From: m1wrp99@milo.uucp (William R. Palenske)
Newsgroups: rec.music.classical
Subject: Re: mozart's ignominious deposit
Date: 12 Jan 93 20:44:43 GMT
Organization: Federal Reserve Board, Wash, DC

Roger Lustig writes:
>William R. Palenske writes:
>>i've wondered why mozart was buried in a common grave.
>
>He wasn't, actually.  He was buried in a *sanitary* grave, one
>mandated by Imperial decree during an epidemic.

[ were sanitary graves gratis ? were they common ? ]

could we say then, fairly, that his wife was not all that destitute and
could have afforded a private, unsanitary, grave had not the 
authorities mandated otherwise ?  

from curiosity, what was the epidemic and does it seem 
reasonable ( or possible ) to conclude that mozart died
from it and not from something else given what is known
about the circumstances of his death ( if anything is
known ? )

>>yes, i've heard his widow was left in straightened 
>>....
>
>Actually, the musical market had dried up badly in the previous 
>year.  Mozart had taken several steps toward improving his condition,
>incl. getting in line for a big church job that would have been his if 
>he'd lasted another year and a half.  Mozart had done well for four years 
>in the 1780's as a free-lance, but it was somewhat downhill after that.
>Not having a court job of real substance meant that he didn't get all
>the payments in kind (firewood, candles, etc.) that court employees got;
>also, he had to maintain a fairly expensive lifestyle in order to move
>in society.

let's see.  as i understand it, he left the service of the archbishop 
in 1781.  he died in 91.  that's ten years.  if he'd done well for four,
then he did _not_ well for six.  how were the _not_ and not _not_ years
portioned ? for example,  assume the four good years were contiguous.  
since the market dried-up ( did the public develop tin-ears suddenly 
or was it the plague ? ) the previous year, that means the first five
years were _not_ years.  it seems to me, any way you look at it, he
should have been trying for those church jobs a bit sooner. especially,
if you have to wait a year and a half to assume the post.  maybe he was 
just a bad businessman afterall ?
 
>>but i understand he had acquaintances who professed to admire him ....
>>e.g., haydn.  
>
>Haydn didn't have all that much money; nobody was doing really well
>at that time.  
>
>>surely, a modest plot / monument would not have been that costly.  
>>or did he expire when haydn was abroad or something ?   
>
>Yes, as a matter of fact.  The 98th Symphony will tell you all about it.

>There probably was a wooden marker, but at the time this was not considered
>crucial.  You can read about it in Braunbehrens' or Robbins Landon's 
>books.

i'm sorry.  i can't keep track of all those symphonies.  i guess all ( ? )
haydn symphonies have cute little labels to them.  ( another question:
are any just called symphony number _number ?_ )  apparently, the 98th is 
not called the _vienna_ symphony.  it's the _surprise_ symphony !  because
you're _surprise_'d he ( haydn ) didn't cough up some money to help bury
mozart because he didn't have to because mozart was buried in a *sanitary*
grave because the music scene had dried-up because there was an epidemic 
because .... 

>>what about van sweitan (sp?) was he still about ? 
>
>van Swieten was most certainly around; he had yet to commission the two
>great oratorios from Haydn.

okay.

>>couldn't he have stuck him in a family vault ?  i think that had been done before.
>
>But Mozart wasn't family, or even that close, and besides, there was the 
>matter of sanitary burial.
>
>>sounds worth it to memorialize yourself even if only potentially.
>
>Keep in mind that unitl then, composers had not, for the most part,
>been outlived by their works in any "timeless" fashion.  Nor was there
>a concept of musical classics such as we have today.

i know mozart wasn't _family;_ and i, obviously, didn't know about the
epidemic / sanitary burial having instead subscribed to what i think
is the common notion that he died dissipated.  even so, is it fair to
say van swieten did / didn't think of mozart in _ornament of the age_ 
terms ?  for instance, did he have a mass said or offer any other
postumous sign of ( high or otherwise ) regard or respect. 
how 'bout haydn ?

with regard to timelessness / musical classics, what about the
handel [ centennial ? ] concerts ?  didn't pepusch organize
an _academy of antient ( antick ) musick_ to play _classics_  
or at least early(er) music.  i presume they wouldn't have been
playing what they thought early bad music.  so they played early 
good music.  something worth studying / playing / enjoying.  
were they exhibiting a sense of the `classic ?'  what about van
swieten having mozart redo "messiah" etc ?  was he ( van swieten ) 
regarding them as contemporaneous compositions or was he implying 
something akin to classic status ? doesn't haydn quote handel in,
say, "the creation ?" or am i viewing these things in the wrong 
light ?

>>i've also heard / read this story variously about
>>mozart or haydn which relates that a phrenologist
>>decapitated the corpse of haydn / mozart and that
>>the skull is floating about etc.  any truth to this ?
>
>Even worse: there are *two* skulls.  On the other hand, phrenology
>wasn't in vogue yet, so it wasn't a phrenologist who did it.  The 
>source of one of them seems to be the keeper of that particular
>cemetery.

okay.  so any chance they could be the actual skulls ?

>>one more thing, how may other _famous_ composers are grave
>>unknown ?  obviously, the further back we go the more
>>likely. even so, ....  another question: who's the earliest 
>>composer whose burial site is known ?
>
>Dufay was buried in Cambrai Cathedral; the monument is still there.
>That's 1474.  On the other hand, what do you call 
>"famous"?  

as far as the earliest known goes, i think that be de facto famous
regardless.

famous was set off because i didn't care to define famous.  for
discussion's sake, i'd accept the various names proffered in 
whatever was the most recent _greatest_ composer debate.  

-- 
   Bill Palenske            Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
   m1wrp99@fed.frb.gov      Washington, D.C.  20551
   uunet!fed!wrp            DISCLAIMER: MY OPINIONS ARE MY OWN.