Talk:Constanze Mozart

message: The initial entry on Constanze Weber had only a single paragraph. Added information mostly from the German wikipedia entry on her.
--Hs282 16:16, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I am so sorry to have to disappoint, but the alleged photo of Constanze has been proven to be a hoax.  Details here: http://classicalmusicguide.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=122954#122954.  This rumor has apparently been around for years, but it has been debunked by scholars.  Its kind of silly really-- at the time the photo was taken, Constanze was extremely ill and hardly able to sit up, nevermind unable to travel aborad to visit people who she had not seen in decades.  She was also close to eighty-- the woman in this photo is much younger.
I am deleting the photo and the link for now.  Maybe it can be mentioned as a popular hoax, but it is not a photo of Constanze. 
: More for the curious: The phot was also debunked by photography experts, who estimate that teh photo in question as actually taken sometime in the 1870's.
Link: http://www.soundsandfury.com/soundsandfury/2006/07/and_the_mystery.html
Money Quote:
"The "newly discovered" picture of Constanze Mozart has already been published twice in the 1950s, the last time in an article by E. H. Mueller von Asow in the Österreichische Musikzeitschrift, March 1958, p. 93. For decades it has been known as a hoax among Mozart experts. There are no outdoor photographs of groups of people dating from 1840, because the lenses invented by Joseph Petzval, which were to make such portraits possible, were not available yet. It was simply not possible in 1840 to take sharp outdoor pictures of people as long as the necessary exposure time still amounted to about three minutes. The first outdoor portraits of human beings originate from the 1850s and the picture in question definitely looks like an amateur snapshot from the 1870s. If the BBC (or anyone else) knows a verified group portrait originating from 1840, I would like to see it. But the guys in Altötting wanted to have their share of fun and publicity in the Mozart-year." 
It *is* an interesting hoax! Cheers! 
Why is the photo still here if it has been proven to be a fake!?
:Because people like to be fooled.--141.203.254.65 13:16, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If Agnes Selby thinks the picture is a hoax, it might well be authentic. Selby is famous for inventing non-existent sources and for spreading slanderous accusations against members of the Mozart family, for instance that Leopold Mozart "referred to Constanze Weber as slut".[] Needless to say that there is no such statement by Leopold Mozart.--Suessmayr (talk) 17:25, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Photograph is not authentic

message: Could someone please rewrite the final sentence in this paragraph of the article:
: Mozart and Constanze Weber met in 1777 in Mannheim. However, Mozart was at first more interested in her sister, Aloysia. When Mozart met the family again in Vienna in 1781, Aloysia showed no interest in Mozart anymore and married Lange, an actor, though it is rumored that she regretted this decision years later. Mozart lived with the Weber family for a time, though he left due to rumors about their relationship. 
I can't figure out who "their" refers to in the final sentence.  Mozart and Constanze?  Mozart and Aloysia?  Mozart and the Weber family?  Aloysia and Lange?  - Lawrence King 02:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear sentence 

message: I did some research on Constanze, and most sources say she was born in 1762, not 1763. 70.101.160.105 00:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You research was porous. Constanze's birth certificate survives. It was published in 1941 by Erich Valentin.--62.47.130.208 (talk) 05:50, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthyear

message: Could we please acknowledge the well-documented fact that Leopold Mozart was not buried in the churchyard, but in the communal crypt of St. Sebastian.--Suessmayr (talk) 07:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constanze and Leopold Mozart do not share a grave 

message: I am amazed that such a large inclusion has gone unnoticed without comment to the section Marriage to Mozart - a section prior was basically a historical account of the actual marriage, its dates and locations, and heritage. The contribution of letters and assumption of the nature of their marriage should either be a separate section or a completely new article all its own; specifically analyzing the letters and their meaning. The opening sentence to the newly included material: It is impossible to determine from the historical record if Constanze's marriage to Mozart was a happy one sets up a direct line of personal opinion and based solely on research confirming such. Extractions of the Mozart letters in this fashion, especially here with a condensed summary without proper citations to source the statements, open a means of inclusion that does not really belong in this section (perhaps not on this page at all). Furthermore, I do not remember seeing the question or debate that the marriage was a happy one to begin with -- and certainly, this new inclusion does not confirm or deny such claim. In fact, it confuses the matter. I strongly suggest that this newly, non-sourced material, drawn heavily on summary from personal opinion be discussed at length to remain. I personally see no reason to speculate a question or idea that is not even reasonable or necessary: It is impossible to determine from the historical record if Constanze's marriage to Mozart was a happy one. Presently, nearly every statement needs a citation-needed tag to remain. Statements that are not even brought up on the Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart page. Thoughts? Maineartists (talk) 17:03, 17 October 2016 (UTC
:You're right, it needs sourcing to go in, so I took it out.  On the other hand, this is an item in Mozart biographies, so something ought to be done about it in the long run.    Opus33 (talk) 17:27, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, Opus33. Yes, I agree, this may be an item in the Mozart biographies; but if it does not even show up on the Mozart WP, then it far should be brought up here first. It is an assumption based on his letters to Constanze that the marriage was happy, or even more so, that she herself was happy in the marriage (based on his letters to her). Her letters addressing the issue would be more pertinent to support such a claim in this article. If the original contributor wishes to address such issues, I suggest an article all its own on the letters and their implications; or finding better sources to back his/her claims. Creating a new section would help, too; if such a claim is even necessary. Perhaps even moving it to the Mozart page since the original inclusions here were directed toward facts regarding such matters as The Magic Flute and not Constanze. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 18:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marriage to Mozart - speculative and personal opinion 

message: In regards to the constant removal of the section Treatment by biographers by The Great Corrector. Inviting editors involved: Michael Bednarek and Sparafucil and editors of this article here on this Talk Page; in additional to the original editor for initial discussion to reach a consensus rather than in-article reversions with opposing summary views. Regardless of outcome, hopefully this will put an end to the reversions. Thanks to all. Maineartists (talk) 12:50, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, Sparafucil. I saw that you reverted the edit once again. Any chance you can bring your reasons here to better gain consensus so that the original editor does not simply revert your edit? Thanks! Maineartists (talk) 01:18, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit warring 

message: One could try to avoid the narrow point of view that Constanze had a direct influence of Mozart's compositions, or that an aria was intended for her (this is purely professional) and therefor reveals something about her influence. In my opinion the relation they had, and foremost the love they had together is the main source of inspiration for some of Mozart's best composition, for example the second duo for violin and alto KV 424. 2A02:A03F:615C:9C00:7DEF:351:A1BB:5F5A (talk) 07:11, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Influences on Mozart's music