Halifax Judas, The

Cowgill, Rachel

An unknown Handed arrangement by Mozart?

Is a newly discovered manuscript a fifth Handel-Mozart arrangement? RACHEL COWGILL considers the evidence.

THAT MOZART STUDIED the music of earlier eighteenth-century masters, encouraged by Baron van Swieten (`Lord Fugue' in Peter Shaffer's play Amadeus) has been well known for generations.1 Evidence of his familiarity with Bach and Handel can be traced through his music of the 1780s, and still be heard in his last works - in the austere duet for the Men in Armour from Die Zauberflote, for example, and the Kyrie fugue of the Requiem, for which Mozart borrowed his subject and counter-- subject from the closing fugue of Handel's Dettingen Te Deum (Handel himself having reused them for the chorus `We shall rejoice' in Joseph). This was by no means mere pandering to an influential patron's taste for the antique: the depth of Mozart's creative involvement with these earlier models was such that he even `contemplated writing oratorios in the style of Handel', according to his son.2 And it is intriguing to think that Mozart might have anticipated Haydn's move into that genre, had he lived longer.

Further, more substantial evidence of Mozart's Handel studies survives in the additional wind and brass parts he composed for four of Handel's large-scale choral works. These arrangements -- of Acis and Galatea (1788), Messiah (1789), and the Ode for St Cecilia's Day and Alexander's Feast (1790) - were commissioned by van Swieten for the Gesellschaft der Associierten Cavaliere, a group of noble enthusiasts dedicated to sponsoring performances of oratorios in Vienna. From today's perspective, the willingness of this circle to introduce new elements into Handel's scores seems to contradict the spirit of historicism these performances represent. Its reasoning, however, was quite pragmatic. The Viennese penchant for the timbres of `die Harmonie' (a band of mixed wind and brass instruments) had enhanced the development and significance of these sections of the standard orchestra considerably since Handel's time. Mozart's addition of new wind and brass parts to Handel's scores, at van Swieten's instigation, was therefore a means of enriching the orchestral textures, and modernising Handel's orchestration to suit contemporary expectations. Moreover, musical language itself had altered considerably in the space of two generations, and for late-eighteenth-century audiences the services of an arranger were helpful in making sense of by then unfamiliar modes of expression.

Mozart's version of Messiah achieved particular celebrity, following its publication by Breitkopf & Hartel in 1803: it catalysed performance traditions of Handel oratorios in the German-speaking lands, and many of Mozart's ideas were carried over into Ebenezer Prout's edition of 1902 - the standard version in use among British choral societies for much of the last century. All four of Mozart's Handel arrangements, their authenticity uncontested, were published in the Supplement of the Neue Mozart Ausgabe between 1961 and 1973, in editions by Andreas Holschneider.

RECENTLY, what purports to be a fifth Mozart arrangement of Handel - a manuscript full score of Judas Maccabaeus, in three volumes, `mit Begleitungen fur Blasinstrumenten Von W: A: Mozart' - has come to light, in Calderdale District Archives, West Yorkshire, among the scores of the Halifax Choral Society.3 The manuscript was presented to the Society in 1850, by one of its founder members - William Priestley (1779-1860), an affluent wool clothier, amateur musician, and collector of an extensive library of choral works.4 Bound into Volume I is a statement of provenance from Priestley himself, a copy of a letter he had written to a local clergyman, describing how he had obtained the manuscript `about 25 years ago' from one of the German settlements of the Moravian Church situated to the north-east of Dresden - `whether from Gnadenthal, Niesky, or Gorlitz in Lusatia, I do not now recollect'.

The protestant Moravian Church traces its origins back to one of the earliest, pre-Lutheran dissents from Catholicism - the ancient church of the Bohemian Brethren, or Unitas Fratrum. Religious persecution during the Counter-Reformation prompted the Moravian diaspora, and an early settlement was founded by refugees at Herrnhut in Saxony, which remains the hub of the church to this day. The Moravians flourished during the eighteenth century, establishing settlements across Europe and the colonies. Their influence was strongly felt in the West Riding of Yorkshire, thanks in part to the support of the itinerant Anglican evangelical, Benjamin Ingham. Communal houses were opened in Lightcliffe, Priestley's village, before the Moravian settlement of Fulneck was founded near Leeds, in 1744.5 Priestley's musical scrapbook, which is also preserved in Calderdale District Archives, contains a handbill for a concert given by the Moravian musicians of Fulneck, featuring German choral music by composers who were unfamiliar in Yorkshire, but well represented on the shelves of Priestley's musical library.6 His connections with the Moravians were probably commercial as well as musical, since many of the brothers and sisters at Fulneck, a working community, were involved in wool production.

Priestley's letter is undated, but it was written to convey his permission for the score to be shown to Michael Costa, conductor of the mammoth Handel performances at the Crystal Palace, Sydenham. Since the Halifax Guardian of 2 May 1857 reported Costa's decision to perform Judas in this arrangement the following June, the letter must date from around 1856, which means the manuscript which Priestley obtained `about 25 years ago' probably came into his possession around 1830. The whereabouts of the score before then is more difficult to establish, but it may be more than coincidence that around 1820, the Leipzig firm of Breitkopf & HArtel advertised an arrangement of Judas Maccabaeus by Mozart in their catalogue.7 The lack of surviving copies suggests that they did not go ahead with their edition, and the source might well have been among the manuscripts sold off by the firm during the 1820s. Whilst there are no marks on Priestley's score to connect it with Breitkopf cCt Hartel, the paper-type is consistent with a date as late as 1820, and certainly the layout of the title page and neatness of the copying is such as might be expected in a score produced intentionally to serve as the basis for a published edition. (The copyist, who cannot at this stage be identified, was probably working from another source, or sources, which seems not to have survived.) With regard to the Moravian connection, at least one prominent Moravian musician, Christian Ignatius Latrobe, is known to have bought both manuscript and printed material from Breitkopf & Hartel around this time.8

If the provenance of the score still leaves questions open, then, the process of authenticating the arrangement is even more problematic. The Halifax score was by no means the only arrangement of Judas Maccabaeus to have been attributed to Mozart. For many years Mozart was assumed to be the author of an anonymous Viennese arrangement of Judas held in the Austrian National Library (A-Wn S.m. 3239) - an adaptation which bears no relation, musically, to the Halifax version (as will be discussed later). More recently, Andreas Holschneider has argued persuasively that this was in fact the work of Joseph Starter. Starter was musical director of the Tonkunstlersozietat, an insurance society founded in 1771 for widows and orphans of Viennese musicians, which is known to have given a performance of Judas Maccabaeus at the Kartnerthortheater in 1779.9 This was the only airing of a 'complete' Handel oratorio in eighteenth-century Vienna, as far as we can tell from surviving sources, and it was probably scheduled at van Swieten's behest. Financially it was not a success, however, to the extent that the Tonkunstlersozietat, which relied on concert takings to replenish its pension funds, gave no further performances of Handel oratorios until 1806 (when Judas was given again, in an arrangement attributed in the programme to Mozart).10

This 'Starzer' arrangement, if we may call it that, proves to have been the basis of a vocal score published in 1820 by Johann August Bohme of Hamburg and Pietro Mechetti of Vienna, the title page of which reads: `Haendels Oratorium Judas Maccabaeus nach Mozarts Bearbeitung im ClavierAuszuge'.11 This vocal score was prepared and edited by Ludwig Hellwig, musical director and organist of Berlin cathedral and joint deputy conductor of the Sing-Akademie, who had himself made several arrangements of Handel's vocal works and was a great proponent of Baroque music. The text of the oratorio, by Thomas Morell, is given in a German translation which shows striking similarities to the German translation used in the Halifax score; but this does not necessarily link the two arrangements. This German translation was readily available in late eighteenth-century Vienna: Hellwig, in his preface, identifies it as the work of classicist and poet Johann Joachim Eschenburg of Braunschweig, who had published it in 1772. Van Swieten may have brought a copy of it with him when he returned to Vienna from Berlin in 1777, having experienced performances of Handel, Graun, and Bach oratorios during his time as ambassador to the court of Frederick the Great.12

RUMOURS that Mozart had made an arrangement of Judas Maccabaeus were certainly persistent in the decades following his death, causing Leopold von Sonnleithner, the Viennese solicitor and early Mozart scholar, to investigate the matter. He interviewed Stadler, Eybler, Weigl, and others who had had first-hand experience of Handel performances given in Vienna during Mozart's lifetime, and on the basis of their recollections, he too came to the conclusion that the Tonkunstlersozietat score had been the work of Starzer.13 But Sonnleithner appears to have known only one arrangement of the piece: the version which has come to light in Halifax, seemingly in a unique source, was unknown to him.

To test the attribution of the Halifax arrangement to Mozart, we first need to consider whether Mozart was ever engaged in making an edition of Judas Maccabaeus. According to his letters, Mozart began his studies of the early eighteenth-century masters with Swieten in April 1782: `Baron van Swieten, to whom I go every Sunday, gave me all the works of Handel and Sebastian Bach to take home with me (after I had played them to him)', he wrote to his sister on 20 April.14 These musical exercises - the private meetings of a small, dedicated circle - took place in the early afternoon at the Royal Library (Swieten was Prefect of the Royal Library, as well as President of the Court Commission on Education and Censorship for Joseph II). Initially, instrumental fugues were the principal fare, but from 1783, van Swieten began to include vocal music: oratorios were studied, rehearsed, and performed in arrangements, and as Joseph Franz Weigl recalled in his autobiography of 1819: [o]nly compositions by Bach, Haendel & Graun, & by the earliest & most famous masters were given. Mozart accompanied at the fortepiano, Salieri, Starzer, Teiber & the Baron sang.'15 Weigl's comments give something of the flavour of these occasions, and Mozart's involvement was apparently primarily due to his abilities as a keyboard virtuoso:

Those who never saw Mozart play Handelian scores of 16 or more staves with inimitable dexterity, and at the same time heard him sing and correct the other singers' faults, do not know him thoroughly, for he was as great there as in his compositions. One always heard a whole orchestra.16

Although Mozart evidently took the lead at the keyboard, any performances of Judas Maccabaeus by this group would presumably have been based on the existing 'Starzer' arrangement, in view of Starzer's seniority over Mozart and his position as director of the Tonkunstlersozietat concerts.

During the mid 1780s, Swieten's private music-making escalated, as he began to gather around him a circle of noble enthusiasts - the Gesellschaft der Associierten Cavaliere - who shared his aim of cultivating the performance of oratorios. From 1786, they presented an oratorio each year, either at Lent or Christmas, for which the chorus and orchestra of the court were engaged. Performances were held in the Royal Library, at 3.00pm, and then were transferred to the Schwarzenberg or Esterhazy palaces. If the piece proved popular enough, Swieten would arrange a public performance at the Burgtheater or the hall of Ignaz Jahn, the court restaurateur.17

The first oratorio to be given by the Associierten was Judas Maccabaeus, in 1786, probably drawing on the services of Mozart, among others. Starzer was musical director for the Associierten at this point, however, and although the 1779 Tonkunstlersozietat performance of the 'Starzer' version had not lived up to expectations, it would have been both untactful and uncharacteristic of the rank-conscious Swieten to have commissioned a new arrangement from Mozart for this occasion. Starzer would have had easy access to performing materials from the Tonkunstlersozietat library. Furthermore, the existence of several late eighteenth-century copies of the 'Starzer' arrangement in which the 'organo' part has been omitted indicates that this arrangement received performances after 1779 in venues where an organ was not available (neither the Court Library nor the majority of the aristocratic palaces of the Cavaliere had organs).18 When Starzer died the following year, however, Mozart was appointed musical director for the Tonkunstlersozietat in his place - a desirable position, in view of the honorarium and opportunities it offered to enhance his connections with major aristocratic patrons. Mozart, we can speculate, might well have jotted down ideas for a new arrangement of Judas at this point, either at Swieten's suggestion, or in order to show him ways in which Starzer's version could be improved on, perhaps even as a means of encouraging the Cavaliere to favour him with the appointment.

Several obstacles are encountered when testing out this thesis. Mozart listed his arrangements of Acis and Galatea, Messiah, Ode for St Cecilia's Day and Alexander's Feast in his Verzeichnuss alter meiner Werke - the notebook in which he kept track of his compositions with details, dates and incipits - and there is no mention of an arrangement of Handel's Judas Maccabaeus. The Handel entries were added out of sequence, however, at the bottom of the relevant pages, marked `nota bene'.19 They could date from long after the arrangements themselves were completed, therefore, allowing the possibility that Mozart simply forgot to mention his work on Judas. Moreover, Mozart did not, in fact, list all the arrangements he made for the Associierten in this notebook. His first duty as music director for the Associierten was to direct performances of CPE Bach's Auferstehung and Himmelfahrt Jesu on 26 February, 4 March and 7 March 1788, the final rendition taking place in the Burgtheater. Although Bach's scoring required fewer alterations than the Handel works, Mozart still had to divide the concertato trumpet part in the tenor aria `Ich folge dir, verklarter Held' between flute, clarinet and trumpet before it could be rendered by the players at his disposal. A score and parts for this arrangement have survived (A-- Wgm III/14232 Q.678), yet there is no record of this arrangement (K.537d [=K626b/19]) in his notebook.20

A second problem with the attribution of the Halifax arrangement to Mozart is the absence of performing materials or a score in Mozart's hand, or indeed of any other source for this arrangement. (The Halifax score itself, as we have seen, probably dates from after 1800, and possibly as late as 1820, and the source from which it was copied does not appear to have survived.) By contrast, the other Mozart Handel arrangements are well catered for in this respect, as Holschneider reports in the prefaces and critical reports of his volumes for the Neue Mozart Ausgabe: for the Messiah arrangement, for example, the printed word book, a complete set of performing parts, the third part of Mozart's working score, and a later copy of the entire arrangement are all extant. It is unlikely that any performance parts or printed word books would have been produced, however, if the 'Mozart' Judas arrangement had remained unperformed; and the absence of corroborating musical sources would not in itself be sufficient grounds to disregard the attribution of the arrangement.21

HAVING considered the equivocal historical evidence for Mozart's authorship of an arrangement of Judas Maccabaeus, the next step is to consider the stylistic evidence of the score itself. How did the arranger of the Halifax score proceed? How does it compare with the procedures Mozart adopted in his Handel arrangements of the late 1780s?

The source of the Halifax arrangement was probably either William Randall's full score (1769), or Wright's edition, published around 1785. Possibly it came from van Swieten's extensive personal library, but Judas Maccabaeus is listed under `Oratorien and Cantaten in Partitur' in Artaria's sales catalogue of 1788, so it was clearly available in Vienna at the time Mozart was working on his Handel arrangements.22

The Halifax 'Mozart' arrangement requires an orchestra virtually identical to that which Mozart called for in his 1789 adaptation of Messiah, including two clarinets (parts written in A, Bb, and C), three trombones, and two horns (variously in B6, Eb, C, G, A, and D).23 (An extra trumpet is called for in Judas, reflecting the oratorio's militaristic character.) Mozart's Messiah, therefore, provides us with a useful reference point when investigating the authenticity of the Halifax arrangement, and nowhere is this more appropriate than in the opening number: both Messiah and Judas begin with an orchestral 'Grave' and close similarities can been observed in the way this movement has been treated in the two arrangements (ex.1(24)). In both arrangements, where the 'organo' part diverges from the general continuo line, it has been deleted or reallocated to other instruments, implying the absence of a suitable instrument in the venue for which the arrangement was made. Partly to compensate for this, the three trombones are deployed to create a suitably solemn, weighty sound and to fill out the harmonies. In Messiah, however, Mozart paired the trombones with horns, whereas in Judas they are joined by clarinets and flutes (which simply reinforce the violin lines). In both arrangements, the first bassoon begins by doubling the violas and the second by doubling the bass. The third trombone also doubles the bass-line: in Messiah this doubling is well-nigh exact, whereas in Judas some notes are left out, even where the harmonies are changing, probably because the bass line is more active rhythmically. Thus the similarities between the 'Grave' of Mozart's Messiah and that of the Halifax Judas are considerable, even if the procedures followed are not identical.

In the Halifax score, it is clear that one of the main concerns of the arranger was to enrich Handel's orchestral textures, particularly in opening ritornelli. The beginning of the mourning chorus `For Sion lamentation make' (Part I), for example, was apparently considered too sparse, even for the expression of grief: the arranger adds soft clarinet and horn chords which support the faltering strings and chromatic bass (though reducing the effect of Handel's poignant bassoon sighs). Similarly, the violin and continuo sonorities of the G minor bass aria `With pious hearts' (Part II) are warmed almost throughout by a cushion of harmony from clarinets, bassoons, and violas. Perhaps the most striking example, however, and one of the most attractive new ideas in the Halifax score, is the addition of two new elements to the plaintive cello solo at the beginning of the soprano aria `Ah! wretched Israel!' (Part II) (ex.2): (a) a descending motive in clarinet and flute, and (b) a new, hushed string line. The flute/clarinet motive is derived from the soprano phrase in bars 22-23, to which expressive appoggiaturas have been added. Mozart worked to a similar principle in his Messiah arrangement - for example, his addition of flute, clarinet, and bassoon doubling, and a new viola line, to the opening of 'I know that my redeemer liveth'.

Where the ritornello makes way for the voice, the arranger of the Halifax score tends to support the vocal line by doubling, outlining the harmonies, or supplying simple countermelodies in the instrumental lines. This can be seen, for example, in the aria `Pious orgies' (Part I), where added flutes accompany the vocal line, softening the contrasts Handel created by the juxtaposing of orchestra and voice (ex.3). In this way the arranger smoothes over the clean lines of the ritornello structure, achieving a blend of vocal and instrumental colours - a different understanding of the relationship between voice and orchestra to that of Handel and his contemporaries. Other examples can be found in `From mighty kings', and the duet `Hail Judea' (Part II).

Like Mozart, the author of the Halifax arrangement also responds to expressive cues in the text, picking up, for example, the martial tone of `Arm, arm ye brave' and `Call forth thy pow'rs' (Part I) by adding arpeggio flourishes and signals in trumpets, horns, and echo dynamics. Similarly, he responds to the choral exhortation `Tune your harps to songs of praise' in `Sion now her head shall raise' (Part II) with sumptuous orchestral sonorities, drawing on all the instruments available (with the exception of trumpets and timpani). The aria `So shall the lute and harp awake' (Part III) is also suitably enhanced. At times, when adding instruments, he also develops aspects of Handel's original conception of the number: in the duet version of `Come, ever smiling liberty' (Part I), the imitation of motives between the two voices is taken up and expanded on by the newly added wind and brass parts. The undulating quaver lines of `Oh! never bow we down' (Part II) are enhanced by new parts for divisi violas, partly doubling the voices, which recall the divisi violas Mozart added to `Oh death where is thy sting' in his Messiah arrangement (exx.4a and b). And later in this number, to emphasise the contrast between Handel's quaver motive and the homophonic setting of `But ever worship Israel's Go&, the wind-band takes over from the preceding string sonorities (ex.4c). In the tenor aria `Sound an alarm!' (Part II), Handel had already hinted at imitation between the voice and continuo. The arranger enhances this by adding oboes, horns, and upper strings on the second beat of the opening bars, accentuating the sense of instruments responding to the voice's imperative (ex.5). (Interestingly, in this section, the arranger seems to have 'corrected' the voice's first semiquaver passage (bars 5-6) so that its upper notes rise by step, as they do in the semiquaver sequence at bars 21-24. The same adjustment is made when this section returns.) `Sound an alarm!' is remembered most, perhaps, for the blaze of `silver trumpets' on the return of the opening section, leading into the chorus `We hear, we hear'. There was, however, a dearth of clarino trumpet players in Josephinian Vienna, hence Mozart's reworking of `Ich folge dir, verklarter Held' from CPE Bach's Auferstehung and Himmelfahrt Jesu in 1788, and his rearrangement of the soloistic `The trumpet shall sound' for two horns and clarino in Messiah. Whilst the horn had remained a virtuoso instrument throughout the eighteenth century, the trumpet had exchanged its soloistic role for something more functional - supplying harmonic and rhythmic support in orchestral tuttis - and as a result, few trumpeters were able to meet the concertato demands of Handel's scores. 'Starzer' appears not to have made changes to the trumpet parts in this chorus in the arrangement of Judas for the Tonkunstlersozietat, but in some later copies the trumpet parts were simplified (for example, see A-Wn S. m. 13046, where the changes are marked in the copy by a second hand, and A-Wn S. m. 9877). Similarly, Handel's trumpet parts are untouched in this chorus in the Halifax score, but in Judas's aria `With honour let desert be crown'd' (Part III), the virtuosic trumpet part is passed to the oboe, leaving but a pale shadow of its former self (rather ironic, in view of the Judas's confident declaration, `the trumpet ne'er in vain shall sound').

The arranger of the Halifax score explores the dramatic potential offered by the additional wind and brass forces to great effect in choruses such as `Fall'n is the foe' (Part II) and `Lead on, lead on' (Part I), where the the full brass and wind complement creates a more dynamic, emphatic sound, focusing attention particularly on the opening vocal motive. Using the new wind and brass parts to reinforce the vocal entries proves very effective in, for example, `Hear us, Oh Lord, the closing chorus of Part I. At times he emulates the Viennese practice of doubling the alto, tenor, and bass choral parts with trombones, but less consistently than Mozart does in his Messiah arrangement. (The fact that this doubling is actually written into the score here suggests that the trombones may not have done this as a matter of course, as Mozart required them to do in his version of Messiah; although possibly this was simply due to the copyist having misinterpreted instructions in the source.) The trombones again come into their own at the close of Part II, in the fugal conclusion of `Oh! never bow we down', where they double the subject, lending appropriate ecclesiastical solemnity to the minims of `We worship God and God alone'.

In the chorus `Disdainful of danger' (Part I), we find a good example of the use of the extra wind and brass to articulate the ends of sections, and emphasise cadence points - an attempt to clarify for contemporary audiences the structural outlines of the Baroque oratorio. A similar principle probably motivated the changes Mozart made to `Why do the nations', for example, in his arrangement of Messiah.

Although the title page of the Halifax arrangement draws attention to the additional parts for 'Blasinstrumenten', it is not only wind and brass parts that have been added to Handel's scoring. As in Mozart's Messiah, new violin and viola lines can sometimes be heard, in, for example, string-- accompanied numbers such as the bass aria `The Lord worketh wonders' (Part II): as he often does elsewhere, the arranger has taken care to base these on ideas already in the source, for example in the added line for violin II which anticipates the violin I figure from bars 13-15 (ex.6). (We have already noted the addition of divisi violas in `Oh! never bow we down').

When viewed as a whole, the arranger's work has been extensive in the Halifax score. Mozart altered the instrumentation of around sixty per cent of Handel's Messiah, but for the Halifax score that figure is much higher. Only one solo number in the Halifax arrangement remains as it was printed in Wright's edition of the oratorio (dynamics excepted) - the soprano aria `Wise men, flatt'ring' (Part II). That this remains untouched is surely due to the unusual richness of Handel's scoring, so appropriate to the magical charms and seductive flattery described in Morell's text at this point.

When comparing the Halifax score with the 'Starzer' arrangement, the most notable difference is that the former includes the entire oratorio (as set down in Wright's edition), whereas in the 'Starzer' score it has been cut it by a third. This respect for the integrity of the source is consistent with Mozart's treatment of Messiah, although even Mozart was prepared to cut several numbers, including the penultimate number Of God be for us') and replace it with accompanied recitative something the Halifax arranger was not willing to do.25 Another point of difference between the 'Mozart' and 'Starzer' arrangements of Judas can be found at the beginning of Part III. In the `Starzer' version, we find a choral arrangement of `Father of Heav'n!' in place of the alto aria, whereas the Halifax version retains Handel's original conception of the movement. Whilst Handel accompanied the voice with strings only, however, `Mozart' adds phrases in flutes, clarinets, horns, and bassoons, setting off the elegant vocal lines to great effect and enhancing the Sarastro-like serenity of the piece (ex.7).

The similarities we have observed between the Halifax score and Mozart's Messiah arrangement are extensive enough not to contradict the attribution of the arrangement to Mozart. Certainly, if we compare the Halifax arrangement to the `Starzer' version - which was itself attributed to Mozart for many years - we find that the arranger of the Halifax score is much more imaginative in his response to Handel's work, more willing to introduce new material to the score rather than reinforcing what was already there, more imaginative in his instrumental combinations, and yet also more respectful of the integrity of Handel's score as a whole. These are certainly qualities we might expect to find in work emanating from Mozart's pen. From Mozart, however, we would also expect a high level of technical fluency that is sometimes lacking in the Halifax score.26 Errors in the part-writing such as Mozart would surely have corrected in the work of his pupil Thomas Attwood are evident, and a few examples should serve to illustrate this.

In `From this dread scene' (Part I), for example, we find repeated consecutive fifths between the added viola line and the bass (bars 39-42) (ex.8). Elsewhere we find unprepared dissonances, as in `Arm, arm ye brave' (Part I), where the horns are used to articulate the 6/4-5/3 cadence called for in the figuring of Wright's score, but without having first prepared the fourth (bars 49-50). Later in the same movement, we find a leading note in the bassoon that does not rise to the tonic (bars 70-71). The opening of `Ah! wretched Israel!', quoted above, is also somewhat flawed: for example, the violins anticipate the resolution of the dissonant F appoggiatura in bar 7 (much as they do in Sussmayr's version of the Lacrimosa of the Requiem). Indeed, the violin moves in consecutive seconds with the clarinets at this point, which Mozart would surely have avoided (see ex.2, above). At times it seems as if the arranger is trying too hard. In the opening bars of 'O liberty', for example, the added clarinet and bassoon seem to clutter the music with extraneous chromaticism, contradicting what is suggested by the movement of the bass. The clarinet writing also seems unMozartian sometimes, as Richard Maunder has observed: the clarinets are often deployed in their least flattering register, rather than working in their more expressive middle and upper range, although much the same could be said of the clarinet parts Mozart wrote for Messiah.

Taken as a whole, these points cannot easily be explained away as the errors of the copyist. Whilst the arranger of the Halifax score was clearly capable of producing inspired ideas in response to Handel's works, it seems that errors crept in during the execution or working out of those ideas. If the attribution to Mozart on the title page is correct, therefore, it seems likely that at least one other person also had a hand in it. Mozart was probably involved in a performance (or performances) of Judas Maccabaeus in Vienna before he died, and as we have speculated, he may have jotted down ideas for a new arrangement of the work, possibly at Swieten's behest. That Mozart produced sketches and exercises based on his studies of Handel's vocal works, which he would sometime draw on when composing a new work, is apparent from the recollections of his friend Abbe Stadler, who had this to say, years later, when discussing the authenticity of the Requiem:

just as Mozart took the motive for the Kyrie from a Handel oratorio, so too he took the motive for the 'Requiem' from Handel's Anthem for the funeral of Queen Caroline, composed in the year 1737 [HWV264] [...] He found a very apt idea for a requiem in this anthem; used it as some sheets [now lost] among his papers testified; worked it out in his own style; added the Kyrie in the manner suggested by Handel's idea; and then, when he received the commission for the Requiem, he sought out his old sketches, put everything into his new score, and developed it all in masterly style.27

Sketches by Mozart relating to Judas Maccabaeus do not appear to have survived, but if Mozart did indeed leave such materials among his papers when he died, they could well have been worked up by a pupil or an associate into a version that could be performed. There was certainly an incentive for such a project, in view of the success of the Mozart arrangement of Messiah, particularly in Breitkopf & Hartel's edition of 1803.

Performances of Handel's oratorios were still being given in Vienna in the years after Mozart's death, and as Mary Sue Morrow records in her chronicle of Viennese concert life, Judas Maccabaeus was given at least twice:28 on 22 December 1806 the Tonkunstlersozietat gave a performance of Judas Maccabaeus in a version attributed to Mozart, and before that, a private performance was given on 15 April 1794 at the palace of Prince Lichnowsky, under the direction of `Herr Spangler.29 This was probably Johann Georg Spangler (1752-- 1802), a composer and tenor of some reputation in Vienna, and archivist of the Hofkapelle from 1796. Might Spangler have played some part in this arrangement then? His only other Handel performance in Vienna that year was of Athalia, given at Prince Paar's residence, and we find Athalia advertised alongside Judas in an arrangement by Mozart in the Breitkopf & Hartel catalogue of c.1820 mentioned earlier. Swieten himself might have had a part in it to some degree: when a catalogue of his library was made after his death, it included versions of Athalia and Hercules, the former attributed to Swieten himself and the latter to Mozart.30 Whilst these are possibilities, the evidence at the moment is hazy and contradictory and in the absence of anything more concrete, it is difficult to move beyond the realms of speculation.

As we have seen, the case for Mozart's involvement in the Halifax arrangement is plausible, but nothing more than that. If there is material in the score that originated with Mozart it has been obscured, the ideas, perhaps in the form of sketches, annotations, or instructions, having been acted on by another party, who lacked his technical fluency, but followed his Messiah arrangement for guidance. Parallels can be drawn, of course, with recent scholarly debate over the Sanctus and Benedictus of the Requiem. Even if we cannot be sure of the extent to which it reflects Mozart's own response to the Handelian oratorio, the Halifax score of Judas Maccabaeus certainly offers intriguing new light on the reception of Mozart's Handel arrangements and on performing traditions of Handel's works in the German-speaking lands - areas in which there remains a great deal of research still to be done.

An extended version of this article will appear as `Die Judas Maccabeus Partitur aus Halifax: eine unbekannte HandelBearbeitung von Mozart?' in the forthcoming issue of the Gottinger Handel-Beitrage.

NOTES

1. See, for example, Edward Olleson: `Gottfried, Baron van Swieten, and his influence on Haydn and Mozart' (unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oxford, 1967).

2. Conversation with Franz Xaver Mozart, transcribed by Mary Novello; see A Mozart pilgrimage, being the travel diaries of Vincent & Mary Novello in the year 1829, trans. Nerina Medici di Marignano, ed. Rosemary Hughes (London: Novello, 1955), p. 113.

3. West Yorkshire Archive Service (henceforth WYAS), Calderdale District Archives, HCS:22/1-3.

4. On William Priestley as a collector of music, and the early history of the Halifax Choral Society, see Rachel Cowgill: "The most musical spot for its size in the kingdom": music in Georgian Halifax', in Early Music 28 (November, 2000), pp.557-75.

5. On the history and influence of Moravianism in England, see Colin

Podmore: The Moravian Church in England, 1728-1760 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), and Geoffrey Stead:

The Moravian settlement at Fulneck, 1742-1790 (Leeds: Thoresby Society, 1999). By 1760, there were twelve Moravian congregations in England, which equalled the number of congregations active in Germany at that time.

6. WYAS, Calderdale District Archives, Soc:7/1.

7. Letter to the editor, signed 'A Querist', referring to Mozart's accompaniments to Handel included in `the last catalogue issued by Breitkopf & Hartel', in Quarterly Musical Magazine and Review 4 (London, 1822), pp.138-40.

8. Breitkopf & Hartel held their great manuscript auction in 1836, but it is thought that this was probably anticipated by other, less formal sales, for which catalogues have not survived.

See Yoshitake Kobayashi: `On the identification of Breitkopf's manuscripts', in Bach perspectives II. JS Bach, the Breitkopfs, and the eighteenth-century music trade, ed. George B. Stauffer (Lincoln & London: University of Nebraska Press, 1996), pp.107-21 (esp. pp.110-12). On Latrobe's connections with Breitkopf & Hartel, see Cowgill: `The papers of Cl Latrobe: new light on musicians, music and the Christian family in late eighteenth-century England', in Music in eighteenth-century Britain, ed. David Wyn Jones (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000), pp.234-58.

9. See Andreas Holschneider: `Die "Judas-Macchabaus"-Bearbeitung der Osterreichischen Nationalbibliothek', in Mozart Jahrbuch (1960-61), pp.173-81. Holschneider disputes Reinhold Bernhardt's previous conclusions that the arrangement was the work of van Swieten himself; Reinhold Bernhardt: `Van Swieten and seine Judas Maccabaus-Bearbeitung', in Zeitschrift far Musikwissenschaft 17 (Leipzig, 1935), pp.513-44. For additional evidence of

Starzer's authorship, see Bernd Edelmann: `Handel-Auffuhrungen in den Akademien der Wiener Tonkunstlersozietat', in Gottinger Handel-Beitrage 1 (1984), pp.172-99.

10. Andreas Holschneider: Preface to the edition of Mozart's arrangement of Acis and Galatea for the Neue Mozart Ausgabe, x/28/i (Kassel: Badrenreiter, 1973), p.ix.

11. Two manuscript full scores of the 'Starzer' share this Mozart attribution (`nach Mozarts Bearbeitung'): D-Bsb Mus. ms. 9014/2 and A-Wgm 111/1890 Q.815. The second of these includes an appendix of the pieces that were left out of the Starzer version, on different paper, under this rubric: `diejenigen Stucke aus der Original Partitur enthaltend, welche in vorstehender Bearbeitung Mozarts ganz hinweg gelassen worden sind'. This score might well have belonged to Weigh in an annotation on the title page of A-Wgm V/7547 Q.21005, dated 20 April 1834, Sonnleithner refers to a copy of the Starzer arrangement in Weigl's possession which had been misattributed to Mozart. The Berlin score is believed to have come from van Swieten's library.

12. On Eschenburg's translation, see W Hobohm: `Eschenburg, Nicolai and die Berliner Judas Maccabaeus-Auffuhrung 1774', in Georg Friedrich Handel: Halle 1985, pp.209-14.

13. Leopold von Sonnleithner: 'Ober Mozarts angebliche Bearbeitung und Instrumentierung des HAndelschen Oratoriums Judas Maccabdus', in Cacilia 18 (1836), pp.242-50, and 'Ober Mozarts Opern aus seiner frfihen jugend', in Cacilia 25 (1846), pp.93n, 94n.

14. The letters of Mozart and his family, trans. and ed. Emily Anderson, 3rd ed. (London & Basingstoke: Papermac, 1989), p.801.

15. Copy of Joseph Weigl's autobiography, Austrian National Library, quoted in Mozart: a documentary biography, ed. Otto Erich Deutsch, trans. Eric Blom, Peter Branscombe & Jeremy Noble (London: Simon & Schuster, 1990), p.519.

16. Unpublished biography of Weigl,

based on his autobiography, by Eduard von Lannoy, Gesellschaft der Musikfreunde, quoted in ibid., p.520.

17. See Mary Sue Morrow: Concert life in Haydn's Vienna: aspects of a developing musical and social institution, Sociology of Music no.7 (Stuyvesant NY: Pendragon Press, 1989), pp.10-12.

18. In manuscript A-Wu S. m. 13046, deletions and adjustments necessary in the absence of an organ have been made in a second hand.

19. See Mozart's thematic catalogue: a facsimile of British Library Stefan Zweig MS 63, intro. and trans. Albi Rosenthal & Alan Tyson (London: British Library, 1990), ff. 19v, 20v, 23v.

20. See Andreas Holschneider: 'C.Ph.E Bachs Kantate "Auferstehung und Himmelfahrt Jesu" und Mozarts Auffuhrung des jahres 1788', in Mozart jahrbuch (1968-70), pp.264-80; his edition is soon to be issued as volume X/31/4 of the Neue Mozart Ausgabe. I am grateful to Neal Zaslaw for drawing this to MY attention.

21. A set of parts for the 'Mozart' Judas arrangement is held at Calderdale District Archives, but these date from the period 1850-70, when regular performances were given in Halifax (annotations in the score, including English translations of passages of the German text and dynamics, also relate to these performances).

22. Verzeichnis von Musicalien, welche bey Artaria Compagnie Kunst- KupferstichLandkarten- Musicalienhandlern and Verlegern in Wien auf dem Kohlmarkt zu haben sind. Im Janner 1788 (Vienna, 1788). 1 am grateful to Rupert Ridgewell for this information. On early prints of Judas see William C. Smith & Charles Humphries: Handel: a descriptive catalogue of the early editions (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1970), pp. 113-15.

23. Recent discussion of Mozart's adaptation of Messiah includes: Christoph Wolff: 'Mozart's Messiah: "The spirit of Handel" from Van Swieten's hands', in Music and civilization: essays in honor of Paul Henry Lang, ed. Edmond Strainchamps & Maria Rika Maniates

(New York & London: WW Norton, 1984), pp. 1-14; and David Schildkret: `On Mozart contemplating a work of Handel: Mozart's arrangement of Messiah', in Festa musicologica: essays in honor of George J. Buelow, ed. Thomas J. Mathiesen & Benito V Rivera (Stuyvesant NY: Pendragon, 1995), pp. 129-46.

24. Figuring has not been given in musical examples here because it is has been omitted in the Halifax score. Small notes and dynamics, and dotted slurs indicate the arranger's additions.

25. Christoph Wolff makes the point that Swieten was probably responsible for some of the decisions concerning the scope and nature of the Messiah arrangement, just as he would later prompt Haydn's musical imagination in The creation and The seasons. References here to Mozart's work on Messiah should be read in this light. See Wolff: `Mozart's Messiah', p.3.

26. I am indebted to Richard Maunder for sharing his views on these aspects of the arrangement with me.

27. Abbe Maximilian Stadler: Vertheidigung der Echtheit des Mozartischen Requiem (Vienna, 1826), p.17; quoted in Christoph Wolff: Mozart's Requiem: historical and analytical studies; documents; scores, trans. Mary Whittall (Oxford: Clarendon, 1994), pp.78-80.

28. See Morrow: Concert life in Haydn's Vienna, pp.340, 387.

29. Andreas Holschneider suggests that the annotated 'Starzer' score, A-Wn S. m. 13046 may have been used for the 1794 performance. See Kritischer Bericht X/28/1: Bearbeitungen von Werken Georg Friedrich Handels I: Acis and Galatea (Kassel: Barenreiter, 1995), p.a/40. This remains tentative, however.

30. Andreas Holschneider: Preface to his edition of the Acis und Galatea arrangement for the Neue Mozart Ausgabe, p.xii Holschneider suggests the Hercules arrangement was also by van Swieten, or possibly Joseph Haydn, who participated in the Associierten performances before the commissioning of The creation and The seasons.

I would like to thank Neal Zaslaw, Julian Rushton, Richard Maunder, and Philip Wilby for their generous advice and input during the preparation of this article. I am also grateful for the co-operation of the Halifax Choral Society who have allowed musical examples from the Halifax score to be included here.

Rachel Cowgill is Lecturer in Music at the University of Leeds.

Copyright Musical Times Publications, Ltd. Spring 2002
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved