not to experience such hardships. And then he determined to transfer his son to the Piarist school.
I guess Mozart tried to prepare these church music for this expedient.

Well, we knew in his letter to Constanze (June 25, 1791) that he was going to join saintly body queue at Josephstadt (where the Piarist church was ) with a candle in hand.
The reason why he joined the saintly body queue would have been in the point that his deed would be of some help to Karl's transferring to the Piarist school.

Probably Mozart's composition of above mentioned church music had the same meaning as joining saintly body queue, that is, for the expedient of transferring Karl to a Piarist school, not by his piety for Catholic.
Then the opinion, that his church music in late Vienna years proves Mozart's remaining piety for Catholic, becomes more and more suspicious to me .

As written above, Mozart had his clear consciousness before two hours of his death. He was aware that he would die during the day.
Then, if he had piety for Catholic that time, he might have asked Constanze to call a priest for his last blessing. But he himself never did so. He refused to be sent to Heaven by Catholic way.
Upon his death, his dead body was wrapped in black cloth which was common way for Freemason.
He thus died the death of a Freemason.

Mozart was the man who hated from the bottom of his heart the Establishment to which Catholic church belonged. .Why can we say that such a man could maintain his Catholic piety to the end of his life, even after joining Freemasonry ?





TOP
HOME

Bibliography


1. Johannes Rogalla von Bieberstein
Die These von der Verschwörung 1776-1945(translated by Kazunori Kunishima, Yohichi Kubo and Hiroki Toda. Koron-sha, 1981)
2 .Serge Hutin
LES SOCIÉTÉS SECRÈTES(translated by Tohichiro Ozeki. Hakusui-sha,1994 )
3. Katharine Thomson
The Masonic Thread in Mozart(translated by Arata Yukawa and Kohkichi Taguchi. Hosei University Press,1989)
4. Alfred Einstein
Mozart. Sein Charakter-sein Werk ( translated by Masao Asai. Hakusui-sha,1997)
5. Shunichi Kayata
Freemason and Mozart(Kodansha,1997)
6. Shinichi Yuasa
Freemasonry(Chuoh Koron-sha,1990)
7. Bin Ebizawa and Taisuke Yoshida( editors in chief)
DAS MOZART LEXIKON (Tokyo Shoseki,1991)
8. Joseph Heinz Eibl ( the editor)
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Chronik eines Lebens (translated by Hiromi Takekawa. Ongakunotomo-sha, 1974)
9. op.cit
Mozart in Vienna 1781 - 1791
10. op.cit.
MOZART A DOCUMENTARY BIOGRAPHY
11. op.cit
Musik und Freimaurerei, Mozart und die königliche Kunst
12. op.cit
Mozart's profile
13. op.cit
MOZART, Briefe und Aufzeichnungen Gesamtausgabe, Weiterer Nachtrag
14. op.cit
MOZART : A LIFE
15. op.cit
1791 MOZART'S LAST YEAR

Author : Shuji Fujisawa
e-mail : ssfuji@mbj.nifty.com
First published : January 10, 2005
Updated : August 15, 2007

All rights reserved