New Mozart Theory - 1

Grave Issue on the Primary Sources

As to Mozart's speaks and behaves, there have been many opposing opinions in the past. And the arguments seem not to be settled yet now. On top of it, there still remain many enigmas about him. Many musicologists and writers after ages have talked their plausible opinions about these enigmas, yet they do not seem to be persuasive to me.
Almost all these oppositions and enigmas are concentrating in Mozart's Vienna era, especially in the latter half of his Vienna years. Yes, his speaks and behaves were relatively clear up to the first half of his Vienna era. Yet, they became vague in the latter half. The main issue of which are shown below. What backgrounds had made them so ?
The purpose of this chapter is to describe about them in a broad way. Particulars of my opinion to these outstanding are to be explained in and after chapter-2.

Contents

1. Problems still outstanding

(1) Mozart's Debts
(2) Mozart and Freemasonry
(3) Opinions on Constanze
(4) Mozart's Death

2. The Causes of Confusion

(1) Problems caused by Posterity

1) Lack of Analytic Viewpoints
2) Insufficient Assessments
3) Other Factors

(2) The Primary Sources with Problems in themselves

1) Mozart's letters like Moth-eaten Cloth
2) Missing Important Documents
3) Three Biographies in early stage

1. Problems still outstanding

After Mozart's death, vast volume of books on Mozart have been published and are now still in printing. Thanks to these books, we can know Mozart's speaks and behaves in the eighteenth century.
However, we sometimes feel embarrassment to read these books since there exist many different opinions there. Those may come from the divergences of authors' views, but are not yet unified to a collective view despite of so long discussions. However, we should pay effort to eliminate vague and groundless opinions in the past and try to establish a definite one which is full of grounds to believe so, since the fact in the past is only one.

As to the particulars about Mozart's speaks and behaves, there still exist many opposing opinions and enigmas there. They are, for example, the issue on his debts, the issue on his Masonic enthusiasm, issue on Constanze , and the cause of his death, etc, I think..
My detailed consideration about these are to be explained later, and then I would like to mention here what kind of problems existed in the past opinions.


(1) Mozart's Debts

It is now well known that he left vast amount of debts behind. The total amount, well over 4,000 florins, equaled to eight to ten times as much as the annual salary of a middle class government employee those days.
The question is why he had to pile up such huge debts. The past opinions blamed it for his income drop, his continuation of dissipated life, the medical treatment costs for Constanze's disease and/or gambling debts. These in a sense look like plausible, but they are all off the point from my viewpoint.

In connection with this issue, the poor Mozart theory did him harm very badly. All scholars and writers in the past recognized that Mozart was miserably poor in the latter half of his Vienna era because Mozart begged loans from Puchberg again and again. Moreover his loans were not restricted to Puchberg. He borrowed considerable amount of money from such persons as Hofdemel, Lichnowsky and Lackenbacher as well.
By these frequent borrowings, persons in the past easily thought that Mozart had fallen into poverty in his late Vienna era. But to think so was the pitfall.

He was never poor up to his death in any year in his late Vienna era, though the popularity of Mozart as a pianist suddenly faded away in Vienna and he could no more appear on the Vienna stage after the spring in 1786.
Why I can say so decisively is simple. We can guess so by analyzing his annual income in each year those days. However, as long as I know, there has not been such kind of analysis until M. Solomon's "Mozart : A life" was published in 1995.
In this web site, I introduced my study on Mozart's yearly income, mainly based on Solomon's but modified some of them by myself, which can be seen in Mozart's Debts.

According to this study, Mozart's annual income in each year during his late Vienna years always exceeded those of Salieri (2,050 florins annually as the Kapellmeister) and Gluck (2,000 florins annually as the Court composer). Yes, his income was very high and he was not in the least poor. By this high income, he could, for example, educate his son Karl at the Häger's educational facilities up to his death, which cost him amazingly high expense of 400 florins annually.
Thus his so high income must have enabled him a comfortable life and could afford his wife's medical treatment expenses without depending on debts.
In this regard, the income drop theory, the dissipated life theory and the medical treatment expenses theory for the causes of his debts have lost their grounds, I believe. More details of which are described in Mozart's Debts.

To make things worse, this plausible poor Mozart theory has unjustifiably explained incomprehensible Mozart's and Constanze's behaves.
For example, they blamed Mozart's two travels, Sachsen and Frankfurt trips, for the solution of his poverty. But they probably were not for such purpose. If they were so, we wonder why Mozart did not have his public concert more frequently. He held only twice during Sachsen trip and only once in Frankfurt though he spent about two months for each travel. Then the purposes of these travels are still unexplained enigmas by now.

Poor Mozart theory has also justified the miserable Mozart's funeral, by the third class funeral ceremony and mass grave burial, for a long time. This was also blamed for his poverty. However, when we take a close look at Mozart's earning in 1791, we can easily detect that it was a transparent lie. Yes, there were a lot of money left to the bereaved family.
Then why Constanze did Mozart's funeral with the lowest rank funeral becomes a new enigma.
More details of these two are explained in Mozart, an enthusiastic Freemason and Mozart's Death and Burial. respectively.

Thus poor Mozart theory has became the cause which made us believe wrong way that his debts was on account of poverty. But if someone in the past had checked Mozart's annual income in each year through his late Vienna era and watched his economic background closely, such ridiculous opinions as above would not have happened, I suppose. But such important study has been neglected so far somehow.

Now, the biggest enigma as to Mozart's debts is the use of money, of course.
As to this, scholars and writers in the past tried to find out his use of money only from his ordinary life and his character. As a result, they tried to combine Mozart's debts with the medical expenses for his wife's disease and his dissipated life, etc..
However, as mentioned earlier, Mozart's high earning could actually afford them without depending on debts. On top of it, who can image that more than 4,000 florins ( eight to ten years' salary for a middle class worker) were necessary for his wife's cure or his gorgeous life?
We should, in addition, be careful that his needs for the loans were limited to only three years from mid 1788 to mid 1791.

The key to solve this enigma existed in the following two, I think.
One is Mozart's letters to Puchberg. Reading these letters with utmost care, we can come to know that his use of money was something he did not like to open in public. Constanze's disease was just a cover for it.. Yes, his use of money was not for the sake of his ordinary life, but for non-ordinary life, say, some incident he was involved in.
In my view, persons in the past have overlooked or could not think of such point of view, being too much wedded to the medical expenses theory and/or his dissipated life theory.

The other key is Constanze's statement in front of the emperor Leopold‡U at her petition on December 11, 1791.
It is allegedly said that the purposes of her petition were to remove the wicked rumor on Mozart occurred in the court, for one thing and the application of widow's pension which was suggested by a noble lady, for the other.
She then talked that the court people talked wildly about her husband and they exaggerated his debts as being ten times as large as the one he actually left behind.
This 'wild talk' and ' exaggeration of ten times as large as his actual debts' has an important meaning to find out the use of his money. Yes, her statement suggested that his use of money was unusual one other than his ordinary life.

Who could talk wickedly this and that if Mozart's debts were such serious use as the medical expenses for his wife? Who could exaggerate his debts to ten times if his debts were such serious use ?
Soon after her petition, she was granted for receiving widow's pension as an exceptional treatment (She normally had no qualification to receive it for the shortage of Mozart's service years to the court). This fact clearly denies other plausible opinion, the gambling debts theory, since the emperor would not allow it if the rumor on Mozart in the court was about his gambling.
Scholars and writers in the past had showed no concern about her statement, and then they had overlooked such viewpoints.

Well, more detailed explanations and my answer to this outstanding issue are described in Mozart's Debts. Then let us move to next item.


(2) Mozart and Freemasonry

I must admit in advance that this issue does not seem to have been a big point in dispute of Mozart so far. The reasons may come from the following, I guess.

1.There have been few opinions in the past which insisted that Mozart was an enthusiastic Freemason. Only the opinions of 'Mozart as a frivolous Freemason' have been predominant. That may be because Freemasonry is still recognized as an unfavorable party in Europe, especially in the countries where the influence of Catholic is strong. As a result the opinion that Mozart was an enthusiastic Freemason has been hesitated to propose, I guess.

2. No matter how we want to bring up this matter for discussion, we can not find any important documents related to Freemasonry in Vienna in the eighteenth century (It is allegedly said that Freemasonry themselves had destroyed their documents).

By above reasons, Mozart has been recognized as a frivolous or a temporary Freemason in the past. However was it so ?
I myself think that this issue involves a serious problem to decide Mozart's personality
He was apt to be recognized as a dissipated man who had no interests in anything other than music except for such pleasures as drinking, billiard, gambling and womanizing. But, was he so silly except for his music talent ?

To review this, we should pay careful attention to his Masonic activities. It is needless to say that Freemasonry those days was the party full of Enlightenment thought, in general. Then if he were really an enthusiastic Freemason, we can say that we have for a long time overlooked a part of his important character that he had enough concerns about politics and ideologies.

Scholars and writers after ages had few interest in this issue, and the following enigmas still remain unexplained..

1. Mozart's Masonic activities were very vigorous in 1785. However, after that his activities seemed to be very feeble up to mid 1791. Why was that ? How did he work for Freemasonry during the term ?
2. Mozart re-started his brisk Masonic activities again from mid 1791. What was the reason for that ?
3. He had a plan to establish a new lodge named "Cavern". By what incentive had he such plan and what progress had the plan shown ?

As to these, I showed my own opinion in Mozart, an enthusiastic Freemason.
By studying Mozart's aspect of a Freemason closely, we shall be able to conclude that he was a stalwart Freemason. And this result will press us for the review of his personality from.the bottom.

In the end, I would like to express here that the following curiousness had all close connection with his Masonic activities, though they remained still enigmas even now. The details of which are to be explained later in Mozart's Debts and Mozart, an enthusiastic Freemason.

1. The reason why he asked Nannerl to send 1,000 florins (his share for Leopold's inheritance) to Puchberg, not to his bank account.
2, The purposes of his Sachsen and Frankfurt trips.
3. The reason why he did not tell Constanze that he was given 450 florins by Maximilian Franz for his piano performance, only describing in his letter that he was given a beautiful snuff-box.
4. The reason why Lichnowsky suddenly came back to Vienna, leaving Mozart alone in Leipzig during their Sachsen trip.
5. Many incomprehensive passages written in Mozart's letters to Puchberg
6. The reason for his 500 florins loan to Stadler and why it was recognized as a loan without liability in his inheritance records.


(3) Opinions on Constanze

In the past, the good wife theory and the bad wife theory have been conflicting hotly. However, reading both theories in the past, they do not at all sit easily with me. Their arguments seem to be concentrating in one-sided talks full of emotion and imagination. Their arguments are lacking analytic and evaluative view points for Constanze's character and her actual behaviors.

It seems that the good wife theory could have attained the overwhelming majority at present. However, such serious problems as described below were left with heavy silence and/or without reasonable explanation, which suspect us the rightness of this theory from the bottom.
The good wife theory insisted that Constanze was a tender, an attentive and a clever wife who made her husband very happy. They insisted as well that their marital relationship was good enough and she was Mozart's beloved.
But I wonder from where they have found such facts in Mozart history, unless those were their robust imagination. The following are Constanze's actual deeds which contradict to what the good wife theorists praised.

1. In exchanging letters, she did not respond to Mozart's letters properly. Then he was always irritating and in grief not to get her letters properly. If Constanze truly loved Mozart and she were attentive to him, why didn't she respond properly ?

2. She destroyed all her letter